both may be part of the Catholick Church Protestants as wâ— have seen in the former Chapter say that aâ—â— Christian Congregations are parts of the Catholick Church as well as we Roman Catholicks Thiâ— assertion they ground upon the signification of the worâ— Catholick which is as much to say as Vniversal In the saâ— me sense they explicate Catholick Tradition to be onelâ— that which is contradicted by any Christian Church According to this opinion no Congregation of Christian can be Hereticks because Hereticks must be obstinate against the Doctrine of the Universall or Catholick Church but no Christians can be obstinate against thâ— Doctrine of the Catholick or Universall Church seeinâ— themselves are part of it and they can not be obstinate against themselves or their owne Tenets and Doctrine therefore none can be Hereticks This absurd and hereticall sequele is a sufficient refutation of the Protestant principle and their explication of the word Catholick 2 But let us prove directly that neither all Christians nor any two Churches dissenting in their testimonies concerning whatsoever matters of Faith can be the Catholick Church My proofe is this The testimony of the Catholick Church concerning what is pretended to be revealed or not revealed by God must oblige all persons who are informed of it to believe what it saith and proposeth But if all Christians or any two Churches not agreeing in their testimonies suppose Roman Catholicks and Protestants be parts of the Catholick Church the testimony thereof can not oblige any sober person to believe what both say and propose First because one Church contradicts the other and its impossible to believe contradictions at one and the same instant Secondly when witnesses do not agree in their testimonies if they be of equall authority no man is obliged to believe either side but rather is bound in prudence to suspend his judgement Therefore if the Catholick Church be composed of all Congregations and Churches of Christians or of any two Churches not agreeing in their testimonies concerning matters of Faith no man is obliged to believe the testimony of the Catholick Church but rather to suspend his judgement and credit nothing which sequele is absurd and contrary to the Doctrine not onely of Catholicks but also of Protestants Therefore the Catholick Church must not be all Congregations of Christians or any two dissenting but one onely Congregation of persons who agree in one Faith CHAP. VII VVhether the testimony of the Catholick Church be infallible not onely as Protestants terme them in fundamentall but also in not fundamentall articles of Faith 1 THough we Catholicks say that all articles of Faith if once sufficiently proposed are in one sense fundamentall because under paine of damnation they must be believed yet in ananother sense we admit a distinction betweene fundamentall and not fundamentall articles of Faith Fundamentall articles may be called such as no ignorance of them can excuse men from damnation for not being believed Not fundamentalls may be called such articles as if proposed must be believed but if not proposed sufficiently the ignorance of them is excusable 2 But whether these articles be both called fundamentall or onely the first sort of them our controversie with Protestants is the same and the question is not set here out of its proper place because the resolution of it is necessary to answer an objection which Protestants make against the Doctrine of the former Chapter All Christians say they do agree in fundamentall points of Faith as in the Trinity Incarnation c. what great matter is it if they agree not in other things of little importance without the knowledge and sufficient proposall whereof they may be saved as Purgatory Transubstantiation c Why should we be obliged to believe things that are not absolutely necessary for salvation especially seeing Roman Catholick Divines do not deny that ignorance of not fundamentalls is not damnable Therefore all Christians though dissenting in not fundamentalls may be called Catholicks and the universall Church because they agree in all necessary articles of Catholick Religion and though their testimonies do not agree in Purgatory v.g. being an article of Faith why should their disagreement in that petty point invalid their testimony concerning the mystery of the Trinity Incarnation and other fundamentall articles 3 This discourse and objection of Protestants hath damned many a soule because they did not examine the truth of it as they ought But to declare the fallacy of it something must be said of the Churches infallibility Most Protestants do grant that the testimony of the Church is infallible in proposing the fundamentall articles of Christian Religion as in delivering Scripture to be Gods Word and in declaring the mystery of the Trinity c. because Christian and Catholick Faith must admit of no doubts concerning the truth of fundamentalls and if the Church be not infallible in proposing those to us we must necessarily doubt of their truth for though we doubt not that whatsoever God said is true yet we can not but doubt whether he revealed or meant any such thing as the mystery of the Trinity or Incarnation if we do not believe that the Church is infallible in proposing the said mystery God therefore in his Providence can not permit the Church to erre or deceive us in fundamentalls seeing its necessary for our salvation not to doubt of the truth of fundamentall mysteries but if the Church may erre in proposing them we can not but doubt of their truth This reason say Protestants can not be applyed to not fundamentalls because they are not absolutely necessary for salvation and our salvation is the onely motive that God had to make the Church infallible in proposing articles of Religion Therefore none is bound to believe that the Church is infallible in not fundamentalls 4 If the onely motive that God had to make the Catholick Church infallible were our salvation this discourse of Protestants might have some colour of truth but Gods motive in all his actions is not onely our salvation but in first place his owne honour and glory There is nothing concerns Gods honour more then that whatsoever is sufficiently proposed as revealed by him be credited by us without the least doubt whether the matter be great or of little importance Therefore the Churches infallibility and our obligation of believing it ought not to be measured by the greatnesse importance or absolute necessity of the matter proposed in order onely to our salvation but also by the sufficiency of the proposall in order to Gods honour and veracity If a matter not absolutely necessary for salvation be as sufficiently proposed to be revealed by God as the mystery of the Trinity the obligation is as great of believing the one without any doubt as the other The reason is cleare because there is as great an injury done to God by denying or doubting of his veracity and revelation in a small matter as in a great In believing
God revealed it reserving to his owne private â—udgement or to that of his first Patriarchs Luther Calvin Chillingworth c. the decision of this controversie VVhether God revealed it or no But the Catholick believes absolutely and doubts not but God revealed what the Church proposeth as revealed submitting his judgement in matters of Faith to whatsoever the Church doth define or declare 4 The obstinacy of Heresie may be well compared to the obstinacy of Rebellion Heresie being indeed a Rebellion of private and proper judgement against Gods authority and veracity appearing sufficiently in his Church Put the case that a Province of Spaine or France did reject any Lawes or Ordinances made by their King and intimated by his Officers to the people and proclaimed in the same Provinces In case these Lawes and the said Officers who have all the exterior signes or markes whereby the Kings authority is usually discerned were contemned by the people not because they doubt of their Kings legiflative power but because they will not believe he made such Lawes or gave any such Commission to his Officers would not the people notwithstanding all this pretended ignorance be Rebells and obstinate against their Soveraigne would it excuse them from the guilt of Rebellion to alledge in their owne behalfe that they did not thinke or believe the King commanded any such thing as his Officers pretended and proclaimed Their very excuse involves obstinacy and Rebellion The obedience and duty which Subjects owe to their King must be extended also to his Officers they must obey their Soveraigne not onely when himselfe commands but also when the Officers that have the ordinary signes of his authority do command in his name 5 This is the case of Hereticks They protest if they had thought or believed that the Doctrine of the Roman Church was revealed by God they would embrace it with all their heart But they do not consider that this very If or doubt is their crime and heresie What reason or prudent ground have they to doubt that Goâ— doth speake by the Roman Church as Kings do by theâ— Officers No Officers or Ministers have more authenâ—tick and credible signes of their Kings authority the the Roman Catholick Church hath of Gods Commission and trust of proposing his Revelations and interpretinâ— his meaning of Scripture as is demonstrated in the 14â— and other Chapters Now its sufficient to know that thâ— signes of the true Church are Miracles Sanctity of Doctrine and life conversion of Nations continuall succession from thâ— Apostles to the present age both of Pastors and Doctrine c. These signes are obvious to our senses and may bâ— perceived by all people Clounes Souldiers and other illiterate persons that will inquire and examine the history of their owne Countrey or the Religion of their Ancestors Whatsoever amongst all the Christan Churches hath these signes That Church must be heard obeyed and believed as having Gods authority and Commission to decide all doubts and controversies of Faith whosoever believes not her Definitions and obeyes not her Decrees is an obstinate Heretick and Rebell CHAP. V. Of the Catholick Church 1 SEeing the obstinacy of Hereticks is against Gods Revelations as they are proposed by the testimony of the Catholick Church it s required something be said of this Church That there is a Catholick and visible Church in this world is granted tacitely by all Hereticks seeing every Sect oâ— them pretends to be the whole or at least one part of the Catholick Church 2 The Catholick Church is a multitude or Congregation of men whose testimony doth so sufficiently propose their Doctrine to be Gods Word and the true meaning thereof that it is evidently imprudence and infallible damnation in any person whosoever not to acquiesce iâ— the said testimony and not to believe without the least doubt what it proposeth as Divine Revelation There are but two wayes to convince the understanding of man the one is evident and cleare reason the other is authority To some things its necessary even for salvation we give our assent though no evident and cleare reason appeareth authority that is the testimony of lawfull witnesses must be taken for reason and supply the want of it It is unreasonable and damnable not to honour our Princes and Parents though they have no other evidence or reason to shew that they are our lawfull Princes or Parents but the authority and testimony of lawfull witnesses God therefore having decreed that men should believe some mysteries above reason commanded all to believe under paine of damnation whatsoever the Church saith he revealed It is not unreasonable that God should condemn us for not believing the testimony of the Catholick Church in matters of Faith which are above reason seeing we shall be condemned if we believe not the testimony of our Neighbours concerning our Princes and Parents Is it a lawfull excuse for any man to say If I had believed such a man to be my Soveraigne I would obey him or such a woman to be my Mother I would honour her If there be lawfull witnesses for Prince or Parents their testimony is to be believed the very not believing them is a crime though there be no more evidence for it then the said testimony Therefore à fortiori the not believing the testimony of the Church confirmed with so many signes in matters of Faith is a crime and obstinate heresie 3 Some Protestant Divines of the English Church are so civill as to admit of us Roman Catholicks and so eharitable as not to exclude any Christians from being a part of the Catholick Church yet we have reason to thinke that it s no civility or kindnesse but interest that moves them to open the dore to us because if they reject us themselves can not pretend to be a Church having neither succession of Bishops nor without begging our testimony any solid proofe that Scripture is Gods Word What Bookes of Scripture they are pleased to accept of as Divine Revelation they do it upon our score and word but the sense which we delivered to them with the said Books as the most principall part of Gods Word they do refuse never being able hitherto to give any tolerable reason why they take our word more for the letter oâ— Scripture then for the sense and meaning of it If we deserve credit in one why not in both being no lesse against our conscience and as much in our power to corrupt the letter as the sense But of their obstinacy in this particular and others I shall discourse more at large when speake of Protestancy Now I will proceed in the discovery of the true Church CHAP. VI. VVhether all Christians be the Catholick Church or whether it may be composed of any two or more Congregations of them if not agreeing in all matters whatsoever which any one Congregation or Church pretends to be revealed by God 1 THis is as much as to demand Whether Catholicks and Protestants
age That is to say in every Century or age there were honest men and lawfull witnesses who testified that Henry the IV Ancestors descended from Saint Lewis though one onely age could remember or see Saint Lewis yet the next ensuing did see the first and heard their testimony the third did see the second c. In every age did live men whose testimony might be relyed upon It must be granted therefore by all that the knowledge which is grounded upon a continuall and never interrupted tradition is sufficient for lawfull witnesses 6 That the Roman Catholick Church hath a continuall and never interrupted tradition of its Faith and sense of Scripture being taught by Christ and the Apostles can not be denyed by our adversaries it being evident to the world that they who contradicted any article of this Faith we now professe in former ages were looked upon and condemned as Hereticks which is an infallible argument that we in every age received our Doctrine from the former not as the word of men but as the Word of God or as Divine Revelation for if it were not believed as Divine Revelation why should we condemne men as Hereticks because they denyed it Neither do Protestants deny that we believed our tradition and the testimony of our Church to be grounded upon Divine Revelation they onely say we were mistaken and that both our tradition and testimony of the Roman Church was fallible But then we urge that they acknowledge both were infallible in delivering to them the Scripture and testifying that it was the Word of God therefore in delivering and testifying all the rest seeing the same testimony delivering many things together must be of equall authority in all and equally believed by them who accept of it as a lawfull proofe All our pretended Reformers had no other ground in the yeare 1517. to believe Scripture as Divine Revelation but the testimony of the Roman Church Therefore they ought to believe all the rest or not to believe Scripture 7 I said it concernes also our adversaries to grant that their reformed Churches have no lawfull witnesses in matters of Faith because there can not be that sufficient knowledge which is required in a lawfull witnesse of Faith without tradition whereby it may appeare that the Faith and sense of Scripture of this age doth agree with that of the primitive Church If once our adversaries acknowledge lawfull witnesses of things past long since without a constant and never interrupted tradition every man whose spirit of ambition moves him may pretend to be true heire of any hereditary crowne or estate and without further proofe then his owne word and spirit or some obscure text of Scripture will exclude Kings and others whose rights are grounded upon tradition But if tradition be so necessary to preserve and make credible the testimony of men in matters of estates and rights in the Common-wealth it can not be superfluous to make credible the testimony of men concerning matters of Faith 8 It remaines now we prove that the testimony of the Roman Catholick Church hath beene confirmed with supernaturall signes or miracles But seeing there are in the Roman Church lawfull witnesses who prove that the Faith which they now professe is the same with that of the primitive Church miracles also are proved by the same witnesses it being granted by Protestants themselves that miracles were wrought in the primitive Church to confirme the Faith which Christ and his Apostles taught Yet in the Roman Catholick Church there are now lawfull witnesses and have beene in every age since Christs preaching that there have beene miracles done in confirmation of the Roman Faith This is evident to all who read the Ecclesiasticall Histories of present and past times Neither can our adversaries deny that we have lawfull witnesses for miracles now wrought in our Church even in confirmation of that Doctrine wherein we differ from them and reported by so credible testimonies See the 13. Chap. that it were imprudence in any person whosoever to deny them which is enough to propose sufficiently our Doctrine as Divine Revelation But Protestants do not believe our miracles because they imagine that they are against Scriptures that is against their owne interpretation of it and that some miracles have beene false and forged We do not say that all things which the common people thinke to be miracles are really true miracles but we affirme that true miracles there are in our Church and very frequent confirming that very Doctrine which Protestants reject the forgery or knavery of some particular wicked men in feigning miracles can not prejudice all especially such as are seene and experimented by persons of knowne integrity and learning able to discerne betweene true and false miracles otherwise it will follow that all the new Testament must be called in question or denyed to be Gods Word because Saint Thomas his pretended Ghospell or Nicodemus his writings are condemned as forged or Apocryphall That no reformed Church of Protestants can have lawfull witnesses to propose sufficiently their Doctrine as Divine Revelation is evident because for the space of 1500. yeares they were without any visible Church or tradition therefore their witnesses also are invisible and by consequence not lawfull or credible Fox and others made a certaine Catalogue of men who opposed the Doctrine of the Roman Church in former ages but they were known Hereticks and did neither agree amongst themselves nor with Protestants in their Tenets or Religion as hath beene demonstrated by Father Persons in his Examination of Fox his Kalendar and by many others 9 I conclude therefore that seeing Protestants grant there is and hath alwayes beene a Catholick Church upon earth and that Church must have lawfull witnesses testifying their Doctrine to be Divine Revelation it being evident that no Congregation of men can produce any such lawfull witnesses but the Roman Catholicks amongst whom I include also them of the Greeke Church who agree with us it s also evident that there can be no Church Catholick but the Roman CHAP. XI VVhether Transubstantiation and the lawfulnesse of the worship of Images be sufficiently proposed by the testimony of the Roman Catholick Church as Divine revelation and whether Protestants have any lawfull exceptions against them 1 THere are so many Bookes printed in defence of these Catholick Tenets that I judge it superfluous to treate of them ex professo I will onely answer some exceptions that Protestants have made against them to my selfe in diverse occasions That the Roman Church doth propose these articles sufficiently as Divine Revelation is cleare because it proposeth them by the same testimony and confirmed by the sames signes whereby it proposeth Scripture to be Gods Word this last proposall Protestants themselves grant to be so sufficient that no man may in prudence deny it Therefore the same must be said of all the rest and in particular of Transubstantiation and worship of Images 2 But let us
though the Church can not its testimony ought to be believed Many Clownes who unanimously say they have seene an Eclyps or extravagant inundation of the Sea deserve credit though they be no Philosophers or Mathematicians and consequently can not give any cleare reason of an Eclyps c. Therefore the testimony of Catholicks ought not to be rejected concerning Transubstantiation or any other mystery though they can not give cleare reason for it it s enough for them to recurre to Gods omnipotency 7 But how say Protestants can we be called Hereticks or obstinate if we are content to submit our judgements and believe what is sufficiently proposed as Gods Revelation We onely deny that the Roman Church doth propose sufficiently as Gods Revelations their Decrees in the Councells of Trent and Lateran c. To this I have answered in the third Chap. and now againe do affirme that there is no Prince who doth propose his commands and sense concerning any matter more sufficiently by his subordinate Ministers then God doth his Word and sense of Scripture by the Roman Church Because there hath not beene onely a continuall succession of this Doctrine we professe from the primitive Church to this present which neither the Greeke Church See Chap. 9. nor any other can pretend to having changed the Doctrine of Faith more then once but because there do appeare such evident signes of the Roman Churches being appointed by God to declare to all the world the true Faith and sense of Scripture that it must be obstinacy in the highest degree to doubt of the sufficiency of the Roman Churches proposall and testimony First the conversion of Nations by Roman Catholicks in all parts of the world is evident Secondly no other Church doth pretend to miracles but we alone Thirdly we heare of no eminent sanctity confirmed by prophecy and other supernaturall signes in any Church but in ours Fourthly there is no unity peace or end of controversies but amongst us all submitting our judgements in matters of Faith to any generall Councell approved by the Pope Fifthly no Church hath continuall tradition and succession of Doctrine but we Roman Catholicks 8 All these signs are marks of the true Catholick Church and are so obvious to our senses that idiots may take notice of them if they will but inquire and spend as much time in that as in reading the History of their owne Countrey or of informing themselves of their Ancestors This is the true reason why no Protestants can pretend ignorance of the true Church nor rely upon the word of their Ministers If they inquire not they will be damned for being ignorant If after due inquiry made they become not Roman Catholicks they will be damned for Heresie not onely for denying the truth of our Doctrine and Faith but also the sufficiency of its proposal He is a rebell who denyeth that the accustomed exterior signes of the Princes commission and authority which are seene in his Officers is not a sufficient proposall of his will and pleasure to have the said Officers obeyed as his Judges or Deputies c. I see no reason why the same ought not to be grated with proportion in our case unlesse Protestants thinke that Princes ought to be more respected in their Ministers then God in his Church or that there is greater evidence required to believe that God doth speake by his Church then to believe that Princes do speake by their subordinate Ministers Truly though this greater evidence were required Protestants can have no excuse because the signes of the Roman Church are greater evidence that it alone is the true one by which God declares and speaketh his minde then the signes of any Magistrate in a Common-wealth or Kingdome are of the true regall authority of the said Magistrate by which Kings and Princes declare their minde to the Subjects See more in the 4. and 5. Chapters CHAP. XIII VVhether any Protestants may be saved 1 THough Protestancy be Heresie all Protestants are not Hereticks there is a difference saith Saint Austin betweene Hereticks and them who believe Hereticks The greatest wits may be misinformed if they rely upon other mens informations 2 To the question proposed I answer that such Protestants as never had any occasion to doubt whether their owne Religion be the true one may be saved if they never committed a mortall sinne because they are baptised and dye in the grace of God which they received in the Baptisme Now whether there be any Protestants who never committed a mortall sinne the Lord knowes this I am sure of that there are very few in any part of the world who have not great reason and many occasions to doubt of their owne Religion Because amongst them or neare unto the places where they live there are Catholicks who as Christians and true Friends advertise them of the falshood and novelty of their Sect. And though the Protestant Ministers assure them that they are in a safe way of salvation when others as honest and learned as the Ministers tell them the contrary they are bound under paine of damnation at least to examine the truth and grounds of both Religions according their capacity and possibility which if they do sincerely that is setting aside all regard of honour interest conveniency and all other temporall affections which obstruct the understanding God in his providence will give them knowledge of the truth and resolution to embrace it 3 But in case Protestants contemne the charitable warnings given them by Catholicks of the Schisme and Heresie wherein they are involved and neglect Gods inspirations of examining the truth there is no question to be made that if they dye in that condition they are damned because though they were brought up Protestants they had reason to doubt of their Religion seeing as honest and learned men as those that gave them their education and instruction advertised them seriously of their danger And not to examine whether the danger be reall or not in a matter of so high concernment is not excusable no ignorance can be pretended after they are admonished by sober and honest men I conclude therefore that onely such silly soules as believe the Pope hath hornes and the Jesuits cloven feete can be excused by ignorance from damnation for not believing as Catholicks doe because if any such be they are so simple that they believe all which the Minister sayes as Gods Word and that nothing ought to be called in question How many Ministers there be who deserve this credit and esteeme of infallibility even amongst the least prying and simple people let their owne Parishes and the world define This I dare say that there are few Protestants who commit not at least one mortall sinne and that is enough to damne them though their invincible ignorance as schoole men speake may excuse their want of true Faith But the want of Charity is as damnable as the want of Faith and we have no reason
was thought by Her Majestie dangerous to Monarchy Therefore the titles of Archbishops Bishops Deanes and Chapters were retained as also in her owne Chappell some Images the Altar and a Crucifix upon it Though the titles of the Catholick Clergy were bestowed upon persons who favoured the new Religion yet the Ordination was not because that which was instituted by Edward the VI. was judged invalid by all Catholicks and so declared by publick judgement in Queene Marys reigne in so much that leases made by King Edwards Bishops though confirmed by the Deane and Chapter Brooks novell cases Placito 463. fol. 101 printed at London 1604. were not esteemed available because they were no saith the sentence consecrated nor Bishops Some Protestants are so charitable as to say that King Edwards Bishops were declared no Bishops to the end Bonner and other Catholick Bishops restored by Queene Mary might make the leases voyd let the world judge whether 3 Bonner and others who loft their Bishopricks for conscience sake alone would commit so great a sacrilege as must needs follow out of declaring invalid King Edwards new forme of Ordination They who renounced the propriety for Religions sake would not damne themselves for the profit of new leases 14 Seeing therefore it concerned the Queene to have consecrated Bishops and that in King Edwards reigne the Catholick Consecration was held to be superstition most of the Clergy then being Zuinglians or Puritans the Queene endeavoured by all possible meanes to have such as she named for the Bishopricks consecrated by Catholicks but they all resolved not to make Bishops in that Church whereof themselves refused to be Members An Irish Archbishop prisoner in the Tower was offered his liberty and great rewards if he would consecrate the newly elected but he denyed to commit so great a sacrilege CHAP. II. Of the Nullitie of the English Protestant Clergy 1 THe Queene notwithstanding all this reluctancy of Catholick Bishops named in her Letters Patents Anthony Kitchin Bishop of Landaf amongst others to consecrate Parker and his fellowes because he was the onely man amongst all the Catholick Bishops that tooke the oath of Supremacy in her reigne But this frailtie was not a sufficient ground to thinke that he would consecrate Parker and others whom he knew to be Hereticks and averse from the Doctrine of the Roman Catholick Church which himselfe so constantly adhered unto the Supremacy onely excepted during his life Sacroboscâ— lib. de investig Christi Ecclesia cap. 14. D. Champ. cap. 14. Many others of the Catholick Bishops complyed with Henry the VIII in that particular who now refused to ordaine Parker the same was Landaffe resolved to do but at last by faire words and promises they prevailed with the old man to give them a meeting at the Nags head in Cheap-side where they hoped he would ordaine them Bishops despairing that ever he would doe it publickly in a Church because that would be too great and too notorious a scandall for Catholicks amongst whom Landaffe desired to be numbered Bonner Bishop of London being well informed of all that passed sent one Master Neale his Chaplaine an honest and learned man who had formerly beene Lector in Oxford to the Bishop of Landaffe forbidding him under paine of excommunication to exercise any such power of giving Orders in his Diocesse wherewith the old man being tertified and otherwise also moved in his owne conscience refused to proceed in that action alledging chiefly for reason of his forbearance his want of sight Which excuse Parker and the rest interpreting to be but an evasion were much moved against the poore old man and whereas hitherto they had used him with all curtesie and respect they then turned their copy reviling and calling him doating foole and the like some of them saying This old foole thinketh we cannot be Bishops unlesse we be greased alluding to the Catholick manner of Episcopall unction 2 Being thus deceived of their expectation and having no other meanes to come to their desire they resolved to use Master Scoryes helpe an Apostata religious Priest who having borne the name of Bishop in King Edward the VI. time was thought to have sufficient power to performe that office especially in such a streight necessity as they pretended He having cast off together with his religious habit all scruple of conscience willingly went about the matter which he performed in this sort having the Bible in his hand and they all kneeling before him he laid it upon every one of their heads or shoulders saying Take thou authoritie to preach the VVord of God sincearly And so they rose up Bishops of the new Church of England 3 This story of the Nags-head was first contradicted by Mason in the yeare 1613. yet so weakly and faintly that the attentive Reader may easily perceive he feared to be caught in a lye and convinced by some aged persons that might then be living and remember what passed in the beginning of Queene Elizabeths reigne In the yeare 1603. none of the Protestant Clergy durst call it a fable or a tale of a Tub as some now doe Bancroft Bishop of London being demanded by Master VVilliam Alabaster how Parker and his Collegues were consecrated Bishops answered He hoped that in case of necessity a Priest alluding 〈◊〉 Scory might ordaine Bishops This answer of his was obâ—â—cted in print by Holiwod against him and all the English â—lergy in the yeare 1603. not a word replyed Bancroft â—imselfe being then living I have spoken with both Caâ—â—olicks and Protestants that remember neare 80. yeares â—nd acknowledge that so long they have heard the Nagsâ—ead story related as an undoubted truth In the beginâ—ing of the late Parliament some Presby terian Lords preâ—nted to the upper House a certaine Booke proving that â—â—e Protestant Bishops had no succession nor consecraâ—ion and therefore were no Bishops and by consequence â—ad no right to sit in Parliament Hereupon Doctor Morâ—on pretended Bishop of Durham who is yet alive made 〈◊〉 speach against this Booke in his owne and all the Bishops behalfe then present he endeavoured to prove succession from the last Catholick Bishops who said he â—y imposition of hands ordained the first Protestant Bishops at the Nags-head in Cheap-side as was notorious â—o all the world c. Therefore the aforesaid Booke â—ought to be looked upon as a groundlesse Libell This was told to many by one of the ancientest Peeres of Engâ—and present in Parliament when Morton made his speech And the same he is ready to depose upon his oath Nay he can not believe that any will be so impudent as to deâ—y a thing so notorious whereof there are as many witnesses living as there are Lords and Bishops that were that day in the upper House of Parliament 4 This narration of the Consecration at the Nags-head have I taken out of Holiwood Constable and Doctor Champneys workes they heard it from many of the ancient Clergy who were prisoners for
some circumstances prove more then any others Qui tacit consentire videtur 9 As soone as Master Mason published his Records Fitz Herbert suspected them his words are these It was my chance to understand that one Master Mason hath lately published a Booke Wherein he endeavoureth to prove the first Protestant Bishops Consecration by a Register Thou shalt therefore understand good Reader that this our exception against the English Clergy is no new quarrell now lately raised but vehemently urged divers times heretofore many yeares ago yea in the very beginning of the late Queenes reigne urging them to shew how and by whom they were made Priests Bishops c. And what trow you was answered thereto was there any Bishop named who had consecrated them was Master Masons Register or any other authenticall proofe thereof produced by â—aster Jewell or Master Horne No truly This then being 〈◊〉 I report me to the judgement of any indifferent man What redit Master Masons new found Register deserveth being proâ—uced now after fifty and odde yeares to testifie this Consecraâ—ion whereof not so much as any one witnesse was named nor â—ny Register pretended by those whom it most imported to prove 〈◊〉 5. or 6. yeares after it was supposed to be done This and much more did Fitz Herbert print in the yeare 1613. in his Appendix to the Discovery of Doctor Andrews absurdities â—alsities lyes c. I say that no mention was ever made of Registers or Records testifying Parkers Consecration at Lambeth untill Master Masâ—n printed his Booke by Master Abbots command For though in a Booke called Antiquiâ—ates Britanniae pag. 39. edit Hanoviae an 1605. there be a Register of the Protestant Bishops in England thrust in with-but any necessity or purpose immediatly after Saint Austin the first Archbishop of Canterbury yet that very Register doth not mention any certaine place or forme of their Consecration so that it might be performed as well at the Nags-head as at Lambeth But that all the world may see how this very Register was forged I will set downe the words of the learned Author of a Booke called The Iudgement of the Apostles and first agein points of Doctrine questioned betweene the Catholicks and Protestants of England printed an 1633. Pag. 209. It hath beene pretended from a new borne Register of Mathew Parker that â—he was made a Bishop by Barlowe Scory and three others by vertue of a Commission from Queene Elizabeth and this new worke was acted on the 17. day of December an 1559. but â—alas they had then no forme or order to do such a businesse Pag. 349. VVhereas this printed Booke of Parkers Antiquitates Britanniae is the first that mentioneth any such pretended Consecration of him and the rest and the other VVriters seeme to borrow this from thence in the old Manuscript of that Booke which I have seen and diligently examined there is not any mention or memory at all of any such Register or Consecraâ—ion of either Mathew Parker Pag. 211. or any one of those pretended Protestant Bishops as the obtruded Register speaketh of And any man reading the printed Booke will wanifestly see it is a meerly foisted and inserted thing having no connexion correspondence or affinitie either with that which goeth before or followeth it And containeth more things done after Matheâ— Parker had written that Booke But now let us see how thâ— Protestant Clergy was charged with the nullitie and illgalitie of Ordination and how they never stopt the Adversaries mouths with Masons Registers or Records 10 Consider saith Doctor Bristow what Church that iâ— whose Ministers are but very lay-men Mot. 21. unsent uncalled uncoâ— secrated holding therefore amongst us when they repent anâ— returne no other place but lay-men in no case admitted no nâ— looking to minister in any office unlesse they take Orders whicâ— before they had not Master Fulke who was ignorant of noâ— thing in this point that Master Mason did know answering Bristow his objection denyeth ordinary calling to bâ— alwayes necessary which desperate shift he would neveâ— have used if he had beene provided of so easy and sufficient an answer as Master Masons Records would have afforded him if they had beene authenticall or extant 11 Master Reynolds Calvino Turcis lib. 4. cap. 15. There is no heardman in all Turkie which doth not undertake the governmen of his heard upon better reason and greater right order and authoritie then thesâ— your magnificent Apostles and Evangelists can shew for thiâ— divine and high office of governing soules reforming Churches c. 12 Doctor Stapleton in his Counterblast against Masteâ— Horne pretended Bishop of Winchester hath these urging speeches Fol 7. 9. To say truly you are no Lord VVinchester nor elsewhere but onely Master Robert Horne Is it not notorious that ye and your Collegues were not ordained according to thâ— prescript I will not say of the Church but even of the very Statues How then can you challenge to your selfe the name of the name of the Cord Bishop of VVinchester Fol. 301. You are without any Consecration at all of your Metropolitan himselfe poore man being no Bishop neither 13 Doctor Harding in his Detection of sundry foule errours against Master Iewell Fol. 129. You tell not half my tale which truly is noted by many that Master Iewell passes over the difficulties without answering or mentioning I laid for my foundation out of raint Hierome the se words Ecclesiaâ—onest quae non habet Sacerdotem that is no Church which hath not a Priest or Bishop c. for Sacerdos as you know doth signifie both a Priest and Bishop I aske then as well of your Bishoply vocation and of your sending as of your Priesthood c. These being my questions Master Jewell you answer â—â—ither by what example hands were laid on you nor who sent â—u but onely say he made you Priest that made me in King â—dwards time Verily I never had any name or title of Priestâ—od given to me during the raigne of King Edward I onely â—ke the order of Deaconship as it was then ministred furâ—er I went not c. Truly after I had well considered with â—y selfe these questions which in my confutation I moved unto â—u I tooke my selfe neither for Priest nor yet for lawfull Deaâ—n in all respects by those orders which were taken in King â—dwards dayes being well assured that those who tooke upon â—em to give orders were altogether out of order themselves â—nd ministred them not according to the Kite and manner of â—e Catholick Church as who had forsaken the whole succession 〈◊〉 Bishops in all Christendome and had erected a new Conregation of their owne planting the forme whereof was imaâ—ned in their owne braines and had not beene seen nor praâ—ised in the world before 14 Master Iewell answers all this with profound silence â—s though it had never beene written albeit he would haâ—e the world believe that he
It s very credible that if Master Laud had found successe in his first attempts he would in time reforme the forme of the English Ordination and thrust in some words expressing the power of Priests and Bishops seeing he and others of the Protestant Clergy of late Kallend an 3. Ed. Vl. c. 12. Mason pag. 94. did differ so much in opinion concerning Priesthood and Episcopacy from those who lived in King Edward the VI. time and in the beginning of Queene Elizabeths reigne He could not misse with six Prelats and six other men learned in Gods Law whereof the greater number might devise as warrantable a forme of making Bishops and Priests as was devised by the same number in King Edwards time Yet all had beene in vaine because neither Master Laud himselfe nor any of the rest then living could consecrate others even with the Catholick forme seeing none of them all had valid Ordination as hath beene demonstrated Therefore it was thought expedient to cover the want of the reality of true Ordination with an exterior formality of long cloakes and surplises and supply the want of Sacrifice with crosses and candlesticks upon the Altars 26 Master Mason commends much the wisdome of the English Church that so discreetly and religiously pared away all superfluous Ceremonies in Ordination and saith it was a singular priviledge of Master Parker that being the 70. Archbishop after Saint Austin the Apostle of England yet of all that number he was the onely man that received Consecration without the Popes Bulls and superfluous Aaronicall ornaments How discreet and religious the English Church was in paring away pretended superfluities in Ordination can not be determined by Master Mason untill he makes appeare that all is superfluous in that kinde which he and the Puritans who made the English Rituall in King Edward the VI. time fancied superfluous It is not the part of any particular Church to pare away any thing that hath beene delivered to them by antiquity to be observed Though some words have beene added to ancient formes of Ordination for their greater explanation or solemnity yet none were ever so rash as to pare away any especially those that seemed to signifie the power and authority intended by the Ordainer 27 To conclude this matter I say with Saint Ierome Ecclesia non est quae non habet Sacerdotem How can the Protestant Church be the true Church seeing it hath not any one Priest or Bishop Though it were not evident that it hath no valid Ordination yet so many manifest uncertainties and doubts as themselves must acknowledge concerning their Ordination doth demonstrate the nullitie of their Church For if there remaine but one solid and prudent doubt of the validity of Ordination of any Church its impossible it should be the true Catholick and Apostolick because a doubtfull Clergy makes a doubtfull Church and a doubtfull Church is no Church The first step to Christian and Catholick beliefe is the well grounded credibility excluding all prudent doubts of that Church whereof we are members if we have any prudent ground to doubt of the Clergy we have the same to doubt of our Church and of the Faith or Doctrine proposed by its testimony and the true Faith admits of no such doubts Therefore Protestants before they can prudently believe to have true Faith or be in the Catholick must cleare all the doubts heretofore objected against their Ordination which I will briefly summe up 28 First they must prove clearly that the story of the Nags-head was a fable and consequently that Master Neale and the other Catholicks who said they were eye-witnesses of what passed were impudent Impostors and content to be convicted as such in the same place and time that they invented so palpable a lye Secondly they must make appeare evidently that all the Catholicks of that time both Bishops Priests and others who believed Master Neale and suffered much for conscience were all runne mad because they believed so great a foppery or if they did not believe him they were most wicked and sacrilegeous persons to engage posterity by their relation and testimony to reordaine the Protestant Clergy Thirdly they must demonstrate that all the first Protestant Bishops and others consecrated by them did conspire not to contradict the story of the Nags-head and their owne invalid consecration for the space of fifty and odde yeares to the great discredit of themselves and their whole Church where as they might easily stop their adversaries mouths by producing witnesses and Records of the pretended solemne Congregation at Lambeth being so often demanded in printed Bookes by whom and how were they ordained Fourthly it must be made appeare to the world that Bancroft Bishop of London could be ignorant of the publick Registers of Parkers Ordination at Lambeth himselfe being so much concerned in it and in the knowledge of it if he were not ignorant of the publick Registers why did he answer so fondly and contrary to the very Protestant principles that a Priest might ordaine Bishops in case of necessity Fifthly it must be manifestly proved that not onely Bancroft was ignorant of the publick Registers but that all the Bishops of England who were present in the late Parliament knew nothing of them whereas Doctor Morton pretended Bishop of Durham affirmed publikely in the upper House that the first Protestant Bishops were consecrated at the Nags-head This answer all the rest approved by their silence and were glad to have that retiring place against the Presbyterians who proved clearly that they were not consecrated at Lambeth as Master Masen pretends But if Doctor Morton and the rest of the Bishops knew any thing of Masons Booke and Registers as infallibly they did why did not they stick to that This proves evidently that none of them did give credit to Masons new found Registers 29 Sixthly supposing Master Masons forged Records were true it must be made cleare that there was in their Ordination a competent number of true Bishops and consequently that the Bishops of Edward the VI. were validly consecrated notwithstanding the Declaration of the contrary by publick Acts and sentences in Queene Maryes reigne Seventhly if there was not a competent number of true Bishops whether in the beginning of Queene Elizabeths reigne there as any such necessity as Protestants pretended having then in England 14. Catholick and true Bishops Eighthly it must be made appeare that Barlowe was consecrated who was the principall Consecrator of Parker for if he were how is it possible that in all the Registers of England and Wales there should be no mention of his Consecration Lastly it must be proved clearly that the forme used in the ordaining of Protestant Ministers and Bishops is valid It will be a very hard taske to cleare all these doubts and exceptions How unfortunately was Charles the First late King of England misinformed in matter of his Bishops and Clergy What scruple could he have had if he had knowne
well versed in Scripture have so much honesty as not to conceale from the world that true sense of Scripture which seemeth to themselves cleare and evident after the combination and examination of all controverted texts But to be briefe and decline all comparisons which are odious let us suppose for the present which Protestants ought to take as a courtesie that learned Protestants and learned Catholicks are equally honest and equally learned both honest and both learned if the contrary be not made appeare by the ensuing demonstration 5 It is impossible for men equally learned and equally honest to have any controversie about the sense of any words of Scripture if the sense be cleare and evident But Protestants and Catholicks who are supposed to be equally learned and equally honest have controversies about the sense of such words of Scripture as concerne Transubstantiation worship of Images and other controverted points Therefore its impossible that the sense of such words of Scripture as relate to Transubstantiation c. should be cleare and manifestly against the Doctrine of Catholicks Therefore the testimony of all Protestant Churches maintaining the clearnesse against them is not onely incredible but manifestly false Because the testimony of Catholicks though in their owne defence is made evidently true by the controversie it selfe a visible and undeniable effect that can proceede from no other cause amongst learned and honest men but from the obscurity of the words and sense wherein their judgements differ If they squable about what is cleare both parties or at least one is ignorant or not honest We Catholicks have no reason to thinke that all our Doctors want knowledge and sincerity its cleare to all Christenâ—ome that in our Church we have in all parts of the world â—oth learned and honest men and if Protestants thinke â—he same of themselves they must grant that our controâ—ersies do manifestly demonstrate the obscurity of Scripture 6 Seeing Scripture is obscure and in no place cleare against Transubstantiation worship of Images Purgatory c. what ground or warrant had the first Protestants for their pretended Reformation would not all the world have reason to laugh at us Catholicks if we should part with that ancient sense of Scripture in favour of Transubstantiation Purgatory c. which we received from the Church that went before us assuring it was revealed by God upon the bare word of Luther Calvin Knox or the â—2 persons that made the Ritual and pretended to reforme in Edward the VI. time the Sacraments both in matter forme and number What signes or miracles did they shew for their extraordinary Mission and Apostleship of reforming the Doctrine of the Catholick Church If any man who received his Land by inheritance from his Ancestors ought not to part with it if not forced by better evidence then his owne how can we part with our Faith and sense of Scripture which is the ground of all our supernaturall inheritance and happinesse untill Protestants shew a better title then the inheritance or continuall succession of our Doctrines from the Apostles They must produce better evidence then their pretended clearnesse of Scripture If they laugh at Quakers notwithstanding all the texts of Scripture which they have at their fingers ends against Protestant Doctrine how do they imagine did Catholicks looke upon the first pretended Reformers One advantage these new Quakers have against all Protestants which Protestants have not against Catholicks and it is that a new Quaker may say with truth to an old or new Protestant he hath as prudent ground and as good evidence for his owne interpretation of Scripture and Religion as the Protestant hath for his their fancies the onely ground of both their Faith being much alike and their Mission being not warranted by any precedent Church This the Protestants can not object against Catholicks because we had alwayes the word and warrant of a precedent visible Church for our interpretation of Scriptures and Religion CHAP. IX VVhether any Puritanicall Congregation be the Catholick Church by reason of their pretended spirit 1 THere not a trades-man or simple woman amongst the purer sort of Protestants who do not imagine themselves to be more infallible in interpreting Scripture then the Pope and all the generall Councells together This infallibility they attribute to the Spirit of God which they all pretend to have But this fond imagination is as easily refuted as the clearnesse of Scripture hath beene in the former Chap. because every pure Protestant or Puritan pretends to have the Spirit of God but that Spirit contradicting it selfe according the diversity of Tenets which the purely inspired hold it is impossible it should be the Spirit of God who can not inspire contradictions Yet they are so obstinate that its impossible to perswade them to the contrary though you may clearly convince them The Pope must be Antichrist Catholick Kings the horns of the Beast religious Orders rags of Rome wherewith the VVhore of Babylon adornes her selfe The Puritans must onely be the Elect the Saints and pure Zealots of the beauteous discipline of Sion which to carry on though whole Nations be extirpated their holy Spirit doth not onely rid them from any remorse of conscience but assures them no worke can be more meritorious If you inquire of them how they know whether this spirit of theirs be good or bad of God or the Divel Calvin their Patriarch and Master answers that they do discerne it as clearly as they do white from black sweet from sower and light from darknesse his proofe is the experience and testimony of every one of the faithfull Brethren concerning the purenesse of his owne spirit 2 This Calvinisticall and private spirit being so hidden and undiscernable can not be a sufficient and prudent ground at least for any man that hath it not to believe it is the Spirit of Truth and of the Catholick Church Men who are not in the true Church must be led into it by some credit and exteriour signes And though Faith be a gift of God yet it is communicated by preaching and hearing Rom. 10. We do not deny that God must helpe all Catholicks interiourly with his supernaturall grace and spirit but the difference between the Puritan and Catholick spirit is that the Puritan spirit inspireth a beliefe contrary to reason the Catholick spirit inspires a beliefe non contrary but agreable to reason Though Christian Faith be above reason it is not unreasonable But it can not be agreable to reason that any person believe a Puritanicall spirit without any more proofe of the goodnesse of it then a Puritans word against a sense of Scripture which hath beene continued in the Roman Churches since the primitive times as is evident by tradition testimony of Fathers and acknowledged by the Magdeburg Centuries and other Protestant Writers Therefore the private spirit can not be a sufficient proposall of the true Faith or a credible and convincing signe of the true Church
3 Another proofe that no private spirits interpretation of Scripture can be the true one being contrary to the publick testimony of the Church which went before it and Puritans pretend to reforme may be borrowed from Saint Peter who giveth to understand Pet. 1.20 that no private interpretation can be the true sense of Scripture The reason is cleare because there is none if not confirmed in grace who may not be an obstinate Heretick against the true sense of Scripture in controverted texts but no man can be obstinate against his owne private interpretation and the sense of his private spirit Therefore he can not be an Heretick if the private interpretation of Scripture against the publick testimony of the precedent or present Church which he impugneth be the true meaning and sense of Gods Word 4 Perhaps Puritans will grant that its impossible for any of them to be an Heretick seeing their spirit is infallible If this be granted it s also impossible for any other to be an Heretick or obstinate against their spirit or interpretation because he who is obstinate may be convinced and it s not possible to convince any man but by cleare reason or at least by lawfull witnesses Cleare reason Puritans can not pretend for their spirit because it s against reason to believe it Lawfull witnesses for it there can be none or no more then one which is not enough nor allowed as lawfull in a mans owne case Though every Puritan giveth not onely a testimony of his owne but also of his Brethrens spirit yet he is no lawfull witnesse for any other mans spirit because he hath no better evidence or ground for the testimony he gives then the other mans owne word in commendation of his owne spirit he neither seeth the spirit of the other nor any signe whereby it may be made credible onely he may witnesse that the man whose spirit it is sayeth it is of God but one mans word in his owne case is no sufficient evidence for a lawfull testimony Therefore there are no lawfull witnesses for the private spirit and consequently none can be obstinate against us because none can be convinced that it is of God Whence it followeth that the spirit can be no sufficient proposall of Gods Word or sense and therefore no inspired Congregation of Protestants can be the Catholick Church CHAP. X. VVhether that Congregation of persons which live in communion with and subjection to the Roman Church be the Catholick and true Church of God 1 THis question seemeth to have beene resolved by what is said in former Chapters Because iâ— there be a Catholick Church Vide summam Concâ—liorum A.F. longo in Conâ—il â—â—orâ—n 〈◊〉 〈…〉 〈…〉 and that is noâ— all Congregations of Christians taken together nor any Protestant Church in particular the dispute can onely be now between the Greek Church and the Roman but the Grecians having so many times altered their Faith so many of their ancient Patriarchs being condemned Hereticks and all their Church being legally convicted of Schisme and Heresie in three generall Councells of Florence Lions and the Lateran they can not pretend to be the true Church which never erred I do not speake of that part of the Greeke Church which communicates with us Roman Catholicks because that is part of the Roman But suppose the Roman Church were not the Catholick I see not what advantage Protestants may have by pleading for the Grecians seeing these agree not with them but are altogether against the pretended Reformation and condemne it as Heresie as appeares by the answer of the Patriarch of Constantinople to the Protestants of Germany mentioned by Bellarmine lib. 3. de Euchar cap. 21. in fine 2 To prove therefore that the Roman Church is the true Catholick it must be made appeare that it proposeth sufficiently its Doctrine of Faith as Divine Revelation this sufficient proposall can not be done by cleare and evident reason because the mysteries of Christian Religion are above humane capacity Therefore it must be done according to what hath beene said in the 4. Chap. by authority and the testimony of lawfull witnesses But lawfull witnesses in matters of Faith are onely they whose testimony hath beene confirmed by miracles as hath beene demonstrated in the 2. Chap. Therefore we must prove also miracles if we intend to prove that the Roman Church is the whole Catholick and that it proposeth sufficiently its Doctrine as Divine Revelation Now to the proofe of the assertion 3 That Doctrine is sufficiently proposed as Divine Revelation which is delivered to us as such by the testimony of lawfull witnesses confirmed by miracles But the Doctrine of the Church of Rome is delivered to us as Divine Revelation by the testimony of lawfull witnesses and their testimony is confirmed by miracles Therefore it s sufficiently proposed as Divine Revelation and by consequence the Church of Rome is the true Catholick 4 If the Minor or second proposition be proved my intent is concluded That the Roman Church hath lawfull witnesses of its Doctrine to be Divine Revelation hath this difficulty A lawfull witnesse requires not onely knowledge of what he testifieth but also honesty both qualities are necessary an honest foole being as little to be credited as a knowing knave But how can the Roman Church now extant in the 17. age of Christianity have lawfull witnesses of the Doctrine and sense of Scripture which Christ and the Apostles taught the world so long since Though honesty can not be denyed to many Roman Catholicks yet the knowledge what the Apostles taught which is required for a lawfull witnesse of the true Church can not be granted to any seeing none is now living on earth that conversed with the Apostles This argument doth equally impugne all Churches yet none can answer it but we Roman Catholicks 5 It concernes all the world even our very adversaries to grant that the Roman Catholicks have lawfull witnesses with sufficient knowledge of what Religion and sense of Scripture was taught by the Apostles in the primitive Church nay which is more that no other Church pretending to Reformation can have sufficient knowledge required for lawfull witnesses of the true Religion sense of Scripture and Doctrine of the primitive Church If the Roman Church hath not sufficient knowledge for lawfull witnesses of Christ and the Apostles Doctrine no hereditary King or Prince can have a title or right to his crowne because the right descended to them by inheritance doth depend upon a lawfull testimony averring that they are the true heires of such a man who reigned perhaps three or four hundred yeares ago Henry the IV. of France proved himselfe by lawfull witnesses to be the heire of Saint Lewis But who couldbe a lawfull witnesse that Henry the Great descended of Saint Lewis All France did give a lawfull testimony of it because it was a constant tradition in the whole Kingdome descended from Saint Lewis his time to this present
to judge that God will do so extraordinary a favour to Protestants who are out of the Church and have not the helpe of the true Sacraments as to give them an act of contrition in the last houre 4 I have often said that I can not but admire to see any person of solid judgement and good understanding a Protestant The more I consider the grounds beginning and progresse of these new Religions the more I am confirmed in my admiration What matter can then be of greater wonder then to see wise men preferre the testimony of some few wanton and dissolute Priests and Friars to the testimony of the grave and ancient Fathers of the Catholick Roman Church Let the Councell of Lateran be confronted with Cranmer and the six or seven Ministers who invented the English Church and with the Parliament that confirmed it Let both the Councells of Lateran and that of Trent be compared with the petty Assemblies of Ministers in the English Protestant Church or in the Kirke of Scotland Dort or any other pretending Reformation Shall a few Ministers know better the Catholick tradition the sense of Scripture and Fathers then the Councell of Lateran wherein sate two Patriarchs and the Pope 70. Metropolitans 400. Bishops 800 Conventuall Priors all learned men out of the most parts of Christendome Shall one Apostate Paulo Dolce his word be taken concerning the Councell of Trent and preferred to the testimony of all the Catholick Churches which hath accepted all its Decrees in matters of Faith I speake not of other Councells nor of the cleare testimonies of Fathers which are obvious to all persons who understand Latin in Bellarmine Coccius and other Authors 5 Most of all I admire to see any person stick to the Common prayer Booke or to that Church as if it were the true Catholick How is it possible that God should permit the publick exercise of Catholick Religion and Church to be brought so low and to so narrow a compasse as we see the Common prayer If Antichrist reigne were come or the Turke had possessed the whole world then it might be thought that the Church fled to the wildernesse and became almost invisible but when through the mercy of God we see Christianity flourish not onely in Europe but in all other parts of the world how is it credible that God should permit the true and pure exercise of Catholick Religion to be invisible 6 Therefore I judge it a duty of conscience and charity to warne all Protestants that they may be pleased to reflect upon the Authors and first Apostles of their Reformation Is it credible that God would make choice of such wicked persons as they were knowne to be to reform his Church Suppose there were some abuses in the Court of Rome must therefore the Popes authority be tread under foot Must Kings loose their Crownes because some Courtiours are lewd If Luther had beene appointed to preach for Indulgences he had never writ against them the Pope or the Church of Rome If Henry the VIII had prevailed with the Pope to declare null his mariage with Queene Catharine of Spaine he had never made himselfe spirituall Head of the Church of England If Calvin had obtained the Bishoprick of Geneva Puritans had never beene so fierce against Episcopacy If Queene Elizabeth had not beene declared illegitimate by the Doctrine and Church of Rome the Common prayer and Reformation had ended with Edward the VI. who begunne it Doth not the world see that these pretended Reformations of Religion were onely pretexts for Princes to obtaine their politick ends and for dissolute and incontinent Clergy to gaine authority whereby their liberty and vices might not onely be excused but applauded by the ignorant and common people Let Protestants therefore examine how things past because ignorance in so important a matter can not be warranted by relying upon other mens judgements seeing they may so easily informe their owne 7 Neither ought they to sooth themselves with that no lesse usuall then groundlesse excuse Agree you Clergy men amongst your selves and we will agree submit our judgements c. But untill then we are not obliged seeing our Ministers are learned and honest men We Catholicks declare to all the world and the same must Protestant do that the Church out of which there is no salvation may be so easily discerned from all false Sects by signes so visible and obvious to all persons though illiterate that to trust to Ministers testimony in so important a matter is damnable negligence especially seeing we charge them of not believing Clergy men nor ordained As for the Protestant Ministers being learned and honest men its certaine that either we or they want learning or honesty and that either they or we impose upon the people manifest falshoods which may easily be discovered by any person that desires to be saved Let our Doctrines and Tenets be examined and it will clearly appeare that the Protestant Faith doth tend to liberty of believing and doing what every man thinkes convenient which is an infallible marke of Heresie and damnation CHAP. XIV VVhether Protestancy be manifestly against reason and common sense and how may the most learned Protestants be convinced in disputes of Religion by every illiterate Roman Catholick SECT I. 1 THe true Christian and Catholick Religion is so evidently credible that all others must necessarily be evidently incredible It is not in Religion as in cases of morall Divinity Two contrary opinions in morall matters may be prudently followed each of them as probable because there are learned men that patronize both If there were two or more Gods and they could differ in opinion or judgement men might accommodate themselves to which they pleased But seeing there is but one God there must be but one Faith and one Religion This one Faith is more then any probable opinion it is an undoubted and prudent assent of the understanding to whatsoever is sufficiently proposed as Divine Revelation An undoubted and prudent assent doth suppose there can be no prudent probability in any other contrary Faith or Church for if once we grant that two Religions are probable or prudently credible we have none at all because we reserve a doubt of both and are indifferent for any True Faith admits no doubts or indifferencies Supposing this no prudent Protestant can take ill that which I intend to prove in this Chap. unlesse he will have Catholicks acknowledge that they have one true Faith or Christian Religion 2 If it be proved that Protestancy is contrary to reason it s evidently demonstrated to be a false Religion because whatsoever is against reason can not be true The true Christian Faith doth perfect the understanding and not deceive that faculty of man whereby he is distinguished from brute beasts God is the Author both of Reason and Religion one must be subordinate to the other its true Faith is above Reason but never stands in opposition with it