approving their poverty and extolling their perfection retaining also his former Catholike opinion as Brereley proves out of Wiccliffs own writings concerning Holy water the worshiping of Reliques and Images the intercession of our blessed L. St. Mary whereof he saith in Serm. de assumptione Mariae Videtur mihi quod impossibile est nos praemiare sine Mariae suffragio c. the apparrell and Tonsure of Priests the Rights and Ceremonies of Masse extream Unction and all the seven Sacraments and all those sundry other Points of our Catholike Faith now in question with denyall whereof he is not found so much as charged 81 Husse as Brereley tract 2. c. 2. sect 5. proves out of Protestant Writers beleived seven Sacraments Transubstantiation the Popes Primacy the Masse it self and being a Catholike Priest he said Masse even to his dying day and observed the Vowes of Priestly Chastity in the Doctrine concerning Free-will Predestination informed Faith the cause of Justification and merit of good works Images he agreed with Catholikes 82 To the aforesaid learned Protestants I may adde two famous men the one an Englishman the other a Stranger I mean D. Andrews pretended Bishop of Winchester and Hugo Grotius a man of great estimation among Protestants 83 As for D. Andrewes in his Stricturae or A brief Answer to the 18. chapter of the first book of Cardinall Perron's Reply c. n. 1. he disclames from the opinion of Zuinglius and also saith plainly It cannot be denyed but reserving the Sacrament was suffered a long time in the Primitive Church From whence we must inferre that Christ is present in the Sacrament permanently and not only in the Action or use Yea he grants that in time of persecution Christians were permitted to carry away how great a part they would and to keep it by them and to take it at times to comfort them that those that lived in remote desart places as Anchorets and Hermets were permitted to carry with them how much they thought good because a long time together they were not to come back to places where any Churches were that they did carry it about with them in their journey c. Out of which Concessions I inferre by the way that Christians did not alwaies receive the Sacrament under both kinds seing it is clear that Wine could not be so long conserved in hot countries nor delivered to so many in different Vessels to be kept at home or carried up and down in journies c. n. 9. he saith For offering and praying for the dead there is little to be said against it it cannot be denyed but that it is antient n. 10.11 He acknowledges the Fast of Lent and that Protestants fast not on Christmas day though it fall upon a Friday or a Saturday n. 12. He professeth the restraint of Priests from marrying not to be against either Jus Naturale or Divinum From which grant it follows that the Arguments which Protestants are wont to allege out of Scripture or natural reason to prove the unlawfulness of such restraint are of no force For if they were of force it should be against Jus Naturale or Divinum and no positive Law could ordain it n. 13. He grants that Vows of a single life made orderly and duly are to be kept and cannot be broken without offence n. 14. He doth not disallow the mingling of Water with Wine in the Eucharist as also n. 17. He doth not reprove in the Ceremonies of Baptism the sign of the Crosse and the consecration or hallowing of the Water and confesseth that Crism indeed is very antient n. 18. He confesseth the necessity of Baptism via ordinariâ n. 20. He confesseth that the antient Church had the five Orders of Ostiarius Lector Exorcist Acolythus Subdeacon which we hold and keep but Protestants reject n. 20. He saith the Church of England doth hold that there is a distinction between Bishop and Priest and that de jure divino n. 23. He tells us that the Protestant Church of England holds Good workes necessary to Salvation and that Faith without them saveth not that no man is predestinate to do evill nor that it is safe for any man peremptorily to presume himself predestinate From whence it follows that men are not justifyed by an assured and certain beleif that they are just and predestinate for with such a Faith it could not be presumption but certainty to beleive himself predestinate n. 25. He grants that in time of persecution and after in the time of Peace so long as the Christians dwelt mingled with the Heathen they shewed plainly by making and using the Crosse that they were not ashamed of that sign wherewith the Heathen men did use to deride them What then shall we say of Protestants who deride us Catholikes for not being ashamed of that sign wherewith the Heathen men did use to deride Christians and much more what shall we say of those who sacrilegiously abuse and break down that holy sign Ibidem he grants that the primitive Christians in time of persecution used Lights and Incense though voluntarily he faign to himself the reason for which they used them and after when Peace came Christians retained both the Lights and the Incense to shew themselves to be the Sons and Successors of those antient Christians which in former times had used them shewing their Communion in the former Faith by the communion of the former Usages What then shall we say of Protestants who in us deride those things as superstitious but that they shew themselves not to be the Sons and Successors of those antient Christians nor to have communion of that former Faith In the Brief of the 26. Heads he saith The Church of England holds Feasts in Memory of the Saints and Martyrs with other points which I omit In his Sermon upon the 20. of St. John n. 23. he saies confession to a Priest is necessarie urging that of St. Augustine hom 49. de 50. homil Nemo tibi dicat occultè ago paenitentiam apud Deum ago ergo sine causa dictum est Quae solveritis in Terra soluta erunt in Coelo ergo sine causa claves datae sunt Ecclesiae Dei frustramus Evangelium Dei frustramus Verba Christi Finally to joyn his deeds with his words when the Bishop of Spalata by way of complaint said to some of Andrews iste Episcopus toruè me aspicit this Bishop shews me a soure countenance Andrews not denying the thing answered This man could have no good meaning in coming to England from a place where he had in abundance all things for the salvation of his Soul 84 Now to shew how far Grotius stands for us against other Protestants I will cite only and that breifly what I find in two Books which he wrote in his ripest age after long study and mature consideration The one book he calls Votum pro pace Ecclesiastica the other Rivetiani Apologetici pro Schismate contra
Castalio in defen trans pag. 170. Castalio that learned Calvinist and most learned in the tongues reprehendeth Beza in a whole Book of this matter and saith that to note all his errours in Translation would require a great volume And Mr. Parkes saith [x] Parks in his Apology for three testimonies of Scripture c As for the Geneva Bibles it is to be wished that either they may be purged from those manifold errors which are both in the text and in the margent or else utterly prohibited All which confirmeth King James his grave and learned Censure in his [y] In the Conference before his Majesty pag. 46. thinking the Geneva Translation to be worst of all and that [z] Ibid. fol. 47. in the marginal notes annexed to the Geneva Translation some are very partial untrue seditious c. Lastly concerning the English Translations the Puritans say [a] Master Christopher Carlile in his Book that Christ descended not into Hell pag. 116. a. 117 c. Our Translation of the Psalms comprised in our Book of Common Prayer doth in addition subtraction and alteration differ from the truth of the Hebrew in two hundred places at the least In so much as [b] Purita Petiti to his Majesty pag. 76. initio they do therefore profess to rest doubtful whether a man with a safe conscience may subscribe thereto And Master Carlile saith of the English Translators that they have [c] Carlile pag. 118. depraved the sense obscured the truth and deceived the ignorant that in many places they do detort the Scriptures from their right sense And that they shew themselves to love darkness more than light falshood more than truth And the Mininisters of Lincoln [d] In their Book delivered to King James 16. of Decem. pag. 11. Diocess give their publick testimony tearming the English Translation a Translation that taketh away from the text that addeth to the text and that sometime to the changing or obscuring of the meaning of the Holy Ghost Not without cause therefore did his Majesty affirm [e] In the confer before his Majesty fol. 46. that he could never yet see a Bible well translated into English Thus far Brereley 34. Pu. Now let Protestants consider duly these points First Salvation cannot be hoped for without true Faith Faith according to them relyes upon Scripture alone Scripture must be delivered to most of them by the Translations Translations depend on the skill and honesty of men in whom nothing is more certain than a most certain possibility to erre and no greater evidence of truth than that it is evident that some of them embrace falshood by reason of their contrary translations What then remaineth but that truth faith salvation and all must in them rely upon a fallible and uncertain ground How many poor souls are lamentably seduced while from Preaching Ministers they admire a multitude of texts of Divine Scripture but are indeed the false translations and corruptions of erring men Let them therefore if they will be assured of true Scriptures fly to the alwaies visible infallible [f] St. Aug. l. 4. de Trinit c. 6. saith Contra rationem nemo sobrius Contra Scripturas nemo Christianus Contra Ecclesiam nemo pacificus senserit Catholick Church against which the gates of Hell can never so far prevail as that she shall be permitted to deceive the Christian world with false Scriptures Translations or Interpretations wherein there is a main and clear difference between us Catholicks who rely upon an infallible and living Guide the Church and Protestants who believe not only every private man but the whole Catholick Church to be fallible and subject to error and if it were but for this cause alone we ought to believe the Catholick Church to be infallible without the belief whereof we can have no absolute certainty what Books be Canonical nor what is the certain interpretation of them and the end of all will be that we cannot believe Christian Faith to be infallible and certainly true in so much as Luther himself by unfortunate experience was at length forced to confess thus much saying [g] In lib. cont Zuingl de ver ta Corporis Christi in Eucha If the world last longer it will be again necessary to receive the decrees of Councels and to have recourse to them by reason of divers interpretations of Scripture which now reign On the contrary side [h] Brereley tract 1. sect 10. subdivis 4. pag. 259. as our learned adversaries do thus agree to disagree in their own translations mutually condemning as before each other so also have they upon a second and more advised consideration afforded honourable testimony of our vulgar Latin translation had from Rome which Master Witaker otherwise in splene and spirit of contradiction tearmeth [i] Whitaker in his answer to Mr. Reynolds Preface pag. 2. fine 26. initio an old rotten translation c. full of faults errors and corruptions of all sorts [k] Whitaker de Sacra Scriptura quaest 5. c. 11. pag. 543. initio then which nothing can be more faulty or desteined and [l] Whitaker in his answer to Mr. Reynolds pag. 223. fine vide pag. 218. fine of all others most corrupt To this purpose Beza saith [m] Beza Annot. in Cap. 1. Lucae ver 1. The old Interpreter seemeth to have interpreted the holy Books with mervyllous sincerity and Religion Vetus Interpres videtur summa Religione sacros Libros interpretatus which Religious observation of the old Interpreter is acknowledged in like sort by D. Humfrey de ratione interpret l. 1. pag. 74. where he saith Proprietati verborum satis videtur addictus vetus Interpres quidem nimis anxiè quod tamen interpretor Religione quadam fecisse non ignorantia Also Beza further saith in praefat novi Testam Anni 1556. Vulgatam editionem maxima ex parte amplector caeteris omnibus antepono the vulgar Edition I do for the most part imbrace and prefer before all others Carolus Molinaeus in nov Testam part 30. signifieth his no less answerable liking thereof saying aegerrimè à vulgari consuetaque lectione recedo quam etiam enixè defendere soleo I can very hardly depart from the vulgar and accustomed reading which also I am accustomed earnestly to defend In so much as he professeth [n] See Molinaeus in Luc. 17. to prefer the vulgar Edition before Erasmus Bucer Bullinger Brentius the Tigurine translation also before John Calvin etiam Joannis Calvini omnibus aliis and all others Whereto might be added the like further answerable commendation thereof given by that famous Protestant Writer Conradus Pelicanus who in praefat in Psalterium Anni 1534. saith Tanta dexteritate eruditione fide Hebraica quoad sensum concordare deprehendimus vulgatam editionem Psalterii ut eruditissimum pariterque piissimum verè Prophetali Spiritu fuisse interpretem Graecum Latinum non dubitem And
Puritans for seditious by D. Wilts in his odedience or Ecclesiastical union pag. 6. prope initium And Knox alleged in proof of his own seditious opinion Calvin and certain other Ministers then residing at Geneva teaching that it is lawful for Subjects to reform Religion when Princes will not yea rather than fail even by force of Arms and accordingly our adversaries themselves acknowledge that-the Protestants of Geneva did depose their liege Lord and Prince from his temporal right there from which yet to this present he is kept by strong force debarred albeit he was by right of Succession the temporal Lord and owner of that City and territory 39. His intollerable contempt of the Antient Holy Fathers will appear many wayes when we shall come to prove that Protestants confess the Fathers to stand for us and for that cause they reject them Here we will only set down his taxing the Fathers for believing and teaching the Sacrifice of the Mass [n] Brereley tract 3. sect 1. under the Letter t. a point most opposed by Protestants and most dear to us Catholicks in these words lib. de vera Ecclesiae reformatione extant in tract Theologic Calvini c. pag. 389. a. fine b. initio Solemne est nebulonibus istis meaning us Catholicks quiequid vitiosum in Patribus legitur corradere c. cùm ergo objiciunt locum Malachiae de Missae sacrificio ab Irenao exponi oblationem Melchisedech sic tractari ab Athanasio Ambrosio Augustino Arnobio breviter responsum sit eosdem illos Scriptores alibi quoque panem interpretari Corpus Christi sed ita ridiculè ut dissentire nos cogat ratio veritas c. And in his Book of Institutions Printed Argentorati 1539. pag. 350. ante medium and after the other Edition lib. 4. Instit cap. 18. sect 11. he saith Veteres quoque illos video hanc memoriam aliò detorsisse quam institutioni Domini conveniebat quod nescio quam repetitae aut saltem renovatae imolationis faciem eorum coena prae se ferehat c. Imitati sunt enim propius Judaicum sacrificandi morem quam aut ordinaverat Christus aut Evangelii ratio ferebat And see Brereley tract 1. sect 3. subdivis 3. post 12. where he expresly chargeth the Fathers with forging a Sacrifice in the Lords Supper without his Commandement and adulterating the Supper with adding of Sacrifice Thus Calvin in omnes Pauli Epist in Hebr. c. 7. ver 9. pag. 924. saith Quo magis tot veteres Ecclesiae Doctores hac opinione occupatos fuisse miror c. certè ut error errorem trahere solet cum ipsi Sacrificium in Christi coena nullo ejus mandato finxissent adeoque coenam adulterassent addito Sacrificio colores postea hinc inde accersere conatisunt quibus errorem suum fucarent And in his Book de vera Ecclesiae reformatione extant in tract theologic Calvini pag. 389. b. fine he further saith Veteres excusandi non sunt quatenus scilicet ipsos apparet à puro gennino Christi instituto deflexisse nam cum in hunc finem celebranda sit coena ut Sacrificio Christi communicemus eo non contenti oblationem quoque addiderunt hoc auctarium vitiosum esse dico c. 40. The Doctrines and sayings of Calvin and Calvinists whereby he unavoydably makes God the Author of sin in us are so known and so strongly impugned by Protestants themselves as I need not be long in alleging them particularly and at large but refer the Reader to Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 10. subd 14. Where he will find exactly cited these and other like Doctrines [o] Calvin Instit l. 3 cap. 23. sect 6. That God doth ordain by his Counsel and Decree that among men some be born destined to certain damnation from their Mothers womb and that the decree of God in this behalf is only because it so pleaseth him without any respect had to their works either good or ill That God exciteth the wicked will of one thief to kill another guideth his hand and weapon justly inforcing the will of the thief That God not only permitmitteth but leadeth into temptation even with an active power and not permissive only and doth truly and by his determinate purpose harden make blind and incline the heart to evill that God hardned Pharao not speaking hyperbolically but truly and hardned him that so he might resist that God would that Pharao should not obey his Commandement yea he wrought in him that he should resist it nor could he do otherwise That God worketh effectally in our sins that the falling of the ten tribes he calleth his work that Davids adultery was the proper work of God as was the conversion of Paul that God pronounceth Absolons incestuous pollution of his Fathers Bed to be his own work and that in our sinning neither Satan nor we are Authors but as the instruments of God That whatsoever thing God doth foresee and he foreseeth all sins the same he doth will decree and ordain to be done that therefore he is the Author of all those things which the Popish Censurers think that he idely permitteth Which Doctrines are so absurd that even Calvin confesseth it for [p] Calvin Instit l. 1. cap. 18. sect 3. inexplicable how God may be said to will sin which he himself forbiddeth to be done and sundry Protestants of great estimation do thereupon reject and condemn them expresly also for that cause charging their Authors with teaching that God is the Author of Sin From whence and from their other foresaid principle of advancing of only Faith extenuating good works and their other like Doctrines have sprung as from a hydra the sect of the Libertines who upon the very foresaid grounds and colours [q] Calvin ubi supra pag. 540. b. paulo ante med saith of their said principal man contestatur sibi longe aliam esse mentem seque Dâ—um mâ—li authorem facere nolle affirmat denying nevertheless verbally as Calvin doth God to be Author of sin and verbally also requiring [r] Calvin ibid pag 548. a. prope finem saith of their contesting in this case as Catholicks say of Calvin himself Contestetur quantum vol. t se licentiam peccand praebere nolle hoc enim nihil al ud est quà m inane nimisque ridiculum simolationis velum obtendere quoniam ipsi nihil est cùm Deus omnia facere putatur Might not thâ—se very words of Calvin against them be returned aptly against Calvin himself integrity of life and manners have set abroad to the world by their published [s] Concerning their sundry published writings See Calvin tract Theologic pag. 510. a. ante med pag. 532. a. fine writings stored [t] See their frequent allegation of Scripture in Calvin ubi supra 533 534 535 536 c. And see in Calvin their allegation of these very Scriptures which Calvin and other Protestants usually alleage in
losses in all kinds which if we did undergoe for externall profession of that Faith which we doe not inwardly believe to be true we should deserve rather to be begged for fools then persecuted for our Religion In the mean time every Catholick hath this comfort that he is safe even by the confession of an Adversary if he be not a foolish dissembler which would be cause of damnation in a Protestant or any other Even the profession of a truth believed to be false is a sin But I return to say it were impossible for any Roman Catholick to be safe upon what condition soever if we erre in any one Fundamentall Article of Faith 7. With D. Potter agreeth M. William Chillingworth in his book intituled The Religion of Protestants a safe way to salvation For whereas Charity Mantained part 1. pag. 15. n. 13. saith Since D. Potter will be forced to grant that there can be assigned no visible true Church of Christ distinct from the Church of Rome and such Churches as agreed with her when Luther first appeared I desire him to declare whether it doth not follow that she hath not erred Fundamentally because every such errour destroyes the nature and being of a Church and so our Saviour Christ should have had no visibly Church on earth To these words which he thought fit to set down very imperfectly he answers pag. 16. n. 20. in this manner I say in our sense of the word Fundamentall it does follow For if it be true that there was then no Church distinct from the Roman then it must be either because there was no Church at all which we deny or because the Roman Church was the whole Church which we also deny Or because she was part of the whole which we grant And if she were a true part of the Church then she retained those truths which were simply necessary to salvation and held no errours which were inevitably and unpardonably destructive of it For this is precisely necessary to constitute any man or any Church a member of the Church Catholick In our sense therefore of the word Fundamentall I hope she erred not Fundamentally But in your sense of the word I fear she did That is she held some thing to be Divine Revelation which was not something not to be which was He hath spoken so clearly and fully in favour of the Roman Church and not only affirmed but proved that she did not erre in any Fundamentall Point that I need not say one word to ponder his words or declare the force of them Pag. 7. n. 3. He expresly approves the saying of D. Potter That both sides by the confession of both sides agree in more Points than are simply and indispensably necessary to salvation and differ only in such as are not precisely necessary Therefore doe we inferr Catholicks believe all that is precisely necessary to salvation and more But we never yield so much to you Protestants Pag. 85. n. 89. He confesseth the Roman Church to be a part of the Catholick Church and pag. 16. n. 20. he saith If she were a true part of the Church then she retained those truths which were simply necessary to salvation and held no errours which were unevitably and unpardonably destructive of it For this is precisely necessary to constitute any man or any Church a member of the Church Catholick Pag. 163. n. 56. He saith From Scripture we collect our hope that the Truths she The Roman Church retains and the practise of them may prove an Antidote to her against the errours which she maintaines in such persons as in simplicity of heart follow this Absalon These points of Christianity which have in them the nature of Antidotes against the poyson of all sins and errours the Church of Rome though otherwise much corrupted still retains therefore we hope she erreth not Fundamentally but still remaines a part of the Church But this can be no warrant to us to think with her in all things Seeing the very same Scripture which puts us in hope she erres not Fundamentally mark how he professeth to learn out of Scripture that we erre not Fundamentally assures us that in many things and those of great moment she errs very grievously And these errors though to them that believe them we hope they will not be pernicious yet the professing of them against Conscience could not but bring us certain damnation Therefore the Points in which we differ from Protestants being acknowledged not to be Fundamental and in other Points professing nothing against our conscience we are safe by his own confession If we did not believe as we professe we were no Roman Catholicks In the same place he saith expresly De facto we hope the Roman Church does not erre in Fundamentalls Yea he saith line 33. Perhaps she does not erre damnably the contrary whereof he affirmes so often His example of Absalon was very ill applied to the Roman Church which did not rebell from Protestants but they against the whole Church the Mother of all Christians more sacrilegiously than Absalon behaved himself wickedly toward his Father Pag. 404. n. 29. He approves Dr. Potters saying pag. 79 which I cited above that the Roman Religion is safe that is not damnable to some such as believe what they profess And in the same place he saith Wee may hope that she retains those Truths which are simply absolutely and indispensably necessary to Salvation Pag. 401. n. 7. VVe approve those fundamental and simply necessary Truths which you retain by which some good souls among you may be saved but abhor your many superstitions and Heresies The Truths you retain are good and as we hope sufficient to bring good ignorant souls among you to salvation yet are not to be sought for in the Conventicle of Papists If any Soul may be saved in our Religion It is clear we hold not any fundamental Error with which no soul can be saved Pag. 277. n. 61. he saith The simple defect of some Truths profitable only and not simply necessary may consist with salvation Seeing therefore he hath so often confessed that we erre not in fundamental points our Errors in some Truths profitable only and not fundamental may consist with salvation How then doth he say to Catholicks pag. 401. n. 27. As for our freeing you from damnable Heresie and yielding you salvation neither he Dr. Potter nor any other Protestant is guilty of it Pag. 219. n. 50. Speaking of Protestants he saith They do not differ at all in matters of Faith if you take the word in the highest sense and meanby matters of Faith such Doctrines as are necessary to salvation to be believed or not to be believed Now you know well that in points of greatest moment which Catholicks believe against some Protestants other Protestants stand for us against their pretended Brethren And therefore he must either say that we believe all such Doctrines as are absolutely necessary to salvation or
Supremacy and was so conformable to the Doctrine of the Roman Church that he was made [14] Osiander in epitom c. cent 12. pag. 309. Simon de Voyon in his Catalog c. Abbot of Clairevaux being also [15] Ofiander abi supra pag. 309. fine saith Centum quadradraginta monafteriorum Author fulsse creditur and Danaeus in primae partis altera parte contra Bellarminum pag. 940. saith Hieronymus Bernardus suerunt monachi istius erroris Authores Fautores Author of many Monasteries both in France and Flanders Insomuch as our Adversaries alleging him to us do call him Sanctus vester [16] Gomarus in speculo Ecclesiae pag. 23. fine our Saint and [17] Whitaker in respons ad rat Campianiâ— â—at 7. pag. 105. ante med saith Bernardus quem Ecclesia vesâ—ia multis annis unum tulit piuni virum a man brought forth by our Church who in regard of Christian communion was dearly [18] Osiander â—bid See his words heretofore in the fourth Consideration num 1. sine in the margâ—nt at the figure 3. initio familiar to Muiachias whom our Adversaries reject for a confessed Catholick or Papist As also the * The Câ—rturists câ—rt 12. col 1637. l n. 45. â—o say therefore of S. Bernard Coâ—uâ—t Deum Mâ—ozim ad novissimum vitae suae articulum col 1638. lin 16. they say farther of him Acerrimus propugnator Sedis Antichristi suir c. Centurists do for such in most plain tearms reject S. Bernard and yet this his known Religion notwithstanding our Adversaries do acknowledge him for [20] Whitaker de Ecclesia pag. 369. paulò post med saith Ego quidem Bernardum verè fuisse Sanctum ex stimo And see the like in Whitaker against M. William Reynolds pag. 125 126. a true Saint [21] Osiander cent 12. pag. 309. post med a very good man [22] See this in Pasquds return into England pag. 8. 13. a good Father and one of the Lamps of the Church of God In like manner S. Bede who lived about 900 years since was so evidently of our Religion that our Adversary Osiander therefore saith of him [23] Osiander in epitom c. cent 8. l. 2. c. 3. pag. 58. initio Beda was wrapped in all the Popish errours wherein we at this day dissent from the Pope for he admired and embraced the worship of Images the Popish Mass invocation of Saints c. Which thing appeareth also yet more undoubtedly to omit his evident writings by his [24] See M. Fox Act. Mon. printed 1576. pag. 128 129. confessed credit and estimation had with the Popes of that age whom M. Fulk tearmeth * M. Fulk in his retentive against Bristow c. pag. 278. post med reciteth Bede ' s authority saying The last testimony out of Beda who lived under the tyrannie of Antichrist I will not stand upon M. Sanders may have great store of such c. Antichrists and yet is he all this notwithstanding acknowledged by our Adversaries to have been [25] Osiander cent 8. pag. 58. ante med a good man [26] M. Cowper in his Chronicle at the year of our Lord 734. fol. 171. b. renowned in all the world for his learning and godly life for which he was also privileged with the sirname of [27] Of this title see Holinshead 's Chronicle at the year 735. and M. Cowper in his Chronicle at the year 724. fol. 168. b. and M. Fox Act. Mon. printed 1576. pag. 128. b. vide 129. a. Oecolampadius in libro Epist Zuinglii Oecolampadii pag. 654. post med Reverend and by D. Humfrey specially registred among [28] Hum fredus in Jesuitismi part 2. rat 3. pag. 326. initio the godly men raised up by the Holy Ghost Hitherto also appertaineth the like examples of Gregory and Austin both of them acknowledged for [29] Hereof see Brereley tract 1. sect 2. aâ—d 2. 3. e. confessed Popish Catholicks and yet is one of them called by our Adversaries [30] M. Godwin in his Catalogue of Bishops pag. 3. ante med that blessed and holy Fatner S. Gregory and the other [31] M. Godwin ubi supra pag. 7. initio ante med S. Austin our Apostle Whereunto to omit others might be added the fore-mentioned example of your Highness dearest Mother whose undoubted Salvation her known Religion notwithstanding was even in that opposition of time by the learned Adversary as before [32] See Brereley in the beginning of this 6. section of tract 1. at z. publickly acknowledged What now can our Adversaries answer unto these confessed examples Is there [33] James 1.17 with God variableness or [34] Ephes 6.9 Deut. 10.17 Ro. 2.11 1 Pet. 1.17 any acception of persons or is he [35] Num. 23.19 as the Son of man that he should change so as one and the same Religion which was before in them holy should now be in us damnable And thus much briefly concerning certain undoubted examples of this kind 3. Thirdly to make this point more evident as yet by the like confessed answerable practice of almost all the Protestant reformed Churches Whereas they hold that [p] In the Propositions and Principles disputed in the university of Geneva pag. 166. 25. the Sacraments are onely to be administred to those that are taken for known members of the Church which no man can be without faith because that [q] Hebr. 11.6 without faith it is impossible to please God for which cause they teach concerning Infants who in their opinion have not [r] That Children have not faith is affirmed by M. Cartwright in M. Whitgifts defence pag. 611. and by Beza in respons ad Acta Colloquii Montisbelgar part 2. pag. 124. initio and in the Propositions and Principles disputed in the university of Geneva pag. 178. sect 4. and by Jacobus Kimedoncius in his redemption of mankind l. 2. c. 15. pag. 164. fine and by M. Whitaker contra Duraeum l. 8. pag. 682. initio faith which as the Scriptures witness [Å¿] Râ—m 10.17 cometh by hearing which Infants cannot accomplish that [t] So say the Divines of Geneva in the foresaid Propositions and Principles disputed pag. 178. sect 4. Also Oecolampadius in libro Epistolarum Oâ—colampadii Zuinglii l. 2. pag. 301. circa med saith hereof Parentum compatrum fides pueros sanctificat And Praetorius l. de Sacramentis pag. 108. saith Respectu fidelium parentum infantes fideles habentur c. credunt igitur infantes sed in parentibus they are comprehended within the Covenant of eternal life by means of the faith of their Parents and * In the Propositions c. pag. 178. Luther l. de praeparatione cordis pro suscipiendo Sacramento Eucharistiae saith Parvulus alienae fidei merito baptizatur salvatur and see him further tom 2. de captiv Babyl fol. 77. a. fine And
M. Perkins in his works printed 1605. fol. 585. o. post med affirmeth that Parents believe for themselves and their Children and that the Child by the Parents faith hath title to the Covenant and fol. 585. b. initio it is said that Infants are Gods children not by vertue of their birth but by means of their Parents faith are for that cause to be baptized and that therefore the Children of Jews Turks and such like professed Infidels [u] In the Propositions and Principles c. ubi supra sect 8. pag. 179. and M. Whitaker contra Duraeum l. 8. pag. 679. fine saith Infidelium liberos ut Turcarum Judaeorum Ethnicorum Calvinus meritò verè negat esse baptizandos and the like is taught by Kimedoncius in his redemption of mankind l. 2. cap. 15. pag. 167. fine and see M. D. Some in his defence against Penry and resutation c. pag. 150. are not to be baptized as not being comprehended within the Covenant by reason that their Parents do not believe All this yet notwithstanding they profess [x] Taught by M. Whitgift in his defence c. pag. 623. ante med by M. Hooker in his Ecclesiastical Policy l. 3. sect 1. pag. 131. by D. Some ubi supra pag. 149 150. and in the foresaid Propositions and Principles c. pag. 179. sect 9. it is said by the Divines of Geneva We are of mind that the Children of Papists may be received into Baptism to teach and practice their baptizing of Infants born of Catholick or as they tearm Popish Parents not saith M. Hooker in regard of [y] M. Hooker ubi supra Gods promise which reacheth unto a thousand generations for by this reason the Children of Turks and as M. Hooker saith [z] M. Hooker ibidem all the world may be baptized insomuch as no man is a thousand descents from Adam but their said baptizing of them is according to the other premisses of their Doctrine by themselves practised and holden good though as M. D. Some affirmeth to [a] M. Some in his foresaid defence c. cap. 22. pag. 165 167. Penry they were the Children of Popish West Indians whose other former Ancestors never knew the Christian faith And though saith he those West-Indians [b] M. Some ibid. pag. 167 were baptized by Popish Shavelings yet they received true Baptism and were ingrafted into Christ and for this reason because there is a Church in Popery For saith he [c] M. Some ibid. pag. 149. post med And Amandus Polanus in partit Theolog. pag. 305. post med saith Hodierna Ecclesia Romana est adhuc Ecclesia Christi sed omnium impurissima c. alicquin ii qui in Papatu sunt Baptizati extra Ecclesiam Christi ac proinde nec baptismo Christi fuissent baptizati c. if there were no Church at all in Popery then the Infants of Papists were not to be baptized in any reformed Church By which premisses of their confessed practice it appeareth First that the Children of Catholick or Popish Parents are to be baptized Secondly as being comprehended within the Covenant of eternal life Lastly and that by reason of their Parents faith So evidently in their Doctrine and practice is the faith of the Catholick or Popish Parent holden for available to his Child And shall it then be thought damnable to himself or holden worthy to be yet further persecuted by our so implacable and unrelenting Adversaries 4. This foresaid Truth is further proved by Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 14. saying That the more sober and learned Protestants whom headstrong and inconsiderate zeal hath not altogether blinded for the preservation of Christs Church in Being which according to [r] M. Whitaker against M. Reynolds in his answer to the Preface pag. 33. saith We believe to the comfort of our souls that Christs Church hath continued and never shall fail so long as the world endureth And we account it a prophane heresie to teach otherwise And the same is yet further affirmed by Fulk in the Tower disput with Edm. Camp the 2. daies conference And also by the Confessions of Belgia in the Harmony of Confessions pag. 321. and by the Confession of Helvetia ibid. pag. 306. by the Confession of Saxony ibid. pag. 324 325. 473. Insomuch as the Divines of Wittemberg in Colloquio Badensi apud Osiandrum in epitom c. cent 16. pag. 1064. ante med say Ecclesiam inde ab ascensione usque ad haec tempora nunquam interruptam sed perpetua successione in terris permansisse firmiter credimus And ibid. pag. 1065. post med it is said Contra omnes furores Satanae Ecclesia vera in terris usque adventum Christi ad extremum judicium est mansura all opinions must evermore continue without failing or ceasing to be not so much as for any one moment of time do acknowledge as well that their own Succession Calling and Ministry is and hath been for former times †Apud Brereley tract 2. c. 2. sect 6. post med in the margent at * next before d. M. Bridges in his defence of the government c. pag. 1276. post med resteth so wholly upon the calling conferred to their Protestant Ministers from and under our Catholick Church that saith he of our Catholick Bishops and their calling If our Brethren will make them but meer Laymen then are neither they nor we any Ministers at all but meer Laymen also For who ordained us Ministers but such Ministers as were either themselves of their Ministry or at least were made Ministers of those Ministers except they will say the people can make Ministers c. See hereof further in Brereley ibid. at g. h. preserved in and by the onely succession and calling continued in our Catholick Church as also that the true Church immediatly before Luthers time had its * Luc. Osiander in epitom hist Eccl. cent 16. part altera pag. 1073. in fine saith Ecclesia quae sub Papatu fuit eo tempore quo Lutherus natus est suit Ecclesia Christi c. Ideoque qui sub Papatu ad ministerium Ecclesiasticum fuerunt ordinati ut Lutherus multi alii Evangelici Doctores revera habuerunt legitimam ordinationem being in our Catholick Church To this end M. D. Field saith †M. D. Field in his Treatise of the Church l. 3. c. 6. pag. 72. ante med Where some demand of us where our Church was before Luther began We say it was where now it is if they ask us which Church we answer it was the known and apparent Church in the world wherein all our Ancestors lived and dyed wherein Luther and the rest were baptized received their Ordinance and power of Ministry And our other learned Adversaries do accordingly teach that like as Luther himself before his preaching against the Pope was an (t) Sleydan l. 1. initio Augustine Friar and as himself saith (u) Luther
as well as they Therefore we Catholicks have the life and substance of Religion pag. 60. In the prime grounds or Principles of Christian Religion we have not forsaken the Church of Rome Therefore he grants that we have the prime grounds or Fundamentall Articles of Religion pag. 11. For those Catholick verities which she the Roman Church retains we yield her a member of the Catholick though one of the most unsound and corrupt members In this sense the Romanists may be called Catholicks Behold we are members of the Catholick Church which could not be if we erred in any one Fundamentall Point By the way If the Romanists may be called Catholicks why may not the Roman Church be termed Catholick And yet this is that Argument which Protestants are wont to urge against us and Potter in particular in this very place not considering that he impugns himself whiles he speaks against us not distinguishing between universall as Logicians speak of it which signifies one common thing abstracting or abstracted from all particulars and Catholick as it is taken in true Divinity for the Church spread over the whole world that is all Churches which agree with the Roman and upon that vain conceit telling his unlearned Reader that universall and particular are tearms repugnant and consequently one cannot be affirmed of the other that is say I Catholick cannot be affirmed of D. Potter nor D. Potter said to be a Catholick because a particular cannot be said to be universall or an universall pag. 75. To depart from the Church of Rome in some doctrines and Practises there might be just and necessary cause though the Church of Rome wanted nothing necessary to salvation pag. 70. They the Roman Doctors confesse that setting aside all matters controverted the main positive truths wherein all agree are abundantly sufficient to every good Christian both for his knowledge and for his practise teaching him what to believe and how to live so as he may be saved His saying that the Roman Doctors confess that setting aside all matters controverted c. is very untrue it being manifest that Catholicks believe Protestants to erre damnably both in matters of faith and practise yet his words convince ad hominem that we have all that is necessary yea and abundantly sufficient both for knowledge and practise for us to be saved And then he discoursing of the Doctrines wherein we differ from Protestants saith pag. 74. If the Mistaker will suppose his Roman Church and Religion purged from these and the like confessed excesses and novelties he shall find in that which remains little difference of importance between us Therefore de facto we believe all things of importance which Protestants believe After these words without any interruption he goes forward and sayes pag. 75. But by this discourse the Mistaker happily may believe his cause to be advantaged and may reply If Rome want nothing essentiall to Religion or to a Church how then can the Reformers justify their separation from that Church or free themselves from damnable Schisme Doth not this discourse prove and the Objection which he raises from it suppose that we want nothing essentiall to Religion Otherwise this Objection which he makes to himself were clearly impertinent and foolish if he could have dispatched all by saying we erre in essentiall points which had been an evident and more then a just cause to justify their separation which yet appears further by his Answer to the said Objection That to depart from a particular Church and namely from the Church of Rome in some Doctrines and practises there might be just and necessary cause though the Church of Rome wanted nothing necessary to salvation And afterward in the next pag. 76. speaking of the Church of Rome he saith expresly Her Communion we forsake not no more than the Body of Christ whereof we acknowledge the Church of Rome to be a member though corrupted And this clears us from the imputation of Schism whose propertie it is to cut off from the Body of Christ the hope of salvation the Church from which it separates But if she did erre in any one Fundamentall point by that very errour she would cease to be a member of the Body of Christ and should be cut off from the hope of salvation therefore she doth not erre in any Fundamental point p. 83. We were never disjoyned from her the Church of Rome in those main essentiall truths which give her the name and essence of a Church You must then say that she errs not in any Fundamental Point For the essence of a Church cannot subsist with any such error And that it may appear how desirous he is that it should be believed Catholicks Protestants not to differ in the essence of Religion he adds these words immediately after those which we have last cited Whereof if the mistaker doubt he may be better informed by some late Roman Catholick writers One of France who hath purposely in a large Treatise proved as he believes the Hugonots and Catholicks of that Kingdom to be all of the same Church and Religion because of truths agreed upon by both And another of our Country as it is said who hath lately published a large Catalogue of learned Authors both Papists and Protestants who are all of the same mind Thus you see he ransacks all kind of proofs to shew that Catholicks and Protestants differ not in the substance and essence of Faith and to that end cites for Catholick writers those two who can be no Catholicks as Charity Maintained part 1. chap. 3. pag. 104. Shews the former in particular to be a plain Heretick or rather Atheist Lucian-like jesting at all Religion Pag. 78. he saith We hope and think very well of all those holy and devout souls which in former Ages lived and dyed in the Church of Rome Nay our Charity reaches further to all those at this day who in simplicity of heart believe the Roman Religion and professe it To these words of the Doctor if we subsume But it were impossible that any can be saved even by Ignorance or any simplicitie of heart if he erre in a Fundamentall point because as by every such error a Church ceases to be a Church so every particular person ceases to be a member of the true Church the Conclusion will be that we doe not erre in any Fundamentall point Nay pag. 79. he saith further We believe it the Roman Religion safe that is by Gods great Mercy not damnable to some such as believe what they professe But we believe it not safe but very dangerous if not certainly damnable to such as professe it when they believe or if their hearts were upright and not perversly obstinate might believe the contrary Behold we are not only in a possibility to be saved we are even safe upon condition we believe that Faith to be true which we professe and for which we have suffered so long so great and so many
that many learned Protestants do not believe all such Doctrines and consequently are not capable of Salvation Pag. 269. n. 45. A man may possibly leave some opinion or practise of a Church formerly common to himself and others and continue still a member of that Church Provided that what he forsakes be not one of those things wherein the Essence of a Church consists For this cause he saith That although Protestants leave the external Communion of the Church yet they left not the Church because they left her not in any thing essential to a Church as Fundamental points are Therfore he supposeth the Church before Luther did not erre in any Fundamental Article Otherwise Protestants had left her that is they had disagreed from her in a Fundamental point P. 272. n. 52 and pag. 283. n. 73. He denies that Protestants divided themselves from the Church absolutely and simply in all things that is ceased to be a member of it which still supposes that the Church before Luther believed all essential and fundamental Points which Protestants also pretend to hold and for that cause say they left not the Church Pag. 272. n. 52. He saith In the reason of our separation from the external Communion of your Church you are mistaken For it was not so much because she your Church as because your Churches external Communion was corrupted and needed Reformation But if we erred in Fundamental points Protestants must have forsaken us chiefly for that reason that our Church was corrupted with Fundamental errours of Faith Therefore he grants that we erred not in any such necessary Points Pag. 401. n. 26. He confesseth that D. Potter saith indeed that our not cutting off your Church from the Body of Christ and hope of salvation frees us from the imputation of Schism Pag. 133. n. 12. He saith expresly By confession of both sides we agree in much more than is simply and indispensably necessary to salvation It is well he makes so open a confession that we believe much more than is simply necessary to salvation But as I said before we will not because we cannot yield so much to Protestants And here I must ask again how he could say Pag. 401. n. 27. As for our freeing you from damnable Heresie and yielding you salvation neither D. Potter nor any other Protestant is guilty of it Seeing he saith that by the confession of both sides we agree in much more than is simply and indispensably necessary to salvation If we believe much more than is necessary to salvation by what Logick will he deduce that we believe not as much as is necessary 8. These so many and so clear words of D. Potter and M. Chillingworth may justly make any man wonder with what pretence of truth or modesty he could say Pag. 280. n. 95. As for your pretence that your errours are confessed not to be Fundamental it is an affected mistake as I have often told you And Pag. 308. 108. As for your obtruding upon us that we believe the Points of difference not Fundamental or necessary you have been often told it is a calumny The oftner the worse it being a Saying void of all truth and a shamefull calumny in him 9. To these testimonies of Potter and Chillingworth many other might be alleged out of other Protestants as we have seen divers other alleged by Potter D. Laud in his book against Fisher Pag. 299. saith I doe acknowledge a possibility of salvation in the Roman Church But so as that which I grant to Romanists is not as they are Romanists but as they are Christians that is as they believe the Creed and hold the foundation Christ himself Behold not only a possibility of salvation but also the reason thereof because we believe the Creed c. which is the very reason for which Protestants hold that they themselves may be saved though they differ in many points from one another This I say is the reason of D. Laud which other Protestants must approve though in true Divinity it be of no force at all for though one believe the Creed and hold the foundation Christ himself that is that he is God and Saviour of the world yet if he deny any point evidently delivered in Scripture or otherwise sufficiently propounded as revealed by God he cannot be saved even according to Protestants who therefore doe in this as in many other things speak inconsequently and contradict themselves Pag. 376. he saith The Religion of the Protestants and the Romanists Religion is the same nor doe the Church of Rome and the Protestants set up a different Religion for the Christian Religion is the same to both but they differ in the same Religion Therefore say I we hold no Fundamental errors wherein whosoever differ cannot be of the same but must be of a different Religion And Pag. 129. The Protestants have not left the Church of Rome in her Essence not in the things which constitute a Church And Pag. 282. he saith The possibility of salvation in the Roman Church I think cannot be denyed and in proof hereof Pag. 281. he alleges Luther Field Joseph Hall Geor Abbot Hooker Mornaeus Prideaux Calvin And D. Jeremie Taylor in his liberty of Prophecying Pag. 251. sect 20. teaches that we keep the foundation and believe many more truths than can be proved to be of simple and original necessity to Salvation And therefore all the wisest Personages of the adverse party allowed to them possibility of Salvation whilst their errors are not faults of their will but weaknesses and deceptions of the understanding which as I said may easily be believed of us Catholicks who suffer so much for our Religion so that there is nothing in the foundation of Faith that can reasonably hinder them to be permitted The foundation of Faith stands secure enough for all their vain and unhandsome superstructures And in particular he shews that Prayer for the dead and the doctrine of Transubstantiation are not Fundamental errours and also saith these two be in stead of the rest Yea he affirmes Pag. 258 that there is implyed as great difficulty in the mystery of the B. Trinity as in the Doctrine of Transubstantiation and shewes that we are not in any danger of sinning by Idolatrie in adoring the Sacrament 10. Thus good Reader having proved out of the Confession of Protestants That the first Protestants who pretended to reform all Churches extant when they appeared led such lives and taught such Doctrines as no man of judgement can think them to have been fit Instruments for that Work That Protestants confesse the Ancient Holy Fathers to stand for us That the chiefest Protestant Writers joyn with Catholicks against other Protestants in the most principal Articles of Religion Yea even in those very points for which Luther and his followers opposed our Doctrine and forsook our Communion which deserves well to be considered That our Doctrines have been confirmed by Miracles and finally That all