SAINCT AVSTINES RELIGION COLLECTED FROM HIS owne writinges from the confessioÌ„s of the learned Protestants Whereby is sufficiently proued and made knowen the like answearable doctrine of the other more auncient Fathers of the Primitiue Church Written by IOHN BRERELEY Quod Patres credunt credo quod tenent tenâ—o quod dâ—cent doceo quod praedicant praedico c. Aquiesce istis et quiescis à me Aug. Tom. 7. contra Iulian. Pelag. l. 1. c. 5. prope finem Printed 1620. D. Augustinus Monachus Perrexit Petilianus ore maledico in vituperationem Monasteriorum et Monachorum arguens etiam me quod hoc genus vitae a me fuerit institutum Aug. Tom. 7. contra literas Petil. l. 3. c. 40. post med Disponebam esse in Monasterio cum fratribus c. capi bom propositi fratres celligere compatres meos nihil habentes sicut nihil habebam et imitantes me vt quando ego tenuem paupertatulam meam vendidi et pauperibus erogaut sic facerent et illi qui mecum esse voluissent vt de communi viueremus c. nulli licet in societate nostra habere aliquid proprium Aug. Tom. 10. de diuersis serm 49. de communi vita Clericorum post init Quantum in hac perfectionis via profecerim magis quidem noui ego quam quis quam alius homo c. Et ad hoc proposituÌ„ quantis possum viribus alios exhortor et in nomine Domini habeo consortes quibus hoc per meum ministerium persuasum est Ang. Tom. 2. epist 89. versus finem S. Austines being a Monke is coÌ„fessed by the CeÌ„tury writers cen 5. c. 6. col 701. TO THE MOS HIGH AND MIGHTY PRINCE IAMES by the grace of God King of great Britaine France Ireland defender of the faith my most gracious dread Soueraigne THe much obserued and no lesse commended care wherwith your highnes endeauoreth to enrich your Princely vnderstanding not forbearing so much as at the time of your bodily repast to haue for the then like feeding of your intellectual part your highnes table surrounded with the attendance conference of your graue and learned diuines in which respect you may not vnaptly be tearmed in the very wordes of Eunapius a liuing liberary walking study addeth a more then ordinary lustre of ornament to your royal estate and encorageth my otherwise fearful humble thoughtes more bouldly to approch and salute your highnes with this saying of S. (a) Lib. 8. indict 3. ep 37. Innocentio prope sin Gregory Si delicioso copitis pabulo saginari beati Augustini opuscula legite And although the viandes hereby thus prepared may in reguard of the Cookes plaine or rather vnskilful workmanship in confection seeme vnworthy of your royal preseÌ„ce for so much yet as they be of them selueâ— soueraigne Antidotes whereby to repel the dispersed contagioÌ„ of dangerous infection and are now placed on the table before your highnes by the attendance and seruice of men to your Maiesty not vngrateful or suspected euen the learnedst Protestantes them selues from whose frequent abounding confessioÌ„ the many hereafter ensuing particulars of S. Austines professed religion are collected I am not without hope that your highnes wil in such respect vouchsaife to esteeme them as not vnworthy either of your owne taist or the view and further tryal of your attending learned diuines And pardon great Saueraigne your meanest yet wel meaning subiect but to put your Maiesty in remembrance that seeing our knowledge in this life is but in (b) 1. Cor. 13.9 part euen by a (c) 1. Cor. 13.12 glasse in a darke sort and that the Sciptures a lone are prescribed by your learnedst diuines for the satisfying quieting of our knowlege in al doubts of religioÌ„ whatsoeuer that your Maiesty would plese to take notice that the said sacred Scriptures are not able to afford vs so much as certaine infallible proofe knowledge of them selues for as the titles of the said bookes can be no certaine proofe of their diuine authority considering that many writinges of like title were forged vnder the (d) See Eusebius hist l. 3. c. 19. et lib. 6. c. 10. S. Aug. contra aduers leg et Proph. l. 1. c. 20. Zozom hist l. 7. c. 19. Hmmelmannus de tradit Apost part 1. l. 1. col 251. et part 3. l. 3. col 841. Aâ—d see 2. Thes 2.2 Apostles names and neuer receiued by the Church for Canonical So likewise Protestant writers expresly teach (e) Hooker in Eccles pol. l. 1. sec 14. p. 86. conclude resolutly that of thinges necessary the very cheifest is to know what bookes we are to esteeme holy which point is confessed impossible for the Scripture it selfe to teach And (f) Ibid. l. 2. see 4. p. 102. 146. Couel in his defeÌ„ce of Hooker art 4. p. 31. it is not the word of God which doth or possibly can assure vs that we do wel to thinke it is his word From whence it is that yet to this present Protestantes so importantly differ in the very Canon of the Scriptures for it is wel knowen that the (g) Adamus Francisci in Margarita Theol. p. 448. Chemnit in exam part 1. p. 55. 56. 57. and in Enchirid p. 63. Hafenref in loc Theol. loc 7. p. 292. Osiand Cent. 4. l. 3. c. 38. p. 399. The Centuristes cent 1. l. 2. c. 4. col 54. Lutheran Churches do stil reiect as Apocryphal the Epistle to the Hebrewes the Epistle of S. Iames the second and third of S. Iohn the latter of S. Peter the Epistle of S. Iudas and the Apocalips of S. Iohn with whom agreeth (h) Loc. com c. de iustific parrag 5. p. 250. Wolphangus Musculus a Caluinist in reiecting the Epistle of S. Iames as erroneous in iustification by workes Now if the Scriptures be coÌ„fessedly thus vnable to afford vs but so much as certaine proofe of them selues then in al true consequence of reasoÌ„ much lesse are they able to direct exempt vs in case of al doubt or question infallibly from error And the rather cosidering that in such case as D. (i) Conference c. 2. diuis 2. p. 68. Raynoldes confesseth It is not the shew but the sense of the wordes of Scripture that must decide controuersies and that touching this questionable sense the Scripture howsoeuer infaliible and sufficient in it selfe which none denyeth yet it is not which is the onely point now pertinent and questionable infallibly sufficient as to vs in her instruction therof as not resoluing and instructing vs therein infallibly because not immediatly of it selfe but onely by certaine meanes (k) Whitaker de Scriptura controuer 1. q. 5. c. 9. p. 251. on our behalfe required as (l) Whitaker ib. p. 521. 522. 523. Reynoldes in his coÌ„fer c. 2. p. 83. 84. 92. namely Our skil in the tongues our waighing the circumstances of the text our conferring of places our
likewise taught that the B. Virgin vowed perpetual chastity for thus he writeth (r) Tom. 6. de sancta virginitate c. 4. prope initium How saith she shal this be done hecause I know not man which truly she would not haue said if she had not before vowed her selfe a virgin to God c. Verily she would not haue asked how a woman should hring forth a sonne promised vnto her if she had married to haue lyen with a man This is so clearly S. Austines religion that D. Fulke confessing the same chargeth S. Austin with a non sequitur saying (s) Against Rhem. Test in Luke c. 1. v. 34. sec 13. although S. Austin gather she vowed virginity yet it followeth not c. And Chemnitius to vse his owne words attributeth (t) Examen part 3. p. 39. And sec p. 56. to Austin this fained vow of Mary which directly saith he impugneth the Scriptures Yea saith Peter (u) De Eucharist et votis col 1609. Martir Austin in his booke of holy virginity beleeueth that B. Mary vowed virginity c. which saith this hereticke al easily know how absurd it is Lastly whereas (w) Instit l. 1. c. 14. parag 5. 6. Hiperius in method Theol. p. 387. 288. and the ministers of Lincolne Diocese in their abridgement p. 74. Caluin other Protestants do vtterly deny the diuers orders of Angels other Prot. them selues translate S. Austin to say (x) In their English translation of the bookes de ciuitate Dei l. 22. c. 30. p. 919. ante med No inferior shal in heauen enuy his superior euen as now the other Angels do not enuy the Archangels Yea Cheâ—â—itiâ—â— alledgeth S. Austin as affirming the diuers degrees of (y) Loc. com part 1. fol. 2. Thrones Dominations Principalities c. Saying further how they differ amongst them selues c. In the next life we shal see face to face Concerning the sacred Scriptures CHAPTER 3. S. Austin teacheth the sacred Sciptures to be discerned for such by the authority of the Church SECTION 1. VVHereas Protestants ordinarily teach that the sacred Scriptures are infallibly discerned by vs from al Apocriphal writinges either by the Scriptures them selues or the priuate spirit S. Austin agreeably with the now Roman Church referreth our certaine knowledge therof to the authority and determination of the Church of Christ saying (b) Tom. 6. contra ep fundamenti c. 5. ante med I would not beleeue the Gospel vnlesse the authority of the Catholicke Church moued me therto c. If thou houldest me to the Gospel I may hould my selfe to them by whose commaundement I beleeued the Gospel and these commaunding I wil not credit thee c. The Authority of Catholickes weakned I can not then beleeue the Gospel c. It is necessary that I beleeue the Actes of the Apostles if I beleeue the Gospel because Catholicke authority doth commend a like both Scriptures vnto me And though sundry (c) In whitakers duplicatio aduersus Stapletonum l. 2. c. 8. p. 387. Protestants labour to euade this by affirming that S. Austin spoke of the time past when he was a Manichee and not as then being Catholicke al the wordes cyted do clearly contest the contrary and accordingly are vnderstoode by the Protestant (d) Centuriae tres cent 2. q. 3. p. 267. Bachmannus in this very sense which we now vrge And Suinglius hauing recyted this former saying of S. Austin in steede of better answeare is not ashamed to geue this vndeserued censure saying (e) Tom. 1. fol. 135. here I intreat your indifferent iudgementâ— that you freely speake whether this saying of Austin may not be thaught more audacious then meete or to haue beene vttered imprudently S. Austin teacheth the bookes of Tobie Iudith Hester Machabees c. to be diuine and canonical Scriptures SECTION 2. SAinct Austin professedly dissented from the Canon of the Hebrewes saying (f) Tom. 5. de ciuit Dei l. 18. c. 36. fine not the Iewes but the Church houldeth the bookes of Machabees for Canonical which saying is so plaine that the Protest (g) In his defence englished art 5. p. 151. Pierre du Moulin affirmeth these wordes of the Church houlding theÌ„ for Canonical to be an added falsification alledging yet not any proofe or testimony thereof whereas al copies are consenting against him In so much as our (h) P. 725. aduersaries english translation of this booke not daring to deny these wordes doth of fraudulent purpose and to make them lesse apparent onely omit this other parcel quos non Iudaei sed because that this but appearing it argueth the said bookes to be Canonical in the same sense wherein they were by the Iewes reiected and therefore properly Canonical But concerning al the bookes now in question S. Austin comprehendeth them at once with the other vndoubted Scriptures vnder one and the same word Canonical saying (i) Tom. 3. de doctrina Christiana l. 2. c. 8. ante med The whole Canon of the Scriptures is contained in these bookes following and then next immediatly numbring them vp he placeth in ranke with Genesis Exodus c. the other now controuerted of Tobie Iudith Hester c. which Protestants generally reiect for Apocriphal And whereas S. Austin was present and (k) Council Carthag 3. fine subscribed to the Carthage Councel in the same it was vniuersally decreed (l) Concil Carthag 3. can 47. That besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing should be read in the Church vnder the name of diuine Scriptures now the Canonical Scriptures are Genesis Exodus c. wherwith it in order reckneth the other bookes now in question most euidently so placing and ranking them vnder the foresaid title of Canonicas Scripturas and of such as are to be read in the Church sub nomine diuinarum Scripturarum And though M. Moulins obiecteth that S. Austin saith (m) His defence p. 152. and see Aug. tom 7. contra Epist Gaudentii l. 1. c. 31. circa med The booke of Machabees is receiued not vnprofitably of the Church if men read it soberly yet M. Moulin in the same place geueth the answeare him selfe which in substance is that S. Austin said this as in respect of Razes killing himselfe whose example the Donatistes of indifferent zeale followed in reguard whereof S. Austin requireth this sobriety And he further explaineth this which M. Moulin omitteth saying (n) Ibidem tom 2. ep 61. post med The Scripture of the Machabees touching Raze his death haith tould how it was done but not commended it as though it were to be done Euen as the booke of (o) Cap. 16.30 Iudges reporteth the like of Sampson whom yet the (p) Hebr. c. 11.32 And see Aug. de ciuit Dei l. 1. c. 21. Apostle commendeth Againe to that other often answeared cauil of our aduersaries that the foresaid Councel of Carthage here mencioneth fiue bookes of Salamon whereas we haue but
three I do once more in answeare therto explaine that the Councel vnder those fiue bookes of Salamon comprehendeth also the other two bookes of Wisdome and Ecclesiasticus both which as S. Austin further explaineth (q) De doctrina Christiana l. 2. c. 8. circa med were said to be Salamons in reguard of a certaine resemblance of stile But the truth hereof is so clearly defended by the Carthage Councel and S. Austin that our aduersary Mathaeus (r) Tract tripart theol p. 46. Hoe confesseth and reproueth the Carthage Councel in these wordes The Councel of Carthage haith decreed for Canonical al the bookes of the old Testament excepting the third and fourth of Esdras the third of Machabees c. I ad that the Councel of Carthage ought not to haue Canonized more bookes because it had not authority c. To which the French Prot. Poliander addeth saying (s) In his refutation p. 44. To come now to the error of some Councels the Councels of Carthage and Florence haue enrouled for Canonical bookes and as diuinely inspired c. The bookes of Tobie Iudith Wisdome Ecclesiasticus and the Machabees c. And the Popes Innocentius and Gelasius haue reckned these bookes among the Canonical c. And to be breife S. Austin is so clearly ours in this waightiest point concerning the number of the sacred scriptures that he with the foresaid Councel is therefore sharply reprehended by (t) Hist sacram part 1. p. 160. Lub de principiis Christ dog l. 1. c. 4. p. 8. Hip. in method theol l. 1. p. 46. Bucer in his scrirpta Anglicana p. 713. Zanch. de sacra Script p 32 33. Field of the Church l. 4. c. 23. p. 246. 247. Reynoldes in his conclusions annexed to his conference conclus 2. p. 699. 700. Hospinian Lubbertus Hiperius Bucer Zanchius D. Field and D. Raynoldes S. Austin teacheth that one text of Scripture may haue diuerse true senses SECTION 3. DIrectly contrary to (a) Confut. of Purgat p. 151. Willet in his sinopsis p. 26. D. Fulke and D. Willet S Austin teacheth with vs that one text of Scripture may haue diuerse true senses saying (b) Tom. 1. l. 12. confes c. 31. initio when one saith this meant the Scripture which I do another saith yea that which I do I thinke I speake more religiously in saying why not both if both be true and if a third and fourth c. why not al which in diuerse other places he so often repeateth and confirmeth that sundry (c) The diuines of Geneua in their propositions and principles c. c. 52. p. 149. Zanchius de Scriptura p. 422. 424. 425. Aretius loc com loc 59. p 187. 177. The author of Catholicke Traditions p. 86. 112. Bilson in his suruey p. 418. Prot. authors do assent to his iudgement therein Now this truth supposed it fully preuenteth our aduersaries vsual euasion in many pointes of controuersy as for example where we alledge the Fathers expounding some texts of Scripture in behalfe of Purgatory Prot. do commonly obiect the same or some other Father vpon occation of other applicatioÌ„ vnderstaÌ„ding thereby the tribulation of this life so opposing this against the other which exposition the said Fathers neuer intended but admitted both the said senses And the like instance might be geuen of our aduersaries like euasion in other pointes of doctrine as namely in the further exposition of Tu es Petrus et super hanc Petram c. Hoc est corpus meum c. and sundry such like Now this is so certainly S. Austines doctrine that the Prot. (d) In the ministers defene for refusal of subscription part 1. p. 61. Hutton accordingly alledgeth and confesseth the forecyted saying of S. Austin to this purpose S. Austin teacheth that besides the sacred Scriptures the TraditioÌ„s of the Church are to be receiued and beleeued as also that al hereticks do insist only vpon the Scriptures SECTION 4. COncerning the question whether the Scriptures do containe al needful pointes of faith and saluation not onely by general direction to (e) Hebrewes 13.17 Obey our Prelates (f) Math. 18.17 Heare the Church hould (g) 2. Thes 2.15 the Traditions c. which we graunt and in which sense the Fathers do often commend the Scriptures perfection but also so particularly as that there should be no neede of any vnwritten Traditions which we deny Protestants affirme S. Austin disputing against Ciprians error of rebaptizing (h) Tom. 7. de Baptismo contra Don. l. 5. c. 23. ante med saith The Apostles commaunded nothing herein but the custome which was opposed against Ciprian is to be beleeued to haue proceeded from their tradition as many thinges be which the vniuersal Church houldeth and are therfore wel beleeued to haue beene commaunded by the Apostles although they be not found writen And speaking of the Baptisme of Infants he (i) Tom. 3. de Gen. lit l. 10. c. 23. prope finem auoucheth that it were Not at al to be beleeued if it were not an Apostolical Tradition Againe (k) Tom. 2. ep 118. ad Ianuar. c. 1. Those thinges which we obserue not written but deliuered which are kept al ouer the world ar to be vnderstod to be obserued as decreed either by the Apostles the selues or general Councels And so likewise (l) Tom. 3. de doctrina Cristiana l. 4. c. 21. prope initium And in concil Carthag 3. can 24. The mixture of water with wine in the Chalice he confirmeth from Tradition which his sayinges are so euident for Apostolicke Traditions that M. (m) In Whirguiftes defence p. 103. Carthwright answearing thereto saith To allow S. Austines saying is to bring in Popery againe Adding (n) Ibidem in Carthwrightes his 2. â—eply part 1. p 84. 85. 86. further that If S. Austines iudgement be a good iudgement then there be some thinges commaunded of God which are not in the Scriptures and thereupon no sufficient doctrine contained in the Scriptures Lastly whereas M. Carthwright and others do vsually (o) In Hookers Eccles pol. l. 3. sec 7. p. 118. obiect against vnwritten Traditions certaine obscure and by vs often answeared sayinges of S. Austin and other Fathers our learned aduersarie M. (p) Ibipem p. 119. Hooker forbeareth not in our so cleare a cause by his special explication and answeare to explaine and cleare them to our handes so that al further answeare I deeme ouer tedious and vnworthy I wil now conclude this point with but remembring how peculiar S. Austin maketh it vnto heretickes to insist vpon onely Scripture To which end he induceth the Arian hereticke saying then to Catholickes as Protestants Puritans Brounistes Anabaptiistes c. do now say to vs If (q) Tom. 6. contra Maximinum l. 1. prope init prope finem you bring any thing from the Scriptures c. it is necessary that we heare it but these words
praier diligence c. Al which though endeauored by vs with al possible care are yet as being actions on our part most clearly not infallible but humane and subiect to (m) Lubbeâ—tus de princip Christian dog l. 6. c. 13. p. 442. Whitaker de Eccles controuer 2. q. 4. p. 221. error And such as the same notwithstanding Luther and many other his followers haue euen according to our aduersaries censures no lesse confessedly then greeuously (n) Whitguift in defence p. penult Bridges in def of the gouernment p. 559. Hospin hist sacram part 2. fol. 14. 44. 55. 49. 57. erred and therin persisted (o) Luther de caen a Domini tom 2. Germ. fol. 174. euenconcerning such pointes of doctrine as they from their owne careful obseruation of these foresaid meanes held for most certaine vndoubted cleare And the like might be exemplifyed in the (p) In their Apol. p. 103. Broumstes (q) Hooker Eccles pol. in pref sec 8. p. 38. Anabaptistes (r) Carrh wright in his second reply part 1. p. 18. 509. Puritanes (s) Caluin Tract theol p. 533. c. Libertines and (t) Colloq Ratisbone Lutheranes whoal of them in like manner haue no lesse carefully conferred and seriously pretended the Scriptures in defence of their so many different errors which each of them seuerally apprehended for vndoubted true and yet the same notwithstanding al of theÌ„ confessedly erred Vpon due consideratioÌ„ therefore had of these premises so necessarily inferring our owne incertanty al foresaid pretence of Scripture to the contrary notwithstanding and like further obseruation that the cheife question of the Canonical Scriptures theÌ„ selues is determined to vs not by Scripture it selfe as haith (*) See here before at e. f. beene shewed nor (u) Whitaker aduersus Stap. l. 2. c. 6. p. 370. l. 2. c. 6. p. 357. by priuate testimony of the spirit but according to the learnedst (x) The author of the treatise of the Scriptures and the Church c. 16. fol. 75. Whitaker cont Staplet l. 2. c. 4. p. 298. 300. Chemnit in examen part 1. p. 69. Lubbertus de princip Christian dog l. 1. c. 4. p. 18. Protestants by iudgement of the Church which confessedly (y) Fulke his answeare to a count Cath. p. 5. Iewel in def of the apol part 2. p. 242. Witaker contra Stap. l. 1. c. 5. p. 69. had the assistance of the holy Ghost in her infallible discerning to vs which bookes of Scripture were sacred and which not wherby also is further argued or rather conuinced her no lesse needful assistance of the same spirit in her like discerning to vs the sense (z) Chemnit in ex am part 1. p. 74. Sarâ—â—ia in defen tract cont Bezam p. 8. of the said Scripture for what auaileth it vs to be made certaine of the bookes and left incertaine of the sense What reason can our aduersaries allegde wherby to acknowledge the Churches priuiledge in the one deny it where it is no lesse needful in the other It cannot therfore I hope in these times of so great doubt question seeme either vnfitting or vnsafe that for our owne more certaine instruction in the doctrine of the Primitiue Church which both parties acknowledge for the true Church we should make humble recourse vnto the receiued and renowmed writinges of S. Austin a principal member of the said church who liuing so long before these our times and being in such respect indifferent to our late since vprisen controuersies is by our learned aduersaries professedly reuerenced as the vndoubted (a) See hereafter c. 1. h. c. best witnes since the Apostles times of Apostolicke doctrine Neither can the perswasion which is oftentimes setled and growen strong in vs by education afford any infallible certanty to your greatest Maiesty or your learned diuines whereby to secure your selues from error as might be made plaine without al further needful discourse by example not onely of sundry auncient Kinges and (b) See the Protest Apol. tract 2. c. 3. sec 6. parag 2. p. 513. at s Emperours who brought vp in Arianisme did thereupon imbrace and by their lawes establish the error therof as a truth most consonant to the Scriptures but also of diuerse moderne Lutheran Princes as of Denmarke Saxony Brunswicke c. who vpon their like education in Lutheranisme do professe as not to be questioned their monster of (c) See Whitguifâ— in his defence of the answeare p. penult Bridges in his def of the gouernement l. 7. p. 559. Hospin in hist Sacram fol. 14. 44. 55. 49. 57. And part 2. fol. 245. 282. 286. 287. vbiquity and other now dissenting opinions condemning therupon the aduerse doctrines of Caluin and Suinglius for (d) Luther Tom. 2. Wittenberg fol. 503. and tom 7. fol. 382. Fulke against the defence of the censure p. 101. 155. Hospin hist saciam part 2. fol. 183. errors most execrable In like sort the reformed Churches so are they (e) By Hooker in Eccles pol. l. 4. sec 8. p. 101. 183. styled of Transiluania Poland and hungary who being Antitrinitaries and yet otherwise (f) See Gratianus Prosper in his instrumen tum doctrinarum c. onely differing from the Caluinistes in the doctrine of the Trinity the Baptisme of infants haue together with their milke sucked the poyson of Arianisme are vpon this like ground euen to this present so carried away against our receiued doctrine of the blessed Trinity that they forbeare not to compare it to the (g) See Osiander cent 16. l. 2. c. 22. p. 209. three headed Cerberus condemning the same in their sundry (h) Gratianus Prosper Socinus Gentilis Seruetus Blandrata and other new Arians published writinges stored with plentiful alledged testimonies of Scripture for the cheifest brand of al Popish and Antichristian (i) See Osiander cent 16. l. 2. c. 22. p. 209. corruption And as we can not assure our selues but that in case of our like supposed educatioÌ„ in those opinions so once in like manner established with the current and countenance of the state our iudgements no lesse then theirs in like sort might haue beene preoccupated and transported with the same errors so their example affordeth vs iust forwarning not to rest secure vpon the appearing probability of any such like setled perswasion whatsoeuer And so much the lesse if we not onely obserue ingeneral the great reuoult of late made by so many of the learnedst Caluinistes from Caluins former receiued so much applauded (k) See Willet in Rom. c. 9. p. 442. Melancth in Con. Theol. part 2. p. 111. Hemingius de vniuersali gratia Snecanus in method de script p. 124. 430. 441. Castalio in his booke hereof de praedest Fox in Apoc. p. 473. sundry others doctrines concerning Reprobation induration vniuersality of grace (l) So did Caluin Beza and the French Protestantes and our now
9. p. 208. of the house haunted with spirits and cleared by the Preist saying Masse in it To conclude therefore this passage concerning the miracles most of them done in Affrica at the memorial of S. Stephâ—n reported by S. Austin in his foresaid booke de ciu Dei it is yet further to be obserued that the same are also acknowledged and recorded by Euodius of whom thus writeth S. Austin at (m) Lib. 22 de ciu Dei c. 8. and after the engl trans p. 888. Vzaly neare Vtica haue many miracles bâ—ne wrought by power of the said martyr Stephen where Bishop Euodius erected his memorial long before this of ours The same Euodius did accordingly publish a special treatise in 2. bookes de miraculis Protomartyris Stephani extant in S. Austins workes Tom. 10. Also Sigebert Gâ—mblacensis 500. yeares since in l. de illust (n) Cap. 15. Eccles script maketh mention of this Euodius and of his treatise of S. Stephans miracles and the Century writers say from (o) Cent. 5. c. 10. col 1137. Trithemius there is a booke of Euodius extant of the miracles done in Affricke by the reâ—iques of S. Stephen of which miracles mencion is also made by S. (p) Tom. 10. de diuers ser 51. Austin elswhere by (q) In script Eccles in Luciano c. 46. in Auito c. 47. in Orosio c. 39. Bede l. Rerract in act Apost c. 5. 8. et in l. de tempor ratione Nicep hist l. 14. c. 9. Genadius Bede and Nicephorus A truth so cleare that Hospinian confesseth that (r) De Templis p. 301. Austin telleth many true miracles done by the signe of the Crosse the deuil put to flight de ciu Dei l. 22. c. 8. Yea he further saith (s) Pag. 138. hither b long those other true miracles which other Fathers mention as also Austin de ciu Dei l. 22. c. 8. And wheras Duraeus obiecteth these foresaid miracles D. Whitaker denyeth not but confesseth saying (t) Reply to Duraeus p. 886. I do not thinke these miracles vaine and therfore not forged which are affirmed to haue bene done at the monuments of the martyrs Moreouer our aduersaries them selues haue in such like respect not forborne to translate and publish in english S. Austines foresaid booke of miracles In further confirmation of al which I might yet ad sundry other miracles mencioned by S. Austin in sundry (u) Tom. 1. l. 1. Retract c. 13. post med tom 7. de vnit Eccles c. 19. ante med Tom. 1. l. 9. confes c. 7. Tom. 9. in Ioan. tract 120. circ med other of his writinges as also by (x) Orat. in mamant Naz. orat in Cipri Chrisost l. contra Gentiles Amb. ser de S. Geruas et Protas Hier. cont Vigilan ep ad Eustochium and in vita Hilarion Sulpt in vita Martini and see Cent. 5. c. 13. from col 1478. til 1493. cent 4. c. 13. froÌ„ col 1433. til col 1456. S. Basil S. Gregory Nazianzen S. Chrisostome S. Ambrose S. Hierome Sulpitius and the Century writers against al which if any yet vnsatisfyed shal oppose his owne bare vnwarranted denyal we leaue that man as much more worthy of contempt then further reply And thus much breifly concerning such miracles collected from S. Austin as do clearly conuince what religion it was whether Catholicke or Protestant which was by him professed and by miracles thus confirmed Concerning such sayinges of S. Austin as are vsually obiected by our aduersaries against his former Catholicke doctrines confessed for such by Protestantes and confirmed by miracles CHAPTER 19. Such places are answeared as are vrged against the Canonical Scriptures against Traditions and the authority of Councels SECTION 1. AGainst the booke of Machabees M. Moulin obiecteth that S. Austin saith (a) Defence p. 152. The booke of Machabees is receiued not vnprofitably of the Church if men read it soberly M. Moulin in the same place geueth the answeare him selfe which in substance is that S. Austin said this as in respect of Razes killing himselfe whose example the Donatistes of indiscret zeale followed in reguard wherof S. Austin required this sobriety explaning further there and elswhere (b) Tom. 2. ep 61. post med which Moulin omitteth that The Scripture of the Machabees haith touching Razes death tould how it was done but not commended it as though it were to be done And in the booke of Iudges (c) Cap. 16.30 is reported the like of Sampson whom yet the Apostle (d) Hebrewes 11.32 and Aug. de ciu Dei l. 1. c. 21. commendeth Wheras M. Carthwright (e) In Hookers Eccles pol. l. 2. sec 7. p. 118. 119. obiecteth against vnwritten traditions certaine obscure sayinges of S. Austin and other Fathers M. Hooker forbeareth not in our so cleare a case by his special explication and answeare to explaine and cleare them to our handes D. Fulke (e) In Hookers Eccles pol. l. 2. sec 7. p. 118. 119. obiecteth against the authority of Councels that S. Austin teacheth that (f) Answeare to a counterf Cath. p. 89. And Aug. tom 7. de Bapt. cont Don. l. 2. c. 3. post med general Councels themselues may be often amended the former by the later when by some experience of thinges that is opened which before was shut and that knowen which before was vnknowen But his meaning here is onely concerning matters of fact or at most but concerning such pointes of faith as were by former Councels not erroneously determined but onely left vndefyned and afterwardes resolued vpon by later Councels for S. Austins wordes of Amendment argue him not to speake of faith seeing faith or heresy is not properly said to be amended but of matters of fact which are subiect to amendment A truth yet more euident in that this amendment is here said to come to passe by the experience of thinges vnto which experience not doctrine of faith but matters of fact be properly subiâ—ct M. Iewel obiecteth (g) Reply art 4. p. 272. the testimony of S. Austin concerning Constantine the great vndertaking the iudgement of Bishops and their cause vpon appeale made to him in that behalfe but M. (h) 2. Reply part 2. p. 163. Carthwright answeareth hereto in our behalfe that Austin saith that the Emperour was driuen by the Donatistes importunity who made no end of appealing vnto him to geue sentence in that matter for the which also he was to craue pardon of the Bishops To which purpose also S. Austin and Optatus haue (i) See before c. chapter 4. sec 6. formerly made their seueral answeares Such places are answeared as are obiected from S. Austin against Baptisme by women in case of necessity And against the real presence SECTION 2. MAister Carthwright obiecteth against Baptisme by women the 4. (k) Can. 100. Carthage Councel saying (l) In Whitguiftes def tract 9. c. 5. p. 523. Let not a woman presume to Baptise But his answeare is geuen him by
c. 14. sec 3. Beza in ep theol ep 28. p. 174. herein the error of the auncient Fathers cannot be excused In like sort concerning the canonical Scriptures the Protestant Poliander saith (d) See before c. 3. sec 2. to come now to the error of some Councels the Councels of Carthage and Florence hauing rouled for Canonical bookes and as diuinely inspired c. the bookes of Tobie Iudith Wisdome Ecclesiasticus and the Machabees c. and the Popes Innocentius and Gelasius haue reckoned these bookes among the canonical And the like is formerly confessed by sundry other Protestants Traditions are so fully taught by the Fathers as that for teaching the same D. Raynoldes (e) Conclusions annexed to hiâ— confer conclus 1. p. 689. reproueth S. Basil and S. Epiphanius Chemnitius reprehendeth (f) Examen part 1. p. 87. 89. 90. Clemens Alexandrinus Origen Epiphanius Ambrose Hierome Maximus Theophilus Basil Damascen D. Fulke acknowledgeth as much of (g) Confut. of Purg. p. 362. 303. 397. and against Martial p 170. 178. against Bristowes motiues p. 35. 36. Chrisostome Tertulan CipriaÌ„ AustiÌ„ Hierom. D. Whitaker confesseth the like of (h) De sacra Script p. 678. 681. 683. 685. 690. 695. 696. 668. 670. and see Schrodâ—â—us in opusc theol p. 72. Chrisostome Epiphanius Tertulian Ciprian Austin Innocentius Leo Basil Eusebius Damascen The Fathers in general are confessed to teach the Primacy Ecclesiastical of of Peter and the Bishops of Rome As also to deny supreme Ecclesiastical gouernment to temporal Princes and that the Pope is not Antichrist SECTION 2. COncerning S. Peter and his then successors Bishops of Rome in the foresaid auncient times sundry of the Fathers are by Protestants reprehended for their affirming the Church to be builded vpon Peter wherof Caluin saith (i) Instit l. 4. e. 6. parag 6. Some of the Fathers haue so expounded those wordes super hanc Petram but al the Scripture cryeth the contrary Danaeus also saith of the Fathers (k) Resp ad Bellar part 1. p. â—77 the saying of Christ thou art Peter c. they haue noughtily expounded of the person of Peter And the (l) Cent. 3. col 84. 85. cent 4 col 1250. col 1141. col 555. 557. 558. Centuristes do expresly reprehend and charge many of the auncient Fathers with this opinion D. Fulke affirmeth that not some few (m) Confut of the Papistes quarrels p. 4. but many of the auncient Fathers c. were deceiued to thinke something more of Peters prerogatiue and the Bishops of Romes dignity then by the word of God was geuen to either of them In so much as in reguard of the Roman Bishops then câ—aimed and enioyed Primacy Protestantes feare not to affirme that the Roman Bishops in the time of Constantine the great were very Antichristes whereof writeth M. (n) In Apocalip p. 539. Brightman Antichrist haith raigned from the time of Constantine the great to this very day And speaking of the Pope of Rome he saith (o) Ibidem p. 477. and see p. 471. for these thousand three hundred yeares he is that Antichrist whom M. Nappier nameth (p) Vpon the reuel p. 362. 85 88. 75. 68. And see Gauuius in Palma Christiana p. 34. to be Siluester the first But Protestants forbeare not to reproue and charge with affected vsurped Primacy euen S. Peter him selfe and the other next to him succeeding bishops of Rome for of this certaine Caluinistes write thus (q) Catalogus testium veritatis tom 1. p. 27. It may not be denyed but that Peter was somtimes faulty in ambition and desire of power c. by which infirmity of Peter doubtles it was signifyed that those Bishops which bragged of Peters succession were to be faulty of the like yea with greater ambition by infinit degrees c. wherfore this so peruerse abition of Peter and ignorance of heauenly thinges and negligence withal c. did without doubt signify that the Roman Bishop because he would be cheife and heire of Peters priuiledges was to be ignorant and a contemner of heauenly thinges and one desirous of human riches power and pleasures To which purpose also auoucheth another Protestant writer that (r) Philippus Nicholai in comment de regno Christi p. 221. The affectation of Primacy was a common infirmity of the Apostles as also of the first Bishops of the Citie of Rome Hence also it is that the auncient Fathers did confessedly reproue some Emperours of their times for vsurping of Ecclesiastical gouernment of which thus write the Centuristes (s) Cent. 4. c. 7. col 54â— The Emperours also did somtimes assume to them selues vnseasonably the iudgement of matters of faith which Athanasius reprehendeth in Constantius and Ambrose in Valentinian of which latter also saith (t) Cent. 4. l. 4. c. 9. p. 477. And D. Downham in his defence l. 1. c. 8. p. 162. 163. Osiander Ambrose answeared o Emperour do not trouble thy selfe to thinke that thou hast any imperial right ouer heauenly thinges do not extol thy selfe c. with whom agreeth M. (u) 2. Reply part 2. p. 161. 162. 155. 156. Carthwright adding further Ambrose saith it was not read nor hâ—ard of before that any Emperour was iudge ouer a Bishop in a cause of faith which was not the iudgment of Ambrose onely but of other Bishops round about Of which point also Polanus alledgeth (x) Symphonica e. 22. Thes 2. p. 836. 837. 838. 839. 841. 842. 843. 844. 849. sundry testimonies of the auncient Fathers Concerning Antichrist whose comming person and continuance were no doubt plainly and faithfuly deliuered by the Apostles to their followers and from them successiuely continued in the Church of God in better forewarning and discouery of the monster when he should appeare And first as touching the time of his comming foretould not to be before the end of the Roman Empire M. Fulke confesseth saying (y) Against Rhem. test in 2. Thes 2.3 sec 4. Indeed most of the auncient Fathers did iudge that the Roman Empire should first be decayed before Antichrist were reueled wherof also saith Caluin (z) In 2. Thes 2.3 for as much as they haue expounded this place of the defection of the Roman Empire it is more friuolous then that it needeth any long confutation and I do maruel that so many writers otherwise learned and witty haue beene deceiued in so easy a thing but that when one had erred the rest without iudgment followed in troupes which their pretended error was for sooth because they did not agree in the said exposition with the (a) Fulke in his answeare to a counterf Cath. p. 27. 36. Downham of Antichrist l. 1. p. 4. Willet in synops p. 160. Perkins vpon the Creede p. 307. Danaeus resp ad Bel. part 1. p. 371. Whitak de Eccles controu 2. quaest 4. p. 144. Powel de Antichristo in praefat p. 1. Protetestants late nouel opinion concerning
the fast of Lent the vnmarried life of Preistes Baptisme of laye persons in case of necessity the manner of sacrifycing c. Whitaker answearing therto iustifyeth the same saying (d) De Eccles controu 2. 9. 5. p. 299. wheras Bellarmine alledgeth certaine testimonies from Caluin and the Century writers as noting certaine errors of the auncient Fathers which were common to them with the Papistes as namely freewil merit Limbus Inuocation of Sainctes the vnmarried life of Preistes satisfaction and certaine other such like c. before mencioned by Bellarmine I answeare therto that it is true which Caluin and the Century writers haue written that in many thinges the auncient Church erred as in Limbus freewil merit of workes and in the residue of those other before recyted Agreeably hereunto also acknowledgeth (e) Nouum testam praefat ad Principem Condensem Beza of the times of Ciprian Austin and Chrisostome that euen then Satan did laye the first foundation in Greece of inuocation of the deade wherto some Bishops of cheifest note were so far from opposing them selues c. that they did not only not expresse the opeÌ„ superstitions arising but also nourished them c. Hence those opinions of freewil c. affirming presently after that the knowledge of prouidence freewil faith and free iustification was as then almost oppressed with the commentaries of the Grecian Bishops c. At the same time inuocation of the deade preuailed and the foolish opinion of single life which shamful errors being openly defended the multitude also of Ceremonies increased c. and the Monkes in Aegipt and Syria c. almost al admired as Angels prayers also for the deade begun then to be vsed more freely and the Platonical question concerning Purgatory fire c. This acknowledgment of Beza is so certaine that the Protestant (f) Asinus Auis sec 43. p. 60. Holderus purposly preuenteth al extenuation or excuse therof M. (g) In Apoc. in c. 14. p. 382. Brightman hauing named S. Athanasius Basil Chrisostome Ambrose Hiâ—rome Augustine c. auoucheth further that they were in words condemning Idolatry but indeed establishing it by inuocatioÌ„ of Saincts worshiping of Reliques such other like wicked superstitions affirming yet further that no more pure doctrine can be drawen out of their writinges then any profitable notion be gathered by the beating of the waues In like sort M. Napier recordeth that (h) Vpon the reuelation p. 361. The Bishops staf the Archbishos cloake or pale c. Item their holy water their Chrismes in Baptisme the shauing of their heades their golden and siluer vessels in the Church their Albes and Corporals of linnen for the Altar their consecration of the Altar the obseruation of dayes c. the fasting in Lent from flesh the choice of meates the pretended chastity of the Cleargy the celebration of Masses in memory of Martyrs the adoration of the Crosse were al instituted and deuised and arose about the 313. yeare of Christ together with the style of Primacy vsurped by the Roman Bishop The (i) Ib. p. 362. supper of the Lord was then degenerate and turned ouer to the Masse to be celebrated for deade men c. and mixed with water In the (k) Ib. p. 363. 20. Articles of the first Councel of Nice are superstitious rytes euen the obseruation of dayes to wit of peace or indulgence and superstitious penances c. Thâ—se and diuerse other abuses and superstitious rites creeped in in the outward visible face of the Church in Siluester the first his dayes The Century writers in their fift Century being that age wherin S. Austin flourished affirme that as theÌ„ (l) 〈◊〉 dedic euery where Monasteries and Celles of Eremites were builded and that they had for their praisers Austin Chrisostome and others most excellent men Hence also the cheife articles of faith of free remission of sinnes by faith in Christ began to be obscured and defyled c. The doctrine also of good workes was diuersly corrupted c. They attributed saluation to them with reproch and iniury to the merit of Christ c. The light also of true inuocation began to be obscure c. Afterwardes also because ouermuch should be challenged to the merits and worship of deade men in this age also rise vp the worship of Reliques c. running to peeces of Sainctes as they were commonly thought Therefore these cheife heades being adulterated it is easy to conceaue that in the other parts also of heauenly doctrine sincerity was many wayes corrupted c. The Roman Bishops not onely greedily but also impudently sowed the seedes of their Primacy or eminency aboue other Churches of the world c. Rome formerly the head mistres of the world is becom the seat of Antichrist c. more particularly they charg the Fathers of this age as erring in our Catholicke doctrines of (m) Cap. 4. col 500. freewil of (n) Col. 504. Iustification of good (o) Col. 506. workes of (p) Col. 510. prayer of human (q) Col. 513. Traditions of (r) Col. 513. virginity of (s) Col. 513. Penance of (t) Col. 515. Baptisme of the Lords (u) Col. 517. supper of (x) Col. 518. marriage of the (y) Col. 520. Church of the place of (z) Col. 520. soules and of the (a) Col. 523. Canonical bookes In al which they recyte and reiect their particular sayinges And the like also might be seene vnder the titles of (b) Cap. 7. col 774. Primacy of (c) c. 6. col 684. Lent of (d) Col. 697. Reliques and their translation of (e) Col. 700. Monkes of (f) Col. 714. Heremites and the Ceremonies (g) Col. 727. of Baptisme In so much that Osiander auoucheth that (h) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 1. Most diuines of this Century did no litle diuert from the purity of Apostolical doctrine vnto human opinions and Traditions c. In this Century Antichristianisme was conceiued in the braine of Ambitious Bishops c. So confessedly auncient are both the foresaid rites and doctrines of our Catholicke religion from the abounding testimonies of the Centuristes Osiander Caluin Beza Whitaker Brightman and Napier And here it may be wel obserued that the foresaid Protestants reiecting the Fathers thus in general for agreeing with Catholickes in al the foresaid points of faith that this preuenteth and confuteth D. Mortons vsual euasion throughout his Appeale in pretending that the Fathers held these pointes but in other manner then we Catholickes now do as though the Fathers agreed with vs in wordes tearmes and differed from vs in meaning Ad now lastly hereunto that in reguard of our foresaid sympathie with the Fathers in matters of faith and religion that D. Whitaker further auoucheth (i) â—ontra Duraeum l. 6. p. 4â—3 The Popish religion to be a patched couerlet of the Fathers errors sowed together And
Waldo Wicliue Husse Luther Caluin and other damned Heretickes whose very inconstancy and ciuil dissentions amongst them selues may serue vs for a strongest argument that their singular doctrines first proceeding from the spirit of error and ignorance were after mantained by the spirit of pride and obstinacy shortly wil be ended by the spirit of discord and contradiction God saue the KING THE CONTENTES of the preface to the kinges Maiesty THat the sacred Scriptures alone are not sufficient to determine controuersies p. 5. That controuersies in Religion are to be decyded by the Church p. 9. That long education in any profession or Religion is not sufficient security for the truth therof p. 10. That Protestants haue reuoulted from their former professed doctrines And of their great inconstancy and incertanty therein p. 12. The contentes of the Preface to the learned aduersaries Certaine writinges of S. Austin charged by Protestants for counterfeate are defended and other their euasions preuented p. 25. Chapter 1. The Author beginneth his booke to his Catholicke frend p. 1. Chapter 2. CoÌ„cerning God the humanity of Christ the B. Virgin Mary and the holy Angels Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that the sonne of God is God of God and not of him selfe p. 8. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that God doth not reprobate any to sinne or damnation or commaund any thing impossible p. 10. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that Christ suffered not according to his diuine nature nor according to the same was Preist or offered sacrifice or was mediator and that from his natiuity he was free from ignorance and after his death descended into hel and that his body by Gods omnipotency may be without circumscription p. 16. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that the B. Virgin Mary was freed from original sinne That her body was assumpted into heauen and that she vowed chastity He also teacheth the different degrees of Angels and Archangels p. 22. Chapter 3. Concerning the sacred Scriptures Section 1. S. Austin teacheth the sacred Scriptures to be discerned for such by the authority of the Church p. â—26 Section 2. S. Austin teacheth the bookes of Tobie Iudith Hester Machabees c. to be diuine and Canonical Scriptures p. 28. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that one text of Scripture may haue diuerse true senses p. 33. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that besides the sacred Scriptures the Traditions of the Church are to be receiued beleeued As also that al heretickes do insist onely vpon the Scriptures p. 35. Chapter 4. Concerning the Church of Christ Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that the Church of Christ is freed from error p. 39. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that the Church of Christ is Catholicke or vniuersal p. 41. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that the militant Church must euer continue and that visibly p. 46. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that the Church was built vpon Peter And that Peter was the head of the whole Church p. 50. Section 5. S. Austin teacheth the Primacy of the Roman Church p. 53. Section 6. S. Austin denyeth Ecclesiastical Primacy to Emperours Kinges p. 57. Chapter 5. Concerning the Sacramentes Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that the Sacraments do not onely signify but truly confer grace to the worthy receiuer p. 60. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that certaine of the Sacraments do imprint a Character or marke in the soule of the receiuer p. 62. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that there are seauen Sacramentes p. 64. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that the Sacraments are to be administred with the signe of the Crosse p. 66. Chapter 6. Concerning Baptisme Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that Baptisme taketh away al sinnes both original and actual p. 68. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that concupisence remaning after Baptisme is not sinne p. 69. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that children dying vnbaptised are not saued p. 71. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth sundry Ceremonies of Baptisme now vsed in the Roman Church p. 73. Chapter 7. Concerning the Sacrament of Confirmation p. 76. Chapter 8. Concerning the real presence or Sacrament of the Eucharist Section 1. S. Austin teacheth the real Presence of Christes body and bloud in the Sacrament of the Eucharist p. 81. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that the very wicked do truly receiue the body of Christ p. 85. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that great care is to be vsed lest any part of the Sacrament do fal vpon the ground and that it is to be receiued fasting Besides which he also teacheth and alloweth the vse of holy bread now vsed by Catholickes p. 87. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that the sacrament of the Eucharist is to be adored And other Fathers teach that it is to be inuocated and that Angels are present in time of the sacrifice p. 90. Section 5. S. Austin teacheth that the Eucharist is a true and proper sacrifice and that it is propitiatory euen for the dead and that it was offered vpon Altars consecrated with oyle and the signe of the Crosse p. 104. Chapter 9. Concerning the Sacrament of penance wherin auricular confession to Preistes imposed Penance and dayes of pardon are taught by S. Austin and other Fathers p. 111. Chapter 10. Concerning the Sacrament of Extreme vnction wherein is proued the same to be a Sacrament and vsed in the Primitiue Church p. 122. Chapter 11. Concerning the Sacrament of Orders wherein S. Austin teacheth that they are properly a Sacrament geuen onely by a Bishop who haith authority to excommunicate euen the deade And that Preistes may not marry or be one that was Bigamus p. 125. Chapter 12. Concerning the Sacrament of Matrimony taught by S. Austin and that the innocent party vpon Adultery may not marry an other And of the Preistes blessing after marriage p. 134. Chapter 13. Concerning free wil iustification merit of workes workes of superogation and the difference of mortal and venial sinnes Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that man haith free wil. p. 139. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that our iustification consisteth not onely in remission of sinnes or not imputation therof but likewise in good workes and that the same once had may be lost p. 145. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that good workes do merit and that there are workes of supererogation p. 149. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that mortal and venial sinnes do differ of their owne natures pag. 154. Chapter 14. Concerning praier for the deade Purgatory material fire in hel Limbus Patrum inuocation of Sainctes their worship and Images Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that it is lawful and godly to pray for the dead and that there is a place of Purgatory after this life p. 157. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth local hel and material fire therin as also Limbus Patrum or Christes descending into hel p. 163. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that Sainctes are to be inuocated and worshiped as also their reliques to be reuerenced p. 163. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth
Chrisme 128. they haue authority to Excommunicate 128. euen such as are dead 129. C CAluinistes reuoult from Caluin Pref. p. 12. Ceremonies moue to deuotion 198. vsed in administration of the Sacraments 199. Obiections against them answeared 253. 312. Character imprinted by some Sacraments 62. Chrisme hallowed onely by a Bishop 77. Miracles wrought therby 223. Christ is God of God 9. denyed by some Prot. 8. but beleeued by others 10. he suffered not according to his diuine nature 16. Neither as God was Preist or mediator 17. 266. He was freed from ignorance 18. He descended into hel 19. His body may be without circumscription 19. Obiections against this answeared 241. Christian liberty taught by Prot. disliked by the Kinges Maiesty 387. Church of Christ freed from error 39. she is Catholicke or vniuersal 41. and euer visible 46. Built vpon S. Peter 50. Churches were consecrated 207. They were sanctuary 207. Commaundements of God not impossible 15. 142. Commaundements of the first table diuided by S. Austin as Catholickes now do 169. Concupiscence is not sinne without consent 69. Confession of sinnes 113. 278. c. Shamefastnes is not to hinder the same 118. Sinnes in particular are to be told 118. 278. Obiections against confession answeared 279. Confirmation a Sacrament 76. 276. Geuen by impsition of handes 78. 277. Councels of good authority 40. Obiections against them answeared 232. Crosse vsed in administration of the Sacraments 66. 200. 276. worshiped 300. It shal be carried before Christ at the day of iudgement 191. It was vsed in prayer 205. Miracles wrought therby 218. Ciprians sermon de abâ—â—lutione pedum proued to be auncient 66. D DIuorce in case of Adultery doth not warrant the Innocent party to marry againe 136. E EDucation no warrant for the truth of religion Pref. p. 10. England conuerted by Austin to Popery 323. Enoch and Elias yet aliue and to come at the time of Antichrist 190. Eremites and their austere life 185. Eucharist Real presence proued 81. 283. The wicked receiue the body of Christ 85. Great care is vsed that no particle fal vpon the ground 87. 289. It is to be receiued fasting 88. 285. It is adored 90. 97. Inuocated 94. 95. AdoratioÌ„ was not first brought in by Honorius 99. Obiections against Real presence answeared 225. How it was reciued by Infantes 260. Transubstantiation aunciently taught 106. 284. It was receiued chast 284. 89. It was aunciently reserued for the sicke 285. Extreame vnction a Sacrament 123. Aunciently vsed 122. 277. S. Iames his epistle reiected for the same by Prot. 124. F FAstes prescribed 175. 310. Obiections against fasting answeared 311. Fathers by Protestantes made contrary to them selues 256. Fathers obscure sayinges are to be expounded by the common receiued opinion of other Fathers 259. Their speaches vttered in heat of disputation are to be discerned from sayinges dogmatical 262. They are confessed in general for our Catholicke faith 313. They are disclaimed from by Prot. 320. Freewil taught 139. 302. The denyal therof condemned in the Manichees 140. Obiections against it answeared 248. G GOd doth not reprobate any to sinne or damnation 11. Yet Prot. teach the contrary 10. Gods foreknowledge doth not hinder freewil 13. H HEl haith in it material fyre 161. The contrary reproued in Origen 162. And yet taught by some Prot. 162. Holy bread aunciently vsed 89. Houres Canonical aunciently vsed 204. I IMages of Sainctes aunciently vsed 168. Their placing in Churches approued by Lutheranes Caluinistes 172. 299. Obiections against them answeared 244. Incertainty of our predestination 148. Inconstancy of diuerse Prot. in matters of faith Pref. p. 12. 13. 14. Iustification consisteth not onely in remission of sinnes 145. Once had it may be lost 147. Workes do iustify 147. K KIng Iames his deserued commendation Ep. to his Maiesty Kyrieleison aunciently vsed in Masse 208. L LEnt fast obligatory 173. 310. Wednesday Fryday and Saterday aunciently fasted 174. 311. The denyal of prescribed fastes reproued in Aerius 174. Saboth fastes impugnâ—d 175. Lâ—mbus Patrum or Christes descending into hel 163. 296. M MArriage a Sacrament 134. Married persons by mutual assent may vow perpetual chastity 137. 177. 306. The Preistes benediction after marriage 138. Marriage after the vow of chastity vnlawful 177. 305. Mary the mother of God freed from original sinne 22. Assumpted into heauen 23. Vowed perpetual chastity 24. Masse a proper sacrifice 104. 290. according to the order of Mâ—lchisedech 104. 291. It is the sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christ 105. Of our mediator 106. Of our price or redemption 106. Of Christians 107. It is propiciatory 107. 291. for the deade 108. 292. It is offered vpon Altars 109. Aunciently said in Latine 208. The word Masse auncient 210. Miracles wrought by oblation therof 220. Water mingled with wine in the Chalice 294. Merites of workes 149. Diuerse degrees of merites 150. The denyal thereof reproued in Iouinian 150. Merits of one may helpe another 151. Miracles in proofe of Catholicke Religion 213. 325. Obiections against them answeared 224. c. 251. 327. Prot. worke no miracles 329. Monastical life approued 180. 307. It requireth al thinges in common 180. It is vnder vow 181. The impugning therof is reproued in Petilianus 181. the particular habit of Monkes and Nunnes 182. 307. Their great abstinence 183. 308. S. Austin him selfe was a Monke 183. Monkes obedience to their superior 309. N NVnnes in ancient time 182. 308. their consecration in the Church and their habit 309. Their Monasteries 309. 310. O OBedience of religious persons 309. Obscure places of Scriptures and Fathers are to be explained by plainer 254. Orders a Sacrament 125. Inferior orders 131. 277. Their proper offices 131. P PEnetration of bodies proued by miracles 221. Penance importeth more then repentance of the minde 111. It is imposed by the Church according to our sinnes 111. 120. 281. It is somtimes remitted by Indulgence 120. 282. Penance is a Sacrament 122. S. Peter head of the Church 50. 268. Popes of Rome S. Peters successors 53. 268. Prayer for the dead 157. 295. Prayer to Sainctes 164. 297. Miracles in proofe of prayer to Sainctes 213. Apparitions made by Sainctes 215. Obiections against praying to Sainctes answeared 242. Prayer toward the East 104. Princes Kinges or Emperours not supreame heades of the Church 57. 270. Obiections for them answeared 233. Preistes properly so called 127. Preist the spiritual Iudge 113. He haith power from Gâ—d to remit sinne 115. The denyal therof condemned in the Nouatians 115. Preistâ—s are inferior to Bishopes 126. The denyal therof condemned in the Acrians 1â—6 They may not marry 133. 306. The contrary condemned in Iouinian Vigilantius 307. Purgatory and temporal punishment after this life 160. Obiections against it answeared 246. R REliques of Sainctes to be honoured 166. 246. 299. Miracles wrought by Reliques 216. 219. Rogation dayes aunciently vsed â—04 Roman faith haith continued and beene knowen in al ages 330. S SAcraments confer grace 60. Some of them imprint a character in the soules of the receiuers 62. There are seauen Sacraments 64. Sainctes are to be worshipped 165. Scriptures not able to geue vs certaine knowledge of them selues Pref. p. 5. Al conference therof by priuate men subiect to error Ibidem p. 7. The Canon therof not agreed vpon by Prot. Pref. p. 6. They and their sense are knowen by the Church Ib. p. 9. 26. The bookes of Toby Iudith c. Canonical 28. 266. Obiections against them answeared 30. 231. One text of Scripture may haue diuerse true senses 33. Heretickes insist onely vpon Scripture 37. Sinnes mortal and venial of their owne natures 155. Venial sinnes forgeuen by our Lords prayer and Ceremonies 155. Stewes permitted 194. T TRaditions are to be beleeued 35. 267. Obiections against them answeared 232. V VEssels consecrated 201. Vestiments consecrated 203. Virgins preferred before married persons 150. 177. Vowes of chastity aunciently vsed 305. Vowes made by Monkes Nunnes 181. 305. Obiections against vowes answeared 250. Vsury vnlawful 192. W VVOrkes do iustify 147. Obiections answeared 248. do merit 149. 303. Workes of supererogation 152. FINIS