Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	aaron_n	altar_n	see_v	18	3	3.6711	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A00294	A booke intituled, The English Protestants recantation, in mattersof religion wherein is demonstratiuely proued, by the writings of the principall, and best learned English Protestant bishops, and doctors, and rules of their religion, published allowed, or subscribed vnto, bythem, since the comminge of our King Iames into England, that not onely all generall grownds of diuinitie, are against the[m], but in euery particular cheife question, betweene Catholicks & them, they are in errour, by their owne iudgments : diuided accordingly, into two parts, whereof the first entreateth of those generall grounds, the other of such particular controuersies, whereby will also manifestely appeare the vanitie of D. Morton Protest. Bishop of Chester his boke called Appeale, or, Ansuueare to the Catholicke authour of thebooke entituled, The Protestants apologie.	Broughton, Richard.	1617 (1617)	STC 10414; ESTC S2109	209,404	418

themselues to the Church of Rome and doctrine thereof as hee hath before aduised CHAPTER XIIII CONCERNINGE REVERENCE of holy Relicks WHEN I entreated before of the religeous vse of holy Imadges I would also haue spoken of this question the reuerence of holy Relicks being so neare and symbolizing doctrines had not the Relator of Religion before referred mee to an other course Therefore I will now speake thereof in which case the Catholick doctrine expressed in the Councell of Trent is this Cōcil Trid. Sesi 9. Veneranda esse àfidelibus c. The bodies of Martyrs c. Are to be reuerenced of the faithfull According to which thus I argue in this Article by these Protestants That which was the doctrine of the primatiue Church in this question is true and what it cōdēned for Heresie is false But the primatiue Church taught reuerence of Relicks as the present Romane Church now dothe and condemned the contrary of Protestants for Heresie Therefore the Catholicke doctrine is true in this controuersie and the contrary of Protestants false and Hereticall The Maior proposition is euidently true by often graunte before And the Minor is thus proued First D. Willet citeth and approueth S. Ambrose thus speaking Willet Antill pag. 201. Sutcliff Subu pag. 27. Pag. 50. of Valentinian deceased I will honor his Relicks and commend his gratious memorie D. Sutcliffe wittnesseth that S. Gregorie and S. Augustine that conuerted this nation esteemed much the relicks of Saincts And in their time Churches were built in the honor of Saints and their relicks worshipped And D. Willet with others Willet Antil pag. 13. acknowledge as they needs must that Vigilantius was condemned of heresie for denyall thereof in the primatiue Church and by the authoritie thereof Secondly I argue thus againe That which was the custome and doctrine of the primatiue Church may or is still to bee kept and defended But to pray at the monuments of Saincts and reuerence their Relicks was the custome and doctrine then Therefore still to bee kept and defended The Maior is euident and the Minor thus proued First M. Wotton Wotten def of Perk. pag. 9 hath these words It was the maner of the primatiue Church to pray at the Tombes of Martirs and the Christians assembled ordinarily where the Martirs were buried And to shew what they did there which hee would willingly haue concealed for hee loueth not prayers to Saints nor reuerence of their Relicks for which causes the primatiue Christians so there assembled hee citeth S. Hierome writing Wotten sup pag. 544. in this maner of holy Paula shee went into the Sepulchre and kissed the stone of his Resurrection which the Angell had remoued from the dore of the Tombe the place of his bodie where the Lord had lien as if shee had thristed for the desired waters shee li●k●d with her faithfull tonge D. Downame writeth the like of the holy pilgrimadge of that blessed woman And to giue moste conuincing instance and proofe in this matter M. Perkins in his Problema writeth thus Primitiua Perkins problem pag. 81. Ecclesia honorauit veneratione prosecuta est reliquias mortuorum The primatiue Church did honour and prosecute with reuerence the Relicks of the deade Thirdly thus I argue That vsadge and behauiour which was lawfull to the Iewes and practized of them towards their Reliks is now in the time of grace giuen by Christ as lawfull for Christians towards their holy Relicks and things But the true faithfull Iewes lawfully vsed reuerence and honour to their Relicks Therefore it is lawfull to Christians to doe the like The Maior is euident this beeing no ceremoniall or legall thinge abrogated by Christ but rather confirmed by making the things of his lawe and Ghospell more reuerentiall then the figuratiue was The Minor is thus proued by M. Wotton in these words You bringe diuers Wotton def of Perk. pag. 581. proofes that the Arke was had in greate reuerence all needlesse for whoe denies it and againe The Iewes saith Hierome in foretimes worshipped the holy of holies because there were the Cherubins and the propitiatorie and the arke of the testament Manna Aarons rodd and the golden altare and further in this maner Hee speakes not of worshippinge the Pag. 581. 582. Arke but the holy of holyes because of the things that were in it Hee makes the Propitiatorie Manna Aarons Rod and the golden Altare causes of that worship as well as the Cherubins In the words followinge hee counts the Sepulchre of our Lord more worthie of wor●hip Then seeing those Relicks vnder the lawe and before Christ the meritorious cause of all grace and such excellencie were so worthie of worshipp and reuerence that they were not onely reuerenced in themselues but other things were worshipped and reuerenced because of them and yett by this Iudgment the Relicks in Christianitie as the Sepulchre no part of Christ but the place of his sacred bodies some few howers lyeing there are more worthie of worship as this Protestant writer confesseth wee may not deny this Reuerence and the Catholick doctrine thereof to bee holy euen by English Protestants sentence Lastely thus I argue from the generall practice of English Protestants if it is lawfull to giue ciuill reuerence to the bodie of a noble man or woman deceased because they were noble and honored when they liued much more reason there is to giue religeous and spirituall Reuerence to the bodie of a Saint holy and honored by God and man when hee lyued and now in Ioyes in heauen truely and for euer honorable But the Antecedent is true by English Protetestants whoe by their Heralds of armes allowe and practice that all Inferiours shall giue and yeeld the same honour to the bodie of the honorable parson deceased that was due vnto him lyuing his soule and bodie beeing vnited and this though in all morall Iudgment the soule of such an one is damned And this is the custome and ceremonie not onely with Heralds but vsed in Court ratified by their Bishops Doctors and Vniuersities as many and late examples teache which I will vrge no further but desire all may liue and die well that they may leaue behinde them sufficient or some motiue eyther to bee honored or helped by the prayers and deuotions of the lyuinge The consequence is euidently true and thus demonstrated for as excellencie is the cause of honor and ciuill excellency of ciuill and terrene honor so spirituall or religeous excellency of spirituall and such honor And much more for the ciuill honor and motiue thereof is onely ens rationis an inuention worthines and attribute of men and nothing at all Inherent in the bodie or soule of the partie so honored when the other excellency and cause of honor is both permanent and an Inherent dignitie as is proued before of inherent Iustice and for euer remayneth in the soule glorified in the presence of God his Saints and Angells in heauen and

embrace doctrine for this whole Kingdome were so renowned for constancie pietie and learninge and all this in their confessed puer time of Christianitie I will recite what doctrine in this poynt of Popes supreamacye they approued and receaued there for this and all nations to followe and obserue In the third Canon of this Concil Sardic can 3. their greate Councell it is thus decreed Bishop Osius said if any Bishop shall be iudged in an other cause and hee thinketh hee hath a Good cause that a Councell should be called againe if it please you lett vs honor the memorie of S. Peter the Apostle that they which haue examined the cause may write to Iulius Bishop of Rome and if hee shall adiudge that Iudgment is to be renewed lett it be renewed and lett him appoint Iudges but if hee shall allowe the cause to be such that the things that ar done shall not be examined againe such things as hee shall decree shall be confirmed Doth this please you all The Councell answeareth it pleaseth vs. Therefore all now in England ought to be pleased with the supreamacie of that highest See and appeales vnto it The 4. and next Canon Can. 4. sup immediatly beginneth thus Bishop Gandentius said lett it be added if you please to this sentence full of sanctitie that when any Bishop shall be deposed by the Iudgment of those Bishops that be in the places neare And hee shall demaunde to haue his busines handled in the citie of Rome that after his appeale no Bishop be ordeyned in his chaire that was thought to be deposed except his cause shall be determined in the Iudgment of the Bishop of Rome The 7. Canon declareth it to be in the Can. 7. sup Popes power to send a latere Iudges in such causes into any contry notwitstandeing any sentence of other Bishops And as these primatiue Bishops of this Kingedome with that learned and Holy assemble of that generall Councell receaued and approued that supreame power in the Pope of Rome so hee by these Ptotestants testimonie euer practized it in this nation For besides that which is written before they vse these words Celestine Pope of Rome sent his Archdeacon Palladius into Brittaine to withstand Theater lib. 4. cap. 1. pag. 138. n. 22. the Pelagian Heresie whoe at one time did driue out these enemyes of grace and ordayned a Bishop amonge the Scots whereby that Barbarous nation ●mbr●ced Christianitic This they cite and approue from Prosper Aquitan And againe in this maner Pelagius by birth a brittane by profession a Mouke by leude doctrine an Hereticke brought vp in the fame us Lib. 6. cap. 53. pag. 277. n. 10. monasterie of Bangor in Wales his Hereticall assertions were afterwards condemned by Innocentius the first Bishop of Rome Whose doctrines were 1. that man without the grace of God was able to fullfill all the commaundements 2 that man in himself had free will That the grace of God was giuen vnto vs according to out merits 4. That the Iust haue no synne 5. That children ar free from originall synne 6. That Adam should haue died though hee had not synned Concerninge the Towne of Stanford Lib. 1. cap. 31. pag. 59. n. 8. they make this relation from Ihon Hardinge it continued an vniuersitie vnto the comeing of Augustine at which time the Bishops of Rome interdicted it for certayne Heresies sprange vp amonge the Brittaines and Saxons They write futher thus Yorke hath challenged to haue beene sometime Pag. 6. n. 7. Metropolitane ouer all the Bishops in Scotland It was made equall in honor and power with Canterbury by Pope Gregory as Beda relateth and had twelue suffragan Bishopricks that owed obedience And againe Yorke was made a Metropolitane Pag. 78. n. 9. cittie by a pall sent vnto it from Honorius And to shew that the disposeing of these things was in the power of that highest See thus they testifie againe That Lichfeild was made an Lib. 1. cap. 3. pag. 6. n. 8. Archiepiscopall See by Pope Hadrian the first at the suite of Offa the greate Kinge of Mercia is manifested by Mathew of Westminister vnto whose Iurisdictiō were assigned the Bishopricks of Winchester Hereford Leicester Siduacester Helinham and Dunwich Like were the condition of S. Dauids n. 6. 8. Dorchester by Oxford and others And to shew that these primatiue bishops were onely subiect to the Pope and no Prince in their spirituall proceedeings when the wicked Kinge Vortigern had put away his first lawfull Christian wife and maryed Rowena the daughter of Hengist a Pagan Theat l. 7. cap. 12. pag. 313. about the yeare of Christ 470 for declareing the remedie thereof they write in these wordes Which Pagan mariadge proued not onely the bane of the land but so ruinated the Church of Christianitie that a prouinciall Councell of the Brittaines was assembled in Ann. 470. to repaire those things that this mariadge had decayed Then Popes and not Princes by these Parker lib. antiq Britan nic pag. 329 Protestants euer had spirituall supreamacie in this Kingedome For their first Archbishop Parker An. 1536. writeth thus Potentia populis nongentis amplius Annu in Anglia durauit The power of the Pope continued in England aboue nyne hundred yeares And there ought to continue still as I haue made demonstration by these Protestants before to which I add this sentence of Isaac Casanbon ex o●e Isaac Casanb respons ad ep Cardinal p●r pag. 8. ipso ser Regis taken from the mouth it self of our moste syncere Kinge commaundeing him to committ it te writeinge and is as followeth Rebus ipsis probet Romanus pontifex lett the Pope of Rome proue by things themselues that hee doth not seeke his owne Pag. 67. supr but the glory of God immortall and the peace of people concord and saluation to be a care vnto him then our moste se●ene Kinge as hee hath longe since protested in his Admonitory epistle without delay primas illi deferet ipsumque 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cum Gregorio Nazianzen● dicet non inuitus will giue primacie vnto him and not vnwillingely say with Gregorie Nazienzen that hee hath charge ouer the whole Church To which I answeare that I wish and I trust with more deuotion and Religion then hee That not onely Popes but other Princes spirituall and temporall Bishops Preists and all men in authoritie and others did more seeke the glorie of God then their owne and were more carefull of the peoples peace concord and saluation then they now ar or many were euen from the time of Christ Then so many disorders and Impieties should not haue so full dominion where Protestancie Ruleth and the scripture had neuer saide omnes quae sua sunt quaerunt non qu● Iesu Christi all men or all sortes of men seeke the things that be their owne and not of Iesus Christ And it chargeth vs againe to obey Magistrats and men in

will not haue any such canon or constitution his friuolous distinction in the Nicene Councell then lately ended then they must needs be of more auntient and vncontroleable antiquitie and authoritie by his owne censure and S. Ciprians Councell and decree against this highest power of no validitie if hee could bringe forth any such decree or Councell which hee doth not but onely alledgeth these words of S. Ciprian to Pope Cornelius statutum est omnibus nobis Which hee thus translated S. Ciprian directly ordeyned in a Councell Which Ciprian ep 55. ad Cornel. Morton App. lib. 2. pag. 296. S. Ciprian neither had done nor could doe to bynde S. Cornelius and the Church of Rome with all others For by D. Mortons owne Argument if Pope and S. Cornelius Pope and Saint Stephen with others Bishops of the Mother and commaunding Churche of Rome then by his Maiestie a Rule vnto all might not be a Rule and commaunder ouer the African Church much lesse could the Church of Africke subiect Ruled and dependinge make statutes and decrees to rule and commaund this Rule and commaunder of all And Mr Morton might haue concluded the contrary of his translation for the Church of Rome if hee had considered that S. Ciprians words be not Statutum sit ab omnibus nobis it is decreed of or by vs all ●●t statutum sit omnibus nobis a decree is made for vs all Because S. Fabian Pope of Rome and predicessor to S. Cornelius had made such a ●abian ●●ist 3. ●●m 1. conc decree to bynde all as S. Ciprian spake of Ibi causa agatur vbi crimen admittitur lett the cause be hard there where the fault is committed Yet in the same place Appeales to Rome ar excepted in these words Wee forbid forreyne Iudgments by a generall decree reserued allwayes the Apostolicke authoritie And againe It pleaseth alsoe that if a Bishop accused hath appealed to the See Apostolicke that shall be decreed which the high Bishop of that See giueth sentence of All which as alsoe that whole epistle of S. Ciprian to S. Cornelius then Pope of Rome neuer denyeing appeales thither but excuseinge and defendeing and purgeing himself and other Bishops of Africke accused by Appellants at Rome as they had likewise done priori anno the yeare before sufficiently Ciprian ep 55. supr confirme the vndeniable supreame authoritie of that Church Which S. Ciprian there proueth to be of Infallible Iudgment and vndeceaueable by any Appellants or others in matters of Religion and so to be appealed vnto and supreame His words in the same epistle and concerning the same Appellants ar these Nauigare audent ad Petri cathedram They dare to saile euen to the chayre of Peter and to the principall Church from whence preistly vnitie is risen and cary thither letters from Scismaticks and wicked men nor to thinke that they be Romans whose faith by the Apostle preachinge is praised to whome false beleefe cannot haue accesse Hitherto the very wordes of S. Ciprian in that place and epistle which D. Morton alleadgeth against the Romane supreamacie by which is euident that S. Ciprian neither did nor could by his doctrine deny appeales to that Church which as hee writeth could not be deceaued with Hereticks nor false beleefe could haue accesse vnto it which could be for no other cause but for the Infallible Iudgment thereof and that God did assist it in truthe as other Protestants ar wittnesses before And D. Morton haueing first written Morton app pag. 296. in this order The Title of vniuersall Bishop of the Church hath beene long vsed of the Pope of Rome is as mutch to blame to speake thus S. Ciprian saith none of vs is called the Bishop of Bishops which not S. Ciprian onely but the whole Councell of Carthadge vnder Ciprian did professe furthermore callinge it a terror tyrannicall for any one Bishop to impose vppon his fellowe Bishops a necessitie of obedience For first D. Morton cannot but knowe that this Councell of Africke defendeinge Rebaptization was iustly condemned by the then Popes of Rome and recanted by the African Bishops present at it as is proued before Secondly D. Morton will be a Presbyterian if hee maketh equalitie in the cleargie and denyeth Archbishops primates and Patriarkes as his citation without better glosse implyeth Thirdly hee doth abuse his Readers to wish them to beleeue that S. Ciprian and the African Bishops decreed any thing against the clayme of S. Stephen then Bishop of Rome his predecessors and successors to be Bishop of Bishops Mort. sup pag. 296. in a right sence as hee there citeth from Binias for so against his owne words and citation they had called their owne decree a terror tyrannicall for any one Bishop to impose vppon his fellowe Bishops a necessitie of obedience For D. Morton dareth not to deny but S. Stephen and other Popes of Rome were at the leaste fellowe Bishops with those of Africke But S. Ciprian and those Bishops decreed no such thinge for D. Morton may so in that Councell that the sentence of S. Ciprian is the laste of all and after all the other Bishops and onely to condemne Baptisme by Hereticks after recanted and condemned And the words which hee cited against Bishop of Bishops ar in S. Ciprians Carthagin concil sub Cyprian to 1. concil init exhortation not decree to the Bishops of Africke begynninge Audistis Collegae Dilectissimi you haue hard ô moste beloued fellowes nothing concerning except affirminge or confirminge that clayme and Title in Pope Stephen an holy Saint and Martyr but alltogether about rebaptization and are these Superest vt de hacre quid singuli sentiamus proferamus Yt remayneth that euery of vs speaketh of this matter what hee thinketh Iudginge no man or remoueing any man from the Right of communion if hee shall thinke otherwise for none of vs there assembled constituted himself Bishop of Bishops Which seing S. Stephen an holy Pope and Martyr with others of that sacred See then a Rule to all by Protestants and D. Morton did by them also it must be yeelded to be iust and lawfull Neither must D. Morton be so hyperpapall as to deny the Councell of Sardyce where appeales to Rome ar warranted to be generall for his Masters the makers of their greate Theater haue so allowed and receaued it before Nor slander S. Cyprian by perswadeing the worlde that hee dyed out of the vnitie of the Church of Rome for recallinge of which his greate rashnes I referre him to better Authorities of S. Augustine S. Ierome Augustin ep 48. Hieron dialog cont Luciferian and the like And this sufficeth of this question By which the vniuersitie of Cambridg may easely resolue themselues by their owne Doctors of the second proposition offered vnto them by the Preists of Wisbich There is an externall Iudge in matters of faith whoe it is and of what authoritie his definitiue sentence is in such things

Whitsontide was generally receaued as a Tradition deliuered by the Apostles then the times themselues not being either commaunded or directly exemplified in scripture must also be allowed by tradition And yet the Sabboth day in the old lawe which was abrogated by this tradition of the Sonday the Lords day as hee nameth it was so expressely commaunded by scripture that in order it is the third of the ten cheife commaundements and one of the first table belongeing to the worshipp of God Therefore a Tradition so powerable as to giue a ceaseinge to the expresse writtē worde lawe and commaundement of God must needs be of equall power And the Christians feaste of Easter likewise crosseing with and euacuateing the Pascha of the lawe written and without scripture onely by the prerogatiue of Tradition cannot be inferior especially seeing as before the Quartadec●mans denyers thereof were condemned as Hereticks by the primatiue Church for that cause And the like reason is of the feast of Whitesontide in the Church of Christ receaued by the same Rule of Easter onely by vnwritten tradition yet clearely abolisheinge and takeinge away the written lawe and word of God in that behalf Further I argue thus whatsoeuer is not a perfect and compleate Rule and Square in matters and questions of Religion without the help and dyrection of vnwritten traditions cannot be termed an absolute Rule in this kinde But the scripture and written worde of God by these Protestants is such Therefore by them no absolute and perfect Rule in matters of faithe The Maior is euidently true in the light of nature otherwise one and the same thinge in the same respect might be absolute and not absolute perfect and not perfect and two Contradictories might be true which is vnpossible The Minor proposition is thus proued by D. Feilde who speakeing of traditions Feild l. 4. cap. 20. pag. 239. vnwritten and yet allowed by him hath these wordes The third kinde of tradition is that forme of Christian doctrine and explication of the seuerall partes thereof which the first Christians receauing of the same Apostles that deliuered to them the scriptures commended to posterities This may rightly be named a tradition for that wee neede a playne and distinct explication of many things which are somewhat obscurely conteyned in the scripture Which is sufficient proofe that tradition vnwritten is the cause why many things are beleeued by faith grownded vppon tradition not written which the scriptures could neuer warrant vs to beleeue For things obscurely handled and not playnely and distinctly explicated which as hee saith is by tradition cannot be the formall obiect of faith by any possibilitie for seeing true certayne and vndoubted Reuelation from God euen by Protestants is the formall cause of beleeueinge things obscurely conteyned or taught cannot haue this priuiledge And yet by D. Feilds wordes many thinges be in this state without the assistance of tradition and yet firmely to be beleeued Therefore not the obscuritie in scripture but to vse his wordes a playne and distinet explication of many thinges by tradition receaued by the first Christians from the Apostles commended to posterities is the formall cause and reason of beleeueinge such verities Now to drawe to an end in this question of traditions D. Feild to his fowre before acknowledged kindes of traditions The holy scriptures the Creede of the Apostles the forme Feild pag. 238. l. 4. of Christian doctrine and explication of the seuerall parts thereof which the first Christians receaueinge of the same Apostles that deliuered to them the scriptures commended to posterities and the continued Feild pag. 239. practise of such thinges as neither are conteyned in the scripture expressely nor the example of such practise expressely there deliuered thoughe the growndes reasons and causes of the necessitie of such practise be there conteyned and the benefitt or good that followeth of it hee addeth the fift kinde in these wordes The fift kinde of traditions comprehendeth Feild supr pag. 239. such obseruations as in particulare are not commaunded in scripture nor the necessitie of them from thence concluded though in generall without limitation of times and other circumstances such things be there commaunded Of this sorte many thinke the obseruation of the lent faste to be the faste of the fourthe and the sixt dayes of the weeke and some other This supposed as also the Feild pag. 242. same Protestant Doctors Rules before to know true traditions the consent and doctrine of the Churche the moste renowned for learninge the constant Testimonie of the pastors of an Apostolicke Church amonge which next to generall Feild pag. 202. Councells bynding and commaunding all the Church of Rome is especially to be obeyed reuerenced and respected as moste priuiledged from error yt must needs be euident by these Protestants that Traditions whether deliuered in scripture to be deduced from them or to be receaued without scripture are to be adiudged for the Romane Churche for that before is proued by them to be the true Church of Christ the Pope of Rome to be the supreame commaunding Ruler in it that the scriptures receaued by it are Canonicall and the vndowbted worde of God and all true and Iuridicall expositions and deductions from them are onely for the doctrine of the same Churche of Rome And so their other grounted Rules of generall Councells and Learned Fathers to be handled in the next chapters doe also teach vnto vs the same doctrines by these Protestants for by their Iudgment they may not nor can proceede in such b●sines but by the holy scriptures and true expositions and deductions from them allreadie proued by these Protestants for the present Roman Church Therefore I conclude this question with this Arguments following Whatsoeuer doctrines in Religion generall Councells the highest binding and commaunding Rule and authoritie ouer all Christians in the Iudgment of Protestants haue defined by the Bishops and Fathers assembled in them in matters of Religion by traditions written or vnwritten are to be receaued and embraced of all But all or the cheefest Articles in question betweene Catholicks and Protestants are directly concluded by the grounte of these Protestants by the Councells and Bishops in them assembled at Nyce the seconde the greate Laterane Florence and Constance Basile cited and allowed for generall Councells by the Protestant Bishop of Winchester D. Bilson D. Willet D. Couell M. Bils Middlet papist ●9 119. 120. 124. 125. Willet synop cont 1. q. 7. Liniban ap Parkes and others in such maner as the present Church of Rome now teacheth Therefore they ought so to be receaued and embraced of all Christians bothe propositions are graunted before by these Protestants or in these citations Therefore nothinge remayneth to be proued in this Argument And because these Protestants Parkes pag. 137. 180. Couell def of Hook pag. 21. Parkes ag lymb pag. 176. Willet Antil pag. 178. c. Abbot ag Hill pag 38. 48. 49. 51.

Protestant preacher in his more then vncharitable booke against Catholicks witnesseth of Prot. proof-part 1. c. 9. cap. 8. c. his owne brethren in Religion the English Protestants Of the more then irreligeous and prophane behauiour of their cleargie of English Protestants in abuseing falsefieing peruertinge the holy Scriptures Fathers Councels and all Authorities for Religion I haue for this point sufficiently entreated before to proue that they are not iust or righteous but most vniust and impious by their owne testimonie What other syns they are defiled with let their owne liues and the world censure But suer I am they are not voide of all greuous sinnes which they must be if they be iustified and in grace and such they must be in deed before they knowe themselues to be such except they can know that to be which is not as their sharp wits would seeme to doe in this and other questions of Religion Then seeing it is to apparant that Protestants are not iust either by their Imagined assureinge faith or howsoeuer let vs further examine by these writers and Protestant professors whether it is in it self possible that this supposed faith should Iustifie The contrary whereof thus I demonstrate from their owne writings All men that pretend to be iustified by this Imagined faith must needs be iustified by some act or acts thereof But no man is Iustified by any act or acts thereof Therefore no man is iustified by it The Maior is manifest The Minor is thus proued by Protestants First D. Feild with Feild pag. 177. others doth and of necessitie must affirme that in this busines of their fantasied Iustification their deuised faith hath twoe and onely twoe acts One going before iustification teaching vs to pray entreate God and humble ourselues when wee are not iust and this act as hee acknowledgeth it to goe before Iustification so hee thus freely confesseth that it doth not iustifie The second Act as hee telleth vs doth followe Iustification and so by no possibilitie because the cause cannot be after the effect caused by it that is able to iustifie wherefore his owne words of this Act of their inuented faith be these Shee doth not actiuely Iustifie but findeth the thinge done Therefore seeing they teach there be but two acts in their new faith the first and second te laste which admitt no more and neither the one nor other nor both together because they graunt there is no partiall influence or cooperation from them to that purpose dothe doe or can iustifie there is no possibilitie of Iustification by such idle faithe for so two contradictoryes should be true man is iustified by some act of faith man is not iustified by any act of faith Which in Logicke and nature is knowne to be vnpossible and a stupide absurditie to affirme it This matter is further proued by D. Couell who reiecting Luthers Couell def of Hooker pag. 42. opinion in this question graunteth a seperabilitie of faith and workes and that faith as they commonly graunte doth not iustifie Then Iustification cannot possibly be by onely faith which in an other treatise hee declareth by example in these words Faith is the fowndation of spirituall buylding of Gods howse charitie the Roofe without which the best are Couell against Burges pag. 148. but as howses vncouered that cannot longe continue Then iustification which is the Roofe of our spirituall buildinge in this world is and musts needs be the worke and buildinge of charitie and not of faith alone Which demonstratiuely is true by his graunt that faith and the works of charitie may be seperated for they consent that without such works man is not iustified therefore not possibly by this their Poeticall faith Further both the present Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury D. George Abbot against D. Hill and D. Feild also doth often tell vs that the Greeke Church is the true Church of Christ Then supposing from my first chapter in the first part of this worke by the graunt of the same D. Feild Protest proaf part 1. cap. 1. D Couell D. Sutcliffe M. Wotton and M. Ormerod that the direction thereof is to be followed her Iudgment to be rested in that it hath authoritie to commaund her children the Iudgment of it is a very speciall grownd of faith supporting the truthe as a piller doth vnderpropp a building is a diligent and true keepr of doctrines committed to her chaungeth nothing diminisheth nothing at any time addeth nothing superfluous looseth not her owne vsurpeth not things belonging to others and that there is no saluation remission of syns or hope of eternall life out of the Church All which be the verie words of those laste cited Protestants related in that place From which graunts thus I argue No doctrine or opinion that is a thinge moste horrible vnworthie any Christian against the lawe of God and light of nature is or can possibly be true But the paradoxe of Protestants that this their supposed onely faith doth iustifie is such Therefore it neither is or can be true The Maior is euidently true and to affirme the contrary is to denie all true Religion and the Authoritie of God for yf hee should or could teach or reueale to men to followe doctrine that is horrible vnworthie a Christian against his owne lawe and naturall light such doctrine could not be true nor hee honored as God but to be accoumpted a deceauer and seducer The Minor or second proposition be the expresse words of the Greeke Church so true to be obeyd and followed in doctrine by these Protestants as before is cited For Hieremias Patriarke of Constantinople cheef in Hieremias Patriarcha constant in censura cap. 5. that Church in his censure against Protestants vseth these words in this article The doctrine that onely faith doth iustifie is a thinge moste horrible vnto or thie any Christian against the lawe of God and the light of nature Therefore these men mayntayning so horrible doctrine by the censure of the true Church as they teach and out of which as they affirme before there is no saluation remission of syns or hope of eternall life are so farre from being iust iustified or to be saued by faith or any other meanes in their proceedings that by their owne confession they haue left vnto themselues no hope of eternall life or saluation at all Moreouer I argue thus Nothing which cannot be defended without graunting and mayntayninge more new and straunge absurdities and impossibilities is or can be true doctrine But this Protestant assertion of their onely assuring faithe iustifying is such therefore it neither is nor can be true The first proposition is euidently true for euery truthe may and is defended without any absurditie or inconuenience The seconde proposition is also manifestly proued from D. Feild and others before To whome I add M. Wotton who laboureing what hee can to defend this his forged faithes iustification and answere that place

will The Maior is euident by Protestants graunteing such freedome to make free will The Minor is proued by D. Couell Couell def of Hooker pag. 35. writing thus Notwithstanding all the wownds given to humane nature by the fall of Adam Ignorance Malice Concupiscence and Infirmitie ●et the will is free from necessitie and coaction though not from miserye and infirmitie where hee doth moste playnely teache a freedome of the will from syn for where no necessitie and coaction is there must needs be libertie and freedome and in the will freedome in it and free will And to make Protestants agree with the recited Councell of Trent in this matter thus hee speaketh againe in their name In supernaturall thing● wee say the Couell sup pag. 37. will of man hath not obtayned grace by freedome but freedome by grace Meaneing that by the grace of Christ man is made free to doe all duties in supernaturall and religeous affaires of themselues aboue the naturall power before it is assisted by spirituall and supernaturall help and grace And concerning the naturall power it self before the comming of grace hee speaketh in this maner There is in the will of man naturally that freedome whereby it is apt to take or refuse any particular Couell sup obiect whatsoeuer beinge presented vnto it And frome hence I argue further in this order That without which mans actions are neyther good nor euill must needs be graunted But free will in man is such Therefore it must needs be graunted The Maior is euident for if mens actions were neyther good nor euill there could be no reward for vertue because nothing should be vertue where nothinge is good nor punishment for syn because nothing could be syn where nothing could be euill The Minor is proued by D. Couell who ascribeth to this freedome of mans will the goodnes and malice of humane actions as if hee would say if man had not freedome and libertie of will his Actions could not be praysed for good nor condemned for euill his words be these All the vnforced Actions of Couell sup def of Hooker pag 49. 50. men are voluntarie and all voluntary actions tending to their end haue choice and all choice presupposeth the knowledge of some cause wherefore wee make it And therefore it is no absurditie to thinke that all Actions of men endued with the vse of reason are generally either good or euill Where wee may see what a creature man is made by them that deny free will vnto him that euen in Protestants Iudgments by that denyall not onely his actions as before be neither vice or vertue and himself thereby depriued of the power of choice and election is denyed to be a reasonable creature and proued by their owne deductions to be a beaste and wholly mortall Againe I argue thus All that graunt and acknowledge the truthe of the doctrine of the schoolemen and of the Church of Rome in this poynt and further that man hath libertie to vertue and vice must needs graunt free will in man But these English Protestant writers following graunt these things Therefore they must graunt free will in man The Maior is both too manifest and copious The Minor is proued by these Protestant citations D. Couell writing of Couell def of Hooker pag. 34. the fall of man in Adam setteth downe his opinion in this o●der Wee must needs confesse that by syn hee hath loste much who is now able to comprehend all that hee should But wee dare not affirme that hee hath loste all who euen in this blindenes is able to see some thinge and in this weakenes stronge enough without the light of supernaturall iustifyeing grace to treade out those pathes of morall vertues which haue not onely greate vse in humane societie but are also not altogether of a nature oppositely different from mans saluation And further thus hee writeth Though syn hath giuen as the Couell sup pag. 35. scholemen obserue foure wownds vnto our nature Ignorance Malice Concupiscence and Infirmitie the first in the vnderstanding the second in the will the thirde in our desiring appetite the laste in the Irascible yet the will is free from necessitie and coaction though not from miserie and Infirmitie For as S. Bernard saith there is a threefold freedome from necessitie from syn from misery the first of nature the seconde of grace the third of glorie In the first from the bondadge of coaction the will is free in it owne nature and hath power ouer it self In the seconde the will is not free but freed from the bondadge of syn And in the third it is freed from the seruitude of corruption Now that freedome by which the will of man is named free is the first onely And therefore wee dare say that the wick●d who haue not the two laste being captiues to syn in this life and to misery in the life to come yet for all this want not the freedome of will And to make playne demonstration that in this question hee ioyneth with the Church of Rome as hee hath before followed the scholemen in Part. 1. cap. 2. Couell sup def pag. 35. 36. 37. generall cheefest Agents and foretops of poperye as they are called by Protestants before so in particular hee appealeth to the Authoritie of Petrus Lombardus Master of the Sentences To Albertus Bonauentara Scotus S. Thomas c. For decision hereof Whose opinion to be the same with the present Catholicke Church no man can make question To this man I add the fore-named approuers of the Greeke Church to be the true Church D. Abbots the present Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury D. Feild c. For this Greeke Church censureth in these words Man hath Hieremias Patriarch constant Censur cap. 18 ● 19. free will to eternall saluation And againe Vertue and vyce be in the power and choyce of man Wee may auoide all syns It is against the nature of things that to be esteemed vertue which a man doth by necessitie For euerye vertuous action must proceede from the libertie of the will I argue further thus That which was the doctrine of the primatiue Church in this poynt is true But to graunt free will was the doctrine thereof Therefore it is true Both the Maior and Minor be proued before Part. 1. cap. 9. part 2. c. 4. Couell mod examinat pag. 120. Sutcliff subu pag. 50. The Maior in the first part and this also The minor in the 4. chapter before out of D. Couell and D. Sutcliff And so nothing in this argument requireth proofe any further Therefore I make this new argument All men graunting vnto man libertie to syn or not to syn to be saued or not to be saued must needs graunt free will in man as Catholicks doe But the Protestants following graunt such libertye and freedome to man Therefore they graunt vnto him free will as Catholicks doe The Maior is manifest and the Minor thus proued by M.