I am made partaker of all that feare the Lord. Now this former doctrine touching the sufferings of one to be applyed to an other being the vndoubted true and auncient doctrine of Christ Church vpon which ground Indulgances are builded it from hence appeareth how idly and impertinâ—ntly our aduersaryes do vrge some texts of Scripture to the contrary As where it is sayd The soule which sinneth â—â—en that shall dye And againe Euery one shall be are his owne burden And more No Man câ—â— redeeme his brother or giue a price to God for him All which texts are spoken of the state of eternall damnation and therefore impertinently alledged in which state a Man deparâ—eth out of this World but they are not spoken of temporall punishment only which is reserued after the guilt of eternall damnation is remitted which is the point here controuerted If it be vrged against this doctrine that the actions of the Saincts deceased were meritts to themselues and therefore cannot be applyed as satisfactions for others â—o this I answere that one and the same action may be in a different respect both meritorious and satisfactory Meritorious as it proceedeth from supernaturall grace satisfactory as it is performed with payne labour and difficulty According hereto we reade in Scripture that almeâ—deeds do both merit and satisfy for sinne For thus we reade Whosoeuer shall giue in my name a cup of cold water c. he shall not loose his reward Here is merit We also reade of Almeâ—deeds in this sort Almesdeeds deliuer vs from sinne and death and againe As water quencheth the fire so Almesdeeds extinguish sinne Here is satisfaction Here also we are to conceaâ—e that though the same action may be meritorious and satisfactory yet a man meriteth only for himselfe not for others but satisfy he may both for himselfe and for others only Christ our Sauiour hath merited both grace and glory for vs all and also hath satisfyed for the sinnes of all Men Yet the worth and price of his merites we can apply only to ourselues by our meritorious actions and not deriue it to any other but the benefit of his satisfaction we may deriue by our owne satisfactory works not only to our selues but also to others Where it is vulgarly objected that Iuduigences are oftentymes granted for more thousands of years then the World or Purgatory are like to endure and continue And that therefore they are ridiculously and foolishly granted I answere this argument proceedeth from meere Ignorance For heere the yeres are not to be vnderstood of the yeres or dayes of penall satisfaction which are to be imposed in Purgatory but of the number of yeres which were more or lesse in number proportioned according to the diuersity of the crime by the Canonicall Decrees of the Church And here we are further to know that God in the space and compasse of an houre or some such short time may by the bitter paynes of Purgatory expiate that which in this life a remisse and slow penance or satisfaction would scarce redeeme in the compasse of many yeres Now touching the antiquity of Indulgences we fynd them practized by S. Paul who thus sayth of the incestuous person Whom you haue pardoned I also pardon for that which I haue pardoned in the Person of Christ for you I haue done it that we be not circumuented of Satan Here now we are to remember that the incestuous person to whom the Indulgence was heere giuen being in great contrition and sorrow for his sinne was excommunicated by S. Paul who at the request of the Corinthians did release him of his excommunication for feare he might faule into dispayre Now in this example we find all things necessary to an Indulgence or Pardon As first the authority of the granter of the pardon to wit S. Paul who affirmes to do it in the person of Christ Secondly state of grace in the Receauer of the Indulgence as appeareth by his Contrition and sorrow for his sinne committed Thirdly the temporall punishment remitted to wit his Excommunication Lastly a iust sufficient cause for giuing this Indulgence or Pardon Which was lest the offendour should faule into dispayre or be ouerplunged in sorrow After the Apostles tymes we fynd that the Bishops of the Primatiue Church gaue pardons and Indulgences to many and this was done by the mediation of Confessours or designed Martyrs as is witnessed by Tertullian Cyprian We also find that Pardons and Indulgences were giuen by sundry â—â—opes in other ages as by Leo the third by Gregory the Great by Vrban the second by Innocentius the third by Paschalis the first and by others All which dispensed and distributed out of the common treasure of the Church Besides the former authorityes the doctrine and vse of Indulgencs is warranted by Councells both Generall and Prouinciall To wit the first Councel of Nice the Councell of Ancyran the Councell of Leodice the Councell of Claramontane the Councell of Lateran of Vienna of Constance and of Trente as appeareth in the Councells themselfs Now if the former auncient Popes and Fathers as also these alledged Councells should erre in the doctrine of Indulgences then two mayne absurdityes should follow first that the Primatiue Church should most fouly erre in a dogmaticall poynt of fayth contrary to the iudgment of the more sober Leared Protestants among whom I will for breuity heare set downe the iudgment only of Kempnitius touchâ—ng the Primatiue Church who thus saith I dowbt not but the Primatiue Church receaued from the Apostles and Apostolicall Men not only the text of Scripture but also the natiue sense thereof But this the Primatiue Church could not receaue if it wholy erred in so mayne a matter of Christian doctrine as the doctryne of Indulgences is The second Absurdity is that in regard of the said Fathers and Generall Councells defending the doctrine of Indulgences the whole Church of Christ supposing the doctrine to be faâ—se should erre in matter of fayth contrary to the Promise of Christ who hath promised euer to be with his Church till the end of the World which said Church of his is styled by the Apostle for it greater certainty of fayth columna firmamentum veritatis and therefore incompatible with errour And thus much concerning the doctrine of Indulgences ending this discours with the Confession of Kempnitius touching the antiquity thereof who plainly acknowledgeth and saith that the beginning of Indulgences is not clearely enough set downe in histories The Catholicke doctrine touching Communion vnder one Kynd defended THe true state of this question is not whether Christ did institute the Eucharist vnder both kynds Or whether hymselfe and the Apostles did at the first institution receaue it vnder both kynds Or whether the Apostles and the Fathers afterwards at sundry tymes did minister it to the Laity vnder both kynds for all this
a Protestant Church preaching the Word and administring the Sacraments vpon the face of the earth to be seene or heard of But hereat I meruayle not since Philosophy reacheth vs to speake by all â—sion that where the Obiect is wanting there the sense suspendeth it operation DOCTOVR REYNOLDS Admitting all that you say to be true touching the first twenty yeares before Luther yet it is most euâ—cent that Iohn Hus who liued anno 1400. and not very many yeares before those 20. yeares was a good and true Protestant for him I fynd registred for a most holy Martyr by M. Fox and D. Downeham MICHAEAS Iohn Hus did liue in the yeare 1400. Who first was a Catholicke Priest The cause of his death was in that he taught the Necessity of Communion vnder both kinds and the seditious doctrine touching Princes Bishops and Priests being in mortall sinne But to make a more particular dissection of this Instance The Articles wherein his followers the Bohemians dissented from the Church of Rome were these following which M. Fox thus relateth The Bohemians being demanded in what poynts they did differ from the Church of Rome the only Propositions which they propounded were these foure Articles first Communion vnder both kinds The second that al Ciuil dominiou was forbidden to the Clergy The third that the preaching of the Word was free for all Men and in al places The fourth that open crymes are in no wyse to be suffered for auoyding of greater euill Thus M. Fox of the Hussite who we see as comparting with the Church of Rome in all other points cannot possibly be alledged for visible members of the Protestant Church D. REYNOLDS But what do you say of Iohn Hus himselfe was not he a Protestant and dyed in defence of the Protestant fayth MICHAEAS M. D The testimonies of Luther and M. Fox shall decide this point betweene vs. And first M. Fox thus saith of him Quid vnquam docuit aut in concilio defendit Hussius c. What did Hus defend at any tyme or taught in the councel wherein he might not seeme euen superstitiously to agree with the Papists What doth the Popish fayth teach concerning Transubstantiation which he did not in like sort confirme with the Papists Who did celebrate Masses more religiously then he Or who more chastly did keep the vowes of Priestly single life Add hereto that touching freeâ—â—l fayth predeâ—â—nation the cause of iustification merit of Works what other thing taught he then was taught at Rome What Image of any saint did he cast out at Bethleem therefore what can we say for which he deserued death touching the which he is not a like to be condemned with the Sea of Rome or with it to be freed and absolued Thus far M. Fox with whom agreeth Luther thus writing of Hus The papists burned Hus when as he departed not a fingars breadth from the papacy for he taught the same which the papists do only he did find fault with their vices and wicked life agaynst the Pope he did nothing Thus Luther Besides all the Catholicke doctrines mantained by Hus he taught as aboue is touched the Heresy of Wiclef to wit that there are no Princes Priests or Bishopps whyle they are in mortall sinne as M. Fox recordeth with whom agreeth the Protestant Osiander thus wryting Nullus est Dominus ciuilis nullus est Praelatus nullus est Episcopus dum est in mortali peccato Haec propositio approhart non potest sed passus est Ioannes Hus hac in parte aliquid humani There is no Ciuill Prince no Prelate or Bishop whiles he is in mortall sinne This proposition cannot be approued but Iohn Hus suffered herein the infirmity of Man Now I cannot but admire the incredible boldnes of M. Fox who acknowledging the former Heresy mantayned by Hus but especially granting as shewed out of his owne words that Hus did hould all the cheise points and frame of the present Roman Religion was neuerthelesse not ashamed to pronounce Iohn Hus for a most holy Martyr as aboue is expressed meaning a martyr of his owne Protestant Church So gladly you Protestants for the supporting of the continuance and visibility of your Church do make clayme to any Catholicke or hereticke whosoeuer who in one only point of Religion though dissenting in all others may seeme to compart and interleague with you Thus far of Hus whom to legitimate for a Protestant you see it is impossible OCHINVS I must here agree in iudgment with Michaeas And this Instance had far better bene forborne then obtruded And indeed it is no small blemish to our Church to insist in such weake and insufficient examples But M. Doctour Let vs entreate you to rise vp to Higher tymes in your discourse D. REYNOLDS I will satisfy your desire The next then in whom I will instance shal be our owne Contryman Wicklef Whom all the world I hope will euen dispose that he was a perfect Protestant and that himselfe and his followers enioyed the administration of the Word and Sacraments the practize of which is acknowledged to be an essentiall note of the Churches Visibility This my opinion touching Wicklef being a Protestant is not myne alone but it is warranted with the authorityes of M. Fox and the learned Crispinus MICHAEAS Indeede M D. M. Fox Crispinus I grant do so teach but how truly Obserue what followeth and then geue vp your eauen and impartiall iudgment And yet before I come to the tuche of this point I must put you in mind what thy two former Protestants grant in the places by you cited that at Wickleffs reuolt supposing him to be a Protestant the Protestant Church was wholy inuisible for thus M. Fox writeth In the tyme of horrible darknes when there seemed in a manner to be no one so little sparke of pure doctrine left or remayning Wicklef by Gods prouidence rosevp through whom the Lord would first awaken raize vp againe the World Thus he This Wicklef being an Englishman as you know M. D. was a Catholicke Priest and Person of Lutterworth in Leicestershirs and as Stow relateth He first inueighed against the Church of Rome because he had bene depriued by the Archbishop of Canterbury from a certaine benefice He liued anno 1370. Now that Wicklef cannot be truly claymed for a Protestant I proue in that besides he was a Catholicke Priest and no Church of the Protestants then knowne to him he still retayned many Catholicke Opinions and withall taught diuers notorious Heresyes Touching his Catholicke Opinions still beleiued by him I will alledge diuers out of his owne Wrytings First he beleiued seauen Sacraments thus writing of them Quaedam sacramentaper se promulgauit Christus c. Certaine sacraments Christ did promulgate by himself as Baptisme the Eucharist the sacrament of Orders and of Penance certaine also by his Apostles as the sacraments of Confirmation and of Extreme
the Church of Rome since the Apostles dayes Which Position is indeed the iuncture without which the whole frame almost of all other Controuersies hang loose Doctour Whitakers vndertaks to proue the Contrary In whom rather then in any other Protestant I haue peculiarly and ex professo made choyce to personate all the speeches and arguments vsed to proue this supposed change in the Church of Rome principally because there is no Protestant wryter that I know who hath so much prosecuted this presumed change as Doctour Whitakers hath done as appeareth in his Bookes agaynst the Cardinall himselfe agaynst Father Campion that blessed Saint and cheifly against Duraeus where the Doctour vndertaketh to instance diuers examples of this imaginary Reuolt Yet here you are to conceaue that I haue not so dwelled in the only wrytings of Doctour Whitakers as that I neglect what other Protestants haue also written in maintenance of this change for I assure you I haue omitted nothing of Moment which I could fynd in their Bookes to be obiected in proofe thereof though Doctour Whitakers is introduced to deliuer or speake it And withall I haue made speciall references to their Books where such their sentences or authorities are to be found And yet learned Men notwithstanding all that which can be vrged by any of them in this behalfe sooner shall they prooue that the fixed starrs haue changed their postures situations in their Orbe then that Rome hath changed it fayth So true are those words of an auncient Father Vetus Roma ab antiquis temporibus habere rectam fidem semper eam retinet What sentences authorities or instances of change Doctour Whitakers hath vsed in any of his Bookes by me alledged the same I haue set downe with citation of the Books and in a seuerall Character from that which he speaketh at large in the person of a Protestant and this to the end that the Reader may seuer the Doctours owne words from the words of a Protestant in generall In like sort what intemperate speeches euen loaded with malice and rancour the Doctourâ—seth â—seth against the Church of Rome are not by me forged and fathered vpon him But are especially those which are most virulent his owne words yet extant in his Bookes and accordingly they are printed in a different letter with the Latin words set in the margent So carefull I am not to wrong the Doctour by vniustly obtruding vpon him any scurrilous and vndecent Inuectiues or Pasquills The Conclusion consisteth in retorting that vpon our Aduersartes where with they here charge the Church of Rome I meane in demonstrating that it is the Protestant who hath made in fayth this change and innouation from the auncient fayth of the Apostles And thus by comparing these two contrary fayths doctrines together and the antiquity of the one and innouation of the other you shall find that errour is best knowne by truth as death is knowne bylife Now here your ingenuities are to suppose for the tyme that Cardinall Bellarmine and Doctour Whitakers are at this present liuing In like sort that the Cardinall hath read all bookes written either in Latin or English which are in this Dialogue alleadged Which like supposalls you are also to make in the other subsequent Dialogues touching the Persons in them produced as that they are now liuing and that they all liued at one tyme c. All which imaginations are fully iustifiable in the true methode of Dialogues since in this kind of writing the Persons you know are forged for the matter and not the matter for the Persons And thus much touching the first Dialogue Now to descend to the second Dialogue The subiect wherof is to demonstrate that the visibility of the Protestant Church cannot be iustifyed from the Primitiue Church much lesse from the Apostles dayes till Luthers reuolt And which is more that not any one Man during all that long Period of tyme nor Luther himselfe can be truly insisted vpon for a perfect absolute Protestant and such as the present Church of England can or will acknowledge to be a member of it Which point being once euicted How deadly it woundeth the Protestants may easily appeare in regard of the euer necessary and vndeniable visibility of Christs true Church whose expansion enlargment and vneclypsed radiancy at all tymes is much celebrated in Holy writ Her sunne shall not be set nor her Moone hid as will more fully appeare bereafter in it due place The interlocutours are the foresayd Michaeas the Iew Ochinus who first in King Edward the sixt his dayes did diseminate Protestancy at least seuer all points of Protestancy here lâ— England Doctour Reynolds of Oxford and Neuserus chiefe Pastour of Heidelberg in the Palatinate Why Ochinus Neuserus are brought in as speakers in this Dialogue the Argument prefixed therto will show I haue presumed to incorporate most of what can be vrged for the visibility of the Protestant Church in Doctour Reynolds as a Man who was best able in his dayes to support his owne Church from ruyne And sutably herto the supposed place of this disputation is Oxford I haue in no sort wronged the Doctour whom I well know to haue bene a blazing Comet in your Euang elicall spheare to whom as being of good temperance in his writings in respect of his brother Doctour Whitakers I am vnwtlling to ascrybe too litle only I wish his fauorits had not ascrybed to him too much If any of you shall muse why in these Dialogues all the Protestants being otherwise presumed to be most learned do reply so sparingly eyther to Cardinall Bellarmyne or to Michaeas their answeres and arguments as here you shall find them to do you are to conceaue that it is agreed in the begining of the two first Dialogues among all the Interlocutours to stand indisputably to the freqrent Confessions of the learned Protestants vrged in behalfe of any poynt controuerted Now both the Cardinall and Michaeâ—s for the most part do auoyd the other Interlocutours reasons and instances by the contrary acknowledgments of diuers eminent Protestants as also do produce their owne arguments in defence of their Catholicke articles from the like acknowledgments of the learned Protestants speaking in those points agaynst themselues and in behalfe of the Catholickes Which method being chiefly houlden throughout these Dialogues how then can the Protestant Interlocutours continue any new reply agaynst the Caidinall or agaynst Michaeas But to reflect vpon the subiect of this second Dialogue And here I do auouch that to maintayne that Protestancy was euer before the breaking out of Luther though euen then it was not in it perfection is no lesse absurd in reason then to maintayne that the byrth of any thing can precede it conception and the effect the cause True it is that in diuers former ages there haue bene some secret and indeed blind Moules who working vnder the foundation of the Roman Church haue labored
at S. Gregory his sending of Augustine into England which was about a thousand yeares since our present Roman Religion was then wholy and publickely practised in Rome that if the Church of Rome had suffered any change of Faith from that first taught by the Apostles that this change should haue beene made not since but before Gregories time and before he had sent Augustine to plant in England the Fayth of Christ I may adde M. Doctour in further confirmation of D. Humfrey his iudgment herein the iudgment of your owne Centurists who in their Index or Alphabeticall table of the sixt Century at the Word Gregory set downe with particuler figures ofreferences where euery such mentioned opinion may be found as followeth Eiusdem Error de bonis operibus de CoÌ„fessione de coÌ„iugio de Ecclesia de sanctorum â—nuocatione do Inferno de Libero arbitrio de â—ustificatione de Purgatorio de Paeniâ—entia de satisfactione c. And which is more your sayd CeÌ„turists do further accuse Gregory out of his owne writings with consecration of Altars Chalices Corporals with oblatioÌ„ of sacrifice for the dead with translation of Reltques with Monachisme with Pilgrimages with consecration of Churches with Masse spriâ—kling of holy-water With consecration of the fort of Baptisme of Chrâ—â—sâ—â—e Oyle with celibratio of Masse finally With claime of soueraignty ouer all Churches All which places of the Centurists charging him are to be found in their sixt Century after the first edition thereof To these former acknowledgmeÌ„ts we may adioin the words of Luke Osiander your famous Protestant which are these Augustinus Romanos Ritus et consuetudines Anglicanis Ecclesus obstitit And then immediatly after he perticulerly setteth downe seuerall rites doctrines practized and beleeued at this present by the Church of Rome which as he confesleth Augustine did plant establish in England a poynt so euident that euen your owne selfe M. Doctour auertes that Boniface the third who liued anno 605. and presently after the foresaid Gregory and all his successours were Antichrists Yea you speaking of the conuersion of England made by this Gregory and of other conuersions of Countries by other Popes after thus conclude The Conuersions of so many countries were not pure but corrupt With you herein Dauaeus that remarkable Protestant conspirech who thus basely censureth of Gregories conuerting of England Purgatio illa quam Gregorius primus fecit c. fuit iâ—ebriatio mer etricis mundo facta de qua est Apocalips 17. et 18. Thus referring our Conuersion to Christianity to the worke of Antichrist And thus M Doctour you here may see how the Church of God through an ouer vnkind peruerting and misconsturing her most motherly and charitable endeauours hath reason even to complaine and grieue at those who vaunt themselues for her owne Children so the Vine being vntimely cut weeps out its mishap through out it owne wound Now from all these former testimonies of your selfe M. Doctour other Protestant writers we may infallibly conclude that from this day till we arriue at least to the age of the fore-said S. Gregory the present Roman Catholicke Religion was taught in diuers Countries consequently seeing those Countries receiued their instruction in Faith from Rome that it was not during all this time introduced into the Church of Rome as an Innouation and change of the Faith afore professed by the said Church Now it being made euident first that the Church of Rome did retaine her purity of Faith the first foure hundred and forty yeares after Christ and also that for this last thousand yeares the present RomaÌ„ Catholicke Faith hath not at any time thereof bin first brought into the world but during the said thousand yeares it hath bin continually the generall taught doctrine of the Church of Rome It now followeth that we take into our consideratioÌ„ the number of years which passed betweene the first foure hundred and forty from Christ and these last thousand yeares from vs. Which number seeing it is sixteene hundred yeares some more from Christ to vs amounteth to about one hundred and sixty yeares Well then if here we can prooue that no change of Fayth in the Church of Rome within the compasse of this 160. yeares then followeth it vnauoidably that the Church of Rome neuer to this day hath suffered any alteration in Fayth and Religion since its first embracing of the Christian Fayth That no Change of Faith did happen within the compasse of the sayd 160. yeares I prooue seuerall waies yet all conducing to erect this one maine truth like as diuers lesser numbers though counted after different waies make vp but one and the same great number And first this assertion of mine is prooued from the doctrine which was beleeued and generally taught at such tyme as Constantine who was our first Christian Emperour was conuerted to Christianity which was about the yeare 320. after Christ and therefore before the foresayd 160. yeares That the Faith in his time was the same that the Church of Rome professeth at this present appeareth from the frequent testimonies of your former Centurists who most elaborately punctually do record all the particuler Articles of the present Romane Fayth to be beleeued most constantly by the said Constantine and that he did cause to be put in practise all the Ceremonies now vsed in the Church of Rome And the said Centurists are so exact and diligent in their enumeration of all the Catholicke Doctrines beleeued by Constantine and of the Catholicke Rites and Ceremo ies obserued in his time as that they spend seuerall Columnes of the fourth Century touching this point to wit from Column 452. to Column 497. or thereabout Now that not only Constantine himselfe but also the whole fourth Age did generally beleeue and professe the now professed Doctrine of the Romane Church is in like sort abundantly confessed registred by the said Centurists they spending most of the leaues of the said Century in particularizing the now Catholicke Doctrines and the doctours of that age beleeuing teaching them and therefore for the greater manifestation of this point I remit you M. Doctour to the â—â—ligent perusall herein of their fourth Century touching which particuler subiect I am so confident that I dare auouche that by the industry of the said Centurists the true state of the Church in that age is so painfully articulatly according to my former speaches registred as the perfect memory thereof as being exempt from all obliuion in future dayes is able to turne the syth of time so certaine it is that euen in your owne Histories so long as they shal be extant the Catholicks shal be euer able to glasse the true face of their times But M. Doctour for the greater euidency of this point I pray you tell me whether it is your iudgment that the Fathers liuing in the fourth Age but especially those who
of you the second time for all the Protestants do not precisely consent herein how longe do you thinke that the Church of Rome did continue in her Verginall state and Purity without any stayne in her Faith D. WHITAKERS I thinke that during the first six hundred yeares after Christ the Church was pure florishing and inuiolably taught and defended the Fayth deliuered by the Apostles During all which ages the Church of Christ in respect of truth in Faith and Religion was as I may say in the full assent of the wheele And although to speake by resemblance there are found euen many irregularities in the regular motions of the Heauens yet I am fully perswaded that for the space of the first six hundred yeares no annomalous exorbitancies of errours or superstition did accompany the heauenly preaching of the Ghosple in the Church of Christ CARD BELLARM. M. Doctour indeed part of what you here say are your owne words in your booke against D. Sanders and you deale more liberally herein then diuers of your Breehren by affording a hundred and fifty yeares more to the true Church then most of them will allow Now you granting the purity of Faith to continue in the Church of Rome for the space of the first six hundred yeares after Christ do withall implicitly and inferentially grant that no change of Faith was made in that Church within the compasse of the afore mentioned 160. yeares seeing the said 160. yeares are included within the first six hundred yeares as being part of them But to proceed further you are here M. Doctour to call to minde what your selfe at other times no doubt at vnawares haue writen I do finde to instance only in some two or three points that you affirme that Victor who liued anno 160. after Christ was the first that exercised iurisdictō vpon forraine Churches That not Cyprian only who liued anno 240. to vse your owne words but almost all the most holy Fathers of that time were in errour touching the Doctrine of good works as thinking so to pay the paine due to sinne to satisfy Gods iustice Finally that Leo who was Pope anno 440. to speake in your owne dialect was a great Architect of the Antichristian kingdome Are not all these your assertions M. Doctour D. WHITTAKERS I cannot but acknowledge them for mine since they are extant to be read in my owne bookes loath I am to be so vnnaturall as to disauow or abandon any issue begotten on my owne brayne CARD BELLARM. Marke well then M. Doctour my deduction If the Chucrh of Rome remayned in her purity of Fayth without any change for the first six hundred yeares for your owne confessiō aboue expressed is that the Church of Christ so long continued a chast and intemerate Spouse And if as your owne penne hath left it written the doctrine of the Popes Supremacy was taught by Victor the first The doctrine of Merit of Works was mainteyned by Cyprian generally by other Fathers of that age and to be short if Leo were a great Architect of the kingdome of Antichrist you meaning of our present Roman Religion all which said Fathers to wit Cyprian Victor Leo and the rest did liue diuers ages before the sixt age or Century to what time you extēd the purity of the Faith of the Church of Rome doth it not then ineuitably result out of your owne Premisses if al this be true as you affirme it is that the doctrin of the Popes Supremacy the doctrine of merit of workes and our Catholicke Doctrine generally taught by Antichrist as you tearme the Pope were no innouations but the same pure doctrines which the Apostles first plāted in the Church of Rome Se how your felfe through your owne inaduertēcy hath fortified the truth of that doctrine which your selfe did intende to ouerthrow And thus farre to show that their neuer was made any chāg of Fayth in the Church of Rome prooued from the distribution diuision of those two different times which by the learned Protestants acknowledgments do contayne the Periods of the Church of Rome her continuance in the true Fayth of the Publicke and generall Profession of our now present Romane Fayth D. WHITTAKERS My L. Cardinall Whereas you haue produced seuerall testimonies from our owne learned Protestāts who teach that in the second third fourth age after Christ such such an Article of the Papists Religion had it beginning It seemeth in my iudgment that these their authorities do more preiudice then aduantage your cause Since such testimonies if so you will stand to them do shew a beginning though most anciēt of those doctrines after the Apostles deaths and consequently a change of Faith in the Church of Rome For if you will admit the authorities of the Protestants granting the antiquities of the present Romish Religion in those former times you are also by force of reason to admit their like authorities in saying that at such tymes and not before those Articles were first taught for seing both these points are deliuered by the Protestants in one the same sentence or testimony why should the one part thereof be vrged for true and the other reiected as false MICHAEAS M. Doctour Here with my L. Cardinall and your owne good licence I am to make bould to put in a word or two This your reply M. Doctour by way of inference may seeme to lessen the antiqurty of our ancient Iewish Law and therfore I hold my selfe obliged to discouer the weakenes therof though not out of desire to entertaine any contestation with you Grant then that some miscreants or Heathen Writers as Enemies to the Law of Moyses affirme that the Religion of the Iewes had it beginning in the tyme of Esdras for example This their testimony may iustly be alleaged to prooue that our Iewish Law was as auncient at least as Esdras but it cannot be alleadged to prooue that our Law tooke it first beginning at that time only and not before in the dayes of Moyses Therefore in the Authorities of this Nature produced from our Aduersaries writinges we are to distinguish and seuer that which the Aduersaries granteth in the behalfe of vs from that which he affirmeth to his owne aduantage What he grāteth for vs against himselfe so farre we are to embrace his authority seing it may be presumed that ordinarliy no learned man would confesse any thing against himselfe his Religion but what the euidency of the truth therein enforceth him vnto and therefore one of the ancient Doctours of your Christian Church if I do remember his words in this respect said well I will strike the Aduersaryes with their owne weapons But what the Aduersary affirmeth in fauour of his owne cause and against vs their we are not to stand to his own authority since no man is to be a witnes in his owne behalfe and it well may be presumed that such his sentence
vs at what times some sensible degrees and increase of this supposed change did happen and the manifestatioÌ„ of these degrees is to be made by naming the time and person when by whoÌ„ such and such a particular poynt or article of our present Roman Religion was first sensibly introduced into the Church of Rome The which not any Protestant notwithstanding all his exquisite and precise search of Ecclesiasticall Histories hath bin able yet to perform And thus farre M. Doctour of these your similitudes which you see in a true ballancing of them do become rather hurtfull then beneficiall to your Cause and therfore they had ben better forborne by you then vrged D. WHITAKERS Indeede I grant that there are no Histories or Records at this day out of which we can certainly collect the change of Religion in the Roman Church But no doubt such Records there were though now wholy extinguished made away by the vigilancy and carefulnes of former Pâ—pes who to preserue the honour of their Church as free and exeÌ„pt from all change and innouation did deliberately purposely cause all Coppies of such writings and narrations to be for euer suppressed and buried in obliuion eyther by fire or otherwise CARD BELLARM. M. Doctour this is a meare groundles Phantasie If you haue any graue testimonies warranting a generall suppression of all such records then all of them were not extinguished since the testimonies which affirme so much are yet extant If you produce no authority witnessing so much then why should we beleiue your bare and naked affirmation herein But to examine more punctually this poore refuge And first wheras you teach that this change of Faith in the Roman Church came in by degrees now by innouating one point of the ancient true Fayth now another supposing for the time this to be true how can it be conceiued that all the Coppies of such particular changes in Faith already dispersed throughout all Christendome in the handes of infinite Protestants as you maÌ„taine though vntruly that in those times they were could be gathered suppressed without any remembrance thereof to all posterity It is most absurd but to furmise such an impossibility Furthermore do we not see that the liues of such Popes which can be lesse warranted were recorded in histories yet extant to this very houre as else where is intimated Neither the narrations of them either were or could euer be suppressed How then can we be persuaded that the memory of this supposed great chang could by any such meanes be cancelled in a perpetuall forgetfulnes Since certaine it is that the Popes if possible they could would haue caused all narrations touching the personall faults of their Predecessours to haue beene vtterly extinguished considering that such their lesse iustifiable liues might be reputed by many to be no smale blemisne to the Church of Rome Such an improbability this your euasion M. Doctour inuolues in its selfe D. WHITAKERS My Lord It seemes you are very dexterous in warding all our instances and other arguments aboue produced to prooue the former presumed change But imagine for the time that we cannot alleadge out of any now extant authorized history examples of any knowne innouation imagine also that we cannot shew at what particular time and season the parcels of these changes did happen imagine lastly that there were neuer any records testimonies or writings in which these changes were registred yet how are you able to put by the sharp-poynted weapon of Scripture wherwith your religion is mortally foyled We know that the Fayth of the present Roman Religion is repugnant to the holy Scriptures to which only wee appeale and whose â—autarceia and all sufficiency is defended by vs Protestants the sacred Scripture being to vs more then decaplês apologia a tenfould shield of our fayth This I say we know and consequently we further know that the fayth of the Romish Church is not the same which was planted in Rome by the Apostles Here is our fortresse here is our strength and this place to you Romanists is maccessible Here we haue Tò retòn the Word epi tèn dianeian tóùr etóù to the true meaning of the Word all Controuersies are to be referred And with this Word we are able to inflict Cairian pâ—etèn deadly to wound your popish Religion And we are so truely impatrônized of the holy Scripture as that wee dare pronounce with the Apostle If an Angell reach any other Ghosple vnto you then that which wee haue preached let him be Anathema For to vs it is sufficient by comparing the Popish Opinious with the Scripture to discouer the disparity of Fayth betweene them and vs and as for Historiographers Wee giue them liberty to write what they will seeing this aplóùs lógos tes ' aletheias this simple Word of truth is able to refute any thing brought to the contrary And therfâ—re my Lord Cardinall I must say to you here with Archidamus ' èt è◠dynamei próstheis ' e tóù phronématos ' ypheis either maÌ„taine your Religion with the force of Scripture or else wisely cease from the further defence thereof CARD BELLARM. M. Doctour before I come to ballance this your last argument you must pardon me if I smile to my selle to obserue how affectedly and ambitiously you haue rioted in your Greeke throughout this whole discourse and especially in this your last close besprinkling diuers passages thereof as it were with some Greeke word or other Which in my iudgment beare with me if I misconster your meaning is but to beare your ignorant followers in hand what jolly men and great Clarkes you Protestants are And according hereto we commonly find the bookes writen either by English French or German Protestants euen to swell with Greeke phrases or sentences But who seeth not how forced this is it being a point of ostentation and vanity thus to braue it forth in a froath of strange wordes We all know the tongues are but the porters of learning in which the Catholicks though with more cession modesty are most skilfull and that he who is a learned man indeede is euer presumed afore hand to be expert in them as being meanes conducing to the perfection of learning Thus the want of Greeke is a great defect the enioying of it but a necessary furniture of a scholar Therefore who vanteth hereof or is become fond of a few greeke words being commonly ignorant of the riches contayned in that tongue as many Protestants are is like to that man who taketh delight in a litle Mother of Pearle he reioiceth he hauing no interest to the Pearle within contayned I speake not this but that it is lawfull sometime to make vse of Greeke phrases and sentences but this chiefly when the QuestioÌ„ is touching translations out of that tongue and that we are to recurre to the Greeke being the originall for the cleering of that point Or when the
into the wildernesse c. All which places are strangely deâ—orted by some few iniudicious men to the defence of the Churches Inuisibility And to the first against these Inuisibilists I say touching those former words of Elias first admitting the Iewish Synagogue to haue bene then inuisible yet is this exaÌ„ple defectiuely alleadged as applyed to the Church of Christ since the predictions and promises made to Christ his Church whose Testament is established in better promises are farre greater and more worthy then those of the Iewish Synagogue Agayne the foresaid example doth not extend to the whole Church of God before Christ but only to the Iewish Synagogue being only but a part or member thereof For besides the Iewes there were diuers others faythfull as Melchisadech Cornelius the Eunuch to the Queene of Caudace c. Secondly I say this example maketh wholy agaynst the alleadgers of it since the words of Elias were spoken not generally of all the Iewish People but only in regard of the Countrey of Israel and accordingly God answered the complaint of Elias with restraint to that only Countrey the texts saying I haue left to me in Israel seauen thousands which haue not bowed vnto Baâ—l Adde hereto that in those very tymes the Church did greatly florish in the adioyning Countrey of Iuda and was to Elias then knowne and Visible vnder the raigne of Asa and Iosaphat And thus is this obiection answered euen by Melancthon and Enoch Clapham Lastly admitting these seauen thousands were vnknowne to Elias yet followeth it not that they were vnknowne to all others of the same tyme Much lesse then is this Example of force to prooue that the Church of God may be Latent and Inuisible for many hundred yeares together as some of our ignorant brethren do teach not to one Elias only but to the whole World And thus farre of this so much vrged example of Elias To the second Those words of the Prophet The Oast sacrifice shall cease c. Are to be referred to the ouerthrow of Ierusalem and the ceasing of the Iewish sacrifices euen by the exposition of Chrysostome Ierome Austin others Neyther can the words be properly extended to the tymes of Antichrist since we teach that Antichrist is already comne and yet we see that sacrifices do still remayne To the third By the word departure mentioned by the Apostle is vnderstood eyther Antichrist himselfe by the figure Metonymia because he shal be the cause why many shall depart from Christ as Chrysostome and Theodoret vpon this place do expound as also Austin Or rather is vnderstood a departure and defection from the Roman Empyre as Ambrose Sedulius Primasius and diuers Protestants do expound this Text. To the fourth I answere that by the Woman flying into Wildernes S. Iohn meaneth not any locall or corporall flight out of the knowledge and notice of the world but only a spirituall retiring in hart from the allurements and pleasures of the World to pennance mortification and contemplation of celestiall matters And in this very sense Bullenger interpreteth the Churches flight from Babilon To the former texts I may adde though not aboue mentioned that passage in S Iohn Venit hora nunc est c. The hower cometh and now is when the true adorers shall adore the Father in spirit and truth To this I answere that our Lord here teacheth that the chiefe worship of God which shal be exhibited in his Church consisteth in an internall worship of him but from hence therefore it followeth not that the Church is Inuisible or that all externall worship is prohibited for our Lord here speaketh not of the place where God shal be worshiped but of the manner and rite of worshiping Chrysostome Cyrill and Euthimius vpon this place do oppose those words in spirit to the ceremonies of the Iewes as they are corporall and those other words in truth to the sayd Ceremonies as they are figures of things to come Now because diuers of the former passages of Scripture are obiected to proue that the Church of Christ shal be Inuisible at the least in the time of Antichrist I do reply further hereto saying first That the former place of the Apostle to the Ephesians alledged by Ochinus touching an incessant vndiscontinued being of Pastours Doctours in the Church to remaine euen to the end of the world omitting other texts aboue cited by him as also the Protestants confessions of the Churches euer Visibility hereafter to be deliuered by Michaeas do fully answere and satisfy the supposed doubts suggested in the former texts touching the Churches Inuisibility in the time of Antichrist Secondly I reply that diuers learned brethren of ours punctually and purposely with reference to that time do teach that the Church shall remayne then Visible And to giue some tast hereof D. Pulke thus writeth In the time of Antichrist the Church was not driuen into any corner of the world but was is shal be dispersed in many Nations And againe he thus writeth The true Church though obscured and driuen into wildernes by Antichrist yet shall continue dispersed ouer the world Bullenger sayth the Church in the time of Antichrist shal be right famous But if it shal be then right famous it must of necessity be then Visible To be short Szegedine a learned Protestant thus writeth The ministers of Gods word shall preach all the time in which Antichrist shall tread vnderfoote the holy Citty Thus farre in solution of all such chiefe passages of Scripture vsually obiected against the perpetuall Visibility of the Church But now M. Doctour I thinke it is your turne to warraÌ„t the former truth from the wrytings of the auncient fathers and from arguments of Credibility which the force of reason it selfe doth minister DOCTOVR REYNOLDS I am prepared thereto And I will not presse your memoryes with a needles ouercharge of their sentences Some few and those pertinent shall serue though otherwise they are most luxuriant and plentifull herein And first thus Origin writeth Ecclesia est plaena fulgore ab oriente vsque ad Occidentem the Church is full of fulgour or brightnes from the East euen to the West Cyprian discourseth thus Ecclesia Dom. c. The Church of our Lord being replenished with light casteth forth it beames throughout the whole earth Chrysostome saith facilius est solem extingui quam Ecclesiam obscurari It is more easy for the Sunne to be extinguished then the Church to be obscured or darkened Finally for greater conpendiousnesse S. Austin is so full in this point as that he maketh the Visibility of the Church a Marke for the ignorant to discerne the true Church of Christ from all false Conuenticles thus writing Propter hoc enim motus c. By reason of the teÌ„ptations of those who are weake and may be seduced by some from acknowledging the Churches
contrary to the necessary Visibility of Gods true Church proued out of the Scriptures acknowledged by their owne learned Brethren their owne Church to haue beene wholy latent and inuisible or rather wholy extinct and annihilated for so many ages together But this we must asâ—rybe O God to thy holy permission who as thou suffered in the tyme of the Old TestameÌ„t thyne Enemyes to sheath their swords in their brethrens sydes so heare thoâ— permiteest for the greater honour of thy Church so many learned Protestants euen with wounderfull admiration sweete Iesus deadly to wounde their owne Church fayth and Religion with their owne penns D. REYNOLDS Forbeare Michaeas these woundering Interiections the accustomed Dialect of an vngouerned Passion I grant these learned Protestants aboue alledged were of this opinion Notwithstanding to confront their authorityes there may be found many others as learned and iudicious Protestants as these are who absolutly mantayne the Visibility of their Church for all ages And I see no reason but that the sentences and iudgemeÌ„ts of these other should preponderate and weighe equally with the iudgements of the former Protestants by you alledged MICHAEAS You must pardon me M. Doctour if I wounder at things so strangly and vnexpectedly fauling out But to your solution I say it is most defectiue for seuerall reasons First because it mainly crosseth the method agreed vpon amonge vs in the beginninge of our discourse where you tyed your selfe irrephâ—ably to stand to the iudgments and confession of your owne learned Men. Againe though you can bringe other Protestants of as greate eminency for learninge as these by me obiected yet except you and the said Protestants will insist in true and confessed Instances of Protestancy for euery seuerall age which is impossible for you to performe your and their asseuerations are to be reputed but naked verball and inauayleable Lastly and principally your Replye is insufficient Becaus I heare alledge Protestants confessinge the Inuisibility of their owne Church to their owne mighty preiudice and the Catholycks greate aduantage And therefore it must needs be that the racke of Truth forced them being otherwyse ingenuous learned and iudicious to all such Confessions Whereas such Protestants as may be brought to gainsay and contradict the former Confession as being men of more spatious and large Consciences do spake in their owne cause and behalf and therefore as being ready pressed to auere any thinge how false soeuer for the safery of their Church are deseruedly to be reputed in their wrytings more partiall So as in this case the Words of Tertullian may iustly take place Magis fides prouâ— est in aduersus sometâ—psos confitentâ—â— quam pro 〈◊〉 â—egantes NEVSERVS I lyke well Michaeas the reason of your disparity geuen touching some Protestants confessing against themselfs and others affirming the contrary to their owne aduantage OCHINVS The difference set downe by you is most foreible for no doubte the open Confession of one learned Aduersary is to ouerballance twenty denying the same euen for that peculiar reason aboue mentioned D. REYNOLDS Michaeas Suppose for the tyme that we could not proue our Churches perpetuali Visibility yet seinge you are not able if you were pressed thereto to iustify and make good the Visibility of your owne Roman Church during all the ages since the Apostles dayes Therefore looke into what danger through our confessed Inuisibility we may be presumed to tune within the same we may justly includ you And thus you owne argument rebucts vpon your selfe MICHAEAS Heare I see M. D. that for meare want of positiue arguments to support your owne Church you are lastly fled to picke quarrells at our Church as if it were a iustification of yourselfs that wee Catholycks did labour with your infirmities lyke men who reioyce to haue compartuers in misery But to your point vrged say it is impertinent to the whole drift of our dispute which was only touching the want of Visibility in the Protestant Church which alone to proue was by me vndertaken the visibilitye of the Catholycke Church comminge in incidently lyke as a discours of vice doth often in the End biget some specches of Vertue our Contrary being thus brought to our remembrance by meanes of the other Contrary But because M. D. you shall discouer no tergiuersation in vs herein and that here to entreate of the continuall Visibility of our Catholycke Church violateth our former imposed method Therefore I will pawne my credit that there shal be left with you certaine prouffs conâ—ayninge the expresse and confessed Visibility of our Roman Church from the Apostles to these dayes And this by the acknowledgment of sundry learned Protestants though heare by the way I must tell you that the confessed Inuisibility of the Protestant Church during so many former Ages doth potentially and vertually include the proufe of the Visibility of our Roman Church during the said ages Seing the Inuisibility of your Church for so longe a tyme is ascribed by you Protestants as appeareth by many of the former Protestants testimonyes to be the worke of Antichtist you meaninge thereby the Pope and the Church of Rome therefore it ineuitably followeth from your owne Primisses that Popes and the Church of Rome haue euer beene visible during all the said former Ages and Centuryes OCHINVS Newserus I would haue a word or two with you in priuate therefore if it please you let vs walke a little a part NEVSERVS I am willingthereto go into the next roome and I will follow you OCHINVS You see here Neuserus how this Question of the Protestant Churches visibility hath bene discussed and argued And I must consesse that Michaeas hath euen in replicably demonstrated that the Protestant Church hath at least for many ages bene inuisible or rather extinct you see also how royatous and abounding the old Testamentâ—s in prophecyes and other testimonies that the Church in the daye of the true Messias shal be at all cyâ—res most conspicuous and visible Therefore what resteth but that eyther we must reiect the old Testament which I neuer will do for falsly prophetying of the state of the Church Or els we must denye that these tymes of the new Testament are the tymes of Grace that the Church erected by Christ and his Apostles as wanting the accomplishment of the foresayd predictions is the true Church which later poynt I hould to be more probable NEVSERVS You haue preuented me Ochinus in tyme of speaking but not in iudgment For to confesse the truth after I had obserued the weaknes of the Instances alledged though alledged by the Doctour with as much Scholarlike Art and aduantage as might be my houering thoughts transported my iudgment to this your Center Which though it be enuironed with difficultyes yet I hould it the more safe way with you since the one must necessarily be reiected as false and erroneous they so diametrically crossing one the other to retayne our former reuerence to
the old Testament and absolutly to abandon and disclayme from the New And therefore let vs returne backe to Michaeas and the Doctour to acquaint them with this our finall resolution OCHINVS Michaeas and M. Doctour My selfe and Neuserus haue in the secretts of our soules passed our impartiall censures vpon this our Conference And we both acknowledge the full weight of Michaeas his resons in disprouall of your instances of our owne former euading answeres And our Conclusion is that we both assure our selfs that the ProtestaÌ„t Church had neuer any visible existence for these many last seuerall ages at the least And in deed I confesse when I do consider how Christ by his power wisdome and goodnes had established and founded his Church washed it with his bloud and enriched it with his spirit and discerning how the same is funditus auersa vtterly ouerthrowne I cannot but wonder and being desirous to know the cause I find there haue bene Popes who haue preuayled in vtter extirpation and ouerthrow of Christ his Church Here you haue my ceusure accompanyed with the true Reason thereof NEVSERVS I do fully conspyre in iudgment with Ochinus mooued thereto through the strenght and validity of Michaeas his Arguments And yet I hope this is no blemish eyther to you M. Doctour who haue most learnedly handled this poynt nor to our selfs but only to the weaknes of our cause for there are some vntruths so palpable and iniustifiable and among them rang the supposed visibility of our owne Church that neyther learning Art or the bestfiled words which commonly 〈◊〉 the eare of credulity are able to set a good gayne vpon them Therefore Michaeas to be snort in beleiung that the Protestant Church for many centuryes hath bene wholy inuisible Ochinus and my selfe are wholy yours MICHAEAS I much reioyce thereat and I hope notwithstanding both your former acerbity of speeches that now vpon your second and more serious renew of this point the acknowledgment of this one Truth wil be a good disposition for your further encertaynment of the Catholicke fayth since a dislike of the Protestant Church implyeth in itselfe a fauorable respect to the Catholicke Church which Church hath euer bene houored with a perpetuall visibility OCHINVS Stay Michaeas Not so You are ouer hasty your praeÌ„ is as yet not gotten and your credulous expectation ouerrunne your iudgment Know you therefore first that touching your Church at the stearâ—e whereof that Romish Antichrist doth sit we hould it not as aboue we protested to be the Church of God And then it matâ—reth nothing with vs whether your sayd Antichristian Church haue euer since it first being bene visible or no For though we teach that the true Church must euer be visible yet we teach not conuertibly that what Church hath euer bene visible the same is the true Church Furthermore Michaeas and M. Doctour take both you notize that the confessed want of a continuall visibility and of the administration of the word and Sacraments ministreth to vs a great suspicion whether the Church of Christ be that Church of God which is so much celebrated by the Prophets of the Old Testament and consequently whether Christ be the true Messias of the World For if he had so been doubtlesly he would not so quickly haue repudiated his intemerate and chast spouse for so the true Church of God is after his departure from hence NEVSERVS What Ochinusâ—ath â—ath deliuered though perhapps with amazement to you both I do here iustify And as it is euident that the former Prophecyes haue not been actually performed in Christ his Church So we must needs rest doubtfull at the least through want of the performance of the sayd Predictions whether Christ be that Redeemer of the World which was promised to the Fathers of the old Law And whether he had true authority to erect this Church of which he hath made himselfe Head â—or certainly the auncient Predictions deliuered in a propheticall spirit touching the Messias and his Church are infallibly to be performed in the Messias his Church MICHAEAS How now my Maysters Is this the fruit of my refelling your Churches Visibility Tends your approbation of my former discours to this Whether ayme these strange and fearefull speeches of yours Will you disclayme from Christ as your Redeemer because the Prophecyes of the old Testament touching the expansion latitude and continuall visibility of the Church of God are not performed in the Protestant Church And will you not confesse the sayd predictions to be fulfilled at all because they are not fulfilled by that way and meanes as your selfs would haue them Take heed do not obliterate and deface those fayre impressions charactered in your soules at your Baptisme neyther now diâ—auoâ—â— your then taken first now O mercifull God how ignorant are you in these matters And then more miserably ignorant it that partly through learning you are become ignorant Do you thinke to honour the Father by dâ—shonoring the Sonne euen that Sonne in whome the Father tooke such ineffable contentment Hic est filius meus dilectus in quo mihi complacui Certayne it is that if you perseuer in iudgment as your words import you deny him for your Sauiour who had a Father without a Mother a Mother without a Father The first argued his Diuinity the second his immaculate and pure Natiuity Quod de Deo profectum est 〈…〉 eus est Dei Filius Vnus Ambo You deny him whose body was framed of such an admirable and delicate constitution and temperature as that the earth did then contrary to it accustomed manner euen power it influence vpon Heauens To be shorâ— you deny him who gaue himselfe 〈◊〉 Redemption for all who tasted death for all who tooke away the sinnes of the World and finally who was Sauiour of the world and reconciliation for our sinnes In the tyme of whose Passion death did euen â—euiâ—e and Eclips did enlighten Lux in tenebris lucet tenebrae eum non comprehenderunt But why labour I to celebrate his byrth who is from all eternity or to performe his exequies who cannot dye Mors illi vltrà non dominabitur And by you assured that who contemne Christ the Redeemer of all flesh must needs contemne God the Authour of all flesh And where you call the Pope that Romish Antichrist see how malice seeleth vp the eye of your iudgement you mantayne is seems that the true Christ and Messias is not yet come How can the Pope then by your doctrine be Antichrist since Antichrist you know is to come after not before the true Christ Againe for prouffe that the Pope is Antichrist you no doubt will make show to rest vpon the wrested authority of the New Testament And shall not then the said New Testament be of the like authority with you to proue that Christ is the true Messias OCHINVS Tush Michaeas This is but
this Authours fraud and imposturous cariadge who tearmeth all such Articles wherein S. Bernard did agree with vs as the Sacrifice of the Masse Purgatory merit of Works free will praying to saincts and indeed all other Catholicke Articles whatsoeuer only his boldnes of wryting to Pope Eugenius excepted to whom afore he had bene Mayster and therevpon presumed to wryte more freely Slips Lapses as they were beleiued by him which in vs Catholicks he exagerateth by the name of Superstition Idolatry c. And thus we may see how one and the same Cause being exemplified in different Persons is by this Pamphleters deceate diuersly censured Leaning S. Bernard the Authour generally but with out any prouf at all wisheth his Reader to thinke that the Protestant Church was in all Countries in Christendome and did lie hid as those Iewes did in the tyme of Elias for feare of Persecution But this he only saith but proueth not and it is therefore reiected with the same facilitie with which it was spoken Now touching those Men who conceales their fayth for feare of persecution I refer the Reader to the former dialogue wherein the weaknes of this pretext of Persecution is particularly displayed That done the Pamphleter sayth that India Armenia Asia the lâ—ssar and Egypt had in former tymes Christians in them for he giueth them no other name then Christians And then he inferrs without any proofe at all or instances in the points of their Religion that they were Protestants Poore man that thus most insensibly reasoneth Seing we find the Christians of all those Countreyes to agree in all the cheife points with the present Roman Churrch Only some of them do not acknowledge the primacy of the Bishop of Rome aboue all other Bishopps In the last place of all he much insisteth in the Greeke Church within which are included the Russes and Muscouits he thus saying thereof The Greeke Church was neuer so much as in show extinguished And from whome the Russians and Muscouâ—ts had their fayth And then a little after he thus enlargeth himselfe We should do wrong to Almighty God c. to pull from him so many ample Churches meaning the Greeke Church the others aboue specifyed inferring from thence that the Protestant Church did in former ages rest visible euen in the Greeke Church Now this his shamelesse alleadging of the Greeke Church for Protestants shal be confronted with the testimony of Syr Edwin Sands a man of his owne Religion who plainly affirmeth that the Greeke Church doth concurre with Rome in opinion of Transubstantiation generally in the sacrifice and whole Body of the Masse in praying to Saints in auâ—â—cular Confession in offering Sacrifice and prayer for the dead Purgatory worshipping of pictures Yea the Protestant Deuines of Magdeburg do record that the Greeke Church doth not only beleiue all the former Articles recited by Syr Edwin Sands but also that it beleiueth and teacheth the signifying Ceremonyes of the Masse Confirmation with Crisme Extreme Vâ—ction all the seauen Sacraments Almes for the dead freewill Monachisme vowes of Chastity the fast of Lent and other prescribed fasts that Priests may not mary after Orders taken and finally that the tradition doctrine of the Fathers is to be kept Now heere I refeâ—re to any one not blinded with preiudice whether the professours of the Greeke Church are to be accounted for Catholicks or Protestants And from hence we may discâ—uer the idle and ridiculous vaunting of this Pamphleter who in the close of this point touching the Greeke Churches being protestant and a continuall Visâ—â—iliâ—y of Protestancy in the said Churches thus insulteth Looke to these places you Papists and Imagine that if there had beene none but these yet the words of the Scripture which in generality speake of a spouse had beene true And Christ had there had his Body vpon earth and the Church had not beene vtterly extinguished if neither We nor the Synagoâ—ue of Rome had beene extant Thus he His former examples being ended he entertayneth his Reader with great store of frothy and needlesse matter touching former differences betweene the Popes and Emperours the Kings of England and France And then all such persons as did bandy themselues either by wryting or otherwise with the said Emperour or Kings agaynst the Popes of those tymes the Pamphleter vrgeth for Protestants though the cheife cause of such differences betweene the Popes and the sayd Princes was touching Distribution of Ecclesiasticall Liuings within their owne Realmes That done the Treatiser extraâ—agantly discourseth in his deâ—lamatory rayling veyne that the Pope is Antichrist But how rouing and wandring all this is to the title of his Pamphlet and prouing of his owne Churches visibility the which he obliged himselfe to performe may appeare by what is already set downe After all this for a Close of all he obiecteth for forme-sake as if his taking notize of what we can truly obiect against his wryting were a sufficient answere to it certaine exceptions vrged by the Catholicks agaynst his former Instances of protestancy Which Obiections of ours being set downe he shapeth no true Answere vnto them And first he thus obiecteth in our behalfe l The Papists will beginne and say that we rake together as the Auncestours and forerunners of our fayth such as were notorious Hereticks as Wicklefe Hus or the Waldenses c. To which after much securtility of words he finally thus answereth We do not beleiue that all those are Hereticks whom you Papists will so call or account But we reply hereto and say That not only the Catholicks but the Protestants themselues do particularly charge Wicklefe Hus the Waldenses as also Almaricus Peter Bruus c. with many grosse and absurd Heresyes acknowledged for such euen by our Aduersaryes as may abundantly appeare by recurring to the seuerall passages of this former Dialogue The defence of which heresyes doth necessarily make their defendours absolute Heroticks seing they were mantayned by Waldo Wicklefe Hus c. with a froward and open contempt of the authority of Gods Church publikly teaching the contrary far differently from S. Austin S. Cyprtan and Lactantius their beleiuing certayne errours the which this Pamphleter for the more lesning of the Heresyes of Waldo Wicklefe Hus c. in p. 112. suttely repeateth seing these Fathers taught them only as their owne probable opinions euer submitting with all Obedience their Iudgments therein to the supreme Iudgments of Christ his Church Ad hereto that seing those Books written by Catholicks of those tymes do indifferently charge Wicklefe Hus Waldo and their followers with mantayning of some one point or other of protestancy and with diuers absurd Heresyes The authority therefore of those Writers are eyther equally to be beleiued in all their accusations or equally to be reiected in them all And the rather seing they could not foretell a consideration much to be obserued or presage what
of Dauid Who though the eternall punishment due to the guilt of his sinns was for giuen yet was punished temporally by the death of his Sonne For these are the words in Scripture after his sinne was forgiuen Because thou hast caused the name of God to be blasphemed the Child that is borne to thâ—e shall dye In lyke sort Dauids sinne in numberring his People being remitted him yet was he put to chuse for his temporall punishmeÌ„t and satisfaction either Warre Famine or Pestilence Now the guilt of eternall damnation for sinne being remitted there remaineth a temporall punishment And this teÌ„porall punishment thus reserued is the sole subiect of Indulgences Therefore an Indulgence as heare the word is taken is a mercifull relaxation or remission of temporall punishment due for sinne by applying the super abundant satisfaction of Christ after the sinne it selfe and guilt of eternall damnation due to mortall sinne is remitted by the Sacrament of Confession or for want thereof by perfect Contrition The ground and foundation of Indulgencs is cheifly the treasury and satisfaction of Christs death which is of that infinity greate valew an pryce seeing euery drop of his bloud was able to redeeme a thousands Worlds in regard of his Diuinity being vnited to his Humanity as that it can ueuer be exhausted For we reade that Christ dyed for all Also that Christ is apropitiation for our sinns and not for our sinns only but for the Sinns of the whole World But it is certaine that the pryce of Christs death was not actually applyed to all Men hitherto liuing since then it would follow that all Men which hitherto haue liued should haue bene saued Therefore it followeth that theare yet remayneth a greate abundance of the pryce of Christ passion if it were not in finite as indeede it is to be applyed and still will remaine The dispenser of this treasury of the Church is the Heade of Christs Church who hath power to apply this treasury for the absoluing of Men from their temporall punishment due to their Sinns allready remitted by Sacramentall Confession according to the authority geuen him in those words Whatsoeuer thou losest vpon earth shal be losed in Heauen with which place accord other places of the Euangelists Now these words being generall they do extend as well to the punishment due for sinne as to the sinne itselfe seing the punishment is as remissible as the Sinne And as to the one are applyed Christs Meritts so to the other Christs â—atisfactions The Cause why any Indulgence is granted to any Man ought to be iust and reasonable or otherwyse the Indulgence granted is of no valew for seing the Pope is not Lord of this spirituall treasure of the Church but only the distributer thereof therefore this distribution he cannot make without a iust reasonable and lawfull Cause The Partie receauing the benefit of an Indulgence ought at the tyme of receauing it to be in state of grace since otherwise he can reape no benefit by any Indulgence to which state he is brought by true Contrition of his former Sinns although not perhaps forgeuen in respect of eternall damnation in the Sacrament of Confession And heare is discouered the trissling vanity falshood of our Aduersaries in affirming that the Catholicks teach that the Pope can giue a fore hand an Indulgence to any Man for any sinne which hereafter is to be committed Since wee see that the obiect of an Indulgence is the temporall punishment only and not the punishment of damnation and this for a sinne allready committed and not hereafter to be committed of which a Man being in state of grace and consequently not one who beareth a present resolution to commit any sinne hereafter is remitted by his Indulgence applyed to hym vpon iust and reasonable Causes We are further heare to admonish that the Partie receauing an Indulgence ought to performe entyrely and precisly all things enioyned hym by his Indulgence Whether it be prayer Alms fasting c. According to that vsuall saying Indulgentia tantum valent quantum sonant Wheare it is taught that the Merits and suffrings of some greate Saincts as of our Blessed Lady S Iohn Baptiste and some others do concurre to the encrease of this spirituall Treasure of the Church which is the foundation of Indulgences this is to be vnderstood in this sense to wit that because their Meritts works and sufferings haue their vertue and valew only from the Meritts of our Sauiours Passion And that they onely concurre to the increase of the treasure as they depend vpon the meritts of Christ therefore it may be truly said that primatiuely and Originally only the Meritts and Passion of Christ do make this spirituall treasure from whence Indulgences do flowe Ad hearto that if S. Paule might truly say in a researued sense Ad imple ea quae desunt passionum Christi in earne mea pro corporâ—â—ius quod est Ecclesia I do fullfill those things that do want of the passion of Christ in my flesh for his body which is the Church words which if any Catholicke should haue auerred of any one Sainct without the warrant of the Apostle he should haue bene mighrely calumnâ—ated and wronged by the Protestants then followeth it that the afflictions and sufferings of S. Paule as receauing their force from Christs PassioÌ„ may be said without any indignitie to Christ to encreasse this spirituall treasure of the Church For these former words do not import that there was any defect in the Passion of Christ but that the sufferings of S. Paule did fulfill the plenitude of Christ his Passion and his members for the benefit of those to whom they are to be communicated For as Christ being the inuisible and supreme heade of his Church doth with his Church make but one mysticall body so his sufferings with the sufferings of his members receauing all their force and efficacy from the Passion of Christ do make as S. Austin affirmeth one common and publâ—ke Weâ—le or one publike treasure And according hereto it is that we fynd offered S. Paules afflictions sometymes for the Colossians at other times for the Corinthians he desiring at one tyme to dye for the Romans at an other tyme to become an Aâ—athemâ— for them To proceede further The Old Testament it selfe warranteth this mutuall communication of one suffering for an other And in this sense it is said of Gods Church there entituled Ierusalem that it is as a Citty whose participationes in it selfe That is As in a publicke Citty there is a generall trafficke for the publicke benefit of euery particular Citizen So in the Citty of God which is his Church there is a communion or participation of all the spirituall works thereof to the generall benefit and behooâ—e of eich particular Man And vpon this ground it is that Dauid said in respect of the communication of one Mans sufferings for an other