6. fine in his Treatise tending to Pacification sect 14. circa med pag. 89. acknowledgeth a particular blessing of God in the Church of Rome and an evident work of the Holy Ghost saying That the Church of Rome hath ever continued after a sort in profession of the faith since the time that by the Apostles it was delivered to them c. and hath also in some manner preserved and hitherto maintained both the Word and Sacraments that Christ himself did leave unto us which surely saith he is a very special blessing of God and an evident work of the Holy Ghost c. To make good saith Brereley ibidem in the margent at †M. Bunny's words of the evident work of the Holy Ghost in preservation of the Roman Sea the same hath appeared many waies extraordinary and admirable As first in that the other four Patriarchal Seas are noted and known to have been pestered every one of them with confessed Arch-hereticks or Inventers of new doctrines against some principal Article of our Christian faith As at Antioch Paulus Samosetanus at Hierusalem Joannes and Arsenius at Alexandria Dioscorus at Constantinople Macedonius and Nestorius onely the Sea of Rome hath been preserved free from all such known note or touch For howsoever our Adversaries do pretend some one or other Pope to have had his private errour yet to charge any Pope with being an Arch heretick as before-said they have not any colour Secondly in that the Cities of all the other Patriarchal Seas and the Bishops belonging to them now are and of long have been oppressed with Infidels and their succession is either none or but inglorious whereas God hath yet hitherto disposed otherwise of the City and Sea of Rome Thirdly in the example of so many great Christian Kingdomes and Countryes in Asia Africk and Europe which forsaking the Communion of this Sea became not long afterwards barbarous and subject to Infidels accordingly as it is foretold of the true Churches prerogative The Nation and Kingdome that will not serve thee shall perish and those Nations shall be utterly destroyed Esay 60.12 Fourthly in that this is the onely Sea or Church which is confessed by our Adversaries to have continued known and visible for these last thousand or 1300 years whereof see Brereley tract 1. sect 2. at k. l. sect 8. in the margent at c. tract 2. c. 2. sect 7. fine at 3 4 5 6 c. converting also to the Christian faith during all that time by its Legats and Preachers so many confessed Nations and Kingdomes of the Gentiles agreeable to the predictions of the Prophets in that behalf whereof see Brereley tract 2. c. 1. sect 4. initio in the margent at* Fifthly in that this Sea hath been persecuted by the contrary factions of so many Christian Princes by the very Citizens and Cardinals of Rome by the Schisms Factions and wicked lives of the Popes themselves by the implacable hatred and contradiction of so many confessed heresies and hereticks of every age conspiring all of them howsoever divided otherwise among themselves to malign and impugn this Sea as the principal object of their daily continued malice So Hell gates may be said to have assaulted her and yet not prevailed Matth. 16.18 Upon which consideration but duely had of all Hereticks though divided among themselves yet joyning so together in malice against the Roman Sea how can that out-faced opinion of our Adversaries be possibly true which M. D. Downham in his treatise concerning Antichrist l. 2. pag. 22. ante med delivereth saying We hold Antichrist to be the whole body of Hereticks in the last age of the world c. The head of which body is the Papacie The Pope to be their Head and yet he ever against them all and they all ever against him is it possible 6. Pu. Besides what hath been said out of Brereley of this point that Protestants confess that the Roman Church wants nothing necessary to salvation I will shew the same yet more at large D. Potter in his Answer to Charity mistaken pag. 63. saith The most necessary and fundamentall Truths which constitute a Church are on both sides unquestioned And for that reason learned Protestants yield them Romanists as he calls us the name and substance of a Christian Church Where we see that he saith in generall learned Protestants yield them c. In proof whereof he cites in his margent Iunius D. Reinolds and sayes See the judgement of many other writers in the advertisement annexed to the old Religion by the Reverend Bishop of Exeter and adds The very Anabaptists grant it Fr. Johnson in his Christian Plea pag. 123. So that with this one Testimonie of Potter we have many other even of our greatest Adversaries And pag. 62. he saith To those twelve Articles which the Apostles in their Creed esteemed a sufficient Summary of wholsome Doctrine they Catholicks have added many more Such are for instance their Apocryphall Scriptures and unwritten dogmaticall Traditions their Transubstantiation and dry Communion their Purgatory Invocation of Saints Worship of the Images Latine service trafficke of Indulgences and shortly the other new doctrines and decrees canonized in their late Synod of Trent Upon these and the like new Articles is all the contestation between the Romanists and Protestants And then he adds the words which we have cited The most necessary and Fundamentall truths which constitute a Church are on both sides unquestioned and for that c. Where we see he grants we believe the twelve Articles of the Apostles Creed which he teaches at large to contain all Fundamentall Points of Faith and that we hold all the most necessary and Fundamentall truths which constitute a Church Therefore those Points of our Doctrine which he gives for instance are no Fundamentall errors nor the contrary Articles necessary and Fundamentall truths and yet he names all the chiefest Points controverted between us and Protestants even Transubstantiation Communion in one kind and Latine Service which are the things they are wont most to oppose Yea he comprises all the Doctrines and Decrees of the Councill of Trent Therefore we are free from Fundamentall errors by the confession of our Adversaries pag. 59. he further saith The Protestants never intended to erect a new Church but to purge the old The reformation did not change the substance of Religion but only cleansed it from corrupt and impure qualities If the Protestants erected not a new Church then ours is still the old Church and if it were only cleansed from corrupt qualities without change of the substance the substance must be still the same it was and that which was must be still the same with that which is pag. 61. The things which the Protestants believe on their part and wherein they judge the life and substance of Religion to be comprized are most if not all of them so evidently and indisputably true that their Adversaries themselves do avow and receive them
in his Commentary upon the Epistle to the Galatians englished fol. 35. circa med kept chastity poverty and obedience was onely given to fasting watching praying saying of Mass and such like and (x) Luther ibid. fol. 35. a. circa med honoured the Pope of meer conscience c. and was so thereby most undoubtedly a professed member of our Catholick or as they tearm it Popish Church So likewise upon his pretended reformation or preaching afterward against the Pope he did not say they thereby (y) M. D. Covel in his defence of M. Hooker Art 11. pag. 73. post med saith As it is strange for any man to deny them of Rome to be of the Church so I cannot but wonder that they of Rome will ask where our Church was before Luther as if any were of opinion that Luther did erect a new Church c. And see the like saying in M. Hooker in his Ecclesiastical Policy l. 3. pag. 129. post med erect a new Church then before not in being for that were most directly against themselves and therefore did not depart from the Church he was of before but continued still a member thereof Which thing both M. Hooker and M. D. Covel speaking thereof do very plainly (z) M. Hooker l. 3. pag. 130. M. D. Covel in his defence of M. Hooker pag. 68. say We gladly acknowledge them of Rome to be of the Family of Jesus Christ therefore we hope that to reform our selves is not to sever our selves from the Church we were of before In the Church we were and are so still as also we say that they of Rome notwithstanding their manifold defects are to be held a part of the House of God a limb of the visible Church of Christ acknowledge to the great (a) In the Christian Letter of certain English Protestants unto that Reverend man M. Hooker pag. 18 19. they reprove at large M. Hooker for this opinion of not severing themselves from the Church they were of before dislike of the Puritans as also M. Bunny prosecuteth the same more at large affirming therefore (b) M. Bunny in his Treatise tending to Pacification sect 18. pag. 108. paulò post med that of departing from the Church there ought to be no question at all among us (c) Ibidem pag. 113. post med We are saith he no several Church from them nor they from us and therefore there is no departing at all out of the Church for any to depart from them to us nor from us to them all the difference between us is concerning the truer members whether we or they may be found more worthy of that account As for the other we allow no such question Insomuch as he doubteth not to say (d) Ibidem pag. 109. circa med It was evil done of them who first urged such a separation confessing further our great (e) Ibidem sect 15. pag. 92. circa med he saith of this separation Our Adversaries see themselves to have advantage if they can win us to acknowledge it advantage given thereby which our advantage he afterwards very plainly to this purpose expresseth to be (f) Ibid. pag. 96. circa med For that saith he it is great probability with them that so we make our selves answerable for to find out a distinct and several Church from them which continued from the Apostles age to this present else that needs we must acknowledge that our Church is sprung up of late or since theirs And hence perhaps it is that their learned writers to the better enabling of our Church to be howsoever according to their opinion in part erroneous yet withall a true Church doubt not to affirm of the sundry points of our Catholick faith in particular that they are though in their opinion errours yet not †To give some few and chief examples hereof First M. Perkins in his exposition of the Creed pag. 402. saith A weakning errour is that the holding whereof doth not overturn any point in the foundation of salvation as the errour of Free will and sundry such like M. Cartwright in his reply pag. 14. sect 1 2 and in M. Whitgists defence pag. 82. post med affirmeth the like indifferency of the doctrines of Free-will Prayer for the dead and a number of other as necessary doctrines wherein saith he men being mis-led have notwithstanding been saved And a little there before he further saith If you mean by matters of faith and necessary to salvation those without which a man cannot be saved then the doctrine which teacheth there is no Free-will or Prayer for the Dead is not within your compass For I doubt not but divers Fathers of the Greek Church who were great Patrons of Free-will are saved And the like is yet further affirmed of Prayer for the Dead by John Frith Act. Mon. pag. 501. by M. Fulk in his Confut. of Purgatory pag. 336. ante med and by M. Penry in his Book entituled M. Some laid open in his colours pag. 99. Secondly M. Spark in his answer to M. John d'Abbines pag. 382. ante med discoursing of the honouring of Saints Reliques and Prayer for the Dead saith thereof to his Adversary We are not so hasty to pronounce sentence of condemnation of any for such errours for you know well enough that we make not these matters such as that either we think that all must be saved that hold the one way or all condemned that hold the other As touching invocation of Saints M. D. Goade and Fulk do in the disputation had in the Tower with Edm. Campian the 2. daies conference Arg. 8. R. 11. R. 111. affirm thereof that it doth not exclude from being members of the Church c. Thirdly concerning the Real Presence Jacobus Acontius in lib. 3. Stratagematum Satanae pag. 135. paulò ante med saith It is evident concerning as well those who hold the Real Presence of Christs body in the bread as those others which deny it that although of necessity the one part do erre yet both are in way of salvation if in other things they be obedient to God And M. D. Reynolds in his 5. Conclusion annexed to his Conference c. pag. 722. affirmeth the Real Presence to be as it were the grudging of a little ague if otherwise the party hold the Christian faith And John Frith Act. Mon. pag. 503. a. fine saith hereof The matter touching the substance of the Sacrament bindeth no man of necessity to salvation or damnation whether he believe it or not And see Luthers like judgement of Transubstantiation in magna Confessione cited by Amandus Polanus in his Sylog Thesium Theologicarum pag. 464. initio and in the Book entituled Orthodoxus consensus printed Tiguri 1578. in folio fol. 12. b. initio Fourthly as concerning the receiving under one or both kinds Luther in epistola ad Bohemos saith thereof Quamvis pulchrum quidem esset utraque specie in Eucharistia uti Christus hac
to be good with whatsoever words it be ministred so the same be not in the name of Man but God So Luther tom 2. Wittemberg in lib de captivit Babylon cap. de Baptismo fol. 75. a. initio saith Quocunque modo tradatur Baptismus modo non in nomine Hominis sed in nomine Domini tradatur verè salvum facit imô non dubitem siquis in nomine Domini suscipiat etiamsi impius Minister non det in nomine Domini verè Baptizatum esse in Nomine Domini 5 Concerning the [r] Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 10. subdivis 8. sufficiency of our Redemption by our Saviours Passion in his humane nature upon the Cross Luther taught thus far to the contrary as that not only the Humane Nature of Christ sufferd for us for saith he in affirming but so much Christ is a Saviour of vile and small accompt and needeth himself also a Saviour [Å¿] Luther in confessione majori de Coena Domini Cum credo quod sola humana natura pro me passa est Christus ille vilis nec magni pretii Salvator est Imo ipse quoque Salvatore opus habet but also that the [t] Luther de Consiliis Part. 2. saith of the Zuingliand Pertinacissimè contra me pugnabant quod Divinitas Christi pati non posset Divinity of Christ did suffer which is so intollerable and grosse that it is specially contradicted by divers learned Protestants as Zuinglius Hospinianus D. Barnes Beza Czecanorius in Brereley pag. 403 404. and affirmed to be an old condemned opinion in Apollinarius and Eutiches and contrary to the Prophets Apostles and all true Believers To this we may adde Luther's wicked Doctrine concerning our Saviour's descending into Hell there also for to suffer Torments in Soul after his death Thus Luther tom 3. Wittemberg in Psalm 16. fol. 279. a. post med saith Christus sicut cum summo dolore mortuus est ita videtur dolores post mortem in inferno sustinuisse ut nobis omnia superaret c. And see this opinion confessed in Luther by Fulke in his defence of the English translation of the Bible cap. 7. pag. 204. See Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 10. sub 8. at 16. pag. 205. it should be 405 6 Conterning Luther's [u] Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 10. subdi 9. contempt of the antient Fathers and his own great undertaking knowledge he saith [x] Luther in libro ad Ducem Georgium And see his like saying in Colloquiis Litinis cap. de consolatione And ad cap. 1. dd Galatas tom 5. Wittemberg fol. 290 b. He saith Esto Ecclesia Augustinus alii Doctores item Petrus Apollo imo Angelus è Caelo diversum doceant tamen mea Doctrina est ejusmodi quae solius Dei gloriam illustrat c. Petrus Apostolorum summus vivebat docet extra Verbum Dei And after the English Translation fol. 33. b. paulo post med and 34. a. initio and in libro de servo arbitrio contra Erasmum in the first Edition thereof He saith if not most arrogantly judge Deponite quicquid armaturae suppeditabunt Orthodoxi veteres Theologorum Scholae authoritas Conciliorum Pontificum consensus tot saeculorum ac totius populi Christiani nihil recipimus nisi Scripturas sed fic ut penes nos solos sit certa Authoritas interpretandi Quod nos interpretamur hoc sensit Spiritus Sanctus quod afferunt alii quamvis magni quamvis multi à Spiritu Satanae â—lienata mente profectum est See this Saying alleged in Nullus Nemo G. 6. pag. 153. And in Cnoglerus his Symbola tria pag. 152. And Luther tom 2 Wittemberg fol. 486. b. fine saith Ego verò hoc libro non contuli sed asserui assero ac penes nullum volo esse judicium sed omnibus suadeo ut praestent obsequium Since the Apostles times no Doctor or Writer hath so excellently and cleerly confirmed instructed and comforted the Consciences of the Secular States as I have done by the singular grace of God This certainly I know that neither Austine nor Ambrose who yet are in this matter the best are equall to me herein And again tom 7. in serm de eversione Hierusalem fol. 271. a. The Gospel is so copiously preacht by us that truly in the Apostles time it was not so clear And apud Brereley trect 1. sect 3. subd vis 14. initio in the Margent at the figure 4. he affirms tom 2. Wittemberg Anno 1551. lib. de servo Arbitrio pag. 434. the Fathers of so many Ages to have been plainly blind and most ignorant in the Scriptures to have erred all their life time and that unless they were amended before their deaths they were neither Saints nor partaining to the Church See further Luther's Book de servio arbitrio printed in octavo 1603. pag. 72 73 276 and 337. Also in Colloquiis Mensalibus cap de Patribus Ecclesiae Luther saith of sundry Fathers in particular In the writings of Hierom there is not a word of true Faith Christ and sound Religion Tertullian is very superstitious I have holden Origen long since accursed Of Chrysostom I make no account Bazil is of no worth he is wholly a Monk I weigh him not of a hair Cyprian is a weak Divine c. affirming there yet further that the Church did degenerate in the Apostles age and that the Apologie of Phillip Melancthon doth far excell all the Doctors of the Church and exceeds even Augustin himself [y] See Brereley Tract 2. c. 2. sect 10. subdivis 9. How highly he esteemeth of such Doctrine as himself collecteth from the Scriptures and how much he preferreth himself therein before the Fathers himself signifieth saying tom 2. l. contra Regem Angliae fol. 344. b. Gods Word is above all the Divine Majestie maketh for me so as I pass not if a thousand Austins a thousand Cyprians a thousand King Harry Churches stood against me Nay he doubteth not in plain tearms to exempt his Doctrine from all judgment of Men and Angels making himself therby judge of both saying Adversus falso nominatum Ecclesiasticum statum Scire vos volo quod in posterum non amplius hoc honore dignabor ut sinam vel vos vel ipsos Angelos de Caelo de mea doctrina judicare c. nec volo meam doctrinam à quoquam judicari atque adeone ab Angelis quidem cum enim certus de ea sim per eam vester Angelorum judex esse volo And see these words though somwhat altered in the late edition of Wittemberg tom 2. fol. 306. a. fine And apud Brereley tract 3. sect 7. pag. 681. marg at e. tom 2. Wittemberg lib. contra Regem Angliae fol. 333. a. fine he saith Certus enim sum dogmata mea habere me de Caelo c. dogmata mea stabunt c. And will our English Divines allow this in
pag. 397. he in his answer thereto pag. 400. saith thereof All this was before he was of our Religion even whiles he was one of yours and he was yours when he made them And Mr. D. Morton in his Apologia Catholica part 1. l. 2. c. 21 pag. 355. circa med reciteth the objection Orbi notum est quà m salax fuit Beza qui publicatis poematibm paidastrias suas celebrare non erubuit Galliae probrum Symoniacus Sodomita omnibus vitiis coopertus wherto he in his words there and next and immediatly following answereth confessing and saying Erat erat sed dum in volutabro vestro miser haeserat c. Ille Beza igitur dum Papista hircus fuit Which their answer is impertinent for though we deny not but many grievous sinners have repented and become afterwards very holy men yet that any one ever since Christs time offending so inhumanely and unnaturally as is here confessed of Beza should be called extraordinarily by God to restore and publish to the world true Religion then formerly decayed as Beza in the conference had at Ratisbone affirmed his calling to be extraordinary whereof see Brereley tract 2. c. 2. sect 6. fine at the margent at f. is the point now only urged and whereof we affirm all example to be wanting For as to that which Master Morton in Apolog. Catholica pag. 355. allegeth of Saul made Paul is unapt if not injurious to the Apostle seeing his errour was only his persecuting of the Church grounded upon preposterous zeal towards God Acts 22.3 4. and not in other wickedness of life to the contrary whereof himself saith As touching my life from my Childhood and what it was all the Jews know that after the most strait sect of our Religion I lived a Pharisy But besides that this their answer is impertinent it appeareth also to be most untrue even by the testimony of Antony Faius Beza's dearest [f] Antony Faius l. de obâ—u vita Bezae pag. 46. fine Collegue and Successor at Geneva who affirmeth that Beza being but [g] Antony Faius ubi supra pag. 8. fine 9. ante med and see pag. 11. ante med twelve years old was brought up in learning under VVolmarius and by him then instructed out of the pure fountain of Gods word in the ready knowledge of true Christian piety In so much also as Beza himself doth in his last VVill and Testament give special thanks to the immortal God for that at the â—6 year of his age he was enlightned with the knowledge of true Christian Religion as witnesseth Antony Faius in his Book de obitu vita Bezae pag. 73. initio where he maketh recital of Beza's will in which saith he Beza gratias agit Deo immortali quod anno aetatis suae 16. verae Christianae Religionis cognitione ac luce donatus sit VVhich time of his supposed inlightning computation being had of his Birth [h] Antony Faius ubi supra pag. 8. post med 24. Junii anno 1519. and of his foresaid Epigrams Printed at Paris under his name by Robertus Stephanus anno 1548. appeareth evidently to have been many years before his publishing of the foresaid Epigrams the which also as may seem by Antony Faius before cited at a. he dedicated even to his foresaid Mr. Wolmarius by whom he was as before first instructed in Religion Hitherto of Beza's unchast Epigrams In further proof whereof much more as yet is affirmed by Schlusselburg in his Theologia Calvinist l. 1. fol. 92. a. post med b. from recital out of Beza's other writings Only we adde hereto a remembrance of that Poetical vein which Beza afterwards waxing old continued and used when turning the Psalms of David into Latine verse a work greatly commended by Antony Faius l. de vita obitu Bezae pag. 80. saying that Psalmos vario Latinorum carminum genere elegantissimè suavissimè expressos orbi Christiano dedit And see this Treatise of Beza further mentioned pag. 78. fine he did among other Paraphrase the 50. Psalm which being wholly penitential and comprehending in it nothing but matter of grief and tears let it be indifferently weighed upon perusal but of part thereof here alleged we will not say how lasciviously but how unanswerable to Davids contrition the same is by Beza penned He therefore saith of David Rex David amore Correptus vertit Bersabae ad limina vultus Bersabae quâ non formosior altera cunctas Isacidum populos inter numerata puellas Sed coÌ„juncta viro mater jaÌ„ digna videri Et mox tam raras mortali in corpore dotes Miratus patulae radiantem frontis honoreÌ„ Purpureasque genas pulchri discrimina nasi Os roseuÌ„ flavos per eburnea colla capillos Marmoreumq sinum porrectaque brachia longè Et teretes digitos me vero ludere in istis Fas oculis inquit c. And a little after he describeth Bersabe Omnibus arridet pulchrae sibi coÌ„scia formae Nunc sinit extrema crispaÌ„tes froÌ„te capillos Ludere nunc varia discriminat arte vagantes Iam caelare sinuÌ„ simulat maÌ„masque coërcet Et super objectat tenuit velamina tele Iam cunct as ostentat opes colloque superba Nudato pulchra mentitur imagine Divam Interdum excultis illi qui stabat in hortis Marmorâ—o insignis labro atque perennibus undis Fonte lavat celeresque oculis jaculatur amores VVas this the Spirit of Davids repentance or rather of Beza's yet hitherto continued vein of Naso and Catullus whom he is mentioned to have imitated heretofore These wanton verses were such an open scandal that now in the other late Editions they are for very shame quite omitted and left forth but yet still extant and to be seen in Beza's tractat Theologic Printed Genevae in fol. anno 1570. pag. 661. a. circa med But to proceed on with Beza's life that learned Lutheran Conradus Schlusselburg in Theol. Calvinist l. 1. fol. 92. b. fine reporteth further saying This also is manifest that Beza espoused his Candida without her Parents assent and for four years space before he maryed her kept her as is Concubine Constat hoc Bezam fibi despondisse suam Candidam insciis Parentibus cum ea quatuor annos consuevisse ea concubina utendo antequam Candidam uxorem duxerit And whereas it is also reported that his secret flight in Company of the said VVoman for preventing of troubles hereupon to him intended was the first occasion which brought him with her to Geneva where saith the reporter he was forced to marry her in prevention of open scandal of their then conceived incontinency it is not altogether without scruple that Antony Faius not ignorant of this so common report and undertaking to make mention of Beza's marriage doth no better prevent or clear it but rather as some conceive give colour thereto telling how that Beza being intangled with the inticement of voluptuousness ambitious
other beginning or beginners of Protestancy than those whom hitherto they have taken for their glorious Fathers and persons qualified with such gifts and endowments as make them fit to reform the whole Christian world and these being once removed from the rank of their Forefathers how will they answer this question Who in particular were the first beginners of their Protestant Church at what time and in what place did they live To which demand I am sure they cannot answer with satisfaction but perforce they must be content to be like the Donatists of whom St. Optatus sayd that they were Filii sine Patre Sonns without Father and every one must be to himself a begining of his Faith and Religion A dreadfull point in the business of an Eternity and necessary subject to that weighty saying of St. Bernard Qui se sibi magistrum constituit stulto se discipulum subdit He who will be his own Master shall be Scholler to a Fool. Secondly For Manners who can imagin that God being Truth Purity and Peace it self would choose for Reformation of the World such men as confessedly have shamefully erred against Truth for Doctrin and against not only Purity but common honesty and morality and against Peace by being both for their Doctrines and Practises Authors of Tumults Seditions and Rebellions Thirdly it ought to be considered with deepest grief and Tears what a lamentable thing it was that people should have been seduced from that antient Religion which the World professed with the specious names of Dr. Luther c. and with a fair but false and lying title of Reformation by men who indeed were such as hath been declared and proved from their own Writings and the expresse and direct Assertions of their own brethren Fourthly since we have found them to be most inconstant in their Doctrine in matters of highest concernment expresly professing to have temporized accommodated themselves to the times and not to that which even themselves judged true who can rely on them unless he first resolve not to be settled in any truth but to be ranked among those who circumferuntur omni vento doctrinae which in effect is no better than to have no true Faith at all Fiftly seeing they cannot nor ever could agree with those whom they stile Brethren and which is the main point have no possble means of agreement no men in wisdome can join themselves to the common generall name of Protestants not knowing which of them in particular hold the Truth nor who are or are not Protestants nor why they should believe one sect of them more than another neither is it possible to join with them all they believing and professing to believe contradictory Tenents some of which must needs be false Sixtly Seing those first Reformers are confessed to hold Doctrines in themselves damnable and detested even by Protestants how can they be excused from Heresy And seing they left the whole Catholick Church extant before Luther upon pretence of Errous in Doctrine of lesse moment than those wherin they thus differ among themselves and yet forsake not one another but will needs be Brethren and of one Communion how can they be excused from Schism by their division from the Communion of all Churches But now having declared what kind of men the Progenitots of Protestants were let us in the next place examine of what Fathers we Catholicks may deservedly glory even by the Confession of our Adversaries who by evidence of Truth are forced to confesse that the Antient Holy Fathers taught the same Doctrines and practised the same things which Protestants disprove in us and for the Reformation whereof they pretend to have forsaken our Church This then according to the order prescribed in the Preface must be the subject of the next Consideration THE SECOND CONSIDERATION By the Confession of Protestants the Antient Holy Fathers believed and practised the same things which we believe and practise against Protestants 1. FIrst saith Brereley tract 1. sect 3. subdivis 1. concerning Vows it is confessed that the Fathers did allow Vows of perpetual Chastity affirming them to be obligatory Non ignoramus saith Chemnitius exam part 3. pag. 14. ante med quod Patres vota perpetui caelibatûs probent quodque illa obligatoria etiam agnoscant In so much as he Chemnitius doth thereupon specially recite and reject in this behalf the several sayings of Basil [q] Chemnitius ibid. pag. 40. a. ante med Ambrose and Chrysostom Also of [r] Ibid. pag. 42. a. Epiphanins Austine and [s] Ibid. pag. 42. b. ante med Innocentius And it is likewise yet further affirmed that the [t] Peter Martyr de Votis pag. 490. saith Erant ergo Clementis aetate professiones vota fateor I am tune incaeperant homines deflectere à Verbo Dei c. With whom agreeth Mr. Parkins in Problem c. pag. 191. initio saying In antedictis saeculis stipulationes de continentia publice in Ecclesia fieri solebant nam Anno Christi 170. Clemens Alex. l. 3 stromat ait c. profession and Vows of Chastity were extant among Christians in the time of Clement Bishop of Alexandria who by [u] Euseb hist l. 6. c. 11. paulâ—ante med saith Clemens de se ipso loquitur quod prope ad Apostolorum tempoâ—a successerit his own testimony lived neer to the Apostles times that [x] Peter Martyr ibid. pag. 524 fine saith Scio Epiphanium cum multis aliis ex Patribus in eo errare quod peccatum esse dicunt votum hujusmodi violare cum onufuerit malè illum id referre in traditiones Apostolicas Epiphanius and many other Fathers erred therein that [y] Cent. 3. c. 6. col 140. linea 27. cent 3. c. 7. col 176. lâ—ea 39. Tertullian and Cyprian taught Vows of Chastity that the famous antient [z] Iustus Molitor de Ecclesia militante c. pag. 80. fine saith Chalcedonense Concilium contra Spiritus Sancti oracula Monachis Virginibus monialibus usum conjugii interdixit Council of Chalcedon did hereupon forbid Marriage to Monks and Nuns that St. Augustine and all the Fathers assembled with him in the Carthage Council [a] So saith Danaeus contra Bellarm. primae partis altera parte pag. 1011. initio And see Concil 4. Carthag can 104. and 1 Tim. 5.9 10 11 12. abused manifestly the word of God saying upon the Apostles words If any Widow how young soever c. hath vowed her self to God left her secular habit and under the testimony of the Bishop and Church appeared in a religious weed if afterward she go to secular Marriage she shall according to the Apostle have damnation because she dared to make void the vow of Chastity which she made to God that [b] Mr. Fulk against the Rhemish Testament in 1 Tim. 5. fol. 381. b. sect 10. initio And see Danaeus contra Belar 1. partis altera parte pag.
of Scripture sbjected by our other Adversaries against Peters Primacy learned Protestants the anriquity of this opinion is fully confessed by Mr. Fulk who speaking of Leo and Gregory Bishops of Rome the first of them about Anno Domini 440. and the other about 59â— saith [h] Mr. Fulk in his Retentive against Bristows moâ—tives c. pag. 248. fine the mystery of iniquity having wrought in that seat of Rome neer five or six hundred years before them so antiently before them did the Roman Sea in his opinion begin to be Papal and then greatly encreased they were so deceived with long continuance of error that they thought the dignity of Peter was much more over the rest of his fellow-Apostles than the holy Scriptures of God do allow So confessedly antient and of long continuance was this opinion of Peters Primacy even in those elder times of Leo and Gregory A thing so evident that our other learned Adversaries reprehend sundry of the other much more antient Fathers for their affirming the Church to be built upon Peter namely [i] Conturists cent 4. col 1250. l. 2. Hierom [k] Cent. 4. col 555. lin 30. Hilary [l] Cent. 4. col 558. l. 54. Nazianzen [m] Cent. 3. col 84. lin 73. it is said Tertullianus non sine errore sentire videtur Claves soli Petro commissas Ecclesiam super ipsum extructam esse Tertullian [n] Centur. 3. col 84. lin 59. saith Passim dicit Cyprianus super Petrum Ecclesiam fundatam esse ut l. 1. Epist 3. l. 4. Ep. 9. c. Cyprian [o] Cent. 3. col 85. lin 3. it is said Origines tract 5. in Matth. dicit Petrus per promissionem meruit fieri Ecclesiae fundamentum Idem hom 17. in Lucam Petrum vocat Apostolorum Principem Origen and in general [p] Calvin institut l. 4. c. 6. sect 6. saith In Petro fundatam esse Ecclesiam quia dictum sit super hanc Petram c. At nonnulli ex Patribus sic exposuerunt sed reclamat tota Scriptura c. And Danaeus in respons ad Bellarmin disput part 1. pag. 277. post med saith of the Fathers Dictum en im Christi Matth. 16. Tu es Petrus super hanc Petram c. pessimè de persona Petri sunt interpretati c. many Fathers reproving also others for their entituling Peter the [q] Cent. 4. col 556. lin 17. they allege Optatus calling Peter Apostolorum Caput unde Cephas appellatur and see next heretofore at 10. where they allege Origen calling Peter Apostorum Principem And Mr. Fulk in his Retentive c. pag. 248. chargeth Optatus with absurdity for saying of Peter praeferri omnibus Apostolis moruit c. he deserved to be preferred before all the Apostles and he alone received the Keys of the kingdom of Heaven to be communicated to the rest vide ibid. fine in like manner is Peter called Prince of the Apostles by Cyril of Hierusalem Catech. 2. Prince and Head of the rest by Cyril of Alexandria l. 12. in Ioan. c. 64. The Pastor and Head of the Church placed by Christ over the whole earth by Chrysostom in Matth. hom 55. ante med and Apostolorum vertex in the same homily circa med The Master of the whole world by Chrysostom in Ioan. hom 87. paulo ante med ad Pop. hom 80. ante med The rock and top of the Catholick Church in the Council of Chalcedonact 3 Head of the Apostles and [r] Cent. 4. col 554. lin 32. col 1074. lin 13. Arnobius is reprehended for tearming him Episcoporum Episcopus in respect whereof the Centurists do there further say de Petro minus commodè loquitur the Bishop of Bishops In so much that whereas the Fathers doubted not publickly to celebrate a yearly [s] Concil 2. Turonense can 16. saith Sunt etiam qui in festivitate Cathedrae Domini Petri Apostoli c. See this confessed Centur. 6. col 580. lin 2. And S. Austine serm 15. de Sanctis saith Institutio solemnitatis hodiernae a Senioribus nostris Cathedrae nomen accepit c. rectè ergo Ecclesiae natalem illius sedis colunt quam Apostolus pro Ecclesiarum salute suscepit dicente Domino Tu es Petrus c. ideo dignè fundamentum hoc Ecclesia coliâ— And see further mention hereof in Beda in Martyrologio festival day in honour of Peters Sea which respect had thereto is more than we find had to any other Sea of any other Apostle Danaeus answering hereunto affirmeth the Fathers assertion hereof to be [t] Danaeus in resp ad Bellar disput part 1. pag. 275. fine 276. initio the judgements and testimonies of the Church then corrupted and bewitched or made blind with this error And thus much concerning Peters Primacy confessedly as before taught by the Fathers and acknowledged by Mr. Whitgift and sundry other Protestants Mr. D. Covel not only further [u] Mr. Covel in his examination c. against the plea of the innocent Printed 1604. having spoken pag. 106. post med of one above the rest to suppress the seeds of dissention saith further thereof pag. 107. prope initium If this were the principal means to prevent Schisms and dissentions in the Primitive Church when the graces of God were far more abundant and eminent than now they are Nay if the twelve were not like to agree except there had been one chief among them for saith Hierom among the twelve one was therefore chosen that a chief being appointed occasion of dissention might be prevented c. affirming it in particular but also as laying down the general received reason thereof saith to the Puritans [x] Ibid in the words there next following How can they think that equality would keep all the Pastors in the world in peace and unity c. for in all Societies authority which cannot be where all are equal must procure unity and obedience And that this authority of Church-Government by him affirmed in the Apostles times was not then so personally tyed to any one as to dy with him but was to survive and continue to the Churches good himself further signifieth saying expresly of the Apostolick Church-Government in general That it was not to [y] Mr. Covel ibid. pag. 106. circa med saith If it concern all persons and ages in the Church of Christ as surely it doth the Government must not cease with the Apostles but so much of that authority must remain to them who from time to time are to supply that charge cease with the Apostles most evidently so by these premises implying an eminent authority continued in the Church of God and residing in one whereby to prove unity and obedience and to keep all the obedient Pastors of the world in peace whereto also [z] See Martin Luthers saying most pertinent to this purpose and alleged next hereafter in the margent under *
and the Bishop of Romes dignity than by the word of God was given to either of them And as concerning particulars to forbear what is generally [k] That Boniface the third claimed to be Head of the Universal Church Anno 607. is confessed by Mr. Willet in his Synopsis Papismi pag. 160. ante med by M. Fulk in his answer to a counterfeit Catholick pag. 36. initio by Mr. Perkins in his exposition of the Creed pag. 307. by Mr. Downham in his Book of Antichrist l. 1. pag. 4. post med And by Mr. Whitaker de Ecclesia contra Bellarminum c. pag. 144. post med where he affirmeth this Boniface and all his Successors to be Antichrists And the very same is affirmed by Mr. Fulk in his answer to a counterfeit Catholick pag. 27. circa med by M. Powel de Antichristo in Praesat pag. 1. fine confessed of the 1000. years last past the Century Writers of Magdeburg in their fifth Century the last part or end whereof was one hundred and the beginning thereof two hundred years within the compass of Mr. Jewels own challenge do confess and say concerning even those antient times that [l] Cent. 5. col 774. lin 31. in this fifth age the Roman Bishops applyed themselves to get and establish Dominion over other Churches that to this end [m] Cent. 5. col 777. lin 55. and in example thereof say further there Sic Celestinus Cyrillo Alexandrino cui suas partes videlicet ut Synodo Ephesinae praesideret delegavit privilegium dedit usurpandi titulum Papae mitram they usurped to themselves right of granting privileges and ornaments to other Archbishops That also [n] Cent. 5. col 778 lin 16. and in example thereof say further there Nam Leo Max mum Ant ochenum confirmavit in Episcopaâ—u ac Proterâ—o Alexandrino Episcopo jura ant qua ejus Sedis juxta Canones Privilegia confirmasse â—nd â—atur Epist 68 Leonis 69. and ibid. lin 37. it is further said Vsurpabant sib pot starem mandandi alâ—is Episcopis ut quem spsi velient proponerent in dissitâ—s Ecclesiis Episcopum ordinarent aut quem ipsi nollent deponerent sic Câ—lâ—stinus in Epâ—stola ad Cyrillum Alexandrinum Joannem Antiochenum Rufum Thâ—ssalonicensem mandat 〈◊〉 ut Proclum Constantinopoli designarent Episcopum c. they confirmed Arch-Bishops in their Seas [o] See this next heretofore at 25. and see further cent 5 col 778. lin 46. and see next hereafter at 67. in the margent and of Anthimus of Constantinople deposed by Agapitus see cent 6. col 55. lin 20. and Liberatus in Bâ—eviar cap. 21. of Dioscorus in like manner deposed and see Gelasius in Epist ad Episcopos Dardaniae deposed [p] Cent. 5. col 779. lin 31. it is said Sumâ—bant sibi facultatem excommunicandi alios Archiepiscopos Ecclesias sic Leo excommunicavit Orientales Felix Ocaclum Gelasius damnavit Acatium Petrum miffis literis in Orientem excommunicatd and [q] Cent. 5. col 779. lin 38. And in example thereof say further there Nam Gelasius in tomo Anathematum Petrum Alexandrinum secundae Sedis Antistitem negat absolvi a quoquam pose se quam ab Episcopo primae sedis scilicet Romano absolved others [r] Cent. 5. col 779. lin 8. it is said Arrogant sibi potestatem citandi alios ad dicendam coram sese causam sic Constantinopolitanus Episcopus Romam citatur Maximum citaturum sese promittet Bonifacius arrogating also power to themselves of citing other Arch-Bishops to declare their cause before them and that [s] Centur. 5. col 778. lin 5â— it is said Constituerunt postularunt ut in Episcoporum causis liceat ad sese appellari ut patet ex Actis sextae Carthaginensis Synodi Epistola ad Bonifacium Sixtus Epist 3. ad Orientales cap. 5. decernit ut contra Episcopum ad sedem Apostol cam appellantem nihil aliud statuatur quam Romanus Episcopus censuerit Gelasius in Epistola ad Faustum Magistrum impudenter mentitur in Canon bus sancitum esse ut Appellationes totius Ecclesiae ad examen Romanae sedis deferantur abipsa nusquam appelletur against a Bishop appealing to the Apostolick Sea nothing should be determined but what the Bishop of Rome censured that also [t] Cent. 5. col 780. lin 8. it is said Conati sunt eam sibi super Archiepiscopos vendicare authoritatem ut si quid illi agerent ex authoritate Romani Episcopi eg sse viderentur quasi servi ejus mancipia essent sic Leo Epist 84. indicat Antiftites Thessalonicenses semper vicem Apostolicae sedis implevisse ac monet Anasta sium who was then Bishop of Thessalonica ut in longinquis Provinciis quodam modo praesentiam suâ— Visitationis impendat nihil decernat nisi quod fibi probari agnoscat Sic Gelasius in Epistola ad Dardanos dicit se curam Alexandrinae Ecclesiae delegasse Acacio Constantinopolitano ideoque cum debuisse ad ipsum referre omnia And see further col 778. lin 26. col 779. lin 17. example is given of Legates sent into remote Provinces as Constantinople Ephesus and Africk Cent. 5. col 779. lin 43. it is said Ausi sunt ab Archi-Episcopis postulare ut si quid suo judicio non possent determinare ad sese referrent sic Leo Ep. 84. c. 7. Thessalonicensi hanc legem dictitat c. And see col 1230. lin 26. col 780. lin 45. And see further hereof Stephanus Mauritaniae Episcopus in Epistola ad Damasum And Anastasius Hierosolymitanus in Epist ad Felicem they appointed their Legates in remote Provinces challenging Authority to hear and determine all uprising controversies especially [u] See their testimony and examples hereof given col 781. lin 9. in Questions of Faith that likewise [x] Col. 781. lin 20. Generalia Concilia indicendi potestatem sibâ— sumpserunt ut patet Epist 93. cap. 7. Leonis c. Ac Synodos sine sua authoritate convocatas ut illegitimas rejecerunt they took upon them power of appointing general Councils and [y] Col. 781. lin 36. Jus pâ—â—dendi Synodis universalibus sibi adscripserunt c. Sic Celestinus Cyrillo Alexandrino in Ephesina Synodo Praesidendi potestatem suo nomine concessisse videri vult Ac Leo Paschasinum Siciliae Episcopum ut Chalcedonensi praesideret misit And see the subscription of Paschasinus in Concil Chalcid act 3. to be Presidents in general Councils And when themselves were absent even by [z] Vt supra and see this heretofore in the margent at 24. and see Centur. 5. col 781. lin 52. And see Danaeus in resp ad Bellarm part 1. pag. 323. their Deputies which were oftentimes no meaner than some one or other Patriarch [a] See next before at 34. also col 781. lin 57. In Synodis perpâ—ram acta
retractarunt Apostolicam jactantes authoritatem c. Postea ex eo sibi jus de Synodis judicandi arrogâ—runt Decreta retractandi c. And see Concil Chalced Act. 1. where it was said Synodum ausus est facere sine authoritate sedis Apostolicae quod nunquam licuit nunquam factum est rejecting for unlawful those Synods that were called without their authority And as these are confessed to be the known practice of those antient Roman Bishops so also is the like answerable respect and acknowledgement then had to that Sea by other Fathers of those times no less plainly testified by the said Century writers To this like end they say concerning the Roman Bishops [b] Centur. 5. col 744. lin 53. that they had flatterers in those times who affirmed that without permission of the Roman Bishop none might undertake the person of a Judge who then likewise [c] Cent. 5. col 775. 16. Ex errore quodam affirmant antiquitatem ei super omnes Principatum Sacerdotii contulissâ— Concerning this assertion of antiquity c. see further Anastasius Hierosolymitanus in Epist ad Felicem and Innocentius Epist 2. ad Vict. And see him in Epist ad Concil Milevitanum cited cent 5. col 781. lin 4. 5. and Leo Epist 88. ad Anastalium Thessalonicensem cap 1. Epist 93. ad Episcopos per Viennam cap. 2. averred that antiquity therefore it was not then first begun had attributed the principality of Priesthood to the Roman Bishop above all that accordingly [d] Cent. 5. col 774. lin 57. Victor called the Roman Church the Head of all Churches that [e] Col. 775. lin 4. Turbius Asturiensis flattered Pope Leo and acknowleged his Superiority that [f] Col. 778. lin 51. and Leo Epist 24. 25. saith of his Legates in the Ephesme Council Nostri fideliter reclamârunt eisdem libellum appellationis Flavianus obtulit and hereof see further the letter of Valentinian to Theodosius in Praeamb Con. Chal. where it is said Constantinopolitanus Episcopus Flavianus Episcopum Romanae Civitatis per libellos appellavit And again Libellum ad Apostolicam sedem missâ—rit And Liberatus cap. cap. 18. saith of Iohn Talida Patriarch of Alexandria deposed by the Emperor Zeno and Petrus Moggus intruded into his place Romanum Pontificem Simplicium appellavit sicut beatus fecit Athanasius sometimes Bishops condemned in Synods appealed to the Sea of Rome as did say they Flavianus Patriarch of Constantinople in the Council of Ephesus and that Councils [g] Col. 782. lin 36. Patres saepe honoris ergo pretebant ab iis Decreta confirmari Sic Chalcedonensis Synodus ad Leonem scribit Rogamus in tuis Dâ—creris nostrum honora judicium sicut nos cupidi in bonis adjecimus consonantiam sic summitas tua filiis quod decet adimpleat And the Council of Carthage Epist ad Innocentium desireth Innocentius in like tearms Vt Statutis nostrae mediocritatis etiam Apostolicae sedis adhibeatur authoritas alleged cent 5. col 823. And see the Council of Ephesus in Epist ad Celestinum Papam requested to have their Acts confirmed by the Bishop of Rome In so much as they conclude and say of St. Leo who was one of those Fathers of this fift age to whom Mr. Jewel did namely appeal [h] Centur. 5. col 1262. lin 30. And that Peters Primacy was thought to descend or come to the Bishop of Rome is likewise affirmed by Vigilius in Epist ad Euterium cap. 7. by Anastasius in Epist ad Anastasium Augustum by the Emperor Iustinian in his Epistle to Iohn the second cod de sum Trinitate fide Cathol tit 1. by the said Iohn in his Epistle to the said Emperor cited ibid. by Pelagius the second in Epist ad omnes Episcopos by Gelasius in Epist ad Faustum in Epist ad Episcopos per Lucaniam c. c. 11. And see Decret Gelasii cum 70. Episcopis initio And by Innocentius the first in Epist 1. ad Decentium in Epist ad Victoricum initio c. Thirdly and most especially in Rescrip ad Conc. Carth. which Rescript is acknowledged and commended by St. Austin one of the Fathers of that Council in Epist 106. where he saith thereof Pope Innocentius did write answer to the Bishops in all things as became the Bishop of the Apostolick Sea And see more hereof hereafter in this Consideration num 23. at 104. in the margent Leo very painfully goeth about to prove that singular preheminence was given to Peter above the other Apostles and that thence rose the Primacy of the Roman Church To allege other writers Beza further saith [i] Confess Genev. cap. 7. sect 12. and Mr. Whitaker de Conciliis contra Bellarminum pag. 37. paulo ante med saith de Leone prime parum laboro magnus ille fuit Antichristiani Regni Architectus And yet bid pag. 34. circa med he saith of Leo Fuit ille quidem doctus pius Episcopus sed fuit tamen magis ambitiosus c. It is manifest that Leo in his Epistles doth clearly breath forth the arrogancy of the Anti christian Roman Sea In like manner saith the Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury of these times [k] Mr. Whitgift in his defence c. pag. 342. post med It is certain that then viz. in the time of the Carthage and African Councils the Bishop of Rome began at least to claim Superiority over all Churches And it is in like sort confessed of Celestinus who is tearmed by Mr. Whitgift [l] So doth Mr. Whitgift tearm him in his defence pag. 588. fine a godly Bishop and by the antient Father Vincentius Lyrinensis [m] Vicentius Lyr. in libro adver haer prope finem Pope Celestine of blessed memory [n] See this confessed in M. Cartwrights second reply part 1. pag. 500. paulo post med and see M. Cartwrights defence pag. 342. post med that he claimed the hearing of matters in the African Churches and [o] See this in Mr. Cartwrights second reply part 1. pag. 512. ante med claimed Superiority over all Churches taking upon him as it were the name of universal Bishop That also [p] Centur. 5. col 1274. lin 38. 47. and Mr. Symonds upon the Revelations cap. 5. pag. 58. fine Gelasius held that Councils are subject to the Pope and that all should appeal to him but none from him with the like whereof Pope [q] Mr. Symonds ibid. pag. 57. circa med Xistus is also charged that likewise the Council of Chalcedon whose Authority is to our Adversaries establishâ—d by special [r] Anno 1. Elizabeth c. 1. versus finem is established the authority of the four first general Councils Act of Parliament [s] See this in Mr. Cartwrights second reply part 1. pag. 510. circa med And see Mr. Whitgifts defence c. pag. 344. initio And see Saravia de diversis gradibus
for the Scripture hath not all things and therefore the Apostles delivered certain things by writing and certain by Tradition with whom agreeth St. Basil saying [u] Basil de Spir. Sanct. c. 27. Some things we have from Scripture other things from the Apostles Tradition c. both which have like force unto godliness Mr. Doctor Reynolds answering to these foresaid sayings of Basil and Epiphanius saith [x] D. Reynolds in his conclusions annexed to his conference the 1. Conclusion pag. 689. I take not upon me to controle them but let the Church judge if they considered with advice enough c. Whereunto might be added the like further confessed [y] Where Eusebius l. 1. Demonstr Evang. cap. 8. is objected to say That the Apostles published their Doctrin partly by writing partly without writing as it were by a certain unwritten Law Mr. Whitaker de Sacra Scriptura pag. 668. fine saith thereto I answer that this testimony is plain enough but in no force to be received because it is against the Scriptures And whereas Dâ—onysius de Eccles Hierarch c. 1. versus finem saith That the Apostles dâ—d deliver their Doctrin partly by writing partly without writing c. Mr. Whitaker hereafter alleged in this Consideration num 13. aâ— t. de Sacra Scriptura pag. 655. ante med saith I do acknowledge that Dâ—onysius is in many places a great Patron of Traditions testimony from Eusebius and from Dyonysius Areopagita the Apostles Scholar And thus much briefly concerning the Fathers of the Greek Church Now as concerning the like confessed Doctrin in the Fathers of the Latin Church to avoid tediousness St. Austin only as being most [z] Gomarus in speculo verae Ecclesiae c. pag. 96. ante med saith Augustâ—us Patrum omnium communi sententâ—a purissimus habetur Also M. D. Field of the Church l. 3. pag. 170. fine tearmeth Austin the greatest of all the Fathers worthiest Divine the Church of God ever had since the Apostles times approved by our Adversaries shall serve for all who labouring to prove that those who are Baptized by Hereticks should not be re-baptized saith [a] Aug. de Bap. contra Don. l. 5. c. 23. The Apostles commanded nothing hereof but that custom which was opposed herein against Cyprian is to be believed to proceed from their tradition as many things be which the whole Church holdeth and are therefore well believed to be commanded of the Apostles although they be not written Wherein and [b] See the like saying in St. Austin Epist 118. ad Januarium other his like sayings his meaning is so evident and confessed that M. Cartwright speaking thereof saith [c] See Mr. Cartwright in Mr. Whitgifts defence c. pag. 103. ante med To allow St. Austins saying is to bring in Popery again And that [d] See Mr. Cartwrights words alleged ubi supra And see his further assertion hereof in his 2. Reply against Master Whitgift part 1. pag. 84. fine 85. 86. If St. Austins judgement be a good judgement then there be some things commanded of God which are not in the Scriptures and thereupon no sufficient Doctrin conteined in the Scriptures Adde but now hereunto that [e] See Chemnitius examen part 1. pag. 87. 89 90. Chemnitius reproveth for their like testimony of unwritten traditions Clemens Alexandrinus Origen Epiphanius Ambrose Hierom Maximus Theophilus Basil Damascene c. That Mr. Fulk [f] See Mr. Fulk against Purgatory pag. 362. ante med 303. 397. and against Martial pag. 170 178. and against Bristows Motives pag. 35. 36. also confesseth as much of Chrysostom Tertullian Cyprian Augustin Hierom c. That lastly M. Whit. [g] See Mr. Whâ—taker de Sacra Scriptura pag. 678. 681. 683. 685. 690. 695. 696. 670. 668. acknowledgeth the like of Chrysostom Epiphanius Tertullian Cyprian Augustine Innocentius Leo Basil Eusebius Damascen c. Now as concerning Ceremonies Mr. Calfehil to omit others affirmeth that [h] See this saying of Master Calfchil in Mr. Fulks rejoynder to Martials Râ—ply Printed 1580. pag. 131. fine 132. initio the Fathers declined all from the simplicity of the Gospel in Ceremonies In like manner concerning the Machabees Ecclesiasticus Toby and other the Books of the old Testament [i] Unworthily so sâ—cluded by Mr. Whitaker in his answer to Mr. Reynolds refutation pag. 22. 23. for it is a rash assertion so to measure the Scriptures by the â—ongue wherein they are written as to restrain the Spirit of God to one only Language The known vanity of which said asserâ—ion is sufficiently further disproved by example of Daniel a great part whereof viz. from cap. 2. ver 4 u que ad finem cap. 7. though not written in Hebrew is yet by our adversaries themselves acknowledged for Canonical Neither is it approved that God would direct by his holy Spirit no Authors in their writings but such as were known and also further declared by certain testimony to be Prophets For our adversaries cannot yet tell who were Authors of the several Books of Judges the third and fourth of Kings the two of Chron cles and the Books of Ruth and Job even Mr. Whâ—taker himself in disput de Sacra Scriptura pag. 603. post med saith hereof Multoâ—um lâ—brorum authores ignorantur ut â—osuae Ruth Paralâ—ppomenon Hester c. And Mr. Willâ—t in his Synopsis pag. 4. post med saith We receive many Books â—n the old Testament the Aâ—thors whereof are not perfectly known Also Calvâ—n Bâ—za and the publishers of the English Bâ—bles of Anno 1584. 1579. in the Preface or Argument upon the Epâ—stle to the Hâ—brews do all of them profess to rest doubtful of the Author thereof Calvin and Beza there affirming that it is not written by Paul whereof see also Calvin further in cap. 2. Hebr. ver 3. fine unworthily secluded by Mr. Whitaker from the Canon for thaâ— saith he they were written in Greek or some other forein language and not in Hebrew nor had for their known Authors those whom God had declared to be his Prophets that these Books were nevertheless holden for Sacred and Canonical by St. Austin the third Council of Carthage and other Fathers is made evident by their manifest [k] St. Austin de doctrina Christiana l. 2. c. 8. saith Totus Canon Scripturarum his libris continâ—tur Qâ—nque Moylcos c. Job Tobias Hester Judith Machabaeoâ—um lâ—bâ—i duo Esdrae duo c. Illi duo libri unus qui Sapientia alius qui Ecclesiasticus inscribitur de quadam fimilitudine Salomonis esse dicuntur Nam Jesus filius Syracheos conscripsisse constantissimè perhibetur qui tamen quoniam in authoritatem recipi meruerunt inter Propheticos numerandi sunt reliqui sunt c. Also the third Council of Carthage can 47. saith Placuit ut praeter Scripturas Canonicas nihil in Ecclesia legatur sub nomine divinarum
Dâ—onysius de Eccles Hierarch c. 2. By Egesippus apud Eusebium l. 4. c. 22. By Mel to apud Euseb Hist l. 4. c. 26. fine By St. Austin de praedest Sanctorum l. â— c. 14. and see Synod Alexandrin in Epist ad omnes ubique Ecclesias And it is yet further referred to Salomon as Author thereof by Epiphanius haer 76. Ambrose serm 8. in Psalm 118. Hâ—lary in Psalm 127. Tertul. de praescript Melito apud Euseb l. 4. c. 26. So likewise is the Book of Ecclesiasticus alleged by Fulgentius de remiss pec l. 1. c. 12. 29. l. 2. c. 4. and de fide ad Petrum c. 3. and de Incarn Gra. Christi cap. 28. Cyprian de mortalitate post initium and serm de Eleemosyna initio l. 3. Epist 9. Austin de Doctrina Christiana l. 22. c. 8. and de Civit. Dei l. 17. c. 20. Ambros l. 4. de fide cap. 4. serm 30. l. de Nabath Jezraelita cap. 12. fine lib. de Tobia c. 1. Hier. Ep. 33. Maximus Taurinensis hom 1. de Eleemosyna Epiphanius haer 76. ante med Junilius de part divin leg c. 3. 5. 6. and which further proveth they thought it Canonical it it referred to Salomon as Author thereof by Hilary in Matth. can 7. Cyprian l. 3. Epist 9. ad Guirinum c. 35.61.69 Serm. de Eleemof prope initium Basil l. 4. contra Eunomium Ambr. in 1 Cor. c. 7. Chrysost de decollat Joannis Baptistae initio hom 3. imperfect in Matth. Innoc. Ep. ad Exuperium Gregor l. 10. Moral c. 14. Clemens Alex. l. 7. Strom. and Concil 3. Carthag can 47. So also is the Book of To by alleged by Cyprian Serm. 1. de Eleemosyna â—nâ—tâ—o de orat dom prope finem Ambr. l. de Tobâ—a c. 1. l. 6. exam c. 4. l. 10. Ep. 82. Austâ—n Ep. 120. c. 29. Ep. 121. c. 9 de diligendo Deo c. 3. Hâ—lary in Psalm 129. circa med And Irenaeus l. 1. cap. 34. numbreth Toby among the other Prophets of whom the Hereticks called Gnostioi did feign certaâ—n soolish devices The like might be further alleged of the other controverted Books but this place is not capable thereof of divine Scripture wherein the Holy Ghost speaketh or such other like as are peculiar only to those Scriptures that be Canonical Secondly though we should suppose that these Fathers had omitted or denyed all or some of these Books in their Catalogue of the Scriptures accordingly as the Protestants object that the [e] Concil Laodicen can ult Laodicen Council doth in its Catalogue of the Scriptures omit all those Books as indeed the same Council doth also there likewise omit the Apocalyps yet is the objection hereof though supposed for true of no force because it is evident that in the Primitive Church the Canonical Scriptures were not generally received all at once but in so great variety [f] Of the great variety of pretended Scriptures see in Brereley tract 2. cap. 3. sect 7. subd 6. in the margent under the letter b. where he saith Of the very many writings forged under the Apostles names see Euseb hist l. 3. c. 19. l. 6. c. 10. St. Austin contra advers Leg. Prophet l. 1. c. 20. Gelasius in decret cum 70. Episcopis Zozomen hist l. 7. c. 19. post med and see also the Protestant Writer Hamâ—lmannus de traditionibus Apostolicis c. primae partis l. 1. col 251. part 3. l. 3. col 841. lin 15. 22. In which places mention is severally made of sundry writings forged under the names of Paul Peter Barnabas Thomas Matthew Andrew John and divers others and St. Paul 2 Thess 2.2 insinuateth the then forging of Epistles in his name of pretended Scriptures great care and search was requisite whereby to determine which Scriptures were Canonical and which not whereby it came to pass that sundry Books were for the time misdoubted or by some Fathers or Councils omitted or not received which yet afterwards upon greater search and consideration generally acknowledged A thing so evident that our learned Adversasaries themselves do accordingly confess and illustrate the same by many confessed and known [g] In the Tower disp 1581. the first days conference D. 1. The Deans of Pauls and Windsor say Euscbius affirmeth plainly the Epistle of St. James to be a counterfeit or basâ—ard Eorstle Also Mr. Bilson in his Survey of Christs sufferings c. Printed 1604. pag. 664. paulo post initium saith The Scriptures were not fully received in all places no not in Eusebius time He saith the Epistles of James Jude the second of Peter the second and third of John are contradicted as not written by the Apostles the Epistle to the Hebrews was for a while contradicted c. the Churches of Syria did not receive the second Epistle of Peter nor the second and third of John nor the Epistle of Judâ— nor the Apocalys c. The like might be said for the Churches of Arabia will â—ou hence conclude that these parts of Scripture were not Apostolick or that we need not to receive them now because they were formerly doubted of So fully doth Mr. Bâ—lson answer our Adversaries like usual objection had against the Machabâ—es and the other Bâ—nks of the old Testament now in question More confessed examples her of alleged by Protestants Brereley recâ—teth tract 2. cap. 3. sect 7. subd 6. in the margent at the Letter c. saâ—ing In the Tower d. sp Anno 1581. had with Edm. Campian the first days conference D. 1. the Deans of Pauls and Windâ—or do thus report of themselves for proof whereof we allege the testimony of Hierom in Catal. where he thus writeth The Epistle of James is said to be published by some other undâ—r his name and of the 2. of Peter he saith that it is denyed of many to he â—â—s we also alleged Eusebius writing thus thes Books that be gainsaid though they be known to many he these the Epistle attributed to James the Epistle of jude the later of Peter the second and third of John And in the fourth days conference fol. 2. b. M. D. Walker saith Hierom saith concerning that Epistle which is written to the Hebrews many have doubted of it And also concerning the 2. of Peter he saith it was doubtâ—d of by many and so with some were the two last Epistles of John c. examples Mr. Bilson thereupon [h] Mr. Bilson in his saying alleged next heretofore in the margent under g. concluding that this denyal or omission made by certain Fathers of certain Scriptures is no argument against the said Scriptures Whereupon it necessarily followeth as well by Master Bilsons foresaid conclusion as by unavoydable sequel of the other premisses that the Canonical Scriptures are to us at this day discerned and made known not by that which certain Fathers do omit deny or doubt of for so should
D. Humfrey did grievously reprehend Mr. Jewel for his so bold appealing to the Fathers affirming therefore of Mr. Jewel that herein [2.] Humfredus in libel de vita Jewell Printed Londini pag. 212. And see the same also in Mr. Fulks retentive against Bristow pag. 55. circa med he gave the Papists too large a scope was injurious to himself and after a manner spoyled himself and the Church which like disclaim in the antient Fathers is no less plainly professed by Jacobus Acontius in his treatise [3.] Jacobus Acontius in Stratagematum Satanae l. 6. pag. 296. saith of the Protestants allegation of the Fathers Quidam eo redierunt ut Patrum authoritatibus omnia denuò replerent quod utinam tam secundo fecissent successu quam bona spe aggressi sunt c. Equidem perniciosissimam omninoque fugiendam hanc offe abitror consuetudinem And see the like in Peter Martyr de Votis pag. 462. circa med dedicated to her late Majesty and by sundry [4.] Lutherus tom 2. Wittemberg Anno 1551. lib. de servo arbitrio pag. 434. affirmeth the Fathers of so many ages to have been plainly blind and most ignorant in the Scriptures to have erred all their life time and that unless they were amended before their deaths they were neither Saints nor pertaining to the Church And see further Luthers Book de servo arbitrio Printed in Octavo 1603. pag. 72.73 337. Also in Colloquiis Mensalibus cap. de Patribus Ecclesiae Luther saith of sundry Fathers in particular In the writings of Hierom there is not a word of true faith in Christ and sound Religion Tertullian is very superstitious I have holden Origen long since accursed Of Chrysostom I make no accompt Basil is of no worth he is wholly a Monk I weigh him not of a hair Cyprian is a weak Divine c. affirming there yet further that the Church did degenerate in the Apostles age and that the Apology of Philip Melancthon doth far excel all the Doctors of the Church and exceed even Austin himself And Pomerane in Joannam saith Nostri Patres sive sancti sive non sancti nihil moror excaecati sunt Montanico Spiritu per traditiones humanas doctrinas Daemoniorum c. non purè docent de Justicatione c. Nec solliciti quidem sunt ut Jesum Christum per Evangelium suum verè doceant And Beza in his Preface upon the new Testament dedicated to the Prince of Condy Anno 1587. affirmeth that Even in the best times the ambition ignorance and lewdness of Bishops was such that the very blind may easely perceive how that Sathan was President in their assemblies or Councils other Protestant Writers many of them not doubting specially to reprove even those Fathers that lived next to the Apostles times Mr. Whitaker and others to such purpose [5.] Abusing for where as Euseb l. 3. c. 26. fine allegeth Egesippus saying Till those times the Church remained a pure Virgin and incorrupt for if any then were willing to deprave or corrupt the sincere rule of healthful doctrin they lay hid in the obscure corners of darkness But after the Apostles death c. then certainly the false and subtil conspiracy of wicked errors took beginning through the fraud and craft of those who laboured to disperse false doctrine c. Mr. Whitaker in resp ad rationes Campian rat 7. pag. 102. and contra Duraeum l. 7. pag. 490. 491. urgeth this to prove that presently after the Apostles times the true Church was no longer a chast Virgin but became adulterous and corrupt An inference many ways most absurd For first Egesippus only meaneth that during the Apostles times the Church remained a Virgin that is not so much as assaulted openly by Hereticks who then lay secret and lurking where as after the Apostles times they stepped forth and gave open and violent assaults invading sometimes and usurping even upon Bishops Seas and corrupting or altering with their damnable heresies many of the Churches revolted Children which yet no more made the visible true Church to be as then heretical or unchast than Luthers like late dispersion of his doctrine and infecting therewith of many who were formerly Catholicks maketh our now Church to be Lutheran Secondly if otherwise the Church so presently after the Apostles times ceased to be a Virgin and so became adulterous and corrupt who seeth not then the blasphemy thence ensuing For in what one age since the Apostles times to this present may the Church then be thought to be preserved chast Thirdly it is against manifest Scripture as where it is said of the Church I will marry thee to me for ever c. I will marry thee to me in saithfulness and thou shalt know the Lord. Osee 2.19 20. and I will make this my Covenant saith the Lord my Spirit that is upon thee and my words which I have put in thy mouth shall not depart out of thy mouth nor out of the mouth of thy seed nor out of the mouth of thy seeds seed from henceforth for evermore Isa 59.21 Very pertinenently therefore saith St. Cyprian to the contrary Adulterari non potest sponsa Christi incorrupta est pudica c. l. de unitate Ecclesiae post initium abusing the mistaken testimony of Egesippus To this end also doth M. Napper in his discourse hereof to his late Majesty not only condemn all the Fathers that lived for [6.] Brereley tract 2. c. 1. sect 4. at q. r. s t. saith Mr. John Napper in his treatise upon the Revelations pag. 43. versus finem affirmeth that the Popes Kingdom hath bad power over all Christians from the time of Pope Silvester and the Emperour Constantine for these thousand two hundred and sixty years and that ibid. pag. 145. col 3. fine from the time of Constantine until these our days even 1260. years the Pope and his Clergy hath possessed the outward visible Church of Christians That also ibid. pag. 68. versus finem between the year of Christ 300. and 316. the Antichristian and Papistical reign began reigning universally and without any debatable contradiction 1260. years Gods true Church most certainly abiding so long latent and invisible Ibid. pag. 191. initio pag. 161. col 3. circa med pag. 156. ante med 237. paulo post med 23. fine pag. 188. ante med 1260. years last before Luther but doth also proceed yet further affirming that [7.] Mr. Napper upon the Revelations pag. 191. initio and see the Century Writers cent 2. cap. ◠col 125. lin 49. During even the second and third ages next after Christ the trne temple of God and light of the Gospel was obscured by the Roman Antichrist himself In like manner doth M. Fulk averre [8.] Mr. Fulk in his answer to a counterfeit Catholick pag. 35. prope finem the true Church decayed immediatly after the Apostles times and that
[*] Mr. Fulk ubi supra prope initium immediatly after the Apostles times errors and abuses crept into the true Church With whom agreeth Mr. Downham affirming that [9.] Mr. Downham in his treatise of Antichrist l. 2. c. 2. pag. 25. prope finem This mystery of iniquity which St. Paul 2 Thess 2. ver 7. affirmeth to be working in his times is more than boldly perverted by Mr. Downham and our other Adversaries to be as then working in the Church of Christ directly against St. Paul himself who tearmeth the Church the pillar and stay of Truth 1 Tim. 3.15 The working therefore of this mystery of iniquity in the Apostles times was not in the Church but in the Churches then persecutors and sundry heresies of those first times As also it is yet working in the heresies of this time the same being as some Divines hold the very next and ultima or at least penultima myst cal working before the Revelation of Antichrist himself the general defection of the visible Church foretold 2. Thess 2. began to work in the Apostles times And Melancthon saith accordingly that [10.] Melancthon in 2 Cor. cap. 3. Hamelmannus de traditionibus col 460. saith Post mortem Joannis Apostoli caeperunt defectiones a fide doctrinae daemoniorum sub specie verbi Dei prohibitiones nuptiarum ciboruth vota caelibatus c. presently from the beginning of the Church the antient Fathers obscured the doctrine concerning the justice of faith increased Ceremonies and devised peculiar worships As also Peter Martyr affirmeth in like manner that in the Church [11.] Martyr de Votis pag. 477. errors did begin immediatly after the Apostles times And that [12.] Martyr de Votis pag. 490. fine presently after their Age men began to decline from the word of God and that therefore [13.] Martyr de Votis pag. 476. paulo post med saith Quamdâ—â— consist mus in Conciliis Patribus versabimur semper in iisdem orroribus so long as we do insist upon Councils and Fathers we shall be alwaies conversant in the same errors In so much as Beza and others doubted not if not most arrogantly read and judge to prefer in [14.] Beza in Epist Theol. Ep. 1. pag. 5. initio saith Itaque dicere nee immerito quidem ut opinor consuevi dum illa tempoâ—a Apostolicis etianâ— proâ—ima cum nostris comparo plus illos conscientiae scientiae minâ—s hâ—buiffe nos contra scientiae plus conscientiae minus habere haec mea sententia est c. And Mr. Whitgift in his defence of the answer to the admonition pag. 472. fine pag. 473. ante med saith to Mr. Cartwright The doctrine taught and professed by our Bishops at this day is more perfect and sounder than it commonly was in any age after the Apostles c. how greatly were almost all the Bishops and learned writers of the Greek Church and Latines also for the most part spotted with Doctrines of Freewil of Merits of invocation of Saints and such like other points of Popery surely you are not able to reekon in any age since the Apostles times any company of Bishops that taught and held so sound and perfect Doctrine in all points as the Bishops of England do at this day knowledge of the truth their now Protestant Writers even before those other that flourished immediatly and next after the Apostles times Caelius Secundus Curio a principal Protestant writer expressing further to that end [15.] Caelius Secundus Curio in his Book de amplitudine regni Dei lib. 1. pag. 43. circa med which said Book is greatly commended by Beza in Epist Theolog. pag. 232. saith An ignoramus quantis in tenebris quantaque caecitate ignorantia versatus sit mundus ab Apostolorum fere aetate usque ad haec tempora in quibus Dominus praeter omnem expectationem se ipse caepit apetire in how great darkness blindess and ignorance the world hath continued almost from the Apostles age to these very times in which above all expectation our Lord began to manifest himself And an other learned Protestant writer affirmeth accordingly that [16.] The Author of the Book intituled Antichristus sive Prognostica finis mundi apud Brereley tract 2. c. 1. sect 6. subd 1. at g. pag. 12. fine saith Spiritus qui annunciat futura non operatur nisi eunte Evangelio quod sub finem ex confesso Lutherus primus invexit And pag. 13. post med he further saith Non manifestatur autem Psuedo propherarum surrectio nisi Evangelio quod inde primitivo Apostolorum Evangelâ—o ante Lutherum ut diximus nunquam ivit Ne quis autem Hussiticuâ— Evangelium pertinere huâ— putâ—t id prohibet â—uod Christus illud Evangelium edicit quod sub finem per universum forbem esseâ— ituâ—um Porro Hâ—â—â—ticum Evangelium â—ohemis tantum venit signo orgo esse non potest Naâ— commune Orbis Evangelium signo esse voluit non illud unius gentis Lutheri Evangelium per Orbem volat tam voce quam prelo from the Apostles times till Luther the Gospel had never open passage not so much as in Huss his time In respect of which their so common received opinion Sebastianus Francus concluded for certain that [17.] Sâ—bastianus Francus in Epistola de abrogandis in universum omnibus statutis Ecclesiasticis If our Adversaries do hereunto answer that this Sebastianus Francus denyed the Baptism of Infants and being so an Anabaptist his testimony is not to be regarded it is replyed thereto First that being otherwise a learned writer and no less enemy to us than our Adversaries his testimony as against himself and them is therewith of no less force than theirs Secondly that the denyal of Childrens Baptism till they be of years of belief is osspecially by our adversaries who deny the necessity of Baptism to infants excepted against unworthily in comparison of their own far greater differences concerning Real presence Christs descent into Hell his suffering in soul the pains of Hell Reprobation and many more of like consequence notwithstanding which they yet profess to be Brethren of one Church Thirdly that accordingly Zuinglius and Oecolampadius do affirm the Baptism of Infants to be but a matter of indifferency and such at the Church may worthily omit and rightly take away For Zuinglius apud Brereley tract 2. cap. 3. sect 9. subd 3. at e. f. tom 2. l. de Baptismo fol. 96. a circa med saith Num enim tanti momenti res haec est ut tantas turbas diffidia propter hane excitâ—re conveniat etiamsi parvulorum Baptismus nullis omnino Scripturarum testimoniis inniteretur Externum quiddam est ceremonale quo ut aliis rebus externis Ecclesia dignè honestè uti potest vel idem hoc omittere rite tollere c. And in Zuinglii Oecolampadii Epistolarum libro secundo pag. 363. post med Oecolampadius
saith of Baptism of Infants Cogitare illos decebat rem externam effe quae charitatis lege dispensabilis est ad aedificationem proximi fatemur non esse legem Baptizandi pueros sed etiam non est lex quae arceat pueros And see him further pag. 301. prope finem And so accordingly Peter Martyr in his Epistles annexed to his Common places in English Ep. 34. to Robert Cooch pag. 133. b. circa med tearmeth him his dear friend in the Lord his dear friend in Christ Ibid. pag. 115. a. initio and yet did the said Robert as appeareth there pag. 114. b. circa med deny Baptism to Infants as likewise Oecolampadius in libro Epistolarum Oecolampadii Zuinglii pag. 300. prope finem writeth of this very point to Baltazar Pacimontanus tearming him there Charissime Frater and yet was he a chief Anabaptist Fourthly this Sebastianus Franeus was so far enemy to the other barbarous Anabaptists that be specially reprehendeth them apud Brereley tract 2. cap. 3. sect 5. subd 1. at x. Chron. part 111. fol. 236. b. seq where also he numbreth up seventy of the Anabaptists different opinions and concludeth their further differences to be so great as no man can either know or number them affirming further that scarce two of them are found to agree in all things Statim post Apostolos omnia inversa sunt c. Presently after the Apostles times all things were turned upside down c. And that for certain through the work of Antichrist the external Church together with the Faith and Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure and that for these 1400. years the Church hath been no where external and visible 15. Fifteenthly to seal up as it were the premisses whereas Master Whitgift doth against Mr. Cartwright learnedly and truly urge this general rule or proof of Apostolick Doctrine saying [m] Mr. Whitgift in his defence pag. 351. post med And see also further hereof D. Field of the Church l. 4. cap. 21. pag. 242. the title of that Chapter being Of the Rulâ—s whereby true traditions may be known from counterfeâ— For so much as the Original and beginning of these names Metropolitan Arch-Bishop c. such is their antiquity cannot be found so far as I have read is to be supposed they have their Original from the Apostles themselves for as I remember St. Austin hath this rule in his 118. Epistle In so much as he yet further saith in proof of this rule [n] Mr. Whitgift ubi supra pag. 352. ante med and sce Zuinglius his words hereof tom 2. fol. 94. b. circa med it is of credit with the writers of our time namely with Master Zuinglius Master Calvin and Master Gualter and surely I think no learned man doth dissent from them It is now by the premisses and by manifest [*.] Mr. Whitaker in resp ad Camp rat 7. pag. 101. initio confesseth that the time of the Roman churches change cannot easily be told And Master Gabriel Powel in his consideration of the Papists supplication pag. 43. circa post med being provoked that if our Catholick Doctrin be error then to tell us when it came in who was the Author of it c. answereth thereto acknowledging and saying We cannot tell by whom or at what time the enemy did sow it c. Neither indeed do we know who was the first Author of every one of your blasphemous opinions c. confession of sundry learned Protestants made more than evident that the several Doctrines of our Faith are according to this rule no less free from all noted and known beginning fince the Apostles times then are the other foresaid Doctrines of Metropolitans and Bishops a thing so manifest that Master Cartwright though our adversary doubteth not yet further to acknowledge the same saying therefore of this very rule in plain words [o] Mr. Cartwright his words in Mr. Whitgifts foresaid Defence c. pag. 352. initio that thereby a window is open to bring in all Popery And [o] Mr. Cartwriâ—ht alleged ibid. pag. 103. paulo ante med I appeal saith he to the judgement of all men if this be not to bring in Popery again to allow of St. Austins saying c. So evidently do our learned adversaries and the [2.] Apparent probability For seeing Pastors and Doctors must be in the Church till the end of the world Ephes 4.11 12 13. and Mr. Fulk against the Rhemish Testament in Ephes 4. fol. 335. a. initio and that they shall not be silent Esay 62.6 and the marginal notes of the English Bible in Esay 62.6 but shall alwaies resist all false opinions with open reprehension Mr. Fulk in his answer to a counterfeit Catholick pag. 11. initio and 92. ante med And that the Religion being of God no fear of man shall keep them back Mr. Dearing in his Reading upon the Epistle to the Hebrews in c. 2. ver 12. lect 10. cirea med and seeing also that all new and strange Doctrine is at its first beginning against and contrary to the other then before general received opinion as being for the time but private and singular in the first teacher thereof Yet it doth therefore upon these premises most evidently follow as well that all such new doctrine was ever at its first beginning resisted and openly withstood as also that by reason of such open and known resistance such said beginning is discovered and left known to posterity Which point as it is abundantly verified in the many examples of all such confessed heresies as are out of question between our adversaries and us whose resistance and secondary beginning since the Apostles times is yet to us discovered and left known So again to think that it should hold in all other and fail only in these matters now in controversy between our adversaries and us may be thought no less than very partial strange and inforced Vpon all which is necessarily deduced that according to Master Whitgifts foresaid rule and assertion whatsoever opinion is not known to have begun since the Apostles times the same is not new or secondary but received its Original from the Apostles themselves apparent probability of this foresaid rule in it self confirm and prove our foresaid Catholick Religion whereto we were so many ages since converted to be not new or secondary to the Apostles times but only Primitive and undoubtedly Apostolick 16. As [*.] Brereley tract 1. sect 7. subd 4. concerning Transubstantiation Master Whitaker giveth example in Innocentius the third saying [o] Whitaker l. 7. contra Duraeum pag. 480. circa ined saith Qui transubstantiationem primus excogitavit is fuit Innocentius tertius in Lateranesi Concilio And Brereley in his Omissions of pag. 183. saith And Mr. Sutcliff de Mâ—ssa Papistica l. 2. c. 5. fol. 196. b. circa med saith Transubstantiationis nomen Incentius 3. primùm publicè recipendum decrevit nec rem nec
thought that Melchisedech herein resembled the Priesthood of Christ And Calvin in omnes Pauli Epistolas in Haebr c. 7. v. 9. pag. 924. b. circa med confesseth likewise saying Quo magis tot veteres Ecclesiae Doctores hac opinione occupatos fuise miror ut in oblatione panis vini insisterent sic autem loquuntur Christus Sacerdos est secundum ordinem Melchisedech atqui panem vinum Melchisedech obtulit ergo panis vini sacrificium Christi Sacerdotio convenit And Andraeas Chrastovius de opificio Missae contra Bellar. l. 1. pag. 28. sect 66. doubteth not upon the authority of the antient Fathers in this point with us to affirm and defend the said sacrifice against his other Protestant Brethren saying thereof Consensum interpretationis harmoniam Christianis Pastoribus abjicere non licet idque cum propter Apostolici saeculi vicinitatem tum propter singularem omnium concordiam quae in omnibus locis habetur c. omnium veluti conspiratione oblatio Melchisedech Sacra proponitur ut non tantum Abrahae militibus sed etiam Deo incruentum Sacrificium oblatum videatur c. Hence it is that our [*] Brereley tract 3. sect 1. at s 2.3 4 5. t. Spiritual Pastors by reason of their Catholick [*] St. Chrysostm wrote a special Book of this Priesthood Priesthood are as Saint Austin saith now not improperly but [s] Aug. de Civit. Dei l. 20. c. 10. post med saith Non utique de solis Episcopis Presbyteris dictum est qui jam propriè vocantur in Ecclesia Sacerdotes And the most antient Father Irenaeus l. 4. c. 20. affirmeth besides the spiritual Priestly Order of all the just an other peculiar Priesthood of the Apostles who are in respect thereof by him said to attend daly upon God and the Altar properly called Priests in the Church to whom therefore the words Presbyter and Sacerdos are indifferently [2] St. Austin ut supra And the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth Sacerdos is used and referred to Christian Priests by Dionysius Areopagita de Eccles Hierarch c. 5. Epist 8. ad Demophilum Monachum And Ignatius in his undoubted Epistle ad Smyrnenses now extant whereof divers sentences are verbatim alleged under the name of Ignatius and title of this Epistle by Hierom lib. de Viris Illustribus and by Eusebius l. 3. c. 32. as is more at large urged and proved by Mr. Whitgift in his defence c. pag. 408. circa med and he not so much as therein gainsaid by Mr. Cartwright affirmeth the Bishop to be as the high Priest and Christs Image in respect of his Priesthood affirming further that in the Church nothing is greater than the Bishop who sacrificeth to God for the safety of the whole world And Nazianzen in Epist 8. ad Simplicium haeret affirmeth the Priest to be the mediator between God and man and sacrificing together with Christ This point is so evident and common in the Greek and Latin Fathers that Mr. Whitaker l. 9. contra Duraeum pag. 813. initio acknowledgeth the same and answereth only that the said Fathers used the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Sacerdos non propriè sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not properly directly against St. Austins foresaid testimony but by abuse of speech and yet as Mr. Whitgift in his said defence c. pag. 411. versus finem confesseth and saith this name Priest is usually applyed to the Minister of the Gospel in all histories Fathers and writers of Antiquity referred in respect of the blessed Sacrament which is by them offered up to God [3.] Aug. de Civit. Dei lib. 17. cap. 17. circa med under Christ the high Priest and [4] Ambr. in 1 Tim. cap. 4. ver 14. in his stead or [5.] Cyprian l. 2. Epist 3. post medium place as the Churches external and acceptable oblation and acknowledged by [t] For these last thousand years Mr. Beacon whom the Ministers of Lincoinshire in their abridgement c. pag. 65. ante med affirm to be a Divine of chief note in their Church in his works set forth 1560. the third part in his Treatise intituled The Reliques of Rome fol. 344. a. post med saith The Mass was fully finished by Pope Gregory the first about Anno Domini 600. c. And from Charls the great unto Charls the fifth the Mass reigned as a most mighty Queen in all the Churches of the West part of the world See the like confessed by Danaeus de Antichristo pag. 101. initio And Melancthon l. 4. Chronic. in Henric. 4. fol. 186. 187. saith of Gregory He allowed by publick authority the sacrifice of Christs Body and Bloud not only for the living but also for the dead And the like is affirmed of Gregory by Carion in Chronic. pag. 567. paulo ante med Also Musculus loc commun de Coena Dom. pag. 339. fine saith of Pelagius Predecessor to Gregory Pelagius commemorationem mortuorum in secreta Canonis Missatici retulit c. ut mortuis virtus efficacia Missae communicaretur And see this Pelagius directly further charged with the opinion of Mass helping the dead by Master Symonds upon the Revelations pag. 81. ante med Also Symmachus was Bishop of Rome Anno 501. of whom the century writers cent 6. cap. 10. col 664. lin 30. say Notas Antichristi hic habuit Missam enim in formam redegit Before him was Saint Leo Anno 440. of whom Mr. Bale in his Pageant of Popes fol. 27. saith Leo the first allowed the Sacrifice of the Mass not without great blasphemy to God And see this in Bale in Act. Roman Pontific Printed Basileae 1558. pag. 32. fine 33. initio Before Leo was the Carthage Council whereat St. Austin was present whereof Pelargus in his Schola fidei c. prope finem in his tract there de Conciliis pag. 13. faith Synodus Carthaginensis quinta intercessionem Misvam pro defunctis invexit And Osiander centur 4. pag. 16. circa med saith of the 79. Canon of the 4. Carthage Council Hic Canon si non fictitius est ostendit eo etiam tempore rationes oblationes pro defunctis factas Before these Councils was St. Ambrose Anno 370. Whom the Century writers cent 4. cap. 4. col 295. lin 3. reprove and charge with not writing well de transubstantiatione applicatione pro mortuis And ibid. lin 23. they further say Ambrosius locutionibus utitur quibus ante eum ex Patribus nemo usus est ut Missam facere offerre Sacrificium c. Before him again was Gregory Nyssen of the Greek Church Anno 340. of whom Andraeas Crastonius in his Book against Bellarmine de opificio Missae lib. 1. sect 164. initio pag. 81. saith An ignorat opinionem Nysseni per se absurdam esse c. Ait ille Nyssenus Cùm itaque dedit Christus discipulis suis corpus
paulo ante med 268. circa med pag. 269. paulo post med he proveth Cyprian to have also worn the same Pontifical plate or Myter worn by St. John the Apostle M. D. Reynolds confessing further that [97] D. Reynolds in his conference pag. 598. post med and concerning Ecclesiastical Vestments see further Eusebius hist l. 10. c. 4. initio in the Liturgies which bear the names of Basil and Chrysostom are likewise mentioned the amice the girdle the chisible and the fannel with teaching that [98] Centur. 4. col 616. line 1. it is alleged out of the Council of Neocaesarea can 1. Praesbyter si uxorem duxerit ab ordine suo illum deponi debere And see the same further confessed cent 4. col 486. line 58. col 303. line 18. col 704. line 21. col 1293. line 5. 17. and see heretofore in the beginning of this Consideration num 1. at g. h. c. and heretofore in this Consideration num 2. in the margent at f. g. h. i. Priests might not marry after Orders taken that [99] Cent. 4. col 847. line 47. saith it was decreed bigamis ordinationem ad sacerdotium non esse conferendam and see the like in Centur. 4. col 303. line 10. col 877. line 40. col 1293. line 25. also Master Fulk in his Retentive against Bristow and discovery of Sanders rock pag. 164. initio granteth that he which had had two Wives could not be a Priest in Hieroms time and see this confessed also for the Century or age before in cent 3. col 85. line 60. col 86. line 7. and by Mr. Cartwright in his 2. reply part 1. pag. 509. post med Bigamus or he that hath been twice married may not be Priest with [100] Centur. 4. col 497. line 50. sumptuous Churches consecrated and superstitious insolency in celebrating of Mass appointed to be said in no places but such as were hallowed by a Bishop with denyal of [101] Cent. 4. col 549. line 28. it is said Intempestivè etiam sibi Imperatores interdum judicium de causis fidei sumebant quod Athanasius in Constantio reprehendit Ambrosius in Valentiniano c. and Athanasius in Epist ad solitariam vitam agentes allegeth Osius saying to Constantius the Emperour desine quaeso memineris te mortalem esse reformida diem judicii serva te in illam diem purum ne te misâ—â—as Ecclesiasticis neque nobis in hoc genere praecipe sed potiùs ea à nobis disce tibi Deus imperium quae sunt Ecclesiae nobis concredidit c. cave ne quae sunt Ecclesiae ad te trahens magno crimini obnoxius fias c. And again in the same place Quis enim videns eum in decernendo principem se facere Episcoporum praesidere judiciis Ecclesiasticis non meritò dicat illam eam ipsam abominationem desolationis effe quae à Daniele praedicta est And see the like judgement of Ambrose Epist 32. post med 33. circa med And Master Cartwright to this purpose alleging the same in Mr. Whitgifts defence c. pag. 700. initio and see the like further in Zozomen hist l. 6. c. 7. initio and in Concil 3. Carth. can 9. authority to the Emperour in Ecclesiastical causes with affirming [102] Centur. 4. col 515. line 30. saith Hilarius minùs commodè de Petro Apostolo loquitur quod aedificationi Ecclesiae subjacet sit ejus fundamentum and col 557. line 45. saith Hieronymus minùs commodè loquitur de Petro quod Dominus super cum fundaverit Ecclesiam And see the like out of Nazianzen Cent. 4. col 558. line 54. and see further col 1250. line 2. And see this more evidently as yet in the much more antient Fathers namely Tertullian Cyprian Origen heretofore confessed in this Consideration num 10. initio at 8 9 10. the Church to be built upon Peter and further teaching of [103] See the assertion of Peters Primacy confessed in sundry Fathers of this age cent 4. col 556. line 15. col 551. line 31. col 1074 line 13. and the same more fully heretofore in this Consideration num 10. at 5 6 7 12. Peters Primacy and with deducing the same [*] The Centurists Cent. 5. col 1274. line 32. charge Gelasius who lived anno 480. saying Romanam Ecclesiam jure divino contendit Gelasius â—ffe omnium primam in Ep. ad Brut. c. cap. 11. And Gelasius in decret cum 70. Episcopis initio saith Romana Ecclesia nullis Synodicis constitutis caeteris Ecclesiis praelata est sed Evangelica voce Domini Primatum obtinuit Tu es Petrus inquiens super hanc petram c. jure divino from Peter to his [104] Brereley in his Omissions c. of pag. 295. saith Bucer in praeparatoriisad Concilium saith We plainly confess that among the antient Fathers of the Church the Roman Church obteined the Primacy above others as that which hath the Chair of Peter and whose Bishops almost alwaies have been accounted the Successours of Peter And Osiander cent 4. pag. 294. circa med speaking of the Council of Sardis decreeing appeals to Rome professeth to deliver the then common received opinion and reason thereof saying Inveteratus communis de manu traditus fuit error quod Petrus fuerit Romae primus Episcopus ideo hunc honorem habendum censuit successori Petri juxta communem opinionem c. And St. Chrysostom l. 2. de Sacerdotio cap. 1. affirmeth that Peter was the head of the Apostles and preferred before the other Apostles saying further in the same place why did Christ shed his own bloud but to purchase those sheep the charge whereof he committed to Peter and his Successors In like manner concerning St. Leo being one of those Fathers to whom Mr. Jewel in his publick chalenge appealed the Century writers Cent. 5. col 1262. line 30. confess of him saying Leo very painfully goeth about to prove that singular praeeminence was given to Peter above the other Apostles and that thence rose the Primacy of the Roman Church and see no less confessed of Leo by Master Reynolds in his conference pag. 42. 43. And see Mr. Fulk his testimony of the other Fathers like judgement heretofore in this Consideration num 10. at 22. Also that Peters Primacy was thought to descend or come to the Bishop of Rome is in like-manner yet further affirmed by sundry other Fathers cited heretofore in this Consideration num 16. in the margent at 45. in so much as from this Primacy thus attributed to the Apostle Damasus alleged by Theodoret hist l. 5. cap. 10. did as the Censurists cent 4. col 351. line 37. do confess and reprove commend his Children the Bishops of the East for their due reverence done to the Apostolick Sea And Concil Melinitanum in Epist ad Innocentium Papam apud Aug. Ep. 92. saith to Innocentius
saying Let us come to those Traditions which concern the Manners and Conversation of Men that the Apostles delivered many things of this nature to the Churches some by way of Precept some by way of Counsell only some to continue but for a time some to continue for ever we make no doubt Of this sort is the observation of the Lords-days and sundry other things there are which doubtless the Apostles delivered by Tradition And see the unwritten Traditions of the Lords Day and of the Canonical Scriptures further acknowledged next heretofore under the several numbers of 57 58 60. and see also in Mr. D. Field ubi supra pag. 239. circa med the Tradition of Lent-Fast And Mr. D. Covell in his Answer to John Burges pag. 139. circa med affirmeth the moderate use of the Cross to be an Apostolical Constitution as also the said Mr. D. Covell in his Examination against the Plea of the Innocent c. 9. pag. 104. paulo post med referreth expresly the tearmes of Archbishops unto Apostolical ordination and the then Bishop of London and late of Canterbury in the Conference before the King pag. 11. initio referreth likewise Confirmation to Apostolical Institution signified not but necessarily proved from Heb. 6.2 also Mr. Whitgift in his defence c. pag. 539. fine affirmeth and proveth abundantly the Apostles Tradition of Easter and Oecolampadius doth affirm the baptism of Infants not to be taught in the Scriptures in libro Epistolarum Zuinglii Oecolampadii pag. 301. post med 363. post medium and so likewise doth Zuinglius tom 2. l. de Baptismo fol. 96. a. circa med and Mr. D. Field pag. 239. tearmeth it a Pradition because saith he it is not expresly delivered in Scripture either that the Apostles did baptise Infants nor any expresse precept there found that they should do so only undertaking that Scripture delivereth to us the ground thereof which is impertinent unless he shew that it withall delivereth also to us a necessary proof thereof which his former words deny for which cause he tearmeth it as before a Tradition and see lastly Mr. Hooker in his Ecclesiastical Polity l. 2. sect 7. pag. 118. post med 119. where he maketh special answer as we do to divers Testimonies of the Fathers as namely of Irenaeus Hierome and Augustin alleged there by Mr. Cartwright and usually by other Protestants in behalf of only Scripture and see there sect 5. pag. 106. 74 Concerning Equivocation or doubtfullness of Answer affirmed by some Catholikes not in matter of Faith for it is evident to the contrary that we refuse to go to Protestant Churches or to make the least dissimulation of our Faith neither in Civill Contracts for who confessedly more credible or of better performance therein than Catholikes neither in the case of our Prince or Countrey for concerning either of these we are bound in Conscience to make our selves Transparent insomuch as to conceal any thing prejudicial to these were in the sight of God grievous and multiplied Iniquity but only as in case of unlawfull Demands to betray the Professors of Religion to the Persecuters thereof or to reveal to the hurt of others that which the party demanded is in Conscience bound to keep secret For so much as the Doctrine hereof is objected as a special imputation to Catholikes we will forbearing the question thereof only but briefly examine whether any like if not worse Equivocation or doubtfulness of speech be affirmed by our Adversaries Peter Martyr in his Common places part 2. c. 13. sect 39. pag. 547. a. post med after much discourse of this matter concludeth saying In these cases I think it is not forbidden nay I rather think it is most lawfull to speak doubtfully Zuinglius tom 3 fol. 45. a. initio intreating of Abraham's speech to his servants when intending to sacrifice his Son he said to them abide you here and I and the Child will go yonder and worship and come again to you Gen. 22.5 saith of Abraham's reserved meaning Mentitus non est neque enim mentitur qui secretum aliquod celat ne quid periculi inde nascatur Mr. Willet upon Genesis 27. pag. 290. ante med teacheth by many examples of Scripture that dissimulation in outward gesture is tollerable pag 292. circa med he saith It is one thing to conceal the Truth an other to lye As Abraham did hide the Truth when he said Sarah was his Sister Gen. 26.7 Melancthon in loc commun printed Basilliae 1562. pag. 763. paulo post initium saith Non enim nemino mendacia figuras quibus ex probabili causa aliquid tegitur quod non necesse est dici ut Raab negat speculatores domi suae esse tales figurae nominantur officiosa mendacia Of these figurative Locutions or as Melancthon tearmeth them Officiosa mendacia Luther tom 6. Wittemberg fol. 352. b. prope finem saith Simile est mendacium Raab Josuae Est igitur mendacium officiosum quo saluti famae corporis vel animae consulitur c. Igitur honestum pium mendacium est ac potius officium Charitatis appellandum Zegedine a learned Calvinist in loc commun pag. 422. initio affirmeth Mendacia licita bona quae commendantur In proof whereof he there allegeth from Scripture the example of Raab and of divers others Wolfangus Musculus in loc com pag. 106. paulo post initium saith Alius mentitur ex timore Dei sic obstetrices Aegyptiae Exod. 1. Alius ex charitate vel fide debita sic Michol 1. Sam. 19. Alius ex fide sic Raab Haeb. 11. c. To come now to Adversaries known practise Mr. Fox reporteth of Wiccliff saying Wiccliff to avoid the rigour of things answered with intricate words c. To forbear the like known and confessed example of the Waldensis who for peace and tranquillity sake used to be present at Masse which they held and professed to be Idolatricall alleged in Brereley tract 2. c. 2 sect 3. subd 4. in the Text and margent at 17. John Careless Protestant Martyr being demanded by the Magistrate if he knew such a man recordeth his own Answer thereto in these words No forsooth I do not know any such nor have I not heard of him that I wot of But yet saith he I lyed fasly for I knew him indeed Act. Mon. pag. 1530. a. post med As concerning the Equivocation or doubtfull speaking and writing even in matter of Religion used by Martin Bucer it is reported in the example of the Sacrament by the Protestant-Writers Schlusselburg in Theol. Calvinist l. 2. fol. 129. a. post med from the words of Lavater the Calvinist and by Osiander in epitom Hist Eccles c. Centur. 16. pag. 249. initio and by Josias Symlerus Bucer's dearest friend who in his Oration of the Life and Death of Peter Martyr annexed to the end of his Common-places in English fol. Q q. on the a. side paulo post initium reporteth that
any such objection as this at that time when Protestants did much affect the use of lights Altars Pictures in their Churches In the meane time who would not I know not whether to say laugh or conceive just indignation to see so great a Champion as M. Chillingworth was esteemed to object such matters as these and as causes sufficient to forsake Gods Church 96. Ninthly he specifyes our saying of Pater-nosters and Creeds to the hono◠of Saints and of Ave-Maries to the honor of other Saints besides the Blessed Virgin This is not unlike to the former neither can I imagine what difficulty he can find that any good work as saying of Pater-nosters and Creeds is even in the account of Protestants and the saying of Ave-Maries must be sapposed to be in the opinion of these Protestants who allow prayers made to Saints may be offered in honor of Saints What will he say to the known doctrine of S. Augustine that although Sacrifice be offered to God only yet it may be offered in honor of Saints And much more why may not Pater-nosters and Creeds be offered in honour of Saints and Ave-Maries in honor of other Saints though the words be directed only to the Blessed Virgin In the mean time I return to say can such matters as these be alleged in the day of judgement as sufficient to excuse Luther and his followers from the grievous sin of Schism in forsaking the Communion of all Churches then extant 97. Tenthly He names the infallibilitie of the Bishop or Church of Rome Answer It cannot be expected that Protestants or any other divided from the Church of Rome will in expresse termes acknowledge her to be infallible under that word of Infallible but it hath been shewed that if they will speak with consequence to themselves they cannot deny her to be infallible while they give her such titles and grant her such Prerogatives as we have seen heretofore and deny not but that the ancient Fathers yielded her a preheminence before all other Churches and took her Doctrine and Practise for a Rule and proof of the Truth or falshood of what was believed or practised through all Christian Churches Yea and we have heard Protestants confessing that the Popes Authority for conserving unity and deciding Controversies in matters of faith is altogether necessary and that there cannot be expected any peace and union among Christians except by submitting to the Pope Besides Protestants commonly grant that the true Church is infallible in fundamental points and we must either say that the Roman Church was the true Church when Luther appeared or that Christ had no true Church on earth at that time nor hath any at this present seeing even the chiefest Protestants agree with us in many of those very points for which the first Protestants pretended to forsake all Churches extant when they appeared 98. Eleaventhly He objects our prohibiting the Scripture to be read publickely in the Church in such languages as all may understand Of this we have spoken heretofore Neither is it true that there is any general prohibition to read any Scripture in the Church in such a language as all may understand for some Preachers are wont to read in a vulgar language the Gospell of which they are to preach but our doctrine is that there is no Divine precept to use vulgar languages in the Liturgy or publick Offices recited in the name of the Church But what would he say to the custome which I have understood to have been used in Ireland of forcing people of that Nation to be present even at Sermons made in English of which they understand not one word which is a case far different from the use of an unknown tongue in the Liturgie or publick Offices ordained to the publick worship of God by the Church and not referred immediately for a Catechism or Instruction of the people as Sermons are 99. Twelfthly He strangely mentions our doctrine of the Blessed Virgines immunity from actual sin and our doctrine and worship of her immaculate Conception Answer It is a sign you want better matter while you object these points Your conscience cannot but tell you that you know we are so farr from making the immaculate Conception a point of Faith that there is a severe prohibition that neither part censure the other of Heresie Error or the like so that this Instance is manifestly impertinent The reader may be pleased to read Bellarmine tom 4. de amissione Gratiae statu peccati lib. 4. cap. 15. where he saith Quod ad primum scilicet non haberi apud Catholicos pro re certa explorata ac fide Catholica tenenda beatam Virginem sine peccato fuisse conceptam Joannes Pomeranus unus ex primis Lutheri discipulis in comment cap. 1. 44. Hierem. scribere ausus est pro articulo fidei apud Catholicos haberi B. Virginem sine ullo peccato immo etiam de Spiritu Sancto fuisse conceptam Sed hoc impudentissimum mendacium satis apertè refellunt duae Pontificum constitutiones Concilii aecumenici decretum quibus constitutionibus ac decretis Catholici omnes libenter obediunt Sixtus IV. Pontifex Max. in ea Constitutione quae incipit Gravè nimis de reliquiis veneratione Sanctorum desirtis verbis pronuntiat nondum esse quaestionem istam de Conceptione B. Virginis ab Ecclesia Romana Apostolica sede definitam ideò paenam excommunicationis statuit in eos qui alterutram sententiam ut haereticam damnare audent Judicium Sixti Pontificis sequutum est Concilium TRIDENTINUM ses 5. ac demum nostro tempore PIUS V. in constitutione quam edidit de conceptione Beatissimae Virginis Mariae Besides Protestants themselves acknowledge this point to be a thing indifferent excusable and not defined as may be seen in the fift Consideration num 4. at †next after f. in the margent at Fifthly and as Brereley tract 2. c. 2. sect 14. in the margent at †next after f. at Fifthly tract 2. c. 3. sect 5. subd 2. at f. in the margent proves saying Touching our B. Ladies being preserved from Original sin and the worshipping of Images Mr. Bunny in his Treatise tending to pacification sect 17. pag. 104. paulo ante med pag. 105. saith If any think it more honor able for the Blessed Virgin yea for Christ himself that took flesh of her to have been without sin and thereuppon for his part do rather think that by special praerogative she also was preserved from original corruption c. in these or such like whosoever will condemn all those that are not perswaded as we are committeth an uncharitable part towards those his brethren And D. Field ibid. apud Brereley pag. 499. in the margent at * expresly affirmes lib. 3. of the Church c. 42. pag. 174. post med the point concerning the Conception of our Blessed Lady to be a controversie not [ſ] Not defined saith M.
c. 14. Confession of sins to a Priest and [b] S. Bernard in vita Malachiae reporteth that A Noble Man lived near the Monastery of Benohor whose Wise being sick Malachias was requested to aneyl her which was duferred till morning afterwards a sudden outcry being made that she was dead Malachias came and when he certainly found that she was dead he was greatly troubled in mind imputing the fault to himself that she died defrauded of the grace of the Sacrament and lifting up his hands to Heaven said I beseech thee O Lord c. what more she that was dead opened her eyes c. and Malachias giving thanks praised God and aneyled her knowing sins to be remitted in this Sacrament Thus doth S. Bernard write of his known familiar and dear friend Malachias Extreme Unction Whereto were this place capable thereof many others might be added 3. The gift of Miracles being thus evidently proved not to cease as is pretended after those firster times of the Primitive Church but in all ages to continue though not as being common to all the Churches Pastors as was the gift thereof made common to all [c] And having called the twelve he gave them power to cure all manner of diseases Math. 10.1 the twelve but onely as being now but peculiar to certain persons and at certain times according to the more special dispensation of Gods good pleasure in that behalf for as for any supposed necessity of the same to be ordinary now as in the Apostles times against which M. [d] M. Morton in Apologia Catholica part 1. l. 2. c. 25. Morton urgeth certain needless testimonies it is by us neither urged nor affirmed we will now onely further examine which Church it is whether Catholick or the said foresaid Protestant Church to which the said gift hath for the last thousand years been confessedly appertaining or wanting First concerning the foresaid Protestant Church it seemeth so evidently destitute of this gift that our learned Adversaries confess to the contrary the said Church to have been [e] Apud Brereley tract 2. c. 2. sect 11. subd 3. in the margent at ¶ it is said Joannes Regius being urged in this kind doth in his liber Apologeticus c. pag. 176. circa post med answer thereto saying Negas Lutherum suae fidei coetum invenisse c. Dico fuisse ante Lutherum verae religionâ—s qui cum Luthero per omnia consentiret coetum Ecclesiasticum But coming to answer where this Congregation was then to be found be hath no other refuge but saith there that it was à Pontificiis non agnitus nec propter tyrannidem Pontificiam visibiliter for tassis oftendi potuerit ideoque quando urgent Jesuitae ut Lutherus verae religionis asseclam Ecclesiam ostendat c. volunt ut Lutherus oppositum in adjecto demonstret invisibile visibile probet c. Interim tamen absurdum est ita argumentari Haec res ab aliis non agnoscitur nec potest etiam videri aut demonstrarl ideoque non est in rerum natura c. So plainly doth he being urged to particulars acknowledge his pretended Congregation at Luther 's coming to have been then invisible and not able to the shewed Also Whitaker apud Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 11. subd 1. in the margent at †next before t. de Ecclesia contra Bellarminum controv 2. quaeff 5. pag. 262. ante med reciteth Bellarmine 's argument saying Secundum Bellarmini argumentum est hujusmodi c. Ante Lutheri tempora non erat in mundo c. Whereto he there answereth Nostra Ecclesia tumâ—suit At non fuit visibilis inquit Bellarminus Quid â—um Anideo non fuit Nequaquam Latebat enim tum in solitudine and nameth not though thus urged so much as but any one man of his Church in being at Luther 's first appearing See more hereof here in Brereley and in the place above cited tract 2. cap. 3. sect 3. fine at e. f. g. h. i. invisible at the least for almost one thousand years last before Luther which could not so be had the same been made so gloriously known and apparent as with the testimony of miracles And as for the said Protestants Church since Luther's time whereas our learned Adversaries do affirm the calling of Luther Calvin and others to have been [f] Beza apud Brereley tract 2. c. 2. sect 11. subd 3. at ¶ next before g. in Ep. Theolog ep 5. Alemanno paulò post initium pag. 49. saith to Alemannus Ordinariam certè vocationem praetexere non potes Quis enim te elegit ergo de extraordinaria videamus Huâ—c verò tum demum locum esse dicimus cùm vel nulla vel paenè nulla est ordinaria vocatio sicut nostris temporibus accidit in Papatu cùm expectari ordinaria vocatio quae nusquam erat nee debuit nec potuit See more hereof in Brereley tract 2. c. 2. sect 10. subd 15. fine at q. r. tract 2. c. 2. sect 6. versus finem at f. tract 2. cap. 3. sect 4. at q. * s. t. extraordinary as being not by ordination from man but immediatly from God to which calling themselves annex [g] Apud Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 3. subd 2. at z in the margent it is said Amandus Polanus in Partition Theolog. l. 1. pag. 308. saith Ministrorum extraordinariè vocatorum etiam dona extraordinaria fuere nempe Prophetiae donum edendi miracula c. And Musculus loc commun pag. 394. saith Vocatio quae immediatè est à Christo jam in usu non est ut erat olim habebat sua signa unde cognosci potuit de quibus meminit Marcus Evangelista cap. ult dicens Praedicaverunt c. sequenâ—bus signis c. And M. Henoch Clapham in his sovereign remedy against Schism pag. 25. initio doth upon this ground reprehend Brown for that he did take upon him extraordinary calling and wanted miracles And Luther in loc commun class 4. c. 20. initio pag. 38. post med admonished to this end saying Hoc explores an vocationem suam possint probare neque enim Deus unquam aliquem misit nisivel per hominem vocatum vel per signa declaratum nè ipsum quidem fillum And Luther tom 5. Jen. Germ. fol. 491. a. b. saith Unde venis Quis te misit c. Ubi sigilla quòd ab hominibus missus sis Ubi sunt miracula quae te à Deo missum esse testantur Also Luther admonished the Senate of Milhouse against Munster the Anabaptist saying Si dicat se à Deo atque ipsius Spiritu missum esse quemadmodum Apostoli probet hoc signis miraculis editis vel nolite ferre ut concionetur nam ubicunque Deus ordinariam viam mutare vult ibi semper miracula facit Luther tom 3. Jen. Germ. fol. 455. b. 456. a. and hereof see Sleydan lib. 3. An.
that many learned Protestants do not believe all such Doctrines and consequently are not capable of Salvation Pag. 269. n. 45. A man may possibly leave some opinion or practise of a Church formerly common to himself and others and continue still a member of that Church Provided that what he forsakes be not one of those things wherein the Essence of a Church consists For this cause he saith That although Protestants leave the external Communion of the Church yet they left not the Church because they left her not in any thing essential to a Church as Fundamental points are Therfore he supposeth the Church before Luther did not erre in any Fundamental Article Otherwise Protestants had left her that is they had disagreed from her in a Fundamental point P. 272. n. 52 and pag. 283. n. 73. He denies that Protestants divided themselves from the Church absolutely and simply in all things that is ceased to be a member of it which still supposes that the Church before Luther believed all essential and fundamental Points which Protestants also pretend to hold and for that cause say they left not the Church Pag. 272. n. 52. He saith In the reason of our separation from the external Communion of your Church you are mistaken For it was not so much because she your Church as because your Churches external Communion was corrupted and needed Reformation But if we erred in Fundamental points Protestants must have forsaken us chiefly for that reason that our Church was corrupted with Fundamental errours of Faith Therefore he grants that we erred not in any such necessary Points Pag. 401. n. 26. He confesseth that D. Potter saith indeed that our not cutting off your Church from the Body of Christ and hope of salvation frees us from the imputation of Schism Pag. 133. n. 12. He saith expresly By confession of both sides we agree in much more than is simply and indispensably necessary to salvation It is well he makes so open a confession that we believe much more than is simply necessary to salvation But as I said before we will not because we cannot yield so much to Protestants And here I must ask again how he could say Pag. 401. n. 27. As for our freeing you from damnable Heresie and yielding you salvation neither D. Potter nor any other Protestant is guilty of it Seeing he saith that by the confession of both sides we agree in much more than is simply and indispensably necessary to salvation If we believe much more than is necessary to salvation by what Logick will he deduce that we believe not as much as is necessary 8. These so many and so clear words of D. Potter and M. Chillingworth may justly make any man wonder with what pretence of truth or modesty he could say Pag. 280. n. 95. As for your pretence that your errours are confessed not to be Fundamental it is an affected mistake as I have often told you And Pag. 308. 108. As for your obtruding upon us that we believe the Points of difference not Fundamental or necessary you have been often told it is a calumny The oftner the worse it being a Saying void of all truth and a shamefull calumny in him 9. To these testimonies of Potter and Chillingworth many other might be alleged out of other Protestants as we have seen divers other alleged by Potter D. Laud in his book against Fisher Pag. 299. saith I doe acknowledge a possibility of salvation in the Roman Church But so as that which I grant to Romanists is not as they are Romanists but as they are Christians that is as they believe the Creed and hold the foundation Christ himself Behold not only a possibility of salvation but also the reason thereof because we believe the Creed c. which is the very reason for which Protestants hold that they themselves may be saved though they differ in many points from one another This I say is the reason of D. Laud which other Protestants must approve though in true Divinity it be of no force at all for though one believe the Creed and hold the foundation Christ himself that is that he is God and Saviour of the world yet if he deny any point evidently delivered in Scripture or otherwise sufficiently propounded as revealed by God he cannot be saved even according to Protestants who therefore doe in this as in many other things speak inconsequently and contradict themselves Pag. 376. he saith The Religion of the Protestants and the Romanists Religion is the same nor doe the Church of Rome and the Protestants set up a different Religion for the Christian Religion is the same to both but they differ in the same Religion Therefore say I we hold no Fundamental errors wherein whosoever differ cannot be of the same but must be of a different Religion And Pag. 129. The Protestants have not left the Church of Rome in her Essence not in the things which constitute a Church And Pag. 282. he saith The possibility of salvation in the Roman Church I think cannot be denyed and in proof hereof Pag. 281. he alleges Luther Field Joseph Hall Geor Abbot Hooker Mornaeus Prideaux Calvin And D. Jeremie Taylor in his liberty of Prophecying Pag. 251. sect 20. teaches that we keep the foundation and believe many more truths than can be proved to be of simple and original necessity to Salvation And therefore all the wisest Personages of the adverse party allowed to them possibility of Salvation whilst their errors are not faults of their will but weaknesses and deceptions of the understanding which as I said may easily be believed of us Catholicks who suffer so much for our Religion so that there is nothing in the foundation of Faith that can reasonably hinder them to be permitted The foundation of Faith stands secure enough for all their vain and unhandsome superstructures And in particular he shews that Prayer for the dead and the doctrine of Transubstantiation are not Fundamental errours and also saith these two be in stead of the rest Yea he affirmes Pag. 258 that there is implyed as great difficulty in the mystery of the B. Trinity as in the Doctrine of Transubstantiation and shewes that we are not in any danger of sinning by Idolatrie in adoring the Sacrament 10. Thus good Reader having proved out of the Confession of Protestants That the first Protestants who pretended to reform all Churches extant when they appeared led such lives and taught such Doctrines as no man of judgement can think them to have been fit Instruments for that Work That Protestants confesse the Ancient Holy Fathers to stand for us That the chiefest Protestant Writers joyn with Catholicks against other Protestants in the most principal Articles of Religion Yea even in those very points for which Luther and his followers opposed our Doctrine and forsook our Communion which deserves well to be considered That our Doctrines have been confirmed by Miracles and finally That all