Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n bishop_n church_n time_n 3,239 5 3.7702 3 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A69145 The progenie of Catholicks and Protestants Whereby on the one side is proued the lineal descent of Catholicks, for the Roman faith and religion, from the holie fathers of the primitiue Church ... and on the other, the neuer-being of Protestants or their nouel sect during al the foresayd time, otherwise then in confessed and condemned hereticks. ... Anderton, Lawrence. 1633 (1633) STC 579; ESTC S100158 364,704 286

There are 16 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

same to him c. appoynting in Prouinces his Vicars ouer other Churches to end smaller matters and to reserue the greater causes to himself Caluin (25) Instit l. 4. c. 7. sec 12. auoucheth that There is no word in the writings of Gregorie wherin more proudly he boasteth of the greatnes of his Primacie then this to wit I know not what Bishop is not subiect to the Apostolick Sea when he is found faultie c. He assumeth to himself power to punish those who offend D. Raynolds findeth no better shift for the foresayd Saying of S. Gregorie then impudently to say that (26) Conference p. 547. Either Gregorie wrot not so or he wrot an vntruth to cheer vp his Subiects (27) Cent. 6. p. 289. See Philippus Nicolai de Regno Christi li. 2. p. 67. 351. Osiander acknowledgeth that Augustin was sent from Gregorie the Great Bishop of Rome into England that he might subdue the same to the Iurisdiction of the Roman Bishop (28) Cent. 6. p. 290. and to the lust of the Roman Antichrist for which sayth Osiander Austin was after his death vndoubtedly damned to Hel. Yea D. Morton (29) Prot. Appeal l. 1. sec 28. p. 31. a man most sparing to tel the truth yet yeeldeth thus far saying Whether or how far Two hundred yeares after S. Gregorie did reach his Arme of Iurisdiction beyond the limits of his Diocesse is a question by reason of his diuers obscure speeches and some particular practises diuersly censured of our Authours But besides the cleerest premisses this Question of D. Morton is made none by D. Raynodls teaching that (30) Confer p. 550 The Primacie which Gregorie Leo and others giue to the Sea of Rome doth so exceed the truth that c. And (31) Ibid. p. 545. that Gregorie is somwhat large that way Yea that he and al the Popes for three hundred yeares before him (32) Ib. p. 549 auouch more of their Sea then is true and right in the opinion of Protestants With whom accordeth D. Fulk saying Gregorie (33) In 2. Thess 2. was a great worker and furtherer of the Sea of Antichrist and of the mysterie of iniquitie And (34) In Iohn 21. we go not about to cleer Gregorie from al vsurpation of Iurisdiction more then to his Sea appertayned So certayne and out of al question it is that S. Gregorie the Great was a true Roman Catholick in his Doctrine and practise of the Popes Primacie By the premisses then it is euident that the obiection so much vrged by (35) Contrae Camp rat 6. p 97. FulK in his Answer to a Counterf Cath. Iewel in his Reply art 4. p. 225. 226. 227. Mortons Appeal l 1. c. 2. sec 29. p. 32. D. Whitaker D. Fulk D. Iewel D. Morton and sundrie other Protestants from S. Gregorie his reiecting and disliking of the Title of Vniuersal Bishop is altogeather impertinent seing S. Gregorie reiected the same in that sense which Iohn Bishop of Constantinople applyed to himself to wit that he was the sole Bishop and none Bishop but he A thing so euident that the Protestant (36) De Ecclesia l. 2. c. 10. p. 570. Andreas Friccius whom (37) In his com Places part 4. p. 77. Peter Martyr tearmeth an excellent learned man in like sort expresseth the same saying Some there be c. that obiect the Authoritie of Gregorie who sayth that such a Title pertayneth to the Precursour of Antichrist but the reason of Gregorie is to be knowne and it may be gathered of his wordes which he repeateth in manie Epistles that the Title of vniuersal Bishop is contrarie to and doth gainsay the Grace which is commonly powred vpon al Bishops He therfore that calleth himself the onlie Bishop taketh the Bishoplike power from the rest wherfore this Title he would haue to be reiected c. But it is neuertheles euident by other places that Gregorie thought that the charge and Principalitie of the whole Church was committed to Peter c. And yet for this cause Gregorie thought not that Peter was the forerunner of Antichrist So plainly doth this Protestant answer this so often vrged obiection from S. Gregorie and so euident also it is that S. Gregorie himself claymed and defended the Primacie of the Roman Bishop and Church ouer al other Bishops and Churches whatsoeuer But to arise from S. Gregorie to other Doctours and Fathers more ancient his next predecessour Pope Pelagius is for the self same cause much reproued by Osiāder (38) Cent. 6. p. 242 in these words Pelagius greatly inueigheth against Iohn of Constantinople because he assumed to himselfe the Title of Vniuersal Patriarch and shewed by that prophane Title of Vniuersal to abolish the name of other Patriarchs c. But in the meane time he contendeth the Roman Church to be the Head of al other Churches and he bableth manie things of the Priuiledges giuen by Christ to S. Peter The Centurie-writers speaking of the Fathers errours which liued in the fift Age playnly and at large confesse (39] Cent. 5. col 774. that In this fift Age the Roman Bishops applyed themselues to get and establish dominion ouer other Churches So they acknowledge that Pope Celestin of whom (40) In his Defence p. 588. D. Whitguift sayth He was a godly Bishop gaue priuiledge of vsing the Title of Pope and the Miter to Ciril of Alexandria whom he had substituted in his place to be President in the Councel of Ephesus He is also charged by M. Carthwright (41) In his 2. Reply part 1. p. 512. to haue claymed superioritie ouer al Churches taking vpon him as it were the name of Vniuersal Bishop (42) Cent. 5. col 1246. Osiander affirmeth that He contended in behalf of the Roman Churches Primacie more impudently then did his Predecessours (43) Cent. 5. col 1285. Nestorius the Heretick then Bishop of Constantinople he allotted ten dayes space to repent which if he did not he should not only be excommunicated but his name should be blotted out of the Catalogue of Priests And for the accomplishment of the premises he made Cyril of Alexandria his Legat. The Centurists (44) Cent. 5. col 778. charge the Popes of those times that They vsurped to themselues power of commanding other Bishops that whom they would and should propose in forraine Churches they might ordayne Bishop or whom they would not haue might depose So Celestin in his Epistle to Cyril of Alexandria and Iohn of Antioch and Rufus of Thessalonica commandeth them that they designe Proclus Bishop at Constantinople D. Raynolds affirmeth that the (45) Conference p. 457. Popes of the Second Three hundred yeares after Christ claymed some Soueraintie ouer Bishops And that (46) Ib. p. 383. Sozimus Boniface Celestin did vsurp ouer the churches of Africk while S. Austine was aliue c. (47) Ib. p. 544. They would haue Bishops and Elders appeale to Rome
S. Gregorie (36) See before l. 2. c. 4. for his Predecessours Pelagius Celestine Leo Gelasius Sixtus Siricius Innocentius Sozimus Damasus Iulius Steuen Dionisius Victor c. yea S. Peter himself are al of them reproued by Protestant Writers for the foresayd Primacie So confessed it is that the Primacie of the Roman Church did not first begin in the time of S. Gregorie Now whereas D. White further added that the whole Greek Church complayned when Phocas had first conferred it on Boniface that their complaint supposing it for true is nothing material for they being as then diuided in this poynt from the Roman Church assuming to themselues the sayd Primacie their testimonie in their owne Cause is of no account But neither is it true that Phocas did first conferre it on Boniface for though he did by his Edict declare that the Roman Church was the Head of al Churches as testify S. Bede and others (37) l. de Sex Aetatibus in Phoca Ado in Chron. Paulus Diacon l. 18. de Rebus Roman yet is there no intimation that he first bestowed it yea further they affirme that the reason of the sayd Edict was the pride of the Bishops of Constantinople who iniuriously styling themselues vniuersal Bishops and contemning the Excommunications denounced against them by S. Gregorie Pelagius the Emperour therefore thought it necessarie to interpose his owne authoritie which the Grecians much more feared And he is so free from innouating in this Cause that besides the late premisses of the ancientest Popes euer claiming the same Iustinianus (38) Ep. ad Ioann 2. the elder ancient to Phocas by 70. yeares affirmeth the Roman Church to be Head of al Churches And Valentinian who preceded Phocas 140. yeares auoucheth that the Roman Bishop hath euer had the Principalitie of Preisthood aboue al others Yea in fullest satisfaction hereof it is plainly cōfessed by Protestants thēselues that Constantin our first Christian Emperour elder to Phocas almost 300. yeares (39) Before l. 2. c. 4. attributed Primacie to the Roman Bishop before al. So free was Phocas from first conferring Primacie to the Roman Church and so cleerly she resteth acquitted of these pretended Changes Innouations in the first 50. yeares After 650. 650. to 700. I name sayth D. White the Sixt general Councel decreing the marriage of Priests against the Church of Rome labouring to restraine it for which he citeth Can. 13. But the truth is there are not anie such Canons in the Councel cited for the true Sixt General Councel put forth no Canons as it is euident by the Seauenth (40) Act. 4. 5. Synod Wherefore after the Sixt Synode certaine Bishops assembled at Constantinople who in the Emperour Iustini●n the Second his Pallace called Trullum published those Canons vnder the name of the sixt Synode which were neuer approued by anie Roman Bishop but to the contrarie then contradicted by Pope Sergius (41) Beda l. de Sex Aetatibus in Iustiniano Caulus Diacon l. 8. c. 9. de Rebus Rom. But though these Canons were authentical yet litle would they auaile our marrying Ministers not one of them allowing anie Clergie-man to marry after Orders taken and only permitting such to keepe their wiues as had them before they were of the Clergie and neither (42) Can. 6. 12. 48. this do they allow to Bishops but only to others of inferiour Orders Yea the Roman Church is so free from making anie change in this respect at the time prescribed that sundrie (43) Before l. 2. c. 17. Protestants for the self same prohibition of marriage to the Clergie do reproue manie more ancient and confirmed Councels as the 2. Councel of Arles holden in the time of Constantin the Councel of Neocesaraea of Eliberis the first of Nice and sundrie others As also for the same cause they reprehended the ancient Popes Leo Innocentius Calixtus Siricius c. and the learnedst Doctours of those times as S. Hierome S. Ambrose Origen with manie others so that at the time of the 6. Councel of Constantinople no changee at al was made by the Roman Church concerning the Single life of the Clergie But D. White further vrgeth that the sayd ● Councel forbiddeth to make the Holie-Ghost in likenes of a Doue But neither is this true for though it did preferre other Pictures before the Picture of Christ in the figure of a Lambe and the Picture of Holie-Ghost in forme of a Doue yet doth it not condemne these (45) Act. 5. And in the 7. Synod 44 the Image of the Holie-Ghost in forme of Doue is expresly approued Yea therin was also read the Epistle of Adrian to Tharasius in which it is sayd that in the 6. Synod was commended the Image of Christ in forme of a Lambe And that the Roman Church long before those times allowed Images it is euident enough by that which is before sayd concerning Serenus But our Doctour yet vrgeth that at this time there was a Councel holden in Portugal where the Cup is appointed to be ministred to the people against the practise of some that vsed to dip the bread and so to giue it which was one begining of the half Communion But this Councel being the third Councel of (45) Can. 1. Brach did iustly forbid that dipping in that it was neither so instituted by Christ nor could be confirmed by anie testimonie or example from Scripture yet doth it not command both kinds to be giuen And though it had yet were the obiecting thereof impertinent seing as then it was free lawful to vse both kinds Now that Cōmunion vnder one kind was sometimes vsed in much more ancient Ages it might easily be proued by Sozomene (46) Hist l. 8. c. 5. Niceph. hist l. 13. c. 7. Hieron Apol. pro l. in Iouin Cypr. Serm. de lapsis Tertul. l. 2. ad vxor Clem. Al. l. 1. strom 700. Nicephorus S. Hierome S. Cyprian Tertullian and others So that D. Whites Examples for the Roman Churches change in this 50. yeares are altogeather friuolous After 700. to 750. I name saith M. White the General Councel of Constantinople vnder Leo Isaurus against Images This Councel was neuer confirmed but reiected for none of the Patriarchs were present S. German only excepted who would not consent therevnto and thereupon was depriued of his Sea of Constantinople Wherefore this only proueth that some of the Grecians changed their Faith concerning Images for which they were contradicted not only by the Latin Church but by sundrie also of the greatest Doctours of the Greek Church In this Age also he nameth Clemens Scotus and Adelbartus who saith he preached against the Supremacie Traditions Images and in the defence of Priests marriage also against Purgatorie Masses for the dead c. And al this he proueth only by one of his lawful witnesses his Protestant Brother Illiricus which being wholy destitute of al other Authoritie I may lawfully forebeare it al further
is so copiously preached by vs that truly in the Apostles time it was not so cleare And seing 48) Tom 2. lib. Cont. Reg. Angliae f. 344. God's word is aboue al the Diuine Maiestie maketh for me So that I passe not if 100. Austins 1000. Cyprians 1000. King Harrie 's Churches stood against me Wherefore 49) Lib. de Seruo Arb. And see Cnoglerus his Symbolatria p. 152. Cast you off what armour the ancient Orthodoxal Fathers shal afford or the schooles of Diuines the authoritie of Councels Bishops the consent of so manie Ages of al Christian People we receiue nothing but Scriptures but yet so that the infallible authoritie of interpreting is only in vs what we expound that the Holy-Ghost thinketh what others though great though manie bring it commeth from the spirit of Sathan and a mind distracted Yea the Pope 50) L. aduersus Papatum Romae à Satana fundatum f. 1. knoweth saith Luther that by the singular guift and bountie of God I am more learned in the Scriptures then himself and al his Asses But if Luther himself doth so fully mouthe his owne prayses and deserts we may presume his disciples and followers are not sparing in the like And so indeed writeth Alberus 51) Contra Carolostadianos l. 7. I doubt not but that if Austin were now liuing he would not be ashamed to professe himself Martin Luther's Scholler But Musculus lasheth far further for 52) Praef. in Libellum Ger. de Diaboli Tyramide since the Apostles times saith he there liued not in the world a greater then Luther And it may be sayd that God powred al his guifts vpon this only man and that there is as great difference betwixt the ancient Doctours and Luther as betwixt the light of the Sunne and of the Moone Neither is it to be doubted but that the ancient Fathers euen those that are chief and best among them as Hilarie and Austin if they had liued and taught in the same time with Luther would without blushing haue carried the lanterne before him as his Schollers or Ministers And another professeth that 53) In Hos in Hist Sacra part alt f. 346. He preferreth one leaf in Luther before the writings of al Fathers So that if we beleeue either Luther or his Schollers not only Austin and Hilarie and Ambrose but euen al the Fathers since the Apostles times must giue place to Luther in regard of his profoundest knowledge and learning But not only Luther himself thus far excelleth the ancient Fathers but in his opinion the onlie 54) In Col. mensa c. de Patribus Eccl. Apologie of Philip Melancthon doth far excel al the Doctours of the Church and exceed euen Austin himself Beza in like sort affirmeth 55) Praef. in nouum Testament dicat Principi Condiensi Caluin to haue far exceeded al the ancient and later writers in interpreting of the Scriptures wth varietie of words and allegation of reasons Yea saith he 56) Epist Theol. ep 1 p. 5. I haue been accustomed to say and not without cause as I take it that whilst I compare those verie times next the Apostles with our times they had then more conscience lesse knowledge And on the other side we haue now more knowledge and lesse conscience This is my opinion c. Agreably herevnto saith D. Whiteguift in his 57) Defence c. p. 472. Brief Comparison between the Protestants Bishops of our time and the Bishops of Primitiue Church The doctrine taught and professed by our Bishops at this day is much more perfect and sound then it commonly was in anie Age after the Apostles times 58) Ibid. p. 473. Surely you are not able to reckon in anie Age since the Apostles time anie company of Bishops that taught and held so perfect and sound doctrine in al poynts as ●he Bishops of England do at this time Yea in the truth of doctrine our Bishops be not only comparable with the old Bishops but in many degrees to be preferred before them In like sort saith Zanchius 59) De Sacra Scriptura p. 411. Christ hath now giuen to vs more excellent Interpreters then euer heretofore stnce the Apostles Yea saith M. Iacob 60) Defence of Treatise of Christ's sufferings p. 146. And see the Answ to Downham's sermon p. 20. this is the profit that comes by ordinarie flanting with the Fathers c. if in this case we were to looke after anie man surely we haue more cause to regard our late faithful teachers rather then those of old who being equal with the best of them in anie of the excellent graces of God's Spirit c. By which we may see the smal account made by Protestants of ancient Doctours not blushing thus to equal yea much to preferre their owne latest Writers before al the Fathers since the Apostles times But what should I vrge thus much their dislike disclaiming and disgracing of ancient Fathers when they spare not to reiect and contemne the authoritie of al Councels though neuer so general neuer so ancient And first doth not Luther affirme in general 61) In Asser Articulorum per Leonem X. damnat Art 29. That the way is made to vs Protestants of weakning the authoritie of Councels and of freely contradicting their decrees and of iudging their Acts and of confessing confidently whatsoeuer seemeth true to Protestants whether it be approued or reproued by anie Councel Doth not Beza affirme that 62) Praef. in nouum Testam ad Princ. C ndiens euen in the best times the ambition ignorance and lewdnes of Bishops was such that the verie blind may easily perceaue how that Sathan was president in their assemblies or Councels Doth not D. Humfrey disclaime from the Councels celebrated in the first 600. years saying 63) De vita Iuelli p. 212. What concerneth it vs what the false Synods of Bishops as then shal ordayne And doth not M. Carthwright reiect as erroneous euen the first Nycene Councel saying 64) 2. Reply part 1. p. 509. We haue good cause to hould for suspect whatsoeuer either in gouernment or doctrine those times left vnto vs not confirmed by substantial proofs out of the Word c. This appeareth in the first Councel of Nyce where the most errours decreed vpon c. besides the vngodlie custome which may appeare to haue occupyed almost al the Churches touching the forbidding of the second Marriage of Ministers before that Councel And againe 65) Ibid. p. 484. In the same Councel appeareth that to those chosen to the Ministerie vnmarried it was not lawful to take anie wife afterwards c. Paphnutius sheweth that not only this was before that Councel but was an ancient Tradition in the Church in which both himself and the whole Councel rested c. If the ancient Tradition of the Church saith Cartwright cannot authorize this neither can ancient custome authorize the other to wit of Metropolitans Luther
col 778. And Symondes vpon the Reuel p. 57. likewise charge Pope Sixtus that In his 3. Epistle to the Eastern Bishops and 5. chapter he decreeth that against a Bishop appealing to the Sea Apostolick nothing shal be determined but what the Roman Bishop iudgeth But to omit sundrie other particular Popes (79) In his Tryal of the Popes Title p. 117. M. Bunnie confesseth that Innocentius telleth the Bishops of Macedonia that they should haue regard to the Church of Rome as to their Head and that it is wronged because they did not at first yeald to his Iudgement c. The Bishops of Rome gaue also out Decrees which they would bind al to obserue as appeareth in Siricius and Innocentius It sauoureth of too great arrogancie that Sozimus threatneth seueritie if anie despise the Apostolick authoritie So did Leo what should I seek to speak of euerie one their owne Decretals do sufficiently beare witnes Yea it is acknowledged in general (80) Cent. 5. col 778. that the Popes of this fift Age ordayned and required that in the causes of Bishops it might be lawful to appeale to them as is manifest by the Acts of the 6. Carthage Councel And (81) In his Def. p. 342. D. Whitguift auoucheth that It is certaine that then Viz. in the time of the Carthage and African Councels the Bishops of Rome began at least to clayme Superioritie ouer al Churches Now the Councel of Carthage was assembled about Anno 419. and the African Anno 423. Yea it is granted by (82) In his second Reply part 1. p. 510. VVhitguift in his Def. p 344 Sarauia de diuersis gradibus c. p. 493. M. Carthwright and other Protestant Writers that the Councel of Chalcedon whose authoritie is established to our Aduersaries by Act of Parlament Anno 1. Elisabeth c. 1. did offer the name of vniuersal Bishop to the Bishop of Rome And hence it is that the Centurists (83) Cent. 5. col 774. affirme of these ancient Roman Bishops that They had flatterers who affirmed that without permission of the Roman Bishop none might vndertake the person of a Iudge (84) Cent. 5. col 775. Who then likewise auerred that Antiquitie had attributed the Principalitie of Priesthood to the Roman Bishop aboue al. And accordingly that Turbius Asturiensis flattered Pope Leo and acknowledged his superioritie And wheras Theodoret speaking of the Roman Sea sayth That holy Sea hath the Gouernment of al the Churches of the world M. Iewel findeth no better answer hereto then to say (85) Art 4. Diu. 21. That man naturally aduanceth his power at whose hands he seeketh help As though Theodoret would giue an Antichristian Title for so Protestants account it for auarice or S. Leo would accept it for flatterie Thus much as touching those Fathers and Bishops who liued in the Fift Age after Christ and their confessed testimonies of the Iurisdiction really executed by the Popes of those times not only ouer their Neighbour Churches and Bishops in Italie but ouer remote Countries and the other greatest Archbishops and Patriarcks of the world as of Antioch Hierusalem Alexandria and Constantinople and by them then accordingly acknowledged and obeyed To come now to the Fathers that liued in the Age precedent which is the time wherin Constantin the Great liued although the Church began as then but as it were to take breath from her former long endured persecutions whereby neither her Writers were so manie nor her face of outward Gouernment so knowne as in the times succeeding Yet is there not wanting euen for that time sufficient confessed testimonie in this kind In this Age liued Pope Damasus a man for vertue and learning so highly deseruing as that (86) Decades in English on the page next before the first Decade Bullinger not only calleth him Blessed Damasus Bishop of Rome c. but withal setteth downe the Imperial Decree of the Emperours Gratian Valentinian and Theodosius for the embracing of the Religion taught by Damasus and Peter of Alexandria (87) In his Def. c. p 345 M. Whiteguift confesseth that Damasus was a Vertuous Learned and Godlie Bishop (88) The Estate of the Church p. 137. And Crispinus reporteth how much he was esteemed of by Hierom Athanasius and Nazianzen This so much esteemed a Pope for learning and vertue is charged by M. Cartwright (89) In his Reply part 1. p. 502. to speak in the Dragons voice when he shameth not to write that the Bishop of Romes Sentence was aboue al other to be attended for in a synod Crispinus (90) The Estate of the Church p 137. chargeth Damasus that he was too much giuen to eleuate the Dignitie of his Sea For sayth he he begimeth his sayd Epistle to them of Constantinople In the Reuerence deare children which you owe to the Apostolick Sea you do much for your selues c. (91) Vpon the Reuel c. 5. p. 54. and See Cent. 4. col 550 M. Symondes acknowledgeth that Damasus wrote to the Councels of Africk that the Iudgement of the causes of Bishops and al other Matters of great importance may not be determined but by the authoritie of the Apostolick Sea And wheras Socrates l. 4. c. 30. reporteth that Peter Patriarch of Alexandria being thence expulsed by the Arians was vpon his iourney and request to Damasus Bishop of Rome and returne from thence which Damasus his letters restored and confirmed thereby in his Sea of Alexandria This same Historie is acknowledged by the (92) Cent. 4. col 1367. col 532. Centurists And M. Bunnie (93) In his Tryal of the Popes Title p. 117. acknowledgeth that Damasus in his 4. Epistle to Prosper and other Bishops of Numidia commandeth them that in al doubtful matters they referre themselues to him as to the Head c. Siricius taketh vpon him to threaten to pronounce Sentence against such as wil do otherwise then he would haue them So firme was Damasus in defence and execution of the Popes Primacie In this same Age liued also Pope Iulius of whō (94) In his 2. Reply par 1. p. 510. M. Carthwright writeth Iulius Bishop of Rome sayth it was decreed by the Lawes of the Church and immediatly after the Nicen Councel that the Bishop of Rome must be called to the Sinod and that that was voyd which was done there besides his Sentence (95) De Conciliis quest 2. p. 42. 43. 44. D. Whitaker relating the Ecclesiastical Canon of those times wherby it was decreed That no Councel should be celebrated without the sentence of the Bishop of Rome confesseth further that Iulius challenged to himself the like authoritie And wheras Bellarmin doth obiect this example of Iulius and other Bishops of Rome alleaging this Canon (96) Resp ad Bellarm. part 1. p. 595. Danaeus his onlie answear is that this obiection is of no moment because it is produced from the testimonie of a Roman Bishop that is
(161) Cent. 4. col 549. And see Carthwright in Wh●tguift Def. p 700. See Osiand cent 4. p. 477. Amādus Polanus Symphonia p 841. 849. And as the Fathers were thus direct and ful for the Bishop of Romes Primacie so did they answerably reiect al pretended spiritual Primacie in anie temporal Magistrate So the Centurie-writers confesse that Emperours assumed to themselues vnseasonably the iudgement of matters of Faith which thing Athanasius reprehendeth in Constantius Ambrose in Valentinian Yea (162) Of the Estate of the Churcb p. 99 Crispinus confesseth that our first Christian Emperour Constantin sayd God hath ordayned you Bishops and hath giuen you power to iudge of yourselues by meanes wherof we yeeld ourselues to your iudgement Men may not iudge you but God alone Yea (163) Ibid. p. 93 And see the Abridgement of Fox his Acts Mon. p 67. Crispinus further acknowledgeth that he gaue power vnto Clerks for to appeale from Ciuil Magistrats to Bishops And others (164) In the sayd Abridgement p. 66 grant that He freed them from al manner of publick duties and burdens As also that (165) Napper vpon the Reu●l p. 145. He subdued al Christian Churches to Pope Syluester And (166) Frigiuilleus Ganuius in his Palma Christ p. 35. Attributed Primacie to the Roman Bishop before al. And such was his respect to Ecclesiastical Gouernours as that the Centurists (167) Cent. 4 col 4●0 relate that It is knowne what reuerence and obseruance he had to Bishops in the Councel of Nyce where he would not sit downe vntil the Bishops willed him And then as 168) Chron. p. 274. And Lubbertus de Concilijs Carion reporteth Constantin sate downe on a lower Seat amongst the Bishops So far was this most renowned and Christian Prince from challenging to himself Supremacie in causes Ecclesiastical The Centurists (169) Cent. 5. col 663. doe acknowledge and recite Pope Innocentius his Epistle to Arcadius the Emperour and his wife who were aduerse to Chrysostom and took part with Theophilus where he thus writeth I the least of al and a Sinner hauing yet the Throne of the Great Apostle Peter committed to me do separate and remoue thee and her from receiuing the immaculate Mysteries of Christ our God And euerie Bishop or anie other of the Clergie which shal presume to minister or giue to you those holy mysteries after the time that you haue read the present letters of my bound pronounce them voyd of their dignitie c. Arsacius whom you placed in the Bishop-like Throne in Chrysostoms roome though he be dead we depose and command that his name be not written in the role of Bishops In like manner we depose al other Bishops who deliberatly haue communicated with him c. To the deposing of Theophilus we adde Excommunication c. From hence then it appeareth that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church not only denyed euen to the greatest Emperours al pretended Supremacie in Ecclesiastical matters but that also Constantin himself disclaymed from the same and when other Emperours offended against the Church the same Church spared not to punish them for the same The premisses likewise do most fully conuince that the Primitiue Church neuer thought anie Pope or succession of Popes to be Antichrist But contrarie to Protestants making al Popes for manie hundred yeares past to be Antichrists it is confessed by D. Whitaker (170) l. De Antichristo p. 21. that The Fathers for the most part thought that Antichrist should be but one man but in that sayth he as in manie other things they erred either because they yeelded too much to the common opinion concerning Antichrist or because they waighed not the Scriptures so diligently as they ought And as M. Whitaker forsooth hath done M. Carthwright's (171) In his 2. Reply part 1. p. 508. See Gracerus his Historia Antichristi p. 11. censure is that Diuers of the ancient and the chiefest of them imagined fondly of Antichrist as of one singular Person And as for the time of his coming and continuance M. Fox (172) In Apoc. c. 12 p. 345. acknowledgeth that Almost al the holie and learned Interpreters doe by a Time Times and halfe a Time vnderstand only Three yeares and a halfe And (173) In Apoc. c. 13. p. 362. that this is the consent opinion of almost al the ancient Fathers Bullinger (174) In Reuel c. 11. ser 46. f. 142 auoucheth that Doubtlesse al Expositours grounding themselues vpon this Text haue attributed to the Kingdome of Antichrist and to his most cruel persecutions no more then Three yeares and a halfe This shortest time of Antichrists raigne was so cleerly the Doctrine beleef of the ancient Fathers that D. Morton for his truest answere confesseth the same reprouing them al of Errour saying (175) Prot. Appeal l 2. p. 144. Why might not these Fathers be sayd to haue erred in prefining the time of Antichrist who haue been thus farr ouerseen in reporting his Tribe So confessedly do the Fathers cleer al our Popes from being Antichrists (176) Of the Church 9. p. 286 Philip Mornay proueth at large that Antichrist is not to come during the continuance of the Roman Empire in which behalf he alleadgeth the agreable Sayings of S. Ambrose Hierom Austin Chrysostom and S. Paul By al which it is most euident that in the opinion of the ancient Fathers Antichrist is to be but one man and the continuance of his Raigne to be Three yeares and a halfe before the ending of the world before which the Roman Empire must cease To reuiew then the truest harmonie between the Primitiue and our present Roman Church in this principal Controuersie concerning the Popes Supremacie in Causes Spiritual and Ecclesiastical The Fathers and Bishops as then taught First that the Bishop of Rome was S. Peters successour and that this Succession was not anie humane or Synodical Constitution but euen the ordinance of God himself Secondly that therfore Popes might Exercise their Iurisdiction Primacie ouer al Churches Thirdly And so accordingly they did ordaine Excommunicate depose restore and cite other forraine Bishops Archbishops Fourthly they placed their Legats or Vicars in other Countries to end smaller matters reseruing the greater causes to thēselues Fiftly Appeales were made to them from al Christian Kingdomes Six●ly and they not only had power to cal General Councels but they also appoynted Presidents in the same Yea Councels were then so subiect vnto them as that no Councel was holden lawful which was not assembled approued by their authoritie Seauenthly Princes Emperours were subiect to their Spiritual Censures And yet no Father Bishop or King of those times did euer traduce anie one of those Popes with that fowlest note or stayne of Antichrist Now the ancient holie Doctours and Bishops which are here acknowledged and reproued for the foresayd seueral poynts and priuiledges of the Popes Primacie are Gregorie Pelagius Celestin
one litle part or other but Apostasie hath auerted the whole bodie from Christ By which it appeareth that euen at these first beginnings of Luther not only one member or parcel but euen the whole bodie of Christianitie was auerted from Protestancie the Church of Protestants as then not being being knowne to haue the least Being in the smalest parcel or member of the same bodie The like obscuritie or nullitie of the Protestant Church at Wicclifs first reuolt from the Catholick Faith is confessed by (22) Act. mon p. 85. M. Fox in these wordes Out of al doubt al the world was in a desperate and vile estate and lamentable ignorance and darkenes of Gods truth had ouershaddowed the whole earth when Iohn Wiccliffe stepped forth as the morning starre in the midst of a cloud And againe (23.‖ Act. mon p 391. In times of horrible darkenes when there seemed in a manner to be no one so litle sparke of pure Protestant doctrine left or remaining Wiccliffe by Gods prouidence rose vp through whom the Lord would first awaken and raise vp againe the world c. ‖24‖ Estate of the Church p. 418. Crispinus also auoucheth that Ihon Wiccliffe beganne as from a deepe night to draw out the truth of the doctrine of the Sonne of God And D. ‖25‖ Vita Iuelli p 263 Humfrey affirmeth that Ihon Wiccliffe in these last times was almost the first Trumpeter of this Ghospel In so much that ‖26.‖ Cent. 9. 10. 11. p. 439. Osiander confesseth that he as then had not so much as anie Companions of that time brotherly to admonish him So assured we may rest that at Wiccliffs time the Protestant Church was ouershaddowed with horrible darkenes not so much as one litle spark of pure Protestancie appearing in the world But yet neither was Wiccliffe himself Protestant for besides his sundrie Catholick opinions before proued it is testifyed of Wiccliffe to the contrarie by Melancthon ‖k‖ Ep. 〈◊〉 Frider. micō inter ep Suinglii p. 612. saying I haue looked into Wiccliffe who maketh a great ado about this Controuersie of the Eucharist but I haue found manie other errours in him by which we may iudge of his Spirit surely he neither vnderstood nor held the Iustice of Faith which onlie point is so necessarie to the Saluation of Protestants that Luther sayth therof ‖l‖ Praefat. Ep. ad Gal. If article of Iustification by onlie Faith be once lost then is al true Christian doctrine lost And as manie as hold not that doctrine are Iewes Turkes Papists or Hereticks Againe by this only doctrine the Church is built and in this it consisteth ‖m‖ In c. 1. ad Gal. If we neglect the article of Iustification we loose al togeather For ‖n‖ In c. 2. ad Gal. it is the principal article of al Christian doctrine al other articles are comprehended in it It is the foundation sayth M. ‖o‖ Act. mon p. 840 Fox of al Christianitie and the ‖p‖ Ibid. p. 770. only origin of our Saluation It is the ‖q‖ Tovver Desp soule of the Church sayth D. Chark Now this soule foundation principal Article of Protestancie Wiccliffe did not beleeue Yea such were the demerits of Wiccliffe that D. ‖r‖ Antiqu. l 2. p. 268. Caius obiecteth him to the Oxonians as a disgrace to their Vniuersitie And Melancthon censureth him to haue been ‖s‖ Loc. com Tit de Pot. Eccl. A mad man and sundrie his grosse errours and Paradoxes condemned both by Catholicks and Protestants wil discouer hereafter so litle cause haue the Protestants to appeale to Wiccliffe for the continuance of their Church in his time Now as concerning Waldo 27‖ Estate of the Church p. 338. Crispinus confesseth Waldo his beginning to haue been in time of thick darkenes and as a first little begining of the instauration of Christian Religion But whereas Father Campian Rat. 3. affirmeth that the Protestants cannot for manie Ages togeather giue exāple so much as of anie one Cittie village or house professing their doctrine ‖28‖ Resp. ad rat Cāpiani rat 3 p. 48. D. Whittaker coming to answer thy very point telleth in general that in the worst times manie Faithful were found and that all Histories do witnesse this But being prouoked to giue particular instance out of anie one Historie either of time or person he becometh mute affirming in the same place directly to the contrarie that In the times of the Apostles al Churches al Citties al Townes al Families embraced the same Religion which we Protestants professe Afterwards by litle and litle the purritie of doctrine began to be corrupted and much superstition more and more to be spred abroad to which yet the most holie Fathers resisted what they could vntil that mysterie of iniquitie which tooke roote euen in the Apostles Age went through al the partes of the Church and so at last possessed the whole Church So true it is that for manie Ages togeather insteed of anie Instance of the Protestant Churches being Popish pretended superstition possessed euen the whole Church But some may say the Protest Churches inuisibilitie for these last 1000. yeares is a point vndoubted and for such by themselues formerly and fully confessed But it is the Primatiue Church of the first 600. yeares wherein they glory their Church was most splendent knowne and conspicuous Now of al the Ages of the Primitiue Church none is more famous or better knowne or wherein Christian Religion more clearly shined ouer the whole face of the earth then the Age of Constantin whereof say the ‖29‖ Cent. 4 Ep. dedic Reginae Elizabeth Centurists The state of the Church at Constantins time illustrated the whole world with her splendour And D. Morton styleth Constantin himself The ‖a‖ Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 328 great and first Christian Emperour so greatly honoured in the first and most famous Synode of Nice And yet in so great a Sun-shine of Christs true Church it was impossible as then to see a Protestant Chappel for M. ‖30‖ In Apocalyp in his synopsis before the Booke A 1. § 11 Brightman teacheth that the Protestant Church from the times of Constantin for 1260. yeares was hid c. And ‖31‖ Ib A. 2 §. 14. And see p. 383. againe for 1000. yeares from Constantin the was conuersant with Christ in most hidden dens Yea as 32) Ibid. p. 326. then there were no Protestant publick assemblies wherein the Diuine Institutions did wholy flourish So Constantin a sonne of the Church saith he did more hurt then an Enemie As 33) Ibid. p. 577. see p. 341. also the want of publick Religion hath been manie Ages to wit from Constantin the Great to this day al which time Antichrist raigned whilst the Woman the Protestant Church liued in the desert To the same effect sayth M. Napper 34) Vpon the Reuelat. p. 161. From the yeare of Christ 316. God hath withdrawne his
against al the furies of Sathan euen vntil the comming of Christ at the last Iudgement Insomuch as 19) Trast Theol. c. in Refut Errorum Ser. p. 762. Caluin vpon this knowne principle of the Churches Continuance thus vrgeth Seruetus I haue not touched that continual banishment from the earth which he faigneth of the Church in which he playnly argueth God of lying c. He faigneth the Church for 1260. yeares to haue been banished from the world so that Heauen should be her place of exile c. Againe God otherwise should haue lyed who promised a certaine people alwayes to himself as long as the Sun and Moone shal shine in Heauen we know what the Prophets haue in sundrie places testifyed of the eternal kingdome of Christ Do they place the seate therof in the Heauens yea they foretel that our Lord wil shew a far-of her Scepter from Sion wherewith She may rule from the East to the west and her inheritance may be the whole world The Protestant 20) Harm of Confess p. 321. Confession of Belgia teaecheth that there is one Catholick or vniuersal Church c. which as it hath been from the beginning of the world so it shal continue vnto the end therof The which appeareth by this that Christ is our eternal King who can neuer be without subiects And to conclude this holie Church is not situated or limited in anie set or certaine place nor yet bound and tyed to anie certaine and peculiar persons but spread ouer the face of the whole earth c. The Protestant 21) Ibid. p. 306. 307. Confession of Heluetia in the same behalf argueth thus 17) In Osiād cont 16. p. 1064. Forasmuch as God from the beginning would haue men to be saued and to come to the knowledge of truth therfore it is necessarie that alwayes from the beginning at this day to the end of the world there should be a Church c. As also Seing that there is alwayes but one God one Mediatour c it followeth necessarily that there is but one Church which we therfore cal Catholick because it is vniuersal spread abroad through al parts and quarters of the world and reacheth vnto al times and is not limited within the compasse either of time or place But none is more ful heerin then 22) The way to the true Church p. 85. 86. D. white saying we confesse the Church neuer ceaseth to be but continueth alwayes without interruption to the worlds end And that so vniuersally that 23) In his Defence p. 465. D. Whiteguift auoucheth that The Church of Christ is dispersed through the whole world and can not now be shut vp in one Kingdome for that he termeth an impossibilitie 23) In his Defence p. 465. D. Whitaker confesseth of the fore-alleaged Scriptures that The promises of God concerning the largenes and beautie of his Church haue been accomplished And in this regard of the Churches euer continuance and vniuersalitie thus plainly taught by the Scriptures and beleeued by Protestants the holie Apostles in their Creed gaue vnto the Church the Surname of Catholick that is vniuersal for so saith 25) Soueraigne Remedie against S●hisme p. 23. M. Clapham the Church was to enlarge her Tents stretch her Cordes vniuersally through the earth 24) Answ to Raynolds in the Pref. p. 37. for which cause it is called Catholick But now to examine whether the Roman or Protestant Church is this Apostolick Church thus plainly taught by the sacred Scriptures and the acknowledgments of Protestants euer to continue euen from Christs time to the end of the world and that not in one or other particular Nation but euen vniuersally ouer the whole world First concerning the Protestant Church it hath so litle performed the fore-sayd predictions of the Sacred Scriptures for the Churches euer Continuance and Vniuersalitie as that to the contrarie (26) R●sp ad Camp rat 3. p. 48. D. Whitaker confesseth that The Mysterie of iniquitie which took roote in the Apostles times went through al the partes of the Church and at length possessed the whole Church Now if the whole Church of Protestants and al the parts therof were thus possessed with the mysterie of iniquitie what true Church was then left in being or continuing in the world Agreably hereto teacheth (27) In epist Iesuit part alt p. 49. Cannerus we are come to these times which euen exceed the confusion of the Arian furie errour hath possessed not one or other litle part but Apostasie hath auerted the whole bodie from true Christ So that in these times the Protestant Church consisted without a bodie In like sort writeth (28) Vpon the Creed p. 400. M. Parkins we say that before the dayes of Luther for the space of manie hundred yeares an vniuersal Apostacie ouerspred the whole face of the earth Which necessarily inferreth the Protestant Churches not being during the foresayd Apostacie But D. Willet obseruing the certaine discontinuance or not-being of his Church for many former Ages is not ashamed for his best help contrarie to the foresayd Scriptures and his other Brethren boldly to impugne and deny the euer certayne Continuance of Christs Church vpon earth for (29) Synopsis p. 54. thus he sayth A visible Church we desire to be a congregation of men among whom the Word is truly preached and the Sacraments administred Such a Church hath not alwayes been neither can we be assured that it shal be alwayes found vpon the earth c. concluding of the time of Antichrist that then shal the visible Church fayle vpon earth With whom agreeth (30) Answ to a Counterf Cath. p. 79. D. Fulk affirming that the visible Church may become an Adulteresse and be diuorced from Christ And which (31) Answer to a Popish Pamphlet p. 100 M. Woodcock acknowledgeth that Protestāts haue often wanted in their assemblies worshipping of God in the Word Sacraments and Prayer Now from these premisses doth vnauoydably follow the real impugning of the certaine continuance of Christs Church vpon earth for if according to D. Willet here the Churches visibilitie doth consist in administration of Word and Sacraments of which himself saith (32) Synops. p. 71. These markes can not be absent from the Church and it is no longer a true Church then it hath those markes for as he further (33) Ib. p. 69 auoucheth the only absence of them do make a Nullitie of the Church Then if the visible Church may fayle vpon earth who then so dul as discerneth not that by necessarie sequele hereof the true Church may also fayle vpon earth (54) Against M. Raynolds in his Answ to the Pref. p. 33. Directly contrarie to which D. Whitaker sayd before We beleeue that Christs Church shal neuer fayle and we accompt it a prophane Heresie to teach that Christs Catholick Church hath perished from the earth at anie time for this Assertion shaketh the foundation of
Church or rather only seduced and withdrawen from the ancient Catholick Faith by secondarie Innouation As in like resemblance after (29) Math. 13.25 The good seed was sowne in the field the Enemie came and sowed tares among the wheat In which respect Tertulian (30) l. de Prescrip c. 42. sayth excellent wel of al Nouelists that Their Endeauour is not to conuert the Heathen but to ouerthrow ours who are conuerted They glory more to cast those downe who stand then to lift vp those who lye Wherefore Protestants are so farre from conuerting any one Heathen Countrey to Christian beleef that their diuided Church neuer yet before or since Luthers time so much as but passed the Seas with taking hold in anie one Countrey of Asia Africk or America the three greatest knowne parts of the world No Protestant as yet euer being able to giue the least instance of their Church in anie one of al these three parts Yea it remayneth as now though being in its greatest height of encrease so narrowly shut vp or confined within our Northern parts of the world being but an only corner of Europe the fourth and incomparably the least part of al the rest that euen in the farre greater part of this one least part is not so much as anie appearing profession either of Lutherans or Caluinists knowne to be remayning or in being Yea it is most worthie of al diligent obseruation that wheras certaine Protestants haue endeauoured the Conuersion of some Heathen Natiōs the euent was euer such through their owne demerits either of mutual dissentions amongst themselues in matters of Faith Religion or of foule enormous and most scandalous life and conuersation that their trauail and labour was euer spent without fruit and commodity and their returne accompanyed with shame and disgrace In this time is right famous the endeauour made of late times by Caluin the Church of Geneua in their sending Richerus the Caluinist whom (31) In Icon. Beza tearmeth a man of tryed godlines and learning into Gallia Antartica to conuert the Heathens there (32) In Calu. Epist ep 237. But how voyd of al successe it was and that to their lasting discredit is plainly related and confessed by their owne Brethren for first Richerus 32 himself writeth thus vnto Caluin concerning the people of that Country They are ignorant whether there be a God so far are they from keeping his Law or admiring his power and goodnes whereby we are deuoyd of al hope of gayning them to Christ c. But much more fully is this reported by Villegaignon who being then chief Captaine of the French Nauie and one so feruent and forward in planting Protestancie in those Countries that the next day after his arriual he not only as (33) Ibid. p. 438. Richerus mentioneth commanded the Word of God to be publickly preached and the week following the holie Supper of the Lord to be ministred which himself with some of his familie religiously receaued c. but withal gaue certaine yong men to the people of that Nation to be instructed in their Language that so they might afterwards preach vnto them This so zealous a Ghospeller (34) Epist before his book intituled Les Propositions Contētienses c. written after his Returne from Gallia Antarctica relateth the bad successe and cause therof in these words Christian Reader M. Iohn Caluin vnderstanding that I was gone to Brasile with intent to plant the Faith there moued with the old acquaintance had between vs sent vnto me as wel in his owne as in the name of the whole Cittie of Geneva certaine Ministers of his Religion the best learned that could be found with certaine crafts-men in their companie wel furnished with al such books as Caluin had written or anie other which might serue for their people As they passed by Paris certaine other Protestants ioyned with them and among the rest a reuolted Iacobin named Iohn Comtate a man of prompt and subtil wit These men coming to Brasile adorned themselues with a faire Title calling themselues The Reformed Church By reason wherof they were of me receaued with al possible curtesie hoping they would haue been profitable to me in my enterprise But whē they began to execute their fūction I then found they had vsurped a wrōg Title c. They agreed not amōg themselues nor continued long in their owne doctrine but as they learned euerie day so they stil added something thereto The Iacobin would follow a doctrine by himself vndertaking to defend and publish the Confession of Augusta and without dissimulation to impugne the Doctrine of Caluin wherby the contention among them grew so great that no other remedie could be had but by sending away one of the Ministers of Geneua But Villegaignon himself discerning through their mutual disagreements and inordinate accomplished (35) See Launay En la Replique Chrestienne l 2. c. 16. f 251. And Villegaignō aduers Art Richeri l. 1. c. 90. lusts not to be named the whole action of conuerting that Countrey to be frustrated receiued thereupon sufficient motiue to abandon their Religion To the same effect it is reported by D. Philip Nicolai (36) Cōmēt de Regno Christi l. 1. p. 395. that the French men hauing for their Captayne Nicolas Villegaignon being happily arriued in Brasile through fatal mis-fortune and dissension lost their Regiment and Castle built therin being cast out by the Spaniards As in like sort afterwards when with a new Armie they came to Florida Iohn Ribautius being their Captaine c. The English also Forbisher being Captayne opened the Northern side of the new world but they returned home c. And of the bad successe of this Sir Martin Forbisher other English in the Conuersion of the remote Northern Nations M. Hacklute 37) Voy●ges Discoueries c. p. 680. writeth thus The euents do shew that either Gods cause hath not been chiefly preferred by them or els God hath not permitted so abundant grace as the light of his Word and knowledge of him to be yet reuealed to those Infidels before the appoynted time And wheras some Protestants in Germanie did insinuate with the Church of Greece writing to the Patriarch in this humble manner with title of Direction (38) Acta Theol. Witemb Patria● hae Con●tantin c. p. 2. To the most Holie and Oecumenical Patriarch the Lord Hieremie Archbishop of Constantinople of New Rome a pious Lord And renewing againe (39) Ibid. p. 144. the same Direction in steed of Pious Lord they adde our most Reuerend Lord (40) Ib. p. 4 Concluding with farewel most Holy Lord c. and vouchsafing vs pardon and receiuing vs fauourably into thy Fatherlie care c. with much more insinuating submission and desire of Communion with him Al this yet notwithstanding after much conference writing and labour in vanie spent the Patriarch reiected them as most vnworthie (41) Ibid.
the longest Continuance and greatest Antiquitie is a Popish Argument And the Doctrine of the Pope or Church of Rome was so timely working as that it was in being euen in the Apostles dayes For our Conclusion then we haue it here confessed that euer since the time of Constantin and Pope Siluester which contayneth some 1300 yeares al Popes and the Church of Rome haue been so agreable in Doctrine and Faith with our Present Pope and Church that therefore they are al censured for Antichrists Rome for Babylon the imagined Protestant Church during the same time not hauing anie one visible member in the world And not only this but that euen our first Christian Emperours are reproued by Protestants in regard of their very Religion and their honouring and defending of the foresayd Popes And as for the Roman Churches continuance from Christs time vntil the Raygne of Constantin it is plentifully acknowledged that as she was founded by the Apostles so she continued in the doctrine of the Apostles euen vntil the verie times of S. Augustin who flourished almost 100. yeares after Constantin in so much as during al the sayd time the verie Succession of Roman Bishops is granted by Protestants to haue been a good proof of the true Faith And wheras S. Austins Rule of making al such Doctrine truly Apostolical as hath no knowne beginning since the Apostles is approued and applauded by the learnedst Protestants yet themselues likewise confesse that the allowance of this Rule is the opening of a window to bring in al Poperie so truly Apostolical is the Doctrine of Papists Adde lastly that the Antiquitie of our present Papistrie is confessedly no lesse gray-headed then the times of S. Paul and the other Apostles and the continuance therof euer since such as that perusing Councels Fathers and Stories from the Apostles we stil find the print of the Popes feet Now my kindest Aduocats in this so important a Plea are no other then Caluin Suinglius Zanchius Danaeus Beza Winckelmanus Sebastianus Francus Rhegius Brocard Brightman Leigh Napper Parkins Whitaker Powel Fulk Raynolds Ridley Iewel Bunnie Carthwright Parker Field Whitguift Fotherbie Willet Midleton and Morton al of them Protestant Writers and men much renowned by their other Brethren A FVRTHER PROOF OF THE PRESENT ROMAN Religions Continuance from the Apostles times to these dayes is taken from the Christian belief of the Indians Armenians Grecians Brittans al of them Conuerted in the dayes of the Apostles CHAPTER VI. IT is recorded by sundrie Historiographers and acknowledged for most true by the learnedst Protestants that manie Heathen Nations were conuerted by the Apostles themselues to the Faith of Christ whereof peculiar instance is giuen of India Armenia Graecia Britanie c. The Conuersion of India is confessed by (1) Cent. 1. p. 37. Osiander and (2) Comment de Regno Christi p. 45. Nicolaus Phillippi affirmeth S. Thomas to haue been their first Apostle Chemnitius (3) Exam. part 2. p. 7. teacheth that S. Bartholomew preached the Ghospel to the Armenians And as for the Conuersion of Greece it clearly appeareth by Saint Pauls Epistles to sundrie of that Nation as to the Corinthians Ephesians Thessalonians and by the Apocalypse chap. 1. vers 11. Now as concerning the first Conuersion of Britanie it was so vndoubtedly Apostolick as that (4) Britannia c. p. 40. M. Cambden auoucheth that It is certayne that the Brittans receiued the Christian Religion in the verie infancie of the Church In proof wherof he there alleageth sundrie ancient Authorities (5) Ibid. p. 157. And See M. Hal in his Apologie against the Brovvnists p. 58. Further also teaching that in Britannie flourished the Monasterie of Glassenburie which taketh its ancient beginning from Ioseph of Arimathia c. for this the ancientest Monuments of this Monasterie do testify c. Neither is there cause why we should doubt thereof In like sort sayth (6) Description of Britanie annexed vnto Holinshead c. v. 1. p. 23. M. Harison That Ioseph preached here in England in the Apostles times his Sepulchre yet in Glassenburie and Epitaph affixed thereto is proof sufficient (7) Remedie against Schisme p. 24. M. Henoch Clapham is so confident of the Britans conuersion in the Apostles times as that he auoucheth that our Schismatikes may aswel ask me what assurance I haue there was a King Henrie as demand what assurance I haue of the other (8) Against Rhem. Test in 2. Cor. 12. fol. 316. D. Fulk thefore calleth them The Catholick Brittans with whom Christian Religion had continued in succession since the Apostles times This then supposed that al the former Countries were conuerted to Christianitie by Christ his Apostles and disciples themselues The next point to be examined is whether the sayd Faith and Religion which as then they learned receaued and beleeued and which for sundrie succeding Ages they practised and professed is more agreable to the present Roman or Protestant Faith And first as concerning the Indians (9) Comment de Regno Christi l. 1. p. 45. 46. D. Philippus Nicolai relateth that India in sundrie places is inhabited by them in great number who receiued the doctrine of the Ghospel from S. Thomas the Apostle c. vpon the seauenth day according to our custome they meete in the Churches that they may be present at the Sacrifices heare Sermons they vse in their Sacrifices wine made of dryed Grapes giuing bread they not only giue the bodie of Christ but also by drinking of the consecrated Chalice they giue his bloud hauing before made confession of their sinnes c. At the entrance of the church like vnto the Papists they are sprinkled with holie water with the same rite and the same religion they burie the dead c. praying vnto Christ for their eternal Saluation c. The Priests are so shauen vpon the head that they haue vpon the crowne the Image of the Crosse Amongst them there are Societies of Monks and companies of Sacred Virgins shut vp in seueral houses Chastitie is kept by al them with a great desire of honestie abstinence and religion c. They strictly obserue the fasts of Aduent and Lent c. And In the honour of S. Thomas they keep a Festiual day Yea he further writeth (10) Ibid. p. 64. of the remote Cataians of India that they haue their chappels in which for the safetie of their Marchants trauayling in strang countries Sacrifice is offred with Popish ceremonies and Masses Now by this testimonie of so learned a Protestant it appeareth that the Indian Christians first conuerted by S. Thomas retayne yet and practise these Catholick poynts of Faith The real presence of Christs Bodie and Bloud in the Eucharist Confession of sinnes before Receiuing Sprinkling with holie water prayer for the dead Shauing Priestes Crownes The Image of the Crosse Companies of Monks and Nunnes their Chastitie and abstinence The Feasts of Aduent and Lent The
to haue been built or founded vpon Peter and in this regard Peters Sea to haue been preferred before the Seas of al other Patriarcks do herein but symbolize with the ancient Fathers Gregorie Leo Optatus Hierom Hilarie Origen Cyprian Tertullian Dionysius Areopagita and the other Fathers in general who are here produced and reproued in these respects by the Protestant Writers the Centurists Caluin Danaeus Brightman Fulk Field Couel and Raynolds IT IS CONFESSED BY PROTESTANTS that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught the Bishop of Rome to Succeed S. Peter in the Primacie of the whole Church CHAPTER IV. HAuing hitherto proued the Primacie of S. Peter ouer the whole Church the next point to be considered is whether the sayd Primacie not being personally tyed to him as to dye with him but rather being to suruiue and continue in his Successours to the Churches good euen to the end of the world whether I say the sayd Primacie is deriued to the Bishop of Rome as the Successour of S. Peter And herein D. Bilson (1) In his true difference c. part 1. p. 147. confesseth most playnly and in general that The Ancient and Learned Fathers cal the Roman Bishop Peters Successour The Centurists (2) Cent. 5. col 1262. charge S. Leo that He painfully goeth about to proue that singular preheminence was giuen to Peter aboue the other Apostles and that thence rose the Primacie of the Roman Church And the like is confessed of S. Leo by D. Raynolds (3) In his conference p. 42. 43. who further granteth that (4) Conference p. 218. 219. The Fathers say Peter was Bishop of Rome naming Hierom Eusebius Ireneus And (5) Chron. D. Cowper calleth Linus first Bishop of Rome after Peter Osiander (6) Cent. 4. p. 294. speaking of the ancient Councel of Sardis decreing Appeales to Rome professeth to deliuer the then common opinion and reason therof saying It was the ancient common and receaued errour that Peter was the first Bishop of Rome therefore this honour was thought due to the Successour of Peter according to the common opinion c. Bucer (7) In Praeparatorijs ad Concilium sayth We plainly confesse that among the ancient Fathers the Roman Church obtayned Primacie aboue others as that which hath the Chaire of S. Peter and whose Bishops haue almost alwayes been accounted the Successours of Peter Yea the ancient Fathers were so confident herein that they taught the Primacie of the Roman Bishop to be the ordinance of Christ himself and not anie Humane or Ecclesiastical Institution So Gelasius In Decretis cum 70. Episcopis teaching that The Roman Church is preferred before the other Churches not by anie Synodical Constitutions but hath obtayned the Primacie by the Euangelical voyce of our Lord saying Thou art Peter and vpon this Rock I wil build my Church The (8) Cent. 5. col 1274. Centurists hereupon inferre and confesse that Gelasius contended that the Roman Church by the law of God was the First or Chief of al Churches In like sort (9) De Regno Christi l. 2. p. 149. Philippus Nicolai granteth that Pope Iulius who liued Anno. 370. as Socrates and Sozomene relate sent Letters to the Eastern Churches in which as the Letters witnesse he often declareth the right of calling General Councels to belong to him alone who by singular Priuiledge euen by Gods ordinance is the Prelate of the first Sea c. to wit the Roman This Diuine ordinance was so beleeued reuerenced and obeyed by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church as that nothing is more manifest in al their writings or other histories and Records of Antiquitie nor more fully acknowledged and disliked by the greatest Enemies therof the Protestant Writers And to begin with S. Gregorie whom M. Bale (10) In Act. Rom. Pont. p. 44. styleth Gregorie the Great of al the Roman Patriarks the most excellent in life and learning This so excellent a Patriark is charged out of his owne writings by the Centurists (11) Cent. 6. col 425. 426. 427. 428. 429. 430 431. 432. c. with clayme and exercise of Iurisdiction and Primacie ouer al Churches Carion (12) Chron. l. 4. p 567 568. affirmeth that Though he tragically declaymeth himself to abhorre the name of Vniuersal Bishop yet indeed he sheweth himself earnestly to desire that which the Title importeth And Peter (13) In Cap. 8. Iudicum And see the liKe in Philippus Nicolai De Regno Christi l. 2. p. 66. Martyr in this scoffing manner reprehendeth him saying This litle Saint Gregorie would haue the thing it self of Vniuersal Bishop although he streightned the name and Title For as the Histories of those times teach and his owne Epistles witnesse he did not abstayne from gouerning other Churches M. Bale (14) In his Image of both Churches fol. 11. See Bullinger in 2. Thess 2. p. 531. And Melancton in Ep. Ad Rom. p. 405. q. 2. p. 17. acknowledgeth that Iohn of Constantinople contended with Gregorie of Rome for the Supremacie in which contention Gregorie layd for himself S. Peters keyes with manie other sore arguments and reasons The Protestant Authour 15 of Catholick Traditions reporteth that Maurice the Emperour would haue taken away the Primacie from Gregorie Bishop of Rome and giuen it to Iohn Bishop of Constātinople c. Gregorie did oppose himselfe against him least he should loose his place vrging how insolent that Title was The Centurists (16) Cent. 6. col 425 confesse that Gregorie vpon the fourth Penitential Psalme greatly inueigheth against the Emperour who challenged to himself the Roman Church being the Head of al Churches and would make her a seruant being the Mistresse of Nations Christ also saying I wil giue to thee the Keyes And (17) Cent. 6. col 425. Gregorie glorieth that the Emperour and Eusebius his fellow-Bishop of Constantinople do both of them acknowledge that the Church of Constantinople is subiect to the Apostolick Sea Yet the Magdeburgians do further charge S. Gregorie and by collection out of his owne writings by them particularly alleadged that (18) Cent. 6. col 426. He challenged to himself power to command Archbishops to ordayne or depose Bishops at his pleasure And (19) Cent. 6. col 427. tooke vpon him right to cite Archbishops to declare their cause before him when they were accused And also (20) col 427. to Excommunicate and Depose them Giuing (21) col 428 Commission to theyr Neighbour Bishops to proceed against them That (22) col 428. 401 In theyr Prouinces he placed his Legats to know and end the causes of such as appealed to the Roman sea That (23) col 428. He vsurped power of appoynting Synods in theyr Prouinces (24) col 429. And see more col 430. 432. 433. 434. 435. 436. 437. 438. And required other Archbishops that if anie cause of greater importance fel out they should referre the
from a Partie in his owne cause And M. Carthwright (97) In his 2. Reply part 1. p. 501. auoucheth that Iulius Bishop of Rome at the Councel of Antioch outreached in claiming the hearing of causes that appertayned not to him The (98) Cent. 4. col 529. Centurists confesse that The Roman Bishops made a Law that they might command al things first to be written to them as appeareth by the Epistle of Iulius in Athasius Apologia secunda For Iulius sayth Are you ignorant this to be the custome that first we be written vnto c. (99) Vpon the Reuel c. 5. p. 53. And see Mornay of the Church in English p. 264. M. Symonides testifye●h that Iulius decreed that whosoeuer suspected his Iudge might appeale to the Sea of Rome In so much that wheras the Arians had expelled Athanasius B●shop of Alexandria Paulus Bishop of Constantinople and diuers other Catholick Bishops of the East Church it is (100) Cent. 4. col 530. testifyed that Iulius commanded the Arians to come to Rome and appoynted also a day to Athanasius Theodoret. l. 2. c. 4. c. where hearing euerie mans accusations and (101) Cent. 4. col 550. compl●ynt He restored euerie one of these wronged Bishops to his owne place or Bishoprick and that not by intreatie or arbitrably but as the (102) Cent. 4. col 550. 530 Centurists confesse by Prerogatiue of the Roman Sea Al which might as ye be made much more euident by Iulius his vndoubted Epistle extant in A●hanasius his second Apologie and alledged by the Centurists (103) Cent. 4. col 735. who mention their (104) col 737 742. Citation euen vnto Iudgement (105) col 739. 740. and at a certayne day and greatly reprehending this (106) col 529 And see D. field of the Church l 5. p. 178. Saying of Iulius Are ye ignorant this to be the custome that first we be written vnto that from hence that which is right may be defined c. for what we haue receaued frō the blessed Apostle Peter that I signify vnto you To cōclude this of Pope Iulius Doctour Philippus Nicolai (107) De Regno Christi l. 2. p. 149. auoucheth that Pope Iulius as Socrates and Sozomene relate sent letters to the Eastern Bishops in which as the letters witnes he often affirmeth the right of calling general Councels by a certain singular Priuiledge euen by Diuine Precept to belong to himself alone who as he sayth is the Prelate of the first Sea He also affirmeth that it no lesse appertayneth vnto him being the Bishop of that Cittie that he be acquaynted with the affaires of Bishops and other waightie businesses of that kind After the same manner and with like ambition Damasus c. and afterwards Innocentius c. Thus far the Protestant Philippus To whom I wil only adde M. Fox confessing that (108) Act. Mon. l. 1. p. 1. The Church of Rome in al those Ages aboue specifyed from the Apostles challenged to it self the Title and ring-leading of the whole vniuersal Church on earth by whose direction al other Churches haue been gouerned And (109) Ibid. p. 8. whatsoeuer was done in other places cōmonly the manner was to write to the Roman Bishop for his approbation The testimonie of the Roman Bishop was sometimes wont to be desired in those dayes of Pope Iulius for admitting Bishops in other Churches wherof we haue examples in Socrates l. 4. c. 37. when Bishops of anie other Prouinces were at anie dissension they appealed to the Bishop of Rome Neither was this only the priuate opinion of some particuler Popes of those times but it was the general receaued doctrine of other Bishops and Fathers In so much as the Councel of Sardis which M. Bel (110) In his Regiment of the Church p 158. tearmeth The famous and ancient Councel of Sardis cōsisting of 300. Bishops and aboue assembled from Spaine (111) Cent. 4. col 747. Theodoret. hist. l 2. c. 8. Frāce Italie Greece AEgipt Thebais Palestine Arabia c. and most other parts of the Christian world wherat sundrie Fathers of the Nicene Coūcel were (112) Carion in his Chron. p. 282. present (113) Cent. 4. col 764. decreed Appeales to the Bishop of Rome Insomuch as the (114) Ibid. Centurists and (115) Epitome p. 294. Osiander do both of them acknowledge and recite this 7. Canon of that Councel It hath seemed good to vs that if a Bishop be accused if the Bishops of the Prouince assembled togeather haue iudged the matter and haue depriued him if the Partie depriued do appeale and fly to the Bishop of Rome c. if the Partie accused desiring his cause to be heard once againe do intreate the Bishop of Rome to send Legats à latere suo from him it shal be in the power of the Bishop to do as he shal think good c. (116) Antich Disp bipart p. 31. sect 103. Tilenus speaking hereof auoucheth that The Decree of the Coūcel of Sardis of Appealing to Rome made the Roman Bishop more bould And in regard of this Decree this so anciēt a Councel is much reproued (117) Instit l. 4. c. 7. sect 9. by Caluin (118) In his com places in English p. 4. p. 39. Peter Martyr (119) Palma Christiana p. 30. 122. 124. Frigiuilleus Gaunius and (120) Cent 4. p. 294. Osiander But to end this Centurie wherin our first Christian Emperour Constantin the Great liued ruled The Protest writer (121) Palma Christiana p. 35. Frigiuilleus Gaunius plainly confesseth that the sayd Constantin himself attributed Primacie to the Roman Bishop before al. that (122) Ibid p. 34. Therby it appeared to be fatal that Cōstātin would giue power to the Beast which Pope Iulius forthwith put in practise for Constantin the Great carryed in his Ensignes the Dragon for his Armes c. so that he was the Dragon Apoc. 13.2 (123) Fidelis Relatio c. p. 19. Bibliander acknowledgeth that Constantin the Great raigning c. Siluester the Bishop of Rome began to lay the foundations of the Papistical Monarchie c. M. Bale hath almost the same words saying (124) Cent. 1. c. 36. In these times of Cōstantin Syluester began to lay the foundation of the Popes Monarchie and finding the key of the depth he opened the pit if it be true which Papists write of him Yea al the Popes after Syluester to Bonif. 3. he tearmeth Mitred Bishops preparing by their Canōs and Decrees the seat for the great Antichrist The (125) Cent. 4. col 549. Cēturists cōfesse in general that In this age the Mysterie of iniquitie was not idle (126) Cent. 4● col 550. And that The Bishop of Rome challenged by Ecclesiastical Canon the dissallowing of those Synods wherat they were absent So cleer it is that the Fathers Bishops and Councels of this Age agreed with vs Catholicks in the
that he might answer it Secondly the Roman 62) Zonaras Cedrenus Paulus Diac. in vita Leonis Isauri Bishops Gregorie the Third Adrian the First and Leo the Third Excommunicated the Grecian Emperours and transferred the Empire from them to the French cheifly for that they patronised the Heresie against Images whereas the French persisted euer constant in the ancient Catholick Faith wherefore it is most improbable that Charles should write in defence of the Grecian errour against the Pope of Rome Thirdly 63) L. 1. de cultu Imaginum Ionas Aurelianensis who liued in the Raigne of Ludouicus sonne to Charles testifyeth that Claudius Taurinensis a special Patrone of the Heresie durst neuer open his mouth therein during the life of Charles Fourthly Pope 64) Paulus Aemil. l. 2. Franc. And see cent 8. c. 9. col 570. Stephen holding a Councel at Rome against the sayd Errour Charles himselfe sent 12. of the cheifest Bishops of his Kingdome to assist him therein And D. Cowper 65) Chron. 174. reporteth that certaine Bishops were sent by Adrian to Charles who held a Councel in France against the condemnation of Images Fiftly this most famous Emperour Charles was so wholy Roman Catholick as that 66) Ep. ded Hist Sacra Hospinian recordeth of him 67) Epist Hist Eccl. Cent. 8. p. 101. Crisp of the Estate of the Church p. 221. 216. Bul. in 2. Thess c. 2. p 533. Cowp Chron. f. 173. 195. Foxin Apoc. p. 436. that he not only cōmanded by publick Edicts that the verie Ceremonies Rites and Latin Masse of the Roman Church as also the Decrees Lawes and Ordinances of the Roman Bishop should be obserued through his whole Empire but himself by imprisonments and diuers kinds of punishments compelled Churches to the same The like whereof is confessed of him by Osiander Crispinus Bullinger D. Cowper and M. Fox So vnlike was he to write against the Roman Church concerning Images Sixtly Caluin himself insinuateth this Booke to be forged about Charlemaines time saying 68) Iust l. 1. c. 11. sec 14. There is extant a refuting Booke vnder the name of Charles the Great which by the words thereof we may gather to haue bene made at the same time Seauently wheras Charles was knowne to be verie skilful both in Greek Latin learned ingenious in this booke there are manie absurdities committed as where it affirmeth Constantinople to be a Citty most knowne in Bythinia whereas indeed it is in Thracia as also that at Constantinople there was a Councel celebrated in defence of the worshipping of Images whereas the sayd Councel was celebrated at Nice And that the Nicene Councel tearmed the Eucharist the Image of Christs bodie whereas directly and purposely they refute and condemne the sayd speech Eightly supposing for the time against al the premisses that it had been Charles his Booke yet nothing would it auaile but much preiudice Protestants for therein is expressely taught that the last sentence in Controuersies of Faith belongeth to the Roman Bishop And that he hath his Primacie not from Councels but from God himself It prescribeth also Exorcismes to be vsed in Baptisme Churches to be dedicated with special Rites That we are to pray for the dead and Inuocate Saincts and their Relicks to be worshipped That Chrisme and Holie-water are to be vsed That in the Eucharist there is the true Bodie of Christ and the same to be worshipped yea to be offred as a true and proper Sacrifice Al which do mainely impugne Protestant Religion And therefore if they wil haue vs to beleeue this Booke teaching that the Councel of Nice erred concerning Images let them beleeue it teaching the other Catholick poynts next recited Lastly if it could be proued that Charles himself had made this Book that he had been a perfect Protestant in al poynts yet how would it hence follow that the Roman Church had changed her Faith in the time of Charles Or what would the testimonie of a Lay-man auaile them seing according to 69) Orat. 2. de Imag. Damascen Christ committed not his Church to Kings and Emperours but to Bishops and Pastours But we haue seene sufficiently before that Charles was a Prince wholy deuoted to the Roman Church and a special Patron of Images and consequently the Booke written against them and imposed vpon him is meerly forged and of no authoritie And so likewise is no lesse forged that other vnder the name of Lewes his Sonne which for such is condēned by the Catholick Church Neither 70) Index lib. prohibit doth our Doctour affoard vs the least colour of proof for the legitimation of either of these Bookes but only sayth that they are extant as though it were rare among Hereticks to finde manie spurious adulterine Bookes And so I cōclude that seing our Ministers proofs for the Roman Churches change in these 50. yeares are al of them in seueral respects either most impertinent or most false that therefore the Roman Church during the same time did not change After 800 800. to 850. I name sayth our Cataloguer Ioannes Scotus c. who resisting the Real presence c. was therefore murdred The same time Berthram also writ against it c. Claudius Bishop of Towres resisted Images worship of Saincts and Pilgrimage Lotharius the Emperour reduced the Pope to the obedience of the Empire c. These are the examples of the Roman Change in this time But let vs examine them As concerning Scotus that he resisted the Real presence M. White proueth it only by the testimonie of Daneus who being a formal Protestant of these times his testimonie is insufficient as bearing witnesse in his owne Cause therefore al further answer were needles But yet I do acknowledge that about the same time there was one Scotus not the subtil Doctour who liued some Ages after but an other who writ something doubtfully in this poynt but his Booke was condemned in the Councel at Vercella as testifyeth Lantfrancus (a) lib. de verit Corp. Et sang Domini in Eucharistia And he is obserued to be the first in the Latin Church who writ suspiciously against the Real Presence And as for Bertram though the Booke extant vnder his name doth vse some doubteful and obscure words as Figure Spiritual and Mysterie yet at other times doth it speak as plainly Affirming the Presence of Christs Bodie vnder the veyle or couerture of Bread Yea the Centurists confesse that Bertram 71) Cent. 9. c. 4. Col. 212. in the sayd Book hath the seeds of Transubstantiation Secondly this sayd Book being set forth lately by Oecolampadius may iustly be suspected and rather in that Pantaleon 72) p. 65. in his Chronograph mentioning Bertram and his other writings forbeareth yet to mention this Booke or to charge him with this pretended opinion Thirdly Illiricus making a Catalogue of Protestant witnesses to whom our Minister for this of his is no litle beholding
Innouation therein could be obserued or reproued by Almaricus In like sorte though Robert Bishop of Lincolne withstood the Popes proceedings in England yet this nothing proueth anie change or first comming in of anie point of Faith in the Roman Church obserued or resisted by the sayd Robert Besides D. Godwine reporteth that a Cardinal sayd to the Pope concerning him He (a) Catalo of Bishop of England p. 240. is for Religion a Catholick as wel as we And so dying he gaue al his bookes an excellent Librarie vnto the Friar Minors at Oxford So charitable was he to Friars and consequently so Roman Catholick euen at his verie death And where he affirmeth that Ioakim Abbas sayd that Antichrist was borne at Rome and should sit in the Apostolick sea It is so vntrue that in his Epistle prefiged to his Exposition vpon the Apocalypse he submitteth his writings to the Censure of the Sea Apostolick affirming further that he firmely beleeueth that the Gates of Hel cannot preuaile against the Roman Church and that her Faith shal not perish before the end of the world Yea in his Exposition vpon the 6. Chapter and 11. verse he calleth such the Sonnes of Babylon who impugne the Church of Peter And vpon the 7. Chapter and 2. verse by the Angel ascending from the East hauing the signe of the liuing God he vnderstandeth the Bishop of Rome who with his fellow-fellow-Bishops with the signe of the Crosse wil arme the Elect in that last tribulation which Antichrist shal rayse So litle cause there is to vrge this Abbot against the Pope And indeed al that truly can be vrged against him is that being an old man and half out of his wits he was censured by the Pope for certaine fonde Prophecies and some errours also about the B. Trinitie as appeareth by the Decree extant in the Canon Law against him and by other Authours that haue written of him And as for Fidericus the Second Emperour resisting the Popes Supremacie it proueth no more but that euen the most vicious Emperours were most aduerse to the Pope For he being a Prince of most scandalous and wicked life was after due admonitions excommunicated as also deposed by Pope Innocent the Fourth in a general Councel holden at Lyons so that his resisting in this regard the Supremacie is only a guiltie and conuicted Persons resisting of al such lawful Authoritie whereby he is censured and punished Concerning Arnoldus Villanouanus speaking against Friars the Sacrifice of the Masse and Papal Decrees This M. White only proueth by the testimonies of the Magdeburgians and Osiander which being Protestants are no competent witnesses against Catholicks But besides I haue proued (107) l. 2. c. 9. 4. before that the Sacrifice of the Masse and the Popes Authoritie were beleeued and practised in much more ancient times As also that the Institution of Friars proueth no Innouation in Faith and Religion Euerardus broaching those foule and false reproaches against Pope Gregorie the Seauenth called Hildebrand proueth nothing but his owne disobedience and impatience hauing been by the same 108) Greg. 7. Ep. 18. Pope for his owne demerits iustly suspended from his Episcopal function After 1250. 1250. to 1300. I name Gulielmus de S. Amore withstanding Friars and their abuses but how impertinent this is I haue shewed sufficiently before The Preachers also saith he in Sweden that publickly taught the Pope and his Bishops to be Hereticks But M. White receiuing this Relation from Illiricus no further answer wil be requisit Dante 's also saith he writ that the Empire descended not from the Pope But Dante 's being only a Poet intermedling in other matters committed (109) See Bellar. in Append. ad lib. de Sum. Pont c. 14. manie grosse errours for which his bookes are condemned and prohibited by the Church yea he liued in faction against some (110) Ibid. c. 12. Popes and therefore his writing against them is of no force As for Gulielmus Altisiodorensis M. White producing nothing in particular out of him against the Roman Church but only affirming that in his Summes are found manie things confuted that then were comming in no further particular answer can be expected and though he referre himself for particulars to this his own Booke yet citing no page or place thereof I hould it vnworthie of so paineful search it being also wel knowne that Altisiodorensis only differed from other Schoole-men in matters disputable and not defined After 1300. 1300. to 1350. I name sayth he Marcilius Patauinus that wrot against the Popes Supremacie But he being a knowne condemned Heretick a flatterer of the Schismatical Emperour and his Bookes condemned by the Church as also the Popes Primacie being formerly acknowledged in the Primitiue Church his testimonie is sundrie wayes insufficient And the like is to be answered to Ocham (111) Trithe●nius Genebrard l. 4. Chron. who was purposely hyred by the Emperour to write against the Pope who was also Excommunicated and his Bookes prohibited Gregorius Ariminensis his differences were only in Schoole points not determined by the Church And as for the Vniuersitie of Paris condemning the Popes Pardons it is most vntrue and therefere M. White did wel to father it only vpon his Brother Illiricus whom he knew to be expert in the art of forging After 1350. 1350. to 1400. I name sayth he Alu●rus Pelagius who wrot a Book of the L mentation of the Church wherein he reproueth diuerse abuses of his times But who denyeth but that in the Militant Church consisting of good and euil there are manie abuses in life and conuersation But as for abuse or Innouation in matter of Doctrine and Faith Aluarus maketh no mention at al in his sayd Booke And as for Montziger disputing against ●ransubstantiation and Adoration of the Sacrament and Cesenas calling the Pope Antichrist besides that the truth hereof dependeth only of the testimonie of Fox and Ill●ricus both of them Protestants I haue sufficiently before cleered both these poynts from al Innouation in Ages much more ancient Now as for Iohn Wiceliffe as I haue shewed (112) l. 1. c. 3. before that in sundrie poynts of Faith he agreed with Catholicks which Protestants now impugne so it is euident that he taught sundrie grosse errours which both Catholicks and Protestants do detest as that If a (113) Fox Act. M●n p. 96. Bishop or Priest be in deadly sinne he doth not Order consecrate or Baptize that Al (114) Osiand cent 9. 10. 11. p. 459. oathes are vnlawful That (115) Osiand cent 15. p. 457. al things come to passe by absolute necessitie That there 116) Ib. p. 454. is no Ciuil Migistrate whilest he is in mortal sinne and sundrie others in regard of which Protestants 117) Pant. Chronol p. 119. Mathias Hoe in his Tract duo Tract 1. p. 27. themselues ranke him in the Catalogue of Hereticks So that smal Credit or succour wil M. White
Christ Or that Godlie men would for feare of anie persecution not only deny Christ before men but withal commit Adulterie with the pretended whore of Babylon in partaking with her in al her superstitions Idolatries and abominations what more forcible can be desired or vrged against the sayd imagined Church that she was not the Church of Christ then her owne confession of grosse and palpable dissimulation in the weightiest matters of Faith and Religion Doth not Christ himself auouch say (43) Math. 10.33 whosoeuer shal deny me before men him wil I also deny before my father in heauen And his Apostle teacheth (44) Rom. 10.10 that with the hart a man beleeueth vnto Iustice and with the mouth confesseth to Saluation And how possibly could the (45) Math. 16.18 Gates of Hel more strongly preuayle against the Church of Christ then by making her to commit Idolatrie and Superstition and that for manie hundred yeares togeather Wheras in steed of these (46) Psal 86.3 glorious things are foretold of the Church of Christ as that (47) Esa 60.11 her Gates should be continually open her (48) Esa 62.6 Pastours neuer silent her (49) Dan. 2.44 Kingdome not giuen ouer to another people but should stand for euer as (50) Esa 60.15.16 an eternal glorie and ioy from generation to generation So that the censure which by this last answer is imposed vpon the Protestant Church and that by her owne Children is that in steed of Christs Church she is a dissembling Church a Church denying Christ and his Religion a Church for temporal respects committing manie Idolatries and Superstitions and so by most true consequence no Church at al. THE FIFT BOOK WHERIN IS SHEVVED THAT PROTESTANTS IN THE Decision of Controuersies betvveen them and CatholicKs do absolutly disclaime from Antiquitie reiecting the Ancient Fathers and Councels for Papistical and the Sacred Scriptures for erroneous THAT PROTESTANTS DISCLAIME from al Antiquitie since the Apostles and further reiect and condemne as Papistical the Ancient Fathers and General Councels CHAPTER I. SO foule is the stayne of Noueltie in anie profession of Religion as that some Protestants haue aduentured to charge our Roman Church with the deformitie and crime therof Mr. Hal therupon auouching that (1) Peace of Rome p. 24. Poperie is but a new fashion and D. (2) Way to the true Church p. 341. 342. White vndertaking to proue it contrarie to the primitiue Church But as nothing can be more grateful to a Christian Reader then a cleere and sincere trial of this point to wit whether the ancient Fathers of the primitiue Church were the true Progenitours and Fathers of Catholicks or Protestants so among manie meanes and arguments al of them able most cleerly to determine the same I wil only make choice for this time of the free grants acknowledgements and confessions of Protestants themselues And this chiefly concerning their owne bastardie degenerating and disclaiming from those so ancient so noble so worthie Peeres of those purest times And first concerning the Argument drawne from Antiquitie in general it is acknowledged to be a Popish Argument and for such to be auoyded and taken heede of so do some careful Ministers prescribe to the King's Maiestie himself saying Let 3) Suruey of the Booke of common prayer p. 18. not your Maiestie be now deceiued by the Popish Argument of supposed Antiquitie as Iosue was with the old and mouldie bread of the Gibeonites c. And now followeth the reason of this so necessarie preuention And the rather O Christian King take heed because Antichrist began to work euen in the Apostles dayes Yea sayth D. Willet Papistrie 4) Synop. Controu 2. q. p. 56. c. began to work in S. Paul's dayes So that Papistrie being as old as S. Peter and S. Paule it behooueth Protestants in al good policie to reiect and vtterly abandon Antiquitie as a Popish argument and as the old and mouldie bread which the poore Papists feed on The like prouident and most necessarie preuention for Protestants vsed the Maddeburgians 5) Pref. ep Dedicat. ad Elizab. Angliae Reg. in Cen. 4. before to Q. Elizabeth to whom pretending to bring Antiquitie for her Maiestie to looke vpon yet at the first premonish that few Doctours in ancient times did write Luculenter et cum iudicio perspicuously and witb iudgement And withal complayne that very manie are as it were so bewitched with the holie title of Antiquitie that without al attention and true iudgement they do giue willingly consent to neuer so foule errours if they be set downe by Antiquitie so fearful are these deepest Diuers and Searchers into Antiquitie to be tryed therby Iust cause had then D. Humfrey to reproue Mr. Iewel for his so bold appealing to the first 600. yeares saying Iewel 6) De vita Iewelli p. 212. And see the like in Fulks Retentiue p. 55. prouoked to al that Antiquitie but he was ouer liberal and yeelded more then reason and was ouer iniurious to himself c. and in a manner spoiled himself and his Protestant Church c. It is sufficient for a Christian to say So saith the Lord c. What haue we to do with Fathers with flesh or bloud or what belongeth it to vs Protestants what the false Synodes of Bishops shal ordaine Here our Doctour wisely controuleth Mr. Iewel for his so rash appealing to the primitiue Church as seeing plainly that his new Protestant familie would be vtterly spoyled and vndone therby And the like dislike sheweth Iacobus Acontius against some Protestants alleadging the Fathers in their owne behalf saying 7) Stratag li. 6. p. 296. Some are come to that that they wil fil al their writings with the authoritie of Fathers which I would to God they had performed with as prosperous successe as they hopefully attempted it c. I do verily think that this custome is most dangerous and altogeather to be eschewed So that in this Doctours iudgement it is no wisdome but imminent danger for Protestants to meddle with the Fathers Now if any desire to know the true cause of this danger hanging ouer Protestants by appealing thus to Fathers it is confessed to be no other but because the sayd Fathers were Papists We are sure saith Mr. 8) Papisto-mastix p. 193. Midleton that the mysterie of iniquitie did work in Paul's time and fel not a-sleep so soone as Paule was dead waking againe 600. yeares after when this mysterie was disclosed c. and therfore no maruaile though perusing Councels Fathers and Stories from the Apostles forward we find the print of the Popes feet O how firme and during are the Pope's steps or our Roman faith which at this day are presented vnto vs by Councels Fathers and stories from the Apostles times al of them recording to vs their Posteritie the Popish Faith to be the Faith of their times What reason then haue Protestants to appeale to such
Truth like a chast matrone though it be slandred yet is so bold and powerful that it feareth not to be tryed by those that are the greatest enemies therof Now this kind of inuincible and vnanswerable argument haue I specially chosen and pursued throughout this Treatise following as wel thereby to take the most speedie surest course for the final deciding of Cōtrouersies as also clearly to preuent the endles shifts euasions and deceipts so generally and so cunningly practised by al kind of Sectaries For who would not thinke but that anie man of iudgement and learning diligently perusing the large and learned Works but only of Cardinal Bellarmine and Iodocus Coccius men so studious payneful and sincere in describing the pedigree of the Church of Christ but that he would easily see iudge and confesse the ancient primitiue Church Faith and Religion the most approued General Councels and learnedst Doctours the most authentical Records Histories and Monuments of those purest times al of them to testifye to depose and confirme the self-same Truth Faith and Religion which the present Roman Church at this day beleeueth practiseth and professeth And yet what a world of tricks fallacies and inuentions hath the Enemie suggested to our moderne Hereticks for the blemishing and obscuring of that clearest glasse of the Primitiue Church wherin our present Roman is so liuely represented Who would thinke it equal to oppose a dark and casual saying of S. Austin for example against his knowne practise and laboured proof to the contrarie And who would not blush to oppose S. Austin to his fowlest disgrace as contrarie to himself What more desperate course can be taken then to censure his most certain writings for counterfet because they contradict and confute their impious Nouelties What greater schisme can be raised against the Church then to pretend her chiefest Bishops Doctours and Pastours in the chiefest articles of Faith to be at mutual and deadlie warres amongst themselues What more audacious temeritie and base ingratitude can Malice itself offer to those our so noble Progenitours then to alter and corrupt their learnedst writings which as clearest euidences for the Catholick Faith they bequeathed to Posteritie And yet these and manie more then these are the ordinarie Sophismes of our late Sectaries For the surest and final preuention of al which what shorter or more expedite course can I take then Protestants for example appealing to the Primitiue Church and her Doctours and Pastours to produce themselues confessing al these to be their Enemies and the Teachers and Patrons of Papistrie How more vnanswerably can I conuince that S. Austin beleeued taught our Catholick doctrine of Purgatorie Prayer and Sacrifice for the Dead then if sundrie Protestants of greatest knowledge and reading not beleeuing the same doctrine themselues doe yet acknowledge and reproue the same in S. Austin Now whether in this Treatise following I performe this and that by the confessions not of few or of those of the least esteeme but of very manie and those of the primest Protestants that are or euer were and these not only reprouing S. Austin but with him S. Ambrose S. Gregorie S. Hierome S. Chrysostom S. Leo S. Epiphanius S. Gregorie Nazianzen S. Gregorie Nyssen S. Cyril S. Hilarie S. Basil S. Cyprian S. Ireneus S. Ignatius S. Dionisius and the rest of the most renowned Doctours of the purest and most approued times and this not only in the Doctrine of Purgatorie but in al the points of chiefest weight I remit myself wholy to the seuerest Censures of al Iudicious and Diligent Readers THE EPISTLE DEDICATORIE TO M. DOCTOVR MORTON SVPERINTENDENT OF LICHFIELD AND COVENTRIE GOOD M. Doctour As yourself were occasionally the principal motour for me to compose this Treatise following so haue seueral reasons since summoned themselues to my serious thoughts for the further presenting of the same vnto you For who now more renowned in the new English Church for his supposed learning then yourself Who more paynefully hath laboured for the promoting of the Protestant Ghospel then D. Morton Who higher aduanced meerly for the former respects from his lowest fortunes then the Superintendent of Lichfield And therefore I cannot but expect tbat your kinde acceptance wil afford some luster vnto it at least in the eyes of your illuminated Brethren Wherof I rest also very confident in that the method generally obserued therin by concluding my intent from the confession of my Aduersaries is the course specially affected and studyed by yourself in al your writings which cannot but beget some better liking in your setled iudgement therof But that indeed Sir which did chiefly induce me aboue the rest both to compile and dedicate this Work as you see was your Appeale for Protestants made in answer to the Protestāts Apologie for the Roman Church For hauing diligently perused and examined this our Apologie and finding the Arguments there framed to be most concluding the testimonies produced to be most pertinent and al this euer to be backed and strengthned with the answerable acknowledgements of Protestants themselues I must confesse my thirsting curiositie was such as that neither my thoughts nor desires were at rest vntil with like diligēce I had perused and examined your Protestants Appeale Which finding to be such as I wil shortly describe I was hēce encouraged to make yet further vse of the foresayd Apologie conioyning therewith some labours of my owne in that kind which as I desire they may be profitable to al so to yourself most earnestly I wish And so now briefly to discouer to yourself and al other iudicious Readers the manner of your answer vsed throughout your whole Appeale M. Brierlie a Catholick Roman Priest presuming to present vnto his Maiestie of Great Britanie our Soueraigne Lord King Iames his humble Petition in behalf of the Catholicks of England so grieuously pressed and persecuted during the Raigne of Q. Elizabeth his late Predecessour amongst innumerable Motiues which as so manie darts would presently wound a hart so sensible of his Subiects miseries iniuries and oppressions he specially selected the sweetest harmonie and most pleasing concord in matters Diuine and Celestial between the Ancient Apostolick and Catholick Faith of the Primitiue Church of Christ and our present Roman nothing doubting but that the bare presenting of the louelie face of so gray Antiquitie would timely beget in so generous and noble a Mind an immouable loue and liking to al her true heires and lawful posteritie But M. Brierlie further knowing the malignant Enemie his ordinarie imposture in sending forth Emissaries for the dazeling and deluding of the best aspects in preuention therof and al other imaginable deceit in that kind the self-same Emissaries his greatest enemies he specially picked for his chiefest Aduocats strangely but indeed most strongly affecting the equitie of his Cause to be finally decided by no other Iudge then the Aduersarie therof For wheras the indubitate writings of the ancientest Fathers the sacred Decrees
of al General Councels the credible Histories of al times and places the surest records of al Lawes and Countries yea al monuments of greatest Antiquitie doe ioyntly contest and depose not only for the vniuersal and vninterrupted continuance of our Roman Faith from Christ's verie time vntil the Date heerof but also for the sympathie or rather Identitie of our same Faith with the Faith of the Apostles and their first Disciples M. Brierlie often obseruing al these our honours and helps to haue been so strangely defaced blemished and obscured by the art and malice of the foresayd Emissaries as that their true face and beautie were neuer suffred to be seen or knowne to vulgar Protestants purposely therefore forbare to presente Antiquitie only in her natiue colours and chiefly to rest contented with that stayned dye and luster which the Protestant pencil through her clearest splendour durst not denye her producing to that end the plentiful and clearest testimonies of almost al the primest Writers that euer Protestancie brought forth al of them as it were conspiring in flat charging reprouing and impugning the learnedst Doctours and most renowned Bishops of the eldest and purest times for the self-same doctrines and practise of Religion which the Roman Church at this day exerciseth Now supposing M. Brierlie his sincere and faithful demeanour heerin what could the wit of man produce more palpable and concluding for our foresayd harmonie with the Primitiue Church For if the volumes of Fathers and Councels be so clear in themselues for our Catholick Roman and Papistical Faith that the learnedst Protestans most playnly studying and perusing the same are finally enforced through euidence of their words and deeds to acknowledge and reproue the self-same Doctours and Bishops for Roman Catholicks then M. Brierlie his desire and intent of prouing our Roman Faith and Church to continue most agreable with the Primitiue Faith and Church of Christ and his Apostles is fully accomplished And that M. Brierlie his candour may more clearly shine and his so vnanswerable Arguments be the better conceaued I wil therefore dispel those thick clowdes wherewith yourself M. Morton hath most painefully laboured to couer or darken the foresayd brightnes What then must we expect from you for an Answer pertinent and direct and as proceeding from a iudicious and learned Doctour yea from a Minister of simple truth but either ingenuously to confesse with the Puritans and so manie your other Protestant Brethren cited by M. Brierlie that the sayd Primitiue and purest Church of Christ was one and the same for Faith and Religion with our now Roman or else that M. Brierlie had cunningly corrupted maymed and defaced the sayings and writings of your foresayd Brethren in his owne behalf If you seing the first to be most true would haue honestly subscribed therunto as manie more learned Protestants then yourself had formerly done then your Answer or Appeale had been altogeather needles The second you durst not auouch knowing right wel that M. Brierlie his affected nicenes and precisenes in so particularly quoting his Aduersaries Bookes Chapters Pages lines or letters would ouer strongly contest for his Religious integritie industrie and fidelitie in handling the same What then is imaginable for you M. Doctour to answer against such pregnant testimonies of other Protestant Doctours Nothing at al but what M. Brierlie foresaw and accordingly premonished and wherof yourself also taketh notice in the beginning of your Appeale would be only trifeling vnworthie extrauagant and impertinent As first when your other Brethren are plentifully produced confessing and reprouing the Fathers for teaching our Roman Faith yourself often very honestly ioyne with them acknowledging the same in our behalf and against yourself so that in this Case in steed of Answer or Appeale you make a strong Apologie for M. Brierlie and the Romish Church Doe not you yourself speaking of the Antiquitie of our Doctrine concerning the Popes Primacie confesse and say [1) Prot. Apol. p. 72. Be it granted for so it is that the Papal Primacie beginning in Boniface the Third is now 900. yeares old Doe you not arise and write of S. Gregorie that (2) Ibid. p. 31. whether or how farre c. S. Gregorie did reach his arm of Iurisdiction beyond his Dioces is a question by reason of his diuers obscure speaches and some particular practises diuersly answered of our Protestant Authours Doe you not charge S. Leo to haue been in this respect (3) Ibid p. 283 285. peremptorie and ambitious and that he was so 4 Ib. 294. 295. peremptorie that for his presumption he found in his time brotherlie checks Yea doe you not confesse that certain (5) Ib. 294. 295. Sentences of S. Cyprian may seeme at their first view vnto the vnexpert Reader to obserue in the Church of Rome both a Grace of impossibilitie of erring and also a prerogatiue of the Mother-Church of al others But though yourself may be deemed an Expert Reader yet no otherwise doe you euade those cleerest sentences then by affirming that such like speaches are but the languages of Rhetorical Amplification which commonly the Fathers vse by way of perswasion rather then by asseueration And seing you admit that the Fathers did commonly vse such speaches by way of perswasion you must needs admit that they being holie and learned men did also beleeue and affirme the same Yea you approue such (6) Ib. pag. 300. Protestant Authours as reprehēd Victor for arrogācie transgressing the bounds of his Iurisdiction in Excōmunicating the Churches of Asia Lastly wheras in proof of Antichrist's short raigne (7) Ib. pag. 143. M. Brierlie produceth M. Fox teaching that almost al the holie and learned Interpreters doe by a time times and half a time vnderstand only three yeares and a half affirming further this to be the consent and opinion of almost al the ancient Fathers Doe not you likewise subscribe therunto and say (8) Ib pag 144. Now therefore c. why might not these Fathers be sayd to haue erred in prefining the time of Antichrist c. So that you are inforced to confesse that in the Fathers opinions al our precedent Popes are cleered from being Antichrists In like sort concerning Vnwritten Traditions you grant that S. Gregorie vseth (9) Ib. pag. 62. to confirme some things by Tradition and that the ancient beleeuing Iewes (10) Ib pag. 377. pretended vnwritten Traditions As teaching Purgatorie and Prayer for the Dead you reproue S. Gregorie touching that (11) Ib pag. 19. 20. the Sacrifice of the Altar is profitable for the Soules departed And againe (12) Ib p. 498. S. Austin speaketh with a Peraduenture but S. Gregorie kindled the fire with a Credo But you somewhat passed Peraduenture when you writ that Protestant (13) Ib. pag. 495. Authours haue obserued S. Augustin to haue been the first who opened the window vnto the doctrine of Purgatorie by whose owne direction say you we