he concluded there had bin no such thing as Christs Diuinity and proceeded to teach Circumcision and Poligamy and at length came to be an impure Apostata as the famous Beza doth term him in his Treatise de Poligam pag. 4. Impurus ille Apostata Bernardinus Ochinus Read likewise Sebastian Castalios ' own words in his Preface of the great Latin Bible dedicated to King Eduard 6. which are The more I do peruse the Scriptures the less do I find the same he meanes the profecies of the conuersion of Kings and Nations performed hovvsoeuer you understand the same profecies Dauid George say the Protestant Diuines of Basil in their History of him edit 1568. discoursed thus If the doctrin of Christ and his Apostles had bin true and perfect the Church vvhich they planted c. should haue continued c. But novv it is manifest that Antichrist hath subuerted the doctrin of the Apostles and the Church by them begun as is euident in the Papacy therfore the doctrin of the Apostles vvas false and imperfect And so this protestant Apostle of Basil by reflecting vpon the fundamental principle of the Reformation which is a supposition that the true Church and doctrin had bin inuisible or destroyd for many ages by Popery became a blasphemous Apostat affirming that our Sauior was a seducer In like manner Adam Neuserus the chief Pastor of Heidelberg turnd Turk and was circumcised at Constantinople See Osiander in his Epitom Centur. 16. pag. 818. The like fate had Alemannus Beza his bosom friend as Conradus Schlusserburg sayes in Theol. Caluin fol. 9. and Beza confesseth ep 65. pag. 108. Alemannum affirmant ad Iudaismum defecisse And all their conuersions to so damn'd sects were grounded vpon their not finding any pagan Kings or Nations to haue bin euer conuerted to protestancy but all wayes to popery Q. I must confess Sir that if all the Heathen Kings and Nations haue bin conuerted to that Christianity which we call popery and this was performed by Papists which could not be don without miracles and no pagan Kings and Nations haue bin euer conuerted to Protestancy nor by Protestants yee haue much more to say for yourselues than euer I heard before and we much less But I doubt you will hardly proue that untill the end of the first 600. years there were any Kings or Nations conuerted to Popery though afterwards I must own that profession was spread ouer the world and reignd untill our Protestant Reformation began in the year 1517. And to auoyd prolixity I desire you to rosolue me this one question whether Constantin the great the first Christian Emperor was a Papist Vve belieue that he and the Church of his time was Protestant because the purest Christianity Protestancy was then in vogue though afterwards it degenerated insensibly into Popery A. Euseb de Vita Constantini l. 3. c. 47. lib. 4. cap. 38. S. Hieron contra Vigilant ante med Costantinus Imperator saÌ„ctas reliquias Andreae Lucae Timothei transtulit Constantinopolim apud quas Daemones rugiunt And ibid. Si reliquius Sanctorum traÌ„sferre in aureos loculos re condere non licet sacrilegus fuit cum Constantino Arcadius omnes Episcopi non solum sacrilegi sed fatui iudicandi qui rem vilissimaÌ„ cineres dissolutâ—s â—n sericâ— vase aureo portauerunt c. S. August tom 39. dâ— Sanctis saith Crucis caracterâ— Basilicae dedicantur altaria consecrantur S. Greg. apud Bedam hist lib. 1. c. 30. Euseb de vitâ Constantini l 3. c. 2. atque interdum vultum salutari illa passionis signavit nota Zozomen hist l. 1. c. 8. Sanctae Crucis plurimum tribuit honoris Prudentius in Apotheosi vexillumque Crucis summus Dominator adorat S. Chrysostom in ep 2. Cor. hom 26. versus fin Nam ipse qui purpuram indutus est accedit illa amplexus sepulchra fastu deposito staâ— Sanctis supplicaturus ut pro se ad Dominum intercedant See the same also in S. Chrysost ad pop hom 60. versus finem That Constantin the great was a Papist and the Religion then in vogue and the only then called Catholik was Popery is euident by Eusebius his Ecclesiastical History written a litle after Constantins death as also by what the Centurists of Magdeburg and all other learned Protestants confess For it is euident by their writings that Constantin erected Temples in memory of Martyrs and the Apostles prouided his Sepulchre there to the end that after his death he might be made partaker of the prayers there offered He translated to Constantinople the reliques of St Andrew Luke and Timothy at which the Deuil did roare which particular circumstance St Hierom presseth against Vigilantius whom he concludeth an heretik for being against the praying to Saints and worshiping their reliques St Augustin and St Gregory two other Doctors of the Church defend the practise of consecrating Churches when Constantin built them with the sign of the Cross and sprinkling of holy water which I belieue the protestant Clergy of Dublin were ignorant of when as I haue bin credibly informed they framed very lately a new form of their own heads to consecrat Mr Lingars oual Temple with such hatred to the Cross that they would not make use of the sign therof in the Consecration nor bless themselues in the beginning or throughout the whole work nor place any Cross in the top of the Church for fear of profaning it or troubling the Spirit of that peaceble Minister not long before departed Nay Crosses were pull'd down in that Diocess and Catholiks punished for opposing them who committed such sacrileges Vvithout doubt Constantin the great was one of the most rank Papists and though he was the man who pulled down Idols and established Christianity in the world with its splendor and publik exercise yet I feare our Zealous Dublinian Clergy will protest against his Religion as superstitious and censure him guilty of Idolatry when they heare how often he blest himself making the sign of the Cross in his forhead nay which is worse not only adorning but adoring with an inferior religious worship the Cross and which is worst of all praying to St Peter and Paul that they vvould be Intercessors for him to God At least the Church of England will not challenge him as a member of theirs he being so auerse to the spiritual supremacy and Ecclesiastical iurisdiction of temporal soueraigns that he would not sit down at the Councell of Nice untill the Bishops had therto giuen their assent nor would he take vpon him to iudge of Ecclesiastical causes saying God hath ordained you Bishops and hath giuen you povver to iudge of yourselues by meanes vvherof vve yeeld ourselues to your iudgment So Crispinus in his book of the estate of the Church pag. 99. and Zozomen hist l. c. 10. post med sets down these popish vvords of Constantin Mihi vero non est fas cum homo sim ciusmodi
demonstratiue assent of him self being the Author and Reuealer of the Christian doctrin it is so far from being fit the Doctors of his Church should conuict Pagans or heretiks by cleerly euidencing to them God reuealed the sauing truthes that it is not possible For though som Diuines haue sayd Faith is consistent with cleer euidence of God hauing reuealed the truth of its obiect because forsooth though the belieuer doth see the truth and by consequence can not doubt of it or be an heretik yet he doth not see it in its proper causes but only in Gods reuelation notwithstanding I say this vnwary opinion of som schoolmen themselues can not well reconcile with it the merit obscurity liberty and obsequiousness of Christian Faith nor shew how 't is possible for any learned Catholik or other man to be an heretik in his iudgment because the malice of Heresy this being an error in the understanding as well as obstinacy in the will consists in doubting or denying inwardly that God did reueal such an article of Faith but if euery learned Catholik doth see by virtue of tradition that he did realy reueal it he can not see nor say the contrary in his mind and by consequence can not be an heretik And yet it s granted on all sides that any learned man without forgetting any part of his learning or knowledge may be an heretik Besides the assent and certainty of Christian Faith doth not enter further vpon its obiect than to say it exists or that the act of Faith is true it medles not with why it exists or with any of its proper or particular causes that is with any reasons why the obiect exists or why the act of Faith is true it is grounded only vpon Gods reuelation and this sayes no more than it is so all other reasons and causes are impertinent as to the nature and vse of Faith Faith being an imperfect knowledge and a total relying vpon the Diuine authority and not vpon the knowledge of proper or any other causes Now it is impossible that the obscurity and nature of Faith can be more or so much destroyd by subsequent euidence impertinent to its end and nature than by an euidence that immediatly and directly opposeth and is inconsistent with its motiue its merit and nature If the act of Faith be not consistent with the cleer sight or euidence of its truth in the proper and particular causes notwithstanding those causes are not its motiue nor considered or toucht by the act or assent of Faith how can its merit obscurity or nature consist and continue with a cleer sight of its truth or of its motiue or which is the same with euidence of the Diuine reuelation This sight or euidence being as destructiue of the obscurity and difficulty wee meet with in assenting to the mysteries and of the trust we repose in God by belieuing which is no less essential to Faith than its truth as it is directly oppofit to the state of obscurity wherin we must be if we trust his word deliuered to vs by the Church as also to the darkness and desguise he must speake to vs in if he will haue vs trust him and merit by Faith or indeed belieue him at all for men do not belieue when they assent to a truth they see or can not deny And it is impossible for them to see that God who is truth itself speakes or reuealeth any mystery without seing also t is truth he speakes or reueals Our aduersaries seem to make the Montebanks saying seing is belieuing the rule of Diuine Faith Q. Vvhy should not the merit of Faith be consistent with the cleer euidence of the truth therof in its proper causes or with cleer euidence of Gods reuealing the mystery belieued Is it not sufficient for a meritorious assent that the VVill applyed the vnderstanding to cleer the difficulties which might retard or suspend the act of Faith before its actual assent Must this assent also meet with obscurity and ouercom a difficulty in saying and not seing that God reuealed what it assents vnto after all our former pains taken in finding out the rule of Faith and examining the nature of Catholik Tradition A. The chief merit of Christian Faith consists in ouercomming the difficulty we find in assenting to more than we see or with more assurāce than wee see there is euidence of truth If we did see or certainly know that God reuealed what we assent vnto by the act of Faith we could not haue that difficulty in assenting to the mysteries therof which we find by experiēce for what difficulty can there be in saying inwardly God reuealed the Trinity or the Trinity is true if we see that God reuealed that mystery and by an immediat consequence that it is true Therfore the proper and immediat merit of an act of Faith as such doth consist in ouercoming the difficulty of actualy assenting that God reuealed the mystery or matter we belieue he did reueale though we see not his reuelation nor any necessary connexion between it and the doctrin tradition or testimony of the Church As for those other difficulties antecedent to this and to the act of Faith which we ouercom and are rather dispositions to make our selues fit to belieue by remouing the obstacles of education and custom or by examining the nature of Tradition and the motiues of credibility than immediat acts of Faith the merit that results from ouercoming those difficulties is not the proper and immediat merit of Faith itself because it is antecedent to it for after all our aforesaid inquiry and examination of the rule and motiues of Faith we find still a great difficulty in assenting actualy or belieuing that God reuealed what Tradition affirms he did this our own experience doth demonstrat and it may be proued by diuers places of holy Scripture as that of Luc. 19. when one hauing bin credibly informed and perhaps seen how Christ wrought many miracles he desired Christ to dispossess his son of a dumb Deuil Christ told him if he could belieue he would deliuer his son from that spirit Vvithout doubt the Father found great difficulty in the very act of Faith whereby he belieued Christs power for though he sayd I do belieue yet he cried out adding Lord help my incredulity And yet this man was very well disposed and informed of Christs power and miracles before he brought his son to him otherwise he would not have taken so much pains to follow him and present his son before him And indeed incredulity as obstinacy also doth suppose as much information and euidence of the motiues of credibility and of the rule of Faith or Tradition as is requisit for the actual assent of Faith otherwise none could be called incredulous or obstinat for not belieuing The faithfull therfore merit and ouercom a great difficulty by the very act of Faith after that all other difficulties precedent to it are cleered or ouercom And
declared by the Parliament of Q. Mary a bundel of Cranmers errers and priuat opinions which himself and som few others inuented or borrowed from Luther and Caluin and other Innouators who had resolued to make themselues popular and powerfull by setting vp their own priuat interpretations of Scripture and opinions for points of Religion So that though all England or a greater part of the world than England is should embrace that Reformation and submit their iudgments to that Church their protestant Tenets are still priuat opinions and the submission of their iudgments to the same doth still inuolue that pride and preference of their own choice of a nouelty or new interpretation of Scripture before the ancient doetrin and against the publik testimony of all precedent English Parliaments as also against the tradition of the Catholik Church As for Queen Elizabeth shee accommodated her religion to the times untill shee got the Croun and then shee made use of the new Faith to serue her turn and secure her interest Indeed Iohn Fox his Martyrs were great but foolish sufferers their ignorance was proportion'd to their obstinacy they cast themselues into the fire without Knowing wherfore And yet Iohn Fox sayes those Tinkers Tanners and silly women confuted the Bishops that endeuored to saue their liues which themselues had forfeited acording to the ancient lawes of the land And though they dyed not Martyrs yet they dyed like Englishmen that is with as litle concern and as great courage as if their cause had bin better But this is no miracle in England though the foolish partiality of Iohn Fox his pen doth endeuor to make his Protestant Readers mistake those proud mad fellows for pious Martyrs Q. Though I do approue of your difference between heretical obstinacy and Catholik constancy yet I must still condemn your application therof to protestancy and popery for an other reason which is that Protestancy is so far from inuoluing pride that the Church of England doth not as much as pretend to be infallible in its doctrin neither doth it exact from its children a submission of their iudgments to itself but only to Scripture And I hope there is as much humility I am sure there is more safety in submitting our iudgments to Gods written word as to the tradition of the Roma Catholik Church A. As I commend the Church of Englands modesty and ingenuity in acknowledging its fallibility and in dispensing with the submission of your iudgments to the same no fallible Church can exact or expect a submission of iudgment in any points of doctrin so must I continue in my opinion of the pride and obstinacy of protestancy 1. Because you will not belieue any thing inculcated to you by God vnless it be deliuered to you in writing as if the Diuine maiesty had not as much right to command by orders intimated to us by word of mouth as by his writing All the true belieuers of the world vntill Moyses his law were gouernd by the testimony and tradition of the Church without any writing or Scriptures neither is any thing written in the old or new Testament wherupon Protestants may with any color of probability ground their pretended priuilege of not belieuing any thing but Scripture and this doth in many places tell them they are as much obliged to belieue Tradition or Gods unwritten word as the written Now why Englishmen and som Northen people alone should refuse to obey the Catholik Church vnless it shewes for euery particular Gods order in writing is not intelligible themselues and all other Nations owning the contrary to be prudently practised in all human gouernments This must be pride and obstinacy 2. The pride and obstinacy of this their pretended priuilege which is the life and fundation of all Protestant Reformations is further discouered by the practise of aprinciple wherin all Protestants agree which is that not one of them thinks he is bound in conscience to submit his iudgment to any of their own or any other Congregations sense of Scripture in controuerted texts if that sense agreeth not with his own priuat interpretation If that of his Church agree not with his own sense he may stick to his own and reiect the other And this is the reason why Protestants are diuided into so many sects How this principle and practise may be excused from heretical pride and obstinacy I know not For they stand at a defiance with all Churches and will as litle submit their iudgments to their own as to that of Rome Euery Protestant is by the fundamental Tenet of the Reformation his own Master and a supreme Iudge of Gods written law Doth not this demonstrat how those Reformations are founded vpon pride and obstinacy Can there be greater than that simple men and silly women should presume to be Masters and Iudges of those Diuine and incomprehensible mysteries That they should preferr their priuat iudgments before that of their own Church and of ours vnto which the greatest Doctors in all ages haue submitted Vvhat a proud foolish insolent and obstinat people would the English conclude any other to be wherof not one would acquiesce in the iudgment or sentence of the Courts of Iudicature but euery one assume to himself the power of deciding his own law suites and of appealing from the Chancery or euen from the Parliament to his own priuat opinion and iudgment Let euery Protestant know this is his own case in matters of religion He appeals in what concerns Faith and the sense of Scripture from his own Church and the Catholik and general Councells to his own proper iudgment Doth he think that Christ would institute so absurd a spiritual gouernment Can any man of sense imagin it agrees with Scripture To what purpose then should the Scriptures and St Paul bid us be of one belief peaceable and humble Is any of these virtues or that of Catholik Faith consistent with such pride obstinacy and dissentions as this principle must inspire and we see in all the reformed Churches and in that of our own Countrey You see therfore that your reformed Churches and interpretations of Scripture haue so litle in them of the vnity obsequiousness and humility of Christian Faith so much recommended to us by St Paul that they seeme to the most learned Roman Catholiks not only to sauor of heresy but to be the very source of heretical pride and damnable obstinacy so far are they from hauing the least smack of the fundation or fruit of Christianity SECT III. SOM INFERENCES FIT TO BE considered by all Protestants and vvhether any may be saued if they dye in that persuasion IF Protestancy doth inuolue that pride and obstinacy which I haue endeuored to proue and deduce from its principles without doubt he who dyes a Protestant is damn'd But Because som are called Protestants and yet know not what protestancy is I will deliuer my opinion how far their ignorance may excuse them from being