is tearmed (80) Lib. German quo causas recusati concilij Trid. reddunt f. 257. An impudent Writer heauing the Pope vp into an Idol a corrupter of Gods honour and preacher of Antichrist Yea so sincerely was he affected to the Pope and the Church of Rome that the Centurists report him to (81) Cent. 12. Col. 1639. say to the Count of Aquitaine whatsoeuer is out of the Roman Church that by Gods iudgement is of necessitie to perish euen as those things which were out of the Ark were drowned in the Deluge c. As also he that persecuteth the pope of Rome whom the Centurists here cal Antichrist he persecuteth sayth S. Bernard the Sonne of God himself Neither was anie of this Papistrie noted as then to be singular in S. Bernard but to the contrarie it is confessed by M. Iewel and M. Whitaker that S. Bernard liued in the midst of the Popes Rout and Tyrannie D. Morton as formerly calling S. Bernard for his life a Sainct and for his doctrine a Lamp to preuēt obiections thereby arising against him prouidently addeth that he neither was Sainct nor Lamp (83) Prot. Appeal p. 458. Simply as vnspotted with errours but Comparatiuely or c. in his generation that is in respect of the Age wherin he liued when a deluge of iniquities and mist of Popish Superstition had ouerspred the outward face of the Church So truly Papistical was S. Bernard At this time of S. Bernard liued also S. Malachias of whom Osiander writeth thus (84) Cent. 12. p. 315. 256. Malachias an Archbishop in Ireland from his childhood was giuen to learning and Religion and at length intreated and much inforced he vndertook to be the Archbishop of Ireland He was verie familiar with S. Bernard admiring and imitating his Monachisme and embracing Popish superstitions He worshipped the Pope of Rome for God To him verie manie miracles are ascribed c. So truly Roman Catholick was S. Malachias (82) Def. of the Apol. p 557. Vvhit cont Dur. l. 2. p. 154. In the Age precedent to these liued Berengarius who being a Catholick Priest and the Archdeacon of Angiers dissented afterwards from the Roman Church in the Doctrine of Transubstantiation which yet before his death he so fully (85) Fox Act. Monu p. 13. Vvestphalus his Apologetica c. fol. 6. Osiand Cent. 11. p. 158. Centurie-writers Cent. 11. col 458. recanted and conformed himself to the Roman Church as that the same is plainly acknowledged by M. Fox by Westphalus Osiander and the Centurists who record his recantation verbatim as it was Before him liued the most renowned Emperour Charles the Great who was so wholy deuoted to the Roman Religion as that the same is plentifully aknowledged by (86) Osiand in ep cent 8 p. 101. Cowpers Chron. fol 173. Fox in Apoc. p. 436. Crispinus of the Estate of the Church p. 221. Bulling in 2. Thess p. 533. Osiander D. Cowper M. Fox Crispinus and Bullinger In somuch that (87) In Epist Dedic Hist Sacram. Hospinian affirmeth that The Emperour Charles the Great commanded not only by publick Edicts that the Ceremonies and Rites as also the Latin Masse of the Roman Church and the other Decrees Statutes and Ordinances of the Roman Bishop should be obserued but himself also by imprisonnents and other kindes of punishments compelled Churches to the same Yea such was the vnion between the Popes of Rome and Charles the Great in matters of Faith and friendship as that according to D. Cowpers (88) Chron. f. 174. relation there were Certain Bishops sent by Adrian to Charles who held a Councel in France against the condemnation of Images c. And of the other side wheras Paulus (89) Lib. 2. Hist Franc. Aemilius relateth that Charles the Great sent twelue Bishops vnto a Councel holden at Rome by Pope Stephen in confutation of the errour of the Greeks against Images the same is so true that the like report therof is made by the (90) Cent. 8. col 570. Centurie-writers So assured it is that this Age in the opinion of Protestants was most superstitious and Papistical Before Charles liued S. Bede whom (91) Cent. 8. p. 58. Osiander tearmeth a good man and D. Cowper (92) Chron. f. 171. confesseth that he was Renowned in al the world for his learning and godly life For which he was also priuiledged with the Surname of Reuerend (93) Hollinsh Chron at An. 735. Covvpers Chron. at An. 724 fol. 168. Fox Act. Mon. p. 128. and by D. (94) Iesuit part 2. p. 326. Humfrey is specially registred among The Godlie men raised-vp by the Holie-Ghost D. Morton sayth (95) Prot. Appeal l. 1. p. 70. Although we deny not that Bede did hold diuers Romish Doctrines yet do we find sufficient cause in his writings why we may allow him his Title of Venerable and good man M. Bale further testifyeth that S. Bede (96) Cent. 2. c. 1. was so practised in prophane Authours that he scarce had his match in that Age He learned Physick and Metaphysick out of the purest fountaines He knew the Mysteries of the Christian Faith so soundly that for his exact knowledge both of Greek and Latin manie preferred him before Gregorie the Great There is scarce anie thing worth reading to be found in al Antiquitie which in due places is not read in Bede If he had liued in the times of Augustin Hierom Chrysostom I doubt not but he might haue contended for Equalitie with them He put forth manie bookes ful of al kind of Learning M. Fox acknowledgeth that (97) Act. Mon. p. 127. He was a man of worthie and memorable memorie and famous learning The whole Latin Church at that time gaue him the Maistrie in Iudgement and knowledge of the holie Scripture M. Bel granteth (98) Downfal that Bede for vertue and learning was renowned in al the world And M. Cambden recordeth that Bede (99) Descrip Brit. p. 670. the singular glorie of England by Pietie and Erudition obtayned the name of Venerable wrot many volumes most leardnedly So truly godlie learned and renowned was S. Bede euen in the iudgement of Protestants But now to obserue in particular whether the Faith and Religion taught beleeued and practised by this so worthie a man was Roman Catholick or English Protestant [100] Cent. 8. p. 58. Osiander who before called him A good man in expresse tearmes confesseth that Bede was wrapped in al the Popish Errours wherin we Protestants at this day dissent from the Pope For he admired and embraced the worship of Images the Popish Masse Inuocation of Saincts c. In which respect also M. Fox (101) Act. Mon. p. 128. 129. acknowledgeth that he liued in great credit and esteem with the Popes of that Age whom M. Fulk (102) Retentiue ag Bristovv p. 278. tearmeth Antichrists and therupon reiecteth S. Bedes authoritie saying The last Testimonie out of Bede
that not only by General Churches of later times but euen by the Councels Tradition of the true Primitiue Church that therfore al parties are bound to approue beleeue the foresayd Bookes to be truly Canonical Al which wil yet be made much more euident by our easie Refutation of their chiefest arguments vsually vrged against them For first it is obiected by D. Whitaker (21) Answ to Rayn p. 22. 23. that therfore they are not Canonical because They were written in Greek or some other forraine language and not in Hebrew nor had for their knowne Authours those whom God hath declared to be his Prophets But neither of these are of force for it is no litle temeritie so to measure the Scriptures by the tongue wherein they are written as to restrayne the Spirit of God to one only language The further falsehood and vanitie wherof is abundantly disproued by example of Daniel a great part wherof (22) to wit from Chap. 2 vers 4. to the end of the 7. chap. though not written in Hebrew is yet by our Aduersaries themselues acknowledged for Canonical Neither likewise is it true that God would direct by his holie Spirit no Authours in their writings but such as were knowne and also further declared by certaine testimonie to be Prophets For Protestants themselues can not yet tel who were Authours of the seueral Bookes of Iudges the Third and Fourth of Kings the Two of Chronicles and the Bookes of Ruth and Iob Euen D. Whitaker (23) De sacra Scrip. p 603. himself doth directly answer his owne obiection saying The Authours of manie Bookes are not knowne as of Iosue Ruth Paralipomenon Hester c. And we receiue sayth D. Willet 24) Syn p. 4 manie Bookss in the old Testament the Authours wherof are not perfectly knowne Yea Caluin Beza and the publishers of certaine of our English Bibles in the Preface or Argument of the Epistle to the Hebrewes do al of them professe to rest doubtful of the Authour therof Caluin Beza there affirming that it is not written by S. Paul So that though the foresayd Bookes be not written in the Hebrew nor haue their Authours or Penners knowne yet by like example of other approued Scriptures it maketh nothing against their Sacred and Diuine Authoritie (25) of Anno 1584. 1578 See Calu. in c 2. Heb ver 2. Secondly it is obiected that the sayd Bookes were reiected or doubted of by sundrie of the ancient Fathers as namely by Origen (26) In Ps 1 apud Euseb Hist l. 6. c. 19. Epiph. de Pondere Mens Haer. 8. Epicureorū Hier Pref. in l Regum Epiphanius and Hierom who agreed therein with the ancient Iewes But first these Fathers in the places cited do not speak of their owne opinion but do only report what was the opinion of certaine of the Iewes therin for Origen was so far from according herein with the Hebrewes that he expresly defended (27) Ep. ad Iulium hom 1. in Leuit. against Iulius Africanus who doubted therof the Historie of Susanna which Iewes and Protestants reiect Yea he auerreth )28) Ep. ad Iulium that part of Esther to be Canonical which Protestants refuse as not being in the Hebrewes Canon In like sort S. Epiphanius 29) Haer. 76 numbreth Sapientia and Ecclesiasticus among the Diuine Scriptures and referreth (30) Lib. de Pond Mensura post init Sapientia vnto Salomon As concerning S. Hierom wheras he vnto an vnwarie (31) Praef. in Daniel Reader may seem to seclude certaine Chapters of Daniel as not being in the Hebrewes Canon insomuch that Ruffinus mistaking herein S. Hierom's meaning doth therfore as Protestants (32) Whit. cont Camp p. 18. stil doe reproue and charge him with refusal of these foresayd parts of Daniel S. Hierome (33) Apol 2. cont Ruffin fin answereth and explaineth himself saying Truly I did not set downe what myself thought but what the Hebrewes are accustomed to say against vs herein calling there further Ruffinus and in him our Protestants a foolish Sycophant for mistaking and charging him herein with the Hebrewes opinion Yea S. Hierom's thus explaining himself is a matter certaine that it is accordingly confessed by D. Couel (34) Answ to Burges p. 87. Banc. in the Conf. before his Maiestie p. 60. D. Bancroft And it is further euident that S. Hierom placed the Bookes of Machabees bees (35) Prolog in Machab. among the Stories of diuine Scripture (33) Apol 2. cont Ruffin fin And of the Booke of Iudith he sayth (36) Pref. in Iudith with the Hebrewes the book of Iudith is read among the Hagiographal writings whose authoritie to strengthen those things which fal in Contention to wit with the Iewes may be thought lesse fit c. But because we read that the Nycene Councel accompted this in the number of holie Scriptures (34) Answ to Burges p. 87. Banc. in the Conf. before his Maiestie p 60. I haue yeelded c. So cleer it is that the Fathers obiected did only relate in the foresayd places the opinion of the Hebrewes from which themselues did yet disclayme Secondly supposing it for true that the foresayd Fathers haue doubted or reiected the foresayd Bookes yet neither hence wil it follow that they are not truly Canonical it being certaine that in the Primitiue Church the Canonical Scriptures were not generally receaued al at once but in great varietie of pretended 37) 2. Thes 2.2 Euseb hist l. 3. c. 19 l. 6. c. 10. Aug. cont Aduers Leg Proph l. 1. c. 20. Gelas in Decret cū 70. Episc Sozom hist l. 7. c. 19. Hamelman de Tradit Apostol 1. part l 1. col 251 part 3 col 841. Scriptures special care and search was requisite whereby it came to passe that sundrie Bookes were for the time misdoubted or by some Fathers or Councels (38) Conc. Laodic can vlt. omitted or not receiued which yet afterwards were vpon greater search and consideration generally acknowledged A poynt so euident that D. Bilson testifyeth in our behalf that (39 Suruey of Christs suffrings p. 664. The Scriptures were not fully receiued in al places no not in Eusebius time He sayth the Epistles of Iames Iude the 2. of Peter the 2. and 3. of Iohn are contradicted as not written by the Apostles the Epistle to the Hebrewes was for a while contradicted c. The Churches of Syria did not receaue the 2. Epistle of Peter nor the 2. and 3. of Iohn nor the Epistle of Iude nor the Apocalyps c. The like might be sayd for the Churches of Arabia wil you hence conclude saith D. Bilson that those partes of Scripture were not Apostolick or that we need not to receaue them now because they were formerly doubted of So fully doth this Protestant Doctour answear his owne Brethrens like vsual obiection had against the Machabees and the other Bookes
of the Old Testament now in question And that the foresayd Epistles of S. Peter S. Iames S. Iohn S. Iude and the Apocalyps were doubted of by some Fathers of the Primitiue Church and not generally receaued by al it is further confessed by the Deanes of Paules and Windsor who in the Towers Disputation had with that Ornament of our Nation and most victorious Martyr Edmund Campian do thus report of themselues (40) The first Dayâ—s Conf. D. 1. For proofe hereof we alleadged the testimonie of Hierom in Catal. where he thus writeth The Epistle of Iames is sayd to be published by some other vnder his name and of the 2. of Peter he sayth that it is denyed of manie to be his we also alledged Eusebius writing thus Those Bookes that be gaynsaid though they be knowne to manie be these the Epistle attributed to Iames the Epistle of Iude the latter of Peter the 2. and 3. of Iohn And D. Walker in the same Disputation affirmeth 41) 4. Dayes Confâ—r fâ—l 2. 6. that S. Hierom saith concerning that Epistle which is written to the Hebrewes manie haue doubted of it And also concerning the 2. of Peter he sayth it was doubted of by manie and so with some were the two last Epistles of Iohn c. Now if the Bookes of Machabees Tobie c. be not Canonical because as Protestants before obiected they were reiected or doubted by some ancient Writers then by the same reason Protestants must likewise reiect the Epistle to the Hebrewâ—s the Epistles of S Peter S. Iames S. Iude S. Iohn and the Apocalyps because these also were no lesse doubted reiected by sundrie ancient Writers Wherefore the weaknes and ensuing absurditie of this obiection being thus discouered we are to obserue that the Canonical Scriptures are to vs at this day discerned and made knowne not by that which some ancient Writers omit deny or doubt of but by that which most of the Fathers constantly affirme and chiefly by that which is iudged and decreed by the Catholick Church lawfully assembled in General Councel Thirdly some obiect that there are in the foresayd Bookes diuers repugnances or Contradictions and consequently that they are not inspired by the holie-Ghost But to omit that in those Scriptures which are beleeued by al to be Canonical there are manie hidden difficulties and seeming (42) See Mat. 10.10 Mar. 6.8 1. Reg. 8.9 2. Par. 5.10 Hebr. 9.4 Act. 9.7 Act 22.9 Math. 26.34 Marc 14.68 Mar. 15.25 Io. 19.14 Luc. 3.35.36 Gen. 11.12 And see Iewel Def. c. p. 361. repugnances which yet notwithstaÌ„ding we are bound to acknowledge the sayd Scriptures to be true and sacred I wil for breuitie only alledge what other Protestants think and answer themselues to the foresayd pretended Contradictions in the Bookes of Machabee Tobie c. D. Couel (43) Answ to Burges p. 85. writeth We could without violence haue afforded them the Reconcilement of other Scriptures and vndoubtedly haue proued them to be most true Yea he particularly answereth certaine of the pretended repugnances In like sort Conradus Pelican (45) Ep. Dedic Professour at Tigure writing his Commentarie vpon the foresayd Bookes sayth I easily yeelded c. especially seing those Bookes were alwayes accompted so Ecclesiastical and Biblical that euen from the Apostles times they were read in the Catholick Church with much reuerence although they were not produced in authoritie against the Iewes as Canonical who receiued not these into their Sacred Canon wheras they do not only not contradict in anie thing the writings of the Law and the Prophets (44) Ib. p. 87 88. 89. 90. but also c. for the most part they cleerly carry the right style of the holie-Ghost certain knots or difficulties intermingled which are sound more easie to be loosed then some haue thought c. Wherupon they were euer reuerenced and read by holie men yea the Sayings therof are found to be alledged by the Apostles Agreably hereto M. Hutton (46) 2. Parte of the Answ p. 238. 239. at large answereth and cleereth the common obiection against Iudith and the like in behalf of Ecclesiasticus (47) Ibid. p. 247. and (48) Ibid. p. 246. And see Bucers scripta Anglic p. 713. Daniel So weake and impertinent are the Contradictions pretended by Protestants against the foresayd Bookes Now from the premisses that by the CoÌ„fessions of our Aduersaries we may collect that the foresayd Bookes of Scripture were only not approued for truly Canonical by S. Austin Innocentius Gelasius and al the Fathers and Bishops of the 3. Carthage Councel but also were approued as partes of the Old Testament by the Apostles and for such alledged by them and so from the Apostles times were read in the Catholick Church with much reuerence Witnesses wherof are the Protestant Writers Hiperius Lubbertus Zanchius Hospiman Trelcatius Hoe Scelico Brentius Bibliander Lascicius Pelican Raynolds Parker Field Couel Bancroft Hutton Parkes D. Bilson al of them affording their helping hands in maintayning and defending the foresayd Bookes by true Antiquitie It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught our now Catholick Doctrine concerning Traditions CHAPTER VI. THE Catholick Doctrine concerning (1) Bellarm. de Verb. Dei non Scripto l. 4 c 3. Traditions is that the sacred Scriptures or written Word of God do not expresly containe al poynts or matters concerning Faith and manners And therfore besides the same is necessarily required the not written Word of God that is Diuine and Apostolical Traditions To the Contrarie Protestants (2) Luth. in Comment c. 1. ad Gal. Caluin Inst l. 4. c. 8. sec 8 directly teach that al things necessarie to Saluation are set downe in the sacred Scriptures And that we are not bound to beleeue or do anie thing which is not taught and commanded thereby Now what the Primitiue Church beleeued and whether the present Roman or Protestant Church doth Symbolize and agree therewith the Sequele only taken from the free and liberal testimonies of Protestants themselues shal euidently demonstrate And to begin with S. Gregorie D. Morton confesseth that (3) Prot. Appeale l. 4. p 62. He vseth to confirme some things by Tradition S. Augustin also whom D. Field (4) Of the Church l. 3. p. 170. tearmeth Austin the greatest of al the Fathers and worthiest Diuine the Church of God euer had since the Apostles times This indeed most worthie Diuine endeauouring to proue that those who are Baptised by Hereticks should not be rebaptised freely confesseth that (5) De Bapt. cont Don. l. 5. c. 23. The Apostles commanded nothing hereof but that Custome which was opposed herein against Cyprian is to be beleeued to proceed from their Tradition as manie things be which the whole Church holdeth and are therefore wel beleeued to be commanded of the Apostles although they be not written A Saying so euident
is acknowledged of Dionysius by Melancthon (49) In aliquot libel c. fol. 23. D. Fulk 50) Against Purgatory p. 353. which D. Fulk in plainest words teacheth that Tertulian (51) Against Purgat p. 3â—2 see p 303. 393. Cyprian Austin Hierom and a great manie more do witnesse that Sacrifice for the dead is the Tradition of the Apostles Wherunto Bucer accordeth (52) In Enarrat in Sacra quatuor Euangel in Math. c. 12. p 311. affirming that prayer and almes were made for the dead almost from the verie beginning of the Church Lastly Zuinglius being impugned for denying Prayer for the dead and pressed with the Authoritie of Fathers especially of S. Chrysostom S. Augustin who deriue this Custome from the Apostles answereth thus (53) Tom. 1. Epicheroe de Can. Miss f. 186. And see Tom. 2. in Elench contra Anabap f. 10. If it be so as Augustin and Chrysostom report I think that the Apostles suffred certayne to pray for the dead for no other cause then to condescend to their infirmitie So insimulating the Apostles wilfully to haue permitted others to erre according to the errours of Protestants in praying for the Dead which they could not do without errour in themselues Yea the Doctrine of Purgatorie and Prayer for theÌ„ dead was beleeued and practised by the ancient true beleeuing Iewes For whereas M. Morton speaking of the Church before the coming of Christ affirmeth the doctrine then taught by the Iewes to be now knowne among other Reasons (54) Treat of Israel the Church p. 93. 94. By the open Confession of the Iewes in al Ages since the coming of Christ For sayth he it is plaine that they hold euen to this day those opinions which they receaued from their Ancestours and were commonly held of that Nation Yea say the Centurists (55) Cent. 8. col 885. The Iewes are constant in their opinions And Pet. Martyr writeth that (56) Com. plac in Engl. part 2. p. 599. The Iewes as yet continue and kept in so great aduersities in so diuers and griâ—uous Captiuities and Dispersions they hold stil their Religion Doubtles no ancient Troians Lumbards Hunnes or Vandals haue so held their owne c. and could shew their original Historie set forth in most true writing and being euerie where dispersed as they were could neuertheles keep their owne Ordinances c. Now concerning these Iewes so constant in their Faith and admitting the bookes of Machabees but only for a true Historie it is euident thereby that Iudas Machabeus a holie and iust man procured (57) 2. Machab 2.43.45 Sacrifice for the dead and that the Priests of Hierusalem then true beleeuers offred the same wherein also our later Iewes are so conformable that D. Whitaker confesseth the same in these words (58) Cont. Dur. l. 1. p. 85. I know that the Iewes haue libros memoriales books of Commemorations which they read in their Synagogues and I am not ignorant that now they are accustomed to vse certaine prayers for the Dead Insomuch that Buxdorsius also reporteth their knowne and confessed doctrine of Purgatorie (59) Synagoga Iudaica p. 24. 505. 506. 508. 275. D. Beard auoucheth that (60) Retractiue from the Romish Religion p. 77. The Romanists are like vnto the Iewes in their doctrine and practise of Prayer for the dead for they hold and teach that prayer Sacrifice is to be offered for the dead grounding their opinion partly vpon the example of Iudas Machabeus who as they affirme procured Sacrifice to be offered by the Priests for the dead c. and partly vpon the Thalmudical Traditions of diuers of their ancient Rabbins From the Premisses then we may remember that the ancient Fathers did confessedly beleeue a place of Purgatorie after this life Secondly wherin Sinnes were punished and remitted Thirdly for which Remission they vsed to Pray giue Almes and offer the most precious Sacrifice of Christs Bodie and Bloud Now the Fathers acknowledged and reprehended by Protestants for the forsayd Poynts are S. Gregorie Austin Ambrose Hierome Chrysostom Prudentius Epiphaenius Pelagius the Fourth Carthage Councel Cyprian Tertullian Origin Clemens Alexandrinus Dionysius the Areopagite the Apostles and the ancient beleeuing Iewes The Protestant Writers obseruing and disliking in the sayd Fathers the forsayd Poynts are Caluin Beza Bullinger Zuinglius the Centurie-writers Carion Chemnitius Osiander Melancthon Hospinian Winkelmannus Buxdorsius Bucer Symondes Bale Sutcliffe Humfrey Fulk Whitaker Gifford Willet Morton It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught our Catholick Doctrine of Christs Descending into Hel. CHAPTER XII ACcording to the Article of our Creed He descended into hel Catholicks generally teach that the Soule of Christ presently after his death descended into Hel or Lymbus Patrum or Abrahams Bosome there to deliuer and redeeme the Captiue Soules of the holie Patriarks Prophets and other Iust who liued before his time But Protestants being diuided amongst themselues (1) Buâ—er in c. 27. Mat. Beza in c. 2. Act. some of them teach that by the foresayd Article is only vnderstood that Christ descended to his Graue (2) Calu. Instit l. 2. c. 16. § 8 9. 10. 11. 12 others that he suffred the paynes of the Damned Soules Now do decide this Controuersie by the beleef and Doctrine of the Fathers of the Primitiue Church and that by the confessed acknowledgement of our Aduersaries who in a case so euident liberally confesse the general streame of ancient Doctours to be most aduerse vnto them in this verie Article of our Faith wheras that most holie and euer renowmed Cardinal Bellarmine in proofe of this Article alledged (3) Tom. 1. l 4. de Chri. Anima c. 14 the plaine testimonies of the Greek Fathers as namely of Iustin Ireneus Clemens Origen Eusebius Basil Nazianzen Nyssen Epiphanius Chrysostome c. And of the Latin Fathers Tertulian Hypolitus Cyprian Hilarie Gaudentius Prudentius Ambrose Hierome Ruffinus Austin Leo Fulgentius c The Protestant (4) Ad Bellarm Disput part 1. p. 176. Danaeus in answer to so manie most famous Fathers testimonies most barely affirmeth that As concerning them they were not instructed out of Gods word neither do they confirme their opinion from it but only from their owne coniectures c. Thus supposing their Catholick opinion herein and therefore reiecting al their iudgements as confirming their Faith only by their owne coniectures in Danaeus his opinion which as no lesse absurd in itself then improbable to al Iudicious I omit as an answer purely Protestantical In like plaine manner (5) Conc. Dur. l 8. p. 567 And see p. 773. D. Whitaker in answer to the like testimonies of the Fathers vrged by our Catholick Writer Duraeus writeth thus That which thou couldest not do by Scriptures no doubt thou wilt performe by the testimonies of the Fathers of whom that I may freely and briefly answer thee what I
Emperour Constantin and Pope Syluester they repeat and dislike the Second Canon therof which was That no marryed man ought to be admitted to Priesthood nisi fuerit promissa Conuersio vnlesse his Conuersion or leauing of his wife was first promised Yea they further 23) Cent. 4. col 616. And see col 486. 303. 704. 2293. confesse that the ancient Councel of Neocesarea decreed That if a Priest should marry he should be deposed from his Orders But this prohibition of Priests Mariage was so general in the ancient Fathers as that Hospinian (24) Hist Sacr part 1 p. 132. acknowledgeth the same in Siricius Innocentius Calixtus the second Councel of Arles the Councel of Neocesarea And M. Parkins (25) Volum 2. p. 658. reproueth for the same the Councel of Ancyra which was before the Nicene Councel as also S. Hierom (26) Ibid. p. 661. Siricius Leo Ambrose Isidore Arator c. D. Field (27) Of the Church l 3. p. 475. reiecteth likewise herein the Councel of Eliberis which was holden Twentie yeares before the Nicene Councel But Osiander (28) Cent. 4. p. 46. in Can. 1. And see p. 195. 167. 45. 122. 156 298. 365. 406. reproueth the same in the Councel of Neocesaria in the second Councel of Arles in the Councel of Eliberis in the first Toletane Councel in the Councel of Agatha in the Fifth Councel of Carthage in the First Arausican Councel in the Councels called Turonense and Venetica Beza (29) In nou Test in Praef. ad Principem Condensem speaking of the times of Cyprian Austin and Chrysostom confesseth that There was in vse the Inuocation of the dead and the foolish opinion of single life which shameful errours sayth he Hierom plainly defendeth Yea S. Hierom preferring Single life before Mariage is therfore cēsured by Caluin (30) Hermonia in Math. 19.11 to haue giuen a clear proof of a malignant peruerse disposition Againe (31) In 1. Cor. 7.7.9 whilest the chiefest Doctours are wholy busied in extolling Virginitie forgetting man's frailtie they neglect this Admonition of Paul yea of Christ himself But Hierom blinded I know not with what zeale doth not only slide into such false opinions but runneth headlong But because D. Whitaker (32) Cont. Duraeum l. 7. p. 480. Mort Prot. App p 477 D. Morton affirme that Siricius who liued about Anno 384 was the first that annexed perpetual Chastitie to the Ministers of the Word I wil therfore search further into the times more ancient And I find the Centurists (33) Cent. 4 col 467. to acknowledge that it is euident by the Fourth book of Eusebius of the life of Constantin that there were before Cōstantins time who liued aboue sixtie yeares before Siricius virgins women continent that professed perpetual chastitie Where also say they Eusebius affirmeth that the Emperour Constantin did greatly approue that kind of discipline Insomuch as he often went vnto them And Socrates testifyeth l. 1. c. 17. that Helen mother of Constantin found at Hierusalem Virgins consecrated to God whose profession she liked so much that she made her selfe seruant vnto them Yea the Centurists (34) Cent. 3. c. 6. col 140. c. 7. col 176. further confesse that Cyprian in his first book and 9. and 11. Epistles declareth that among Christians there were Virgins consecrated vnto God which would could keep chastitie c. And that Tertulian in his booke of the cloathing of Virgins expresly mentioneth the vow of Chastitie And that It was decreed by Cyprian his fellow Bishops l. 1. ep 11. that Virgins vowing chastitie ought not to dwel with men And wheras Origen in Numer hom 23. sayth It is certaine that the continual Sacrifice is hindred to them who serue the necessities of wedlock wherupon it seemeth to me that he alone is to offer the continual Sacrifice who hath vowed himself to continual perpetual Chastitie This Saying is confessed reiected as being euidētly against Priest Mariage by Chemnitius (35) Exam. part 3. p. 50. And see p. 58. And so likewise in the same case is S. Cyprian (36) Med. Theol. p. 357 by Schultetus But before them liued S. Clement of whose time Peter Martyr (37) De votis p. 490 writeth I confesse there were in the time of Clement Professions and vowes of Chastitie c. And M. Parkins (38) In Probl. p. 191. acknowledgeth that In the foresayd Ages promises of Continencie were accustomed to be made publickly in the Church For in the yeare of Christ One hundred seauentie Clemens Alex. l. 3. Strom sayth c. In like sort Hospinian (39) De origine Monachetus f. 104 I wil grant that in the time of this Clement that is about the yeare of Christ One hundred seauentie fiue there were Professions vowes of Virginitie or continencie single life But before Clement liued S. Ignatius Scholler to S. Iohn the Euangelist about the yeare One hundred and nine of whose time the Centurists (40) Cent. 2 c. 4. col 64. say It appeareth by the Epistles of Ignatius that euen then men began somewhat more earnestly to loue and reuerence the desire of Virginitie for in the Epistle ad Antiochenses he sayth Virgines videant cuise consecrauerint Let Virgins see or remember to whom they haue consecrated themselues And wheras in his Epistle ad Tarsenses he aduiseth thus Honour yet those who are Virgins Sicut Sacras Christi as the Sacred or consecrated to Christ and reuerence the chast widowes Sicut Sacrarium Dei as the vestrie or Temple of God This his Saying is reproued (41) Cent. 1. l. 3. c. 23. p. 131. by Osianders And the Centurists (42) Cent 2 c. 10. col 167. charge him that he speaketh incommodiously of Virginitie and that his foresayd Sayings (43) Cent. 2. p. 65. were an occasion and opened the way to those things which afterwards were therupon founded concerning Cloysters Vowes c. Shulterus (44) Med. Theol. p. 450. alledgeth Ignatius writing ad Philippenses I salute the Colledge of Virgins wherupon he immediatly inferreth Were there then in that floure of the Church Virgins which professed perpetual Chastitie and Continencie There were truly c. sayth he D. Morton also acknowledgeth that (45) Prot. Appeal l. 1. p. 88. we find that the Age next abutting vpon the Apostles time did practise a perpetual vow of virginitie which being guarded with a iust moderation may be iudged both commendable and conuenient But to passe from the Schollers to the Maisters themselues to wit the blessed Apostles Luther (46) Tom 5. Wittemb fol. 108. inferreth this Doctrine from the example of S. Paul himself saying Dicendum est c. It is to be sayd that either Pauls wife dyed or that she was dismissed from him by her owne assent that he might not carry her about with him so in matrimonie to haue liued a single life as he
that he might answer it Secondly the Roman 62) Zonaras Cedrenus Paulus Diac. in vita Leonis Isauri Bishops Gregorie the Third Adrian the First and Leo the Third Excommunicated the Grecian Emperours and transferred the Empire from them to the French cheifly for that they patronised the Heresie against Images whereas the French persisted euer constant in the ancient Catholick Faith wherefore it is most improbable that Charles should write in defence of the Grecian errour against the Pope of Rome Thirdly 63) L. 1. de cultu Imaginum Ionas Aurelianensis who liued in the Raigne of Ludouicus sonne to Charles testifyeth that Claudius Taurinensis a special Patrone of the Heresie durst neuer open his mouth therein during the life of Charles Fourthly Pope 64) Paulus Aemil. l. 2. Franc. And see cent 8. c. 9. col 570. Stephen holding a Councel at Rome against the sayd Errour Charles himselfe sent 12. of the cheifest Bishops of his Kingdome to assist him therein And D. Cowper 65) Chron. 174. reporteth that certaine Bishops were sent by Adrian to Charles who held a Councel in France against the condemnation of Images Fiftly this most famous Emperour Charles was so wholy Roman Catholick as that 66) Ep. ded Hist Sacra Hospinian recordeth of him 67) Epist Hist Eccl. Cent. 8. p. 101. Crisp of the Estate of the Church p. 221. 216. Bul. in 2. Thess c. 2. p 533. Cowp Chron. f. 173. 195. Foxin Apoc. p. 436. that he not only cōmanded by publick Edicts that the verie Ceremonies Rites and Latin Masse of the Roman Church as also the Decrees Lawes and Ordinances of the Roman Bishop should be obserued through his whole Empire but himself by imprisonments and diuers kinds of punishments compelled Churches to the same The like whereof is confessed of him by Osiander Crispinus Bullinger D. Cowper and M. Fox So vnlike was he to write against the Roman Church concerning Images Sixtly Caluin himself insinuateth this Booke to be forged about Charlemaines time saying 68) Iust l. 1. c. 11. sec 14. There is extant a refuting Booke vnder the name of Charles the Great which by the words thereof we may gather to haue bene made at the same time Seauently wheras Charles was knowne to be verie skilful both in Greek Latin learned ingenious in this booke there are manie absurdities committed as where it affirmeth Constantinople to be a Citty most knowne in Bythinia whereas indeed it is in Thracia as also that at Constantinople there was a Councel celebrated in defence of the worshipping of Images whereas the sayd Councel was celebrated at Nice And that the Nicene Councel tearmed the Eucharist the Image of Christs bodie whereas directly and purposely they refute and condemne the sayd speech Eightly supposing for the time against al the premisses that it had been Charles his Booke yet nothing would it auaile but much preiudice Protestants for therein is expressely taught that the last sentence in Controuersies of Faith belongeth to the Roman Bishop And that he hath his Primacie not from Councels but from God himself It prescribeth also Exorcismes to be vsed in Baptisme Churches to be dedicated with special Rites That we are to pray for the dead and Inuocate Saincts and their Relicks to be worshipped That Chrisme and Holie-water are to be vsed That in the Eucharist there is the true Bodie of Christ and the same to be worshipped yea to be offred as a true and proper Sacrifice Al which do mainely impugne Protestant Religion And therefore if they wil haue vs to beleeue this Booke teaching that the Councel of Nice erred concerning Images let them beleeue it teaching the other Catholick poynts next recited Lastly if it could be proued that Charles himself had made this Book that he had been a perfect Protestant in al poynts yet how would it hence follow that the Roman Church had changed her Faith in the time of Charles Or what would the testimonie of a Lay-man auaile them seing according to 69) Orat. 2. de Imag. Damascen Christ committed not his Church to Kings and Emperours but to Bishops and Pastours But we haue seene sufficiently before that Charles was a Prince wholy deuoted to the Roman Church and a special Patron of Images and consequently the Booke written against them and imposed vpon him is meerly forged and of no authoritie And so likewise is no lesse forged that other vnder the name of Lewes his Sonne which for such is condēned by the Catholick Church Neither 70) Index lib. prohibit doth our Doctour affoard vs the least colour of proof for the legitimation of either of these Bookes but only sayth that they are extant as though it were rare among Hereticks to finde manie spurious adulterine Bookes And so I cōclude that seing our Ministers proofs for the Roman Churches change in these 50. yeares are al of them in seueral respects either most impertinent or most false that therefore the Roman Church during the same time did not change After 800 800. to 850. I name sayth our Cataloguer Ioannes Scotus c. who resisting the Real presence c. was therefore murdred The same time Berthram also writ against it c. Claudius Bishop of Towres resisted Images worship of Saincts and Pilgrimage Lotharius the Emperour reduced the Pope to the obedience of the Empire c. These are the examples of the Roman Change in this time But let vs examine them As concerning Scotus that he resisted the Real presence M. White proueth it only by the testimonie of Daneus who being a formal Protestant of these times his testimonie is insufficient as bearing witnesse in his owne Cause therefore al further answer were needles But yet I do acknowledge that about the same time there was one Scotus not the subtil Doctour who liued some Ages after but an other who writ something doubtfully in this poynt but his Booke was condemned in the Councel at Vercella as testifyeth Lantfrancus (a) lib. de verit Corp. Et sang Domini in Eucharistia And he is obserued to be the first in the Latin Church who writ suspiciously against the Real Presence And as for Bertram though the Booke extant vnder his name doth vse some doubteful and obscure words as Figure Spiritual and Mysterie yet at other times doth it speak as plainly Affirming the Presence of Christs Bodie vnder the veyle or couerture of Bread Yea the Centurists confesse that Bertram 71) Cent. 9. c. 4. Col. 212. in the sayd Book hath the seeds of Transubstantiation Secondly this sayd Book being set forth lately by Oecolampadius may iustly be suspected and rather in that Pantaleon 72) p. 65. in his Chronograph mentioning Bertram and his other writings forbeareth yet to mention this Booke or to charge him with this pretended opinion Thirdly Illiricus making a Catalogue of Protestant witnesses to whom our Minister for this of his is no litle beholding
Innouation therein could be obserued or reproued by Almaricus In like sorte though Robert Bishop of Lincolne withstood the Popes proceedings in England yet this nothing proueth anie change or first comming in of anie point of Faith in the Roman Church obserued or resisted by the sayd Robert Besides D. Godwine reporteth that a Cardinal sayd to the Pope concerning him He (a) Catalo of Bishop of England p. 240. is for Religion a Catholick as wel as we And so dying he gaue al his bookes an excellent Librarie vnto the Friar Minors at Oxford So charitable was he to Friars and consequently so Roman Catholick euen at his verie death And where he affirmeth that Ioakim Abbas sayd that Antichrist was borne at Rome and should sit in the Apostolick sea It is so vntrue that in his Epistle prefiged to his Exposition vpon the Apocalypse he submitteth his writings to the Censure of the Sea Apostolick affirming further that he firmely beleeueth that the Gates of Hel cannot preuaile against the Roman Church and that her Faith shal not perish before the end of the world Yea in his Exposition vpon the 6. Chapter and 11. verse he calleth such the Sonnes of Babylon who impugne the Church of Peter And vpon the 7. Chapter and 2. verse by the Angel ascending from the East hauing the signe of the liuing God he vnderstandeth the Bishop of Rome who with his fellow-Bishops with the signe of the Crosse wil arme the Elect in that last tribulation which Antichrist shal rayse So litle cause there is to vrge this Abbot against the Pope And indeed al that truly can be vrged against him is that being an old man and half out of his wits he was censured by the Pope for certaine fonde Prophecies and some errours also about the B. Trinitie as appeareth by the Decree extant in the Canon Law against him and by other Authours that haue written of him And as for Fidericus the Second Emperour resisting the Popes Supremacie it proueth no more but that euen the most vicious Emperours were most aduerse to the Pope For he being a Prince of most scandalous and wicked life was after due admonitions excommunicated as also deposed by Pope Innocent the Fourth in a general Councel holden at Lyons so that his resisting in this regard the Supremacie is only a guiltie and conuicted Persons resisting of al such lawful Authoritie whereby he is censured and punished Concerning Arnoldus Villanouanus speaking against Friars the Sacrifice of the Masse and Papal Decrees This M. White only proueth by the testimonies of the Magdeburgians and Osiander which being Protestants are no competent witnesses against Catholicks But besides I haue proued (107) l. 2. c. 9. 4. before that the Sacrifice of the Masse and the Popes Authoritie were beleeued and practised in much more ancient times As also that the Institution of Friars proueth no Innouation in Faith and Religion Euerardus broaching those foule and false reproaches against Pope Gregorie the Seauenth called Hildebrand proueth nothing but his owne disobedience and impatience hauing been by the same 108) Greg. 7. Ep. 18. Pope for his owne demerits iustly suspended from his Episcopal function After 1250. 1250. to 1300. I name Gulielmus de S. Amore withstanding Friars and their abuses but how impertinent this is I haue shewed sufficiently before The Preachers also saith he in Sweden that publickly taught the Pope and his Bishops to be Hereticks But M. White receiuing this Relation from Illiricus no further answer wil be requisit Dante 's also saith he writ that the Empire descended not from the Pope But Dante 's being only a Poet intermedling in other matters committed (109) See Bellar. in Append. ad lib. de Sum. Pont c. 14. manie grosse errours for which his bookes are condemned and prohibited by the Church yea he liued in faction against some (110) Ibid. c. 12. Popes and therefore his writing against them is of no force As for Gulielmus Altisiodorensis M. White producing nothing in particular out of him against the Roman Church but only affirming that in his Summes are found manie things confuted that then were comming in no further particular answer can be expected and though he referre himself for particulars to this his own Booke yet citing no page or place thereof I hould it vnworthie of so paineful search it being also wel knowne that Altisiodorensis only differed from other Schoole-men in matters disputable and not defined After 1300. 1300. to 1350. I name sayth he Marcilius Patauinus that wrot against the Popes Supremacie But he being a knowne condemned Heretick a flatterer of the Schismatical Emperour and his Bookes condemned by the Church as also the Popes Primacie being formerly acknowledged in the Primitiue Church his testimonie is sundrie wayes insufficient And the like is to be answered to Ocham (111) Tritheâ—nius Genebrard l. 4. Chron. who was purposely hyred by the Emperour to write against the Pope who was also Excommunicated and his Bookes prohibited Gregorius Ariminensis his differences were only in Schoole points not determined by the Church And as for the Vniuersitie of Paris condemning the Popes Pardons it is most vntrue and therefere M. White did wel to father it only vpon his Brother Illiricus whom he knew to be expert in the art of forging After 1350. 1350. to 1400. I name sayth he Aluâ—rus Pelagius who wrot a Book of the L mentation of the Church wherein he reproueth diuerse abuses of his times But who denyeth but that in the Militant Church consisting of good and euil there are manie abuses in life and conuersation But as for abuse or Innouation in matter of Doctrine and Faith Aluarus maketh no mention at al in his sayd Booke And as for Montziger disputing against â—ransubstantiation and Adoration of the Sacrament and Cesenas calling the Pope Antichrist besides that the truth hereof dependeth only of the testimonie of Fox and Illâ—ricus both of them Protestants I haue sufficiently before cleered both these poynts from al Innouation in Ages much more ancient Now as for Iohn Wiceliffe as I haue shewed (112) l. 1. c. 3. before that in sundrie poynts of Faith he agreed with Catholicks which Protestants now impugne so it is euident that he taught sundrie grosse errours which both Catholicks and Protestants do detest as that If a (113) Fox Act. Mâ—n p. 96. Bishop or Priest be in deadly sinne he doth not Order consecrate or Baptize that Al (114) Osiand cent 9. 10. 11. p. 459. oathes are vnlawful That (115) Osiand cent 15. p. 457. al things come to passe by absolute necessitie That there 116) Ib. p. 454. is no Ciuil Migistrate whilest he is in mortal sinne and sundrie others in regard of which Protestants 117) Pant. Chronol p. 119. Mathias Hoe in his Tract duo Tract 1. p. 27. themselues ranke him in the Catalogue of Hereticks So that smal Credit or succour wil M. White
Church or rather only seduced and withdrawen from the ancient Catholick Faith by secondarie Innouation As in like resemblance after (29) Math. 13.25 The good seed was sowne in the field the Enemie came and sowed tares among the wheat In which respect Tertulian (30) l. de Prescrip c. 42. sayth excellent wel of al Nouelists that Their Endeauour is not to conuert the Heathen but to ouerthrow ours who are conuerted They glory more to cast those downe who stand then to lift vp those who lye Wherefore Protestants are so farre from conuerting any one Heathen Countrey to Christian beleef that their diuided Church neuer yet before or since Luthers time so much as but passed the Seas with taking hold in anie one Countrey of Asia Africk or America the three greatest knowne parts of the world No Protestant as yet euer being able to giue the least instance of their Church in anie one of al these three parts Yea it remayneth as now though being in its greatest height of encrease so narrowly shut vp or confined within our Northern parts of the world being but an only corner of Europe the fourth and incomparably the least part of al the rest that euen in the farre greater part of this one least part is not so much as anie appearing profession either of Lutherans or Caluinists knowne to be remayning or in being Yea it is most worthie of al diligent obseruation that wheras certaine Protestants haue endeauoured the Conuersion of some Heathen NatioÌ„s the euent was euer such through their owne demerits either of mutual dissentions amongst themselues in matters of Faith Religion or of foule enormous and most scandalous life and conuersation that their trauail and labour was euer spent without fruit and commodity and their returne accompanyed with shame and disgrace In this time is right famous the endeauour made of late times by Caluin the Church of Geneua in their sending Richerus the Caluinist whom (31) In Icon. Beza tearmeth a man of tryed godlines and learning into Gallia Antartica to conuert the Heathens there (32) In Calu. Epist ep 237. But how voyd of al successe it was and that to their lasting discredit is plainly related and confessed by their owne Brethren for first Richerus 32 himself writeth thus vnto Caluin concerning the people of that Country They are ignorant whether there be a God so far are they from keeping his Law or admiring his power and goodnes whereby we are deuoyd of al hope of gayning them to Christ c. But much more fully is this reported by Villegaignon who being then chief Captaine of the French Nauie and one so feruent and forward in planting Protestancie in those Countries that the next day after his arriual he not only as (33) Ibid. p. 438. Richerus mentioneth commanded the Word of God to be publickly preached and the week following the holie Supper of the Lord to be ministred which himself with some of his familie religiously receaued c. but withal gaue certaine yong men to the people of that Nation to be instructed in their Language that so they might afterwards preach vnto them This so zealous a Ghospeller (34) Epist before his book intituled Les Propositions ConteÌ„tienses c. written after his Returne from Gallia Antarctica relateth the bad successe and cause therof in these words Christian Reader M. Iohn Caluin vnderstanding that I was gone to Brasile with intent to plant the Faith there moued with the old acquaintance had between vs sent vnto me as wel in his owne as in the name of the whole Cittie of Geneva certaine Ministers of his Religion the best learned that could be found with certaine crafts-men in their companie wel furnished with al such books as Caluin had written or anie other which might serue for their people As they passed by Paris certaine other Protestants ioyned with them and among the rest a reuolted Iacobin named Iohn Comtate a man of prompt and subtil wit These men coming to Brasile adorned themselues with a faire Title calling themselues The Reformed Church By reason wherof they were of me receaued with al possible curtesie hoping they would haue been profitable to me in my enterprise But wheÌ„ they began to execute their fuÌ„ction I then found they had vsurped a wroÌ„g Title c. They agreed not amoÌ„g themselues nor continued long in their owne doctrine but as they learned euerie day so they stil added something thereto The Iacobin would follow a doctrine by himself vndertaking to defend and publish the Confession of Augusta and without dissimulation to impugne the Doctrine of Caluin wherby the contention among them grew so great that no other remedie could be had but by sending away one of the Ministers of Geneua But Villegaignon himself discerning through their mutual disagreements and inordinate accomplished (35) See Launay En la Replique Chrestienne l 2. c. 16. f 251. And VillegaignoÌ„ aduers Art Richeri l. 1. c. 90. lusts not to be named the whole action of conuerting that Countrey to be frustrated receiued thereupon sufficient motiue to abandon their Religion To the same effect it is reported by D. Philip Nicolai (36) CoÌ„meÌ„t de Regno Christi l. 1. p. 395. that the French men hauing for their Captayne Nicolas Villegaignon being happily arriued in Brasile through fatal mis-fortune and dissension lost their Regiment and Castle built therin being cast out by the Spaniards As in like sort afterwards when with a new Armie they came to Florida Iohn Ribautius being their Captaine c. The English also Forbisher being Captayne opened the Northern side of the new world but they returned home c. And of the bad successe of this Sir Martin Forbisher other English in the Conuersion of the remote Northern Nations M. Hacklute 37) Voyâ—ges Discoueries c. p. 680. writeth thus The euents do shew that either Gods cause hath not been chiefly preferred by them or els God hath not permitted so abundant grace as the light of his Word and knowledge of him to be yet reuealed to those Infidels before the appoynted time And wheras some Protestants in Germanie did insinuate with the Church of Greece writing to the Patriarch in this humble manner with title of Direction (38) Acta Theol. Witemb Patriaâ— hae Conâ—tantin c. p. 2. To the most Holie and Oecumenical Patriarch the Lord Hieremie Archbishop of Constantinople of New Rome a pious Lord And renewing againe (39) Ibid. p. 144. the same Direction in steed of Pious Lord they adde our most Reuerend Lord (40) Ib. p. 4 Concluding with farewel most Holy Lord c. and vouchsafing vs pardon and receiuing vs fauourably into thy Fatherlie care c. with much more insinuating submission and desire of Communion with him Al this yet notwithstanding after much conference writing and labour in vanie spent the Patriarch reiected them as most vnworthie (41) Ibid.
stileth the Canons of the sayd Councel of Nyce 66) Luther l. de Cōcilijs part 1. p. 92. hay straw wood stubble and demandeth whether the the Holie-Ghost hath nothing els to do in Councels but to bind and burden his Ministers with impossible dangerous and vnnecessarie lawes So absurd was the Councel of Nyce in Luther's iudgement affirming further That more light is brought to a Christian by that Catechisme which children do learne then by al the Councels Caluin calleth the Fathers of the sayd Councel of Nyce 67) Lib. de vera Eccl. reformat opuscul p. 486. And Inst l. 4. c. 9. 3. 10. Phanaticos that is men Phanatical or deluded by the Diuel and withal giueth leaue to euerie priuate man to examin the decrees of Councels by the Scriptures saying 68) Inst l. 4. c. 9. §. 8. 9 11. Let no names or authorities of Councels Pastours Bishops hinder vs but that we may examin al Spirits of al men by the rule of the Word of God And againe 69 Ib. 3. 14. I deny that Interpretation of Scripture to be alwayes true and certain which is receaued by the consent of a Councel But I cannot heer but obserue the strange giddines of this primest protestant Caluin who directly contrarie to his former Assertions writeth thus 70) Inst l. 4. c. 9. §. 8. Those ancient Synods as Nyce Constantinople the first of Ephesus of Chalcedon and the like which were assembled for the confuting of errours we do willingly embrace and reuerence as Sacred for as much as concerneth doctrines of Faith For they containe nothing but the pure and natiue Interpretation of Scripture which the holie Fathers with spiritual wisdome applyed to the vanquishing of the Enemies of Religion which then appeared But to leaue him thus fighting with himself and to come to the Ministers of the Church of Scotland 71) In the end of the Harmonie of Coafes p. 19. And see the sayd Harmonie sect 1. p. 14. Without iust examination we do not receaue say they whatsoeuer is obtruded vnto men vnder the name of a General Councel for plaine it is that as the men assembled were men so haue some of them manifestly erred and that in matters of great weight and importance So far then as the Councel proueth the determination and commandment that it giueth by the plaine word of God so soone do we reuerence and embrace the same Heervnto also do accord our English Protestants teaching that 72) Articles of faith agreed vpon in the Conuocations of A. 1562. 1604. art 21. General Councels c. may erre and sometimes haue erred euen in things pertaining vnto God Wherefore things ordained by them as necessarie to saluation haue neither strength nor authoritie vnles it may be declared that they be taken out of holie Scriptures So vnwilling or rather truly fearful are Protestants to appeale vnto General Councels for the decision of Controuersies But D. Luther proceedeth further seriously expecting exacting that al Councels shal be subiect to his Censure determination 73) Tom. 2. wittenberg f. 375. The Rectours of Churches saith he the Pastours of Christ's sheep haue indeed power to teach but the sheep ought to iudge whether they propose the voice of Christ or of strangers c. Wherefore let the Pope Bishops Councels c. decree appoynt and ordaine what they wil we wil not hinder them but we who are the sheep of Christ and heare his voice wil haue it in our power to iudge whether they propose things true and agreable to the voice of our Pastour or no and they are to yeald subscribe and obey our Censure and Sentence Now if Councels be subiect to the Censure of Luther or anie other such rotten sheep then lesse is the authoritie of Councels then of Luther himself then the which nothing can be spoken more absurd or ridiculous In like sort saith Peter Martyr in general 74) De votis p. 476. As long as we rest in Councels Fathers we shal be euer conuersant in the same errours Yea saith M. Carthwright 75) In whiteg Tract 2. p. 95. If this be a sufficient proof to say such a Councel decreed such a Doctour sayd so there is almost nothing so true but I can impugne nothing so false but I can make true And wel assured I am that by their meanes the principal grounds of our Protestant Faith may beshabken But to conclude 76) De Concil contr Bellar. 9. 6. Fulk Answ to a Counterf Cath p. 89. 90. Will. Syno 92. D Whitaker D. Fulk D. Willet and most other Protestants teaching that General Councels may erre in Faith and manners it is no wonder though they reiect their authoritie but yet it euidently conuinceth that in matters of Faith and Religion Protestants dare not relye and submit themselues to the decrees and definitions either of ancient or moderne General Councels So that though Ministers in their Pulpits where none wil gainsay them do florish and flaunt forth the ancient Fathers prayses approue their authoritie applaud them as Protestants and appeale to those primitiue Doctours as Maisters and Patrons of their errours yet when they are pressed by Catholicks with cleerest euidence of their particular writings sayings and practise and with the answerable acknowledgements of the learned Protestants then their tone is changed bitterly exclaming that The argument drawne from Antiquitie is a Popish argument that To appeale to the Primitiue Church is to iniurie the Protestant Congregation That for Protestants to fil their books with the authorities of Fathers is dangerous and to be eschued That in al Councels Fathers and Stories since the Apostles the print of the Popes feet is to be found That the Papists strongest towers are in the testimonies of the Doctours That the Fathers were blind and ignorant in the Scriptures That they were certainly damned for their Papistical opinions vnles they repented That their interpretations of Scripture were aduantagious to Papists and preiudicial to Protestants That their books and Commentaries were contrarie to Scripture Yea that the Fathers did contradict one another and often one and the same himself That Luther and sundrie other Protestants are much to be preferred for learning before S. Austin S. Ambrose and al the other Fathers That the Doctrine now taught by the Bishops of England is much more sound then euer was taught by any Bishops since the Apostles and therefore that our Bishops are in manie degrees to be preferred before them that euen in the best times Sathan was president in Councels And lastly that al decrees of Popes Bishops and Councels are to yeeld and obey the Censure of Luther Dot not al this most strongly confirme that in the verie harts and consciences of Protestants themselues the ancient Fathers were Roman Catholicks and most aduerse to Protestants and that therefore and only therefore they are thus reiected contemned disgraced and wronged by them euen by Luther Caluin Beza
Confess Mansfelden Ministror tit de Antinomis f. 89. 90. that the Law of God is not worthie to be called the Word of God If thou beest a where a whore-mungar if an adulterer or otherwise a sinner beleeue and thou walkest in the way of saluation When thou art drowned in sinne euen to the bottom if thou beleeuest thou art in the midst of happines Al that busie themselues about Moyses that is the Ten Commandments belong to the Diuel to the gallowes with Moyses In like sort Illiricus the chief of the Centurie-writers and whom M. Bel termeth 16) Regim of the Chur. p. 28. a very famous Writer and most worthie defender of the Christian truth this so famous defender of Protestancie is accused of these Antinomian errours by his owne Brethren saying 17) Act. Colloq Aldeburg p. 94. After the death of Luther when Flaccus Illiricus and manie other factious Companions of his had begun againe those Antinomian filthinesses c. And with no litle applause of the multitude c. had dispersed them abroad c. Yea D. Hutter publick Professour at Wittenberg addeth yet further saying 18) Concord explicat Art 5. c. 1. p. 478. And see Art 6. p. 535. 536. c. But neither did that errour rest in a narrow compasse but presently getting strength crept abroad c. In so much that Melancthon in the last Edition of his CoÌ„mon Places hath plainly renewed the same errour c. And An. 59. the later Antinomians who named themselues the Schole-men of Wittemberg publikly and before the whole Church vndertook the Defence of that errour Yea that Antinomian furie encreased so much that also An. 70. in this our Wittemberg some Diuines for the obtaining of the highest degree in Diuinitie c. propounded publickly that errour and endeauoured to defend it as it appeareth by the 38 and 39. Theses of that Disputation Some Protestants also teach that 19) Act. Mon. p. 1335. And see the Parable of the wicked Mammon wherof Tindal is sayd to be Authour p. 573. 486. the Commandments were giuen vs not to do them but to know our damnation and to cal for mercie to God And D. Whitaker sayth accordingly 20) Cont. Camp par 8. p. 153. Christ proposeth to vs another more easie condition Beleeue and thou shalt be saued By this new league the old one is taken away that whosoeuer beleeueth the Ghospel is freed from the condition of the Law For those who beleeue are not vnder the Law but vnder Grace what need I say more Christians are freed from the curse of the Law not from the obedience But if Christians be deliuered from the condition curse of the Law how can they be bound to the obedience of it Or what can the breach therof be preiudicial vnto them So that if Catholicks do at anie time vrge against Protestants the authoritie of Moyses or of his Law or the Ten Commandments sundrie of the chiefest Protestants haue alreadie answered I wil not heare Moyses he is Christ's enemie he is the maister of hangmen Away with Moyses therefore to the gallowes His Law is a fable leading to Acheron or the pit of Hel. The Ten Commondments do not pertaine to Christians they are the fountain of al Heresies and are not to be taught in Churches The Law of God is not worthie to be called the Word of God Yea if thou be an adulterer or drowned in the depth of sinne do but beleeue and thou art in the midst of felicitie And so al Arguments drawne from Moyses or his writings are of no force or esteeme in the iudgement of Protestants But to proceed to other Scriptures Luther further affirmeth that 21) In Ser. Conuin tit de Patriar Prophet he doth not beleeue al things to be so done as they are related in the booke of Iob. And againe 22) Tit. de libr. Vet. Nou. Testa the booke of Iob is as it were the argument of a fable to propose the example of Patience And when Luther had read ouer the booke of Ecclesiastes his graue censure was 23) Pet. Robenstock lib. 2. Colloq Lat. Luâ—her c. de Vet. Test This Booke is not perfect manie things are taken away it wanteth bootes and spurres that is it hath no perfect sentence It rideth vpon a long reed as I when I was a Monk was wont to do in the Monasterie And as for the Canticles which our English Protestants terme the Ballet of Ballets of Salomon 24) Bible of An. 1595. Luther was of opinion that they imported no further but only a familiar 25) In Exordio fuarum Annot. in Cant. conference between Salomon and the Common-wealth of the Iewes inuiting Salomon to raigne ouer her But Castalio proceedeth further iudging this Book to be only 26) In his Laâ— Transl of the Bib. Praef. in Cant. the first Edit And see Beza in Praef. ante Comment Calu. in Iosue a loue-communication betweene Salomon and his Mistris Sulamitha for which he citeth those words Returne Sulamitha returne and let vs looke vpon thee adding also in the Margent Sulamitha the Mistris and spouse of Salomon And Beza testifyeth of Castalio that 27) In Vita Caluini And see Vvhitak poorest euasion hereof cont Dur. l. 1. p. 121. he commanded the Canticles of Salomon to be thrust out of the Canon as an impure and obscene Song reuiling with bitter reproches such Ministers as resisted him therin Yea this so impious reiecting this parcel of Canonical Scripture was so grosse in Castalio a Caluinist that now since in the later Editions of his Bible at Basil the Protestant publishers therof haue for verie shame altered it But now to passe from the Old Testament to the New and to omit that Caluin 28) Instit l. 2. c. 16. §. 18. resteth doubtful whether the Creed commonly called the Apostles Creed was made and published by the Apostles or no and consequently whether it be of infallible authoritie and beleef He further chargeth S. Mathew's Ghospel with errour saying 29) In Matth. 27. vers 9. Surely the name of Hieremie to be erroneously put for Zacharie the thing itself sheweth because no such thing is read in Hieremie but that other place vnlesse it be dexterously applyed may seeme to be drawne into a contrarie sense c. And wheras Math. 20.16 Christ sayth Manie are called but few are chosen Caluin reiecteth it saying 30) Harm in Math. 20.16 Minimè quadrat quae à quibusdam inseritur sententia Multi vocati pauci electi That sentence Manie are called few are chosen which by some is inserted doth not agree Which words doth not agree he expoundeth in French is nothing to the purpose M. Iewel likewise affirmeth 31) Def. of the Apol. p. 361. that S. Mark alleadgeth Abiathar for Abimelech and S. Mathew Hieremias for Zacharius 32) Bible of An. 1592. Our English Church Math. 6. receaues as Canonical scripture these
16. f. 65. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed and practised the vow of Chastitie and that they neuer allowed such as were of the Clergie afterwards to marrie or such as had been twice married to be admitted to holie Orders without special dispensation chap. 17. fol. 69. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Promitiue Church allowed practised the Religious State of Monastical life and that manie Christians of those purest times both men and women did strictly obserue and professe the same chap. 18. f. 74. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed practised prescribed fasts and abstinence from certaine meats vpon dayes and times appointed holding the same obligatorie vnder sinne condemning also our Puritan Sabboath Fasts chap. 19. fol. 80. It is admitted by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church expresly taught our Catholick Doctrine concerning Free wil. chap. 20. fol. 84 It is granted by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church taught not only Faith but likewise Good works truly to iustifye that the sayd works are meritorious of Grace and Glorie chap. 21. fol. 86. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Ceremonies now vsed in the Roman Church in the ministring of seruice or Sacrifice as also of the Sacraments were formerly vsed by the Bishops Priests and Fathers of the Primitiue Church chap. 22. fol. 89 THE THIRD BOOK WHERIN is proued that the Church of Protestants was neuer knowne or in Being before the d yes of Luther And that the Articles of Religion now taught by the Protestant Congregation were Heresies condemned by the Primitiue Church of Christ IT is confessed by Protestants that from the dayes of the Apostles vntil the tyme of Luther themselues neuer had any knowne Church or Congregatiō in anie part of the vniuersal World chap. 1. fol. 1. A Further conuincing proof of the Protestant Churches not being during the first 600. yeares is taken from the Fathers Condemning in the ancient Hereticks the chiefest articles of the Protestant Religion and our Protestants Confessing the same And First Concerning the Sacraments chap. 2. fol. 6. That the Fathers condemned in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning the Scriptures and the Church Militant and Triumphant chap. 3. fol. 9. That the Fathers condemned in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning Monachisme the mariage of Priests and prescribed Fasts chap. 4. fol. 12. That the Fathers condemned in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning Free-wil Faith Good works the Commandments sinne and the knowledge and Death of Christ chap. 5. fol. 14. Protestants Vsual recrimination of obiecting old Heresies to the Catholick Roman Church is cleerly examined discouered confuted by their owne acknowledgements chap. 6. fol. 17. A Further trial is Made Whether Catholicks or Protestants be true Hereticks and this by sundrie knowne badges or markes of Heresie chap. 7. fol. 23. A brief Suruey of D. Whites Catalogue wherin contrary to the Confessed truth in the precedent Chapter of no knowne beginning or change of our Romane Faith in anye Age he vndertaketh according to his Title therof to shew That the present Religion of the Roman Church was obserued resisted in al Ages as it came in and increased naming withal the Persons that made the Resistance And the poynts wherin And the time when from fiftie yeares to fiftie through-out al Ages since Christ chap. 8. fol. 35. THE FOVRTH BOOK WHERIN is proued by the Confession of Protestants that according to the Sacred Scriptures the Roman Church is the true Church of Christ And so to haue euer continued from his time vntil the Date hereof And of the contrary the Protestants Church to be only a Sect Heretical and neuer to haue been before the dayes of Luther PRotestants flying to the sacred Scriptures in proof defence of their Church and Religion it is shewed the sayd flight not only in itself to be dishonourable but also to be the ordinarie flight of al moderne Hereticks chap. 1. fol. 1. That euen the Sacred Scriptures themselues do most plentifully testify our Romane Church to be the Church of of Christ and the Congregation or Church of Protestants to be no true Church but a Sect Heretical most contrarie to the said Scriptures And that first by the Churches necessarie continuance and vniuersalitie chap. 2. fol. 5. The second Proof from sacred Scriptures in cōfirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Euer visibilitie of Christ's Church chap. 3. fol. 10. The third Proof from Sacred Scriptures in Cōfirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Churches Pastours which must euer continue with lawful Calling and Succession and with Administration of Word and Sacraments chap. 4. fol. 13. The fourth Proof from sacred Scriptures in confirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Conuersion of Heathen Kings and Nations to the Faith of Christ chap. 5. fol. 24. A Discouerie or brief Examination of sundrie sleights and Euasions vsed by Protestant Writers in Excuse of the manifest confessed want of their Churches fulfilling the foresaid Scripiures concerning the continuance vniuersalitie and visibilitie of Christs true Church chap. 6. fol. 33. THE FIFT BOOK WHERIN is shewed that Protestants in the Decision of Controuersies between them and Catholicks do absolutly disclaime from Antiquitie reiecting the Ancient Fathers and Councels for Papistical and the Sacred Scriptures for erroneous THat Protestants Disclaime from al Antiquitie since the Apostles and further reiect and condemne as Papistical the Ancient Fathers and General Councels chap. 1. fol. 1. That the Protestant Church disclaimeth from the Fathers of the Primitiue Church it is further proued by the Protestants condemning al the ancient Fathers in general for beleeuing teaching and practising the seueral particular actions of our Catholick Roman Faith and Religion chap. 2. fol. 12. That Protestants do not only disclaime from al the ancient Fathers as Papists but do further reiect the authoritie of the sacred Scriptures and of the Apostles themselues as being erroneous and that therefore they do not found their Faith or Religion vpon Sacred Scriptures or Christ his Apostles chap. 3. fol. 18. A TABLE SHEWING THE particular matters handled in this Booke A. AELfricus no Protestant l. 3. c. 8. pag. 51. Albigenses taught sundrie errours lib. 1. c. 3. pag. 12. Almaricus his errours l. 3. c. 8. p. 55. Antiquitie commended Praef. to the Reader and lib. 5. c. 1. pag. 1. 2. Antiquitie reiected by Protestants as a Popish Argument l. 1. c. 5. pag. 26. Anthonie the Monk commended l. 2. c. 18. Apostles according to Protestants erred in Faith euen after the comming of the Holie-Ghost l. 5. c. 3. p. 23. 25. Apocalyps reiected by Protestants lib. 5 c. 3. p. 24. Armenia conuerted by the Apostles lib. 1. c. 6. p.