they knew not the Apostolicall doctrine And D. Whitaker de Scriptura lib. 2. cap. 8. sect vlt Howsoeuer they were enuironed with most grosse darknesse yet they told some sparckes of truth and shewed them to others And what other thing I pray you is this but to confesse that such were but Protestants in part and in some sort Yea they name some whome they confesse to haue reprehended only certaine abuses amongst the Papists as Melancthon in his Answere to the Bauarian articles tom 3. fol. 369. and Illyricus in his Catalogue lib. 15. confesse of Hilten It remayneth yet for the accomplishing of this demonstration that we also shew by the Confessions of Protestants that the true Church of God can neuer want Pastors as they haue confessed theirs to haue wanted for the space of some ages That the true Church cannot be without Pastors CHAP. VIII 1. THAT the Church can neuer be without Pastors I proue first out of the Confessions of the Protestant faith For thus professe they to belieue in the Confession of Saxony cap. 12 The Sonne of God hath giuen ministers of the Ghospell vnto the Church to the end it do not quite perish Againe He would haue alwayes a company in mankind in which the Sonne himselfe appointed and conserued the Ministery of keeping and spredding his doctrine The Confession of Suitzers cap. 18 God hath alwayes vsed ministers for to setle and gather him a Church and also for to gouerne and preserue it and vseth the same now and further will vse them whiles the Church shall be on earth The French Confession art 25 VVe belieue the Church cannot consist if it haue not Pastors who haue the office of teaching The Confession of the low Countries art 30 VVe belieue that the true Church ought to be gouerned and ruled by that spirituall policy which God hath taught in his word so that there be Pastors and ministers in it And the Confession of Strasburg Seing the â—hurch is the Kingdome of God it hath diuers functions of ministers 2. Secondly I proue it because for the church to be without Pastors is to want some part of the essence and definition giuen by the Protestants themselues For Luther Proposition 15. to 1. fol. 385. thus defineth a Church It is a number of baptized persons and belieuers vnder one Pastor And tom 2. fol. 366. he sayth The publike Ministery of the word whereby the Mysteries of God are dispensed must be instituted by holy ordination as the thing which in the Church is the cheifest and principallest of all Kemnice in his Common places title of the Church pag. 146 The Church consisteth of Pastors and learners Gerlachius in his 22. Disput pag. 966 The Church is not a company meeting by chance or disordered but called by the voice of the cryers of the word for to heare the doctrine of the Ghospell Caluin 4. Institut cap. 2. § 7 The Ministery is the cheifest sinew and soule of the Church Beza of the Notes of the Church pag. 9 By the name of the Church properly taken it is certaine that not only Pastors but also stocks are vnderstood Iunius Cont. 5. lib. 1. cap. 15 God instituted orders in the Church for the essentiall outward constitution therof D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 6. pag. 508 The Church cannot subsist without Pastors of whome it is taught For doctrine doth make and constitute the Church and is her soule and life And cap. 18. pag. 546 The Church is no other number then that which holdeth the pure preaching of the word and right vse of the Sacraments And cap. 17. dag 541 Syncere preaching of the word and lawfull administration of the Sacraments do make the church in so much as whersoeuer they be there the Church is and where they be not the Church is not D. Feild in his 2. booke of the Church cap. 6 The Ministery of Pastors and teachers is absolutely and essentially necessary to the being of the Church And lib. 1. cap. 10 Bellarmine laboureth in vaine in prouing that there is and alwayes hath byn a visible Church and that not consisting of some few scattered Christians without order of Ministry or vse of Sacraments for all this we do most willingly yield vnto Yea the Philosophers by the light of reason perceiued that it is impossible they should be a Common wealth without Magistrates This same also is manifest by many other definitions which Protestants haue made of the Church and we haue rehearsed them before in which they place true preaching and administration as essentiall parts of the true Church which yet cannot be without Pastors 3. Besides this were against the definitions of the Church giuen by the holy Fathers For thus writeth S. Cyprian epist 79 The Church is the people vnited to the Priest and the flock cleauing to the Pastor And this he proueth out of those words of our Sauiour Math. 16 Thou art Peter and vpon this rock will I build my Church S. Hierome also in his dialogues against the Luciferians It is no Church which hath no Priest S. Ignatius in his epist ad Trallianos VVithout these Priests the elect Church is not no congregation without these no meeting of Saints And whereas Danaeus lib. 4. de Eccl. cap. 8. sayth that these Fathers define only a visible church that auaileth nothing because indeed there is no Church on earth which is not visible in profession of faith Againe Pastors shall be at least of the essence of the visible Church and consequently the Protestant Church which before Luther wanted Pastors was no visible Church Furthermore S. Cyprian proueth his definition out of those words of Christ Matt. 16. which as is certaine and Protestants confesse are spoken of the true Church in the sight of God And S. Ignatius sayth that there is no elect church no congregation of Saints without Priests which he must needs meane of the true Church And Saint Hierome simply sayth it is no Church which hath no Priests which he could no wayes say if the true Church in the sight of God could be without Priests And hereby also is refuted Sadeel in Repetit Sophism Turriani pag. 652. when he sayth The definition of S. Cyprian is not essentiall nor properly teacheth what the Church is but what a one it ought to be For S. Cyprian inferreth out of his definition that if one be not with the Bishop he is not in the Church And Saint Hierome pronounceth one Hilaries sect to haue perished with him because he left no Pastor behind him And for this cause the Fathers do still obiect vnto heretiks the want of succession of Pastors as an euident marke that they are not the Church as euen Protestants themselues confesse For thus writeth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 6. pag. 509 The Fathers rebuked heretiks that they wanted succession of Bishops Sadeel of Vocation of Ministers pag. 546 S. Augustin oftentyms opposed this succession against the Manichees and
Analysis of the Confession of Ausburge pag. 525 As many as are enrolled for Christs soldiers by sacred baptisme or at least wise are ioyned to him by profession of fayth are euery one of them members of the Church simply taken as it signifieth the company of them that are called Serauia defens contra Bezâ—m cap. 2. pag. 31 As long as there remaines amongst them the new and old testamâ—nt together with the Sacrament of baptisme and beliefe in God the Father and in the Sonne and holy Ghost and they trust to be saued by the Sonne of God and his death albeit they adioyne a number of their owne wicked forgeries they are notwithstanding parts and members of the vniuersall Church The ministers of the scattered Church of the Netherlands in sua narrat pag. 71 No man can ProfessioÌ„ of Christ nor ought to giue sentence in the Church of an others condemnation of whome it is not publikely knowne that he is fallen away from the foundation of the Apostolicall Confession vttered by the mouth of Peter Oecolampadius epist ad Bucerum apud Hospin part 2. ProfessioÌ„ of Christ God and man Histor fol. 112 VVe are gladly at peace withall those that confesse with vs and teach Iesus Christ true God and true man in vnity of person And Bucerus apud eundem fol. 84 VVho so preach the same Christ with vs we account them ours what estimate soeuer they make of vs. Beza de lib. notis Eccles pag. 30 VVe say it is a true definition of the true Church whether generally considered or in particuler wherein it is sayd to be a company which acknowledgeth one Sauiour To acknowledge one Sauiour For sayth he this alâ—ne is the only ground-workâ— of that spirituall house of God Christ Iesus is the soule of that mysticall body the only rule and square of that building And the Confession of Bohemia artic 8. defines the Catholike Church to be all Christians That are associated in one beliefe concerning Christ and the holy Trinity The faith of Christ and the Trinity The Confession of Basse artic 5. hath this assertion VVe belieue the holy Christian Church c. VVherein all those are Citizens that confesse Iesus to be Christ the lambe of God which taketh away the sinnes of the world and shew openly the same beliefe by works of charity Acontius l. 3. Stratagem Satanae pag. 119. concludes that nothing else is necessarâ—ly to be belieued Beliefe of one God Christ but That there is one God and Christ his Sonne made man and raised from the dead and that saluation is purchased by his name and not by any other name nor by the works of the law And Luther vpon the 7. of Math. fol. 86. closeth vp all with this epilogue The head and summe of Christian doctrine is this That God saueth by Christ that God sent and gaue his Sonne by whome alone he pardoneth our offences and doth iustify and saue vs. This sayth he and nothing else it behoues thee firmely to belieue Sometyme to belieue their article of iustification by only fayth is as much as they require in a limme of their Church The only article of iustification sufficeth or think needfull to saluation Luther tom 7. tract in 3. symbol fol. 140 I haue found by experience that who so haue truly and sincerely belieued that principall article of Christian fayth concerning Iesus Christ though they had their errours and faults haue at last notwithstanding byn saued And tom 4. in cap. 42. Pareus in 1. Galat. lect 8. Iezler de bello Euch. fol. 77. Isaiae fol. 178 If we abide in this article we are secure from heresies and retaine remission of sinnes which pardoneth our weaknes in ciuill dueties and beliefe And in cap. 43. fol. 200 VVho so belieueth this article is out of danger for euer falling into error and the holy Ghost must needs assist him And Brocard vpon the 2. cap. of the Apocalips fol. 45 The former Ministers who were before the first councell of Trent determined that we ought not to contend but that their Supper should be common which had receiued one doctrine touching iustification Caluin de vera Eccles reform pag. 316. writeth thus I know it is the common saying of a great many that so the doctrine of vndeserued Iustification continue sound we should not be so stifly contentious about the rest And the Author of the Preface in Syntagma Confess after he had affirmed that the article of iustification is the ground work the forme and soule of Christian religion makes this demaund How can they then but haue peace one with another whosoeuer are fellow-partners of so great good And he saith it is An vnseemly and hainous thing that betweene such there should be emnity and debate And indeed all Protestants should teach so since they make this article the definition the summe and very soule of Protestantisme as shall be herrafter shewed in the 6. chapter Sometymes in a member of their Church they require only some one point of Christianity or but the profession of Christs name For Sturmius apud Hospin in Corcord discord c. 24. testifieth that Bucer sayd He would neuer condemne any one in whome he saw any point of Christianity Any point of Christianity And Plessy lib. de Eccles cap. 2. affirmeth that the Church may be infected with heresy from top to toe yet be a part of the vniuersall Church as long as it professeth the name of Christ And Moulins in his buckler of fayth pag. 43. The vniuersall visible Church is the company of all them who professe themselues to be Christians Thus we see that to a member of the visible Church yea to fayth to Christianity to a member of the true and Catholike Church to eternall saluation as Protestants sometyme iudge and determine litle or nothing sufficeth Do not these men go about to expose the Church meanes of saluation vnto scorne and mockery What Iew or Turke did euer make his Synagogue so common 4. ProtestaÌ„ts challenge those that deny eueÌ„ fundameÌ„tall articles Albeit the former allegations do sufficiently conuince that when Protestants calculate the limmes and members of their Church they take to make vp the number such as renounce the very fundamentall articles of their beliefe yet to make it more euident and to preuent all colour of doubt I will adde other proofes besides And first we haue in this behalfe their owne Confessions For Beza lib. de Notis Eccles pag. 45. teacheth plainly that some errours euen in some fundamentall heads of fayth may creep into the Catholike Church And D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 4. cap. 3. pag. 490 It is manifest that the true Church may erre for a tyme euen in necessary points The like hath Hutterus in Analysi Confessionis Augustanae pag. 453. and Iunius doth intimate as much lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 17. D. Whitaker againe cont 2. quest 5 cap. 17 VVe gather
by externall profession they are all whose marke of recogniscance hath in it those things which we haue mentioned yea although they be impious idolaters wicked heretikes persons excommunicable Againe Those whose knees were bowed vnto Baal euen they were also of the visible Church of God Boysseul in Confut. p. 822 answering to the place where Spondeus obiected that if the Church of Rome be an Idolatresse as Boysseul had auouched it is not the Church of Christ makes this reply And why not as well as Israel And D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 475. saith Although this errour Idolatry in adoring the calfe were most grieuous yet it destroyed not the whole nature of the Church 2. And Infidells That they sometymes comprize also Infidels in the Church is manifest first because they affirme that such may be saued For M. Fox in his Martyrologe pag. 495. reporteth that a certaine Protestant Martyr whole learning piety zeale he greatly commendeth taught that a Turke Saracen or any Mahamet an whatsoeuer may be saued if he trust in one God and keep his law M. Bale in his 6. Century pag. 464. bids vs beware that we condemne not rashly any Turke And Zuinglius tom 1. lib. de prouid fol. 370. sayth It is not vniuersally true that who so hath no fayth is damned Againe As for the damnation of vnbelieuers it is meant only of those who heard and did not belieue And tom 2. declarat de peccat orig fol. 118 This saying who so doth not belieue shall be condemned must in no wise be absolutely vnderstood but it is to be vnderstood of those See Homiâ—â— in Specim Contr. art 27. who hauing heard the ghospell would not belieue And ibidem in exposit fidei fol. 559. he sayth that in heauen Christians shall meet many heathens whose names he there sets downe and amongst the rest that cruel Theseus and Magician Numa the founder of heathenish superstitions amongst the Romans Which opinion of his those of Zurich in Apolog. Gualter in prefat tom 1. Zuinglij Simler in vita Bullengeri and others seeke to patronize and make good Now it were folly and madnes to auouch that these men were of the number of the faythfull They belieue then that infidels may be saued But S. Augustin was of a farre different beliefe lib. 4. cont Iul. cap. 3. where he writes thus VVhat one of those who would be accounted Christians will say an Infidell is iust be it euen Fabritius 3. Secondly their doctrine touching the predestinate carrieth with it a necessary acknowledgement of their Communion with Infidels For they teach that who so is predestinate is alwayes a member of the Church Hus his first article condemned by the Councel of Constance was this The predestinate remayneth euer a member of the Church And Luther tom 2. in Assert art 30 I say the opinions of Iohn Hus are all Euangelicall and Christian Againe I admit all the condemned articles of Iohn Hus. And tom 1. in disput Lypsic fol. 254. he maintaineth openly this article of Hus The Church is the whole multitude of the predestinate Vorstius in Anti-bellarmine page 125 VVe affirme that the Councell of Constance which condemned the doctrine of Hus that who so is predestinate is alwayes a meÌ„ber of the Church was surely in this respect Antichristian Danaeus in Resp ad Bellarm. Contr. 4. lib. 3. cap. 2. sayth The first opinion which was the opinion of Hus is true and is ours Againe our opinion is that the Church is the whole company of men whome God hath predestinated to saluation And cap. 7 It must be answered that Paul was alwayes but not alwayes apparently in regard of men of Gods true Church Againe Such Turkes and Iewes as God hath predestinated to saluation are of the Church euen now at this tyme in regard they are predestinate and in respect of God but they are not yet of Gods Church apparently and in respect of vs for as much as they lack yet those marks whereby God doth heere shew vs men who are of the church And Cont. 4. lib. 3. cap. 12 The true definition of the true church is this The company and multitude of those whome God hath chosen to saluation And Iunius lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 7 Paul was alwayes of the church according to predestination from which sayth he the church taketh her being or formal definition but not according to the outward forme of the church What can be more apparent then that these men teach that the predestinate are members of the church according to the true being therof and in the sight of God euen during the tyme of their infidelity 4. Thirdly this followeth necessarily vpon that which they teach concerning infants especially such as are descended from faythfull parents departing this life vnbaptized For they affirme that the children of the faythfull are actually in the Church as the French Confession article 35 Togeather with the parents God accounteth also their ofspring in the church And the Zuitzers cap. 20 VVhy should not they the children of the faythfull be ingrafted by sacred baptisme who are Gods proper possession and within his church Caluin in Instruct cont Anabap. art 1 Vnspotted infants are in the Communion of the church before they come forth of their Mothers wombe And Pareus lib. 3. de Iustificat cap. 4. pag. 884 Caluin on good reason determineth that the children of the church are borne cittizens of the church Their doctrine also hath the same issue who teach that infants at leastwise the children of the faythfull are saued without baptisme as the Protestants in the colloq Ratisbon And Zuinglius tom 2. Declarat de peccat orig fol. 119 Concerning Christians children we are assured that they are not damned for originall sinn of others we haue not the like assurance howbeit to confesse ingenuously the opinion we taught heretofore to wit that we ought not to iudge rashly of heathens children seemes to vs the more probable Voritius in Anti-bellarmine pag. 542 Zuinglius and some other ghospellers auouch that all children whatsoeuer are by the grace of Christ saued others for the most part hold that at leastwise all the elect whether extract from faythfull or other parents do euen vnbaptized attaine to saluation Whereof he sayth The opinion of these later is surely the safest and yet the first opinion is probable inough and ought not to be rashly condemned Now as D. Whitaker sayth Cont. 2. quest 1. cap. 5. 6 All that are saued are really and actually in the church And D. Morton part 1. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 4 To be of the church in possibility sufficeth not to saluation Lubbertus lib. 2. de Eccles cap. 2 Neither can any one be saued except he be actually and really in the church Whence Martyr in 1. Cor. 7. fol. 177. sayth Infants must of necessity appertaine vnto the church seing there is no saluation without it They teach moreouer that Infants haue
church we define to be a congregation of men amongst whome the word is truly preached and the Sacraments administred Such a church hath not alwayes byn neither can we be assured that it shall alwayes be sound vpon the earth There was a tyme when as the visible church failed vpon earth The visible church failed This inuisibility of the Protestant Church which I haue hitherto proued by their manifold Confessions I will also proue by sequels out of other their sayings First therefore D. Morton in his Apology part 1. book 1. cap. 31. disliketh not these words of Bellarmine Protestants when they say the church cannot faile or perish meane the inuisibible church And many of them in expresse words deny that the Promises of perpetuity Protestāts say the promises belong not to the visible Church which in the scripture are made vnto the church Math. 16. and other where be made to the visible church D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 468 It is most false that it is the visible church against which the gates of hell shall not preuaile And Daneus Cont. 4. lib. 3. cap. 13. pag. 717 There Math. 16. is not meant the visible church To whome assenteth D. Willet in his Synopsis cont 2. quest 2. M. Powell of Antichrist lib. 1. cap. 10. Beurlin in his Refutation of Sotus cap. 53. Moulins of the vocation of Ministers lib. 1. c. 4. in his Bucklet part 1. pag. 49. And D. Morton lib. cit cap. 13. addeth that those three places Math. 16. vlt. and psal 47. which promise the perpetuity of the Church Protestāts belieue not the visible church Are euery one of them vnderstood almost by euery Father of the only company of the elect which the Protestants call the inuisible Church Besides they all generally teach that by the Catholike Church which they professe to belieue in the Creed they meane not the visible Church but only the inuisible Luther in his booke of abrogating Masse tom 2. fol. 247 VVho shall shew vs the holy church seeing it is hidden in spirit and is only belieued according as I belieue the holy church Zuinglius in his explication of the 31. article The church which consisteth of those which are knowne to God alone in that which we professe in the articles of our creed Danaeus lib. cit pag. 713 The question is of the true church of God whereof it is sayd in the creed I belieue the holy church Bellarmine vvill haue it to be the visible vve deny it The like he sayth pag. 789. 717. 718. and 725. Vorstius in his Antibellarm pag. 144 VVe professe not in the creed to belieue the visible church but the inuisible D. Whitaker lib. 3. against Duraeus sect vlt You see vvhat Catholike church vve belieue not the visible multitude of Christians but the holy company of the elect The same he sayth Cont. 2. quest 2. cap. 2. Brentius in Prolegominis pag. 2. and others commonly Furthermore they say that the visible Church is not the true Church in the sight of God For Caluin in his 4. book of Institutions cap. 1. § 7. They say the visible Church is not the true Church before God and the rest graunt that both wicked and reprobate Christians may be of the visible Church but deny that they can be of the true Church in the sight of God Now surely if the visible Church be neither the true Church in the sight of God nor she to whome he hath promised perpetuity nor she which Protestants do belieue what reason can they haue to belieue that the visible Church shall alwayes remayne or which is all one that the Church shall be alwayes visible Againe their common doctrine is that preaching of true doctrine is the note of the visible Church for so teacheth the Confession of Auspurg cap. 7. the English Confession artic 19. and all the rest To which his Maiesty in his epist to Cardinall Peron D. Whitaker Contr. 2. q 5. c. 17. D. Morton part 1. Apol. l. 1. c. 6. M. Willet in his Synopsis Cont. 2. quest 3. pag. 102. Sadeel to Turtians Sophismes loc 5. Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 145. and others do adde that it is an essentiall note of the visible Church And it is manifest that they must say so because they vse to define the visible Church to be a company vvherein the pure vvord of God is preached the Sacraments rightly administred For so it is defined of the English Confession and of Sadeel lib. cit of Whitaker quest 5. cit cap. 20. of Melācthon tom 1. in cap. 15. Matth. and of others generally But before Luther there was no preaching of Protestantisme as we shall heare them confesse cap. 7. therefore there was then no visible Protestant Church Finally sometymes they say that not only preaching of the word but that also a lawfull ministery or that not only what true preaching soeuer but also such as is made by a lawfull Minister of the word is of the essence and substance of the visible Church For thus writeth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 5. cap. 19. pag. 550 Stapleton sayth that the preaching of the Ghospell by lavvfull Ministers is the proper note of the church and vve say no othervvise And pag. 551. That he confesseth true preaching by a lavvfull Ministery to be a note of the church is no other thing then that vve say and defend The like hath Sadeel in the place now cited and the Switzers Confession cap. 17. putteth lawfull preaching for the chiefest note of the church Caluin 4. Institut cap. 2. § 1. for a perpetuall note the conclusions defended at Geneua pag. 845. for an essentiall note thereof But before Luther there were no Protestant Ministers at all as we shall hereafter heare the Protestants confesse Therefore no visible Protestant Church 8. By that which hath byn rehearsed it is manifest Summe of the foresayd confessions that very many and very famous Protestants haue often and plainly confessed that when Luther came first as they speake to the Ghospell the Protestant Church and religion was not visible say hid lurked lay in the wildernes in lurking holes indarknesse in Trophonius his denne was buryed was vnknowne vnheard of appeared to none cold not be discerned Her image could not be seene no shew of besides a huge spoile did appeare no face no fashion no trace of her was extant and she was so hid that he who would iudge according to the outward shew would think her to be no where And that this is so manifest as that the experience of many ages beareth witnes thereof With what words I pray you could they say that their Church was altogeather inuisible if they haue not sayd it in these 9. Moreouer it is manifest that for to maintaine their inuisible Church they do teach that the Church may be vnknowne to the godly to those who are of it that it may be not visible not appeare not
God And Beza wrote a booke of this title Of the true and visible marks of the Catholike Church D. Whitaker in answere of the 3. reason of F. Campian That we iudge to be proper to the true Church that it increase and conserue Christs word that it vse the Sacraments entiâ—rly and purely These we defend to be the most true and essentiall properties of the Church Take these away and you will leaue nothing but the carcasse of the church Againe They containe the true nature of the church which if they be present they make the church and take it away if they be taken away And D. Feild in his 1. book of the church cap. 11 VVe say that that society wherein that outward profession of the truth of God is preserued is that true church of God c. Finally to omit the words of others the same teach Wigand in his method of doctrine cap. 19. Gesner in his 24. place of the Church The Magdeburgians in the Preface of their 6. CeÌ„tury Heshusius in cap. 1.1 ad Cor. Soterius in his method title of the church Pelargus in his Compend of diuinity loc 7. Sohnius in his Thesis of the Church Bullinger in his Catechisme fol. 44. Aretius in his places part 3. fol. 50. Theses of Geneua disput 74. SummeoiÌ„ Protest former CoÌ„sessioÌ„s Thus thou seest good reader that according to the manifold iudgement of Protestants a part of the definition of the essence the marke of the Church in this life of the Church militant of the Church which is belieued of the proper Church of the Church whereof the Scripture properly speaketh when it calleth her the spouse of Christ the body of Christ of the true Church of the Church properly so termed and finally of the Catholike Church that I say it is of the definition and essence a marke of this church to be a visible company professing the faith partaking the Sacraments mutually confirming themselues and that otherwise it is as they say but a carcasse of the Church Wherefore it implieth manifest contradiction that there should at any tyme haue byn a true Church and not a visible company because nothing can be without all its essentiall parts The Protestant Church therefore which as we head was before Luthers tyme altogeather inuisible was no true and proper Church but to vse their termes a Platonicall idaea or a carkasse of a Church If any reply that when Protestants affirme the foresayd definitions properties and marks of the true Church they meane not by the name of the true Church that which is simply and absolutely the true Church but that which is the true visible Church I aske why then do they simply call it the true Church if they do not so meane why are not their words conformable to their meaning Besides the Church wherof they giue the foresayd definitioÌ„s and marks they call not only the true Church but also the Church properly so termed the spouse and body of Christ the Catholike church and such like which cannot agree to any which is but a Church in appearance only and in the sight of men but only to that which is the Church in very deed and in the sight of God Further more according to the opinion of Protestants these two termes True and Visible in the nature of the Church do one destroy the other as these two True and Painted exclude each other in the nature of a man For they imagine that the true Church is a society in something that is inuisible to wit in iustification and predestination Wherupon they deny any ill or reprobate Christians to be of the true Church Wherefore as he should speake fondly who should say A true painted man so according to their owne opinion they speake as fondly when they say The true visible Church But as we can only say the true picture of a man attributing the word True to the picture not to the man so they should only The true appearance or shew of the Church gâ—uing the word True to the shew not to the Church it selfe But they are ashamed to speak so least when they inquire the marks of the true visible Church Why ProtestaÌ„ts somtyme call the visible visible Church the true Church it should appeare that they seeke not the marks of the true Church indeed but only of the shew shadow or shape of the Church And yet in very truth they seeke but the marks of the shadow of the church For the inuisible Church consisting only of the iust and elect which alone they will haue to be the true Church hath no certaine marks else we should know certainly who were the iust and elect And this themselues confesse for thus writeth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 8 ProtestaÌ„ts giue no marks of the true Catholike Church The question is not of the marks of the inuisible Church Againe VVe say the marks of the Catholike Church simply so called are knowne to God alone And D. Humfrey to 3. reason of F. Campian pa. 281. sayth that the marks do not reach vnto the nature of the true Church And the reason is manifest because as I sayd otherwise we should know who were the iust and elect 4. If any againe reply that when Protestants say The true visible Church they meane the visible Church true in doctrine in which speach there is no contradiction according to their owne opinion because they admit that the visible Church that is the society in true doctrine and right vse of Sacraments into which Church or society the wicked or reprobate may enter may be true in doctrine though they graunt not that such a Church or society be the true Church in nature or essence Which perhaps Vorstius meant in his Antibellarm pa. 180. when he sayd The outward Church is not without cause called the true church of Christ by reason of the prosession of true doctrine I answere if they so meant why did they not speak so were they ignorant that it is one thing to be true in doctrine or in speach and another to be true in nature as a lyer is a true man in nature of man but not true in his speach Or if they did know this why did they abuse the words and their hearers Moreouer though in this sense their words did not destroy themselues as they did in the former yet fondly should they as they vse to do assigne the truth of doctrine for the marke of the true Church in doctrine For this were to assigne a thing for a mark of it self as if to know a true man of his word one should giue this marke that it is such as speaketh truth Besides this were rather to define what is a true man then to giue the marke to know who is a true man And yet marks are giuen to know which is the true Church not what is the nature of the true Church 5. If yet any reply that the visible Church or
the obscurity of the matter a man may chance to erre slip August l. 11. cont Faust c. 5. or els in such matters of fact as were in times or places far distant from them so that themselues could not search the truth but belieued the reports of others Such a question is that of Pope Ioane in which Protestants cite no Catholike author which liued not some ages after that time wherin Pope Ioan is sayd to haue beene Or if they produce any Catholike Author in any matter of fact the truth wherof he might haue tried either he is of no credit or the matter is such as it turneth to no preiudice of the Catholike faith But we heer produce Protestants in a matter of fact such a matter as they could most easily know For what was more easy then for Luther and his fellowes to try either then or euer since whether when he first began there was in the world any Protestant company whether it were visible whether it had Pastours and the like For who can thinke that only the Protestant company could lye so close hid that neither in all Luthers time or euer since either the being or the estate or condition or place or Pastours or any thing at all therof could be espied out of so many Arguses which now in one whole age haue sifted all corners of the world to find it out And besides this is such a question of Fact as vpon the decision therof an end may be made of all cōtrouersies betweene Catholikes and Protestants For as I sayd before if Luther be the Author and beginner of the Protestant Church it is certaine that it is not the Church of Christ nor to be followed of Christians Note but to be forsaken detested To which I ad now that if Luther himself such so many learned famous Protestāts as I haue cited do by many wayes so plainly confesse that Luther was the Author therof it cannot be doubted but that he was in truth the Author of it For I alleadge not men of small credit among Protestants but such as are of greatest authority with them nor a few but many nor of one nation alone but of diuers to wit Germans Italians French English Scottes Flemings and others nor Protestants of one sort or sect but of all three namely Lutherans Sacramētaries and English Protestants So that they could not beare false witnesse in this matter either for wāt of knowledge because they were many and learned of different countries and most diligent in searching the matter and the matter it selfe most easy nor for want of good will towards the cause because they were all most earnest Protestants And to refuse the testimonies of such witnesses in a matter of fact in their owne time so easy to be knowne and so diligently searched of them what other thing is it then obstinately to refuse to know the truth of this matter so important to be knowne and wherby may be made an end of all contentions in Religion Wherfore let Protestants say as they please Note that in questions of doctrine they will not depend vpon Luther Caluin or any one or all their doctours together but vpon the scripture alone Neuertheles in matter of fact wherof the scripture saith nothing such as this is for the Scripture telleth not what was the state and condition of the Protestant Church when Luther began in what place it was what Pastours it had who saw it and the like either they must confesse that they refuse all triall knowledge of so important a truth or they must giue credit to the deposition of sufficient witnesses And if euer men were or can be sufficiēt witnesses of any matter of Fact Luther and those Protestants which here I produce are sufficient witnesses of that which I bring them for to testify And thus much touching the cause why I proue Luther to haue been the founder of Protestant Religiō only by the testimonies of Protestants Why so many Protestāts testimonyes are alleaged 10. As for the reason why I alleadge so many Protestants that is that it many appeare that it is not the priuate testimony of some one or few but the generall consent of them all or at least the common sentence of many of them And if I seeme to any Catholike ouer tedious in heaping vp so many testimonies of Protestants I pray him to cōsider that I write not this book to Catholikes to confirme them in the Catholike faith who I know to that end doe not need the testimonies of Protestants but that I write it partly to Catholikes for to furnish them with store of Protestants testimonies to stopp their mouthes and to shew them that they are right Heretikes that is condemned as the Apostle speaketh by their owne iudgement to which end a few testimonies of theirs would not suffice And therfore to such as intend this end the multitude of testimonies will not be troublesome For who that indeauoureth to vāquish most obstinate enemies will complain of the abundance of good soldiers wherof he may make choice And if I had rehearsed only some few testimonies and named the places where the rest may be found some would haue cauilled as M. Iewel did against D. Harding that I had cited dumbe witnesses Besides seing the iudgments of men are diuers it may fall out that what kind of testimonyes seem strong forcible to some others acount but weake and litle to the purpose and therfore it was behofull that there should be as it were a store-house of Protestants testimonies that euery one might take what weapon he thinketh fittest for him vse it against them But especially I gathered these testimonies of Protestants for the Protestants themselues that by their owne mens iudgement I might withdraw them from their errour And therfore I was not so fearfull to bring too many for Catholikes as carefull to prouide inough for Protestants In which I could hardly offend by multitude For as S. (p) Lib. 1. Vigil saith Mans mind possessed with the errour of a false opinion is hard and slow to perceiue truth with how many witnesses so euer it be vrged therto (ſ) De gestis cum Emerit Or as (q) Lib. de Patient Tertullian writeth much talke in matter of edification is not foule if at any time it be foule And (r) Lib. 1. cont Iou. S. Hierom delay is no losse when by delay the victory is more assured Wherupon S. Augustin counsaileth vs not to regard and delay whatsoeuer so we bring good proofe of what we say Besides (t) VVhi. cont 295. c. 17. l. 1. de script c. 11. sect Sadeel in Refut Posnan c. 12. Protestants deny that we ought to iudge of them by one or few though they be Pastors and (u) White in defence of his way c. 7. write that M. Brierly in his Protestants Apologie although it be stuffed with all kind of
Heathens Pagans and infidells And in his Apology for the Switzers Churches he defineth Schisme to be a separation from the rest of the body of the Catholike Church Zanchius also in his treatise of the Church cap. 7. reacheth that Schismatikes are not in the Church And suâ—us in his 3. booke of the Church c. 5. approueth the fame of such Schismatikes as separate themselues from the whole Church The strangers in England writing to Beza in the 24 epistle haue these words in their 13. article VVhosoeuer is lawfully excommunicated of a particuler Church or cutteth himselfe of vpon vnlawfull causes and with scandall in that doth loose all priuiledge of the Catholike Church And Beza answereth them in the name of the Church of Geneua in this manner Your thirteenth article we wholy receiue at most orthodoxall Casaubon in his 15. exercitation against Baronius num 6. It is an vndoubted truth that how often soeuer a pious flock is ioyned to a true Bishop there is a Church of God in so much that if any forsake that Church it cannot be doubted but that he is out of the Church Finally Chamier in his epistle to Armand excludeth Schismatikes out of the Church because sayth he they want the sincerity of the Sacraments English ProtestaÌ„ts Amongst our English Protestants his Maiesty in his foresayd epistle to Cardinall Peron All those testimonies of Augustin proue only this that there is no hope of saluation for those who leaue the Communion of the Catholike Church which the King willingly graunteth D. Whitaker in his 2. controuer 5. quest 6. cap. sayth It is false that hereticall and Schismaticall Churches be true Churches Againe The Catholike Church consisteth not of diuided but of vnited members And cap. 2 The true and Catholike Church is that which consisteth of Catholiks D. Fulke in his booke of the succession of the Church VVhat auailed it them to eternall saluation to haue byn sound in Religion and doctrine seing they were cut of from the Communion of the true Church in which alone saluation is and from her true head VVhat skilleth it whether one being drawne by heresy or Schisme from the body of Christ be subiect to euerlasting damnation D. Humfrey in his answere to the 3. reason of F. Campian VVe confesse that he is vndone who is separated from the followship of the Church And D. Feild in his first booke of the Church cap. 7 The name of the Catholike Church is applyed to distinguish men holding the sayth in vnity from Schismatiks And in his 2. booke c. 2. he sayth that Schismatikes are not Catholike Christians Thus we see how Protestants sometymes do teach that the true Church consisteth of Catholiks of members vnited not deuided that it hath no Schismes or Sects That Schismatiks are not Catholiks that their vnity is not true nor Catholike that their Churches ought to be forsaken that they are not vniuocally Churches nor true Churches that they are not members of the true Church but out of the Church altogeather out of the Church and actually neither of the visible nor inuisible Church and that this is an vndoubted truth which coÌ„fession of theirs must be well noted and kept in mind for thereby is ouerthrowne as we shall see in the 2. booke their only argument wherwith they endeauour to proue that their Church was before Luther and also is defaced their only essentiall mark of finding the true Church by the truth of doctrine For Schismatikes as we shall heare them confesse in the 2. booke hold true doctrine and neuertheles as here they acknowledge are not of the true Church They exclude those that deny any fundameÌ„tal article 5. In like manner they do commonly debarre from their Church all such as deny any principall or fundamentall point of fayth Melancthon in his booke of common places in the title of the Church They are not members of the Church who pertinaciously maintaine errours opposite to the foundation And in his answere to the Bauarian articles Saints may haue errours but not such as ouerthrow the foundation In his examen of those that are to take orders Agreement in the foundation LutheraÌ„s is a thing necessary to the vnity of the Church And vpon the 3. cap. of the 1. epistle to Timothy The foundation is held in the Church otherwise there should be no Church at all And in his 79. proposition tom 4 It is most certaine that those companies are not the Church of God who either are altogeather ignorant of the Ghospell or impugne some article of the foundation that is some article of fayth or doctrine of the decalogue or maintaine open idols Chemnitius in his common places pa. 3. title of the Church Neither can these be acknowledged for the true Church who imbrace fundamentall errours And the Lutherans in the conference at Ratisbon Ses 14. Hutter in his Analysis of the Confession of Auspurg Gesner in his 24. place Adam Francis in his 11. place and other Lutherans commonly agree that the Church cannot erre Fundamentally or in the Foundation And the Confession of Saxony giueth this note to know who are in the Church SacrameÌ„taries Those who hold the Foundation As for Sacramentaries Caluin in his 4. booke of Institutions cap. 2. num 1 So soone as a lye hath broken into the castle of Religion the summe of necessary doctrine is inuerted the vse of Sacraments is fallen certainly the destruction of the Church ensueth euen as a mans life is lost when his throat is cut or his vitall parts deadly wounded And soone after It is certaine that there is no Church where lyes and errour haue gotten to the toppe And cap. 19. num 17 VVithout doubt the Church of the faythfull must agree in all the heads of our Religion Sadeel in his answere to the Theses held at Posna cap. 12 I thinke the matter is thus to be defined by the word of God that if any in what Church soeuer dissent in the foundation of sayth and be obstinate in their errours such appertaine not to the vnity of the Church The like he hath in his answere to Arthure cap. 12. Vesinuâ— in his Catechisme quest 54. cap. 4 The whole Church erreth not nor wholly nor in the foundation Polanus in his Thesis of the Church sayth The Church erreth not in the foundation The same teacheth Zanchius in his treatise of the Church c. 7. Lubbertus in his 2. booke of the Church c 3. Vorstius in his Anti-bellarmin pag. 139. Bucanus in his 41. place and other Sacramentaries commonly And with them herein agree our English Protestants English ProtestaÌ„ts For thus sayth his Maiesty in his epistle to Cardinall Peron The Churches are vnited in vnity of sayth and doctrine in those heads which are necessary to saluation And D. Whitaker in the preface of his Controuersies The foundations of sayth are of that nature that one being shaken nothing in all religion remaineth sound And Contr. 2. quest 4. cap.
1 We say that the Church cannot erre in things simply necessary Which he often repeateth in the 2. cap. And quest 5. cap. 17 If any fundamentall doctrine be taken away the Church straight way falleth And cap. 18 The fundamentall articles are those on which our fayth relyeth as the house vpon the foundation Againe If any fundamentall and essentiall principle of fayth be ouerturned or shaken it cannot be truly called a Church And quest 6. cap. 3 That is no true Church which taketh away one only foundation The same he teacheth in his 1. booke of the scripture cap. 7. sect 8. and cap. 12. sect 3. M. Perkins in his explication of the Creed If any man or Church retaine or defend obstinatly or of willfull ignorance a fundamentall errour we must not account them anymore Christians or Churches D. Sutliue in his first booke of the Church cap. 1 Those blemishes take away the name of the true Church which are against the grounds of fayth D. Feild in his 2. booke of the Church cap. 3 Purity free from fundamentall and essentiall errour is necessarily required in the Church D. Morton in the 1. part o◠his Apology booke 2. cap 38 Purity of doctrine in fundamentall principles of fayth is required to the being and constitution of the Church And in his answere to the Protestants Apology l. 4. c. 3. Sect. 5 The deniall of fundamentall doctrines doth exclude men from saluation and disannulleth the name of the Church in the gainsayers D. White in his way to the Church pag. 110 VVe do not thinke euery company to be the true Church that holdeth only some points of the true fayth but it is requisite that the foundation be holden And in his defence of the way cap. 17 A fundamentall point is that which belongs to the substance of fayth and is so necessary that there can be no saluation without the knowledge and explicite fayth thereof And surely they all and at all tymes ought to affirme this seeing they deliuer truth of doctrine as an essentiall marke of the Church which they must needs vnderstand and so Vorstius in his Anti-bellarmin pag. 148. expresseth it of true doctrine in fundamentall points And this their doctrine touching this matter I earnestly commend to the memory of the Reader because it is necessary to find out what a Protestant is and also is one of the grounds whereby it may appeare that there was no Protestant Church before Luther because before him there was no company which held all the same fundamentall points of doctrine which Protestants do hold 6. Finally They exclude all that deny any article of fayth they sometyms shut out of their Church all those who deny any one point of fayth be it fundamentall or other For thus writeth the Apology of the Confession of Auspurge The Church of Christ is not among them who defend naughty opinions contrary to the Ghospell And Luther in his epistle to Count Albert It is not inough if in other things he confesse Christ and his Ghospell For who denieth Christ in one article or word denieth him who is denied in all because there is but one Christ Lutherās the same in all his words And vpon the 17. cap. of Deuteronomy Faith suffereth nothing and the word tolerateth nothing but the word must be perfectly pure and the doctrine alwayes sound throughout And vpon the 17. cap. of S. Matthew Fayth must be round that is belieuing all articles though small ones For who belieueth not one article rightly belieueth nothing righly as Iames sayth VVho offendeth in one is guilty of all and so who in one article doubteth or belieueth not at least obstinatly dissolueth the roundnes of the graine and so can do no good And vpon the 5. cap. to the Galathians In diuinity a small errour ouerthroweth all the doctrine Doctrine is like to a Mathematicall point it cannot be deuided that is it cannot suffer either addition or detraction And when Zuinglius and his followers desired of the Lutherans to be esteemed as their brethren Melancthon as Hospinian reporteth in his Sacramentarian history fol. 81. roughly sayd vnto them VVe meruaile with what conscience they can account vs for brethren whome they iudge to erre in doctrine And againe fol. 82. Luther grauely spake vnto them saying he greatly merueiled how they could hold him for a brother if they thought his doctrine to be vntrue And the same Melancthon togeather with Brentius writeth thus to the Lantgraue Perhaps Christians who are entangled in some errour which they do not obstinatly defend may be tolerated as brethren but they which not only bring false doctrine into the Church but also maintaine it are not to be acknowledged for brethren And againe Melancthon in his examen of those who are to take orders tom 3. There are in that company of the Church many who are not Saints but yet agreeing in doctrine The Deuines of Wittemberg in their refutation of the orthodoxall consent pag. 73 Like as he who keepeth the whole law and offendeth in one as Iames the Apostle witnesseth is guilty of all so who belieueth not one word of Christ albeit he seeme to beliue the other articles of the Creed yet belieueth nothing and is to be damned as incredulous For euery heretike did not impugne euery article of fayth but commonly each of them of purpose impugned some one or other whome neuertheles the Church iustly condemned as heretikes if they pertinaciously stood in their errours Schusselburg also in his 3. tom of the Catalogue of Heretiks pag. 85. Christian fayth is one copulatiue and who denieth one article of fayth calleth in doubt the whole body of the heauenly doctrine Which he repeateth againe in the next pag. And tome 8. pag. 361 The Lutherans do fly him who depraueth the doctrine of truth in any article whatsoeuer And in his 2. booke of Caluinisticall diuinity article 1 VVe are certaine by the testimony of Gods word that an errour in one false doctrine obstinatly defended maketh an heretike For S. Chrysostome vpon the epistle to the Galathians sayd most truly that he corrupteth the whole doctrine who ouerthroweth it in the least article And Ambrose wrote rightly to the Virgin Demetrias That he is out of the number of the faythfull and hath no part in the inheritance of Saints who disagreeth in any thing from the Catholike truth Sacramētaries Thus the Lutherans Peter Martyr in his epistle to the straungers in England tom 2. loc col 136 VVe answere all the words of God as farre forth as they proceeded from him are of equall waight and authority and therefore none may receiue this and reiect that as false Iames sayth boldly who sinneth in one becommeth guilty of all That if it haue place in keeping of the commandements is also true in points of fayth Sadeel in his index of Turriās Repetitions pag. 806 I sayd that it was no true Church which teacheth doctrine repugnant to the
written word of God And his Maiesty in his Monitory epistle pag. 97. English ProtestaÌ„tâ— in Latin I call God to witnes that I hold him not for a Christian who in this learned age belieueth that to wit that Enoch and Elias are to come And D. Morton in his answere to the Protestants Apology lib. 4. c. 2. sect 3. after he had sayd that in a Church albeit corrupted with errour and superstition yet if it do not ruinate the foundation the erroneous superstitious professors may be saued adddeth VVhich notwithstanding we must so vnderstand as that the errour and superstition do not proceed from knowledge but from ignorance which ignorance is not affected but simple Thus we see that Protestants somtymes confesse that true fayth is like a graine or Mathematicall point which cannot be parted that the articles of fayth are one copulatiue and cannot be deuided that who so obstinatly denieth one article belieueth truly none that the obstinate deniall of any one poynt of fayth is sufficient to damne or to make an heretik and no brother of the faythfull or member of the Church And finally that she is no true Church who willfully maintaineth any one thing repugnant to the Ghospell or word of God Which indeed is most true and is the doctrine of the holy Fathers and Catholiks and I would to God Protestants would constantly stand vnto it 7. By all which hath byn rehearsed in this chapter out of Protestants it appeareth how many sortes of Christians Protestants do sometymes exclude out of the Church namely Papists Anabaptists Arians al Heretiks all Schismatiks all those who deny any fundamentall point of fayth and finally al who obstinatly deny any point whatsoeuer of fayth or of the word of God And how many things they sometymes require to the making and being of a Protestant to wit that he belieue all and euery point of their fayth and obstinatly dissent in none To which their doctrine if they would as I haue sayd alwayes constantly stand it would easily appeare first how small a company the Protestants Church is and how little it is spread through the world and much lesse Catholike or vniuersal seeing there is no Prouince nor scarse any citty in which all Protestants agree amongst themselues in al points of their doctrine Secondly it would easily appeare that the Protestant Church was neuer before Luther seeing there is no apparence that before him there was any company of Christians who in all points of doctrine agreed with Protestants But ProtestaÌ„ts as I sayd in the Preface accommodate their doctrine and opinions to tymes and occasions And the tymes when they deny Papists to be of the Church are when they exhort them to leaue the Roman Church or excuse their owne reuolting from her or when they dehort others from returning to her For at all these tymes it serueth to their purpose to deny that Papists are of the Church or in the way of saluation which at other tymes as we shall see in the next chapter they are content to graunt And the tymes when they exclude Anabaptists Arians Heretiks Schismatiks and all that deny either fundamentall or other articles of fayth out of the Church are when either the euidence of truth enforceth them thereto or when they are ashamed to acknowledge such vgly monsters for brethren and members of their Church or would exhort such as haue left their company to returne vnto them and keep others from forsaking them or finally would brag of the agreement and purity in doctrine of their company For at those tymes it serueth their turne to renouÌ„ce all the foresayd kind of men whom at other tymes especially when we demaund of them who were of their Church before Luther they are most willing to receiue as their kind brethren diligently scraping gathering such shreeds and clouts when they perceiue their owne nakednes and beggary which themselues when they thought they were rich and had no need thereof most disdainfully cast on the dunghills as shall appeare in the chapters following CHAP. II. That Protestants sometymes account Papists for members of their Church IN the former chapter we haue seene how sparing Protestants sometyms be in admitting others into their Church now we shall see how liberall they be at other tymes in so much that they graunt not only all those whome in the former chapter they reiected but also their professed enemies idolaters Infidells Atheists Antichrist himselfe and all whosoeuer vnder the name of Christians impugne the deeds or doctrine of the Pope to be their brethren their fellowes and members of their Church This we will shew concerning the Papists in this chapter and of the others afterward 1. That Protestants sometymes do acknowledge Papists to be in the Church is manifest First by their open confession thereof LutheraÌ„s For in the preface of their Confession of Auspurg speaking of themselues and Papists Papists serue vnder christ they say VVe are all soldiers vnder one Christ And Luther in his epistle against the Anabaptists as Caluin in his booke against the Chaunter of Lions and D. Whitaker in the place hereafter cited do confesse writeth The kernel of Christianity in Popery That in Popery is true Christianity yea the kernell of Christianity and many pious and great Saints Againe If Christianity be vnder the Pope then it must be the body and member of Christ And vpon the 28. chapter of Genesis VVe confesse that there is a Church among the Papists because they haue Baptisme absolution the text of the Ghospell and many godly men are among them Caluin in his 140. epistle to Soziâ— I think I haue sufficiently proued that in Popery there remayneth some Church albeit halfe destroyed and if you will broken and deformed And vpon the 2. câ—ap of the 2 epistle to the Thessalonians The Body of Christ I confesse it is the temple of God in which the Pope ruleth and he calleth it the very sanctuary of God And de vera reform pag. 332. SacrameÌ„taries â—ayth that S Paul affirmeth that Antichrist whom he will haue to be the Pope shall sit in the temple of God And lib. de scandalis pag. 103 In the midest of Gods temple And lib. cont Precentorem pag. 372 In the very sanctuary of God And Respons ad Sadolet In the midest of Gods sanctuary Surely this is to graunt that the Romane Church in which the Pope sitteth is the very temple and very sanctuary of God And in his answeare to Sadolet VVe deny not those to be Churches of Christ which you gouerne In his 4. booke of Institutions chap. 2. num 11. he sayth that among Papists Gods couenant remayned inuiolable Not yet killed And num 12 VVe deny not that there are Churches among them Neither deny we but there remaine Churches vnder his the Pope he meaneth tyranny but which he hath almost killed Iunius in his book of the Church cap. 17. writeth that the Popish
Messias to be that notable Antichrist foretold in Scripture For thus writeth M. Powell lib. de Antichristo cap. 33. pag. 338 I will in no wise say that all the Popes from the tyme wherein Papistry was first reuealed to be Antichristianity are damned Howbeit in the beginning of his booke he makes this protestation I solemnely take God to record that I as certainly know the Bishop of Rome to be that great Antichrist and the Popish church to be the Synagogue of Antichrist as I know God to be in the heauens or Iesus Christ to be the true Messias promised to the Fathers D. Whitaker likewise com 4. q. 5. cap. 3. pag. 694. sayth Let vs cry aloud and swore by him who liues for euer that the Bishop of Rome is Antichrist And to D. Sanders last demonstration that the Pope is not Antichrist pag. 799 VVe may take that most sacred and most true oath and sweare by him who liues for euer that the Bishoppe of Rome is the very Antichrist And neuerthelesse in his answere to the first demonstration he sayth with M. Powell I will not say that from the tyme that Papistry began to be Antichristianity the Popes themselues haue byn all damned And both he cap. cit pâ—g 679. 682. other Protestants ordinarily affirme that Antichrists Sea shal be in the true Church among the company of the saythfull and that he shall be a cittizen and inhabitant and Pastour of the Church To whom I pray will these men deny saluation or a place in their Church who graunt it vnto Antichrist the sworne enemy of Christ whome the scripture it self styleth Christs aduersary the man of sin the sonne of perdition I see not why they should henceforward vpbrayd vs with Antichrist since they themselues clayme him for a member of their Church 6. It is also certaine that they challenge Atheists For Illyricus in Catel lib. 9. col 1916. Dâ— Humfrey respons ad Rat. 3. That they challenge Atheists Camp M. Fox in his Acts printed anno 1596. pag. 646. allot that Atheist Machiauel an honorable roome among the witnesses and maintayners of the truth And Luther apud Manlium in loc tit de Eccl. pag. 483. layth of Valla that he gaue place to none but Epicure himselfe and professed openly that he held opinions repugnant to the foundation of sayth Neuerthelesse the same Luther respons ad Louan Colen tom 2. fol. 38. writeth thus of him Valla in my iudgement was either a remanent sparke or some feâ—â—eli of the primitiue Church whose like in constancy and vnfayned zeale of Christian fayth Italy or the whole Church had not for many ages One Epicure then in Luthers iudgement was the remanent sparke and Iewell of the Church That sometymes Protestants account all those their brethren who vnder the name of Christians oppose themselues any way against the Pope CHAP. V. 1. THAT Protestants sometymes acknowledge all those for members of their Church who vnder the name of Christians do any way oppose themselues against the Pope I proue First because some of them do openly so professe For as Keâ—nice reporteth in locis tit de Eccles pag. 122. Some faine the Church to be a rable of all Sects of Anabaptists Sacramentaries Swineseldians and others so they be not Papists And Capito in Caluin epist 6. Some haue brought in a liberty as if all were of the Ghospells side whosoeuer haue cast of the Popes yoke Musculus also in locis tit de caena pag. 522. sayth I imbrace all for brethren in the Lord howsoeuer they disagree from me or among themselues as long as they mayntaine not the Popish impiety Secondly because they professe that the end of their preaching was to lessen the authority of the Pope For what end Luther and â—is fellowes preached and Bishops and to be contrary to them For thus Luther writeth of himselfe epist ad Frederic Elect. tom 2. fol. 330 The Ecclesiasticall tyranny is now weakned and broaken which only I purposed in writing Or as Slcidan lib. 3. reporteth He writeth that the Ecclesiasticall tyranny is now weakned that that alone was his designe at the first And epist ad Waldenses in Hoâ—pin part 2. fol. 8. he sayth that he impugned transubstantiation only for enny of the Papists And in parâ—â— Confell apud eâ—â—â—dem fol. 13. that he impugned the Eleuation only to spite the Papists Caluin 4. Institut cap. 10. § 1. sayâ—h The end of our contention is to bridle that infinite and barbarous Dominion which those who would be accounted Pastors haue vsurped ouer soules Zuinglius lib. de Auctor Sedit â—om 2. â—ol 125. affirmeth that there is a sort of ProtestaÌ„ts which for no other cause do heare the doctrine of the Ghospell then because they extremely hate the Popedome and enuy Papists their felicity and glory Bucer lib. de regno Christi cap. 4 The greatest part of men seeme to haue sought only these things of the ghospell First that they might shake of the tyranny of the Romane Antichrist and of the false Bishops c. Luther also tom 2. German fol. 22. telleth what was the end of the Sacramentaries Anabaptists I heare sayth he that some imbrace Anabaptisme for this only end that so they may spite the Bishop of Rome euen as the Sacramentaries do only in hatred of the Romish Bishop deny that there is any thing in the sacrament beside bread and wine Of the new Arians end thus writeth Zâ—nchius lib. 1. epist pag. 154 Ouâ— Arians haue determined to ouerturne from the foundation whatsoeuer is in the Church of Rome And what end Illyricus had thus telleth D. Whitaker ad Rat. 8. Campiani Illyricus went further then he should as I think to be the further of from you whome he hated 2. Thirdly because they call the departure from the Pope and Popish doctrine the foundation a good part and the summe of the Protestant building Sâ— dâ—el Respons ad Arthu cap. 12 Protestants agree in this foundation that the Church ought to be reformed out of the word of God and that Popish errours must be remoued out of the Church Seranta epist dedicat ad Episc Angliae It is to be wondered how much almost all the Reformers please themselues in this point that they will haue nothing common with the church of Rome Grotius apud Homium in Specimine c Neither can I forebeare to shew the fountaine and ofspring of this and other calamities VVe think that we are so much the purer the further we go from points of Romish doctrine without any difference Vergerius dial 1. pag. 20 VVe hope that shortly all matters will be composed VVe could do by Gods helpe that which seemed the cheifest of all and the hardest and well nigh impossible that is pull our selues and ridde vs of the Papists tyranny VVherefore nothing is to be doubted but we shall compasse other matters of lesse moment For a good foundation is layd yea a good part
at least virtually and implicitly all their articles and wittingly deny none of them because as we see they are fundamentall articles of Protestancy without which one cannot haue the whole essence or substance of a Protestant nor be an entire and absolute Protestant We speak of any who are ProtestaÌ„ts only in part but only in part and in some sort And we as hath byn often sayd treat here only of an entire and absolute Protestant such as at least hath all the substantiall parts of a Protestant and endeauour to proue that Luther was the author of such a company and of such a faith and religion and regard not whither that before his tyme there were any who were Protestants only in part and in some sort and held only some part of Protestant religion but not the whole substance thereof And hereupon we frame an inuincible argument to proue that there was no true Protestant or Protestant church before Luther The definition of a true ProtestaÌ„t Euery true Protestant belieueth Iustification by only speciall faith and at least virtually and implicitly belieueth the articles of the Confession of Auspurg or of Saxony Scotland Strasburg or Bohemia But there was no man no Church before Luther who thus belieued Therefore no true Protestant or Protestant church The Maior is the very definition of a true Protestant gathered partly out of the common doctrine of all Protestants partly out of the foresayd Confessions of their fayth The Minor being negatiue is sufficiently manifest by that neither Luther nor any in his tyme or to this day could produce any one man or company who before Luthers preaching had belieued in that sort This foundation therefore touching the essence and substance of a Protestant and Protestant Church being layd to wit that he only is a true absolute Protestant who belieueth Iustification by only speciall fayth and the foresayd other fundamentall points of Protestancy and that the Protestant Church is a company of such belieuers and the Protestant religion such a beliefe and worship of God I will endeauour in this next book out of Protestants testimonies and Confessions to proue that Luther was the first beginner of their Church and Religion The end of the first Booke THE SECOND BOOKE Of the Author or Beginner of the Protestant Church and Religion CHAP. I. That Protestants confesse that the substance of their Church and Religion was perished when Luther began THE first demonstration wherewith we will proue that Luther was the author and first beginner of the Protestant Church and religion we will take out of Protestants Confessions of the substantiall destruction of their Church ProtestaÌ„ts confesse their religion was perished religion principall article of Iustification by only fayth before Luther arose For of the destruction of their fayth and religion thus writeth Luther himself tom 1. Proposit 62. fol. 375 Certaine it is that our Apostaticall Bishops raigning Gods fayth perished Perished And lib. de Captiu Babylon tom 2. fol. 77 The Popes tyranny hath many ages agone extinguished the fayth Extinguished And lib. de abâ—og Mist fol. 249. he sayth to the Catholikes Ye haue extinguished the Ghospell And lib. de pijs ceremon is fol. 387 alià s 393 Destroyed The doctrine of the ghospell lay destroyed by humane traditions Tom. 3. in psalm 1. fol. 126 VVhat thinkest thou was in the Church but a whirle wind of Gods wrath by which we were thrust into so many so different so inconstant so vncertaine and those infinite glosses of Lawyers Christ altogeather vnknown and opinions of Deuines in the meane tyme Christ being altogeather vnknowne stumbling into many quicke sands gulfes and snares of conscience were knockt together And in psalm 22. fol. 345 Christ together with fayth is now extinguished Christ and fayth extinguished And fol. 348 Fayth lyeth extinct And in psalm 51. fol. 460 The former age could neither vnderstand nor soundly teach the greatest and weightiest points Praefat. in psalm Grad fol. 509 God punisheth contempt so as he plainly taketh away his word whereof Popery is a notable example Al knowlâ—dge of Christ wholy extinct in which we see it hath so fallen out And fol. 568 Fayth it selfe was plainly extinct Tom. 4. Praefat. Eccl. fol. 1 The schooles of Deuines haue wholy extinguished most assured fayth in Christ togeather with all the knowledge of Christ Tom. 5. in cap. 2. Galat. fol. 306 The Papists with their impious and blasphemous doctrine haue not only obscured but simply haue taken away Not only obserued but simply taken away the Ghospell and ouerwhelmed Christ And fol 322 Christs ghospell being obscured yea truly ouerwhelmed the Pope c. In c. 4. fol. 376 This most common and most receiued opinion of the vncertainty of the remission of sinnes was surely an article of fayth in all Popery Christ shut out of the Church wherewith truly they ouerwhelmed the doctrine of fayth destroyed fayth and shut Christ out of the Church Fol. 400 The Pope hath vtterly extinguished Christian liberty In cap. 1. Petri The sincere knowledge of fayth was extinct In cap. 15.1 Cor. fol. 134. VVithout our helpe they had neuer learnt one word of the Ghospell Without Luther not one word or iot of the Ghospell And fol. 141 They had not knowne one iote of the Gospell vnlesse by our labour and study it had byn brought forth into the world â—om 6. in cap. 3. Genes fol. 43 Holesome doctrine was by little and litle extinct In cap. 4. fol. 57 The light of the word was extinguished by wicked Popes In cap. 17. fol. 199 That I may say all in one word the Pope hath truly buryed Christ In cap. 48. fol. 643 The Pope hath obscured nay destroyed the doctrine of sayth In cap. 49. fol. 660 The Pope hath truly obscured the doctrine and taken away the Promises Christ truly buried that we knew not what Christ was Fol. 666 He hath extinguished the Gospell Tom. 7. lib. de Missa fol. 230 The knowledge of Christ was truly abolished and destroyed This ye Papists ye cannot deny the matter it selfe proclaimeth it And fol. 231 All true VVorship of God being extinct from the bottom c. Epist ad Fredericum Electorem fol. 506 Knowledge of Christ truly destroyed The Pope of Rome hath most plainly rooted out the Ghospell truly oppressed and ouerthrowne lib. cont Papatum fol. 469 Fayth was weakened choaked and extinguished and Christian liberty lost Thus plainly speaketh Luther almost in all his Latin comes of the substantiall destruction of his fayth and Ghospell before that as he sayth he brought it againe into the world Ghospell most plainly rooted out To which he addeth in his 7. Dutch tome in his admonition to the Germans This abomination was increased so that they blotted out and supprest the words of this Sacrament and fayth so that neither a letter nor point of them remayned in all Popery in all
608 findeth fault with Cardinall Bellarmine when he sayth that there is alwayes a visible Church by the name of the Church he vnderstandeth not one or two but a multitude Neither also do they by the name of the Church when then say it cannot perish vnderstand any true particuler Church consisting of a Pastour and flock as is euident both because they say the Church may be reduced to one or two as also because as shall hereafter appeare they thinke that all Pastors may perish Cap. 7. and lastly because D. Whitaker loc cit reprehendeth Bellarmine for that by the name of the Church which cannot faile he vnderstandeth a multitude gathered together in which are Prelates and subiects They are therefore of opinion that both the Catholike Church spred through out the world and euery particuler church consisting of Prelates and subiects may faile and perish and when they say the Church cannot faile by the name of the Church they vnderstand fayth and meane that there shall alwayes be fayth in some one or other as clearly appeareth by their former words and also by these of D. Whitaker loc cit pag. 469 What Protestāts meane by the church whē they say it cannot perish Hence he gathereth not as our aduersaries do that the visible Church shall neuer saile but that sayth shall neuer saile in the whole but that to the end of the world Christian religion shal remayne in some This sayth he is the very thing which we say maintaine Ye see plainly that when they say the church cannot faile they only meane that fayth cannotvtterly faile but that it shall be alwayes in some Wherein there is no contradiction to that which otherwise they teach that the Church can faile because fayth and the Church are different things neither doth fayth in whome soeuer and in how few soeuer make the Church Wherefore if they be mad men and no Christians who say that the Catholike Church may faile or that the Church is not to dure for euer as D. Whitaker himselfe sayth cap. 1. 2. cit certainly these Protestants are such For whiles they say that the Church may be brought to one or two and that all Pastors may perish they manifestly say indeed and effect that both the Catholike and all kind of true Churches may faile Moreouer I proue that they meane that the true Church was perished because they think that she is made by inward fayth but this they affirme to haue perished as euen now appeared Besides the very name of the Church properly signifieth the true Church and only improperly that which is not the true Church And therefore when it is simply and absolutely put it ought to be taken for the true Church which thing also themselues do teach For thus writeth Sadeel in Refutat Thes Posnan cap. 4. pag. 827 VVhen the Church is simply put or when it is sayd the Church of Christ it properly signifieth only the elect Hereupon also Kemnice in loc tit de Eccles cap. 3. defineth the Church to be the Catholike company But the Catholike company is the true Church as is euident by the Creed where we professe to belieue the Catholike Church and is confessed by D. Whitaker Contr. 2. quest 1. cap. 2. 5. by D. Morton Apol. part 1. l. 1. cap. 13. by Lubbert lib. 1. de Eccl. cap. 4. by the French Catechisme Domin 15. and others And therefore most rightly saith S. Augustin that it is a wicked impudent detestable De vni◠Bapt. c. 14. Conc. 2. in Psal 101. and abominable speach to say the Church hath perished which yet would not be vnlesse by the name of the Church were vnderstood the true Church For what offence were it to say that the false Church had perished Furthermore when heretikes as the Donatists Calu. cont Seruet pa. 657. Whitak Cont. 2. q. 3. c. 2. 3. Seruetus and the like do say that the Church was perished or banished the Protestants themselues vnderstand thē of the true Church why then ought not Protestants to be vnderstood in the same manner when they vse the same words Againe because sometymes they say that the Kingdome of Christ the temple of God hath perished Cap. 1. n. 7. But what can be the Kingdome of Christ and temple of God but the true Church for the false is rather the Kingdome and temple of Satan Whereupon D. Whitaker Controuers 2. quest 3. cap. 1. pag. 466. sayth The scriptures most plainly teach that there will be no end of the Kingdome of Christ And ad Demonstrat 17. Sanderi VVhat other thing is the temple of God but the Church of Christ which is built with liuely stones And M. Powell lib. 1. de Antichristo cap. 3 The Church is defined 1. Tim. 3. to be the temple of God Hereto we may add that Ochim sayth that that Church which Christ founded washed with his bloud enriched with his holy spirit which vndoubtedly is the true Church was vtterly destroyed Num. 8. Finally because they say that Elias thought that there was not remayning one pious man besides himselfe that he was the only Christian the only true worshipper of God which was left aliue and actuall member of the true Church Seing therfore they will make Elias to thinke so of the true church of the same also ought themselues to be vnderstood who vse to draw arguments out of Elias his words especially when as they say that it sufficeth if there be one or two faythfull men in the most forlorne tymes of the Church which they must needs meane of the true Church which they will haue to consist only of the faythfull seruants of God That they meane of the vniuersall Church 4. Their third shift may be that when they speake of the destruction of the Church they meane not of the vniuersall or whole Church but of some particuler or part of the Church But this is easily refuted First because as we haue rehearsed they say there was a slaughter of the whole Church that all the Church was corrupted all became idolatrous that scarce the name of Christianity was left that none belieued that not one iot of the ghospell had byn knowne without Luther that the whole knowledge of Christ all pure worship all true religion was abolished Secōdly because vnder the name of Elias they plainly say that the whole Church was extinct the whole Church failed he alone was a faythfull man Num. 8. and actuall member of the true Church Wherefore either they thinke it not blasphemy to say the whole Church hath perished or this horrible blasphemy which calleth in question all religion they most impiously attribute to that holy Prophet Thirdly because they say that their Church was brought to one or two and that it is inough to the Church if there be one or two faythfull persons But what man well in his wittes will say that one or two are inough to make the
Catholike or vniuersall church Finally this shall yet more appeare out of the chapter following where we shall see that they teach that the whole world did fall from the fayth 5. Their fourth shift is That they meane of a substantiall perishing that by the words Destruction decaying failing ouerthrowing and such others they meane not a substantiall perishing of the fayth or Church but only an accidentall corruption of becomming worse But this shift also is soone refuted First because Luther sayth of his fayth doctrine or ghospell that it dyed was neglected ouerwhelmed extinct blotted out taken away ouerthrowne lost Cap. 2. n. â—â— abolished forgotten and rooted out And that he might put it out of all doubt that by these words he meant a true and substantiall destruction or perishing he added vnto them most significant aduerbes saying that it was truly ouerwhelmed wholy extinct vtterly extinct Ib. extinct from the bottome plainly extinct plainly taken away simply taken away quite taken away vtterly buryed vtterly lost wholy abolished and blotted out and most plainly rooted out And least any one might also cauill that these words are not meant of a true and substantiall destruction he sayd further that the Pope hath obscured nay extinguished the doctrine of fayth They haue darckned nay wholy ouerwhelmed Christs Ghospell They haue not only obscured but absolutely taken away the ghospell Lib. 1. de peccat mer. c. 4. Surely as S. Augustin sayth such kind of words needs no Expositor but only a reader In like sort other Protestants say of their fayth or ghospell that it was banished cast out extinct ended choaked buryed obscured till it was vtterly extinguished Num. 2.3 that it perished from the earth and vanished out of the Church They add also that it was wholy ouerturned vtterly extinct quite changed into idolatries ouerturned from the root and that there was an vtter abolition an extreme salling away and full destruction of it so that not so much as one litle sparke could be sound but it was quite extinct scarce the name of Christianity was left 6. Besides of their principall and most fundamentall article of Iustification by only fayth they say C. 1. n. 4. 5. 6. that lay long vnknowne that there was profound silence of it that no man taught it that it was neglected lost blotted out extinct and horribly opprest that it was corrupted nay extinct and abolished that no man belieued it that it was vtterly extinct plainly lost quite lost wholy suppressed wholy oppressed wholy trampled wholy dasht out vtterly blotted out quite extinct quite taken away quite neglected and blotted out of the memory of men and not only obscured but quite extinguished But if this doctrine were so extinct as no man belieued it and blotted out of mens memory surely not only the Profession of their fayth but also their fayth it selfe was vtterly perished and consequently also their Church whereof this article is the life soule summe definition and all Num. 7. 7. Of the Church also they say that it was banished fayled was oppressed extinct ouerturned fallen wholy fallen that it fell to Antichrist that the old foundation thereof was remoued and a new layd that the order of the Church perished that there was a slaughter of the whole Church that Christs Kingdome was throwne downe razed to the ground that in the temple of God there was nought but pittifull ruines that the Church was from the foundation rooted out and ouerthrowne by the ground and that where it once was there remayned only the name the substance being quite lost Surely either by these manner of speaches is signified a substantiall destruction or that cannot be plainly signifyed by any manner of words Besides the formes of speach do more clearly signify a substantial destruction theÌ„ those which Protestants condemne in some heretiks For Caluin lib. cont Seruetum pag. 657. condemneth Seruet for saying that there had byn a long banishment of the Church from the earth and that she had byn driuen out of the world And yet as we see Danaeus sayth that the Church was banished Powell that all true religion was banished D. Fulke that the true doctrine of saluation was driuen out Anâ— Crispin that all true worship of God was driuen out D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 471. and otherwhere condemneth the Donatists and other Heretikes for saying that the Church perished and yet Bale sayth that holesome truth perished from the earth And Lobechius vnder Elias his name that the Church quite perished Moreouer they say that the Church may be reduced to one or two which is indeed to say that the Church may substantially perish Num. 8. for the Church is defined to be a company or multitude in the English Confession article 19. That the Church cannot consist of one in the French art 27. in the Suitzers art 17. and in the Flemish art 27. But one or two are not a company Whereupon Danaeus lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 16. sayth It is written of Vlpiaâ— the Lawyer in the ciuill law that at least three persons are required to make a Colledge and if to a Colledge much more to the Church And Lubbert lib. 2. Replicat cap. 3. sayth plainly that one man makes not a Church And Polanus in Syntag. lib. 7. cap. 1 One man though neuer so holy cannot be a church Beurlin also in Refut Soti Neither do we call the solitude of one man which worshippeth God the Church And D. Whitaker lib. 1 de Scriptura cap. 11. Sect. 4. How can the Church be in one seeing the very name of the Church doth signify a company or multitude If therefore there be but one there is no Church For the Church cannot be imagined to be but in many Iuel DefeÌ„s Ap. part x. c. 1. Fulk de Succes p. 89. Beza in Catech. c 5. Brent in Prolog q. 4. And much lesse can one or two be the Catholike Church that is as the Protestants themselues expound it the Church spred throughout the whole world because one or two cannot be spred throughout the world Whereupon the Scots in their Confession cap. 18. say that two or three make not the vniuersall Church And Zuinglius lib. de vera falsa relig tom 2. fol. 192 VVho sayes that the Church signifieth some few erreth like to him who sayth that people signifieth the King Surely it should be a notable flock which consisted of one or two sheep a worthy Kingdome which had but one or two subiects and a strange Catholike or vniuersall Church which contayned but one or two faythfull persons What can the gates of hell preuaile so farre against the Church as they can reduce her to one or two Christians What other thing is this then to say that the Church can perish For seing the Church cannot be imagined but in company or multitude who sayth â—hat the Church can be brought to one or two doth indeed
say the Church can be destroyed 8. If any reply that S. Augustin vpon the 128. psalme sayth that the Church was once in Abel alone and Tertullian lib. de poenit cap. 10. the Church is in one or two I answere that S. Augustin there by the Church vnderstandeth those only whome the scripture by name hath canonized as it hath Abel for otherwise it is manifest that in Abels tyme there were others that were of the Church besides himselfe to wit Adam and Eue. And Tertullian by the Church vnderstandeth not the Catholike or vniuersall Church as we do but any number of Christians such as were those domesticall Churches which S. Paul sometymes saluted 9. The last refuge may be that what Protestants haue sayd of the destruction of the Church and fayth they meant not of their owne Church and fayth but of some others But this is a fond shift For first as I haue shewed they meane the destruction of the true Church and fayth Eyther therefore their Church and fayth is not the true but false or else they meane of their owne For the true Church and fayth is but one as the Apostle sayth Ephes 4 One God one fayth And the Nycen Creed I belieue one church S. Cyprian lib. de vnit One God one Christ one Church and one sayth S. Hilary ad Constant VVhatsoeuer is besides one fayth is not fayth but treachery And S. Leo serm 4. de Natiuit Vnlesse it be one it is no fayth Nay Luther lib. cont Papaâ—um tom 7. fol. 461 Christ knoweth not two kinds of vnlike Churches but one only Church Caluin 4. Inst cap. 1. § 2 VVe cannot find two or three churches vnlesse Christ be pluckt in peeces And in his Catechisme As there is one head of the faythfull so they must all be vnited in one body that there be not many Churches but one only And hereupon inferreth Sadeel in Refutat Thes Posnan art 61. that what is sayd of the true Church is sayd of theirs Seeing sayth he the true Church is one and not many as often as the truth of doctrine shineth openly so often we say the true Church and therfore our Church was visible Secondly because as we haue seene they speake of the destruction of their most principall article of iustificatioÌ„ by only faith which they affirme to be the life soule and summe of their Church Thirdly because they estsoones speake of the destruction of the Ghospell but by the name of the Ghospell they meane their owne doctrine as by the name of Gospellers they vnderstand themselues as hereafter shall appeare Finally because they professe that by the name of a Protestant Lutheran or Caluinist they vnderstand a true Christian Sadeel lib. de peccat remiss cap. 1 Ours that is the true Christian Catholikes opinion D. Fulke lib. de Succest pag. 186 I will neuer deny that Iewell was a noble Protestant that is a Christian And ad Cauillat Staplet The community of Christians whome ye call Protestants Hutten in Expostul cum Erasmo Against Lutherans that is maintayners of the truth Schusselburg tom 7. Catal. haeret Pap. 73 A Lutheran or true Christian is c. And lib. 2. Theol. Caluin fol. 131 Lutherans that is true seruants of Christ Beza cont Illyricum pag. 168 VVe perceiue no difference betweene Sacramentaries and Christians Hospinian part 2. Histor fol. 384 The Sacramentaries that is the orthodoxall And Danaeus cont Bellarm. pag. 311 The Caluinists that is Christians pag. 169 A Caluinist that is a godly man 10. Wherefore out of all whâ—ch hath byn sayd in this and the former Chapter I thus make my first demonstration to proue that Luther was the Author and first beginner of the Protestant Church and religion If the Protestant Church were not at all when Luther began he was the author thereof But it was not at all Therefore he was the author of it The Maior or first proposition is euident For if it were not at all when Luther began he was the beginner of it The minor is manifest by the foresayd CoÌ„fessions of Protestants wherein they plainly say that it was substantially perished That euery man followed a Church and religion different from the Protestant before Luther arose CHAP. III. 1. THE second demonstration wherewith we will proue Luther to haue byn haue byn the Author of the Protestant Church and religion we will take from the Protestants confessions that wheÌ„ Luther first began all the world and euery man imbraced a different religion Luther in the Preface of his first come Here see euen by my case The whole world how hard it is to yet out of errours which are confirmed by the example of the whole world and by long custome as it were changed into nature And to 2. this is written in his Epitaph O Christ Long custome he shewed thâ—e when all the world was ouerwhelmed with darkenesse And lib. 1. de captiuit Babylon fol. 72. being to write against Masse he sayth Neither let it moue thee that the whole world hath the contrary opinion and custome And fol. 68 There is almost this day nothing more receiued or more seâ—led in the Church then that Masse is a sacrifice Againâ— So many ages I set vpon a thing which being approued by the custome of so many ages and consent of all is so ingrafted as it is needfull to change almost the whole face of the Church Consent of all And lib. de â—â—râ—g Miss fol. 244 How often did my trembling hart quake and reprehending me obiected that their strongest and only argument Art thou only wise what did all erre Only Luther wise were so many ages ignorant Behold how Luthers heart or conscience did tell him that he alone knew Protestancy and that for many ages all were ignorant of it And in hiâ— table talkes fol. 10 These cogitations were very troublesome to me Thou only hast the pure word of God all others want it And lib. cit de Missa â—ol 247 The common people without doubt are most fully persuaded that all men are holpen by Masses for it seemeth incredible that all the world should be so forsaken of God And fol. 256 It seemes incredible to them that Luther alone should be wise Contra Cochlaeum fol. 408 The Sophisters and Monks haue seduced the whole world to trust in works The whole world vnder the Pope Tom. 3. in psal 82. fol. 481 In tymes past the whole world was vnder the Popes Dominion Tom. 5. â—n 4. Galat. fol. 388 In former ages Paul was vnknown to the whole world Tom. 6. in cap. 11. Genes fol. 130 The wicked impostour so he termeth the Pope hath deceiued all the word in c. 37. fol. 506 The whole world was horribly brought into madnes and solly by Papists In cap. 19 fol. 238 In the former age all things lay in darknesse Tom. 7. epist ad D. Sabaudiae fol. 483 VVe confesse that the world was by the Pope most miserably seduced
28. fol. 396 If the Pope must be worshipped Christ must be denyed And de Missa priuata tom 7. fol. 475 VVhosoeuer is vnder the Pope and obeyeth him cannot be saued Caluin against Seruer pag. 607 Is it not a profanation of the sacred vnity to professe one God and faith with an impious and prophane company And Respons ad Versip pag. 362 How wicked and soule treachery is it to abide in that sacrilegious company of Papists And D. Whitaker ad Rat. 3. Campiani None abide with the lambe in the mountaine who haue any commerce with Antichrist And Caluin in Confutat Hollandi lib. de vitandis superstitionibus bringeth many proofes to shew that the faithfull may not communicate with the false Church and therto citeth the letters of Melancthon Bucer Peter Martyr and those of Zurich and the same is commonly taught of Protestants How then did not those Protestants separate themselues from the body of Christ how were they saued who in tymes past communicated with papists How were they saued vnlesse God be an acceptour of persons and tyms that he will cut of some from his body and from hope of saluation who communicate with Antichrist and not others at these and not in former tymes Againe Protestants teach that the Church ought to professe her fayth as besides the testimonies before repeated the Preface of the Confession of Saxony sayth They that are demaunded must needs tell the doctrine And the CoÌ„fession of Bohemia art 2 They teach that they must vndoubtedly belieue all the articles of the Creed and confesse them with the mouth Luther in 1. Petri cap. 2. tom 5. fol. 464 If any now as the Emperour or other Prince should aske me my fayth I must plainly confesse it to him And de Scru. Arbit tom 2. fol 432 Truth and doctrine must alwayes be preached openly and neuer kept secret or crookt and turnd awry D. Feild lib. 1. de Eccl. cap. 10 For seeing the Church is the multitude of them that shall be saued vnlesse he mak coÌ„fession vnto saluation for fayth hid in the heart and concealed doth not suffice it cannot be but they that are of the true Church must by the profession of the truth make themselues knowne in such sort that c. And the Preface of the Syntagme of Confessions VVhen euery one ought according to the Apostles precept giue a reason of his hope how much more the Church And D. Whitaker Cont. 4. quest 6. cap. 2. pag 696 True sayth can no more be separated from confession with the mouth then fire from beat or the sunne from its brightnes and beames What fayth then had those protestants which as is sayd durst not professe their mind And Cont. 2. qoest 3. cap. 2. pag. 472 It is not lawfull for the godly to dissemble true Religion or make shew of false nor to conceale what they think of Religion if they be examined of them who haue authority to aske them of their fayth But it is not credible that in so many ages in no part of the Christian world no Catholike Magistrate should aske any protestant of his fayth especially if it be true that Luther writeth in psalm 22. tom 3. fol. 344. that Papists do so examine the body of the Church that all her bones may be counted that is none of them can by hid VVherefore we must not imagine that there are any hidden bones of Christ all are bewrayed and counted wheresoeuer they are either by the espials of secret confession or by the tortours or examiners Which sheweth that if there had byn any true protestants heretofore they would haue byn discouered 11. Finally they are brought to these straights that sometymes they say that the protestant church which they imagine was heretofore in popery did consist of those who were papists both in opinion and profession This Caluin intimateth in the words before cited when he sayth that his church was corrupted with pestilent doctrine And Luther de Missa priuata tom 7. fol. 231. saying The very elect were seduced in that great darknesse And in cap. 9. Isaiae tom 4. fol. 95 Behold sayth he the whole face of the Churches vnder Popery Did not they all who truly felt the burden of sinne imagine that they should by good works satisfy for their sinnes Which thing alone would suffice to blot them out of the role of protestants D. White in defence of his way cap. 36. pag. 350. sayth those imaginary protestants were corrupted some more some lesse with those errors which sayth he now we fly And cap. 40. pag. 394. graunteth that they were infected with damnable heresies D. Whitaker lib. 2. de Scriptura cap. 8. sect vlt. sayth They were beset with most thick darknes Nappâ—r in cap. 12. Apocal. pag. 195. that their visible Church in tymes past VVholy embraced the errors of merits and indulgences c. And Morgersterâ—â— tract de Eccl. pag. 41 These things were in tymes past to be forgiuen the godly that they belieued the Pope to be â—hrists vicar and head of the church Popery to be the church Saints to be prayed vnto Masse to be the Lords supper Are these men think you in their wits who call them godly and say they must be pardoned who belieued Antichrist to be Christs vicar Antichrists Synagogue to be the Church of Christ and horrible idolatry such as they account Masse prayer to Saints to be seruice of Christ The same also they meane when they challenge the simple ignorant Papists for theirs or confesse the vulgar Roman Church to be the true Church or as others of them speake graunt the Roman Church but deny Popery the Popish or Roman Popish Church For they imagine that the simple Catholike people neither doth now nor in former tyms did belieue those points of fayth which themselues deny But this they feigne of the simple Catholike people and cannot proue it Besides there is no Catholike â—o simple as doth not vertually belieue all points of Catholike fayth which Protestants deny sith he actually professeth to belieue whatsoeuer the Catholike Church teacheth Neither is there any at all who doth not belieue iustification by good works which point alone would suffice to make them no Protestants Besides Caluin 4. Institut cap. 8. sayth that we affirme him to be no Christian who doth not vndoubtedly agree to all points of doctrine as well affirmatiue as negatiue And the same sayth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 8. pag. 519. D. Morton part 1. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 9. and D. Willet in the Preface of his Synopsis Yea as before we rehearsed Cap 2. they confesse that before Luthers reuolt all from head to foot were drowned in the pudles of Popery that none dreamed of that which is the cheifest point of Protestancy Wherfore Schusselburg tom 8. Catal. Haeret. pag. 440. seemeth to say That befor Luther arose Popery was the true church like as the Synagogue of the Iewes was before the comming
of Christ for thus he writeth Popery as Iudaisme heretofore signifieth that company which at least in her tyme had the true Church with it Such were the Iewes before the comming of Christ and the Papists before the comming of Luther His meaning as I suppose is that as the Christian Church is in state another church from the Synagogue because it hath other Sacraments other Sacrifyce and more points of fayth and Christ another founder of the Church distinct from Moyses so the Protestant Church is a distinct Church from the ancient Christian Church and Luther not only another Elias as they call him but also another Messias a founder and beginner of another Church distinct from that of Christ at least as far as his church differed from the Synagogue Behold Christian Reader wherto all their winding turning and doubling about the being of their Church in Popery is come Surely as S. Augustin sayd L 20. cont Faust c. 12. against the Manichees their imaginations haue lost all wayes For they are nothing bâ—â— the visions of frantike men For their remayneth no probable way to defend that their Church was heretofore in Popery It is mere frenzy to think that it waâ— in Popery virtually and implicitly like as a plant iâ— in the seed or a man in a child at the Christiaâ— Church once was in the Synagogue or that it waâ— openly distinct in Communion and Profession froâ— Papists or that it consisteth of such which either iâ— hart or at least in Profession were Papists or finally that the Church of God such as they will haâ—â— the Protestant to be was for many ages in a differeÌ„t yea a most opposite church where neither by diuine nor humane testimony it can be proued to haue byn neither can there any way be imagined by which it may with any appearance or probability be sayd to haue byn there Thus sayth S. Augustine do they dote lib. 20. coÌ„t Faust c. vl who not abiding true doctrine turne to fables 12 And out of these wherewith we haue shewed that the Protestant Church heretofore was not in Popery is refuted also Zanchius Praefat. lib. de Natura Dei where he sayth that their brethren in tymes past liued in some obscure vallies and Mountaines and met at night And D. Fulke lib. de Succes pag. 324. saying that in Europe the Church was by Antichrist thrust into obscure places but least they should be tript in their lying they name neither those mountaines nor vallyes nor places nor their night-owle-brethren nor finally proue any thing L. 14. cont Faust c. 9. But as S. Augustin sayd of Faustus They say it away they neuer seeke to proue it Or as Christ sayd of the aduersary man they sow cockle and depart It sufficeth for these new Pythagorians to powre out lyes like oracles for they assure themselues that with retchlesse men they will find credit of themselues like weeds grow without tilling Hence also is refuted the same Fulke in cap. 10. Apocal. Where he affirmeth his brethren hertofore haue liued in the Alpes in the Appenine Mountaines and in the Hereinian Forest He might better haue sayd they liued in the Wildernes of Vtopia for he proueth nothing L. 16. cont Faust c. 26 O man that I may cry out which S. Augustine thincking only of his owne talke and not thinking of any gainesayer Againe Doest thou not know lib. 4. cont Cres c. 54. or doest thou not feele with the heart of what man soeuer that in dispute where truth is sought where proofe followeth not the talke is vaine and foolish Wherefore now let vs heare their arguments or rather Sophismes wherwith sometymes they endeauour to proue that their Church was in tymes past in Popery The Sophismes wherwith some Protestant make shew to proue that their Church was heretofore in Popery refuted CHAP. X. 1. THE first argument wherewith Protestants would seeme to proue that their Church in former tymes was in Popery is grounded vpon that saying Apocal. 18 Goe out of her Babylon my people Therefore Gods people were in Babylon that is say theâ— in Popery Thus argueth Luther in cap. 12. Genes tom 6. fol. 144. And in cap. 19. fol. 234. The Magdeburgians in Praefat. Centur. 8. Plessy lib. de Eccles cap. 10. and others commonly Yea M. Perkins in his reformed Catholike tract 22. writeth that by this commandement it may be gathered that the true Church is and was long tyme in the Roman Church Wherein he speakes more truly then he meant For the true Church is and was alwayes in the Romane but the Protestant neither is nor was there To the argument I answere that this place can be no sufficient ground of fayth among the Protestans because their Angel their Apostle and Euangelist Martyn Luther denyeth the Apocalipse to be Canonicall Scripture Againe though indeed it be canonicall Scripture yet for the most part it is so obscure as but very few places therof are fit to grouÌ„d any point of fayth as is euident both by the booke it selfe which is well nigh all Mysticall and allegoricall and by the iudgement of the Fathers and confession of Protestants Euseb l. 7. cap. 20. For thus sayth S. Denis Patriarch of Alexandria of the Apocalipse I verily think that almost in euery sentence there lyeth some mysticall and merueilous sense Likewise S. Hierome Epist ad Paulin. The Apocalipse hath as many mysteries as words And S. Augustin In the booke of the Apocalipse many obscure things are told and there are few things therein lib 20. de Ciuit. c. 17. by light whereof the rest may be sought ought with labour And with Protestants D. Andrewes in his answere to Bellarmines Apology cap. 9 Is he ignorant that concerning the Apocalipse nothing certaine or of fayth is yet prescribed by the Church that it may be lawfull to vse one only kind of interpretation and no other as if it were so cleare and euident that it were a hainous offence to leaue it or to dissent any way from it Yea as any may with greatest probability shew the prophesies there to be fulfilled so is it free for any to vse his iudgement to follow his own opinion in explicating them And D. Whitaker Cont. 4. quest 5. cap. 3 pag. 677 It is well inough knowne that Iohn in the Apocalipse speaketh not of cleare and open matters but of obscurt and hidden M. Brightman in his Preface of the Apocalipse In so great abundance of ancient and new expositions the Apocalipse yet as all agree needeth an Apocalipse And M. Sheldon in his booke of the miracles of Antichrist cap. 4. pag. 54 calleth it a darck Mysticall prophecy in which sayth he quot verba tot latent Mysteria And pag. 226 The Apocalipse is a booke wholy mysticall which doth excepting some few doctrinall rules and exhortations to vertue in types figures formes and resemblances describe and foretell the future euents of the
vs these accursed speeches and others too when in the midst of the darcknesse of that age it first began to spring and to giue shine some one glimmering beame of truth vnknowne at that time and vnheard of when as yet the thing was but new the successe therof vncertaine and when there could be imagined against vs no fact so detestable but that the people then would soon beleiue it for the nouelty and straungenesse of the matter Ibid. diuis 1 How often haue they set on fire Princes houses to the end they might quench the light of the gospell in the very first appearing of it M. Fox in his Acts set forth anno 1610. pag 788. writing what passed anno 1523 speaketh thus But in the blade Then the doctrine of Luther first beginning to spring and being but in the blade was not yet knowne wherto it tended nor to what it would grow D. Rainolds in his Conference cap. 5. sect 2. sayth that Protestants haue not had long tract of time And a late Chronicler thought to be M. Good win writing the life of K. Henry 8. 1521. sayth In the meane time our king moued at the nouelty of Luthers doctrine c. To all which I adde that Erasmus whome Protestants as is before shewed doe challenge as one of theirs writeth thus to the Brethren of the low couÌ„treis New Ghospell do not they bring a new Gospel who expound it otherwise then the Church hitherto hath don But Why I pray you should the Protestants religion seeme new to all the world and in the iudgement of all pious and prudent men if indeed it were not new How should so many so famous Protestants so often and in so many different kinds of writings to wit in prose in verse in peaceable in contentious writings in Historicall in dogmaticall in speech to men to God himselfe haue sayd so plainly and so many wayes that Protestant religion was new fresh vnwonted vnused wholy new newly planted erected anew if they had not thought that it was indeed new For as Luther sayth It is impossible but that the conscience will some time bewray it selfe 5. ProtestaÌ„ts first refuted If any answeare that the fore sayd ProtestaÌ„nts doe not meane that their religion was absolutely new First I aske why then doe they absolutely say so and that so often and in so many kind of writings Why do they so often and in so weighty a matter write otherwise then they think Besides it cannot be proued that they did not meane that it was absolutely new when they spake so otherwise then because perhappes at other times they sayd the contrary Which kind of proofe in Heretikes is friuolous as partly hath bin shewed before partly shall be more hereafter Moreouer this is like the excuse of the Marcionists who wheÌ„ they had brought in a new God yet would not haue him to be called absolutely new but only newly knowne or discouered 6. Fiftly I proue the nouelty of Protestant religion because euen then when in words they deny it to be new in very deed they confesse it to be new in such sort as sufficeth for me to proue that Luther was the Author therof and that it is not the religion of Christ to wit that it is of new erected built set vp according to the very substance and essence therof in such sorr as a house falleÌ„ downe but newly raised in walls roofe and other such substantiall parts may be called a new house Because Christs Church and religion cannot be new in this sort being such as can neuer fall For they confesse that the antiquity of their Church was abrogated and that it is a religion refined and reformed and that they are refiners and reformers D. Morton 1. part Apol. lib 1. cap vlt writeth that Protestants Challenge the first antiquity but abrogated by mens fault Iunius Cont. 4. lib. 4. cap. 7 sayth The continuance of the old and Catholike doctrine is renewed But surely that thing whose antiquity hath bin abrogated and broken of is new For the kingdome in Caesars time was new in Rome although it began with the citty it selfe because it had bin abrogated for diuers ages Wherupon Riuet Epitom-Cont tract 3 cap. 21 sayth Things are called new when they are renewed and vsed after interruption Besides whether a thing once abrogated and taken away and afterward restored be to be called new or no it sufficeth to me that the Protestant religion is in such sort new as a house fallen downe and newly raised may be called nâ—w because the Church religion of Christ cannot be new in this manner nor the antiquity therof abrogated and cut of In like sort Muscle in locis tit de noua doctrina pag. 417 Albeit he deny that they make new doctrine yet he confesseth that they renew doctrine And that he meaneth of a substantiall renouation wherin the very substance of a thing is renewed it appeareth by the precedent page where he sayth that old matters abrogated fallen down for some ages are renewed A Church therfore and religion fallen downe they doe renew that is erect a new Wherupon the French Confession Beza Bastingius as is before recited say that their Church is againe a new erected and others cal her a Church Reuiued resuscitated reborn and assigne a new birth and begining of her which words doe manifestly signifie a new substantial production or making of her which whether it be called a nouatioÌ„ or renouatioÌ„ maketh not much to the purpose seing it is either a substantial production or first making of that which neuer had bin before or a reproduction and second making of that which though it had bin before yet was fallen and the substance therof corrupted and perished Of which nouation or renouation Luther was the Author Besides they call themselues Renewers or Refiners ProtestaÌ„ts call themselues reformers and their Church or religion Reformed or refined D. Andrewes Respons ad Apol. Bellarm. cap. 1 VVe are Renewers VVe call our religion reformed Caluin Epist 341 VVe carry the name of the reformed Church Iunius lib. 4. de Eccles cap. 16 VVe hold the Reformed Christian saith And in the same sort speaketh the Scots Confession the Consent of Poland D Whitaker Prefat cont cont 1. quest 2. c. 16. 17. cont 2. quest 5. c. 2. others commonly I aske therfore what kind of forme of religion haue they taken away by their reformation and what a one haue they giuen Surely they haue changed the very substantiall forme For to omit al other points they haue taken away the former manner of obtayning remission of sinnes by the Catholike faith and good workes and brought in a new of obtayning the same by special faith only and vndoubtedly the way to obtaine remissioÌ„ of sins is substantiall to a Church and religioÌ„ But they who take away the substantiall forme and bring anew doe make a new thing and such a
be euery wher Caluin pronounceth Admonit vlt. ad Westphalum pag. 829. that it was not borne long since And Alcsius apud Hospiâ— part 2. fol. 201. sayth I know both the tyme when this opinion was first broached to the Church and who was Author thereof Authores Admonit de lib. concord cap. 3. pag 95. No man taught this their opinion before Luther Do they not bring forth new deuises and not heard of before in the Church Beza also lib. de Omnipraesentia carnis Christi pag. 509. calleth it a doctrine vnheard of in the Church Finally Clenuitius apud Heshus lib. cit calleth the very Confession of Auspurg A new and fifth Ghospell Thus Protestants testify the newnesse of each other doctrine 9. Eightly I proue the newnesse of Protestancy by the new and before vnheard of nams The names of Protestats are new which Protestants giue to themselues and to their Church and religion For they call themselues Protestants or Ghospellers and their Church and Religion Euangelicall and reformed D. Andrewes respons ad Apol. Bellarm. c. 1. Protestants is our name D. Willet in the Preface of his Synopsis VVe refuse not the name of Protestants This name agreeth fitly to our profession Praefat. consensus Poloniae VVe are termed Ghospellers Iezler lib. de bello Euchar. fol. 31. VVe will be called Gospellers and woe be to them who call vs otherwise His maiesty in his declaration against Vorstius pag. 49 The men of our Religion doe estsoones take to them the name of Gospellers D. Morton part 1. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 7 If ye aske where is the Euangelicall and reformed Church all will straight point their finger to the ProtestaÌ„ts assembly But surely all these names are new and neuer heard of before Luther neither can there be any name designed which before Luthers time was proper to the Protestant company But it is incredible that there should haue bin such a company and yet that it neuer had any proper or peculiar name giuen either by those of that company or of any others 10. Lastly I proue the nouelty of the Protestant Church by that that Protestants knowing well the newnesse therof deny that the greatest antiquity among Christian Churches is a marck of the true Church of Christ as doth Iunius lib. de Eccles cap. 16. yea some of them are so offended at this marck of Antiquity as they bid vs (a) Luth. tom 2 fol. 367. shut our eyes at it and say that it is a (b) Raino Confer c. 5. diuiss 2. bastardly marke and rather a mark of the (c) Ples l. de Eccles c. 3. Synagogue of Antichrist theÌ„ of the church of Christ Neuertheles seeing it ought to be vndoubted amongst Christians that since Christs Church was founded by him it neuer failed or perished and that it is manifest that he founded his true Church before any false Christian in imitation of him began a false Christian Church it ought also to be certain that she which amongst all Christian Churches is the most ancient is the very true Church of Christ Neither would euer Protestants deny this if they did not too wel know that their Church is far yonger then the Roman as being according to their saying her daughter 11. Out of all which hath beene recited in this chapter I make my eight demonstration in this sort If the Protestant Church and Religion were in Luthers tyme new or builded or begun a new he was the Authour and beginner thereof But so it was as hath beene made manifest by the aforesayd confessions of Protestants Therefore Luther was the Author thereof That Protestants do plainly confesse that Luther was the Author and Beginner of their Church and Religion CHAP. XIIII THE ninth demonstration that Luther was the Author of the Protestant Church and religion shall be taken out of Protestants open confessions thereof First therefore they say that he was the first who openly preached Protestancy Luther Praefat. in tom 1 The Duch men did looke what would be the euent of so great a matter which before none either Bishop or Deuine durst touch Ibi. fol. 159. It is said Luther first of all in our age did taxe the Popes abominations and illustrate the ancient and pure doctrine of the Church And Praefat. disput fol. 370. Luther the first that preached his Ghospell I first allowed the marriage of Bishops In cap. 3. Galat. tom 5. fol. 333 Many gaue God thankes that by the Ghospell which by Gods grace we then first of all preached c. In cap. 4. fol. 387. God in this later tyme hath againe reuealed the truth of the Ghospell by vs vnto the vngratefull world Epist ad Argentinenses tom 7. VVe dare boast First published Christ that Christ was first published by vs. Melancthon Praefat. in tom 3 VVith what ioy did men receaue the first sparckle of light discouered by Luther praef in tom 2. Lutheri God by him restored the Ghospell to vs. Againe He recalled the minds of men to the Sonne of God First spark of Protestancy and as the Baptist shewed the lambe that taketh away the sinnes of the world And praefat in tom 3 VVhen there was great darcknes in the Charch and the light of the Ghospell was oppressed Luther layd open the iustice of fayth The vniuersity of VVittemberg in Hospin part 2. histor fol. 250 Out of this Church and schoole did shine the first light of pure doctrine touching God and Crist The first light which our new aduersaryes are forced to graunt though they burst with enuy Amsdorfe Alber and others write that Luther was the first vnder heauen who impugned externall sacrifice Priesthood in the new testament Schusselburg lib. 2. Theol. Caluin fol. 130. sayth that Vtenhonius a Caluinist was impudent when he wrote that he heard Conrad Pellican say that many learned men in Germany held the doctrine of the â—hospell before Luther appeared and that Pellican himselfe had reiected Purgatory before Luthers name was heard of This lye sayth Schusselburg the later Caluinists haue refuted And fol. 228. he affirmeth that Luther began the refining of the doctrine of the Ghospell This praise sayth he we truly and with good right giue to Luther though the Caluinists take it in very ill part Morgerstern tract 145. sayth It is ridiculous to thinke that before Luther any held the pure doctrine and that Luther receaued it of them and not rather they of him Milius in explicat confess August art 17. If Luther had had orthodoxall forerunners in his office Had no predecessours there had beene no need of a Lutheran reformation The Author of the booke entituled Prognostica or Finis mundi pag. 12. Luther as is confessed first brought in the ghospell at the end of the world The first that brought in the Ghospell Brentius lib. de Coena in fine God raised vp Luther to carry before vs the torch of the knowledg of Christ. And Smedensted apud Hospin
ready to proue out of the scripture that we professe the same doctrine of fayth and manners which Christ would haue to be perpetuall by euident reason our succession is manifest althogh all Historyes were silent of the names of the Persons and continuation of succession And the like he hath pag. 154. and 331. D. White in his way pag. 403. sayth he knoweth his Church was alwayes because it holdeth the fayth of the Scripture which cannot be extinguished The like he sayth pag. 320. 326. Likewise Luther de notis Eccles tom 7. fol. 149. Caluin in Matth. cap. 24. vers 28. and generally al of them whiles they make the truth of doctrin the infallible marke of the Church Lib. 2. contra Arian O proofe that I may cry out in S. Augustins words O errour o dotage And with S. Athanase A worthy heresy which wanteth probable reasons to vnder proppe it For this argument on which all their belief that their Church was before Luther doth rely is a most fond sophisme and most counterfait syllogisme as manifestly appeareth whether it be framed in that forme wherein D. Whitaker hath proposed it or whether it be reduced to this forme That Church which holdeth the true doctrine of Christ hath alwayes beene and consequently before Luther The Protestant Church holdeth the true doctrin holdeth the true doctrin of Christ as say they we will proue by scripture Therefore it hath bin alway 3. I answere that this argument is a manifest sophime for many causes For if the Maior be particuler so that the sense thereof be Some Church which holdeth the true doctrine of Christ hath alwayes beene it is true because the catholik church which holdeth Christs true doctrine hath alwayes been but then the Syllogisme is sophism for want of due forme inferring a conclusion out of particuler propositioÌ„s But if the Maior be vniuersall according as it is made of D. Whitaker then so farre is it from being out of controuersy as he affirmeth that it is manifestly false and no way true but only apparant and therefore vnfit to make a true syllogisme but only a counterfait and a sophisme ProtestaÌ„ts assume a manifest falsity That it is manifestly false is euident because that Church or company of ChristiaÌ„s which is strictly and properly termed schismatical holdeth the true doctrine of Christ as both the Fathers teach and the Protestants themselues doe also most plainely affirme yet it is not the true church of Christ Wherefore sith as the Philosopher teacheth those thinges are probable which seem true to all or to most or to wise men and those either al or most or most approued and such as are not probable serue only to make sophismes The foresayd Maior not seeming true to all or most or the wisest Christians yea not euen to the Protestants themselues it is manifest that it is no probable propositioÌ„ but only apparent and therefore not fit to make a true syllogisme but only an apparent and counterfait 4. That the Fathers teach that a Schismatical Church holdeth the true doctrine of Christ is manifest by S. Augustine who lib. quest Euang. pag. 28. tom 4. sayth It vseth to be enquired wherein Schismatickes differ from heretâ—kes That Schismatikes hold true doctrine and this found that no difference in faytht but breach of society in communion maketh Schismatikes And lib. de fide Symbolo cap. 10 Heretikes by belieuing wrong of God violate the fayth but Schismatickes by wicked diuisions leape from fraternall charity albeit they belieue aright those thinges which we belieue And lib. cont Gaud. cap. 9. refuteth him because he had sayd that Schismatikes and Heretikes are the same against which he sayth Thou art a Schismatike by sacrilegious diuision and an heretike by sacrilegious opinion And lib. 1. cont Cresc cap. 29. and de gest is cum Emerito affirmeth that the same fayth is had out of the Church S. Hierome in Tit. 3. VVe iudge this difference to be between heresy and schism that heresy holdeth a naughty opinion schisme separateth from the Church by dissention of Bishops S. Gregory lib. 18. Moral cap. 14. Some doe belieue false thinges of God others by Gods help belieue rightly of God but keep not vnity with their brethren these are diuided by schisme S. Isidor lib. 8. Origin cap 3. Schisme tooke its name of breach for it beleeueth the same religion and rites that others do only is pleased to keep company a part The same teach S. Ireneus lib. 4. cap. 62. S. Chrysost hom 3. in 1. Cor. S. Optat. lib. 1. 4. 5. cont Parmen and others And it is manifest by reason For if Schismatikes did erre also in Fayth they should not differ from heretikes And it is grauÌ„ted both of old and new Heretikes For thus sayth Faustus in S. Augustine lib. 20. cont Faustum cap. 3. Schisme if I be not deceaued is to belieue the same to worship God in the same manner that others do only to be delighted with diuision of assemblyes Caluin 4. Institut cap. 2. § 5. Austin putteth this difference betwixt heretikes and schismatiks that they corrupt the sincerity of the fayth with false doctrines these sometymes euen hauing the like saith breake asunder the band of society And in 1. Cor. cap. 11. vers 19. It is known in what sense the ancient vsed both these nams schisme heresy they put heresy in difference of doctrine but schisme rather in alienation of minds to wit when any either vpon enuy or hatred of the Pastours or of frowardnesse departed from the Church Beza libro de puniendis Haereticis pag. 89 Shism properly is the diuision of those who belieue the same things And pag. 150. Let them remember that we terme them not heretikes who are properly called Schismatiques The same he hath in 1. Cor. 1. v. 10. and other where Plessie lib. de Eccles cap. 1. pag. 16 VVe call erroneous Churches either heretikes or schismatikes according as they erre either in fayth or in charity And pag. 32. VVhat pertaineth to schismaticall Churches either they are simply schismaticall or when heresy also is adioyned as it vseth after schisme as an ague after a wound And cap. 10. pag. 340. True and pure Schismatiks are those who holding the same doctrine yet make meetinges a part Peter Martyr in locis tit de Schism pag. 618. I thinke it more plaine to define Schisme to be a cutting a sunder of the Ecclesiasticall peace vnity And pag. 619 There may be schisme in the Church without heresy Aretius also in locis part 2. fol. 10 Schisme sometymes in the same doctrin breaketh society Bucan in loc quest 33. de Eccl. affirmeth that shismatiks differ from heretiks because heresy properly is dissention in doctrine Polâ—n part 2. Thes de notis Eccl. Albeit schismatical Churches agree in the doctrine of truth c. Zanchius tract de Eccles cap. There may be breach in the symboles of Charity that is in
participation of Sacraments communication of publike prayer and such like other Ecclesiasticall exercises to wit when one thought he agree with the rest of the Church of Christ in the principall heades of Christian fayth yet I know not for what light causes withdraweth himselfe from the rest of the Church and communicateth not with her in the sacraments Such sayth he are properly called schismatikes M. Perkins in cap. 5. Galat. vers 21. Heresy is in doctrin Schisme in manners order and gouernement D. Fulke de Success pag. 165 There may be schisme in the Church where the same doctrine is held on both partyes the one wanteth lawfull succession D. Field lib. 1. of the Church cap. 7 Some professe the whole sauing fayth but not in vnity as schismatiks Dancus in August de haeres cap. 3. He is a schismatike who retayning the same doctrine of fayth and that entire yet without probable and better reason followeth not the decent rites of the Church The same he hath Apol. pro Heluet. Eccles pag. 1485. Bullinger tom 1. Decad. 5. serm 2. Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 190. D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 5. cap. 10. D. Rainolds Praelect 1. col 2. Heshusius in 1. Cor. 1. and others 5. Now that proper Schismatikes to wit such as willfully separate themselues from the Communion of the Church be not members or parts of the Church is cleare by the testimony of the Fathers That Schismatikes are out of the Church the confessions of Protestants and manifest reason S. Augustin lib. de fide symbolo cap. 10. sayth Neither doth an heretike belong to the Catholike Church nor a schismatike Tract 3. in 1. Ioan. All heretikes all schismatikes are gone out of the Church Lib. 3. de Baptism cap. 19. All heretikes and schismatikes are false Christians And lib 2. cont Crescon cap. 29 I thinke not that any so doteth to belieue him to belong to the vnity of the Church who hath not charity The like he hath in many places S. Ambrose lib. 7. in Luc. cap. 11. Vnderstand that all heretikes and schismatikes are separated from the kingdome of God and from the Church S. Optatus lib. 2. The Church cannot be with any heretikes or schismatikes S. Fulgentius de fide ad Petrum cap. 38 Belieue most stedfastly and doubt nothing that not only all Pagans but also all Iewes Heretiks schismatiks which end this life out of the church are to go into euerlasting fire The same teach S. Hierome S. Chrysostome loc cit S. Ignatius Epist ad Smyrnens S. Iren. lib. 4. cap. 62. S. Cyprian lib. de vnit epist 42.51.55 S. Prosper de vocat Gentium cap. 4. and the rest The protestants confessions of this matter we related heeretofore amongst whome say Lib. 1. c. â— num â— that this is an vndoubted truth Reason also conuinceth the same for as Caluin confesseth 4. Institut loc cit The coÌ„munion of the Church is held with two bandes to wit consent of doctrine and fraternall charity But Schismatikes breake the band of fraternall charity therefore they are not within the Church Againe Danaeus lib. 3. de Eccl. c. 5. sayth This is the marke that thou art of the visible Church that outwardly thou professe the fayth communicate with the rest of the Church in the same SacrameÌ„ts but schismatikes doe not communicate in Sacramentes with the rest of the Church And D. Feild lib. 2. of the Church cap. 2. sayth Communion in Sacramentes vnder lawful Pastours is an essential note of the true Catholike Church but Shismatiks want this communion And Casaubon epist ad Card. Peron pag. 9. The true Churches of Christ are vnited in the vnity of fayth and doctrine and coniunction of minds and in true charity and offices of charity especially of mutuall prayer But Schismatikes are not vnited in charity and offices of mutuall prayer Finally only Catholikes are members of the Catholike Church as is euident and (a) VVhi. conc 2. q. 5. cap. 3. Protestants confesse But Schismatikes are not Catholiks as the very name doth declare the Fathers doc teach and (b) Gesner loc 24. Field l. de Eccles c. 7. Protestants acknowledge 6. By this it appeareth that the foresayd Maior which is the foundation of Protestants in this matter is not only false but also so manifestly false as out of this question it is commonly denyed of Protestants themselues Besides it is not only false but also so improbable that neither it is proued of Protestants nor can be any other wayes then by proofe of fooles or willfull men that is by their owne saying For D. Whitaker as we haue seene proueth it no other wayes then by saying it is out of controuersy D. Fulke that it is manifest But Luther more boastingly sayth l. de Missa priu tom 7. f. 247. This is our solid foundation and most stedfast rocke VVhersoeuer true doctrine of Christ or the Ghospell is preached there is necessarily the true holy Church of God And who doubteth of this sayth he may in like manner doubt whether the Ghospel be the word of God A notable proofe surely and fit for Pythagoras schoole and a sound foundation on which to fayned a Church should rely and a fit rock for them to build vpon who haue left the rocke vpon which Christ built his Church Wherefore that I may imitate S. Augustine in the like matter Lib. 1. cont Gaudent cap. 33. I aske whether God or man hath told them that wheresoeuer true doctrine is there is the true Church If God let them read it out of the Scripture where indeed we read that where the true Church is there true doctrine is but contrarywise that where true doctrine is there the true Church is there we neuer read If men haue told you this Behold a fiction of man behold what you belieue behold what ye serue behold for what ye rebell ye run mad ye burne Againe what kind of men were they surely no other then your selues And what is your authority I say not with vs but euen with your selues Is as one of your part sayd the iudgement of Lutherans or Sacramentaryes the square of truth Moreouer Pareus l 3. ce â—â—stifie cap. 13. seeing that three things are essential or substantial to the true church to wit true doctrine lawfull Pastours and people following their Pastours nor any thing can be vnles all the essentiall parts be it is sophistry and madnesse to inferre that that company is the true Church wherin one only of these parts is to be found If they say that by the true Church they meane not her which is true in nature or essence of the Church but only her which is true in doctrine of whose essence is only truth of doctrin First they deceaue the Reader For we speak only of the Church true in essence not of that which is only true in doctrinâ— as a schismaticall Church may be Besides if they meane such
neither did any maÌ„ feele or perceiue himselfe to haue bin a member of such a Church before that time Wherfore as he should manifestly play the Sophister who would goe about to proue by scripture that the sunne appeareth at midnight so likewise doth he who out of scripture endeuoreth to proue that there was a protestant Church before Luther because all mens sense conuince the one as well as the other Besides Protestants write that though faith commaund vs to beleiue things which we see not yet it doth not commaund vs not to beleiue that which we see for otherwise faith should be contrary to sense and none should become faithfull but he should first be senselesse But surely wonderfull is the blindnes or wilfulnesse of Sacramentaries who in the matter of the Eucharist against the most expresse words of Scripture will endeuour to proue by sense that there is not the body of Christ when as the body of Christ there is not sensible And here in the matter of existence of their Church before Luther out of some apparent shew of scripture against the most manifest sense of all men will proue that it was before Luthers time When as a Church is a sensible thing and can be felt either of others or at least of them who are of it How much better and more reasonably should they proceed if in the Eucharist where Christs body is not sensible they would rather giue eare to the most expresse words of scripture then to the suspicions of their seÌ„ses which can iudge of nothing but of sensible accidents and in the matter of the Church whose being is seÌ„sible they would submit their vncertaine if not false expositions of scripture not only to the sense of all men but also the most certaine expositions of the Church and Fathers But this sheweth that in their beleife they are guided neither by seÌ„se nor scripture but out of them both borrow a shew of proofe for that which of their mere wilfulnes or fancy they choose to beleiue 10. Thus thou seest Christian Reader for how vaine a sophisme whose Maior is manifestly false so false as that out of this matter it is generally denyed of Protestants themselues and so improbable also as that it cannot be proued in no shew or colour and whose Minor is more doubtfull then the conclusioÌ„ it selfe and the manner of prouing sophisticall and no other then the proofes of al Heretikes be for how vaine a sophisme I say then the which scarce any can be more vaine Protestants beleiue or rather will seeme to beleiue a thing wholy incredible and in a thing sensible against the sense of al maÌ„kind to wit that before Luther there was a Church which held the whose substance or all the substantiall and fundamentall points of Protestancy nor in so weighty a matter respect either their oâ—â—e consciences or the iudgements of men or tribunal of God or danger of their eternall damnation Surely Homil. cont Sabel that I may end with S. Basils words I moane and bewayle them that for a meane sophisme and counterfait paralogisme they cast themselues into hel 11. Out of all which hath bin sayd in this chapter I thus frame my tenth and last demonstration If no sufficent testimonie nor any probable argument but only one sond sophisme can be brought to proue that the Protestant Church was before Luther this is not to be beleiued of any wise and prudent man But no other proofe can be brought Therfore c. And if it were not before Luther surely he is the Author of it The Maior is euident by it selfe and the Minor by what hath bin brought in this chapter Certainely if euery one of the demoÌ„strations which we haue brought doe not conuince that the Protestant Church and religion was not before Luther at least all of them together manifestly conuince it For by the first fiue demonstrations was shewed that before Luther it was not at all it was in no place was vnknowne of all the world was not seene of any nor had any Pastors And with the rest hath bin demonstrated that after Luther arose no ancienter Protestant did euer appeare and adioyne himselfe to Luther that all the first knowne Protestant had bin Papists afore times that the Protestant company and religion is new that Luther and other plainly confesse that he was autho of that religion and finally that no proofe besides one friuolous fallacie can be brought to shew that such a Church or religion had bin in former times And if yet any Protestant doubt hereof let him at least compare al the foresayd demoÌ„strations wherwith so many wayes out of the very testimonies of Protestants we haue shewed that no such Church was before Luther with their vaine sophisme wherewith they make shew to proue the contrary and he will easily perceiue on whose side this so important truth is like to stand And if he make any account of truth of Gods seruice of his owne reputation or eternall saluation he will forsake the Protestants Church put himselfe in the lappe of the Catholike Church Which as S. Augustine speaketh euen in the testimony of all mankind hath not only beene in all ages since Christ De vtil credendi cap. 17. but also hath had Pastors nor hath been visible only to her owne but to others also and to the whole world and hath most valiantly fought ouercome and triumphed ouer Iewes Pagans Heretikes Schismatiks and all the gates of hell To preferre before this most ancient most glorious church another newly start vp many ages lurking knowne to none not to her owne and destitute of Pastours flocke seat and appearance and in truth feigned and deuised and to omit all other proofes wounded deadly with so many confessions of her owne champions and proued by one only vaine fallacie what other thing were it then to preferre lyes before truth darcknesse before light death before life the synagogue of Satan before the Church of Christ and finally wilfully to cast himselfe headlong into hell VVhat he must obserue who will answere the foresayd demonstration CHAP. XVI SEEING I haue yielded so much to Protestants condescended to so vnequall conditions as that I haue vndertaken to proue that Luther was the author of their Church and religion by the only Confessions of Luther and other Protestants it is reason that if any one of them goe about to answeare my foresayd demoÌ„strations he hould obserue these most iust lawes which I will here set downe and which themselues haue prescribed to others 2. See Iuel defens Apol par 2. c. d. 5. Kemnice Exam. tit de script Epist Monit p. 145. Calu. cont Seruet p. 643. First therfore touching the words of Protestants which I haue alleadged let him either confesse that they are truely cited by me or if he denye that let him not say it only but let him shew that they are supposed falsifyed or so changed as that the sense which I
lyers they gainesayd themselues May a man accused of crime expound figuratiuely his open Confession of that crime because at other tymes he denyed it Againe Protestants themselues reiect this kind of proofe For as we did see the Ministers of the Prince Electour did reprehend those of the Duke of Saxony because they auoyded Luthers testimonies by opposing other places of his And the Ministers of Saxony pag. 303. say It is a friuolous kind of argument He sayd well sometymes therefore heere Besides it will be as equall for me to inferre that Protestants in those testimonies which he produceth did speake figuratiuely because in those which I alleage they manifestly sayd the contrary For to vse Luthers wordes Tom. 2. fol. 220. By this rashnes and licence ye giue your aduersary leaue to turne it against you Certainly if they clearly haue sayd both we cannot deny but they thought both or ye must confesse that your pleasure shall be the rule and square to know what they speake properly what figuratiuely Moreouer Protestants crie that the holy Fathers contradicted themselues How often sayth Luther doe the Fathers fight with themselues Tom. 2. Assert Art 2. cont Cochleum Praefat. Institut They are men that fight against themselues VVe find the Fathers to haue taught contraryes to haue slumbered And Caluin The Fathers doe often skirmish amongst themselues and sometymes fight with themselues The like sayth Melancthon com 1. Lutheri fol. 341. Iacobus Andreae cont Hosium pag. 282. Beza Praefat. in nouum Testamentum and in Schusselburg lib. 4. Theol. Caluin art 32 Pareus lib. 2 de Grat. lib. arbit cap. 14. lib. 4. cap. 4. Polanus part 1. Thes de Notis Eccles Apologia Anglica And D. Whitaker lib. 5. cont Dureum Wherefore either they must shew some priuiledge whereby Protestants be more excepted from contradicting themselues then the holy Fathers in their opinion were or they must not inferre that they sayd not that which they did in places by me alleaged because other where they sayd the contrary Furthermore Hosp to 2. fo 12. Beza in CoÌ„spicil Zuing to 2. fol. 412. 458. 460. because both the Fathers and Protestants also as I shewed in the Preface doe teach that Heretikes are wont to contradict them selues And the Sacramentaries both say and shew by many examples that Luther oftentymes hath gainsayd himselfe And of Sacramentaries Schusselburg lib. 1. Theol. Caluin art 20. writeth That it is their property to contradict themselues 7. Lastly touching the weight of the Protestant Confessions which we produce let him not think that it is any way impaired in that they haue at other tymes sayd the contrary as if in this matter they were not to be belieued because they haue byn taken in two tales For the Confessions of those that are accused be of greatest force against themselues because as I sayd no man willingly lyeth against himselfe neither can these be discredited by any words of theirs spoken in their owne behalfe For what will it auayle a criminall person if he deny an hundred tymes the cryme which he once openly coÌ„fessed And protestants haue not once but oftentyms most plainly most openly most freely confessed those things which I alleage Againe though no credit be to be giuen to a lyer who gainsayth himself in matters for his owne behalfe or against any others neuerthelesse in a matter against himselfe the greatest yea euen the diuels open free Confession ought more to be credited then any other mans testimony whatsoeuer Wherfore we alleage Protestants sayings not as testimonies but as Confessions neither produce them as witnesses but as Criminels confessing the truth against themselues And as Saint Ambrose sayd Serm. 5. de â—â—uctis I admit not the diuels testimony but his Confession so I accept not the Protestants testimonies but their confessions Let their testimony be of no credit either for themselues or for others or against others vndoubtedly it is of great force against themselues As the Latin Oratour sayd Thy testimony which in another mans matter would be light is in thine owne matter because it is against thg selfe most weighty Besides Protestants cric that it is found to produce the Criminels as witnesses in their owne cause and that any witnesse in his owne cause is to be reiected Vorstius Antibel pag. 44â— 456. Iuâ—â— Def. part 2. c. 3. D. 5. VVhitak cont 4. q. 6. c. 2. q. 4. c. 2. Whereupon in the question of Supremacy they refuse the testimonies of all Popes though neuer so ancient neuer so learned neuer so holy How much better may we reiect the testimonies of Protestants when they speak in behalfe of their religion and yet admit their Confessions when they speake against it These therfore lawes of answearing so iust so equall and approued of the ProtestaÌ„ts themselues if he will not keep who goeth about to answeare my foresayd arguments it will easily appeare that in very deed he could not answeare them And if none endeauour to answeare them it will yet more appeare that they can no way answeate them that this kind of dealing with Protestants out of their owne Confessions is the fittest of all to stop their mouthes FINIS The Translatour to the Reader THE Author adioyned hereto a Catalogue of the Protestant Books with their seuerall impressions out of which he gathered the testimonies by him alleaged but because I thought it not needfull for those that read this English copy I haue omitted it The Reader if he please may see it in the Authors Latin Copy THE INDEX OR TABLE OF THE CHAPTERS CONTAYNED IN THESE BOOKES The first booke of the essence or substance of the Protestant Church and Religion CHAPTER 1. That sometymes Protestants admit very few into the Châ—rch and â—equire very many thinges to the making of a member thereof Chap. 2. That at sometymes Proâ—estants account Pâ—pists to be of the Church Chap. 3. Thâ—t sometymes Protestants acknowledge all that deny either fundamentall or other articles of fayth Heretikes Schismatikes and their professed enemies to be members of their Church Chap. 4. That sometymes they do graunt Idolaters Infidels Atheists and Antichrist himselfe to be members of their Church Chap. 5. That Protestants sometymes account all their brethren who vnder the name of Christians oppose themselues against the Pope Chap. 6. That it is necessarily required to a Protestant that he belieue Iustification by only speciall fayth Chap. 7. That it is also necessary to a Protestant to belieue all the fundamentall points of Protestancy Chap. 8. Which are the fundamentall points of Protestancy and what a Protsteant is THE SECOND BOOKE Of the Author or beginner of the Protestant Church and Religion Chap. 1. THat Protestants confesse that their Church and Religion was substantially perished when Luther began Chap. 2. The shiftes wherewith Protestants would delude their confessions of the substantiall destruction of their Church and Religion refuted Chap. 3. That Protestants confesse that all and euery one followed a differenâ— Church and Religion from theâ—rs before Luther began to preach Chap. 4. That Protestants graunt that their church and Religion was quite inuisible b fore Luther appeared Chap. 5. Those which say there were any visible Protestants before Luther refelled Chap. 6 That the Church cannot be so inuisible as Protestants confesse theirs to haue byn before Lut e s tyme. Chap. 7. That Protestants acknowledge that there were no Protestant Pastors before Luther Chap. 8. That the Church cannot be without Pastors Chap 9. That the Protestant Church was no where before Luther arose Chap. 10. The Sophistries wherewith some Protestants would seeme to proue that in tymes past the Protestants Church was in Popery refuted Chap. 11. That all the first knowne Protestants had byn Papists before tymes Chap. 12. That no auncienter Protestant then Luther stept forth and adioyned himselfe to Luthers company when he preached securely Chap. 13. That the Protestant Church Religion is new Chap. 14. That Protestants doe in plaine termes confesse that Luther was the Author and beginner of their Church and Religion Chap. 15. That Protestants cannot proue by any sufficient witnes or any probable argument that their Church was before Luther Chap. 16. What he must obserue who will vndertake to answeare this Worke. FINIS
sayth he keeping the foundations of fayth about secondary matters haue fallen into misbeliefe And Bucanus loc 41. de Eccles quest 5. auoucheth plainly that Anabaptists are a Church Like as a man attainted with leprosy or out of his wits is a man Hi◠Maiesty epist ad Card. Peron pag. 25. sayth Some reckon baptisme among those things which whether we haue or want the matter is not great And D. Whitaker cont 4. quest 7. cap. 2. pag. 716. sayth we may abstaine from baptisme so there be no contēpt and scandall in the fact Finally D. Morton in his answere to the Protestants Apology lib. 4. albeit in the 6. chapter he make a doubt whether Anabaptists retaine and hold the foundation yet in the 2. cap. sect 10. speaketh thus The Anabaptists exclude Protestants and all different professions from the hope of spirituall life yet do not Protestants iudge the state of euery Anabaptist to be so vtterly desperate We see how they teach that Anabaptists hold the foundation and deny but an externall secondary and ceremoniall matter and such as may be omitted so it be don without scandall that Anabaptists and themselues are sonnes of the same Father that they are in the state of saluation and that they are a church as a man tainted with leprosy is a man Now concerning the Arrians of these tymes M. Morton in his booke of the Kingdome of Israel and the Church pag. 94. And the Arrians auoucheth plainly that their Churches are to be accounted the Churches of God Because sayth he they hold the foundation of the Ghospell Hooker in his 4. Daneus in c. 53. Aug. de hares VVhitak ad Rat. 10. pag. 241. Parentius in Instruct Gall. p. 27. booke of Ecclesiasticall policy pag. 181. writeth thus The Arians in the reformed churches of Poland c. Nay some of the Protestants lay clayme to that old heretike Aërius for that he agreed with them in denyall of prayer for the dead and some other points yet that he was stained with Arianisme S. Epiphanius who liued in those tymes haer 75. and S. Augustin 53. witnesses whole credit herein can no way be impeached do plainly testify They lay claime to their professed enimies 10. Lastly they forbeare not sometymes to challenge for their owne such as were their profest enemies as is certaine by their clayme to the Papists and Grecians who condemned and branded their doctrine with the marck of heresy And the Sacramentaries pretend a right to Luther and the Lutherans In Concil Trid In Censura Orient howbeit it is well known that both the Master and the sect haue diuers tymes censured and condemned their doctrine by name as in the Confessions of Auspurg Mansfeld Antwerpe that of Sueueland set forth anno 1563. in the booke of Concord in the visitation of Saxony and else where it appeareth And that in the Conference of Marpurge and Montbelgard they gaue them the repulse and flatly refused to admit them for brethren Nay as Lanatherus writeth lib. de dissid Euchar. anno 1556 There haue byn many Synodes held by the Lutherans wherein they consulted what way they might take to quell and make an end of the Sacramentaries And they shew the same encroaching desire in personall Claimes For Illyricus in his Catalogue lib. 19. col 1917 enrolleth amongst his witnesses Clicthouaeus an earnest and vehement aduersary both of Luther and Occolampadius D. Humfrey in vita Iuelli claymeth Erasmus for a maintayner and Champion of the truth Rainolds l. 1. de Idolat cap. 2. M. Fox vouchsafes him a place in his kalender of Protestant Saints and Verheiden sets his pourtraiture amongst the Worthies and Pairs of their religion Vorstius in Append Respons ad Sladum pag. 136. accounteth him one of his owne that is sayth he one of the reformed D. Whitaker Contr. 4. quest 5. cap. 3. pag. 693 sayth It is most apparent that Erasmus thought the same of religion that we do And yet Erasmus himselfe lib. 16. epist 11. professeth that he acknowledgeth not Luther and impugneth openly both him and his doctrine And as Amidorfius writeth in epist apud Lutherum tom 2. fol. 487. The summe of Erasmus doctrine is this that Luthers doctrine is heresy O tho Brunsfelsius in his answere to Erasmus spunge layth these things to his charge Thou makest protestation neuer to haue conuersation or fellowship with those men who imbrace the ghospell vnder Luthers name Againe It is well knowne and confest that of so many enemies of the Protestant ghospell no one euer did it more harme then thou Hutterus in Expostulat Hospin part 2. Histor fol. 72. Iames Andrew lib. cont Hosium p. 110 D. Iames l. de corrupt scripturae Patrum pag. 66. and others say the like of him D. Humphrey ad Rat. 3. Campiani will haue King Henry 8. to haue byn a member of their Church D. Fulke lib. cont Heskins Sander sect 82. sayth he was a member of the Catholike church of Christ And D. Andrews in Resp ad Apoll. Bellarm. cap. 1. sayth He was a true defender of the true sayth Bucer epist dedicat Comment ad Rom He imbraced the pure Ghospell of Christ reiecting those forgeries of men which are repugnant to it And yet it is most certaine that he sharply persecuted and pursued Protestants euen vnto death And as Melancthon writeth to him in epist tom 4 He oppressed the truth then appearing and shewing it selfe And as Cambden sayth in Apparatu Annalium Anglie Protestants he burnt for heretikes Of Charles 5. Scultetus in Conc. secular pag. 10. writeth thus It is knowne by vndoubted demonstration that Charles 5. departed this life trusting to the same comfort an◠the same sayth which Luther drew from the sacred welsprings and broached to the people Iames Andrews lib. cont Hosium pag. 233. hath the like and yet in the same sermon p. 27. he sayth To this alone he bent his whole endeauours that he might pluck vp the Lutheran religion by the rootes M Doue in his booke of Recusancy will needs persuade vs that Bellarmine himselfe is a Protestant or at least no right Papist What meruaile is it if these men be so hardy as to challenge the ancient Fathers seing they are not ashamed to claime in this manner their professed enemies such as are knowne to all the world and are yet aliue That Protestants sometymes acknowledge Idolaters Infidels Antichrist himselfe and Atheists to be members of their Church CHAP. IV. 1. THAT they sometymes confesse idolaters are members of their Church Protestāts challenge idolaters is euident First for that they refuse not to receiue Papists as we haue heard before in exclamations and outcries against whose idolatry their tongues and pennes are set most a worke for to their worship of the Eucharist of Saincts of images of reliques they afford no milder name And secondly it appeareth by their owne words For M. Hooker in his 3. booke of Ecclesiasticall Policy pag. 126. sayth Christians