11.26 As often as you shal eate this Bread and drink the Chalice you shal shew the death of our Lord vntil he come to wit at the day of Iudgement Answerably to these Scriptures Protestants teach concerning Preachers that (33) Fulk in his Answ to Counterf Cath. p. 100. The truth can not be continued in the world but by their Ministrie that therefore (34) Propositions disputed in Gen. p. 845. The Ministerie is an essential Mark of the true Church M. Deering (35) Vpon the Epist to the Heb. c. 3. lect 15. 16. teacheth that Saluation springeth in preaching of the Ghospel and is shut vp againe with ceasing of it And that Take away preaching you take away Faith for which he citeth manie Scriptures D. Fulk (36) Answ to a Counter Cath. p. 11. 92. affirmeth that the Churches Pastours shal alwayes resist al false opinions with open reprehension And M. Deering (37) VpoÌ„ the Hebr. in c. 2 lect 10. is of opinion that The Religion being of God no feare of man shal keep them back because that were to kâ—ep the honour of God for corners and solitarie places For as the (38) Rom. 10.10 Apostle prescribeth with the hart we beleeue vnto Iustice but with the mouth Confession is made to Saluation (39) SermoÌ„s vpon the Canticles Englished p 79. 80. Beza confesseth that there must be Pastours and Doctours to the end of the world for the administration of the Word and Sacraments And (40) See the Survay of the Holy preteÌ„ded c p. 440. 441. The Ministrie of the Word and Sacraments are in absolute degree of Necessitie to Saluation D. Whitaker (41) Cont. Duraeum l 3 p. 260. assureth vs that they are Essential Notes of the Church (42) Ibid. p. 249. which being present they do constitute a Church and being absent do subuert it And D. Willet (43) Synopsis p. 71. auoucheth that These Markes can not be absent from the Church and it is no longer a true Church then it hath these Markes for 44 Ib. p. 69 as he further saith The only absence of them do make a nullitie of the Church Lobechius (45) Disput Theo p. 213. speaking of these Markes and of the Church affirmeth that They are coupled togeather with so streight and indissâ—luble a knot that in the assemblies of those who are called the one can not be without the other and the one denyed the other of necessitie is to be denyed Hiperius (46) Meth. Th p. â—48 557. teacheth that These Notes are needful to distinguish the true Church from the false that men careful of their Saluation may know where the true Church is and to which Companie chiefly they ought to adioyne themselues By the premisses now it is euident aswel by the sacred Scriptures as by the manifest Confessions of Protestant Writers that the Church of Christ must euer haue in her Ecclesiastical Pastours and Preachers which must be lawfully sent and ordinarily called by the Church and which must preach the true Word and Faith and administer the holie Sacraments The only poynt therefore resting to be examined is whether the Roman or Protestant Church hath euer had in al Ages the forsayd Pastours lawfully called and succeeding one another truly preaching the holie Word and administring the Sacraments And first concerning the Protestant Church Al personal Succession of Pastours hath been so interrupted or rather altogeather wantâ—ng that in steed of anie Successiâ—n of Pastours to be named it is at large confessed before (47) Before l. 3. c. 1. that their Church hath been wholy Inuisible and vnknowne for manie hundred of yeares togeather Yea Caluin [48) In Lascicius de Russor c. Râ—lig p. â—3 And see Caluin Inst l 4. c 3. sec 4. Danaeus Isagog part 4. p. 36. plainly confesseth that Through the Tyrannie of the Pâ—pe the true Succession of ordination was broken off in the Protestant Church And agayne (49) Tract Th. p. 374. The Church of God for some Ages was so torne and pulled a-sunder that she was destitute of true Protestant Pastours (50) Ep. Theol. ep 5. Beza acknowledgeth that among them ordinarie vocation was no where extant And (51) Disputationes Theol. p. 719 Sadel relateth that sundrie Protestants who acknowledge the doctrine which their Church doth embrace to be true and grounded vpon the expresse word of God do yet affirme the Ministers with them to be destitute of lawful calling as not hauing a continued visible Succession from the Apostles times which they do attribute only to the Papists In like sort saith Bullinger (52) Vpon the Apocalyps ser 145 fol. 137. Sâ—e Libauius in his Gretzerus triumph p. 102. and knewstubs in Confut. of the principal pointes of Popery p. 38 Albeit we can not at this day referre our calling to the Pope and Bishops which brag of lawful Succession yet for so much as we can proue that our Doctrine is Christs Doctrine and therefore that our Ministerie is lawful we care not a whit c. So confessedly is the Protestant Church destitute of lawful Calling And to touch breefly the Calling and Succession of our English Ministerie wheras D. Barlow in his Sermon before the King at Hampton Court publickly taught that The Apostles reserued Ordination to themselues and conueyed it to Bishops c. Neither would the Church of Christ succeeding admit anie other but Bishops to that busines as not iustifyable for the Presbiters either by reason example or Scripture c. Not one Example sayth he is to be showed through the whole Storie Ecclesiastical that anie besides a Bishop did it if some one of the inferior rank presumed to do it his act was reuersed for vnlawful It is so certaine that our Catholick Bishops after the death of Queen Marie were so far from Consecrating those other which were for such named by Q. Elizabeâ—h at her entrie to the Crowne and from whom sithence al the Protestant Clergie of England deriueth itself that the (53) p 177. Protestant Writer of The Assertion for true Christian Church-Policie auoucheth that It cannot be proued that anie Lord Spiritual was so much as present in Parlament or gaue anie assent to the Enacting of Statutes made Anno primo Elizabethae Yea in supply therof there was a Statute made An. 8. Eliz. c. 1 the Title therof being An Act declaring the manner of making and Consecrating Archbishops of this Realme to be good And towards the end of that Statute it is enacted that Al Acts done by anie Person about anie Consecration c. by vertue of the Queens Maiesties Letters Patents shal be good c. And that al Persons that haue been or shal be Consecrated Archbishops c. shal be Archbishops c. But the then Parlament or her late Highnes Letters Patents could not enable the first Protestant Bishops to be true Bishops because that function is not Ciuil but Spiritual and ex
iure diuino Yea M. Mason himself acknowledgeth and that from M. Fox that amongst (54) Consecration of the Bishops in England p. 264 And see Fox Act. Mon. Vol. 2. p. 1295. The Articles sent by Queen Marie to Bishop Bonner one was this Item Touching such persons as were heretofore promoted to anie Orders after the new sort and fashion of Orders Considering they were not ordered in verie deed the Bishop of the Diocesse finding otherwise sufficiencie and abilitie in these men may supply that thing which wanted in them before and then according to his discretion admit them to Minister Here though M. Mason would gladly inforce a different Glosse yet the words are most plaine that Queen Marie and the Church in her time censured such as were promoted to anie Orders after the new sort and fashion of Protestant Orders in K Edwards time were not ordered in verie deed So that stil it deserueth further search whence our present English Clergie as also other forraine Ministers haue obtayned true power and authoritie to preach administer Sacraments And as for Forainers as the Ministers in Germanie Denmark Holland the rest they are so cleerely and confessedly destitute of al true Ordination that M. Mason acknowledgeth that (55) Consec of Engl. Bish. Ep. Dedic wheras other Reformed Churches were constrained by necessitie to admit extraordinarie Fathers that is to receaue ordination from Presbiters or Ministers rather then to suffer the fabrick of the Lord Iesus to be dissolued The Church of England had alwayes Bishops to conferre Sacred Orders according to the ordinarie and most warrantable Custome of the Church of Christ So that no Protestant Ministers in the world haue anie ordinarie Calling or Ordination by Bishops but only the Ministers of England who yet beg and deriue al that which they haue from their imagined Antichrist himself as now shal be shewed Some Protestants therfore teach that they haue their Calling Ordination from the Church of Rome so D. Bridges (56) Defence of the GouernmeÌ„t p. 1276. speaking of our Catholick Bishops and their Calling vrgeth thus in our behalf If our Protestant Brethren wil make them but meer Lay-men then are neither they nor we anie Ministers at al but meer Lay-men also for who ordayned vs Ministers but such Ministers as were either themselues of their Ministerie or at least were made Ministers of those Ministers Except they wil say the people can make Ministers c. yea some (57) SileÌ„ced Ministers supplication of Anno 1609. p. 9. 10. 17. Puritans do reproue their Protestant Brethren for deriuing their Ministerie from the Church of Rome But (58) Cont. Dur. l. 9. p. 820. D. Whitaker exemplifyeth the same saying Luther was a Priest and Doctour according to your Rite or ordination c. And it is manifest that so also was Zuinglius Bucer Oecolampadius and innumerable others c. M. Parkins (59) Vol. 1. p. 737. speaking of the Calling of the first Preachers of the Protestant Ghospel argueth thus If they had no Calling neither haue we that are their followers But They had their Callings c. from the Romish Church itself for they were either Priests or Schoole-Doctours as in England Wiccliffe in Germanie Luther in Bohemia Iohn Husse and Hierom of Prage at Basil Oecolampadius in Italie Peter Martyr others And therefore these with manie others were ordayned either in Popish Churches or in Schooles c. And agayne We say the first restorers of the Ghospel in our times had their first Callings of them to wit the Papists M. Mason discoursing at large of this verie poynt of Ordination and in particular of the Ordination of our English Protestant Clergie confesseth first that the Roman Church hath euer had true power of Ordination (60) Consecration of the Bishops of England Ep. Dedic Such was the goodnes of God saith he that euen in the darknes of Poperie as Baptisme so the Ministerial function c. was wonderfully preserued for the Church of Rome by Gods special prouidence in her ordination of Priests retayned such Euangelical words as in their true and natiue sense include a Ghostlie Ministerial power to forgiue sinnes c. Thus the Church of Rome gaue power to her Priests to teach the truth c. which (61) Ibid. p. 262. Power saith he is a Rose which is found in the Romish wildernes but the plants therof were deriued from the garden of God It is a Riuer which runneth in Aegipt but the fountaine and Spring of it is in Paradise It is a Beame which is seen in Babilon but the original of it is from the Sphere of the Heauen Wherefore when your Priests returne to vs our Church paring away their Pollutions suffereth them to exercise their Ministerial function according to the true meaning of Christs word And agayne (62) Ibid. p. 262. we being content with their calling and commission of their function already committed vnto them do not reiterate their ordination and Imposition of hands And as Catholick Priâ—sts Apostated only through vice are here allowed for sufficient Ministers without al new ordination from anie Protestant SuperinteÌ„dent so doth M. Mason most seriously labour throughout his whole Booke to proue the ordination of the Protestant English Clergie to haue been certainly deriued from our Catholick Roman Church To which end acknowledging that (63) Ibid. p. 64. 65. 66. The whole Clergie of England at this day deriueth their Consecration from Cranmer he painfully laboureth to proue that Cranmer was appoynted by Pope Clement to be Archbishop of Canterburie and that he was Consecrated by three Catholick Bishops which Consecration was performed with wonted Ceremonies according to the vsual forme of the Romane Church which saith he continued al the dayes of King Henrie the Eighth euen when the Pope was banished yea he expresly concludeth his book thus (64) p. 267. Thus it appeareth that although we receaued our Orders from such as were Popish Priests yet our Calling is lawful So cleer it is that M. Mason would be glad to wring his Ministers Ordering from our Roman Church And the like is acknowledged taught by (è) Cath. Trad. p. 183. Buca loc com p. 509. Bernard in his Diswasion from Brownisme p. 144. Whyte in his way to the Church p. 404. Fotherby his Answer annexed to his 4. Sermons p. 81. Sutcliffe against D. Kellison p. 5. Sarauia of diuers Degrees of Ministers p. 9. sundrie other Protestants But here I can not but obserue by the way how strange it is that Protestants should thus much delight and please themselues in their Ordination from Cranmer a man so vicious inconstant and treacherous both to God and man Doth not D Godwin relate that (65) In Cranmsr p. 123. Being yet verie young he â—aryed and so lost his fellowship in Iesus Colledge in Cambridge Doth not Fox report that being Archbishop in his returne from Rome he brought with him a Dutch
40) Retractiue from Romish Religion p. 66. Hieroms Age this Superstition of Candles lighted in the day-time began to grow vpon the Church Yea the 41) Cent. 4. col 454. Centurists acknowledge that Waxe candles were accustomed to be carryed at Burials And that Priests did carry before the Corse Lamps and wax-candles 42) Cent. 4. col 453. And that Funeral-rites and Ceremonies in this Age of Constantin Superstition say they increasing were heaped vp partly from Heathenisme partly from Iudaisme Seauenthly as for the vse of Images in Churches in the time of the Primitiue Church the same is prooued at large in the Chapter (a) See before l. 2. c. 14. of Images Eightly D. Raynolds 43) In his Conference with M. Har. p. 552. coÌ„fesseth that Altars Sacrifice are linked by nature in Relation and mutual dependance one of another Wherupon it doth euidently follow that Aultars being vsed in Churches in the ancientest times true external Sacrifice was likewise vsed which Sacrifice to haue been the Sacrifice of the Masse I haue largely proued in the (b) See before l. 2. c. 9. Chapter of Masse Now because true and proper Sacrifice can not be offred at the Altar but by a Priest therfore in the Primitiue Church there were true Priests whose Ordination was euer by a Bishop and not by the Laïtie The 44) Cent. 4. col 435. Centurists confesse that The Constitutions of the Laodicen Councel forbad Ordinations by the iudgement of the multitude And that They were desired of that Bishop who had authoritie to giue Orders as appeareth say they by the Fourth Epistle of Basil to Gregorie and the Thirtith to the Cesareans And else-where 45) Cent. 4. col 489. they say expresly that The ordination of Ministers was proper to the Bishop And as for the word Priest so hateful now to our Protestant Clergie it was so vsual in the Primitiue Church as that 46) In his Defence p. 411. D. Whiteguift saith This name Priest is vsually applyed to the Minister of the Ghospel in al Histories Fathers and Writers of Antiquitie The like is acknowleged by 47) L. 9. cont Dur. p. 813. D. Whitaker who only answereth that the Fathers vsed the word Sacerdos Priest not properly but by abuse of speech an answere directly contrarie to the expresse words of S. Austin himself De Ciuit. Dei l. 20. c. 10. But D. Fulk 48) Against Rhem. Test in Act. 14. see 4. f. 210. Willet in his Synop. Controu 13. p. 482. and D. Willet do both of them reproue the Fathers for their vsing the word Priest properly Yea the Priests of the Primitiue Church were as ours stil are specially anoynted in so much as S. Cyprian in his Sermon de Chrismate mentioning the same is therefore reproued by 49) Exam. part 2. p. 247. Chemnitius They had also their Crownes shauen for M. Brightman 50) Apoc. in c. 9. p. 249. confesseth that the Fathers vsed to entreate Priests by their Tonsure or shauing as now we may see in the Epistles of Hierome and Augustin And 51) Medulla Patrum p. 484. Schultetus affirmeth that Dyonisius the Areopagite in his book of Ecclesiastical Hierarchie writeth manie things of Temples Altars Sacred-places the Quier Consecration of Moâ—ks the Tonsure and shauing of heads Ninthly the Priests vsed also consecrated vestments and vessels for the celebration of Masse and other offices of the Church The 52) Cent. 4 col 504. Centurists affirme that S. Athanasius mentioneth Ecclesiastical vestments and ornaments and other things necessarie for the Church 53) De Sacramentis p. 44. Zepperus auoucheth that The Ministers or Priests vsed in the celebration of this Mysterie of the Eucharist a peculiar kind of apparel which they tearmed holie neither was it lawful for Priests to weare them but in the celebration of the Eucharist yea they were not to be touched by anie persons but such as were sacred which inuention the first Decretal Epistle of Pope Stephen referreth to himself 54) Of the Crosse part 1. sec 36. p. 52. And see Hut 2 in his 2. part of the Answ and p. 194. 195. 196. Whiteguift in his Def. p. 268. 270. M. Parker granteth in general The Fathers wil haue the Garments to be Religious that are vsed in the Church in proofe wherof he citeth in the Margent Origen and Hierome And to descend to particulars wheras Theodoret l. 2. c. 27. reporteth that Constantin gaue to the Bishop of Hierusalem a Cope or pretious garment wrought with gold to administer Baptisme the same is confessed by 55) In his Persuasion to vniformity c. 5. p. 19. whyteg in his Def. p. 269. M. Sparke and D. Whiteguift in so much as 56) Ibid. p. 268. M. Carthwright testifyeth Theodoret maketh mention of a golden Cope The Centurists 57) Cent. 4. col 876. confesse that in the Fourth Age the Albe was vsed and 58) In his Persuasion to vniform c. 5. p. 19. M. Spark alleageth sundrie ancient Fathers al mentioning the Albe D. Raynolds 59) In his Confer c. 8. diuis 4. acknowledgeth that in the Liturgies of S. Basil S. Chrysostome are mentioned the Amice the Girdle the Chisible the Fanel The Centurists 60) Cenâ— 4. col 835. likewise confesse that as then was vsed the Stole And D. Whiteguift 61) In his Def. p. 269. 270. admitteth the Dalmatica to be vsed in S. Cyprians time alleageth Peter Martyr to be of the same mind who 62) In his Epistles annexed to his com plac in Engl. p. 119. And Whiteg in his Def. p. 264. 268. likewise relateth that as then was vsed the Bishops Pontifical Plate or Miter and 63) Ibid. p. 269. D. Whiteguift auoucheth the same to haue been worne by S. Cyprian The Centurists 64) Cent. 4. col 835. And Osian cent 4. p. 391. likewise report that in the Fourth Age were vsed by Priests in Churches Holie vessels which Subdeacons and Lay persons might not touch And 65) Cent. 4. col 490. they mention the then Careful committing of the holie Chalice to the Priests Custodie D. Sutilisse 66) De Mâ—ssa Papist ca. l. 5. c. 7. f. 96. sayth We do not deny the Church as Chrysostome sayth hom 4. in Math. and de S. Babila to haue had holie vessels and the same not to be touched by lay-men Yea the Centurists 67) Cent. 4. col 504. And see col 409. And Chem. Exam. part p. 26. affirme that Theodoret l. 3. c. 12. sheweth that the Church of Antioch had manie pretious vessels which Constantin and Constantius gaue to it And they mention 68) Cent. 4. col 873. 874. likewise the yet controuerted rites of Chalice Paten Cruet ful of water Towel Wax-candle for Church lights book of Exorcismes c. Tenthly the Priests thus furnished with sacred vestments and vessels not only offred Sacrifice but likewise obserued Canonical Houres of
woman (67) Act. Mon. p 1037 to whom saith Fox it is supposed he was maryed yet certaine it is that no shew therof was made in K. Henries time when he carryed her vp and downe in a trunck marying her afterwards in K. Edwards time He was also most treacherous to his Prince for albeit he had been so greatly exalted by K. Henrie and by him appoynted one of the Executours of his Wil yet presently after his death he assented to the breaking thereof And after K. Edwards death endeauoured al he could to the aduancing of Q. Iane and vtter excluding from the Crowne of K. Henries lawful daughter Queene Marie To whose dis-inheriting he first subscribed as also to that rebellious letter which he and his complices sent to Queen Marie and which to his euerlasting infamie and confusion (68) Act. Mon. p. 1299 Fox himself hath recorded And although from his cradle he was a Roman Catholick vntil his being Archbishop which honour he receaued from the Pope taking the vsual oath of fidelitie vnto him Yet in the next yeare after K. Henrie by Parlament procuring himself to be tearmed Head of the Church he also forsook the Pope and forswore himself in that poynt agreing yet as also the King in al other with him and both by words and deeds persecuting Protestants as is euident in the death of Lambert and others written by M. Fox Yea in K. Edwards time as Stow (69) Chron. p. 594. reporteth The French King being deceased c. also the Church of S. Paul in London being hanged with black and a sumptuous Herse set vp in the Quire a Dirge was there song and on the next morrow the Archbishop of Canterburie Cranmer assisted of 8. Bishops al in rich Miters and other their Pontificals did sing a Masse of Requiem c. yet after this he fel to Lutheranisme publishing a Catechisme wherin with Luther he taught the Real Presence which not long after impugning he turned with the Duke of Somerset to Zuinglianisme setting forth another Catechisme against the Real Presence And yet after al this vnder (70) Act. Mon p. 1710 Q. Marie he recanted for hope of life al his Protestantisme both by tongue pen professed the Roman Catholick Faith But perceiuing that he must dye choosing rather to dye in the opinion of vulgar Protestants a Martyr then in the true iudgement both of ProtestaÌ„ts and Catholicks as a Malefactor and Traytour he finally dyed in Zuinglianisme being both condemned for Heresy against God and for Rebellion against his Prince as M. Fox (71) Act. Mon p. 1698 confesseth So infamous was the life and death of the first Protestant Bishop that euer England had and from whom al our English Ecclesiastical frie do deriue their Ordination and other good conditions not vnlike vnto his But to returne from whence we haue digressed al this begging by M. Mason and the rest forenamed of Protestant Orders from the Church of Rome is directly contradicted and loathed by others of their Brethren as thinking the Bishop of Rome to be Antichrist himself and the Roman Church to be the whore of Babylon M. Powel (72) De Antich p. 6. 310. tearmeth our Catholick Orders the Mark of the Beast D. Downham (73) Of Antichrist l. 2. p. 108. spareth not to say I say their Priesthood is Antichristian The Diuines of Geneua (74) Propositions Disputed c. p. 245. affirme that There is in Babylon thereby meaning the Roman Church no holie Order or Ministrie indeed no lawful Calling but a meer vsurpation M. Penrie writing against the Protestant Calling disputeth thus From whence haue they their calling had they it not from those which sit in the Chaire of Antichrist (75) Vpon the 122. Ps fol. D. 8. yea how manie are in al Christendome c. but their ordination haue come from Popish Prelacie within three or foure generations at the most c. Can an vnlawful calling bring forth a lawful though it descend from one to another a hundred or thousand times Therefore vnles they can approue the lawfulnes of their calling vnder some other title then that which they now haue by the Clergie it wil fal out there shal hardly be found a Minister duly called in al the world c. In like sort D. Fulk (76) Answ to a Counterf Cath. p. 50. answereth to vs Catholicks you are highly deceaued if you think we esteeme your offices of Bishops Priests and Deacons anie better then Lay-men and you presume to much to think that we receiue your ordering to be lawful And agayne (77) Retentiue p. 67. with al our hart we defy abhorre detest and spit at your stinking greasie Antichristian Orders c. In like modest sort saith Beza (78) Apud Sarauiam in Defens Tract c. p. 56. Popish Orders are nothing els then the impurest buying and selling of the Roman Stewes And (79) Consideration of the Papistes Reasons p. 71. M. Gabriel Powel auoucheth that The Popish ordination is nothing els but mere prophanation c. there is no true Ecclesiastical Vocation in the Papacie We iudge no otherwise saith D. Whitaker (80) Cont. Dur p 635. of your Priests then of Christs Aduersaries and enemies of his Priesthood (81) Ibid. p. 662. You haue neither lawful Bishops nor Priests nor Deacons And according to D. Sutcliffe 82) Answ to Eyâ—â—pt p. 82 The Pope himself is neither true Bishop nor Priest for he was ordayned Priest but to offer Sacrifice and to say Masse for the quick and the Dead But this Ordination sayth he doth not make a Priest nor had true Priests and Elders euer anie such Ordination Therefore (83 Ib p. 87 And see his Chaâ—leng p. 35 The Romish Church is not the true Church hauing no Bishops nor Priests at al but only in name Now if the Protestant Clergie wil not deriue their Vocation and Ordination from the Church of Rome as the former Protestants do refuse and in reason they cannot supposing their absurd Doctrine of the Pope being Antichrist for what more ridiculous then that Christs Ministers should receaue their spiritual power and Commission from Antichrist Then stil we are to demand from whence the Protestant Clergie hath their Calling and Commission seing according to the former Scriptures the true Churches Past ours must be lawfully called sent and ordayned In these so extreme straytes some Protestants acknowledge and defend their Ordination and calling to be from the Laitie itself as from the temporal Magistrate and their hearers followers (84) His two Letters conâ—erning the Earl of Lauale Eng. fol. c. 3. D. Tilanus teacheth that Farel had his sending of the people sf Geneua who had right had authoritie saith he to institute and depose Ministers And The reformed Churches and their calling partly from God and partly from the people as by lawful instruments M Dilingam (85) p. 78. writing against M. Hil
light vpon anie tooth of this dead Lion they tread vpon it with contempt Neuer considering that as out of the (119) Iudg. 14 14. Strong came sweetnes so in those Sentences of Luther which they most traduce there is commonly inclosed the most Sacred truth ful of as diuine comfort as man's hart can ruminate vpon But if the former and innumerable such like Sentences of the Protestants Lyon Luther be so comfortable to D. Morton sure I am that they are odious and loathsome to chast and Christian eares and for such are taxed by sundrie (120] See Ezecanomiê° de corruptis moribus Wygandus de bonis malis Germ. Hospin â—oÌ„c discord 99. Couel Dâ—f of Hook p. 101. Saying Tom. 2. in Resp ad Conf. Luth. f. 458. sundrie lothers of his owne brood euen Protestant Writers who rested much scandalized thereby And therefore M. Morton patronizing so vnpardonable errours may giue ouer iust suspicion of his owne guilt in the like But to returne from the Premisses therefore it euidently followeth our Protestant Clergie to be wholy destitute of al lawful Calling seing it is already proued euen by their owne confessions that their Succession hath been interrupted and that they haue not ordinarie Calling and therefore do fly to extraordinarie which also they are deuoyd of through their confessed want of Miracles and truth of Doctrine or freedome from errour which doth euer certainly accompany the same Now the sacred Scriptures concerning the Churches Pastours Calling preaching and administration of Sacraments not being fulfilled and performed in the Protestant Church It only remayneth to be examined whether the same are verifyed and accomplished in the Catholick Roman Church And first the same is confirmed by ad such Arguments as (121) Before 4. 1. c. 23. 4. heretofore we haue vsed in prooff of the Roman Churches Euer-visibilitie which doth euer suppose the like coÌ„tinuance of Ecclesiastical Pastours with administration of Word and Sacraments Secondly the same is euidently supposed and confessed by al such Protestants as (122) See Before l. 3. c. 4. formerly acknowledged deriued their Succession and Ordination from the Church of Rome for if the Roman Pastours succession Ordination were not good or interrupted then were it fruitles and absurd for the Protestants Clergie to deriue their owne succession Ordination from them Thirdly the Centurie writers of Magdeburg in the tenth Chapter of euerie seueral Centurie do make special mention of the Bishops and Doctours of the Roman Church who liued ahd flourished in euerie Age. Fourthly (123) De rebus grauiss contr Disp p. 719. M. Sadel plainly confesseth sundrie ProtestaÌ„ts not only to affirme the Ministers with them to be destitute of lawful Calling seing they haue not a perpetual visible Succession from the Apostles to these times but also they attribute this only to the Papists whom therefore in this question they preferre before vs. In like direct sort D. Fulk (124) Answ to a Count. Cath p. 27. And in his Reioynder to Bristow p. 343. acknowledgeth vnto vs saying You can name the notable persons in al Ages in their government and Ministrie and especially the Succession of the Popes you can rehearse in order vpon your fingars M. Mason granteth that (125) Cons of the Engl. Bish. p. 52. The Church of Rome c. was planted by two so great Apostles Peter and Paul And that (126) Ibid. p. 41. The Priesthood which the Apostles conferred c. being conueyed to Posteritie successiuely by Ordination is found at this day in some sort in the Church of Rome in regard wherof you may be said to succeed the Apostles c. So certaine it is that the Bishops of the Roman Church haue euer successiuely continued in al Ages euen from Christs time to this and that true Ordination hath been euer in the sayd Church since the Apostles The poore Protestant Familie being meerly Laical as being confessedly destitute of al Calling either ordinarie or extraordinarie The fourth Proof from sacred Scriptures in Confirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Conuersion of Heathen Kings and Nations to the Faith of Chtist CHAPTER IIII. IT is most cleerly taught vs by the sacred Scriptures that the Church of Christ shal conuert manie Heathen Kings Countries to the Faith of Christ The Prophet Esay (1) Esa 60.16 speaking of the Church of Christians saith Thou shalt suck the milk of the Gentils and the breasts of Kings And (2) Esa 60.11 Their Kings shal minister to thee and thy gates shal be continually open neither day nor night shal they be shut that men may bring to thee the riches of the Gentils And that their Kings may be brought c. (3) Esa 49.23 Kings shal be thy nursing Fathers and Queens thy Mothers vpon which place in the Annotations of the English Bible of Anno 1576. it is sayd The meaning is that Kings shal be conuerted to the Ghospel and bestow their power and authoritie for preseruation of the Church Yea God almightie hath further promised that (4) Esa 2 2 Al nations shal flow vnto it And that (5) Psal 2.8 He wil giue the Heathen for thy inheritance and the end of the earth for thy possession Yea it was sayd to (6) Apoc. 10.11 S. Iohn and in him to other Pastours Thou must prophecy againe vnto Nations peoples tongues and manie kings (7) Es 62 2. As also The Gentils shal see thy Iustice and al Kings thy glorie and thou shalt be called by a new name which the mouth of our Lord shal name (8) Ps 102.15 Then the Heathen shal feare the name of our Lord and al the Kings of the earth his glorie These and sundrie other such places are so coÌ„uincing for the CoÌ„uersion of the Heathen Kings and Nations by the Church of Christ that Protestants themselues do endeauour to confirme the same truth from the sacred Scriptures Luther (9) Tom. 4. Wittemb in Es 60. fol. 234. writing vpon the Prophet Esay chap. 60. affirmeth that Kings shal obey and beleeue the Ghospel c. the Church is in perpetual vse of conuerting others to the Faith c. for this is signifyed by her gates being continually open And Oecolampadius (10) In Hier. c. 33. writeth vpon Hieremie that God speaketh heer of the eternitie of Christs Kingdome c. he shal haue Kings and Priests and that for euer and not a few but as the stars of heauen c. for their multitude (11) Tabulae Analyticae in Es c. 60. p. 126. Szegedine affirmeth that the Prophet Esay fortelleth that Gentils and Kings shal embrace with great desire the religion of Gods people which ought to be referred to the Kingdome of Christ where he foretelleth the coming of the Gentils and that in such number as that it should make the beholders amazed In like sort teacheth (12) Meth. Dâ—script p. 583.
of al General Councels the credible Histories of al times and places the surest records of al Lawes and Countries yea al monuments of greatest Antiquitie doe ioyntly contest and depose not only for the vniuersal and vninterrupted continuance of our Roman Faith from Christ's verie time vntil the Date heerof but also for the sympathie or rather Identitie of our same Faith with the Faith of the Apostles and their first Disciples M. Brierlie often obseruing al these our honours and helps to haue been so strangely defaced blemished and obscured by the art and malice of the foresayd Emissaries as that their true face and beautie were neuer suffred to be seen or knowne to vulgar Protestants purposely therefore forbare to presente Antiquitie only in her natiue colours and chiefly to rest contented with that stayned dye and luster which the Protestant pencil through her clearest splendour durst not denye her producing to that end the plentiful and clearest testimonies of almost al the primest Writers that euer Protestancie brought forth al of them as it were conspiring in flat charging reprouing and impugning the learnedst Doctours and most renowned Bishops of the eldest and purest times for the self-same doctrines and practise of Religion which the Roman Church at this day exerciseth Now supposing M. Brierlie his sincere and faithful demeanour heerin what could the wit of man produce more palpable and concluding for our foresayd harmonie with the Primitiue Church For if the volumes of Fathers and Councels be so clear in themselues for our Catholick Roman and Papistical Faith that the learnedst Protestans most playnly studying and perusing the same are finally enforced through euidence of their words and deeds to acknowledge and reproue the self-same Doctours and Bishops for Roman Catholicks then M. Brierlie his desire and intent of prouing our Roman Faith and Church to continue most agreable with the Primitiue Faith and Church of Christ and his Apostles is fully accomplished And that M. Brierlie his candour may more clearly shine and his so vnanswerable Arguments be the better conceaued I wil therefore dispel those thick clowdes wherewith yourself M. Morton hath most painefully laboured to couer or darken the foresayd brightnes What then must we expect from you for an Answer pertinent and direct and as proceeding from a iudicious and learned Doctour yea from a Minister of simple truth but either ingenuously to confesse with the Puritans and so manie your other Protestant Brethren cited by M. Brierlie that the sayd Primitiue and purest Church of Christ was one and the same for Faith and Religion with our now Roman or else that M. Brierlie had cunningly corrupted maymed and defaced the sayings and writings of your foresayd Brethren in his owne behalf If you seing the first to be most true would haue honestly subscribed therunto as manie more learned Protestants then yourself had formerly done then your Answer or Appeale had been altogeather needles The second you durst not auouch knowing right wel that M. Brierlie his affected nicenes and precisenes in so particularly quoting his Aduersaries Bookes Chapters Pages lines or letters would ouer strongly contest for his Religious integritie industrie and fidelitie in handling the same What then is imaginable for you M. Doctour to answer against such pregnant testimonies of other Protestant Doctours Nothing at al but what M. Brierlie foresaw and accordingly premonished and wherof yourself also taketh notice in the beginning of your Appeale would be only trifeling vnworthie extrauagant and impertinent As first when your other Brethren are plentifully produced confessing and reprouing the Fathers for teaching our Roman Faith yourself often very honestly ioyne with them acknowledging the same in our behalf and against yourself so that in this Case in steed of Answer or Appeale you make a strong Apologie for M. Brierlie and the Romish Church Doe not you yourself speaking of the Antiquitie of our Doctrine concerning the Popes Primacie confesse and say [1) Prot. Apol. p. 72. Be it granted for so it is that the Papal Primacie beginning in Boniface the Third is now 900. yeares old Doe you not arise and write of S. Gregorie that (2) Ibid. p. 31. whether or how farre c. S. Gregorie did reach his arm of Iurisdiction beyond his Dioces is a question by reason of his diuers obscure speaches and some particular practises diuersly answered of our Protestant Authours Doe you not charge S. Leo to haue been in this respect (3) Ibid p. 283 285. peremptorie and ambitious and that he was so 4 Ib. 294. 295. peremptorie that for his presumption he found in his time brotherlie checks Yea doe you not confesse that certain (5) Ib. 294. 295. Sentences of S. Cyprian may seeme at their first view vnto the vnexpert Reader to obserue in the Church of Rome both a Grace of impossibilitie of erring and also a prerogatiue of the Mother-Church of al others But though yourself may be deemed an Expert Reader yet no otherwise doe you euade those cleerest sentences then by affirming that such like speaches are but the languages of Rhetorical Amplification which commonly the Fathers vse by way of perswasion rather then by asseueration And seing you admit that the Fathers did commonly vse such speaches by way of perswasion you must needs admit that they being holie and learned men did also beleeue and affirme the same Yea you approue such (6) Ib. pag. 300. Protestant Authours as reprehēd Victor for arrogācie transgressing the bounds of his Iurisdiction in Excōmunicating the Churches of Asia Lastly wheras in proof of Antichrist's short raigne (7) Ib. pag. 143. M. Brierlie produceth M. Fox teaching that almost al the holie and learned Interpreters doe by a time times and half a time vnderstand only three yeares and a half affirming further this to be the consent and opinion of almost al the ancient Fathers Doe not you likewise subscribe therunto and say (8) Ib pag 144. Now therefore c. why might not these Fathers be sayd to haue erred in prefining the time of Antichrist c. So that you are inforced to confesse that in the Fathers opinions al our precedent Popes are cleered from being Antichrists In like sort concerning Vnwritten Traditions you grant that S. Gregorie vseth (9) Ib. pag. 62. to confirme some things by Tradition and that the ancient beleeuing Iewes (10) Ib pag. 377. pretended vnwritten Traditions As teaching Purgatorie and Prayer for the Dead you reproue S. Gregorie touching that (11) Ib pag. 19. 20. the Sacrifice of the Altar is profitable for the Soules departed And againe (12) Ib p. 498. S. Austin speaketh with a Peraduenture but S. Gregorie kindled the fire with a Credo But you somewhat passed Peraduenture when you writ that Protestant (13) Ib. pag. 495. Authours haue obserued S. Augustin to haue been the first who opened the window vnto the doctrine of Purgatorie by whose owne direction say you we
manie of the primest Protestants inhabiting seueral nations through euidence of truth thus writing and confessing against themselues and in behalf of Catholicks then to you M. Morton through want of good conscience or solid iudgement impugning the truth and your more ancient and learned Protestants Againe you being vnable directly punctually to answer the foresaid testimonies of your Brethren acknowledging and reprouing the Fathers for teaching our Catholick Faith you thinke to bleare the eye of an ignorant Reader by obiecting sundrie sayings of the sayd Fathers as making against those seueral points of Fayth for which they were formerly confessed by other Protestants and this is an ordinarie shift throughout your whole Booke But yet this doth lesse satisfye then al the rest for first if the other Protestants perusing the Fathers writings no doubt with as great diligence as yourself hath done had found such pregnant places in behalf of thēselues as you now pretend they would neuer haue written and diuulged the direct contrarie therof to the vtter ruine of their Cause and the eternal shame of themselues Besides sundrie Protestants citing seueral Texts of the Fathers as making for Papistrie and you heer alleadging seueral others as impugning the same and making for Protestancie what should this inferre but that the Doctours Bishops euen of the Primitiue Church should make mutual contradiction and warres amongst themselues in the chiefest articles of our Christian Faith and Religion yea which is more absurd it would further conclude one and the same Father S. Austin for Example to be contrarie to himself for as you do heer often alleadge him in proof of seueral particulars of your new Reformed Faith so do manie Protestants produce him as impugning the sayd particulars Now what more grosse absurditie can be vttered then that S. Austin not in one but in manie points of Faith should thus contradict himself Lastly such sayings of Fathers as you heer produce in behalf of yourself are but the knowne obiections made and answered by Cardinal Bellarmin and other Catholick Writers M. Brierlie affecting through his whole Booke to confirme and conuince his wished intent by the clearest testimonies of his Protestant Aduersaries you wil needs follow the same course producing in that behalf the plentiful sayings of our Catholick Writers but with a double difference your Conscience wel knew For first M. Brierlie alleadged such Protestants as for learning and iudgement were most renowned and respected through the whole Protestant Church such were Luther Melancthon Oecolampadius Zuinglius Chemnitius the Centurists Caluin Beza Whitguift Bale Whitaker Iewel Humfrie Reynolds Parkins and sundrie such others Secondly these Protestants he produceth as confessing the Fathers to agree with vs Catholicks not only in matters of dispute indifferencie or such as are not yet determined by the Church or General Councel but euen in the chiefest and most important Articles and Conclusions of Faith controuerted at this day between Catholicks and Protestants Now as for the Catholick Writers alledged by you M. Morton a great part of them are such as for their knowne errours haue their writings already censured and condemned by their Mother-Church such were Erasmus Valla Cassander Nilus Agrippa and such like and from these only doe you fetch such testimonies as concerne matter of some moment for as for other approued Catholick Writers as S. Thomas S. Bonauenture Lombard Scotus Bellarmine Sanders Allen Parsons and innumerable others though you cite them often yet neuer as denying anie one Article or Conclusion of Faith defined at anie time by the Church of Christ but only as dissenting amongst themselues in matters disputable and indifferent nor euer as confessing the Fathers of the Primitiue Church to make for Protestants in matters of Faith as now controuerted between them and Catholicks And as for the testimonies gathered from the former and worser rank of Catholicks they can nothing preiudice our Catholick Cause For first as before their errours and bookes are censured condemned and prohibited by that verie Church wherin they were Baptized or first became Christians to wit the Roman Secondly most of the sayd Authours finally recanted their errours submitting themselues and their writings to the Censure of the Catholick Church And lastly as it may not be denyed but that in the State Politick the Prince with his Councel may iustly punish censure and correct such men with their errours as shal seeke to innouate in anie thing against the former receaued and established lawes of the whole kingdome so much more is the like iustifyable expedient and necessarie in the Spiritual gouerment of the Church of Christ I might heer proceed to sundrie other such like euasions of yours but I feare to exceed the ordinarie bounds and therefore wil conclude assuring the iudicious and impartial Reader who shal diligently peruse your swelling and ample Appeale written in answer to a smal part of M. Brierlie his first and least Apologie that certainly he may expect in lieu of a Due and satisfyable Answer first that yourself is often enforced to confesse with M. Brierlie and against yourself that the ancient Fathers in seueral important points of Religion were Roman Catholiks Secondly that manie of the strongest allegations brought by M. Brierlie are not so much as named and much lesse answered by your dumb Spirit Thirdly that you are often compelled to impugne and disgrace your owne Protestant Brethren vtterly denying and disclaiming in that which they through the Sunne-shine and splendour of truth haue plentifully acknowledged though against themselues you so Appealing from them no lesse then from M. Brierlie himself Fourthly that finding yourself not able to euade such conuincing proofes taken only from Protestant Doctours by anie direct and pertinent Answer you fil vp your paper with such Sayings of Fathers as are either corrupted by yourself or frequently alreadie answered by Catholick Writers which is no other answer neither but that Protestants amongst themselues do alledge the Fathers yea one and the self-same Father as fighting with himself the affirming wherof is as grosse an absurditie as my self would desire my greatest Aduersarie to be plunged in And lastly that for such testimonies as you draw from Catholick Writers they are either such as are already condemned by the Catholick Church or els are not concerning anie Article or Conclusion of Faith but only matters indifferent and disputable in Schooles Now as euerie one of ordinarie iudgement may clearly see that these poore shifts patched togeather are but beggarlie rags seruing to hide or couer from the weake sight of an ignorant Reader the lothsome sores and shameful deformities of your diseased Bodie the Protestant Church so hath M. Brierlie his sincere and solid proceeding not only encouraged others to make the whole world acquainted with so precious a iewel by translating his Apologie into Latin but hath also induced me to make further vse therof for the special good as I hope of our owne Countrie To which if you also out of
controuersies whatsoeuer the absolute necessitie of finding-out the true Church seing the finding-out therof is the surest finding of the right path which leadeth directly vnto al truth In which regard sayth D. Field most iudiciously (16) Epi. dedicat of the church The consideration of vnhappie diuisions of the Christian world and the infinit distractions of mens minds not knowing in so great varietie of opinions what to think or to whom to ioyne themselues c. hath made me euer to think that there is no part of heauenlie knowledge more necessarie then that which concerneth the Church For seing the controuersies of Religion in our time are growne in number so manie and in nature so intricate that few haue time and leasure fewer strength of vnderstanding to examine them what remaineth for men desirous of satisfaction in things of such consequence but diligently to search out which amōg al the Societies of men in the world is c. that Spouse of Christ and Church of the liuing God which is the Pillar and Ground of truth that so they may imbrace her communion follow her direction and rest in her iudgement But what Catholick can speak more plainly and fully then D. Field here doth either for the necessitie of finding-out the true Church or for our following and obseruing her directions and Sentence when she is found And agreably hereunto D. White speaking of the Common-people sayth (17) Ep ded to the vvay to the true church And see ParKins on the reuel p. 344. And Iames his retraite soūded to Brovvnists fol. 1. 6. If by certain markes they could find which is the true Church there would remaine little difficultie in the rest forsomuch as therein they should find the truth in euerie controuersie The like necessitie vrgeth Caluin saying (18) Inst li. 4. c. 1. sec 4. Because I haue now determined to dispute of the visible Church let vs learne by the onlie testimonie of our Mothers praise how profitable ea how necessarie to vs is the knowledge therof seing there is no other entrance into life vnles she conceaue vs in her womb vnles she bring vs forth vnles c. vnder her custodie and protection she defend vs vntil we dye c. Adde that out of her bosome no Remission of sinnes is to be hoped for With whom agreeth M. Mornay (19) of the chur p. 1. God would saith he that the Church should be honoured for the Mother of al those of whom he vouchsafeth to be Father Seing therefore that God alloweth none for his children but those that are borne againe and brought-vp in this Church if we desire our saluation it is necessarie we know her in whose lap we haue it c. we must not seek saluation for anie but in her And againe (20) vol. 1. 3. Into the visible Church al they must retire themselues in this world that wil be gathered in the inuisible Church in the world to come M. Parkins confesseth that (21) Ib pa. pag. 308. The Arke out of which al perished figured the Church out of which al are condemned c. out of the Militant Church there are no meanes of Saluation no preaching of the Word no inuocation of Gods name no Sacraments and therefore no Saluation And speaking of such as be without that is saith he forth of the Church they are dogs enchanters whoremongers adulterers c. Now from al this I wil only briefly conclude that the Church of God is not only most ancient and in that regard greatly to be honoured reuerenced and preferred but being likewise confessedly directed by the Spirit of God in discerning iudging the truth in matters of Faith that therefore in al doubts arising in matters of Religion we may with greatest safetie and quiet to our minds repose our soules and consciences vpon the Authoritie Iudgement and Determination of the sayd Church Yea further seing it is agreed vpon by al parties that out of the true Church there is no Saluation how lamentable is the state of obstinat Hereticks who through pertinacie in errour and infidelitie are quite cut-of cast out of the Church And how much to be deplored are vncharitable Schismaticks who for false fraile and earthlie respects do foolishly diuide themselues from the Arke of Saluation liuing continually like brute beasts without al spiritual food and nutriment to their soules depriued of supernal grace conueyed by Christs holie Sacraments debarred from the sweetest communion and purest conuersation with their dearest Mother and al this for no other respect or pretence then that only which by S. Iohn was blamed in the Pharisees who (22) Io. 12.42 43. did not confesse Christ that they might not be cast out of the Synagogue For they loued the glorie of men more then the glorie of God THAT THE PRESENT ROMAN CHVRCH AND Religion for these last thousand yeares after Christ haue stil continued most Knowne and Vniuersal throughout the Christian world CHAPTER II. NOW for our certaine finding-out of this true Church so necessarie to Saluation we are to suppose for the present that the true Church is euer to continue euen from Christs time vntil the end of the world wherefore to make this good in our behalf and against our Aduersaries Sundrie and strongest are the proofes wherewith the Euer-during and Vniuersal continuance of the Roman Catholick Religion for these last thousand yeares might euidently be conuinced As the Catholick Coronations and State-gouernment of al Christiā Emperours Kings and Princes The fairest Records of al Lawes Canon Ciuil or Municipal The ancient Seas of Bishops and Archbishops The famous Monuments of Monasteries Hospitals Churches and the like And al Doctours and men most renowned either for Learning or Sanctitie who by their writings or workes haue testifyed to al posteritie that the Religion of their dayes and seueral Countries wherin they liued and which themselues belieued and professed was one and the same with our present Roman Yet to omit al these and much more which might be vrged to the same effect In a case so manifest and confessed I wil content my self with the plentiful acknowledgements of my greatest Aduersaries who through the clearest splendour of our Roman Religion and Piety during al the foresaid Ages are enforced euen by the rack of truth and strōgest Euidences though to the foulest disgrace of themselues and manifest confirmation condemnation of their Sect or Religion plainly to admit grant and confesse the foresayd continuance of our Roman Religion and that most Vniuersal in al Nations for these last thousand yeares For though D. Morton ouer-boldly attempteth to affirme that M. Brierly his passage (1) Prot. App. p. 574. from the dayes of Gregorie c. vnto these present times c. for the inuiolable cōtinuāce of our now Romish Faith is praecipitare nō descēdere an issue voyd of consent and a reckoning as we say without their Hoste yet what Bellarmin or other Iesuit in the
world could speake more fully for vs Catholicks in this behalf then doth the Protestāt (2) In his cōsideration of the Papists reasons pag. 105. M. Powel in these wordes I grāt that from the yeare of Christ 605. the Professant companie of Poperie hath been verie visible and perspicuous Or (3) In his discourse vpō the Catalo of Doc. ī the epi. to the Reader Simon de Voyon affirming that Anno 605. when Pope Boniface was stalled in the Papal Throne thē falsehood got the victorie c. Thē was the whole world ouerwhelmed with the dregs of Antichristian filthines abominable superstistions and Traditions of the Pope then was that vniuersal Apostacie from the Faith foretold by Paul And (4) In his exposition of the Creed v. 1. pag. 266. M. Parkins hauing spoken of the second signe of Christs comming which there he maketh to be the reuealing of Antichrist in Boniface Anno 607. alleageth thē next after as a third signe and as being distinct frō the other a general departing of most men from the Faith saying respectiuely thereof during the space of nine hundred yeares c. the Popish Heresie so do Hereticks stile it hath spred it self ouer the earth and so vniuersally in his opinion through-out al parts of Faith that sayth he next afterwards and the faithful seruants of God were but as a handful of wheat in a mountaine of chaffe (8) In his Reioynder to Bristow p. 34 which can scarce be discerned And againe (5) Ib. p. 310. we say for the space of manie hundred yeares an vniuersal Apostacie ouerspred the whole face of the earth and that our Protestant Church was not then visible to the world but lay hid vnder the chaffe of Poperie and the truth of this the Records of al Ages manifest M. Morton (6) Protest Apeale p. 71. would euade these testimonies of M. Parkins by answering that he speaketh this only of the Article of the Popes Primacie and not in regard of so large continuance and general belief of the other points of our now Catholick Faith which yet is most vntrue Parkins speaking in general of a general departing from the Faith and of an vniuersal Apostacie In so much as the Protestant church or Religion was not according to Parkins then visible to the world In which sense also (7) In his Ansvver to a counterf Cath◠p. 36. D. Fulk confesseth that The very Religiō of the Papists came in and preuailed Anno Dom. 607. c. And so vniuersally that saith he The reuelatiō of Antichrist with the Churches flight into the wildernes was Anno 607. So clear and cōfessed it is that our now Roman Religion hath cōtinued vniuersally for these last thousand yeares A truth so euidēt also that most Protestāts do from thence inferre and auouch that al the Popes of Rome for these last 1000. yeares haue been Antichrists (9) De Antichrist in praef p. 1. 2. M. Powel affirmeth that the Pope hath been Antichrist at al times since Gregorie the Great According to (10) Cont. Bellar. par 1. pag. 371. Danaeus The Kingdome of that Antichrist hath now manifestly cōtinued more then nine hundred yeares from the Emperour Phocas to the time af Luther D. whitaker (11) De Eccles cōt Bellar p. 144. affirmeth Boniface the Third who liued Anno 607 and al his successours to haue been Antichrists (12) In his Answ to a counterf catho pa. 27. and in his confut of Purgatory pa. 344 and ParKins v. 1. pag. 266. D. Fulk auoucheth that the Popes from Boniface the Third were blaspemous Hereticks and Antichrists (13) In his treatise of Antic p. 4. D. Downeham auerreth that The whole row or rable of Popes frō Boniface the Third downeward were Antichrists (14) In his Tryal of the Romish cler pa. 330. M. wotton tearmeth Boniface the Third the first reuealed Antichrist And (15) Hist sacr par p. 189. Hospinian censureth him and al his successours to be verissimos Antichristos most true Antichrists D. whitaker (16) De eccl cōt 8. l. cōtro 2. q. 4. p. 144. deliuering his owne and other Protestants opinion herein sayth we affirme Gregorie the Great to haue been the last true and holie Bishop of that Church c. For those that followed were true Antichrists c. And because they aske and demand of vs some certain time we assigne them this to wit of Antichrist's first comming So manifest it is that al the Roman Bishops after these last thousand yeares being thus censured by so many Protestants for Antichrists haue no lesse professed and maintayned the present Roman Religion then Gregorie the Fifteenth who now gouerneth that Sea and is charged by Protestants to be Antichrist himself And as al the Popes for these last thousand yeares are thus censured for Antichrists so is the article of the Popes Primacie or supreme authoritie ouer the whole Church in al matters Ecclesiastical plainly acknowledged by D. Morton himself to be no lesse ancient For wheras M. Brierlie produceth the testimonies of Parkins Napper and Broccard for the continuance of our Roman Religion in general for these last thousand yeares D. Morton restraineth their meaning though vndeseruedly only to the point of the Popes Primacie saying (17) Prot. Appeal p. 71 The alleaged Authours speak of the Primacie of the Pope And againe 18 Ibid p. 72 Be it granted for so it is that the Papal Primacie beginning in Boniface the Third is now nine hundred yeares old So ancient and vniuersal is this so transcendent Article of the Popes Primacie in matters Spiritual A point of such importāce that D. Reynolds affirmeth therein (19) confe p. 568. the very being and essence of a Papist to consist And D. Whitaker auoucheth that (20) contra Duroe pag. 503. It is the head of Popish Religion of which almost al the rest depend But what more forcibly can be produced for the further confirming of our Churches foresayd cōtinuāce for these last 1000. yeares then the publick exercise of our Churches Liturgie the holy Sacrifice of the Masse during the foresayd time Seing not only according to D. Sutclif (21) Answear to Exceptions pa. 11. In the Masse the verie Soule of Poperie doth consist as also according to D. Whitaker (22) contra Duroe pag. 426. Nothing is more holie and diuine in our conceipt But withal the Masse including sundrie articles of our Catholick Faith as true external Sacrifice the Real presence of Christs Bodie and Bloud in the Eucharist Priesthood Prayer to Angels and Saints Prayer and Sacrifice for the dead and sundrie such like thereby doth plainely conuince the vniuersal continuāce of our Catholick Religion D. Luther (23) In colloquiis Ger. de Missae affirmeth that Priuat Masse hath deceiued many Saints and carried them away into errour frō the time of Gregorie for 800. yeares With him agreeth M. Tindal (24) Act. Mon. p. 1338 in
is tearmed (80) Lib. German quo causas recusati concilij Trid. reddunt f. 257. An impudent Writer heauing the Pope vp into an Idol a corrupter of Gods honour and preacher of Antichrist Yea so sincerely was he affected to the Pope and the Church of Rome that the Centurists report him to (81) Cent. 12. Col. 1639. say to the Count of Aquitaine whatsoeuer is out of the Roman Church that by Gods iudgement is of necessitie to perish euen as those things which were out of the Ark were drowned in the Deluge c. As also he that persecuteth the pope of Rome whom the Centurists here cal Antichrist he persecuteth sayth S. Bernard the Sonne of God himself Neither was anie of this Papistrie noted as then to be singular in S. Bernard but to the contrarie it is confessed by M. Iewel and M. Whitaker that S. Bernard liued in the midst of the Popes Rout and Tyrannie D. Morton as formerly calling S. Bernard for his life a Sainct and for his doctrine a Lamp to preuēt obiections thereby arising against him prouidently addeth that he neither was Sainct nor Lamp (83) Prot. Appeal p. 458. Simply as vnspotted with errours but Comparatiuely or c. in his generation that is in respect of the Age wherin he liued when a deluge of iniquities and mist of Popish Superstition had ouerspred the outward face of the Church So truly Papistical was S. Bernard At this time of S. Bernard liued also S. Malachias of whom Osiander writeth thus (84) Cent. 12. p. 315. 256. Malachias an Archbishop in Ireland from his childhood was giuen to learning and Religion and at length intreated and much inforced he vndertook to be the Archbishop of Ireland He was verie familiar with S. Bernard admiring and imitating his Monachisme and embracing Popish superstitions He worshipped the Pope of Rome for God To him verie manie miracles are ascribed c. So truly Roman Catholick was S. Malachias (82) Def. of the Apol. p 557. Vvhit cont Dur. l. 2. p. 154. In the Age precedent to these liued Berengarius who being a Catholick Priest and the Archdeacon of Angiers dissented afterwards from the Roman Church in the Doctrine of Transubstantiation which yet before his death he so fully (85) Fox Act. Monu p. 13. Vvestphalus his Apologetica c. fol. 6. Osiand Cent. 11. p. 158. Centurie-writers Cent. 11. col 458. recanted and conformed himself to the Roman Church as that the same is plainly acknowledged by M. Fox by Westphalus Osiander and the Centurists who record his recantation verbatim as it was Before him liued the most renowned Emperour Charles the Great who was so wholy deuoted to the Roman Religion as that the same is plentifully aknowledged by (86) Osiand in ep cent 8 p. 101. Cowpers Chron. fol 173. Fox in Apoc. p. 436. Crispinus of the Estate of the Church p. 221. Bulling in 2. Thess p. 533. Osiander D. Cowper M. Fox Crispinus and Bullinger In somuch that (87) In Epist Dedic Hist Sacram. Hospinian affirmeth that The Emperour Charles the Great commanded not only by publick Edicts that the Ceremonies and Rites as also the Latin Masse of the Roman Church and the other Decrees Statutes and Ordinances of the Roman Bishop should be obserued but himself also by imprisonnents and other kindes of punishments compelled Churches to the same Yea such was the vnion between the Popes of Rome and Charles the Great in matters of Faith and friendship as that according to D. Cowpers (88) Chron. f. 174. relation there were Certain Bishops sent by Adrian to Charles who held a Councel in France against the condemnation of Images c. And of the other side wheras Paulus (89) Lib. 2. Hist Franc. Aemilius relateth that Charles the Great sent twelue Bishops vnto a Councel holden at Rome by Pope Stephen in confutation of the errour of the Greeks against Images the same is so true that the like report therof is made by the (90) Cent. 8. col 570. Centurie-writers So assured it is that this Age in the opinion of Protestants was most superstitious and Papistical Before Charles liued S. Bede whom (91) Cent. 8. p. 58. Osiander tearmeth a good man and D. Cowper (92) Chron. f. 171. confesseth that he was Renowned in al the world for his learning and godly life For which he was also priuiledged with the Surname of Reuerend (93) Hollinsh Chron at An. 735. Covvpers Chron. at An. 724 fol. 168. Fox Act. Mon. p. 128. and by D. (94) Iesuit part 2. p. 326. Humfrey is specially registred among The Godlie men raised-vp by the Holie-Ghost D. Morton sayth (95) Prot. Appeal l. 1. p. 70. Although we deny not that Bede did hold diuers Romish Doctrines yet do we find sufficient cause in his writings why we may allow him his Title of Venerable and good man M. Bale further testifyeth that S. Bede (96) Cent. 2. c. 1. was so practised in prophane Authours that he scarce had his match in that Age He learned Physick and Metaphysick out of the purest fountaines He knew the Mysteries of the Christian Faith so soundly that for his exact knowledge both of Greek and Latin manie preferred him before Gregorie the Great There is scarce anie thing worth reading to be found in al Antiquitie which in due places is not read in Bede If he had liued in the times of Augustin Hierom Chrysostom I doubt not but he might haue contended for Equalitie with them He put forth manie bookes ful of al kind of Learning M. Fox acknowledgeth that (97) Act. Mon. p. 127. He was a man of worthie and memorable memorie and famous learning The whole Latin Church at that time gaue him the Maistrie in Iudgement and knowledge of the holie Scripture M. Bel granteth (98) Downfal that Bede for vertue and learning was renowned in al the world And M. Cambden recordeth that Bede (99) Descrip Brit. p. 670. the singular glorie of England by Pietie and Erudition obtayned the name of Venerable wrot many volumes most leardnedly So truly godlie learned and renowned was S. Bede euen in the iudgement of Protestants But now to obserue in particular whether the Faith and Religion taught beleeued and practised by this so worthie a man was Roman Catholick or English Protestant [100] Cent. 8. p. 58. Osiander who before called him A good man in expresse tearmes confesseth that Bede was wrapped in al the Popish Errours wherin we Protestants at this day dissent from the Pope For he admired and embraced the worship of Images the Popish Masse Inuocation of Saincts c. In which respect also M. Fox (101) Act. Mon. p. 128. 129. acknowledgeth that he liued in great credit and esteem with the Popes of that Age whom M. Fulk (102) Retentiue ag Bristovv p. 278. tearmeth Antichrists and therupon reiecteth S. Bedes authoritie saying The last Testimonie out of Bede
Learning and Iudgment c. So willing indeed is M. Doctour to detract from the Authoritie and testimonies of his owne deare Brethren M. Napper and M. Brocard And where he would gladly mince the matter by affirming that they were but Two the perusal of this Chapter and other parcels of this booke wil clearly discouer that there were manie more Twoes of this opinion Wherfore to proceed M. Brightman (11) Apoc. p. 503. thus vrgeth Bellarmine As concerning the continuance of the Apostacie from the true Faith we haue learned by the Apocalypse that the same hath preuayled more then 1260. yeares and that more cleerly then anie of your Subtilties can euade (12) Ibid. p. 539. And againe Antichrist hath raigned from the time of Constantin the Great to this day wherof the Apocalypse affordeth such Demonstrations as neuer anie Iesuit can confute Yea (13) Ibid. p. 477. further The Pope of Rome is the Beast which 1300. yeares receiued power c. therefore from 1300. yeares he is the Antichrist So certain it is by M. Brightmans strongest Demonstrations grounded vpon Scripture that the present Roman Religion hath continued for these last 1300. yeares during which time the Pope in his opinion hath raigned as Antichrist Answerably herevnto (14) Against Staplet Martial p. 25. D. Fulk relateth that some Protestants haue written that the Pope hath blinded the world these manie hundred yeares some say 1000. some 1200. some 900. c. And (15) In Apoc. p. 263. Winckelmanus speaking of the begining and end of the Churches persecution by Antichrist reporteth that there are some Protestant Writers who make the end Anno 1517. when M. Luther first began and so the beginning should be Anno 257. others place the end Anno Christi 1521. when Luther at the Assemblies at Wormes excellently gaue testimonie to the truth and so the beginning should be from Anno Christi 261. c. (16) De Antichristo p. 96. Danaeus also speaking of Antichrists first coming confesseth that some Protestant Writers teach that he came in the Yeare 1000. others 500. others 400. from Christs birth So clear it is that the Pope of Rome for these 1300. yeares in the opinion of Protestants hath raigned as Antichrist But as the Popes for these last 1300. yeares are thus censured for Antichrists so are the most ancient and first Christian Emperours condemned for Papists and fauourers of Antichrist For though D. Morton speaking of the Popes authoritie affirmeth that it hath been (17) Prot. Appeal p. 661. often and notoriously contradicted in Antiquitie c. by right Christian and renowned Emperours Yet M. Brightman speaking of the verie first most ancient and Christian Emperours auerreth the contrarie saying (18) Apoc. p. 344. Into which Catalogue come Constantin the Great Constantius Constans Constantin and their Sonnes Iulian Iouinian Valentinian Gratian Valentinian the Second Theodosius c. for these then raigning the Beast was notably defended and his dignitie much increased Agreably sayth (19) Reioynd to Bristow p. 2. D. Fulk I neuer ment to acknowledge the Emperours Constantin Iouinian Valentinian c. to be such as I would wish for For both in their Religion and manners diuers things are found which I could wiâ—h had been more agreable to the Word of God So that for the second 300. yeares after Christ it resteth euident and for such acknowledged that The Pope and his Clergie possessed the outward visible Church of Christians neuer suffring for 1000. yeares after Syluester the First anie to be seen vouchable or visible of the Protestant Church For which verie cause al the Popes of those Ages are censured for Antichrists and the verie first Christian Emperours for their fauourers and defenders To make now the like trial of the Roman Churches Continuance and her vniuersal and publick profession and practise of her Faith and Religion for the first 300. yeares after Christ to wit from his blessed Apostles to Pope Siluester the First and Constantin the Great Wheras our Catholick Writers do often obiect the Custom of the ancient Fathers in prouoking the Hereticks of their times with the Succession of the Roman Bishops according to the example of Ireneus Cyprian Tertullian Optatus Hierom Augustin and Vincentius Lyrinensis (20) Against Purgat p. 373. D. Fulk for his best answear is enforced to confesse saying That these men specially named the Church of Rome it was because the Church of Rome at that time as it was founded by the Apostles so it continued in the doctrine of the Apostles (21) ConfereÌ„ce vvith M. Hart. p. 442. D. Raynolds being prouoked in the like kind acknowledgeth in like manner that The succession of the Roman Bishops was a proof of the true Faith in the time of Augustin Epiphanius Optatus Tertullian and Irenaeus c. (22) Instit l. 4. c. 2. sec 2. 3. And Caluin himself setting downe our foresayd Allegation affirmeth of Catholicks that They indeed set forth their Church verie gloriously c. They report out of Irenaeus Tertullian Origen Augustin and others how highly they esteemed this Succession wherto he giueth the like answear and reason saying Considering it was a matter out of al doubt that from the beginning euen vntil that time nothing was changed in Doctrine the forsayd Doctours took in argument that which was sufficient for the ouerthrowing of al new errours to wit that the Hereticks oppugned the doctrine which euen from the verie Apostles themselues had been inuiolable and with one consent retayned And in his book of Institutions set forth in French he writeth expresly that It was a thing notorious and without doubt that after the Apostles Age vntil those foresayd times no change was made in doctrine neither at Rome nor other Citties In like sort sayth Zanchius (23) De vera Relig. p. 148. In times past the Roman Church and the succession of their Bishops vntil the times of Irenaeus Tertullian Cyprian Some others was such as that not vndeseruedly these Fathers were accustomed to prouoke and cite the Hereticks of their time to her and others such like (24) De Ecclesia p. 278. D. Whitaker speaking of certain Apostolical Churches and amongst them of Rome by Name collecteth thus From whence we vnderstand why Tertullian prouoked to these Churches to wit because as then by perpetual succession they kept the Doctrine of the Apostles Agreably to which almost in the same words sayth (25) Against Purgat p. 374 D. Fulk The Church of Rome retayned by succession vntil Tertullians dayes that Faith which it did first receiue of the Apostles (26) Fox his Act. Mon. p. 1359. M. Ridley auoucheth that The Patriarch of Rome in the Apostles time and long after was a great maintayner and Setter forth of Christs glorie in the which aboue al other Countries and Regions was preached the true Ghospel the Sacraments were most duly administred c. After the Emperours became Christians
ancient Fathers almost in euerie Age before that in which Gregorie liued saying The Religion cleerly taught in the Word of God brought hither first by Simon Zelotes Niceph. l. 2. c. 4. Ioseph of Arimathia Gildâ—s S. Paul the Apostle Theodoret de Curand Graec. affect l. 9. al or some of them was watred stil on in the dayes of Tertullian l. cont Iudaeos Origen in Ezech. hom 4. Athanasius Apol. 2. Hilarie l. de Synod cont Arian Chysostom hom quod Christus sit Deus Theodoret Hist l. 1. c. 10. l. 4. c. 3. Al which Ancient Fathers speak honourably of the Church Religion and Prelates of Brittanie So exceeding far were the Brittans from being changed in their Religion before the time when S. Augustin came into England Therfore to come to the second and mayne point which is the true harmonie and agreement between the Apostolick Faith of the Brittans and the Catholick Roman Faith of S. Augustin D. Morton labouring purposely to shew (51) Prot. Appeal p. 75. what and of how great importance the differences were between the Brittan Bishops and the Church of Rome at Austins comming can only instance in the difference of Ceremonies or ministring of Baptisme in keeping of Easter and in denial of Subiection vnto Austin which though he much endeauour to proue to be matters of great importance yet if they be considered in themselues and without pertinacie in the Defenders they may with M. Brierlie most truly be sayd to be few and smal points And the more if they should once be compared with our other Roman Articles of Real Presence Adoration of the Sacrament Masse Confession Freewil Merit c. In anie one wherof D. Morton was not able to giue the least Instance of difference between the foresayd Brittans and S. Austin Wherfore to proceed in this same poynt It is reported by Hollinshead out of S. Bede hist. l. 2. c. 2 that S. Austin by the help of King Edilbert obtayned a meeting with the Brittish Bishops and Doctours where he sayd vnto them (52) Beda hist l. 2. c. 2. Hollinsh vol. 1. p. 103. Godwine in his Catalogue of Bish. p. 6. If you wil obey me in these three things That you wil celebrate Easter at the due time That you wil minister Baptisme wherwith wee are borne againe to God according to the custome of the Roman and Apostolick Church That you wil preach with vs the Word of God to the Nation of the English Al other things which you doe though they be contrarie to our customes we wil peaceably suffer In like sort sayth the (53) l. 3. c. 13. p. 133. Authour of the Historie of Great Brittanie The Brittan Bishops conformed themselues to the doctrine and Ceremonies of the Church of Rome without difference in anie thing specially remembred saue only in the Celebration of the Feast of Easter c. (54) Ibid p. 219. And See CaÌ„bdens BritaÌ„ in English p. 578. And agayne when they perceaued the Saxons in some measure to approue it they began to make open Profession of it as seeming therin to agree euen with their Enemies the Saxons howsoeuer otherwise in respect of language situation or Law of Nations they were diuided Yea the (55) Beda hist l. 2. c. 2. Hollinsh vol. 1. p. 102. Brittan Bishops after conference had with S. Austin confessed that they vnderstood that it was the true way of iustice which Austin preached Wherupon as (56) Confut. of Purgat p. 335. D. Fulk acknowledgeth Saint Austin did at the last obtayne the ayde of the Brittish Bishops to the Conuersion of the Saxons (57) Catalogue of Bishops p. 11. Lastly D. Godwin writing of Theodore who was Archbishop of Canterburie some Fiftie or Sixtie yeares after S. Augustin auoucheth that vnto him al the Brittish Bishops and generally al Britanie yealded obedience and vnder him conformed themselues in al things vnto the Rites and discipline of the Church of Rome So euidently doth that Primitiue Faith of the Brittans in al most substantial poynts wholy agree with that Faith which S. Austin taught vs and which the Protestants haue fully acknowledged to be Catholick Roman or Popish And yet is the sayd Faith taught vs by S. Gregorie and S. Austin tearmed by (58) Chron. f. 161. D. Cowper the right beleefe And by (59) Act. Mon. p. 112. M. Fox the perfect Faith of Christ (60) Ibid. p. 124. and the true Faith of Christ And thus from the premisses it necessarily followeth that our present Roman Religion being so consonant or rather the same with that first Faith which the Indians Armenians Graecians and Brittans receiued from the Apostles themselues that therfore no lesse ancient or continuing is our Roman Religion then the Religion of the Apostles M. Brierly hauing produced diuers testimonies of Protestants in proof that the Indians Graecians and Armenians were conuerted to the Faith of Christ in the Apostles times as also that the remnant of Christian Religion which they yet preserue is Roman Catholick not Protestant M. Morton directing a large Reply hereto doth not so much as answer to any one of the foresayd testimonies of his Brethren Osiander excepted of whom he sayth (61) Prop. Appeal p. 79. We approue not Osianders censure c. concerning the Christians in Mount Libanus tearming them Popish for some flying speach But he may now aswel say we do not only not approue Osianders censure but neither the Censures and opinions of D. Philip Nicolai Gomarus Willamont Crispinus the Diuines of Wittemberg Cambden Harison Hollinshead Hal Clapham Fulk Marbeck Symondes Sandes Bale Foxe Midleton Godwine and Cowper al of them Protestants and yet al of them thus affording their helping hands for the proof of our agreement in Faith and Religion with the Doctrine deliuered by the Apostles themselues THE SECOND BOOKE WHERIN IS PROVED THROVGH AL THE CHIEF ARTICLES OF RELIGION AND THAT BY THE Confessions of Protestants that the same Faith Which is now taught by the Roman Church vvas anciently taught by the Primitiue Church of Christ THAT GENERAL COVNCELS DO TRVLY represent the Church of Christ And of the Credit and Authoritie giuen by Protestants to the sayd Councels CHAPTER I. AS in Politick gouernement our Parlament consisting of Prince Peeres Knights and Burgesses doth truly represent the whole Bodie of the Common-wealth and withal is endowed with ful power and authoritie to enact and establish Lawes which euerie particular Subiect is bound to obey and obserue So in gouernement Ecclesiastical a General Councel consisting of the Head of the Church the Bishops and Pastours doth truly represent vnto vs the whole Bodie of the Church itself and in like sort is enriched with plenarie power and vertue to create Decrees and Statutes which may bind the soules and consciences of euery particular member of the sayd Church To which purpose D. Whitaker confesseth expresly that (1) De Conciliis p. 1. 10. The Church is represented in a General
of Scriptures from him therfore is the true interpretation to be sought and seing he can not be contrarie to himself who ruled the Primitiue Church and gouerned it by Bishops it is not agreable to truth now to cast them off D. Iewel acknowledgeth in general that (17) Def. of the Apologie p. 35. The Primitiue Church which was vnder the Apostles and Martyrs hath euermore been accounted the purest of al others without exception D. White testifieth that (18) way to the Church Ep. Dedic nu 8 The Primitiue Church and al the Doctours therof would neuer yeald I wil not say in an opinion but not so much as in a forme of speach or in the change of a letter sounding against the Orthodoxal Faith wherof he further giueth sundrie pertinent examples concluding that So religious were they that had Religion that they would not exchange a letter or a Syllable of the Faith wherwith our Sauiour had put them in trust And in another place he auoucheth that (19) Ibid. p. 385. In the first six hundred yeares there was no substantial or fundamental innouation receiued into the Church So plentifully are the deseruedst prayses of the Primitiue Church during the first six hundred yeares freely giuen and set forth by our greatest Protestants thus much acknowledging and admiring the puritie of her Doctrine and appealing to her Tribunal for the Determination of their doubts And I can not but here admire the potent force violence of truth which racketh from her deadliest Enemies the true Confession thereof For what Church during those primitiue and purest times was euen in the iudgement of Protestants so faithful so chast so constant in soundnes of Faith and sinceritie of manners as the Catholick Roman Church What Bishops euer so renowned either for feeding of their flocks or for patient suffring of so manie and so cruel torments yea and death it self as the Popes and Bishops of Rome (20) Ep. Ded. of F. Persons in his Ansvv to him Doth not Sir Ed. Cooke himself say We do not deny but that Rome was the Mother Church and had thirtie two Virginal Martyrs of her Popes arow What Doctours what Fathers what Pastours more duly honoured by al Posteritie then such as were strictly linked in Faith and Communion with the then Roman Church D. Whitaker being to answer D. Sanders his truest assertion that the Roman Church was not changed during the first six hundred yeares after Christ through clearest euidence of truth acknowledgeth the same saying (21) l. De Antichrist p. 35. c. During al that time the Church was pure and flourishing and inuiolably taught and defended the Faith deliuered from the Apostles D. Iewel confesseth that (22) Reply to Harding p. 246. Aswel S. Austin as also other godlie Fathers rightly yealded Reuerence to the Sea of Rome c. for the puritie of Religion which was there preserued along time without spot And that The Godlie Fathers of those gray-headed times sought to the Church of Rome which then for puritie in Religion and constancie in the same was most famous aboue al others Sundrie other such like testimonies duely dignifying the ancient Roman Church I willingly pretermit hauing treated elsewhere of the same subiect more at large But who likewise more peremptorily pretend the truest harmonie between their Doctrine and the Doctrine of the ancient Fathers as also the iust defence and patronage of their due credit and esteeme then our Moderne Protestants For to omit D. Iewels former complaint that if Protestants be deceaued it was Gregorie Austin Hierom Chrysostom c. that deceaued them not anie one Sentence in anie one Father or Councel of the first six hundred yeares making in his opinion against Protestancie D. Sutcliffe confidently auoucheth that (23) Examination of Kellisons Suruey p. 17. The Fathers in al poynts of Faith are for vs sayth he and not for the Pope D. Willet maketh his solemne Protestation (24) Antilog p. 263. I take God to witnes before whom I must render accompt c. that the same Faith and Religion which I defend is taught and confirmed in the more Substantial Points by those Histories Councels and Fathers that liued within fiue or six hundred yeares after Christ. And againe (25) Ib. p. 264. It is most notoriously euident that for the grossest poynts of Poperie as Transubstantiation Sacrifice of the Masse Worshipping of Images Iustification by workes the Supremacie of the Pope Prohibition of Mariage and such other they to wit the Papists haue no shew at al of anie euidence from the Fathers within fiue hundred yeares after Christ. Pierre de Moulin a French Protestāt is so vndertaking herein that (26) Defenc. against Coefteau p. 139. In this Challenge sayth he I wil lay downe my Ministers cloake readie to be frocked in a Monks Cowle if I shal find a man that wil satisfy me in this point Melancthon sayth (27) Ep. ad Cratonem for the setling of our minds I think the consent of Antiquitie to be of great force c. The best Maisters and guides to vs may be Ireneus Tertullian Augustin who left to Posteritie manie things of this kind And (28) Epist. ad Frider. Miconium As I willingly aduise with such writers liuing as haue some vse of Spiritual things So I think these Ancients whose writings are approued are likewise to be consulted For I think the Church generally beleeued that which they haue writen And it is not secure to depart from the common opinion of the old Church Yea others tearme it in some of their Brethren Paradoxical to disclayme and dissent from the ancient Fathers wherof one sayth (29) The Authour of a Brief Answ to certaine obiect ag the Descension of christ into Hel. p 1. where you say we must build our Faith on the Word of Faith tying vs to Scripture only you giue iust occasion to think that you neither haue the ancient Fathers of Christs Church nor their Sonnes succeding them agreeing with you in this point which implyeth a defence of some strange Paradox D. Bancroft doubteth not to preferre the ancient Fathers before the learnedst Protestants (30) Suruey p. 378. p. 64. For M. Caluin and M. Beza I do think of them sayth he as their writings deserue but yet I think better of the ancient Fathers I must confesse it Yea he purposely vndertaketh their iust defence against the Puritans for where S. Austin sayd to Iulian the Pelagian (31) Contra Iulian. l. 2. c. 10 Truly I haue what to do I haue whither to fly for I may prouoke from these Pelagian darknes to these so cleare Catholick Lights of the Fathers which I now do But tel me what wilt thou do whither wilt thou fly I from the Pelagians to these thou from these to whom c. But thou darest cal them blind And hath time so confounded lowest things with highest Are darknes called light and light darknes
meanes to preuent Schismes dissentions in the Primitiue Church when the Graces of God were far more abundant and eminent then now they are Nay if the Twelue were not like to agree except there had been one Chief among them for sayth Hierom among the Twelue one was therefore chosen that a Chief being appoynted occasion of dissention might be preuented How can they think that equalitie would keep al the Pastours in the world in peace and vnitie c. For in al Societies Authoritie which can not be where al are equal must procure vnitie and obedience In like sort the (4) Cen. 4. Col. 556. Centurists confesse that Optatus l. 2. cont Donat. writeth It can not be denyed but that thou knowest in the Cittie of Rome the Episcopal Chaire to haue been first bestowed vpon Peter in which Peter the Head of al the Apostles sate wherupon he is called Cephas In which one Chaire vnitie should be kept by al least the other Apostles should euerie one defend his owne So that he should be esteemed a Schismatick and sinner who should erect another against that singular Sea therfore there is one Chaire c. (5) Cent. 4. Col. 1100. They also reprehend him for that he extolleth ouermuch the Chaire of Peter and the Succession of the Roman Bishops And (6) In his Retentiue c. p. 248. D. Fulk chargeth Optatus with absurditie for saying of Peter He deserued to be preferred before al the Apostles and he alone receaued the Keyes of the kingdome of heauen to be communicated to the rest (7) Retentiue against Bristows Motiues p. 248. D. Fulk (7) Retentiue against Bristows Motiues p. 248. speaking of S. Leo and S. Gregorie Bishops of Rome confesseth that The mysterie of iniquitie hauing wrought in that Seate neer fiue or six hundred yeares before them so anciently before them did the Roman Sea in his opinion begin to be Papal and then greatly encreased they were so deceaued with long continuance of errour that they thought the dignitie of Peter was much more ouer the rest of his fellow Apostles then the holie Scriptures of God do allow Yea the (8) Cent. 3. col 85. Centurists recite and reproue Origen hom 17. in Lucam for calling Peter the Prince of the Apostles And D. Raynolds (9) In his Cōference p. 485. citeth S. Dionysius de diuinis nominibus c. 3. tearming Peter the chief and most ancient Top or Head of the Apostles (10) Apocalypsis in cap. 13. p. 343. This poynt is so euident in the Fathers that M. Brightman thinketh It hath its original from a corrupt Doctrine to wit the false boasted Authoritie of the Chaire of Peter wherof almost at euerie word the Roman Bishop braggeth and which the Ancient Saints Tertullian Cyprian and others extolled with immoderate prayses not knowing with what impietie they prepared the way c. But the Fathers further proceed teaching that the whole Church was built or founded vpon S. Peter To which purpose the Rhemists citing S. Gregorie D. Fulk answereth The (11) Ag. Rhem. Test in Math. 16.19 Authoritie of Gregorie c. being a Bishop of Rome himself and so neer the time of the open reuelation of Antichrist in the Romish Sea is partial in this case and therefore not to be heard And againe Leo (12) Ibid. vers 18. Bishop of Rome striuing for the dignitie of his Sea as his Predecessours Zosimus Boniface and Celestin had done before c. is no equal Iudge in this case The (13. Cent. 8. col 555. Centurists charge S. Hilarie that he speaketh incommodiously of Peter the Apostle that he lyeth vnder the building of the Church and is made the Foundation therof They (14) Cent. 4. col 557. see col 1250. likewise affirme that S. Hierom sayth incommodiously of Peter that our Lord built his Church vpon him And for the like Saying they (15) Cent. 4. col 558. and see col 1250. reproue Nazianzene Yea they (16) Cent. 3. col 84. charge Tertullian that not without errour he seemeth to think that the Keyes were committed only to Peter and that the Church was built vpon him And they (17) Cent. 3. col 84. confesse that Cyprian in manie places affirmeth the Church to be founded vpon Peter as l. 1. ep 3. l. 4. ep 9. c. And they (18) Cent. 3. col 85. charge Origen Tract 5. in Math. to say Peter by promise deserued to be made the foundation of the Church (19) Resp Ad Bellar. disp part 1. p. 277. Danaeus reproueth the Fathers in general for that they sayth he naughtily expounded of the Person of Peter that Saying of Christ Math. 16. Thou art Peter and vpon this Rock I wil build my Church (20) Instit l. 4. c. 6. sec 6. Caluin sayth The Church to be built vpon Peter because it is sayd vpon this Rock c. some of the Fathers haue so expounded but the whole Scripture gaynsayeth Yea the Fathers kept a yearely Festiual day in honour of S. Peters Sea or Chaire which poynt Bellarmine confirming by the testimonies of sundrie Fathers Danaeus (21) In Resp ad Bellar. Disp part 1. p. 275. 276. only answereth that the Fathers assertion therof was the Iudgements and Testimonies of the Church then corrupted and bewitched or made blind with this errour And wheras Anacletus ep 3. Leo ep 53. and Gregorie l. 6. ep 37. do al of them teach a special preheminence to be giuen euen to the Seas of Alexandria and Antioch before other Apostolical or Patriarchal Seas in respect of S. Peter who first founded them Danaeus (22) In Resp ad Bell. part 1. p 275. in his answer to Bellarmin obiecting them in steed of a better euasion barely writeth What he bringeth out of Anacletus Leo and Gregorie is in vaine seing they plead for themselues in their owne cause But D. Field (23) of the Church l. 5. c. 31. p. 162. ingenuously confesseth that There were in the beginning only Three Patriarcks to wit the Bishop of Rome Alexandria and Antioch The reason as some think why the Bishops of these Seas were preferred before others and made Patriarcks was in respect had to blessed S. Peter who was in sort before expressed in order and honour the First and Chiefest of the Apostles c. Al Churches are rightly called Apostolick but these more specially in which the Apostle Peter sate And in proof of this he alleageth Anacletus Leo and Gregorie before mentioned D. Fulk (24) In his Confut. of Papists quarrels c. p. 4. affirmeth in general that manie of the ancient Fathers were deceaued to think something more of Peters Prerogatiue and the Bishop of Romes dignitie then by the word of God was giuen to either of them Hence then we see that Catholicks defending S. Peter to haue been appoynted by Christ the Head of the Apostles and of the whole Church As also the Church
to haue been built or founded vpon Peter and in this regard Peters Sea to haue been preferred before the Seas of al other Patriarcks do herein but symbolize with the ancient Fathers Gregorie Leo Optatus Hierom Hilarie Origen Cyprian Tertullian Dionysius Areopagita and the other Fathers in general who are here produced and reproued in these respects by the Protestant Writers the Centurists Caluin Danaeus Brightman Fulk Field Couel and Raynolds IT IS CONFESSED BY PROTESTANTS that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught the Bishop of Rome to Succeed S. Peter in the Primacie of the whole Church CHAPTER IV. HAuing hitherto proued the Primacie of S. Peter ouer the whole Church the next point to be considered is whether the sayd Primacie not being personally tyed to him as to dye with him but rather being to suruiue and continue in his Successours to the Churches good euen to the end of the world whether I say the sayd Primacie is deriued to the Bishop of Rome as the Successour of S. Peter And herein D. Bilson (1) In his true difference c. part 1. p. 147. confesseth most playnly and in general that The Ancient and Learned Fathers cal the Roman Bishop Peters Successour The Centurists (2) Cent. 5. col 1262. charge S. Leo that He painfully goeth about to proue that singular preheminence was giuen to Peter aboue the other Apostles and that thence rose the Primacie of the Roman Church And the like is confessed of S. Leo by D. Raynolds (3) In his conference p. 42. 43. who further granteth that (4) Conference p. 218. 219. The Fathers say Peter was Bishop of Rome naming Hierom Eusebius Ireneus And (5) Chron. D. Cowper calleth Linus first Bishop of Rome after Peter Osiander (6) Cent. 4. p. 294. speaking of the ancient Councel of Sardis decreing Appeales to Rome professeth to deliuer the then common opinion and reason therof saying It was the ancient common and receaued errour that Peter was the first Bishop of Rome therefore this honour was thought due to the Successour of Peter according to the common opinion c. Bucer (7) In Praeparatorijs ad Concilium sayth We plainly confesse that among the ancient Fathers the Roman Church obtayned Primacie aboue others as that which hath the Chaire of S. Peter and whose Bishops haue almost alwayes been accounted the Successours of Peter Yea the ancient Fathers were so confident herein that they taught the Primacie of the Roman Bishop to be the ordinance of Christ himself and not anie Humane or Ecclesiastical Institution So Gelasius In Decretis cum 70. Episcopis teaching that The Roman Church is preferred before the other Churches not by anie Synodical Constitutions but hath obtayned the Primacie by the Euangelical voyce of our Lord saying Thou art Peter and vpon this Rock I wil build my Church The (8) Cent. 5. col 1274. Centurists hereupon inferre and confesse that Gelasius contended that the Roman Church by the law of God was the First or Chief of al Churches In like sort (9) De Regno Christi l. 2. p. 149. Philippus Nicolai granteth that Pope Iulius who liued Anno. 370. as Socrates and Sozomene relate sent Letters to the Eastern Churches in which as the Letters witnesse he often declareth the right of calling General Councels to belong to him alone who by singular Priuiledge euen by Gods ordinance is the Prelate of the first Sea c. to wit the Roman This Diuine ordinance was so beleeued reuerenced and obeyed by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church as that nothing is more manifest in al their writings or other histories and Records of Antiquitie nor more fully acknowledged and disliked by the greatest Enemies therof the Protestant Writers And to begin with S. Gregorie whom M. Bale (10) In Act. Rom. Pont. p. 44. styleth Gregorie the Great of al the Roman Patriarks the most excellent in life and learning This so excellent a Patriark is charged out of his owne writings by the Centurists (11) Cent. 6. col 425. 426. 427. 428. 429. 430 431. 432. c. with clayme and exercise of Iurisdiction and Primacie ouer al Churches Carion (12) Chron. l. 4. p 567 568. affirmeth that Though he tragically declaymeth himself to abhorre the name of Vniuersal Bishop yet indeed he sheweth himself earnestly to desire that which the Title importeth And Peter (13) In Cap. 8. Iudicum And see the liKe in Philippus Nicolai De Regno Christi l. 2. p. 66. Martyr in this scoffing manner reprehendeth him saying This litle Saint Gregorie would haue the thing it self of Vniuersal Bishop although he streightned the name and Title For as the Histories of those times teach and his owne Epistles witnesse he did not abstayne from gouerning other Churches M. Bale (14) In his Image of both Churches fol. 11. See Bullinger in 2. Thess 2. p. 531. And Melancton in Ep. Ad Rom. p. 405. q. 2. p. 17. acknowledgeth that Iohn of Constantinople contended with Gregorie of Rome for the Supremacie in which contention Gregorie layd for himself S. Peters keyes with manie other sore arguments and reasons The Protestant Authour 15 of Catholick Traditions reporteth that Maurice the Emperour would haue taken away the Primacie from Gregorie Bishop of Rome and giuen it to Iohn Bishop of Constātinople c. Gregorie did oppose himselfe against him least he should loose his place vrging how insolent that Title was The Centurists (16) Cent. 6. col 425 confesse that Gregorie vpon the fourth Penitential Psalme greatly inueigheth against the Emperour who challenged to himself the Roman Church being the Head of al Churches and would make her a seruant being the Mistresse of Nations Christ also saying I wil giue to thee the Keyes And (17) Cent. 6. col 425. Gregorie glorieth that the Emperour and Eusebius his fellow-fellow-Bishop of Constantinople do both of them acknowledge that the Church of Constantinople is subiect to the Apostolick Sea Yet the Magdeburgians do further charge S. Gregorie and by collection out of his owne writings by them particularly alleadged that (18) Cent. 6. col 426. He challenged to himself power to command Archbishops to ordayne or depose Bishops at his pleasure And (19) Cent. 6. col 427. tooke vpon him right to cite Archbishops to declare their cause before him when they were accused And also (20) col 427. to Excommunicate and Depose them Giuing (21) col 428 Commission to theyr Neighbour Bishops to proceed against them That (22) col 428. 401 In theyr Prouinces he placed his Legats to know and end the causes of such as appealed to the Roman sea That (23) col 428. He vsurped power of appoynting Synods in theyr Prouinces (24) col 429. And see more col 430. 432. 433. 434. 435. 436. 437. 438. And required other Archbishops that if anie cause of greater importance fel out they should referre the
same to him c. appoynting in Prouinces his Vicars ouer other Churches to end smaller matters and to reserue the greater causes to himself Caluin (25) Instit l. 4. c. 7. sec 12. auoucheth that There is no word in the writings of Gregorie wherin more proudly he boasteth of the greatnes of his Primacie then this to wit I know not what Bishop is not subiect to the Apostolick Sea when he is found faultie c. He assumeth to himself power to punish those who offend D. Raynolds findeth no better shift for the foresayd Saying of S. Gregorie then impudently to say that (26) Conference p. 547. Either Gregorie wrot not so or he wrot an vntruth to cheer vp his Subiects (27) Cent. 6. p. 289. See Philippus Nicolai de Regno Christi li. 2. p. 67. 351. Osiander acknowledgeth that Augustin was sent from Gregorie the Great Bishop of Rome into England that he might subdue the same to the Iurisdiction of the Roman Bishop (28) Cent. 6. p. 290. and to the lust of the Roman Antichrist for which sayth Osiander Austin was after his death vndoubtedly damned to Hel. Yea D. Morton (29) Prot. Appeal l. 1. sec 28. p. 31. a man most sparing to tel the truth yet yeeldeth thus far saying Whether or how far Two hundred yeares after S. Gregorie did reach his Arme of Iurisdiction beyond the limits of his Diocesse is a question by reason of his diuers obscure speeches and some particular practises diuersly censured of our Authours But besides the cleerest premisses this Question of D. Morton is made none by D. Raynodls teaching that (30) Confer p. 550 The Primacie which Gregorie Leo and others giue to the Sea of Rome doth so exceed the truth that c. And (31) Ibid. p. 545. that Gregorie is somwhat large that way Yea that he and al the Popes for three hundred yeares before him (32) Ib. p. 549 auouch more of their Sea then is true and right in the opinion of Protestants With whom accordeth D. Fulk saying Gregorie (33) In 2. Thess 2. was a great worker and furtherer of the Sea of Antichrist and of the mysterie of iniquitie And (34) In Iohn 21. we go not about to cleer Gregorie from al vsurpation of Iurisdiction more then to his Sea appertayned So certayne and out of al question it is that S. Gregorie the Great was a true Roman Catholick in his Doctrine and practise of the Popes Primacie By the premisses then it is euident that the obiection so much vrged by (35) Contrae Camp rat 6. p 97. FulK in his Answer to a Counterf Cath. Iewel in his Reply art 4. p. 225. 226. 227. Mortons Appeal l 1. c. 2. sec 29. p. 32. D. Whitaker D. Fulk D. Iewel D. Morton and sundrie other Protestants from S. Gregorie his reiecting and disliking of the Title of Vniuersal Bishop is altogeather impertinent seing S. Gregorie reiected the same in that sense which Iohn Bishop of Constantinople applyed to himself to wit that he was the sole Bishop and none Bishop but he A thing so euident that the Protestant (36) De Ecclesia l. 2. c. 10. p. 570. Andreas Friccius whom (37) In his com Places part 4. p. 77. Peter Martyr tearmeth an excellent learned man in like sort expresseth the same saying Some there be c. that obiect the Authoritie of Gregorie who sayth that such a Title pertayneth to the Precursour of Antichrist but the reason of Gregorie is to be knowne and it may be gathered of his wordes which he repeateth in manie Epistles that the Title of vniuersal Bishop is contrarie to and doth gainsay the Grace which is commonly powred vpon al Bishops He therfore that calleth himself the onlie Bishop taketh the Bishoplike power from the rest wherfore this Title he would haue to be reiected c. But it is neuertheles euident by other places that Gregorie thought that the charge and Principalitie of the whole Church was committed to Peter c. And yet for this cause Gregorie thought not that Peter was the forerunner of Antichrist So plainly doth this Protestant answer this so often vrged obiection from S. Gregorie and so euident also it is that S. Gregorie himself claymed and defended the Primacie of the Roman Bishop and Church ouer al other Bishops and Churches whatsoeuer But to arise from S. Gregorie to other Doctours and Fathers more ancient his next predecessour Pope Pelagius is for the self same cause much reproued by Osiāder (38) Cent. 6. p. 242 in these words Pelagius greatly inueigheth against Iohn of Constantinople because he assumed to himselfe the Title of Vniuersal Patriarch and shewed by that prophane Title of Vniuersal to abolish the name of other Patriarchs c. But in the meane time he contendeth the Roman Church to be the Head of al other Churches and he bableth manie things of the Priuiledges giuen by Christ to S. Peter The Centurie-writers speaking of the Fathers errours which liued in the fift Age playnly and at large confesse (39] Cent. 5. col 774. that In this fift Age the Roman Bishops applyed themselues to get and establish dominion ouer other Churches So they acknowledge that Pope Celestin of whom (40) In his Defence p. 588. D. Whitguift sayth He was a godly Bishop gaue priuiledge of vsing the Title of Pope and the Miter to Ciril of Alexandria whom he had substituted in his place to be President in the Councel of Ephesus He is also charged by M. Carthwright (41) In his 2. Reply part 1. p. 512. to haue claymed superioritie ouer al Churches taking vpon him as it were the name of Vniuersal Bishop (42) Cent. 5. col 1246. Osiander affirmeth that He contended in behalf of the Roman Churches Primacie more impudently then did his Predecessours (43) Cent. 5. col 1285. Nestorius the Heretick then Bishop of Constantinople he allotted ten dayes space to repent which if he did not he should not only be excommunicated but his name should be blotted out of the Catalogue of Priests And for the accomplishment of the premises he made Cyril of Alexandria his Legat. The Centurists (44) Cent. 5. col 778. charge the Popes of those times that They vsurped to themselues power of commanding other Bishops that whom they would and should propose in forraine Churches they might ordayne Bishop or whom they would not haue might depose So Celestin in his Epistle to Cyril of Alexandria and Iohn of Antioch and Rufus of Thessalonica commandeth them that they designe Proclus Bishop at Constantinople D. Raynolds affirmeth that the (45) Conference p. 457. Popes of the Second Three hundred yeares after Christ claymed some Soueraintie ouer Bishops And that (46) Ib. p. 383. Sozimus Boniface Celestin did vsurp ouer the churches of Africk while S. Austine was aliue c. (47) Ib. p. 544. They would haue Bishops and Elders appeale to Rome
And that (48) Ib. p. 550. Popes namely Innocent Leo Gelasius Vigilius Gregorie taught that the Fathers by the Sentence of God decreed that whatsoeuer was done in Prouinces far of should not be concluded before it came to the notice of the Sea of Rome And this they say al churches took their beginning from the Roman that al Bishops had their honour from Peter And herewith he confesseth that in those times Popes (49) Ibid. p. 540. were learned and Catholicks and were (50) Ibid. p. 552. 554. 555. sued vnto by S. Basil S. Chrysostom and S. Austin and the African Bishops sought vnto them for their aduise and counsel for their authoritie and credit To come to S. Leo for whom (51) of the Church l. 5. p. 284. D. Field speaking of this verie poynt profereth thus largely Surely if they can shew that Leo sayth anie such thing as the former Popes are taught to say we wil most willingly listen to them for we acknowledge Leo to haue been a most worthie Bishop and the things that go vnder his name to be his indubitate workes And M. Mason (52) Consecration of Engli Bishops p. 115. tearmeth him Pope Leo a holie and learned Pope Now for D. Fields and al other Protestants further satisfaction in this poynt I wil but only recite what other Protestant Writers acknowledge and censure of that most worthie Bishop Leo. (53) In Confess Geneu c. 7. sect 12. Beza affirmeth that It is manifest that Leo in his Epistles doth cleerly breath-forth the arrogancie of the Antichristian Roman Sea (54) In his Conference vvith Hart. p. 50. D. Raynolds writeth I do freely professe that I mislike those haughtie speaches in Leo and I think that the Mysterie of iniquitie so wrought through his so ambitious aduancing Peter that c. (55) De Conciliis contra Bellarm p. 37. D. Whitakers censure is As for Leo the First I litle care he was a great Architect of the Antichristian kingdome And yet this notwithstanding the same (56) Ibid. p. 34. D. Whitaker acknowledgeth that Leo was a learned and godly Bishop but yet sayth he ouer ambitious The (57) Cent. 5. col 1013. Centurists report how that Theodoret a Greek Father being deposed by the Second Councel of Ephesus did make his appeale to Pope Leo and that thereupon the most godlie Leo restored to Theodoret his Bishoprick They likewise (58) Cent. 5. col 778. confesse that Leo confirmed Maximus Bishop of Antiochia in his Bishoprick and established to Proâ—erius Bishop of Alexandria the ancient rights of that Sea according to the Canons and Priuiledges as is shewed in the 68. and 69. Epistle of Leo. And they affirme (59) Cent. 5. col 779. that the Popes of those times took vnto themselues power to excommunicate other Archbishops and Churches So Leo excommunicated the Eastern Bishops and Foelix Acacius Gelasius condemned Acatius and Peter sending letters into the East And that (60) Cent. 5. col 780. They endeauoured to challenge that Authoritie ouer Archbishops that if they did anie thing they should be thought to do it by Authoritie of the Roman Bishop as though they were his seruants and slaues So Leo Epist 84. sheweth that the Bishops of Thessalonica alwayes supplyed the place of the Apostolick sea and he admonished Anastasius then their Bishop that in remote Prouinces in some sort he should visit himself and decree nothing but what he knew would be approued by him Also They (61) Cent. 5. col 779. dared to exact of Archbishops that if there were anie thing they could not determine by their owne Iudgments they should referre it to them So Leo epist 84. prescribeth this law to the Bishop of Thessalonica In like sort they (62) Cent. 5. col 781. assumed to themselues power to cal General Councels as appeareth in the 93. epist of Leo c. And they reiected as vnlawful such Synods as were assembled without their Authoritie c. Leo sent Paschasius Bishop of Sicilie to be President in the Councel of Chalcedon And (63) Col. 782 The Fathers often for honour sake desired theyr Decrees to be confirmed by them So the Councel of Chalcedon writeth to Leo we desire that thou wilt honour our Iudgement with thy Decrees and as we desirous of good haue agreed so thy Height or greatnes may fulfil in thy sonnes what is fitting And yet D. Raynolds confesseth of this Councel (64) Conf. p. 563. that it 67 was a companie of 630. Bishops sound in Religion and Zealous of the glorie of God affirming further that the sayd Councel (68) Ib. p. 562 named Pope Leo their Head and that he was President of the Councel But to conclude this of Leo wherin for D. Fields further satisfaction I haue been the larger it is playnly confessed by the Centurists (69) Cent. 5. col 12. 62. that Leo verie paynfully goeth about to proue that singular preheminence was giuen to Peter aboue the other Apostles and that thence rose the Primacie of the Roman Church For which verie cause D. Morton chargeth S. Leo to haue been (70) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 283. 285. Peremptorie c. and ambitious As for Pope Leo (71) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 294. 295. sayth he he was so peremptorie that for his presumption he found in his time some Brotherlie checks To proceed Prosper de ingratis c. 2. affirming Rome to be the seat of Peter and the Head of Pastoral Honour ouer the world is censured for the same by (72) Resp ad Bellar. par 1. p. 594. Danaeus to be the Popes flatterer In like sort Vincentius aduersus Haer. is charged (73) Ibid. p. 313. by him to haue plainly flattered the Pope of Rome when he tearmed S. Faelix and S. Iulius Bishops of Rome to be the Head of the world and S. Cyprian and S. Amhrose the Sides But to passe to others the (74) Cent. 5. col 778. Centurists affirme that Gelasius in his epistle to Faustus doth impudently lye affirming that it is established in the Canons that Appeales of the whole Church should be brought to the Examen of the Roman Sea and from her in no place Appeale should be made And agayne (75) Cent. 5. col 780. Gelasius in his epistle to the Dardanians affirmeth that he hath giuen the charge of the Church of Alexandria to Acacius of Constantinople and therefore that he ought to relate al things vnto him Yea (76) Cent. 5. col 779. they further confesse that Gelasius in the Tome of Excommunications denyeth that Peter of Alexandria Bishop of the second Sea can be absolued by anie then the Bishop of the first Sea to wit the Roman As also (77) Cent. 5. col 1274. M. Symondes vpoÌ„ the Reuel c. 5. p. 58. Gelasius held that Councels are subiect to the Pope and that al should appeale to him but none from him They (78) Cent. 5.
col 778. And Symondes vpon the Reuel p. 57. likewise charge Pope Sixtus that In his 3. Epistle to the Eastern Bishops and 5. chapter he decreeth that against a Bishop appealing to the Sea Apostolick nothing shal be determined but what the Roman Bishop iudgeth But to omit sundrie other particular Popes (79) In his Tryal of the Popes Title p. 117. M. Bunnie confesseth that Innocentius telleth the Bishops of Macedonia that they should haue regard to the Church of Rome as to their Head and that it is wronged because they did not at first yeald to his Iudgement c. The Bishops of Rome gaue also out Decrees which they would bind al to obserue as appeareth in Siricius and Innocentius It sauoureth of too great arrogancie that Sozimus threatneth seueritie if anie despise the Apostolick authoritie So did Leo what should I seek to speak of euerie one their owne Decretals do sufficiently beare witnes Yea it is acknowledged in general (80) Cent. 5. col 778. that the Popes of this fift Age ordayned and required that in the causes of Bishops it might be lawful to appeale to them as is manifest by the Acts of the 6. Carthage Councel And (81) In his Def. p. 342. D. Whitguift auoucheth that It is certaine that then Viz. in the time of the Carthage and African Councels the Bishops of Rome began at least to clayme Superioritie ouer al Churches Now the Councel of Carthage was assembled about Anno 419. and the African Anno 423. Yea it is granted by (82) In his second Reply part 1. p. 510. VVhitguift in his Def. p 344 Sarauia de diuersis gradibus c. p. 493. M. Carthwright and other Protestant Writers that the Councel of Chalcedon whose authoritie is established to our Aduersaries by Act of Parlament Anno 1. Elisabeth c. 1. did offer the name of vniuersal Bishop to the Bishop of Rome And hence it is that the Centurists (83) Cent. 5. col 774. affirme of these ancient Roman Bishops that They had flatterers who affirmed that without permission of the Roman Bishop none might vndertake the person of a Iudge (84) Cent. 5. col 775. Who then likewise auerred that Antiquitie had attributed the Principalitie of Priesthood to the Roman Bishop aboue al. And accordingly that Turbius Asturiensis flattered Pope Leo and acknowledged his superioritie And wheras Theodoret speaking of the Roman Sea sayth That holy Sea hath the Gouernment of al the Churches of the world M. Iewel findeth no better answer hereto then to say (85) Art 4. Diu. 21. That man naturally aduanceth his power at whose hands he seeketh help As though Theodoret would giue an Antichristian Title for so Protestants account it for auarice or S. Leo would accept it for flatterie Thus much as touching those Fathers and Bishops who liued in the Fift Age after Christ and their confessed testimonies of the Iurisdiction really executed by the Popes of those times not only ouer their Neighbour Churches and Bishops in Italie but ouer remote Countries and the other greatest Archbishops and Patriarcks of the world as of Antioch Hierusalem Alexandria and Constantinople and by them then accordingly acknowledged and obeyed To come now to the Fathers that liued in the Age precedent which is the time wherin Constantin the Great liued although the Church began as then but as it were to take breath from her former long endured persecutions whereby neither her Writers were so manie nor her face of outward Gouernment so knowne as in the times succeeding Yet is there not wanting euen for that time sufficient confessed testimonie in this kind In this Age liued Pope Damasus a man for vertue and learning so highly deseruing as that (86) Decades in English on the page next before the first Decade Bullinger not only calleth him Blessed Damasus Bishop of Rome c. but withal setteth downe the Imperial Decree of the Emperours Gratian Valentinian and Theodosius for the embracing of the Religion taught by Damasus and Peter of Alexandria (87) In his Def. c. p 345 M. Whiteguift confesseth that Damasus was a Vertuous Learned and Godlie Bishop (88) The Estate of the Church p. 137. And Crispinus reporteth how much he was esteemed of by Hierom Athanasius and Nazianzen This so much esteemed a Pope for learning and vertue is charged by M. Cartwright (89) In his Reply part 1. p. 502. to speak in the Dragons voice when he shameth not to write that the Bishop of Romes Sentence was aboue al other to be attended for in a synod Crispinus (90) The Estate of the Church p 137. chargeth Damasus that he was too much giuen to eleuate the Dignitie of his Sea For sayth he he begimeth his sayd Epistle to them of Constantinople In the Reuerence deare children which you owe to the Apostolick Sea you do much for your selues c. (91) Vpon the Reuel c. 5. p. 54. and See Cent. 4. col 550 M. Symondes acknowledgeth that Damasus wrote to the Councels of Africk that the Iudgement of the causes of Bishops and al other Matters of great importance may not be determined but by the authoritie of the Apostolick Sea And wheras Socrates l. 4. c. 30. reporteth that Peter Patriarch of Alexandria being thence expulsed by the Arians was vpon his iourney and request to Damasus Bishop of Rome and returne from thence which Damasus his letters restored and confirmed thereby in his Sea of Alexandria This same Historie is acknowledged by the (92) Cent. 4. col 1367. col 532. Centurists And M. Bunnie (93) In his Tryal of the Popes Title p. 117. acknowledgeth that Damasus in his 4. Epistle to Prosper and other Bishops of Numidia commandeth them that in al doubtful matters they referre themselues to him as to the Head c. Siricius taketh vpon him to threaten to pronounce Sentence against such as wil do otherwise then he would haue them So firme was Damasus in defence and execution of the Popes Primacie In this same Age liued also Pope Iulius of whō (94) In his 2. Reply par 1. p. 510. M. Carthwright writeth Iulius Bishop of Rome sayth it was decreed by the Lawes of the Church and immediatly after the Nicen Councel that the Bishop of Rome must be called to the Sinod and that that was voyd which was done there besides his Sentence (95) De Conciliis quest 2. p. 42. 43. 44. D. Whitaker relating the Ecclesiastical Canon of those times wherby it was decreed That no Councel should be celebrated without the sentence of the Bishop of Rome confesseth further that Iulius challenged to himself the like authoritie And wheras Bellarmin doth obiect this example of Iulius and other Bishops of Rome alleaging this Canon (96) Resp ad Bellarm. part 1. p. 595. Danaeus his onlie answear is that this obiection is of no moment because it is produced from the testimonie of a Roman Bishop that is
from a Partie in his owne cause And M. Carthwright (97) In his 2. Reply part 1. p. 501. auoucheth that Iulius Bishop of Rome at the Councel of Antioch outreached in claiming the hearing of causes that appertayned not to him The (98) Cent. 4. col 529. Centurists confesse that The Roman Bishops made a Law that they might command al things first to be written to them as appeareth by the Epistle of Iulius in Athasius Apologia secunda For Iulius sayth Are you ignorant this to be the custome that first we be written vnto c. (99) Vpon the Reuel c. 5. p. 53. And see Mornay of the Church in English p. 264. M. Symonides testifyeâ—h that Iulius decreed that whosoeuer suspected his Iudge might appeale to the Sea of Rome In so much that wheras the Arians had expelled Athanasius Bâ—shop of Alexandria Paulus Bishop of Constantinople and diuers other Catholick Bishops of the East Church it is (100) Cent. 4. col 530. testifyed that Iulius commanded the Arians to come to Rome and appoynted also a day to Athanasius Theodoret. l. 2. c. 4. c. where hearing euerie mans accusations and (101) Cent. 4. col 550. complâ—ynt He restored euerie one of these wronged Bishops to his owne place or Bishoprick and that not by intreatie or arbitrably but as the (102) Cent. 4. col 550. 530 Centurists confesse by Prerogatiue of the Roman Sea Al which might as ye be made much more euident by Iulius his vndoubted Epistle extant in Aâ—hanasius his second Apologie and alledged by the Centurists (103) Cent. 4. col 735. who mention their (104) col 737 742. Citation euen vnto Iudgement (105) col 739. 740. and at a certayne day and greatly reprehending this (106) col 529 And see D. field of the Church l 5. p. 178. Saying of Iulius Are ye ignorant this to be the custome that first we be written vnto that from hence that which is right may be defined c. for what we haue receaued froÌ„ the blessed Apostle Peter that I signify vnto you To coÌ„clude this of Pope Iulius Doctour Philippus Nicolai (107) De Regno Christi l. 2. p. 149. auoucheth that Pope Iulius as Socrates and Sozomene relate sent letters to the Eastern Bishops in which as the letters witnes he often affirmeth the right of calling general Councels by a certain singular Priuiledge euen by Diuine Precept to belong to himself alone who as he sayth is the Prelate of the first Sea He also affirmeth that it no lesse appertayneth vnto him being the Bishop of that Cittie that he be acquaynted with the affaires of Bishops and other waightie businesses of that kind After the same manner and with like ambition Damasus c. and afterwards Innocentius c. Thus far the Protestant Philippus To whom I wil only adde M. Fox confessing that (108) Act. Mon. l. 1. p. 1. The Church of Rome in al those Ages aboue specifyed from the Apostles challenged to it self the Title and ring-leading of the whole vniuersal Church on earth by whose direction al other Churches haue been gouerned And (109) Ibid. p. 8. whatsoeuer was done in other places coÌ„monly the manner was to write to the Roman Bishop for his approbation The testimonie of the Roman Bishop was sometimes wont to be desired in those dayes of Pope Iulius for admitting Bishops in other Churches wherof we haue examples in Socrates l. 4. c. 37. when Bishops of anie other Prouinces were at anie dissension they appealed to the Bishop of Rome Neither was this only the priuate opinion of some particuler Popes of those times but it was the general receaued doctrine of other Bishops and Fathers In so much as the Councel of Sardis which M. Bel (110) In his Regiment of the Church p 158. tearmeth The famous and ancient Councel of Sardis coÌ„sisting of 300. Bishops and aboue assembled from Spaine (111) Cent. 4. col 747. Theodoret. hist. l 2. c. 8. FraÌ„ce Italie Greece AEgipt Thebais Palestine Arabia c. and most other parts of the Christian world wherat sundrie Fathers of the Nicene CouÌ„cel were (112) Carion in his Chron. p. 282. present (113) Cent. 4. col 764. decreed Appeales to the Bishop of Rome Insomuch as the (114) Ibid. Centurists and (115) Epitome p. 294. Osiander do both of them acknowledge and recite this 7. Canon of that Councel It hath seemed good to vs that if a Bishop be accused if the Bishops of the Prouince assembled togeather haue iudged the matter and haue depriued him if the Partie depriued do appeale and fly to the Bishop of Rome c. if the Partie accused desiring his cause to be heard once againe do intreate the Bishop of Rome to send Legats à latere suo from him it shal be in the power of the Bishop to do as he shal think good c. (116) Antich Disp bipart p. 31. sect 103. Tilenus speaking hereof auoucheth that The Decree of the CouÌ„cel of Sardis of Appealing to Rome made the Roman Bishop more bould And in regard of this Decree this so ancieÌ„t a Councel is much reproued (117) Instit l. 4. c. 7. sect 9. by Caluin (118) In his com places in English p. 4. p. 39. Peter Martyr (119) Palma Christiana p. 30. 122. 124. Frigiuilleus Gaunius and (120) Cent 4. p. 294. Osiander But to end this Centurie wherin our first Christian Emperour Constantin the Great liued ruled The Protest writer (121) Palma Christiana p. 35. Frigiuilleus Gaunius plainly confesseth that the sayd Constantin himself attributed Primacie to the Roman Bishop before al. that (122) Ibid p. 34. Therby it appeared to be fatal that CoÌ„staÌ„tin would giue power to the Beast which Pope Iulius forthwith put in practise for Constantin the Great carryed in his Ensignes the Dragon for his Armes c. so that he was the Dragon Apoc. 13.2 (123) Fidelis Relatio c. p. 19. Bibliander acknowledgeth that Constantin the Great raigning c. Siluester the Bishop of Rome began to lay the foundations of the Papistical Monarchie c. M. Bale hath almost the same words saying (124) Cent. 1. c. 36. In these times of CoÌ„stantin Syluester began to lay the foundation of the Popes Monarchie and finding the key of the depth he opened the pit if it be true which Papists write of him Yea al the Popes after Syluester to Bonif. 3. he tearmeth Mitred Bishops preparing by their CanoÌ„s and Decrees the seat for the great Antichrist The (125) Cent. 4. col 549. CeÌ„turists coÌ„fesse in general that In this age the Mysterie of iniquitie was not idle (126) Cent. 4â— col 550. And that The Bishop of Rome challenged by Ecclesiastical Canon the dissallowing of those Synods wherat they were absent So cleer it is that the Fathers Bishops and Councels of this Age agreed with vs Catholicks in the
doctrine practise of the Popes Primacie Now as cōcerning the Age next ensuing the 20. yeares after Christ in which persecution so raged as the Churches gouernment was thereby much the more obscured yet it is confessed (127) Cent 3. col 168. that Pope Stephen in this Age did threaten Excōmunicatiō to Helenus Firmilianus al others throughout Cilicia Cappadocia for rebaptizing Hereticks (128) Apocalypsis c. c. 7. p. 193 yea M. Brightman is of opinion that scarcely would anie beleeue those proud brags of the Roman Sea wherwith the Decretal Epistles abound not to haue been forged by succeding Popes and so falsely ascribed to the more ancient they are so impudent and vayne but that Firmilianus assureth they were theyr owne at least a great part of them whose names they beare for speaking of Stephen then Bishop of Rome who sayth he so braggeth of the place of his Bishoprick and contendeth himself to hold the Succession of Peter vpon whom the foundations of the Church were placed and he declareth abundantly how boasting the Bishops then were amongst the Epistles of Cyprian ep 75. The (129) Cent. 3. c. 7. col 168. Centurists confesse that Dionysius Bishop of Rome through the false accusation of some excommunicated Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria but Dionysius of Alexandria made his Apologie and refuted the errours falsely obiected vnto him as Athanasius reporteth Hereby appeareth not only the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome in excommunicating but also the obsequiousnes of the Bishop of Alexandria in not contemning but making his Apologie vnto him They (130) Cent. 3. col 84. likewise reproue S. Cyprian for teaching that There ought to be one Bishop in the Catholick Church And for his calling (131) Ibid. Peters Chayre the principal Church from whence Priestly vnitie ariseth (132) Vpon Iude p. 285. M. Trig reprehendeth S. Cyprian saying Cyprian giueth more priuiledges to the Roman Church he calleth it the chief Church from whence Priestlie vnitie began c. And to which infidelitie cannot haue accesse Wherupon M. Trig thus inferreth Here we may note what certaintie it is to build our Faith on the Fathers c And the (133) Cent. 3. col 84. And See Brightman in his Apocalypsis in c. 13. p. 343. Centurists charge him for teaching say they without anie foundation of Scripture that the Roman Church ought to be acknowledged of al other for the Mother and root of the Catholick Church Yea D. Morton (134) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 294. 295. professing willingly to admit S. Cyprians Iudgement as Vmpier in this controuersie is yet inforced to say Although the next sentences of S. Cyprian may seem at their first view vnto the vnexpert Reader to obserue in the Church of Rome both a grace of Impossibilitie of Erring and also a Prerogatiue of the Mother Church of al others and are therefore censured by our Centurists for speeches inconuenient Yet no man exercised and conuersant in his writings and other Fathers can be ignorant that such like speeches are but the languages of Rhetorical Amplification which commonly they vse by way of persuasion rather then by asseueration But what testimonie though neuer so cleer in anie matter whatsoeuer may not easily be euaded if it wil suffice to answer that it was but the language of Rhetorical Amplification or demy-lying Or for what cause should S. Cyprian and other Fathers vtter the foresayd Sayings by way of Persuasion in behalf of the Roman Churches Prerogatiues if they had thought in their owne Iudgements and Consciences that the sayd Prerogatiues had not been due vnto her So vndoubted it is that S. Cyprian and the other Fathers of his Age beleeued and acknowledged the Primacie of the Roman Church But as touching the Age next after the Apostles themselues wherof as M. Hutton (135) In his ansvver to the 2. par of the Reasons of Refusal to Subscription p. 105. obserueth but few Monuments are now remayning As then liued Pope Victor who in D. Whiteguifts (136) In his Defence c. p. 510. opinion was a godlie Bishop and Martyr and the Church at that time in great puritie And yet of him sayth D. Whitaker (137) Cont. Duraeum l. 7. p. 480. FulK in his Ansvv to a counterf Cath. p. 36. with D. Fulk The first that exercised Iurisdiction vpon forraine Bishops was Victor Insomuch as he excommunicating the Bishops of Asia for not obseruing the Feast of Easter-day according to the vse of the Latin Church D. Fulk (138) Ibid. chargeth him that He passed the bounds of his authoritie Amandus Polanus )139) In Sillog Thes Theol. p. 165 accuseth him to haue shewed a Papal mind and arrogancie And M. Spark (140) Against Iohn de Albines in his Answer to the Preface And see Osiander cent 2. p. 87. 96. affirmeth that somewhat Pope-like he exceeded his bounds when he took vpon him to excommunicate the Bishops of the East Beza (141) Pref. ad Princip Condensem before his Translation of the New Testament tearmeth Victor the most foolish and most ambitious Bishop of Rome And (142) Of the state of the Church p. 47 Crispinus speaking of this Age auoucheth that The Roman Bishops now became more audacious to forge new Ceremonies yea and to force vpon other Churches c. Victor in his 2. Decretal calleth himself Archbishop of the Roman and vniuersal Church D Fulk (143) Against the Rhem. Test in 2. Thess 2. sec 9. p. 659. maketh the Mysterie of iniquitie to work in Peters Sea in the times of Anicetus Victor and Cornelius In like sort D. Morton iustifyeth such Protestant Authors as (144) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 300. reprehend Victor for arrogancie and transgressing the bounds of his Iurisdiction in excommunicating the Churches of Asia c. The Centurists record that (145) Cent. 2. c. 7. col 159. Anacletus in the Epistles which heare his name in the general regiment of Churches so loyneth them togeather that to the Roman Church he attributeth Primacie and excellencie of power ouer al Churches and ouer the whole flock of the Christian People and that by the authoritie of Christ saying to Peter Thou art Peter and vpon this Rock wil I build my Church c. The Bishop of Rome is placed first as the supreame Head of the Church who though he erre yet wil he not haue him to be iudged of others c. He sayth also that certaine Citties receaued Primates from the Blessed Apostles and from S. Clement c. He prescribeth that If greater difficulties arise or causes fal out among the Bishops and Primates themselues let them be brought to the Sea Apostolick if such Appeale be made for so the Apostles ordayned by the appoyntment of our Sauiour that the greater and harder questiōs should alwayes be brought to the Apostolick Sea vpon which Christ built his vniuersal Church Math. 16. In like sort they say of Xistus that In
his 2 Epistle he nameth himself the Bishop of the vniuersal Apostolick Church And willeth others to appeale to the Apostolick Sea as to the Head Whereby it is euident that the ancient Popes Victor Anacletus Xistus and our Gregorie xv do wholy agree in their due clayme of Primacie In like māner holie Ireneus who according to Hamelmanus (146) De Traditionibus col 528. might yet remember the Apostles owne liuelie preaching affirming l. 3. c. 3. that It is necessary that al Churches do accord to the Roman Church in regard of a more powerable principalitie is charged for the same by the Centurists (147) In the Alphabetical Table of the 2. Cent. at the word Ireneus with a corrupt Saying concerning the Primacie of the Roman Church But to arise yet euen to the times of the blessed Apostles themselues wheras Papias as appeareth by the testimonie of Ireneus alleadged by the Centurists (148) Cent. 2 col 172. liued in the Apostles time as D. Fulk (149) In his Answ to A Counterf Cath. p 35. confesseth was Schollar to S. Iohn yet doth M. Midleton (150) Papisto-Mastix p. 200. charge him saying Papias was the first Father and Founder of Traditions and Peters Primacie or Romish Episcopalitie (151) De Scrip. Auth. l. 2. c. 20. fol. 166. Bullinger reporteth that forthwith from the verie times of the Apostles especially from the gouernment of Constantin the Great vnder whom some say the first poysen was powred into the Church the desire of gouerning was often put in practise by certain Roman Bishops c. D. Downeham (152) Antichristi l. 2. c. 8. p. 79. acknowledgeth though not the then open Exercise of the Popes vniuersal Dominion yet the priuate Doctrine therof saying The Antichrist which is to be destroyed at the second coming of Christ was come euen in the Apostles time although he was not reuealed by exercising openly a Soueraigne and vniuersal Dominion M. Midleton (153) Papisto-mastix p. 193. affirmeth confidently that we are sure that the Mysterie of iniquitie did work in Pauls time and fel not a-sleep so soone as Paul was dead waking againe six hundred yeares after when this Mysterie was disclosed c. And therefore no maruaile though perusing Councels Fathers and Stories from the Apostles foreward we find the print of the Popes feet c. But Philippus (154) De Regno Christi p. 221. Nicolai vndertaking to speak of the beginning and increase of the Popes Dignitie auoucheth yet further that The desire of Primacie was the common Infirmitie of the Apostles (155) Catal. Testium veritatis Tom. 1. p. 27. and of the first Bishops of the Cittie of Rome Yea some Protestants doubt not to deriue from S. Peter himself as being the prognosticon or type therof the confessed clayme of his Successours the Bishops of Rome saying to this purpose It can not be denyed but that Peter sometimes was subiect to ambition and desire of Rule c. By which infirmitie of Peter it was vndoubtedly signifyed that these Bishops who boasted of Peters succession were to be subiect to the like yea to greater ambition by infinit degrees c. wherfore this so corrupt ambition of Peter and ignorance and negligence of diuine matters c. without douht did foreshew that the Bishop of Rome in that he wil be the Chief and the Heire of Peters Priuiledges was to be ignorant and a contemner of heauenlie things and a louer of human riches power and pleasures And D. Whitaker blusheth not to write that (156) De Concil p. 37. The mysterie of iniquitie did work in the Sea of Rome in Peters time and did shew itself in Anicetus Victor Cornelius Sozimus Bonifacius Celestinus Now if it be true which Caluin affirmeth that (157) Resp ad Sadoletum It is playne conspicuous both to learned and vnlearned that the Kingdome of Christ by which he meaneth the Protestant Church was ouerthrowne when the Primacie of the Roman Bishop was erected then seing the sayd Primacie confessedly began in S. Peter himself and since hath euer continued in his Successours the Bishops of Rome it followeth that therfore the Protestant Church hath been ouerthrowne and ruinated euer since the time of S. Peter then which what can be produced more conuincing in proof that the Protestant Church indeed neuer was But to conclude this with that Princely testimonie of K. Henrie Luther (158) In Assertione 7. aduersus Luther Art 2. cannot deny sayth he but that al the Church of the faithful acknowledge and reuerence the holie Roman Sea as their Mother and Chief if they be not debarred accesse by distance of places or by dangers in the Way And yet if they speak truth which come hither from India the verie Indians themselues distant by so manie parts of the Earth of the Seas of the deserts do yet submit themselues to the Bishop of Rome Therefore if the Pope hath obtayned neither by the commandment of God nor by the assent of men so great and so vniuersal power but hath challenged the same to himself by his owne power Let Luther tel me when he burst into possession of so great Dominion Can the beginning of so great power be obscure especially if it began within the memorie of man but if he say that it was aboue one or two Ages agoe let him make vs remember the same out of Historie for otherwise if it be so ancient that the beginning of so great a matter be blotted out let him know that it is prouided by the Lawes that whose right or Title so surpasseth al memorie of men that it cannot be knowne what beginning it had it is iudged to haue had a lawful beginning And it is clearly forbidden by the consent of al Nations that those things be not changed which haue long continued without change So vndoubted it is that this our Catholick doctrine of the Bishops of Romes Primacie hath been generally taught and practised time out of mind euen from S. Peter himself euen to the end of the Primitiue Church and euer since as hath been formerly proued To come now to the Gouernment of the Church before Christs time The Puritans themselues do confesse that (159) Engl. Puritan p. 16. And Hook Eccl. Pol. l. 5. p. 235. The high Priest of the Iewes was typically and in a figure the supreame Head of the whole Catholick Church which though say they it were visible only in the Prouince and Nation of Iewrie yet those of other Nations and Countries as appeareth by the Historie of the Acts euen though they were Aethiopians were vnder this High Priest and acknowledged homage vnto him So that he was c. in verie deed an Oecumenical vniuersal Bishop of the whole world yea sayth M. Iacob (160) Reasons taken out of Gods word p 5. The Iewish Church vnder the Law was National and only One in the world vnder one high Priest
(161) Cent. 4. col 549. And see Carthwright in Whâ—tguift Def. p 700. See Osiand cent 4. p. 477. AmaÌ„dus Polanus Symphonia p 841. 849. And as the Fathers were thus direct and ful for the Bishop of Romes Primacie so did they answerably reiect al pretended spiritual Primacie in anie temporal Magistrate So the Centurie-writers confesse that Emperours assumed to themselues vnseasonably the iudgement of matters of Faith which thing Athanasius reprehendeth in Constantius Ambrose in Valentinian Yea (162) Of the Estate of the Churcb p. 99 Crispinus confesseth that our first Christian Emperour Constantin sayd God hath ordayned you Bishops and hath giuen you power to iudge of yourselues by meanes wherof we yeeld ourselues to your iudgement Men may not iudge you but God alone Yea (163) Ibid. p. 93 And see the Abridgement of Fox his Acts Mon. p 67. Crispinus further acknowledgeth that he gaue power vnto Clerks for to appeale from Ciuil Magistrats to Bishops And others (164) In the sayd Abridgement p. 66 grant that He freed them from al manner of publick duties and burdens As also that (165) Napper vpon the Reuâ—l p. 145. He subdued al Christian Churches to Pope Syluester And (166) Frigiuilleus Ganuius in his Palma Christ p. 35. Attributed Primacie to the Roman Bishop before al. And such was his respect to Ecclesiastical Gouernours as that the Centurists (167) Cent. 4 col 4â—0 relate that It is knowne what reuerence and obseruance he had to Bishops in the Councel of Nyce where he would not sit downe vntil the Bishops willed him And then as 168) Chron. p. 274. And Lubbertus de Concilijs Carion reporteth Constantin sate downe on a lower Seat amongst the Bishops So far was this most renowned and Christian Prince from challenging to himself Supremacie in causes Ecclesiastical The Centurists (169) Cent. 5. col 663. doe acknowledge and recite Pope Innocentius his Epistle to Arcadius the Emperour and his wife who were aduerse to Chrysostom and took part with Theophilus where he thus writeth I the least of al and a Sinner hauing yet the Throne of the Great Apostle Peter committed to me do separate and remoue thee and her from receiuing the immaculate Mysteries of Christ our God And euerie Bishop or anie other of the Clergie which shal presume to minister or giue to you those holy mysteries after the time that you haue read the present letters of my bound pronounce them voyd of their dignitie c. Arsacius whom you placed in the Bishop-like Throne in Chrysostoms roome though he be dead we depose and command that his name be not written in the role of Bishops In like manner we depose al other Bishops who deliberatly haue communicated with him c. To the deposing of Theophilus we adde Excommunication c. From hence then it appeareth that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church not only denyed euen to the greatest Emperours al pretended Supremacie in Ecclesiastical matters but that also Constantin himself disclaymed from the same and when other Emperours offended against the Church the same Church spared not to punish them for the same The premisses likewise do most fully conuince that the Primitiue Church neuer thought anie Pope or succession of Popes to be Antichrist But contrarie to Protestants making al Popes for manie hundred yeares past to be Antichrists it is confessed by D. Whitaker (170) l. De Antichristo p. 21. that The Fathers for the most part thought that Antichrist should be but one man but in that sayth he as in manie other things they erred either because they yeelded too much to the common opinion concerning Antichrist or because they waighed not the Scriptures so diligently as they ought And as M. Whitaker forsooth hath done M. Carthwright's (171) In his 2. Reply part 1. p. 508. See Gracerus his Historia Antichristi p. 11. censure is that Diuers of the ancient and the chiefest of them imagined fondly of Antichrist as of one singular Person And as for the time of his coming and continuance M. Fox (172) In Apoc. c. 12 p. 345. acknowledgeth that Almost al the holie and learned Interpreters doe by a Time Times and halfe a Time vnderstand only Three yeares and a halfe And (173) In Apoc. c. 13. p. 362. that this is the consent opinion of almost al the ancient Fathers Bullinger (174) In Reuel c. 11. ser 46. f. 142 auoucheth that Doubtlesse al Expositours grounding themselues vpon this Text haue attributed to the Kingdome of Antichrist and to his most cruel persecutions no more then Three yeares and a halfe This shortest time of Antichrists raigne was so cleerly the Doctrine beleef of the ancient Fathers that D. Morton for his truest answere confesseth the same reprouing them al of Errour saying (175) Prot. Appeal l 2. p. 144. Why might not these Fathers be sayd to haue erred in prefining the time of Antichrist who haue been thus farr ouerseen in reporting his Tribe So confessedly do the Fathers cleer al our Popes from being Antichrists (176) Of the Church 9. p. 286 Philip Mornay proueth at large that Antichrist is not to come during the continuance of the Roman Empire in which behalf he alleadgeth the agreable Sayings of S. Ambrose Hierom Austin Chrysostom and S. Paul By al which it is most euident that in the opinion of the ancient Fathers Antichrist is to be but one man and the continuance of his Raigne to be Three yeares and a halfe before the ending of the world before which the Roman Empire must cease To reuiew then the truest harmonie between the Primitiue and our present Roman Church in this principal Controuersie concerning the Popes Supremacie in Causes Spiritual and Ecclesiastical The Fathers and Bishops as then taught First that the Bishop of Rome was S. Peters successour and that this Succession was not anie humane or Synodical Constitution but euen the ordinance of God himself Secondly that therfore Popes might Exercise their Iurisdiction Primacie ouer al Churches Thirdly And so accordingly they did ordaine Excommunicate depose restore and cite other forraine Bishops Archbishops Fourthly they placed their Legats or Vicars in other Countries to end smaller matters reseruing the greater causes to theÌ„selues Fiftly Appeales were made to them from al Christian Kingdomes Sixâ—ly and they not only had power to cal General Councels but they also appoynted Presidents in the same Yea Councels were then so subiect vnto them as that no Councel was holden lawful which was not assembled approued by their authoritie Seauenthly Princes Emperours were subiect to their Spiritual Censures And yet no Father Bishop or King of those times did euer traduce anie one of those Popes with that fowlest note or stayne of Antichrist Now the ancient holie Doctours and Bishops which are here acknowledged and reproued for the foresayd seueral poynts and priuiledges of the Popes Primacie are Gregorie Pelagius Celestin
Leo Foelix Gelasius the Fathers of the Councel of Chalcedon of Africk and the 6. of Carthage of Sardis Sixtus Innocentius Siricius Sozimus Damasus Iulius Stephen Denis Cyprian Victor Anicetus Cornelius Ireneus Papias Peter and the other Apostles The Protestants producing and reprouing the foresayd Fathers are the Centurie-writers Danaeus Caluin Bucer Philippus Nicolai Peter Martyr Carion Bullinger Melancthon Osiander Friccius Beza Crispinus Tilenus Frigiuilleus Gauuius Bibliander Amandus Polanus Hamelmannus Illyricus Lubbertus Sarauia Napper Mornay Whitguift Carthwright Whitaker Fulk Bilson Trige Rainolds Brightman Bale Symonides Bunnie Spark Midleton Fox Morton and Field euerie one wherof do cite and reproue some Father or Councel before mentioned concerning some branch of the Bishop of Romes Primacie It is confessed by Protestants that the Primitiue Church of Christ beleeued the Bookes of Tobie Iudith Esther Sapientia Ecclesiasticus and two first of Machabees to be truly Canonical Scriptures CHAPTER V. AS it is vndoubted by al that the true Scriptures Prophetical and Apostolical are most sacred diuine and of infallible authoritie so it remayneth stil in Controuersie which Bookes be the sayd Prophetical Apostolical and Canonical Scriptures for as the (1) Concil Carthag 3. Can. 47. Trid. sess 4. Catholick Church hath defyned the Bookes of Esther Iudith Tobie two of the Machabees Wisdome and Ecclesiasticus to be sacred Canonical and of infallible authoritie so are al the sayd Bookes reiected by Protestants (2) Luth. Zuingl Praef. Bibl. a se CoÌ„uers Calu. Inst l. 1. c. 12. §. 8. l. 2. c. 5. §. 18. l. 3. c. 5. §. 8. as merely apocryphal and only human Now to decide this so waightie a Controuersie by the Primitiue Church Wheras in the Third Carthage Councel wherat S. Austin and sundrie other Fathers and Bishops were present and subscribed it is expresly defined that (3) Can. 47 Nothing be read in the Church vnder the name of diuine Scriptures besides Canonical Scriptures And the Canonical Scriptures are Genesis Exodus c. fiue bookes of Salomon c. Tobie Iudith Hester two bookes of Esdras two bookes of Machabees c. Wheras also the same Canon of Scriptures is made and numbred particulerly by S. Austin (4) De Doct. Christi l. 2. c. 8 Innoc. ep ad Exup c. 7. Gel. To. 1. Concil in Decret cum 70. Ep. Isid l 6. Etymol c. 1. Rabanus l. 2. Instit cler Cassiod l. 2. diuinarum Lect. himself as also by Innocentius Gelasius and other ancient Writers the truth hereof is so manifest that the same is confessed by sundrie Protestant Writers and the same Councel and Fathers in steed of better answere seuerely reprehended for the same Hiperius (5) Meth. Theol. l. 1. p. 46. auoucheth that In the Third Carthage Councel there are added to the Canon c. Sapientia and Ecclesiasticus two bookes of Machabees Tobie Iudith c. Al which bookes in the same order numbreth Augustin Innocentius Gelasius for which he at large afterwards reiecteth their iudgement In like sort (6) de Princip Christ Dogm l. 1. c. 4. p. 8. Lubbertus I grant sayth he certaine of these bookes to be admitted by the Carthaginians but I deny that therfore they are the Word of God for no Councels haue that Authoritie But to be brief the Third Carthage Councel is acknowledged and reproued for this verie doctrine by D. Raynolds (7) Conclus annex to his Conf p 699 700. Zan de Sacr. p. 32. 33. Hosp hist Sacram. p. 1. p. 160. Trelc loc com p. 15. Hoe Tract Tripart Theol. p. 46. Park ag Symb. part 2. p 60. Field of the Church p. 246. 247. Zanchius Hospinian Trelcatius Mathias Hoe M. Parker and D. Field And so likewise is S. Austin and other ancient Fathers herein acknowledged and reiected by Hospinian 8) Hist sacr part 1. p. 161. Hip. Meth. Theol. p. 46. Zanch. de sacra-Scrip p. 32. 33. Field of the Church p. 246. Hâ—perius Zanchius D. Field But Brentius auoucheth more in general that (9) Apol. Confess Wittemb See Bucers Scripta Angl p. 7â—3 There are some of the ancient Fathers who receiue sayth he these Apocryphal Bookes into the number of Canonical Scriptures And in like sort some Councels command them to be acknowledged as Canonical I am not ignorant what was done but I demand whether it was rightly and Canonically done Lastly D. Couel not only most plainly confesseth S. Austins like Iudgement had of the Booke of Wisdome but withal further affirmeth (11) Ib. p 87 of al these Bookes that If Ruffinus be not deceaued they were approued as partes of the Old Testawent by the Apostles So cleer it is that this foresayd Bookes were confessedly beleeued to be Canonical by the Primitiue Church Adde hereunto that (12) Of the Church p. 245. 246. Hut 2. part of his Answ p 176. D. Field M. Hutton both of them teaching that some of the ancient Iewes receiued the foresayd Bookes for truly Canonical though others of them did not beleeue and receaue the same accordingly yet are the sayd Iewes therfore expresly reproued by Protestants themselues Bibliander tearming it The rashnes of the Iewes in which his censure he is approued by the Protestant Sceltco in his booke of the Second coming of Christ Englished by M. Rogers (13) fol. 6. for the supposed worth therof D. Bancroft (14) p. 60. in the verie Conference before his Maiestie reiecteth the obiections of the Iewes made against these Bookes tearming them The old cauils of the Iewes renewed by Hierom who was the first that gaue them the name of Apocrypha which opinion vpon Ruffiâ—us his challenge he after a sort disclaymed Yea D. Bancroft is so ful with Catholicks in Defence of the sayd Bookes as that other of his owne Brethren charge him further to say (15) The 2. parte of the Ministers Def. p. 108. that The Apocrypha were giuen by inspiration from God which is al one as to affirme them to be truly diuine and Canonical And as concerning the booke Ecclesiasticus it is defended to be truly Canonical by the Protestant Writers (16) Ep. ad Volanum Lascicius and Parker of which later D. Willet (17) LoÌ„doro mastix p. 69 sayth How audacious is this fellow that contrarie to the determination of this Church of England dare make Ecclesiasticus a book of Canonical Scripture 10) Against Burges p. 76 77. Furthermore seing it is expresly taught and defended by sundrie Protestants that this waightiest Controuersie of discerning true Scripture from forged can not be decided by the (18) Hook Ecol Pol. l. 1 p. 86. Scriptures themselues neither by Testimonie (19) Whit. cont Staplet p. 370. 357. Hook vbi sup p 147. of the Spirit but (20) Hook ib. p. 146. 116. Aretiu Exam p. 24. by the authoritie of Gods Church Hence it necessarily followeth that the Church of Christ hauing decided and determined this foresayd Controuersie and
of the Old Testament now in question And that the foresayd Epistles of S. Peter S. Iames S. Iohn S. Iude and the Apocalyps were doubted of by some Fathers of the Primitiue Church and not generally receaued by al it is further confessed by the Deanes of Paules and Windsor who in the Towers Disputation had with that Ornament of our Nation and most victorious Martyr Edmund Campian do thus report of themselues (40) The first Dayâ—s Conf. D. 1. For proofe hereof we alleadged the testimonie of Hierom in Catal. where he thus writeth The Epistle of Iames is sayd to be published by some other vnder his name and of the 2. of Peter he sayth that it is denyed of manie to be his we also alledged Eusebius writing thus Those Bookes that be gaynsaid though they be knowne to manie be these the Epistle attributed to Iames the Epistle of Iude the latter of Peter the 2. and 3. of Iohn And D. Walker in the same Disputation affirmeth 41) 4. Dayes Confâ—r fâ—l 2. 6. that S. Hierom saith concerning that Epistle which is written to the Hebrewes manie haue doubted of it And also concerning the 2. of Peter he sayth it was doubted of by manie and so with some were the two last Epistles of Iohn c. Now if the Bookes of Machabees Tobie c. be not Canonical because as Protestants before obiected they were reiected or doubted by some ancient Writers then by the same reason Protestants must likewise reiect the Epistle to the Hebrewâ—s the Epistles of S Peter S. Iames S. Iude S. Iohn and the Apocalyps because these also were no lesse doubted reiected by sundrie ancient Writers Wherefore the weaknes and ensuing absurditie of this obiection being thus discouered we are to obserue that the Canonical Scriptures are to vs at this day discerned and made knowne not by that which some ancient Writers omit deny or doubt of but by that which most of the Fathers constantly affirme and chiefly by that which is iudged and decreed by the Catholick Church lawfully assembled in General Councel Thirdly some obiect that there are in the foresayd Bookes diuers repugnances or Contradictions and consequently that they are not inspired by the holie-Ghost But to omit that in those Scriptures which are beleeued by al to be Canonical there are manie hidden difficulties and seeming (42) See Mat. 10.10 Mar. 6.8 1. Reg. 8.9 2. Par. 5.10 Hebr. 9.4 Act. 9.7 Act 22.9 Math. 26.34 Marc 14.68 Mar. 15.25 Io. 19.14 Luc. 3.35.36 Gen. 11.12 And see Iewel Def. c. p. 361. repugnances which yet notwithstaÌ„ding we are bound to acknowledge the sayd Scriptures to be true and sacred I wil for breuitie only alledge what other Protestants think and answer themselues to the foresayd pretended Contradictions in the Bookes of Machabee Tobie c. D. Couel (43) Answ to Burges p. 85. writeth We could without violence haue afforded them the Reconcilement of other Scriptures and vndoubtedly haue proued them to be most true Yea he particularly answereth certaine of the pretended repugnances In like sort Conradus Pelican (45) Ep. Dedic Professour at Tigure writing his Commentarie vpon the foresayd Bookes sayth I easily yeelded c. especially seing those Bookes were alwayes accompted so Ecclesiastical and Biblical that euen from the Apostles times they were read in the Catholick Church with much reuerence although they were not produced in authoritie against the Iewes as Canonical who receiued not these into their Sacred Canon wheras they do not only not contradict in anie thing the writings of the Law and the Prophets (44) Ib. p. 87 88. 89. 90. but also c. for the most part they cleerly carry the right style of the holie-Ghost certain knots or difficulties intermingled which are sound more easie to be loosed then some haue thought c. Wherupon they were euer reuerenced and read by holie men yea the Sayings therof are found to be alledged by the Apostles Agreably hereto M. Hutton (46) 2. Parte of the Answ p. 238. 239. at large answereth and cleereth the common obiection against Iudith and the like in behalf of Ecclesiasticus (47) Ibid. p. 247. and (48) Ibid. p. 246. And see Bucers scripta Anglic p. 713. Daniel So weake and impertinent are the Contradictions pretended by Protestants against the foresayd Bookes Now from the premisses that by the CoÌ„fessions of our Aduersaries we may collect that the foresayd Bookes of Scripture were only not approued for truly Canonical by S. Austin Innocentius Gelasius and al the Fathers and Bishops of the 3. Carthage Councel but also were approued as partes of the Old Testament by the Apostles and for such alledged by them and so from the Apostles times were read in the Catholick Church with much reuerence Witnesses wherof are the Protestant Writers Hiperius Lubbertus Zanchius Hospiman Trelcatius Hoe Scelico Brentius Bibliander Lascicius Pelican Raynolds Parker Field Couel Bancroft Hutton Parkes D. Bilson al of them affording their helping hands in maintayning and defending the foresayd Bookes by true Antiquitie It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught our now Catholick Doctrine concerning Traditions CHAPTER VI. THE Catholick Doctrine concerning (1) Bellarm. de Verb. Dei non Scripto l. 4 c 3. Traditions is that the sacred Scriptures or written Word of God do not expresly containe al poynts or matters concerning Faith and manners And therfore besides the same is necessarily required the not written Word of God that is Diuine and Apostolical Traditions To the Contrarie Protestants (2) Luth. in Comment c. 1. ad Gal. Caluin Inst l. 4. c. 8. sec 8 directly teach that al things necessarie to Saluation are set downe in the sacred Scriptures And that we are not bound to beleeue or do anie thing which is not taught and commanded thereby Now what the Primitiue Church beleeued and whether the present Roman or Protestant Church doth Symbolize and agree therewith the Sequele only taken from the free and liberal testimonies of Protestants themselues shal euidently demonstrate And to begin with S. Gregorie D. Morton confesseth that (3) Prot. Appeale l. 4. p 62. He vseth to confirme some things by Tradition S. Augustin also whom D. Field (4) Of the Church l. 3. p. 170. tearmeth Austin the greatest of al the Fathers and worthiest Diuine the Church of God euer had since the Apostles times This indeed most worthie Diuine endeauouring to proue that those who are Baptised by Hereticks should not be rebaptised freely confesseth that (5) De Bapt. cont Don. l. 5. c. 23. The Apostles commanded nothing hereof but that Custome which was opposed herein against Cyprian is to be beleeued to proceed from their Tradition as manie things be which the whole Church holdeth and are therefore wel beleeued to be commanded of the Apostles although they be not written A Saying so euident
sayth D. Morton (7) Prot. Appeal l. 1. sec 24 p. 27. be greatly moued with the contrarie Doctrine of S. Gregorie allowing praying to Saincts c. And agayne Neuertheles as we find in him very rarely anie prayer vnto Saints c So desiring to mince but not daring to deny a truth so manifest and for such confessed by so manie of his other Brethren of S. Gregorie his defending Inuocation of Saints But to ascend from S. Gregorie to other more ancient Doctours (8) Exam. part 3. p. 211. Chemnitius alleageth S. Austin inuocating S. Cyprian and coÌ„cludeth saying therof These things did Augustin without scripture yeelding to the times and custome Prudentius I grant sayth D. Whitaker (9) Answer to Campian Reas 5. p. 140. 141. as a Poet somtims called vpon the Martyrs whose Acts he describeth in verse And the superstitious Custome of praying to Saints had now taken deep root in the Church which as a Tyrant haled somtimes the holie Fathers into the same errour [10) In his Reioynder to Bristow p 5. D. Fulk spareth not to speak thus plainly I confesse sayth he that Ambrose Austin and Hierom held Inuocation of Saints to be lawful And that (11) Against the Rhem. Test in 2. Pet. c. 1. sec 3. fol. 443. In Nazianzene Basil and Chryostome is mention of Inuocation of Saints And that Theodoret also speaketh of prayers vnto Martyrs As also that Leo ascribeth much to the prayers of S. Peter for him And in brief that manie of the ancient Fathers held that the Saints departed pray for vs. (12) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 675. The Centurists charge S. Chrysostom's Lyturgie with Inuocation of our B. Ladye by name Chemnitius (13) Exam. part 3. 200. auoucheth that About the yeare of our Lord three hundred and seauentie Inuoâ—aâ—ion of Saints began to be brought into the publick assemblies of the Church by Basile Nyssen and Nazianzene (14) Ibid. p. 211. And he reprehendeth for the same Doctrine Theodoret and Hierome A French Protestant answering to the testimonie of S. Gregorie Nazianzene writeth (15) Clypeus fidei Dial. 8. p. 258. In that thou citest S. Gregorie praying to S. Basil dead that he would pray for him I wil let thee know that Gregorie knew not what he sayd when he sayd so Belike this Protestant thought that greatest Diuine S. Gregorie Nazianzen to haue been ouertaken with drinke when he prayed so as we may iustly suspect this giddie French Protestant was when he writ thus But the Centurie-writers (16) Cent. 4. col 295. 296. 297. alledge sundrie examples of prayer to Saincts Athanasius Basil Nazianzene Ambrose Prudentius Epiphanius and Ephrem (17) Apocal. in c. 14 p. 382. M. Brightman hauing named Athanasius Basil Chrysostom Nazianzen Ambrose Hierom Austin c. reproueth them as in words condemning Idolatrie but indeed establishing it by Inuocation of Saints worshipping of Relicks and such like wicked Superstitions c. sayth he And wheras D. Bishop alleageth S. Chrisostom affirming the Emperour Constantin to haue prayed to Saincts (18) p. 17. M. Wotton in his book against D. Bishop only answereth by barely reiecting the Saying for suspected and forged yet (19) In his Ansvver to D. Bishop p. 174. D. Abbot acknowledgeth the contrarie saying We deny not Chrysostom to be authour of the words And then inuenteth an answer no lesse false then impertinent to wit (20) Ibid. that Chrisostom thereby meaneth the Emperour Arcadius who was Emperour aboue sixtie yeares after Constantin but of Constantin it is sayth he that we enquire for what others did after the time of Constantin Superstition more and more increasing is nothing concerning him But yet to omit al other answere this may so much concerne anie indifferent man that it may sufficiently assure him that Inuocation of Saincts was confessedly vsed in the Church at least about Anno Domini 398. when Arcadius raigned Yea this Doctrine was so general and so certainly beleeued in the Primitiue Church that the holie Fathers are reproued by our young Protestant writers for condemning the contrarie Protestant Doctrine as Heretical in Vigilantius and Aerius D. Fulk sayth (21) In his ansvver to a counterf Cath. p. 46 Last of al Vigilantius shal be brought in who wrot against the Inuocation of Saincts c. Him Hierom reprooueth And (22) In defen tract de Diuers p. 349. D. Sarauia and Beza (23) Ibid. p. 346. do both of them affirme that Aërius was likewise charged and condemned by the Fathers for his then affirming that the Saincts departed are not to be prayed vnto But to arise yet somwhat higher and a litle to view the times neer Christ and his Apostles Beza speaking of the times of Cyprian Austin and Chrysostom acknowledgeth that (24) Prefat nou Test ad Princip Condens then preuayled Inuocation of the Dead The Centurie writers speaking of (25) Cent. 3 col 84. S. Cyprian say thus Verily Cyprian in the end of his first Epistle of his first book doth not obscurely think that Martyrs and Saincts departed do pray for the liuing (26) Cent. 3 col 83. Yea they further charge Origen for praying O holie Iob pray for vs wretches And for teaching hom 1. in Ezech. that Angels are to be prayed vnto But to auoyd tediousnes in reciting the other particuler Fathers of that Age they in grosse confesse (27) Cent. 3. c. 4. col 83. that There are manifest steps of Inuocation of Saincts in the Doctours of that ancient Age which was the third Age or hundred yeares after Christ And wheras (28) l. 5. c. 19. S. Ireneus termeth the B. Virgin Marie Eues Aduocat some Caluinists auouch that these were the words (29) Clypeâ—â— fidei Dial. 8. p. 277 Ediâ— Gall. rather of some Idolater or if they were the words of Ireneus Ireneus had not the true vnderstanding of the confession of the holie Faith of Christian Religion But if so ancient and holie Ireneus wanted true vnderstanding of Faith and Christian Religion we may assure our selues that new borne Protestants are wholy blind therin But without al restraint of Age or time (30) In his Examination c c. 9. p 120. D. Couel affirmeth that Diuers both of the Greek and Latin Church were spotted with errours about Free-wil Merits Inuocation of Saincts c. Yea D. Whitguift discoursing of (31) In h is Def. c. against the Reply of Carthwright p. 472. 473. Doctrine taught in anie Age since the Apostles time affirmeth without any exception either of Age or Father that to vse his owne words (32) Ibid. p. 473. almost al the Bishops and learned writers of the Greek Church and Latin also for the most part were spotted with Doctrines of Free wil of Merit of Inuocation of Saincts and such like Now the Doctrine and practise herof in the ancient Iewes is so cleerly recorded in the books of (33) c. 5.
5. 12. 13. 15. 18. Tobie and Macchabees (34) 2 Ma. 15 12.13.14 3.33 4.34 that no better answer thereto can (35) Ad Rat. Camp p. 15. 16. D. Whitaker find then barely to reiect them as not Canonical D. Beard affirmeth that Catholicks (36) Retractiue from Romish Religion p. 80. ioyne hands with the Iewes in their Doctrines of Freewil Inuocation of Angels and Saincts and Merit of good works Al which the Moderne Rabbins hold as Articles of their Creed deriuing them from their Predecessours the Pharisees that went before them And yet we neuer read that the Pharisees were reproued by Christ or anie of his Apostles for the foresayd poynts who yet noted their smallest errours This then our Catholick Doctrine of praying to Angels and Saincts is thus by the Confession of Protestants the ancient Catholick Doctrine and Practise of S. Gregorie Austin Leo Ambrose Hierome Chrysostome Nyssen Nazianzene Basil Theodoret Athanasius Prudentius Cyprian Origen and of almost al say they the Greek and Latin Fathers Now the Protestants acknowledging and disliking this in the sayd Fathers are the Centurists Osiander Carion Chemnitius Beza Sarauia Symonds Brightman Humfrey Fulk Abbot Couel Whitguift Beard and Morton IT IS CONFESSED BY PROTESTANTS THAT THE Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed the vse of Christs Image and his Saincts placing them euen in churches and Reuerencing them CHAP. XIV THough (a) Conc. Trident sess 25. Images may not be worshipped with Inuocation or by placing anie confidence in them as though they were endowed with any Diuinitie yet that otherwise they may be worshiped as by kissing them kneeling downe and praying before them placing them in Churches translating and the like the Catholick Church doth teach and practise But Protestants denying al worship to Saincts do much more deny al reuerence or respect to their Images Wherfore to decide this Controuersie by the Doctours of the Primitiue Church I find the holie Fathers euen often reproued by Protestants for their special deuotion and Reuerence towards holie Images So S. Gregorie is reprehended by M. Bale (1) In Act. Rom. Pont p. 44. 41 46 47. for that he suffred the Image of the Blessed Virgin to be carryed about c. And that he confirmed by Indulgences Pilgrimages to Images for the Deuotion of the People (2) Cent. 6. p. 289 290 Osiander affirmeth that Austin sent by Gregorie thrust vpon the English Churches the Roman Rites and customes to wit Altars Vestmentes Images c. (3) Vpon the Reuelations p. 83.84.85 86. M. Symondes confesseth that S. Gregorie was angrie for breaking of Images and called theÌ„ Lay mens books c. He did worse sayth he then the Hereticks called Collyridiani that worshiped the Virgin Marie (7) Instit l. 1. c. 11. § 5. carryed the Image of the Virgin Marie in Procession c. He sent Austin into England to conuert the English they which were sent spread forth a Banner with a painted Crucifix and so came in Procession to the king c. D. Fulk confesseth that (4) Against Rhem. Test in Mat. 4. Gregory allowed of Images (5) Ibid. In Hebr 11. Allowed Images to be in Churches (6) Ibid. in Act. 17. Allowed Images to be Lay-mens books for which verie point Caluin affirmeth that S. Gregorie was not taught in the Schoole of the Holie Ghost And Osiander (8) Cent. 6 p. 288. affirming that S. Gregorie was fowly and Popishly deceaued in manie Articles besides sundrie other particulars there by him mentioned auoucheth that he approued cloaked and defended the Idolatrical worshipping of Images For which worshipping of Images and defending the same he is cited and reproued by (9) In his â—oÌ„mon plac part 2. p. 343. Peter Martyr (10) Exam. part 4. p. 32. Chemnitius (11) Cent. 6. p. 288. Osiander and Iohn Bale (12) In his Pageant of Popes fol 33. And though D. Morton wil not so ingenuously confesse with his former Brethren that S. Gregorie approued the worshipping of Images yet himselfe (13) Prot Appeal l 1 sect 25. p. 28. reporteth and citeth S. Gregorie reprehending Serenus Bishop of Marseils for breaking downe Pictures in Churches c. And further thinketh that his not suffring Images to be broken when there was so publick and general Idolatrie committed with them seemed vnto our Osiander although not a direct yet an occasional approuing of Idolatries or rather a cloaking therof c. But to goe to the more ancient Doctours (14) In his Pageant of Popes p. 24. 27 And see Osiander cent 5. p. â—3 M. Bale confesseth that S. Leo allowed the worshiping of Images Yea sayth M. Symonds (15) Vpon the Reuel p. 57. Leo decreed that reuerence should be giuen to Images c. And S. Chrysostom (16) Problem pag. 27. Fulk against Heskins p. 673. is charged by M. Parkins and D. Fulk with worshiping of Christs Image D. Fulk (17) Against Heskins c. pag. 672. 47. 675. acknowledgeth that Paulinus caused Images to be paynted on Church wales And of the vse of Images confessedly in Churches in those ancient times sundrie examples are giuen by (18) Against Symbolizing ‖ part 1. pag. 32. M. Parker the Centurie-writers (19) Cent. 4. col 409. and Chemnitius (20) Exam. part 4 pa. 26. 29. 30. from the seueral testimonies of Sozomen Athanasius Prudentius and others D. Morton confesseth that (21) Prot. Appeal pag. 586. About the Foure hundreth yeare Images crept out of priuat man houses and went into the publick Churches standing there c. Now wheras according to Protestants al Religious worship is to be exhibited only to God and none to anie Creature yet as Catholicks now so S. Austin before deuided Religious worship into two kinds the first which is proper only to God he called Latria the second which is communicable to creatures Dulia Hereof the Protestant Hospinian sayth (22) De Templis pag. â—07 Blessed Augustin first forged the Dinstinction of Dulia and Latria c. Amongst Religious worships in this sort he distinguished that which was due only to God he called Latria and that which was lawful to giue to creatures he named Dulia And presently afterwards he citeth the special places hereof out of S. Austin condemning withal this distinction as being sayth he a Defence of Superstition and Idolatrie Chemnitius (23) Exam. part 4. pa. 29. confesseth that in the Tripartite Historie and in Nicephorus there are certain places which seem to tend as though in the time of Constantin certain Statues or Images began to be placed in Temples but of this sayth he I wil not much contend But Lactantius who was yet ancient is reproued by the Centurie-writers for that say they he affirmeth manie Superstitious things concerning the efficacie of Christs Image Which (24) Cent. 4. col 408. 409. Cent. 4. c. 2. col 33. Centurists also do make report of that strange Miracle at large
recorded by (25) Libro de Passione Imaginis Christi And although some doubt be made vvhether this book be made by S. Athanasius yet it is cited as a most ancient historie by the seauenth Synod Act. 4. S. Athanasius of a certaine holie Image of Christ our Sauiour left in a house where a Christian had inhabited a litle before and at his remoual had forgot the same which the Iewes finding in derision of Christ Crucifyed spit vpon it buffeted it with their hands nayled the hands and feet vpon a Crosse offred it vineger mingled with gaul crowned it with a crowne of thornes strock the head therof with a reed and at the last pearced the right side therof with a lance from whence forthwith issued out water and bloud Which the Iewes perceiuing caused a vessel to be set vnder which presently was filled But they remouing it into theyr Synagogue intending therby to offer the greatest disgrace to Christ our Lord assembled thither al the disease and infirme which they could find which annoynting therwith there were cured the Sick of the palsie the blind the lame the deaf the dumbe the leapers and others Which the Iewes themselues seeing beleeued in Christ our Lord and went vnto the Catholick Church in that Cittie where prostrating themselues at the feet of the Metropolitan Bishop confessed their Sinnes and related al the Historie passed Wherupon the Bishop caused the Christian who had inhabited the house before to be brought vnto him and enquiring of him how he came to the Image he answered Nicodemus who came to Iesus by night made it with his owne hands and dying gaue it to Gamaliel who dying left it to Iames and Iames to Symeon and Symeon to Zachaeus and so by theyr Successours it continued in Hierusalem vntil two yeares before the Subuersion therof by Titus and Vespasian When the Christians admonished by the holie-Ghost left the cittie and comming into Syria they brought with them al things which belonged to the worship of Religion At which time the Image being brought amongst other things which concerned the Church remayned vntil this day in Syria which I receauing from my Parents departing this life haue vntil this time possessed by right of inheritance The Bishop hearing this was verie ioyful and instructing the Iewes in the Christian Doctrine after three dayes fast baptised them al and at their intreatie consecrated their Synagogue into a church in honour of the Sauiour of the world Afterwardes consulting what to doe with the sacred liquour of water and Bloud in the vessel resolued to send the same in bottles of glasse made of purpose to al churches through Asia Africa and Europe Exacting this of them that euerie yeare vpon the ninth of Nouember the like Solemnitie should be vsed as vpon the dayes of Christmas and Easter This sayth S. Athanasius is the true and verie credible Historie of the bloud of the side of our Sauiour which issued out of his holie Image which was crucifyed in Syria in the citie Berithus Here wil I leaue our Protestants condemning S. Athanasius of Credulitie and Superstitious Papistrie Now to proceed Functius confesseth that (26) Lib. 7. commentariorum in praeced chron fol. 6. Anno 494. Xenaias was the first in the church that stirred vp warre against Images So quiet possession had they in the Church before that time (27) Exam. part 4 pa. 26. Chemnitius sayth In one and only Tertulian I haue obserued the historie of the Sheepheard calling and seeking his wandring sheep to be paynted and grauen vpon holie Chalices In like sort sayth D. Beard (28) Retractiue from Romish Religion pag 401. Indeed we confesse that there was in these primitiue times of the church an historical vse of Images as may appeare by that Statue of our Sauiour at Cesarea mentioned by Eusebius and the pictures of Peter and Paul in the same Authour And of the good shepheard feeking the lost sheep paynted vpon the Chalices in Tertulian Another Protestant discoursing of the Religion taught and professed publickly by the Graecians and Abissines reciting amongst the rest their hauing (29) In his Catholick Tradictions pag. 212. 214. Pictures in their Churches and inclining and howing before the Images of Saints doth from thence conclude in these words (30) Ibid. pa. 216. It seemes that this is the greatest accusation which Protestants haue against the Churches of the East and Africa neuertheles c. the ancient Doctours which destroyed the Pagans Idolatrie haue approued it their deuotion did lead them vnto it c. So cleerly therfore may we conclude that our Catholick vsage of Pictures in placing them in Churches and reuerencing them doth most truly accord with the like practise and Deuotion of S. Gregorie Leo Paulinus Prudentius Austin Chrisostome Nicephorus Sozomene Athanasius Tertulian Lastantius Witnesses wherof are the Protestant writers the Centurists Osiander Chemnitius Peter Martyr Hospinian Functius Symonds Bale Fulk Parker Parkins Beard and Morton IT IS ACKNOWLEDGED BY PROTESTANTS that the Fathers of the Primitiue Chuch did specially honour and reuerence the holie Relicks of Martirs and other Saincts carying them in Processions and making Pilgrimages vnto them At which also manie Miracles were wrought CHAP. XV. AS it is to be supposed that such Hereâ—icks as deny the due worship and Inuocation of Saincts wil much more deny al reuerent respect or worship to be giuen to the Relicks of their dead Bodies So we may as confidently expect that al holie fathers who so confessedly before exhibited honour to the Blessed Saincts or Soules in Heauen wil likewise performe their answerable respect to their sacred Bodies vpon earth And to begin with S. Gregorie It is acknowledged by (1) In Act. Rom. Pontif. p. 44. c. M. Iohn Bale that Gregorie the great c. commanded Masses to be celebrated ouer the dead bodies of the Apostles And Carion (2) Chron. l. 4. p. 567. 568. auoucheth that He dedicated Churches to the bones and Ashes of Saincts (3) Cent. 6. Col. 381. The Centurie-writers charge him with Translation of Reliques (4) In Iesuit part 2. rat 5. p. 5. 627. And D. Humfrey reciting sundrie particular poynts of Catholick Doctrine which S. Gregorie and S. Austine brought into England amongst the rest doth number Relicks D. Fulk auoucheth that (5) Ag RheÌ„ Test in Apoc. 6. Gregorie liuing so neer the Reuelation of Antichrist it is no maruaile though he be more superstitious in Relicks And Againe (6) Ib. in 1. Tim. 4. Gregorie indeed willeth c. Altars to be built and Relicks to be layd-vp Gregorie indeed did send manie Superstitious tokens c. He sendeth a litle Key froÌ„ the bodie of S. Peter for his blessing in which is enclosed the iron of his chaynes c. Such was the practise and reuerence giuen to the Relicks of Saincts by S. Gregorie But to proceed S. Ambrose hauing made a godlie speech about the pious honouring of Martyrs Tombes the
(3) Bellar. de Monach. l. 2 c. 20. c. Monkes and other Religious concerning Chastitie Pouertie and Obedience and their strick order of life are likewise lawful holie and laudable Directly (4) Luth. l. de Votis Monasticis Caluin Inst l. 4 c. 13. c. 12. contrarie to al which is the Doctrine and practise of the Protestant Church which First teacheth that no vowes are to be made to the honour of God but such as are of things already commanded Secondly that it is lawful for the Clergie or Ministerie euen after Orders taken to marry wiues Thirdly that the Vowes of al Religious Persons with their manner of life are impious vaine Superstitious and not to be kept Now how repugnant are our Moderne Libertines herein to the ancient Fathers and wholy agreable our present Roman with the Primitiue Church let these few lines following serue for fullest proof Luke (5) Cent. 6. p. 208. Osiander numbring vp manie Catholick poynts of Faith wherwith he chargeth S. Gregorie the Great to haue been fouly and Popishly deluded amongst the rest affirmeth that he Sharply vrged the single life of the Ministers of the Church D. Morton accordingly sayth hereof (6) Prot. Appeal l. 1. sec 52. p. 38. The Apologists do truly obiect that our Osiander noted S. Gregorie to haue been a vehement vrger of Single life of the Clergie And concerning such of the Clergie as were married before their Orders taken M. Symondâ— (7) Vpon the Reuel p. 83. 84 85. 86. reproueth him for that He decreed that the Clergie should not haue knowledge of their wiues c. Carion (8) Carion in Chron. l. 4 p 567. 568. reciting his seueral pretended Catholick errours repeateth his errour of Vowes and Single life But to leaue S. Gregorie and to arise to S. Augustin other ancient Fathers I know sayth (9) de Votis p. 524. Peter Martyr declared no lesse to my Auditours in Oxford that Epiphanius with manie others of the Fathers erred in that they hold it a Sinne to break the Vow of virginitie they do il to number it amongst the Apostolical Traditions Chemnitius (10) Exam. part 3. p. 41. 40. 42. in general confesseth saying We are not ignorant that the Fathers allow the vowes of perpetual Chastitie acknowledge them to be obligatorie Insomuch as he doth specially recite and reiect in this behalf the seueral sayings of S. Basil S. Ambrose S. Chrysostome S. Epiphanius S. Austin and S. Innocentius And Iustus Molitor (11) De Ecclesia Milit. p. 80. reproueth the whole Councel of Chalcedon which was most famous and ancient for that It forbad to Monks and Nunnes the vse of Mariage In like sort S. Augustin and al the Fathers assembled with him in the Carthage Councel are reiected by Danaeus (12) Contrae Bellarm. 1. part alterae parte p. 10 11 for that sayth he they abused manifestly the Word of God saying vpon the Apostles words If anie widowes how young soeuer c. haue vowed themselues to God left their Laical habit and vnder the testimonie of the Bishop Church appeared in Religious weed if afterwards they go to Secular mariage they shal according to the Apostle haue damnation because they dared make voyd the vow of Chastitie which they made to God And Osiander (13) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 20. for the same respect confesseth and at large reprehendeth the forsayd Canon of the Carthage Councel Yea the Councel of Nice wherof D. Whitguift (14) In his Def. p. 330 sayth That notable famous Councel of Nyce which is of al wise and learned men reuerenced esteemed and imbraced next to the Scriptures themselues this so famous a Councel did as M. Carthwright (15) In his 2. Reply part 1 p. 485. D. Bancroft in his Suruey c. p. 386. Centurists Cent. 4. c. 9. col 656. D. Fulk against Rhem. Test in Math. 8. fol. 14. and sundrie other Protestant Writers acknowledge affirme and teach that vnto those that were chosen to the Ministrie vnmarryed it was not lawful to take anie wife afterwards only being marryed before entrance into the Ministrie it was lawful for them to vse the benefit of that precedent Marriage And Paphnutius one of the Councel sheweth coÌ„cerning Priests vnlawfulnes to marry after Priesthood vndertaken that not only this was before that Councel but was also yet further an ancient tradition of the Church in which both himself and the rest of the Councel Thus farre M. Carthwright Luther (16) Tom. â— Germ Ienae f 97. de Concil part 1. p. 92. like wise much disgusted with the forsayd Councel of Neece reiecteth the same saying I do not acknowledge the holie Ghost in this Nicene Councel because it forbiddeth him who hath gelded himself to be made Priest and also commandeth the Clergie to haue none dwelling with them but their Mother Sister c. Had the Holie Ghost no other thing to do in Councels but to bind his Ministers to such imposed dangerous and not necessarie Lawes Frigiuillaeus Gaunius (17) Palma Christiana p 103. reprehendeth Socrates and Sozomene for their report of Paphnutius saying Socrates added this report rashly of his owne deuising c. wâ—th like falshood did he wrest the Saying of Paphnutius in the Nicene Councel c. And Sozomene following after Socrates followeth his explication in maintenance of the doctrine of Diuels coÌ„demned by Paul 1. Tim. 4. And the Centurie-writers (18) Cent. 4. c. 9. col 656. D. Fulk (19) Ag. Rhem. Test in Math. 8. sec 3 fol. 14. doe both of them confesse that Paphnutius though he thought that Priesthood did not dissolue Mariage contracted before Orders giuen yet he affirmed to the Nycene Councel that Those who were made Priests before they were marryed should not afterwards marry alledging for this veterem Ecclesiae consuetudinem the ancient Tradition of the Church In like sort say our Puritans 20) A brief Discouery of vntruthes in D. Bancrofts serm p. 21. We must needs confesse that not only this Gouernment of the Church but also manie other poynts of greatest weight in Religion fel to decay long before the councel of Neece c. besides manie other Corruptions which wâ—re past ouer yea and established at that Councel c. Paphnutius alone was inforced to stand vp against the whole Synod in the cause of the Mariage of Miniâ—â—ers which notwithstanding he c. so defended that he would not haue him that were a Minister being vnmarryed euer after to be ioyned to a wife Agreable hereunto sayth D. Morton (21) Prot. Appeal p. 480. The Councel of Neece restrayneth them from mariage who were vnmarryed when they entred into Orders But to proceed the Magdeburgians (22) Cent 4. col 704. And see further Crispinus of the Estate of the Church p. 107. confessing that the second Synod of Arles being celebrated in the time of the
Ireneus and are repugnant to the Scriptures In like sort Osiander 22) Cent. 2. p. 5. 6. And see the Centurists Cent. 2. col 207. reproueth Iustin saying Iustine extolled too much the libertie of mans Wil in obseruing the Commandments of God And it is granted 23) Cent. 2. c. 4. col 59. And see Caluin Inst l. 2 c. 2 §. 4. that Clemens euerie where defendeth Freewil so that it may appeare say they that not only al the Doctours of that Age were in such darknes but also that the same after increased in the later Doctours D. Abbots 24) In defence of the Reformed Catholick part 1. p. 114. speaking of the booke of Hermes entituled Pastor and some others forged according to his opinion in the Apostles times sayth The poyson which Satan had conueyed into such counterfaite books was receiued as wholesome food and sundrie errours and superstitious fancies of vowed Virginitie and Prayer for the dead of Freewil of Inuocation of Saincts of Antichrist and the Assumption of Marie and such like by litle and litle got footing in the Church And here was indeed sayth Abbot the true beginning of manie doctrines of Poperie c. The Centurists 25) Cent. 2. c. 4. 4 coâ— 58. speaking of the times next after the Apostles doe acknowledge That almost no poynt of Doctrine began so soon to be obscured as this of Freewil Yea it is confessed 26) So say the Puritanes cyted in D. Bancrostes Sermon p. 23. that the Protestants know that euer since the Apostles time in a manner it flourished euerie where vntil Martin Luther took the sword in hand against it A true so euident that D. Humfrey 27) Iesuit part 2. p. 530. thinketh It may not be denyed but that Ireneus Clemens and others quos vocant Apostolicos whom they cal Apostolical in respect of the time in which they liued haue in their writings the opinions of Freewil c. Yea sayth M. Caluin 28) Instit l. 2. c. 2. § 9. Al Ecclesiastical Writers excepting Augustin haue written so ambiguously and differently in this matter of Freewil that nothing certain can be gathered from their wrytings And they were ouer ful in extolling Freewil Lastly D. Whiteguift 29) In his Defence against the Reply of Carthwright p. 472. 473. discoursing of Doctrine taught in anie Age since the Apostles time affirmeth without anie other exception of Age or Father that to vse his words almost 30) Ibid. p. 473. And see the lyke in Whitak de Eccl. Con. Bellar. Controu 2. p. 299. al the Bishops and learned Writers of the Greek Church and Latin also for the most part were spotted with doctrines of Freewil of Merit of Inuocation of Saincts and such like And the same also almost in the same words is confessed by D. Couel saying 30) In his Exam. c. 9. p. 120. Diuers both of the Greek and Latin Church were spotted with errours about Freewil Merits Inuocation of Saincts c. Yea the ancient Iewes did so firmely beleeue our Doctrine of Freewil that to omit the 31) c. 15. 12. 15. 16. 17. cleerest words of Ecclesiasticus which D. Whitakers had no other wayes 32) Resp ad Camp Rat. 1. p. 15. to euade but by denying the sayd booke to be Canonical Scripture D. Fulk tearmeth 33) Defence of the Eng. Transl p. 320. The Iewish Rabbins Patrons of Freewil which D. Morton 34) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 371. iustifyeth and further sayth 35) Ibid. p. 370. What if it be confessed that some Rabbins maintayned the libertie of mans Wil as Rabbi Moses did Yea M. Hal chargeth the Pharisees 36) Pharisaisme p. 50. with Freewil and Merit which is more then either Christ or his Apostles did who yet in other respects spared not to discouer their true Errours Wel then our Catholick Doctrine of Freewil is the Primitiue Doctrine taught by S. Gregorie Hierome Epiphanius Nazianzene Basil the Councel of Nice Chrysostome Athanasius Lactantius Cyprian Origen Tertulian Theophilus Iustine Athenagoras Tatianus Clemens Alexand. Ireneus Hermes and by al the Fathers since the Apostles vntil Luthers time Our strongest witnesses herof are the Protestant Writers The Centurists Beza Osiander Hamelmannus Schultetus Calum Humfrey Abbot Hal Morton Whiteguift Fulk and Whitaker Jt is graunted by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church taught not only Faith but likewise Good works truly to iustify And that the sayd works are meritorious of Grace and Glorie CHAP. XXI COncerning Good-works It is the general (1) Se Bellarmin De Iustificatione l. 1. 4. 5. and receiued doctrine of the Roman Church First that the works of the iust are truly good and not of their owne nature sinne Secondly that not only Faith but likewise good works doe truly iustifie a man obtaine remission of sinnes Thirdly that the same good works do truly merit or deserue Grace in this world and glorie in the next Directly 2) Luther in Assert art 31. 32. 36. Caluin Instit l. 3. c. â—◠§ 4. and c. 41. §. 9. c. 19. §. 2. 4. 7. c. 15. § 2. contrarie to al the forsayd poynts concerning Good-works is the ordinarie doctrine of our new Protestants First affirming that the best works of the iust are of their owne natures deadlie sinne Sâ—condly that only Faith doth iustify Thirdly and lastly that works do neither merit Grace nor glorie To come now to the doctrine and Faith of the Primitiue Church The 3) Cenâ— 6. c. 10. col 748. Centurists making a Catalogue of S. Gregories pretended errours amongst the rest number his Errour of good workes and Iustification And 4) Cent. 6. p. 288. Osiander much reproueth him for that he attributeth ouer much to good works S. Augustin is reiected by 5) In Confess Wittemb Brentius for that the taught Affiance in mans merits towards remission of Sinnes The 6) Harmony of Confess in English sec 16. p. 509. Diuines of Wittemberg affirme that These reasons which Augustin bringeth for his opinion of Purgatorie doe seem to leane to this foundation That we obtaine remission of our sinnes and life not only for Christ his sake through Faith but also for the merits of our works And for the same doctrine of Merit of works he is further reprehended by 7) Cent. 4. p. 520. Osiander the 8) Cent. 5. col 507. 1133. Centurists 9) Instit l. 3. c. 11. § 15. Caluin 10) l. 1. Ep. p. 290 in Consil Theol. p. 240. And see Colloq Altemberg fol. 307. Field of the Church l. 3. c. 42 p. 170. Melancthon and D. Field So likewise the 11) Cent. 5. col 1178. Centurie-writers speaking of S. Chrysostom affirme that Chrysostom handleth impurely the doctrine of Iustification and attributeth merit to works They likewise say of Prosper 12) Cent. 5. c. 10. col 1363. that he retayned not a few freckles of his Age Such an
Fathers in particular pronounceth of them in general thus 40) In Col. Conuiual c. De Patribus Ecclesiae See ye what darknes there is in the Fathers writings concerning Faith for when that Article of the Iustification of men is couered with darknes it can by no meanes be that greater errours he auoyded Bullinger doth 41) In Apoc. Serm. 87. fol. 270. acknowledge that The doctrine of Merits satisfaction and Iustification of works did incontinently after the Apostles time lay their first foundations Caluin affirmeth in general that 42) Inst l. 3. c. 25. §. 2. The ancient Writers of the Church vsing euerie where the word Merit gaue occasion of errour to posteritie therby Adde lastly that D. Whiteguift 43) In his Def. against the Reply of Carthw p. 472. 473. treating of Doctrine taught in anie Age since the Apostles time affirmeth without al other exception either of Age or Father that Almost al the Bishops and learned Writers of the Greek Church and Latin also for the most part were spotted with doctrines of Freewil of Merits c. And the same is likewise taught by 44) De Eccl. cont Bellar. p. 299. D. Whitakers Now concerning the ancient Iewes The Books of 45) c. 12 9. 4.10 Tobie and Ecclesiasticus 46) c. 3. 33. are so pregnant for the Merit of works that sundrie Protestants say therof 47) Minist of Lincolne Dioces in their Abridgment p. 76. The two places of Tobie and Ecclesiasticus tend dangerously to the Iustifying of the Merit of Almes-deeds And others writing against the booke of Homilies say 48) â—ilenced Ministers in the 2. Part of Def. p. 164. The book of Homilies whereto we are required to subscribe c. expoundes Tobie saying that Almes is profitable to purge the soule from the spots of sinne alleaging these words of Tobie 4.10 and 12.19 c. and out of Ecclesiasticus c. Yea they further say This 49) Ib. p. 166. place of Tobie were it Canonical c. is verie pregnant for the Merit of works and as strong for it as the Scriptures are for the merit of Christ Buxdorfius also writeth of the Rabbins that 50) Synagog Iudaica p. 23. They perswade themselues that they may satisfy for their sinnes by doing pennance vpon their skinnes and that they may easily merit eternal life by keeping of the Commandments and Good works And the same also is acknowledged in them by 51) Pharisaisme p. 13. 50. M. Hal. I may then conclude that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church are our firmest Patrons for our Catholick Doctrine concerning Good-works confessedly teaching First that Good-works do truly iustify Secondly Meriting Grace and Remission of sinnes in this life and eternal glorie in the next For which verie doctrine the Fathers acknowledged by Protestants are S. Gregorie Chrysostom Augustin Prosper Ambrose Hierom Nyssene Nazianzene Hilarie Ephrem Cyprian Origen Tertulian Theophilus Lactantius Iustin Clemens Alex. Ireneus Hermes Ignatius and the ancient beleeuing Iewes The Protestant Writers producing and charging the forsayd Fathers are Luther the Centurists Brentius the Diuines of Wittemberg Osiander Caluin Melancthon Chemnitius Winkilmamus Schultetus Bullinger Buxdorfeus Wotton Whitaker Humfrey Couel and Whiteguift It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Ceremonies now vsed by the Roman Church in the ministring of seruice or Sacrifice as also of the Sacraments were formerlie vsed by the Bishops Priests and Fathers of the Primitiue Church CHAP. XXII HAuing thus passed through so manie particular Controuersies of greatest weight and finding in al of them a perfect agreement and sweetest harmonie between the ancient most holie and Primitiue Church and the present Roman Catholick Church and this by no weaker proofes or euidences then the free grants Confessions and acknowledgments of our sworne and professed Aduersaries I wil now for my Conclusion in this kind only examen one poynt further which being not purely Doctrinal but most sensible and external wil therby not only prooue most accommodate to the sense and capacitie of the meanest Reader but withal wil most euidently declare and make manifest the outward gracious and beautiful face of Christian Religion practised by the ancient learned and holie Bishops Doctours and people of the Primitiue Church Nothing is better knowne either to those of greater yeares who as yet may wel remember the Ecclesiastical rites and Customes of our owne kingdome or to others more moderne who haue trauailed forraine Nations then the external Ceremonies vsed in Material Churches in Celebration of Seruice and Administration of the most holie Sacraments For who knoweth not that when Catholick Churches are erected they are specially consecrated and dedicated either to Christ or some of his Saincts That in them are seueral Chancels and Vestries as also Altars Candles Reliques and Images that there are truly Priests who offer daily external Sacrifice at the Altar Whose Vestments and vessels are specially hallowed who likewise obserue Canonical houres saying some prayers in Secret others with a loud voice sometimes giuing the people their benediction and burning Incense at the Altar In the Church likewise there is a Font specially hallowed for the administration of Baptisme which is holden necessarie to Saluation and the same is ministred with the Signe of the Crosse with holie Oyles and sundrie other Ceremonies hereafter specifyed And to omit sundrie other In the Church is blessed by the Priest Holiewater Holie-bread Candles Ashes c. I need not describe the naked walles of Protestants Churches or the bare black coates of their wedded Ministers both of them deuoyd of al grace ornament puritie and state duly befitting places and persons Ecclesiastical And therfore I hasten to the confessed practise of the Primitiue Church Wherein I first find that when Material Churches were first built they were specially hallowed by the Bishop so much as S. Gregorie and S. Austin are reproued by D. Humfrey 1) In Iesuit part 2. rat 5. p. 5. 627. for bringing into England the new Consecration of Churches And the 2) Cent. 6. col 364. 365. Centurie-writers do charge S. Gregorie out of his owne writings with Consecration of Churches D. Morton affirmeth that he vsed 3) Prot. Appeal l. 1. p. 53. Superstitious manner of Consecration of Churches Yea the 4) Cent. 4. col 408. further confesse that Athanasius in his Apologie to Constantin plainly sheweth that Christians did not assemble togeather in Churches not consecrated And that in the Fourth Age the Fathers vsed 5) Cent. 4. col 497. Sumptuous Churches consecrated and Superstitious Insolencie in celebrating of Masse appointed to be sayd in no places but such as were hallowed by a Bishop 6) Cent. 4. col 497. Yea they reprooue Constantin himselfe for that say they concerning Consecration of Churches new built proud adorning of them and other Superstitious things the greatest part Constantine inuented and spread abrode in many Churches And wheras Sozomene hist l. 1. c. 8.
reporteth that Constantin when he went to the warres vsed to carry about with him a Tabernacle made in forme of a Church to the end that a Consecrated house should not be wanting either to himself liuing in the Deserts or to his Armie c. And that Priests and Deacons did daily attend vpon the Tabernacle the truth herof is so certaine that it is confessed by Crispinus 7) Of the Estate of the Church p. 89. But for further testimonie of hallowing of Churches in those ancient times see D. Fulk 8) Against Rhem. Test in 1. Thim 4. see 13. fol. 378. the Centurie-writers 9) Cent. 4. col 408. and Crispinus 10) Of the Estate of the Church p. 93. Secondly these Consecrated Churches were dedicated in memorie of Christ or some of his Saincts In which respect S. Gregorie is charged by 11) Chron. l. 4. p. 567. 568. Carion to haue Commanded Churches to be dedicated to the bones and Ashes of Saincts M. Mason affirmeth that 12) Consecration of Engl. Bishops p. 57. In Canterburie the Regal Cittie euen when Austin arriued there was a Christian Church built in the time of the Romans dedicated to the Memorie of S. Martin And wheras Eusebius de vita Constantini l. 3. c. 47. relateth that Constantin erected Churches in the honour of Martyrs And l. 4. c. 58. 59. dedicated a most sumptious Church in Memorie of our Sauiour's Apostles the 13) Cent. 4. col 408. Centurists speaking hereof say These Dedications seem to haue sprong from Iudaisme without anie Commandment of God Yea 14) Cent. 4. col 452. they further confesse that Constantin appointed a verie Solemne Feast for the Dedication of the Church And Brightman 15) Apoc. in c. 12. p. 325. acknowledgeth that at Constantins comming in c. Temples were Consecrated to Martyrs Yea sayth D. Beard 16) Retractiue from Romish Religion p. 388 389. The Annual Feastes of Dedication of Churches grew from a sinister imitation of Constantin the Great who because he kept a Solemne day at the Dedication of a certain Church which he had built therfore it was receaued as a law c. to solemnize euerie yeare a Holiday vpon the day of the Dedication of their Church Thirdly in the Churches was built a place seueral for the laying vp of holie things called the Vestrie wherof the Centurists 17) Cent. 4. col 835. alleage the Laodicen Councel saying It is not fit that Subdeacons haue libertie to goe into the Vestrie and touch our Lords vessels Yea they 18) Cent. 4. col 409. And see Osiand cent 5. p. 391. acknowledge the Vestrie to be mentioned by S. Ambrose l. 1. offic c. 50. Fourthly as concerning Chancels D. Raynolds 19) In his Conference with M. Hart p. 488. confesseth from S. Denis the Areopagite that in his time there were Chancels seuered with Sanctification from the rest of the Church And Hospinian 20) De Templis p. 85. makeh mention of Chancels vsed in Constantins time And the Centurists 21) Cent. 4. col 1165. Hospin do Templis p. 85. 86. 87. affirme that Lay-persons were prohibited to come into the Chancels Osiander 22) Cent. 4. p. 390. chargeth the Laodicen Councel as Superstitious herein Fiftly but nothing was more diligently regarded and obserued in Churches then sacred Altars S. Gregory is charged by the Centurists 23) Cent. 6. col 369. with Consecration of Altars And Osiander 24) Cent. 6. p 289. 290. affirmeth that Augustin sent by S. Gregorye thrust vpon the English Churches the Roman Rites and Customes to wit Altars c. Peter Martyr 25) In his Common places in English part 4. p. 225. writeth that Petrus Alexandrinus attributeth more to the outward Altar then to the liuelie temples of Christ He further 26) Ibid. p. 226. confesseth that Optatus l. 6. against Parmenianus sayth what is the Altar Euen the Seate of the bodie and bloud of Christ Such sayings as these sayth Peter Martyr edifyed not the people And for the selfe same Saying is Optatus reproued by the Centurie-writers 27) Cent. 4. c. 6. col 409. Hospinian 28) de Templis p. 98. And see p. 101. 459. 460 100. sayth I dare not deny but that in the time of Constantin the great Statelie Temples Statelie and beautiful Altars took their beginning and the same were fixed and of stone The Centurists 29) Cent. 4. col 409. speaking of the same Age affirme that The Histories of this time testify that there were Altars in the Churches c. but this Custome came into the Church of Christ from the Iewish custome But Praetorius 30) De Sacramentis 287. ariseth higher auouching that Anno 262. Pope Sixtus the Second abrogated the tables hitherto vsed and erected Altars which sayth he better represent Iudaisme then Christianisme M. Carthwright 31) â—n his 2. Reply part 1. p. 517. And see Iacob in his Reasons taken out of Gods word c. p. 58. thinketh that Ignatius calleth the Communion Table vnproperly an Altar Yea he 32) â—n his 2. Reply part last p. 264 reproueth the Fathers in general saying The ancient Writers abuse herein may easily appeare in that in this too great libertie of speech they vsed to cal the holie supper of the Lord a Sacrifice and the Communion table an Altar In like sort sayth Peter Martyr 33) In his Com. plac part 4. p. 225. The Fathers should not with so much libertie haue seemed here and there to haue abused the name Aultar So plaine it is that Altars consecrated were vsed in those ancientest times of the Primitiue Church Sixtly vpon these Altars were placed lights or Candles M. Bale 34) In Act. Rom. pontif p. 44. confesseth that S. Gregory gaue lights to Churches And D. Morton sayth of him 35) Prot. Appeal l. 1. p. 57. Margin He indeed requireth lights but not that therby he might burne day c. Which may seem to haue been rather the institution of his Successour Sabinianus for c. But our late Writer D. Beard proueth the same from 36) Retractiue from Rom. Relig. p. 65. the decree of our owne Popes Gregorie the First and Sabinian his Successour the one of which appointed certaine lands for the maintenance of waxe-câ—ndles and Lampes in Churches the other ordayned that burning lampes should be alwayes kept in their Churches The 37) Cent. 4. col 487. Centurists charge Constantin that He ordayned the burning of Candles in the Churches in the day-time And againe say 38) Cent. 4. col 410. they Eusebius hath reported that wax-Candles and Lamps were burned in the day-time in the places of the Assemblies by Constantin the great In like sort Crispinus 39) Of the Estate of the Chuâ—ch p. 93. thinketh that In Constantines time manie Ceremonies il-agreing with Gods Word were brought in as Candles lighted in the day-time M. Beard affirmeth that In
prayer in the Church In so much as the Centurists 69) Cent. 4. col 433. And see Bullingers Decades Decr. 5. p. 937. charge the Fourth Age with obseruation of Canonical Houres And with 70) Cent. 4. col 433. Rising in the night to prayer And with 71) Cent. 4. col 459. vsing set forme of Prayer And Litanies 72) Ib. col 433. 414. 411. As also with 73) Cent. 4. col 1329. And Osiand cent 4. p. 454. numbring prayers vpon litle stones or beades yea they 74) Cent. 3. col 134. charge the Third Age saying Tertullian in his booke of Fasting affirmeth those Three Houres to wit the Third the Sixt the Ninth to haue been more famous in diuine prayers And Cyprian in the Lords prayer calleth the Prime the Third the Sixt and Ninth the Houres of praying anciently obserued And they 75) Cent. 3. col 135. further Confesse that as theÌ„ Christians prayed with their face turned towards the East as Tertulian affirmeth in his Apologie c. And that in the holie Sacrifice some prayers were sayd in Secret others audibly In so much as Osiander recyteth and dislyketh these words of the Laodicen Councel Let three prayers be sayd one in silence the second and third vocally or andibly and then let the kisse of Peace be giuen And after the Priests haue giuen the Pax to the Bishop then let it be giuen to the Laïtie and so the Sacrifice offred But let it be allowed only to the Clergie to come vnto the Altar and there Communicate Eleuenthly amongst other prayers vsed by the Priests in the Church were ordinarie such wherby Sundrie Creatures were hallowed and consecrated as Water Bread Oyle Ashes the Font for Baptisme and the like S. Gregorie is reproued by the Centurists and Osiander for his vsing and Sprinkling of Holie-water D. Morton affirmeth that 78) Prot. Appeal l 1. p. 56. True it is that Aqua lustralis Holie-water was vsed but c. as an Inuention of Pope Alexander who liued Anno 109. after Christ c. And it was applyed in the dayes of Gregorie by Augustin to the Consecration of Churches togeather with prayers for the casting out of the filth of Idols and Diuels And of further vse of Holie-water in the Primitiue Church see D. Fulk 79) Fulk against RheÌ„ Test in 1. Ti. 4. sec 13. fol. 378. Parkins in Problem p. 136. and M. Parkins Holie-bread is affirmed so plainly by S. Austin de pec merit remiss l. 2. c. 26. that D. Fulk 80) Against Heâ—kins c. p. 377. doth therfore tearme it A Superstitious bread giuen in S. Austins time to those that were Catechumens insteed of the Sacrament And 81) Of the Masse p. 51. Philip Morney chargeth S. Basils Liturgie with Holie-bread distributed after Seruice to such as had not Communicated And as for Holie oyle or Chrisme the Centurists 82) Cent. 6. col 367. charge S. Gregorie out of his owne wrytings with Consecration of Chrisme and oyle Yea they 83) Cent. 4. col 865 503 1274 869. confesse that in the Fourth Age there was Consecration of Chrisme by a Bishop only And that 84) Cent. 4. col 420. Optatus sheweth that Chrisme was accustomed to be kept in a bottle Yea they 85) Cent. 5. col 1386. relate of S. Martin that A Mayde dumbe from her Mothers wombe being brought vnto him powring Holie oyle into her praying he made her speak wel But Hamelmanus 86) De Tradit Apost 707. 737. Parkar against Symbolizing c part 1. sec 11. p. 76. and M. Parker do both of them confesse that S. Denys the Areopagite maketh mention in his writings of Chrisme In like Sort is S. Gregorie reproued by M. Bale 87) In Act. Rom. Pont. p. 44. c. for Consecration of Ashes c. And for Dedicating the beginning of Lentfast with sprinkling of Ashes 12. But most obserued sundrie were the Ceremonies of Baptisme S. Gregorie is charged by the Centurists 88) Cent. 6. col 367. with Consecration of the Font of Baptisme And they charge the Fathers of the 89) Cent. 4. col 415. Fourth and 90) Cent. 3. col 82. third Age with consecration of the water of Baptisme with Abrenunciation Exorcisme Anoyling threefold Immersion And they 92) Cent. 3. col 8â— say expresly of S. Cyprian that he In his first booke and tweluth Epistle affirmeth that the water must be first purifyed and Sanctifyed by the Priest that it may by baptisme wash away the sinnes of the man that is baptised for which very saying he is also reproued by M. Parker 93) Against Symbolizing c. prat 1 sec 35. p. 112 113. Hamelman de Tradit Apost l. 2. c. 7. col 97. and Hamelmannus In Baptisme was likewise vsed the signe of the Crosse So the Centurists 94) Cent. 3. col 125. And M. Spark in his Persuasion to vniform p. 23. confesse that Origen in his 2. Hom. vpon the 38. Ps sheweth that those who were Baptysed were accustomed to be signed with the signe of the Crosse of which Rite Tertulian also maketh mention in his booke De Resurrectione Carnis And Cyprian also in his booke of baptizing Hereticks mentioneth the Imposition of hands with prayer Siging And D. Beard coÌ„fesseth that 95) Retractiue from Romish Relig. p. 391. The Crosse anoynting in Baptisme are of great Antiquitie Such as were Baptised were also anoyled with holie Chrisme 96) Instit l. 4. c. 17. sec 43. Caluin sayth If anie man wil defend those Inuentions with antiquitie I am not ignorant how ancient the vse of Chrisme exufflation is in baptisme how litle from the Apostles Age the supper of the Lord was touched withrust c. Perkins 97) In the 2. vol. of his works p. 653. confesseth that 76) Cent. 4. p. 390. This Vnction pertained to Baptysme in the West til aboue 300. yeares after Christ 77) Cent. 6. col 364. 365. Osiand cent 6. p. 289. 290. And Zepperus 98) Politia Eccl. l. 1. c. 12. p 123. mentioning Holie-water oyle salt exorcisme spitle c. sayth I confesse these Superstitious Ceremonies are very ancient in the Church not manie Ages after the Apostles times in further (99) Ibid. p. 124. 125 proofe therof he alleageth those most famous ancient Fathers S. Austin S. Cyprian and Tertullian And as concerning Exorcismes Exufflations other ancient rites of Baptisme (100) Compend loc 33. p. 264. Gesnerus auoucheth that Exorcisme in Baptisme is much more ancieÌ„t then Papistrie for Nazianzene Cyril Cyprian Ambrose Austin make mention therof in manie places The like acknowledgement wherof is also made by (101) Common places part 4. c. 9. see 14. 15. p. 132. 133. Peter Martyr M. Parker affirmeth from the manie testimonies of Cyprian Tertulian by him alleaged in the MargeÌ„t saying (102) Against Symbolizing wiâ—â—
assigned the third place to Hereticks who haue Gone out of the elect people of God but were not of them So that Scriptures Fathers and Protestants do al of them agree That the Going out or departing from the Church is the Badge of Heresie and Persons so Going out are thereby marked Hereticks Examples heerof we haue in al former Hereticks in Arius Macedonius Nestorius Pelagius Eutyches Donatus waldo Wicclif Husse c. who al of them being at first Roman Catholicks through Innouation of opinions afterwards seuered themselues from their mother Church going out from her to new Congregations But now to apply this to Catholicks and Protestants and breefly to examine whether companie hath gone or departed out of a former knowne Church the true Church of Christ and first to giue M. D. Morton a short scantling concerning himself his Brethren his owne neighbour M. Mason answering certaine demands of Catholicks in this kinde saith a) Consecrat of English Bishopes p. 41. When it pleased him which causeth the light to spring out of darknes we did spring from yourselues being stil content to be yours so you would be Christs In like sort sayth a) Apol. p. 288. D. Iewel We haue indeed gone from the Pope we haue shaken of the yoake of the Bishop of Rome It is true sayth b) Act. mon. p. 3. M. Fox we are remoued from the Church of Rome And D. Rainolds c) In his Conclusions annexed to his Conference maketh this one of his Conclusions That the reformed Churches in England Scotland France Germanie and other kingdomes and Common-wealthes haue seuered themselues lawfully sayth he from the Church of Rome And as for Luther himself he was at first so Roman Catholick as that sayth he (d) In Ep ad Gal. fol. 38. and see 37. 188. I did so highly esteeme the Popes authoritie that to dissent from him euen in the least point I thought it a sinne worthy of euerlasting death and would my selfe in the defence of the Popes Authoritie haue ministred fire and sword Caluin speaking of Protestants in general expresly sayth 20) In Ep. 141. p. 273. we were inforced to make a departure from the whole world yea we 21) Instit l. 4. c. 6. § 1. haue departed sayth he from her to wit the Roman Church And so accordingly it is so euident that Waldo Wicliffe Husse Luther Caluin Zuinglius c. were first borne baptised and brought vp in the Catholick Church from whence afterwards through Noueltie Libertie they went out became Apostates as that to endeauour anie special proof therof might iustly be censured of no lesse idle vanitie then to seeme to deny it of greatest ignorance or impudencie And so leauing our Protestants thus confessedly Going out of our former Catholick Roman Church and thereby branding themselues with the infamous Mark of Hereticks I wil examine what Protestants think of the Roman Church in this behalf And indeed this crime of Going out is in it self so foule a blemish as that some Protestants much desire to stayne our Roman puritie therewith So D. Fulk would haue the world to thinke That 22) Retentiue p. 85. the Popish Church is but an Heretical Assemblie departed from the vniuersal Church long since Augustins departure out of this life With whom agreeth his Brother blindbyard D. Sutclif affirming That 23) Suruey of Poper p. 315. the Papists are a sect going out of Christs Church and rising long after Christs time But these great Doctours speake much but proue nothing for it behoued them to assigne a former Church from whence the Papists thus reuolted as also the persons who the time when with other Circumstances of al which they rest silent Wherefore to cleere our Roman Church of this so foule Imputation that to the perfect sight of the blearedst eye And first to omit al former testimonies plentifully exhibited in proof of her confessed knowne and vn-interrupted Conrinuance from the Apostles times to these of ours as also to forbeare that ancient Doctours and Writers in al Ages do specially mention and register vp al notorious departures made by any Hereticks from the true Church not insinuating the least concerning our Roman Our Innocencie herein is so notoriously apparent as that sundrie Protestants being prouoked in this kind to giue the least Instance of anie such departure in our Roman Church are euer inforced in their answer therunto only to fly to our pretended departure from the sacred Scriptures so passing ouer al precedent Ages without anie colour of Examples to be vrged against vs. So M. Knewstubs 24) Answer to certaine assertions c. p. 35. answereth you require to know if our doctrine were the same which they in the Primitiue Church professed who they were that did at that time note our Going out c. This question is altogeather vnnecessarie for when an offender is taken with the manner it is needlesse to stand vpon Examination of them who were at the deed doing We haue taken you with the manner that is to say with Doctrine diuerse from the Apostles and therefore neither Law nor conscience can force vs to examine who were witnesses of your first departing With whom agreeth M. Powel only answering that the Roman Church is 25) Consideration of the Papistes supplication p. 36. fallen from the doctrine comprehended in the writings of the Apostles But to omit that this answer is a base and shameles begging of the thing it self in question to wit that we are departed from the Scriptures which as most vntrue we euer do deny It is further most impertinent to the point now vrged which is whether the Roman Church hath gone out from anie other knowne Church yea it most strongly argueth the contrarie seing they much desiring to exemplify against vs herein for want of al Instance during these 1600. yeares constrained to iumpe them ouer and only to insist in the writings of the Apostles then which what more strongly can be vrged in our behalf And yet in like sort for want of better answer D. Sutclif 26) Answer to the mass Priestes supplicat c. 7. sayth Neither is it material that the Roman Church neuer went out of anie knowne Christian Societie So insinuating her neuer Going out with is the only thing I here desire to proue But if this be not material with D. Sutclif yet is it most material and conuincing with al men of iudgement for if the Roman Church or anie other Church hauing once been confessed members of the true ancient visible Church of Christ did neuer depart or Go out of the sayd true Church then are they stil yet within it and members of it Now that the Romam Church was not only a true Church in the Apostles times but also vnto the time of S. Austin and further it is abundantly already confessed and therefore seing she hath confessedly neuer departed out the sequele is euident that stil she continueth tâ—e
been no part of the Protestant Faith for then they would not haue resisted them but embrace them as they do al the rest this kind of arguing as it would be grateful to them so would it proue most disgraceful and distastful to Protestants for hence would it follow that in those verie points wherin Puritans are diuided from Protestants the Protestant Church should be changed and the Puritans should be the men who should obserue resist the same for according to our Doctours wise reasoning if the Puritan poynts had been part of the Protestant Faith then would they not haue resisted the Protestant Articles but embrace them as they do al the rest The which also may be vrged in behalf of Broâ—nists Anabaptists and al other Sectaries whatsoeuer for according to M. White if the Protestant Church were not changed the Puritâ—ns Brownists Anabaptists c. would not haue resisted it in some points but embrace them also as they do in al the rest then which nothing can be vttered more absurd in it self or more aduantagious to al Hereticks euer arising And so I passe to the last and worst part of D. Whites witnesses produced against vs and in behalf of himself that is to those whom sayth he the Church of Rome then persecuted and now calleth Hereticks that is Protestants which in his Catalogue he nameth to be Berengarius Bertram Ahnaricus the Waldenses Wicclinists Lollards and Hussites al which he coupleth togeather like Sampsons foxes to make them good witnesses against the Roman Church But first in what Court or Tribunal wil anie mans naked testimonie be auailable against his Aduersarie and especially of a conuicted offender against his Iudge when he speaketh only for his owne priuate Who may not disclaime and reiect as suspected anie mans bare word in his own cause This is the case of our last witnesses who going out and departing from our Roman Church as al other Hereticks haue euer done were alwaies noted contradicted and condemned for the same What then can the force of their testimonie be against vs but as of a Felon or Traytour against his lawful Iudge or Prince hauing denounced sentence of death against him Besides I wil make it manifest that these who are produced as Protestants resisting the Roman Church in al Ages were not Protestants but cleerly dissenting from them in manie fundamental points And lastly I would gladly know how possibly D. White could haue so good Intelligence of Protestants resisting in al those seueral Ages our Roman Church when as I haue largely conuinced (27) l. 3. c. 1. before by the ful testimonies of manie and the most learnedst Protestants that euer were that during al the foresaid Ages by him instanced there was neuer any one Protestant known and visibile to the world before the dayes of Luther Wherefore after good examining I doubt not but my Doctours Protestants resisting in al Ages our Roman Church wil finally resolue into his owne idle fancies which if they were as forcible to proue as his fond imagination is fertil to frame them the ruine of Catholicks were ineuitable and their verie memorie hateful But to leaue now a while these so sound and lawful witnesses and to come to the poynts wherin they made resistance I wil only obserue that sundrie of the poynts instanced by D. White are either matters of indifferencie or not of Faith neuer yet determined by the Church of God or els of fact and not of right or lastly only of life and conuersation al which is most impertinent in proof of anie change in Faith and Religion which is the only point here to be proued by our Doctour Wherefore now to graple neerer with our Catalogue-Maker and to examine the points instanced in euerie Semicenturie for the Roman Churches change After 600. yeares were expired saith he the seueral poynts of true Faith began one after another to be more grossely corrupted and changed by the Church of Rome In the first fiftie I name Serenus Bishop of Marseils in France who brake the Images that began to be set vp in his Diocesse But at the verie first M. Doctour iuggleth with vs for whereas this matter concerning Serenus was written first by S. Gregorie the great (28) l. 7. Ep. 111. he doth not anie thing insinuate that Images began then to be set vp in the Churches of Marseils in France but only obserueth that Serenus perceauing some Christians lately conuerted to adore the Images in the Church as though they were Gods through Zeale did breake them and cast them downe for which verie fact was he yet seuerely reproued by S. Gregorie himself writing thus vnto him Pictures are vsed in Churches that those who are vnlearned at least should read by seing in the walles those things which they could not read in bookes Thy Brotherhood therfore ought to haue preserued the Pictures and to haue hindred the people from their adoration that so the ignorant might haue from whence to gather knowled e of the Historie and the people not sinne in adoration of the Picture Further also affirming that not without cause (29) l. 9. Ep. 9. Antiquitie admitted Histories to be painted in the venerahle places or Churches of Saincts So cleer it is that the placing of Images in Churches did not as then first begin A truth further so euident that sundrie Protestant Writers (30) Before l. 2. c. 14. haue largely heretofore acknowledged the vse and placing of Images in Churches during the purest times of the Primitiue Church alleaging to that end seueral examples from Sozomene Athanasius Prudentius Nicephorus Tertullian and others who al of them liued some Ages before Serenus was borne But to proceed In the same 50. yeares sayth he Gregory the Bishop of Rome resisted the Supremacie for which he (31) l. 4. Ep. 32. 34. 38. 39. citeth certaine Epistles of S. Gregorie al written against Iohn Bishop of Constantinople who as then assumed to himself the name of Vniuersal Bishop which as he deseruedly reproued in him so was he so farre from denying his owne Primacie as that M. Bale reporteth to the contrarie (32) Image of both Chur. f. 11. that Iohn of Constantinople contended with Gregorie of Rome for the Supremacie in which contention Gregorie layd for himself S. Peters keyes with manie other sore arguments and reasons The which also is granted by manie other (33) See before l. 2. c. 4. Protestants amongst whom one reporteth that whereas (34) Cath. Traditions q. 2. p. 17. the Emperour Maurice would haue taken away the Primacie from Gregorie and giuen it to Iohn Bishop of Constantinople c. Gregorie did oppose himself against him And the Centurists adde further that (35) Cent. 6. col 425. Gregorie gloried that the Emperour and Eusebius his fellow Bishop of Constantinople did both of them acknowledge that the Church of Constantinople was subiect io the Apostolick Sea of Rome Neither was this Primacie first begun by
S. Gregorie (36) See before l. 2. c. 4. for his Predecessours Pelagius Celestine Leo Gelasius Sixtus Siricius Innocentius Sozimus Damasus Iulius Steuen Dionisius Victor c. yea S. Peter himself are al of them reproued by Protestant Writers for the foresayd Primacie So confessed it is that the Primacie of the Roman Church did not first begin in the time of S. Gregorie Now whereas D. White further added that the whole Greek Church complayned when Phocas had first conferred it on Boniface that their complaint supposing it for true is nothing material for they being as then diuided in this poynt from the Roman Church assuming to themselues the sayd Primacie their testimonie in their owne Cause is of no account But neither is it true that Phocas did first conferre it on Boniface for though he did by his Edict declare that the Roman Church was the Head of al Churches as testify S. Bede and others (37) l. de Sex Aetatibus in Phoca Ado in Chron. Paulus Diacon l. 18. de Rebus Roman yet is there no intimation that he first bestowed it yea further they affirme that the reason of the sayd Edict was the pride of the Bishops of Constantinople who iniuriously styling themselues vniuersal Bishops and contemning the Excommunications denounced against them by S. Gregorie Pelagius the Emperour therefore thought it necessarie to interpose his owne authoritie which the Grecians much more feared And he is so free from innouating in this Cause that besides the late premisses of the ancientest Popes euer claiming the same Iustinianus (38) Ep. ad Ioann 2. the elder ancient to Phocas by 70. yeares affirmeth the Roman Church to be Head of al Churches And Valentinian who preceded Phocas 140. yeares auoucheth that the Roman Bishop hath euer had the Principalitie of Preisthood aboue al others Yea in fullest satisfaction hereof it is plainly coÌ„fessed by Protestants theÌ„selues that Constantin our first Christian Emperour elder to Phocas almost 300. yeares (39) Before l. 2. c. 4. attributed Primacie to the Roman Bishop before al. So free was Phocas from first conferring Primacie to the Roman Church and so cleerly she resteth acquitted of these pretended Changes Innouations in the first 50. yeares After 650. 650. to 700. I name sayth D. White the Sixt general Councel decreing the marriage of Priests against the Church of Rome labouring to restraine it for which he citeth Can. 13. But the truth is there are not anie such Canons in the Councel cited for the true Sixt General Councel put forth no Canons as it is euident by the Seauenth (40) Act. 4. 5. Synod Wherefore after the Sixt Synode certaine Bishops assembled at Constantinople who in the Emperour Iustiniâ—n the Second his Pallace called Trullum published those Canons vnder the name of the sixt Synode which were neuer approued by anie Roman Bishop but to the contrarie then contradicted by Pope Sergius (41) Beda l. de Sex Aetatibus in Iustiniano Caulus Diacon l. 8. c. 9. de Rebus Rom. But though these Canons were authentical yet litle would they auaile our marrying Ministers not one of them allowing anie Clergie-man to marry after Orders taken and only permitting such to keepe their wiues as had them before they were of the Clergie and neither (42) Can. 6. 12. 48. this do they allow to Bishops but only to others of inferiour Orders Yea the Roman Church is so free from making anie change in this respect at the time prescribed that sundrie (43) Before l. 2. c. 17. Protestants for the self same prohibition of marriage to the Clergie do reproue manie more ancient and confirmed Councels as the 2. Councel of Arles holden in the time of Constantin the Councel of Neocesaraea of Eliberis the first of Nice and sundrie others As also for the same cause they reprehended the ancient Popes Leo Innocentius Calixtus Siricius c. and the learnedst Doctours of those times as S. Hierome S. Ambrose Origen with manie others so that at the time of the 6. Councel of Constantinople no changee at al was made by the Roman Church concerning the Single life of the Clergie But D. White further vrgeth that the sayd â— Councel forbiddeth to make the Holie-Ghost in likenes of a Doue But neither is this true for though it did preferre other Pictures before the Picture of Christ in the figure of a Lambe and the Picture of Holie-Ghost in forme of a Doue yet doth it not condemne these (45) Act. 5. And in the 7. Synod 44 the Image of the Holie-Ghost in forme of Doue is expresly approued Yea therin was also read the Epistle of Adrian to Tharasius in which it is sayd that in the 6. Synod was commended the Image of Christ in forme of a Lambe And that the Roman Church long before those times allowed Images it is euident enough by that which is before sayd concerning Serenus But our Doctour yet vrgeth that at this time there was a Councel holden in Portugal where the Cup is appointed to be ministred to the people against the practise of some that vsed to dip the bread and so to giue it which was one begining of the half Communion But this Councel being the third Councel of (45) Can. 1. Brach did iustly forbid that dipping in that it was neither so instituted by Christ nor could be confirmed by anie testimonie or example from Scripture yet doth it not command both kinds to be giuen And though it had yet were the obiecting thereof impertinent seing as then it was free lawful to vse both kinds Now that CoÌ„munion vnder one kind was sometimes vsed in much more ancient Ages it might easily be proued by Sozomene (46) Hist l. 8. c. 5. Niceph. hist l. 13. c. 7. Hieron Apol. pro l. in Iouin Cypr. Serm. de lapsis Tertul. l. 2. ad vxor Clem. Al. l. 1. strom 700. Nicephorus S. Hierome S. Cyprian Tertullian and others So that D. Whites Examples for the Roman Churches change in this 50. yeares are altogeather friuolous After 700. to 750. I name saith M. White the General Councel of Constantinople vnder Leo Isaurus against Images This Councel was neuer confirmed but reiected for none of the Patriarchs were present S. German only excepted who would not consent therevnto and thereupon was depriued of his Sea of Constantinople Wherefore this only proueth that some of the Grecians changed their Faith concerning Images for which they were contradicted not only by the Latin Church but by sundrie also of the greatest Doctours of the Greek Church In this Age also he nameth Clemens Scotus and Adelbartus who saith he preached against the Supremacie Traditions Images and in the defence of Priests marriage also against Purgatorie Masses for the dead c. And al this he proueth only by one of his lawful witnesses his Protestant Brother Illiricus which being wholy destitute of al other Authoritie I may lawfully forebeare it al further
that he might answer it Secondly the Roman 62) Zonaras Cedrenus Paulus Diac. in vita Leonis Isauri Bishops Gregorie the Third Adrian the First and Leo the Third Excommunicated the Grecian Emperours and transferred the Empire from them to the French cheifly for that they patronised the Heresie against Images whereas the French persisted euer constant in the ancient Catholick Faith wherefore it is most improbable that Charles should write in defence of the Grecian errour against the Pope of Rome Thirdly 63) L. 1. de cultu Imaginum Ionas Aurelianensis who liued in the Raigne of Ludouicus sonne to Charles testifyeth that Claudius Taurinensis a special Patrone of the Heresie durst neuer open his mouth therein during the life of Charles Fourthly Pope 64) Paulus Aemil. l. 2. Franc. And see cent 8. c. 9. col 570. Stephen holding a Councel at Rome against the sayd Errour Charles himselfe sent 12. of the cheifest Bishops of his Kingdome to assist him therein And D. Cowper 65) Chron. 174. reporteth that certaine Bishops were sent by Adrian to Charles who held a Councel in France against the condemnation of Images Fiftly this most famous Emperour Charles was so wholy Roman Catholick as that 66) Ep. ded Hist Sacra Hospinian recordeth of him 67) Epist Hist Eccl. Cent. 8. p. 101. Crisp of the Estate of the Church p. 221. 216. Bul. in 2. Thess c. 2. p 533. Cowp Chron. f. 173. 195. Foxin Apoc. p. 436. that he not only cōmanded by publick Edicts that the verie Ceremonies Rites and Latin Masse of the Roman Church as also the Decrees Lawes and Ordinances of the Roman Bishop should be obserued through his whole Empire but himself by imprisonments and diuers kinds of punishments compelled Churches to the same The like whereof is confessed of him by Osiander Crispinus Bullinger D. Cowper and M. Fox So vnlike was he to write against the Roman Church concerning Images Sixtly Caluin himself insinuateth this Booke to be forged about Charlemaines time saying 68) Iust l. 1. c. 11. sec 14. There is extant a refuting Booke vnder the name of Charles the Great which by the words thereof we may gather to haue bene made at the same time Seauently wheras Charles was knowne to be verie skilful both in Greek Latin learned ingenious in this booke there are manie absurdities committed as where it affirmeth Constantinople to be a Citty most knowne in Bythinia whereas indeed it is in Thracia as also that at Constantinople there was a Councel celebrated in defence of the worshipping of Images whereas the sayd Councel was celebrated at Nice And that the Nicene Councel tearmed the Eucharist the Image of Christs bodie whereas directly and purposely they refute and condemne the sayd speech Eightly supposing for the time against al the premisses that it had been Charles his Booke yet nothing would it auaile but much preiudice Protestants for therein is expressely taught that the last sentence in Controuersies of Faith belongeth to the Roman Bishop And that he hath his Primacie not from Councels but from God himself It prescribeth also Exorcismes to be vsed in Baptisme Churches to be dedicated with special Rites That we are to pray for the dead and Inuocate Saincts and their Relicks to be worshipped That Chrisme and Holie-water are to be vsed That in the Eucharist there is the true Bodie of Christ and the same to be worshipped yea to be offred as a true and proper Sacrifice Al which do mainely impugne Protestant Religion And therefore if they wil haue vs to beleeue this Booke teaching that the Councel of Nice erred concerning Images let them beleeue it teaching the other Catholick poynts next recited Lastly if it could be proued that Charles himself had made this Book that he had been a perfect Protestant in al poynts yet how would it hence follow that the Roman Church had changed her Faith in the time of Charles Or what would the testimonie of a Lay-man auaile them seing according to 69) Orat. 2. de Imag. Damascen Christ committed not his Church to Kings and Emperours but to Bishops and Pastours But we haue seene sufficiently before that Charles was a Prince wholy deuoted to the Roman Church and a special Patron of Images and consequently the Booke written against them and imposed vpon him is meerly forged and of no authoritie And so likewise is no lesse forged that other vnder the name of Lewes his Sonne which for such is condēned by the Catholick Church Neither 70) Index lib. prohibit doth our Doctour affoard vs the least colour of proof for the legitimation of either of these Bookes but only sayth that they are extant as though it were rare among Hereticks to finde manie spurious adulterine Bookes And so I cōclude that seing our Ministers proofs for the Roman Churches change in these 50. yeares are al of them in seueral respects either most impertinent or most false that therefore the Roman Church during the same time did not change After 800 800. to 850. I name sayth our Cataloguer Ioannes Scotus c. who resisting the Real presence c. was therefore murdred The same time Berthram also writ against it c. Claudius Bishop of Towres resisted Images worship of Saincts and Pilgrimage Lotharius the Emperour reduced the Pope to the obedience of the Empire c. These are the examples of the Roman Change in this time But let vs examine them As concerning Scotus that he resisted the Real presence M. White proueth it only by the testimonie of Daneus who being a formal Protestant of these times his testimonie is insufficient as bearing witnesse in his owne Cause therefore al further answer were needles But yet I do acknowledge that about the same time there was one Scotus not the subtil Doctour who liued some Ages after but an other who writ something doubtfully in this poynt but his Booke was condemned in the Councel at Vercella as testifyeth Lantfrancus (a) lib. de verit Corp. Et sang Domini in Eucharistia And he is obserued to be the first in the Latin Church who writ suspiciously against the Real Presence And as for Bertram though the Booke extant vnder his name doth vse some doubteful and obscure words as Figure Spiritual and Mysterie yet at other times doth it speak as plainly Affirming the Presence of Christs Bodie vnder the veyle or couerture of Bread Yea the Centurists confesse that Bertram 71) Cent. 9. c. 4. Col. 212. in the sayd Book hath the seeds of Transubstantiation Secondly this sayd Book being set forth lately by Oecolampadius may iustly be suspected and rather in that Pantaleon 72) p. 65. in his Chronograph mentioning Bertram and his other writings forbeareth yet to mention this Booke or to charge him with this pretended opinion Thirdly Illiricus making a Catalogue of Protestant witnesses to whom our Minister for this of his is no litle beholding
to examine matters but to define nothing before his notice and withal not to communicate with Photius as a Bishop but only as a Secular man being ordayned contrarie to the Canons and hauing vniustly deposed Ignatius which when Photius perceuied he hindred the sayd Legats for conferring with anie but only their own followers and withal assembled a Synod wherein through the power of the Emperour he further confirmed the Deposition of Ignatius and his own Creation threatning also the Popes Legats that vnles they also would subscribe to the sayd Councel the Emperour would bannish them into remote Countries where for verie hunger they should be inforced to eate lice Through which terrours and also through bribes from Photius the Legats contrarie to the Popes command subscribed to the condemnation of Ignatius and establishment of Photius Which when Pope Nicolas truly vnderstood assembling a Councel in Rome he excommunicated Photius and his own Legats and deposed them al restoring Ignatius to his Sea Which Basil the Emperour succeding Michael according to the Popes determination fully executed Now what doth anie of this make against the Popes Supremacie but rather confirme the same seing that both Michael and Photius sent Embassedours to the Pope entreating that he would send Legats from himself for the redressing of abuses at Constantinople And when themselues were found cheifly faultie the Emperour was seuerely reprehended by the Pope and Photius excommunicated and deposed Adde hereunto that the Greek Writers themselues do generally testifye that both Michael and Photius were men extremely addicted to manie and most enormous vices and therefore their resisting the Pope is of no greater Authoritie then of an offender or Rebel resisting his lawful Iudge or Prince So likewise concerning the Bishop of Rauenna's resisting the Pope Anastasius cited by M. White in proof thereof reporteth (81) In Nicolao 1. that sundrie Persons going to Pope Nicolas with manie complaints of greiuous wrongs and dommages done vnto them by the sayd Bishop the Pope therevpon did by his Legats and letters admonish him to surcease the same and to make satisfaction Which the Bishop neglecting and adding stil more to his former impieties he further commanded him to repaire to Rome there in the Synod to answer in his own behalf which he likewise refusing and contemning to do he was therevpon Excommunicated by the same Councel Yea the Pope himself vpon the earnest intreatie of the people of Rauenna went to the same Cittie where presently he restored manie things taken wrongfully by the Bishop who hauing Intelligence before hand of the Popes comming was fled to Papia there to desire Ludonicus the Emperours help and backing against the Pope But as the people there in the streets did eschew his companie hearing that he was Excommunicated by Pope Nicolas so the Emperours answer was only this by his Messenger Let him go and laying pride aside let him humble himself to the Pope to whom both we and al the Church are subiect Which when the Bishop heard despayring of al other meanes he went to Rome where submitting himself to the Pope and promising reformation and performance of sundrie matters enioyned him and commanded by the same Pope he was therevpon absolued from his Excommunication and suspension from saying Masse This being the truth of the Storie concerning the Bishop of Rauenna his resisting the Pope I referre it to the Iudgement of anie impartial Reader whether this doth not strongly confirme the Primacie of the Bishop of Rome But to proceed after 900. 900. to 950. 950. and so forward D. White vrgeth sundrie abuses noted as then in the Church of Rome But those by him specifyed concerning only matter of life and manners are altogeather improper and insufficient to proue any change in Faith and Doctrine which was the only point pertinent to be proued Yea Baronius by him alleaged speaketh only of such abuses as were brought into the Church by Anti-Popes and Intruders not by true Popes And whereas further it is obiected that certaine of the English Clergie maintayned the Sacrament to be only a figure of the Bodie bloud of Christ against the Real Presence then increasing Besides that the confirmation hereof dependeth vpon the testimonie of the old Fabler Fox I haue shewed heretofore in the Examples of Scotus and Bertram that our Catholick Doctrine of Real Presence was confessedly beleeued and taught in the purest times of the Primitiue Church After 950. 950. to 1000. we haue fayth D. White Otho the Great that deposed Iohn the Pope and assumed into his hands the nominating and making of Popes hereafter c. But this only proueth what was done not with what right it was done for though through the solicitation of a false Synod Otho assented to the deposition of Iohn by reason of manie crimes obiected against him Yet the proceeding therin was in sundrie respects not Iuridical but directly contrarie to the much more ancient practise and decrees of the Church as Baronius proueth at large Anno 963. Neither is it true that Otho assumed into his hands the nominating and making of Popes hereafter for no sooner was Iohn deposed but immediatly in the hearing of the Emperour the Bishops assembled iâ— the same Synod sayd We choose Leo our Pastour that he may be the cheif and vniuersal Pope of the Roman Church to which though the Emperour afterwardes assented yet did he neither first nominate or elect him In this Semi-centurie M. White further vrgeth that Aelfricus Archbishop of Canterburie preached and published his Homilies against the Real Presence comming in But first Aelfricus the Archbishop of Canterburie was so Roman Catholick that D. Godwin testifieth (n) Catal. of Bishops p. 23. that he was brought vp in Glassenburie And M. Bale assureth vs that he was Schollar to S. Ethwald and Abbot of Abingdon and for his craftie (x) Cent. 2. c. 41. sayth he in promoting Papistrie made Archbishop of Canterburie Secondly the Protestants which (*) In the Preface before it published that Sermon confesse that the Authour thereof was no Archbishop of Canterburie And it is more likely to be true which M. Fox (y) Act. mon. p. 1148 1040. sayth that it was Aelfrick surnamed Bara an Heretick who as S. Dunstan appearing to one in a vision sayd as reporteth Osberne attempted to disinherit his Church but I haue stopped him sayth S. Dunstan and he could not preuaile Thirdly that Sermon diligently read maketh as much for Transubstantiation as against it Lastly though we should suppose for the present that Aelfricus did preach or publish such Homilies yet was that doctrine so far from comming in as then as that the best and ancientest Fathers of the Primitiue Church are formerly confessed and reproued for the same doctrine by sundrie Protestant Writers In like sort though Arnulphus a man vicious inueighed against the Pope vrging that if he be voyd of charitie puffed vp only with knowledge he is Antichrist
Innouation therein could be obserued or reproued by Almaricus In like sorte though Robert Bishop of Lincolne withstood the Popes proceedings in England yet this nothing proueth anie change or first comming in of anie point of Faith in the Roman Church obserued or resisted by the sayd Robert Besides D. Godwine reporteth that a Cardinal sayd to the Pope concerning him He (a) Catalo of Bishop of England p. 240. is for Religion a Catholick as wel as we And so dying he gaue al his bookes an excellent Librarie vnto the Friar Minors at Oxford So charitable was he to Friars and consequently so Roman Catholick euen at his verie death And where he affirmeth that Ioakim Abbas sayd that Antichrist was borne at Rome and should sit in the Apostolick sea It is so vntrue that in his Epistle prefiged to his Exposition vpon the Apocalypse he submitteth his writings to the Censure of the Sea Apostolick affirming further that he firmely beleeueth that the Gates of Hel cannot preuaile against the Roman Church and that her Faith shal not perish before the end of the world Yea in his Exposition vpon the 6. Chapter and 11. verse he calleth such the Sonnes of Babylon who impugne the Church of Peter And vpon the 7. Chapter and 2. verse by the Angel ascending from the East hauing the signe of the liuing God he vnderstandeth the Bishop of Rome who with his fellow-Bishops with the signe of the Crosse wil arme the Elect in that last tribulation which Antichrist shal rayse So litle cause there is to vrge this Abbot against the Pope And indeed al that truly can be vrged against him is that being an old man and half out of his wits he was censured by the Pope for certaine fonde Prophecies and some errours also about the B. Trinitie as appeareth by the Decree extant in the Canon Law against him and by other Authours that haue written of him And as for Fidericus the Second Emperour resisting the Popes Supremacie it proueth no more but that euen the most vicious Emperours were most aduerse to the Pope For he being a Prince of most scandalous and wicked life was after due admonitions excommunicated as also deposed by Pope Innocent the Fourth in a general Councel holden at Lyons so that his resisting in this regard the Supremacie is only a guiltie and conuicted Persons resisting of al such lawful Authoritie whereby he is censured and punished Concerning Arnoldus Villanouanus speaking against Friars the Sacrifice of the Masse and Papal Decrees This M. White only proueth by the testimonies of the Magdeburgians and Osiander which being Protestants are no competent witnesses against Catholicks But besides I haue proued (107) l. 2. c. 9. 4. before that the Sacrifice of the Masse and the Popes Authoritie were beleeued and practised in much more ancient times As also that the Institution of Friars proueth no Innouation in Faith and Religion Euerardus broaching those foule and false reproaches against Pope Gregorie the Seauenth called Hildebrand proueth nothing but his owne disobedience and impatience hauing been by the same 108) Greg. 7. Ep. 18. Pope for his owne demerits iustly suspended from his Episcopal function After 1250. 1250. to 1300. I name Gulielmus de S. Amore withstanding Friars and their abuses but how impertinent this is I haue shewed sufficiently before The Preachers also saith he in Sweden that publickly taught the Pope and his Bishops to be Hereticks But M. White receiuing this Relation from Illiricus no further answer wil be requisit Dante 's also saith he writ that the Empire descended not from the Pope But Dante 's being only a Poet intermedling in other matters committed (109) See Bellar. in Append. ad lib. de Sum. Pont c. 14. manie grosse errours for which his bookes are condemned and prohibited by the Church yea he liued in faction against some (110) Ibid. c. 12. Popes and therefore his writing against them is of no force As for Gulielmus Altisiodorensis M. White producing nothing in particular out of him against the Roman Church but only affirming that in his Summes are found manie things confuted that then were comming in no further particular answer can be expected and though he referre himself for particulars to this his own Booke yet citing no page or place thereof I hould it vnworthie of so paineful search it being also wel knowne that Altisiodorensis only differed from other Schoole-men in matters disputable and not defined After 1300. 1300. to 1350. I name sayth he Marcilius Patauinus that wrot against the Popes Supremacie But he being a knowne condemned Heretick a flatterer of the Schismatical Emperour and his Bookes condemned by the Church as also the Popes Primacie being formerly acknowledged in the Primitiue Church his testimonie is sundrie wayes insufficient And the like is to be answered to Ocham (111) Tritheâ—nius Genebrard l. 4. Chron. who was purposely hyred by the Emperour to write against the Pope who was also Excommunicated and his Bookes prohibited Gregorius Ariminensis his differences were only in Schoole points not determined by the Church And as for the Vniuersitie of Paris condemning the Popes Pardons it is most vntrue and therefere M. White did wel to father it only vpon his Brother Illiricus whom he knew to be expert in the art of forging After 1350. 1350. to 1400. I name sayth he Aluâ—rus Pelagius who wrot a Book of the L mentation of the Church wherein he reproueth diuerse abuses of his times But who denyeth but that in the Militant Church consisting of good and euil there are manie abuses in life and conuersation But as for abuse or Innouation in matter of Doctrine and Faith Aluarus maketh no mention at al in his sayd Booke And as for Montziger disputing against â—ransubstantiation and Adoration of the Sacrament and Cesenas calling the Pope Antichrist besides that the truth hereof dependeth only of the testimonie of Fox and Illâ—ricus both of them Protestants I haue sufficiently before cleered both these poynts from al Innouation in Ages much more ancient Now as for Iohn Wiceliffe as I haue shewed (112) l. 1. c. 3. before that in sundrie poynts of Faith he agreed with Catholicks which Protestants now impugne so it is euident that he taught sundrie grosse errours which both Catholicks and Protestants do detest as that If a (113) Fox Act. Mâ—n p. 96. Bishop or Priest be in deadly sinne he doth not Order consecrate or Baptize that Al (114) Osiand cent 9. 10. 11. p. 459. oathes are vnlawful That (115) Osiand cent 15. p. 457. al things come to passe by absolute necessitie That there 116) Ib. p. 454. is no Ciuil Migistrate whilest he is in mortal sinne and sundrie others in regard of which Protestants 117) Pant. Chronol p. 119. Mathias Hoe in his Tract duo Tract 1. p. 27. themselues ranke him in the Catalogue of Hereticks So that smal Credit or succour wil M. White
insufficiencie of this desperate answer I wil make proofe of two seueral truthes First that the sayd answer hath euer been and is stil the ordinarie answer of al Hereticks thereby intending to escape not only the foulest stayne of Nouellisme or Innouation but withal to preuent al strongest arguments drawne from general Councels though neuer so lawful from ancient Doctours though neuer so learned and from Ecclesiastical Histories though neuer so true The second truth is that their so appealing to the Sacred Scriptures is the thrusting their owne throates againsts the sharpest poynts of their Enemies swords For by them I wil euidently proue the Roman Church and Religion to be the only true Church and Religion of Christ and his Apostles As also the Congregation of Protestants and their profession to be most aduerse and disagreing with the Scriptures themselues and so in itself to be nouel heretical and damnable And to omit the ordinarie custome of elder Hereticks in appealing from al other proofes to only Scripture obserued and reproued in them by the ancientest and learnedst (4) lib. De Prescript c. 15. Hieron ep ad Paulin tom 3 cont Lucifer Augu. cont Faust Manic l. 32 c. 19 l. 1. de Trinit c. 3. ep 222. Hilar. l ad Const Vincent Lyrin l. aduers haeres c. 35. Ambr. in c. vlt. ad Tit. Orig. hom 7. in Ezech. Doctours and Fathers of the Primitiue Church namely Tertulian Hierome Augustin Hilarie Vincentius Lyrinensis and others And only to obserue how the refinedst Sectaries of these our dayes with the same pretence of Scripture do dayly reuolt and rebel from their other Brethren And first concerning the Puritans agaynst the Protestants D. white guift alleaging and vrging in behalf of Metropolitanes the authoritie of the Nicene Councel (5) In his 2. Reply part 1. p. 484. M. Cartwright replyeth Touching the perfect vnitie of Substance of our Sauiour Christ with God the Father it giuing Sentence vpon the infallible Word of God is worthily to be reuerenced But if the Doctours wil haue their soundnes in that poynt to authorize the rest c. it is that which we can by no meanes assent vnto And that it may appeare how iustly we cal this Canon of the Councel touching Metropolitanes vnto the touchstone of the word of God Let it be considered c. yea the same 6) In Whiteg Def. p. 111. M. Cartwright alloweth the iudgment of his learnedst father Caluin but with this restraynt So far sayth he as we can esteeme that that which M. Caluin sayth doth agree with the Canonical Scriptures This practise is so ordinarie with the Puritans that D. Bancroft in his Suruey of pretended Discipline spendeth wholy his 27. Chapter in obseruing and reprouing the same In like sort the (7) In their Apologie p. 103. 4. 98. 99. 100. And see M. Aynsworth in his Counterpoyson p. 15. 154. Brownists of Amsterdam answering to D. Bilsons allegations from the Fathers resolutely affirme and say Let M. Bilson with these Doctours know that vnles they can approue by the word of God their Prelacie c. Al the colour they bring out of former times and writers is of no moment in this case And as for the Anabaptistes (8) Eccl. Pol. pref p. 38. M. Hooker reporteth of them that the Book of God they for the most part so admired that other disputation against their opinions then only by allegation of Scripture they would not heare for which verie poynt and errour they are reproued by (9) Tract Theol p. 171 in Psycophannichiae p. 451. And in his Instructiō aduersus Anabap p. 478. M. Caluin in these words Because sillie Christians who haue some zeale towards God can be seduced by no shew or appearance more faire then when the word of God is pretended and alleaged the Anabaptists against whom we now write haue it alwayes in their mouths and they alwayes solemnly recite it c. And agayne The Deuil himself armed himself with the word of God and girded himself with that sword to inuade and assault Christ And we find true by experience that he doth daily vse these guiles or artes by organs or instruments to depraue the truth and so to lead miserable Soules to destruction So ordinarie it is with the Anabaptists and the Diuel himself in defence of their errours euer to appeale to the only written word The same answer is likewise giuen by the Protestant Arians of these times insomuch as (10) Lib de Christi Naturae p. 222. Socinus in defence of his errour agaynst the Diuinitie of Christ answereth his Protestant Aduersarie Volanus in these wordes We propound to vs in this question none for Maister or Interpreter but only the Holie-Ghost c. we do not thinke that we are to stand to the iudgement of anie men though neuer so learned of anie Councels though in shew neuer so holie and lawfully assembled of anie visible Church though neuer so perfect and vniuersal Simlerus (11) De aeterno De◠filio l. 1. c. 2. writeth of the Arians They prouoke vs to Scriptures and because they know al Antiquitie to be against them they reiect al without exception And (12) In ep Theol. ep 15. p. 119. 120. Beza sayth to the Arian Statorius who was sometime Bezas Scholler and deare to him Oughtest thou not to remember from whom to whom thou hast reuolted But thou saist I do not depend of men but of the word of God Very wel But doth the word of God teach thee c. that he can be a Sauiour c who is not God So that our moderne Puritans Brownists Anabaptists and Arians do al of them in defence of their seueral errours being vrged by other Protestants with the authoritie of the Church Fathers and Councels euer appeale vnto the only written word But who would not thinke but that our ordinarie Protestants thus reprouing in their reuolting Brethren their contempt of the Church Fathers and Councels and their running to only Scripture would not be found faultie herein themselues And yet when their learnedst Bishops and Doctours are vrged vpon seueral occasions by our Catholick writers with the authoritie of Church Fathers and Councels none more readie then themselues to refuse disgrace and reiect the same and that euer with pretence and appeal to only Scripture A truth so euident that their forsayd rebellious Brethren do playnly acknowledge that this their course of appealing to only Scripture was taught and defended by themselues for thus say the (13) Simlerus De filio Dei in Bullingers pref there fol. 4. And in Simlerus his other Priface fol. 1. Antitrinitarians to the Tigurine Protestans You haue taught vs that nothing is to be receaued besides the Scriptures therfore we demand where it is written in the Scriptures c. Except you shew this according to your Rule we reiect and condemne those things therfore we haue learned of you to contemne the Fathers And
Fulk (5) Against Rhem. Test fol. 335. Caluin Inst c. de fide sec 37. 38. p. 233. 234. Melan. loc com c. de Ecclesiae Caluin Melancthon Hence it is that (6) Calu. vbi sup Whitak de Ecclesia p. 281. 285. Caluin D. Whitaker do affirme that The Church can neuer want Pastours and Doctours And which is more D. Fulk is of opinion that Christ wil suffer no particular Church to continue without a seruant to ouersee it 8) Ib p. 536. And that Pastours and Doctours must be in the Church til the end of the world euen 9) Ib. p 569 from Christs time til Luthers Age. M. Spark 10) Answ to Albines p. 11. affirmeth that The Church of Christ hath alwayes had and shal haue to the end successiuely in al Ages in one place or other such as haue shewed the truth fully vnto others (7) Against Hoskins c. p 359. as haue shined as Lights in their dayes set vpon a Candlestick And D. Field (11) Of the Church c 6. p. 51 auoucheth that Lawful and holie Ministrie is an inseparable and perpetual note of a true Church and that no Church can be without it Secondly the holie Sâ—riptures teach that these Pastours which must euer continue must not vndertake the charge by vsurpation without sending but by lawful Calling According to that of S. Paul 12) Heb. 5.4 No man taketh to himself the honour of Priesthood but he that is called of Gâ—d as Aaron was to wit visibly and by peculiar Consecration And againe 13) Ro 10.14 How shal they preach except they be senâ— Christ himself auoucheth that 14) Ioh 10.1 who so enâ—râ—th not by the doore into the sheepfold but climeth another way is a theef And God Almightie saith by the Prophet Hieremie (15) c. 23.21 I haue not sent these Prophets yet they ranne (16) c 14.14 1â— 27. 15 The Prophets prophecy lyes in my name I haue not sent them 17) c. 29.31 Semetas hath prophecyed to you and I sent him not Insomuch (18) 2. Paralip c. 26.16.18.19 as Vzias presuming to vsurp the Priests office was therefore reprehended and stroken with Leprosie wherof other like examples are not wanting in the (19) 2. Reg. 6.6.7 1. Paralip 13.9.10 Scriptures Now agreably to these Scriptures Protestants teach that this personal Succession of Pastours is to be continued in the Church no otherwise then by lawful sending or calling by man's Ministerie Luther (20) Vpon the Epistle to the Galath fol. 10. teacheth that God calleth vs at this day to the Ministerie of his Word not immediatly himself but by man As also (21) Tom. 5. Wittemb in c. 1. Gal. fol. 376. God calleth vs at this day to the Ministerie of the Word by Mediate vocation which is done by meanes that is by man c. that vocation hath continued euen til these times and shal continue til the end of the world Piscator (22) Vol. 1. Thes Theol. p. 405. auoucheth that God after the Apostles times hath called and as yet doth cal and to the end of the world is to cal Pastours Doctours and Priests by the Church D. Bilson (23) Perpetual Gouernment c. c. 9. p. 111. affirmeth that The Moderation of the keyes and Imposition of hands were at first setled in the Apostles and that They can haue no part of Apostolick commission that haue no shew of Apostolick succession And therefore that Pastours do receaue by Succession the power and charge of the Word and Sacraments from and in the first Apostles Whereto assenteth also M. Bernard saying (24) Plaine Euidences c. p. 184. 185. In the Scripture of the new Testament there is none allowed to ordayne a Minister but a Minister c. In the new Testament al the Apostles time the Ministrie was by Succession Ministers as it were begetting Ministers by Ordination by laying on of hands let but one Instance be giuen to the contrarie After their time like Succession hath been kept from time to time Bishop after Bishop and Ministers ordayned by them c. The Scriptures promising the same to the worlds end c. Thus by plaine Historical narration both of God and Man we see a Succession of the Ministerie from one Minister to another M. Cartwright (25) 2. Reply part 2. p. 128. auoucheth that It is forbidden that anie should take honour to himself but he which is called of God as was Aaron What greater apparence of necessitie of Sacrificing could be then when Saul took vpon him to Sacrifice 2. Sam. 13.11 c. Likewise what greater apparence of necessitie then when Vzias stayed the Arke readie to haue fallen 2. Sam. 6.6.7 yet these necessities notwithstanding for so much as they tooke vpon them that whereto they were not called they receaued the reward of their boldnes And agayne (26) 2. Reply part 2. p. 141. A Pastour can no more preach now in a particular congregation without a sending then an Apostle could then in al the world c. affirming yet further that one not sent may not preach although he speake the words of Scripture yea (27) Vpon the Epistle to the Galath Eng. in c. 1. f. 10. It is not enough sayth Luther for a man to haue the Word and puritie of Doctrine but also he must be assured of his Calling and he that entreth without this certainly entreth to no other end but to kil M. Mason (28) Consecration of Engl. Bishops p. 9. not only affirmeth it to be impossible to be a lawful Minister without a lawful calling but withal confirmeth the same from seueral texts of Scripture from the testimonie of Beza saying This is an order appoynted in the Church by the Sonne of God and obserued inuiolably by al true Prophets and Apostles That no man may teach in the Church vnles he be called So that according to holie Scriptures and Protestants themselues the true Church must euer haue Pastours endued with lawful callinâ— and ordinarie Succession Thirdly the same Scriptures do teach that the sayd Pastours must not be silent but must preach the Word and administer the Sacraments The Prophet Esay (29) Esa 62.6 fortelleth of the Churches Watchmen that they shal not hold their peace And S. Paul (30) Rom. 10.14.15 setteth downe the necessitie of Preaching in these words How shal they beleeue him whom they haue not heard And how shal they heare without a Preacher But how shal they preach vnles they be sent (31) Rom. 10.17.18 Faith then is by hearing and hearing is by the word of Christ And certes into al the earth hath the sound of them gone forth and vnto the ends of the whole world the words of them And as concerning the administration of Sacraments it is so to continue vntil the end of the world that expressely it is sayd of the Eucharist (32) 1. Cor.
the Eunuch c. yet the Protestant (8) Syntagma ex veteri Test col 1232 1233. Wigandus sheweth by very manie examples of Scripture that the Iewish Synagogue before Christs time was dispersed in sundrie other Nations besides that of the Iewes Now amongst these the Church might in Elias time be visible though it had been then inuisible among the Iewes Fiftly though those 7000. of that one special time were vnknowne as then to Elias yet this proueth not which is the poynt only pertinent to be proued that therfore they should be as then vnknowne also to al others of the same time And much lesse therfore can this particular example proue that al the Faithful not of one special time only but also of so manie seueral hundred yeares as are heer (9) See before l. 3. c. 1. before confessed for the Prot. Churches inuisibilitie should al of them during al those Ages continue so generally latēt vnknowne not to one Elias only but to the whole world as that there should remayne no memorie or notice of the needful preaching administration of Sacraments to haue been performed so much as by one of them in anie one Nation of the earth for anie one moment of al those times Sixtly this obiection of Elias maketh fully for vs against our Aduersaries for it is euident that Elias flying (10) 3. Reg. 19 2.3.8.9 theface of Iesabel wife to Achab who sought his life lay thervpon secret in a Caue vpon Mount Horeb at the time of his complayning that he was left alone the which cōplaynt he made in regard only of that Countrey of Israel which was the kingdome of Achab wherin he then a strāger lay secret as appeareth most plainly aswel in that God himself accordingly answered his sayd complaint with like respect to that only Countrey saying I haue left to me in Israel 7000. c. Of one hundred wherof Elias himself had then special 11 3. Reg. 18.13 notice giuen him before by Obedias to whom therefore the Church was thē euen in that verie Countrey knowne visible which only poynt quite dissolueth al the supposed force of this so often re-enforced obiectiō Besides in those verie times the Church flourished in the next adioyning Kingdome of Iuda and was there as then to Elias both knowne visible vnder two good Kings Asa and Iosaphat who raigned euen in the time (12) 3. Reg. 22.41 of Achab At what time the number of the Faithful was there so exceeding great that the Souldiars only were numbred to (13) 2. Par. 14.8 9. 17.14.15.16.17.18 19 manie hundred thousands And thus is this very obiection answered by M. Henoch (14) Soueraigne Remedy c. p. 17. 18. Clapham saying our ignorāt Reformists say the Church was inuisible in the time of Elias but The Holy Ghost recordeth Elias to haue spoken this against Israel not against Iuda for as he knew that good Iosaphat at that time raigned in Iuda so he wel knew that there was not only the Church visible but also mightily reformed yea )15) In Corpore Doctrinae p. 530. 532 And in Morgensterne Tract de Eccl. p. 4. Melancthon expoundeth those verie words obiected I haue left to me 7000 c. of the visible Church And wheras (16) Def. of the Answ p. 645. Whitguift writeth that Sometimes the Church of God is where there is no good Pastour as in the time of Elias (17) Last part of the 2. Reply p. 63. M. Carthwright answereth This is vntrue for there were an hundred Prophets then kept of one man alone 1. Reg. 18.13 So manie wayes is it euident that the Church in the time of Elias his complaint was visible not only in Iuda but also in Israel Now wheras our Aduersaries do make for the reason of their Churches inuisibilitie Persecution This poore euasion implyeth in termes for what maketh the Church more knowne famous then Persecution Or who can be persecuted but men knowne seen to others Doth not M. Iewel (*) Reply p. 506. And Def. of the Apolog. p. 33. 34. hereupon affirme that The Church is placed vpon a mount her persecutions can not be hid Doth not M. Carthwright (18) In Whytguift Def p 174. And see D. Babington vpō Exodus p 10. cōfesse that the Church vnder Persecutiō is visible and sensible for els sayth he how could it be persecuted As also what a Conclusion is this the Churches were few in number because they were vnder the Crosse c. To let passe both Scriptures and Stories Ecclesiastical haue you forgotten what is sayd in the first of Exodus that the more the children of Israel were persecuted the more they increased But in cleer demonstration hereof is it not further euidēt that though the Primitiue Church during the first 300. yeares after Christ endured (19) Fox Act. Mon. p. 34. c. The Centuristes Cent. 1. col 24 c. Cent 2. col 10. c. Cent. 3. col 10. c. incomparably the most vniuersal violēt persecutions that euer were yet the same notwithstāding euen Protestāt writers (20) Cent. 1. 2. 3. throughout Pantaleon in Chronogr Functius in Chr. Osiand cent 1. 2 3. Dresserus in Millen 5. p. 11. 12. Fulk de Successione Eccl. p. 246. do at this day take certaine particular notice of the Catholick Bishops and Pastours by name in euerie one of those Ages of their administration of the Word and Sacraments and their open impugning of Heresies But besides al this al sides must acknowledge of the Church vnder Persecution that either she doth make Professiō of her Faith as also openly refrayne the external communion of al Idolatrie false doctrine and Sacraments or els that she doth not professe and refrayne as before sayd If the latter then as is heretofore proued she is not the true Church for as D. Field (22) Of the Church l. 3. p. 19. further saith Seing the Church is the multitude of them that shal be saued no man can be saued vnles he make Cōfession vnto Saluation for faith hid in the hart concealed doth not suffice it cannot be but they that are of the true Church must by the Profession of the truth make themselues knowne in such sort that by their profession and practise they may be discerned from other men If then the first then is she thereby made most knowne visible for besides her foresayd Profession consisting in administration of the Word Sacramēts impugning of errours which being done though neuer so priuatly is impossible to be in so manie seueral Countries kept secret for anie smaller time much lesse for so manie Ages togeather wherof D. Humfrey (23) Iesuit part 2. rat 3 p 241. saith most truly Whilst Ministers teach others learne they administer Sacraments these communicate al cal vpon God professe their Faith Who seeth not these things is blinder then a Mole I
Christ Or that Godlie men would for feare of anie persecution not only deny Christ before men but withal commit Adulterie with the pretended whore of Babylon in partaking with her in al her superstitions Idolatries and abominations what more forcible can be desired or vrged against the sayd imagined Church that she was not the Church of Christ then her owne confession of grosse and palpable dissimulation in the weightiest matters of Faith and Religion Doth not Christ himself auouch say (43) Math. 10.33 whosoeuer shal deny me before men him wil I also deny before my father in heauen And his Apostle teacheth (44) Rom. 10.10 that with the hart a man beleeueth vnto Iustice and with the mouth confesseth to Saluation And how possibly could the (45) Math. 16.18 Gates of Hel more strongly preuayle against the Church of Christ then by making her to commit Idolatrie and Superstition and that for manie hundred yeares togeather Wheras in steed of these (46) Psal 86.3 glorious things are foretold of the Church of Christ as that (47) Esa 60.11 her Gates should be continually open her (48) Esa 62.6 Pastours neuer silent her (49) Dan. 2.44 Kingdome not giuen ouer to another people but should stand for euer as (50) Esa 60.15.16 an eternal glorie and ioy from generation to generation So that the censure which by this last answer is imposed vpon the Protestant Church and that by her owne Children is that in steed of Christs Church she is a dissembling Church a Church denying Christ and his Religion a Church for temporal respects committing manie Idolatries and Superstitions and so by most true consequence no Church at al. THE FIFT BOOK WHERIN IS SHEVVED THAT PROTESTANTS IN THE Decision of Controuersies betvveen them and CatholicKs do absolutly disclaime from Antiquitie reiecting the Ancient Fathers and Councels for Papistical and the Sacred Scriptures for erroneous THAT PROTESTANTS DISCLAIME from al Antiquitie since the Apostles and further reiect and condemne as Papistical the Ancient Fathers and General Councels CHAPTER I. SO foule is the stayne of Noueltie in anie profession of Religion as that some Protestants haue aduentured to charge our Roman Church with the deformitie and crime therof Mr. Hal therupon auouching that (1) Peace of Rome p. 24. Poperie is but a new fashion and D. (2) Way to the true Church p. 341. 342. White vndertaking to proue it contrarie to the primitiue Church But as nothing can be more grateful to a Christian Reader then a cleere and sincere trial of this point to wit whether the ancient Fathers of the primitiue Church were the true Progenitours and Fathers of Catholicks or Protestants so among manie meanes and arguments al of them able most cleerly to determine the same I wil only make choice for this time of the free grants acknowledgements and confessions of Protestants themselues And this chiefly concerning their owne bastardie degenerating and disclaiming from those so ancient so noble so worthie Peeres of those purest times And first concerning the Argument drawne from Antiquitie in general it is acknowledged to be a Popish Argument and for such to be auoyded and taken heede of so do some careful Ministers prescribe to the King's Maiestie himself saying Let 3) Suruey of the Booke of common prayer p. 18. not your Maiestie be now deceiued by the Popish Argument of supposed Antiquitie as Iosue was with the old and mouldie bread of the Gibeonites c. And now followeth the reason of this so necessarie preuention And the rather O Christian King take heed because Antichrist began to work euen in the Apostles dayes Yea sayth D. Willet Papistrie 4) Synop. Controu 2. q. p. 56. c. began to work in S. Paul's dayes So that Papistrie being as old as S. Peter and S. Paule it behooueth Protestants in al good policie to reiect and vtterly abandon Antiquitie as a Popish argument and as the old and mouldie bread which the poore Papists feed on The like prouident and most necessarie preuention for Protestants vsed the Maddeburgians 5) Pref. ep Dedicat. ad Elizab. Angliae Reg. in Cen. 4. before to Q. Elizabeth to whom pretending to bring Antiquitie for her Maiestie to looke vpon yet at the first premonish that few Doctours in ancient times did write Luculenter et cum iudicio perspicuously and witb iudgement And withal complayne that very manie are as it were so bewitched with the holie title of Antiquitie that without al attention and true iudgement they do giue willingly consent to neuer so foule errours if they be set downe by Antiquitie so fearful are these deepest Diuers and Searchers into Antiquitie to be tryed therby Iust cause had then D. Humfrey to reproue Mr. Iewel for his so bold appealing to the first 600. yeares saying Iewel 6) De vita Iewelli p. 212. And see the like in Fulks Retentiue p. 55. prouoked to al that Antiquitie but he was ouer liberal and yeelded more then reason and was ouer iniurious to himself c. and in a manner spoiled himself and his Protestant Church c. It is sufficient for a Christian to say So saith the Lord c. What haue we to do with Fathers with flesh or bloud or what belongeth it to vs Protestants what the false Synodes of Bishops shal ordaine Here our Doctour wisely controuleth Mr. Iewel for his so rash appealing to the primitiue Church as seeing plainly that his new Protestant familie would be vtterly spoyled and vndone therby And the like dislike sheweth Iacobus Acontius against some Protestants alleadging the Fathers in their owne behalf saying 7) Stratag li. 6. p. 296. Some are come to that that they wil fil al their writings with the authoritie of Fathers which I would to God they had performed with as prosperous successe as they hopefully attempted it c. I do verily think that this custome is most dangerous and altogeather to be eschewed So that in this Doctours iudgement it is no wisdome but imminent danger for Protestants to meddle with the Fathers Now if any desire to know the true cause of this danger hanging ouer Protestants by appealing thus to Fathers it is confessed to be no other but because the sayd Fathers were Papists We are sure saith Mr. 8) Papisto-mastix p. 193. Midleton that the mysterie of iniquitie did work in Paul's time and fel not a-sleep so soone as Paule was dead waking againe 600. yeares after when this mysterie was disclosed c. and therfore no maruaile though perusing Councels Fathers and Stories from the Apostles forward we find the print of the Popes feet O how firme and during are the Pope's steps or our Roman faith which at this day are presented vnto vs by Councels Fathers and stories from the Apostles times al of them recording to vs their Posteritie the Popish Faith to be the Faith of their times What reason then haue Protestants to appeale to such
good But yet further they doubt not to affirme the argument or consequence vrged from the (22) Puricans Answ to D. Downham's ser p. 92. receiued opinion in the Church of God euen from the Apostles time vnto our Age to be lyable to iust exception So that though the Fathers of al Ages vp to the Apostles themselues do al of them ioyntly agree with our Roman faith in their Expositions and deliuerie of the sense of Scripture yet may one illuminated Protestant except contemne and reiect them al as not hauing the Spirit nor interpreting according to the Analogie of the Protestant faith But O most miserable and lamentable times O insolencie most impious and incredible What the receiued opinion in the Church of God euen from the Apostles time vnto our Age to be lyable to iust exception The Fathers of al Ages during 1600. yeares of al Countries though most distant in place and different in language and other conditions of nature and gouerment al of them to conspire in one opinion of truth doctrine and yet al of them so fowly and so grosly to erre as that a new-found Protestant is able to discouer it This this may a Protestant often declaime but no man of iudgement can possibly beleeue him Yea our Protestants are so far out of loue and liking with the Fathers as they painfully labour to make the world to think that their Cōmentaries books and beleef were directly contrarie to the Sacred Scriptures and therefore to these they wil euer appeale from the writings of men Captaine Luther 23) L. contra Henricum 8. Regem Angliae saith Against the sayings of Fathers Men Angels and Diuels I place not ancient consent nor the multitude of men but the Ghospel being the Word of One Eternal Maiestie which themselues are enforced to allow Here I stand here I sit here I abide here I glorie here I triumph here I insult ouer Papists Thomists Henricians and al the Gates of Hel much more ouer the sayings of men though neuer so holy and deceauable custome The word of God is aboue al Diuine Maiestie maketh with me so that I care not if a thousand Augustins a thousand Tertullians a thousand Henries or Papistical Churches should stand against me God can not erre and deceiue Austin and Cyprian as also al the Elect may and haue erred My Doctrines shal stand the Pope shal fal Here we haue a man of liuelie Faith but yet heare him further 24) In Comment in ep ad Gal. No other doctrine is to be deliuered or heard in the Church then the pure word of God that is the Sacred Scripture Let other Doctours and Auditours be accursed with their learning but here wanteth Charitie Neither is Luther in this alone for Zuinglius likewise declaymeth 25( In Explanat Artic. 64. Presently thou beginnest to cry Fathers Fathers the Fathers haue so deliuered But I do not ask of thee Fathers or Mothers but I require the word of God In like sort Peter Martyr 26) De Votis p. 462. As concerning the Fathers iudgement because our Aduersaries the Papists are accustomed in this and other Controuersies alwayes to prouoke to them I therfore declare that to me it seemeth not the part of a Christian to prouoke to the iudgements of men from the Scriptures of God Yea saith he 27) Ibid. p. 476. As long as we rest in Councels or Fathers we shal alwayes be conuersant in the same errours And the like is taught by Summerus saying 28) Contr. Carolum l. 1. c. 1. Antiquitie by which they affirme we are condemned is of no force for if they speak of a right beleeuing Antiquitie by which we vnderstand Christ and his Apostles the matter itself cryeth that it is for vs but if they wil vnderstand the same of the authoritie of the Fathers we do not take it il that the word of God is condemned by them Agreably heerunto writeth D. Whitaker 29) Contra Sander p. 92. If you argue from the testimonies of men be they neuer so learned and ancient we yeeld no more to their words in cause of Religion then we perceiue to be agreable to Scripture Neither think your self to haue proued any thing though you bring against vs the whole swarme of Fathers except that which they say be iustifyed not by the voice of men but by God himself And againe 30) Answ to Camp Reas 2. p. 70. And see the like in Abbots in his Answ to His. Reas 10 p. 371. We are not the Seruants of the Fathers but the Sonnes when they prescribe vs anie thing out of the Law and Diuine authoritie we obey them as our parents if they enioyne anie thing against the voice of the heauenlie truth we haue learned not to hearken to them but to God You Papists as vassals and base seruants receiue whatsoeuer the Fathers say without iudgement or reason being affrayd as I think either of the whip or the halter if euerie thing they speake be not Ghospel with you Againe 31) Against Sanders de Antichristo p. 21. We repose no such confidence in the Fathers writings that we take any certain proof of our Protestant Religion from them because we place al our Faith and Religion not in humane but in Diuine authoritie If therefore thou bring vs what some one Father hath thought or what the Fathers vniuersally altogeather haue deliuered the same except it be approued by testimonies of Scriptures it auaileth nothing it gaineth nothing it conuinceth nothing for the Fathers are such witnesses as they also haue need of the Scriptures to be their witnesses If deceiued by errour they giue forth their testimonie disagreeging from Scriptures albeit they may be pardoned erring for want of wisdome we can not be pardoned being green-witted Protestants if because they erred we also wil erre with them Thus doth this Protestant Doctour defend his reiecting the ancient Fathers as writing contrarie to the Scriptures and vpbrayd vs Catholicks for our due estimation of the same and so do Protestants stil labour in derogation of the Fathers to oppose the Sacred Scriptures and holie Fathers as contrarie one to another But al in vaine for who euer more duly reuerenced or more carefully preserued those heauenlie writings then the ancient Bishops and Doctours of the Primitiue Church Who more truly translated them to their greatest paines for the good of al succeeding Ages then those learnedst Fathers Who in searching the deepest difficulties so frequent in them did more submit and captiuate their iudgements then these holy Fathers Who euer more pressed Hereticks with the weight of God's word then those zealous Fathers Who euer writ more large or more learned Commentaries and explanations therof then the aged Fathers And is it then possible that the sayd Fathers should so directly contradict the Sacred Scriptures as our Protestants pretend But this so desperate so vnworthie dealing against the Fathers doth cleerly conuince that
is so copiously preached by vs that truly in the Apostles time it was not so cleare And seing 48) Tom 2. lib. Cont. Reg. Angliae f. 344. God's word is aboue al the Diuine Maiestie maketh for me So that I passe not if 100. Austins 1000. Cyprians 1000. King Harrie 's Churches stood against me Wherefore 49) Lib. de Seruo Arb. And see Cnoglerus his Symbolatria p. 152. Cast you off what armour the ancient Orthodoxal Fathers shal afford or the schooles of Diuines the authoritie of Councels Bishops the consent of so manie Ages of al Christian People we receiue nothing but Scriptures but yet so that the infallible authoritie of interpreting is only in vs what we expound that the Holy-Ghost thinketh what others though great though manie bring it commeth from the spirit of Sathan and a mind distracted Yea the Pope 50) L. aduersus Papatum Romae à Satana fundatum f. 1. knoweth saith Luther that by the singular guift and bountie of God I am more learned in the Scriptures then himself and al his Asses But if Luther himself doth so fully mouthe his owne prayses and deserts we may presume his disciples and followers are not sparing in the like And so indeed writeth Alberus 51) Contra Carolostadianos l. 7. I doubt not but that if Austin were now liuing he would not be ashamed to professe himself Martin Luther's Scholler But Musculus lasheth far further for 52) Praef. in Libellum Ger. de Diaboli Tyramide since the Apostles times saith he there liued not in the world a greater then Luther And it may be sayd that God powred al his guifts vpon this only man and that there is as great difference betwixt the ancient Doctours and Luther as betwixt the light of the Sunne and of the Moone Neither is it to be doubted but that the ancient Fathers euen those that are chief and best among them as Hilarie and Austin if they had liued and taught in the same time with Luther would without blushing haue carried the lanterne before him as his Schollers or Ministers And another professeth that 53) In Hos in Hist Sacra part alt f. 346. He preferreth one leaf in Luther before the writings of al Fathers So that if we beleeue either Luther or his Schollers not only Austin and Hilarie and Ambrose but euen al the Fathers since the Apostles times must giue place to Luther in regard of his profoundest knowledge and learning But not only Luther himself thus far excelleth the ancient Fathers but in his opinion the onlie 54) In Col. mensa c. de Patribus Eccl. Apologie of Philip Melancthon doth far excel al the Doctours of the Church and exceed euen Austin himself Beza in like sort affirmeth 55) Praef. in nouum Testament dicat Principi Condiensi Caluin to haue far exceeded al the ancient and later writers in interpreting of the Scriptures wth varietie of words and allegation of reasons Yea saith he 56) Epist Theol. ep 1 p. 5. I haue been accustomed to say and not without cause as I take it that whilst I compare those verie times next the Apostles with our times they had then more conscience lesse knowledge And on the other side we haue now more knowledge and lesse conscience This is my opinion c. Agreably herevnto saith D. Whiteguift in his 57) Defence c. p. 472. Brief Comparison between the Protestants Bishops of our time and the Bishops of Primitiue Church The doctrine taught and professed by our Bishops at this day is much more perfect and sound then it commonly was in anie Age after the Apostles times 58) Ibid. p. 473. Surely you are not able to reckon in anie Age since the Apostles time anie company of Bishops that taught and held so perfect and sound doctrine in al poynts as â—he Bishops of England do at this time Yea in the truth of doctrine our Bishops be not only comparable with the old Bishops but in many degrees to be preferred before them In like sort saith Zanchius 59) De Sacra Scriptura p. 411. Christ hath now giuen to vs more excellent Interpreters then euer heretofore stnce the Apostles Yea saith M. Iacob 60) Defence of Treatise of Christ's sufferings p. 146. And see the Answ to Downham's sermon p. 20. this is the profit that comes by ordinarie flanting with the Fathers c. if in this case we were to looke after anie man surely we haue more cause to regard our late faithful teachers rather then those of old who being equal with the best of them in anie of the excellent graces of God's Spirit c. By which we may see the smal account made by Protestants of ancient Doctours not blushing thus to equal yea much to preferre their owne latest Writers before al the Fathers since the Apostles times But what should I vrge thus much their dislike disclaiming and disgracing of ancient Fathers when they spare not to reiect and contemne the authoritie of al Councels though neuer so general neuer so ancient And first doth not Luther affirme in general 61) In Asser Articulorum per Leonem X. damnat Art 29. That the way is made to vs Protestants of weakning the authoritie of Councels and of freely contradicting their decrees and of iudging their Acts and of confessing confidently whatsoeuer seemeth true to Protestants whether it be approued or reproued by anie Councel Doth not Beza affirme that 62) Praef. in nouum Testam ad Princ. C ndiens euen in the best times the ambition ignorance and lewdnes of Bishops was such that the verie blind may easily perceaue how that Sathan was president in their assemblies or Councels Doth not D. Humfrey disclaime from the Councels celebrated in the first 600. years saying 63) De vita Iuelli p. 212. What concerneth it vs what the false Synods of Bishops as then shal ordayne And doth not M. Carthwright reiect as erroneous euen the first Nycene Councel saying 64) 2. Reply part 1. p. 509. We haue good cause to hould for suspect whatsoeuer either in gouernment or doctrine those times left vnto vs not confirmed by substantial proofs out of the Word c. This appeareth in the first Councel of Nyce where the most errours decreed vpon c. besides the vngodlie custome which may appeare to haue occupyed almost al the Churches touching the forbidding of the second Marriage of Ministers before that Councel And againe 65) Ibid. p. 484. In the same Councel appeareth that to those chosen to the Ministerie vnmarried it was not lawful to take anie wife afterwards c. Paphnutius sheweth that not only this was before that Councel but was an ancient Tradition in the Church in which both himself and the whole Councel rested c. If the ancient Tradition of the Church saith Cartwright cannot authorize this neither can ancient custome authorize the other to wit of Metropolitans Luther
the Sacrament which they improperly cal a Sacrifice Yea saith Chrastouius 20) De Opificio Misse l. 1. p. 167. The sayings of the Fathers do not only import impetration or prayer but a certayn intrinsecal force of appeasing God's Iustice For which verie point of the Masse being a Propitiatorie sacrifice he produceth the sayings of Origen Athanasius Chrysostome Ambrose Austin Gregorie and others al which were no lesse Massing Priests then the Roman Priests of these times 7. That the ancient Fathers thought that S. Peter was the Head of the Church and the Bishop of Rome his successour therin D. Field testifyeth saying 21) Confut. of the Papists quarrels p. 4. Manie of the ancient Fathers c. were deceaued to think something more of Peter's prerogatiue and the Bishop of Rome's dignitie then by the word of God was giuen to either of them And Philippus Nicolai vndertaking to speake 22) De Regno Christi p. 221. of the beginning and encrease of the Pope's dignitie auoucheth that the desire of Primacie was the common infirmitie of the Apostles and of the first Bishops of Rome 8. That the Pope is not Antichrist D. Whitaker confesseth that 23) Lib. de Antichr p. 21. the Fathers for the most part thought that Antichrist should be but one man but in that as in manie other things they erred sayth he And M. Cartwright affirmeth that diuers 24) 2. Reply part 1. p. 508. of the ancient and chiefest of them imagined fondly of Antichrist as of one singular person And as for the time of Antichrist's continuance M. Fox acknowledgeth that 25) In Apoc. c. 12. p. 345. almost al the holie and learned Interpreters doe by a time times and half a time vnderstand only three yeares and a half 9. Vnwritten Traditions are so plainly taught and defended by the Fathers as that Chemnitius reproueth for the same 26) Exam. part 1. p. 87. 89. 90. Clemens Alexandrinus Origen Epiphanius Ambrose Hierome Maximus Theophilus Basil c. D. Fulk confesseth the same 27) Against Purg. p. 362 303. 397. Against Marcial p. 170. 178. Against Brist mot p. 35. 36. of Tertullian Cyprian Chrysostome Augustin Hierome c. And D. Whitaker reprehendeth for the same 28) De Sac. Scrip◠p. 678. 681. 683. 685. 690. 695. 696. 670. 668. Chrysostome Epiphanius Tertullian Cyprian Augustin Innocentius Leo Basil Eusebius c. 10. Purgatorie Prayer and Sacrifice for the Dead were so ordinarily and generally taught by the Fathers as that D. Gifford confesseth 29) Demōst that Brownists be Donatists p. 38. that in the Churches Worship to pray for the soules of the dead and to offer oblation for the dead was general in the Church long before the dayes of Austin as appeareth in Cyprian and Tertullian D. Fulk acknowledgeth that 30) Ag. Purgat p. 362. Tertullian Cyprian Austin Hierome and a great manie more doe witnes that Sacrifice for the Dead is the Tradition of the Apostles And he further affirmeth that 31) Ib. p. 161 the errour of Purgatorie was somewhat rifely budded in Austin's time And that it was the common errour of his time 11. Lymbus Patrum or Christ's descending into Hel was so generally belieued by the Fathers that M. Iacob witnesseth that 33) In Bilson's ful Redempt p. 188. Al the Fathers with one consent affirme that Christ deliuered the soules of the Patriarcks and Prophets out of Hel at his coming thither and so spoiled Sathan of those that were in his present possession 12. Inuocation of Saints was so vniuersally belieued in the Primitiue Church that D. Whiteguift and D. Couel do both of them confesse that 34) Def. ag Cartwr Reply p. 473. Couel in his Exem c. 9. p. 120. almost al the Bishops and learned writers of the Greek Church and Latin also for the most port were spotted with the doctrines c. of Inuocation of Saints and such like And D. Brightman reproueth for the same doctrine 35) In Apocal. c. 14. p. 382. S. Athanasius S. Basil S. Chrysostome S. Gregoire Nazianzen S. Ambrose S. Hierome S. Austin c. And 36) Exam. par 3. p. 211. Chemnitius alledgeth S. Augustin inuocating S. Cyprian wherin sayth he he yealded to the times and custome D. Beard speaking of the Fathers opinion heerin sayth 37) Retract frō Romish Relig. p. 224. First the Fathers if they did allow of this Inuocation yet it was in their priuate Deuotions not sayth he though vntruly in the publick Liturgie of the Church c. vntil Gregorie the First 's time c. Secondly the Fathers though they may seeme to haue prayed sometimes vnto the Saints out of the heat of their deuotion yet it was but now and then and as it were by the way c. Thirdly the Fathers albeit they directed their prayers sometimes to the Saints yet they reposed most confidence in their prayers to God So confessedly did the Fathers themselues pray vnto Saints 13. For worshipping of Saints Relicks S. Basil S. Athanasius S. Chrysostome S. Gregorie Nazianzen S. Ambrose S. Hierome S. Austin c. are al of them reproued 38) In Apoc. p. 382. by D. Brightman The Centurists charge the Fathers of the fourth Age with 39) Cent. 4. c. 6. col 456. publick Translation of Saints Relicks And Chemnitius chargeth the Fathers indefinitly not only 40) Exam. par 4. p. 10. with Translation and Circumgestation of Saints Relicks alledging in proof therof the testimonies of S. Austin S. Hierom and Lucillus but yet further also with Pilgrimage to the Relicks of Saints 14. Images were then so generally vsed as that sundrie examples of their verie placing in churches are giuen by 41) Against symbol par 1. p. 32. Cent. 4. col 409. Exam. part 4. p. 26. 29. 30. M. Parker the Centurists and Chemnitius out of the writings of Sozomen Athanasius Prudentius and others And Functius plainly confesseth 42) L. 7. Comment in Chronol f. 6. at An. 464. that An. 494. Xenaias was the first in the Church that stirred vp warre against Images so general and peaceable was the vse of Images for the first 464. yeares after the Apostles 15. Concerning the Crosse M. Burges acknowledgeth that 43) In Couels Answer to Burges p. 130. 136. there is nothing ascribed to the Crosse in or out of Baptisme by the ranckest Papists but the Fathers are as deeply engaged in the same so as if we wil vse it as the Fathers did c. we take the soule to be fenced by Crossing of the bodie and the Crosse to haue vertue of Consecrating the Sacrament driuing away Diuels witchcraft c. In proof wherof he there alledgeth sundrie ancient Fathers Yea the worshipping of the Crosse was so vniuersal as that M. Parkins reporteth that 44) Vol. 2. p. 596. Paulinus Epist 11. sayth The Bishop of Hierusalem yearly at Easter set forth the Crosse for the people to worship himself being the
chief of the worshippers so general and receaued was the practise heerof in the time of Paulinus who as Osiander relateth was 45) Cent. 5. p. 387. familiar with Hierom Austin and Ambrose 16. Concerning the Vow of Chastitie Chemnitius confesseth that 46) Exam. part 3. p. 41. we are not ignorant that the Fathers allowed the Vowes of perpetual Chastitie and that they thought them to be obligatorie I know sayth Peter Martyr that 47) De Votis p. 524. Epiphanius with manie other Fathers erred in that they affirme it to be sinne to breake this Vow when need shal require and that he referreth the same naughtily to Apostolical Traditions Yea sayth M. Wotton it is one of the blemishes 48) Defence of Parkins p. 491. of the ancient Writers 17. The Chastitie or single life of Priests was so generally prescribed and practised by the ancient Fathers who were Priests also themselues that M. Iewel speaking of this point 49) Def. of the Apol. p. 195. saith Heer I grant that M. Harding is like to find some good aduantage as hauing vndoubtedly a great number of holie Fathers on his side Bucer likewise acknowledgeth that 50) Gratul ad Eccles Angliae p. 35. in the time of S. Hierome the Churches of Aegypt of the East and of the Sea Apostolick were not accustomed to receaue for Priests but such as either were not married or abstained from their wiues 18. Monastical life was so general with the Fathers that M. Cartwright confesseth that 51) In Whiteg Def. p. 344. Ruffin Theodoret Sozomen Socrates do mention Monks almost in euerie page And the Centurists do begin a whole special Tract the title wherof is 52) Cent. 4. c. 10. col 294. Of the Monks through Syria Palestina Bythinia and the other places of Asia vnder Constantin the Great as also the title of another Tract is 53) Cent. 4. c 10. col 1306. The African Monks through Aegypt vnder Constantin the Great And the title of another Tract is 54) Ib. col 1331. The Monks through Europe So that in those purest and ancientest times Religious or Monastical life was generally practised ouer the whole face of the Christian world euen through Asia Africk and Europe 19. Prescribed times for fasting are so ancient and general that Chemnitius confesseth that 55) Exam. par 1. p. 89. Ambrose Maximus Taurinensis Theophilus Hierome and others do affirme the Fast of lent to be an Apostolical Tradition And Caluin professeth that 56) Instit l. 4. c. 1 2. §. 19. heerin he dareth not excuse the old Fathers but that they sowed some seeds of superstition And that 57) Ib. §. 20. euerie where the obseruation of superstitious Lent was in force 20. Concerning Free-wil some Protestants say 58) A Discouer of vntruthes contained in D. Bancrofts serm p. 23. 59 We know that euer since the Apostles times in a manner it flourished euerie where til Martin Luther took the sword in hand against it The Centurists speaking of the times next after the Apostles say 59 In like sort Clemens affirmeth euerie where Free-wil that it may appeare not only al the Doctours of that Age to haue been in such darknes but that it likewise encreased in their successours 21. Merit of works was so generally belieued by the ancient Fathers that D. Whitaker chargeth with errour therin 60) Resp ad Camp p. 78. not only Cyprian but almost to vse his owne words al the most holie Fathers of that time And 61) Iesuit par 2 p. 531. It may not be denyed saith D. Humfrey but that Ireneus Clemens and others called Apostolical haue nothing Apostolically inserted into their writings the opinions of Free-wil and Merit of works 22. And as for the vse of Ceremonies in the Church M. Calfhil affirmeth that 62) In Fulks Reioynder to Martials Reply p. 131. 132. the Fathers declined al from the simplicitie of the Ghospel in Ceremonies Melancthon also affirmeth that 63) In 1. Cor. c. 3. Presently from the beginning of the Church the ancient Fathers obscured the doctrine concerning the iustice of Faith encreased Ceremonies and deuised peculiar Worships 23. But to include manie in one D. Whiteguift a prime Metrapolitan amongst Protestants discoursing 64) Defence c. p. 472. 473. of Doctrine taught in anie Age since the Apostles time affirmeth without anie exception either of Age or Father that almost al the Bishops and learned Writers of the Greek Church and Latin also for the most part were spotted with doctrines of Free-wil of Merit of Inuocation of Saints and such like c. Meaning thereby such other like points of our Catholick Religion which his Assertion hath since been renewed by D. Couel who speaking of the ancient Fathers vseth these like words as 65) Exam. against the Plea of the Innoc. p. 120. Diuers both of the Greek and Latin Church were spotted with the errours about Free-wil Merit Inuocotion of Saints Manie things expressing their Papistrie might be alledged in this kind if it were anie vertue to rip vp their faults whom we ought to honour And wheras Bellarmin alledgeth 66) De Not. Ecclesiae l. 4. c. 9. the particular sayings of Caluin and the Centurie-writers as charging the ancient Fathers with our doctrine of Free-wil Lymbus Patrum Denyal of our Concupiscence without consent to be sinne Satisfaction Prayer for the Dead Merit Pennance the Fast of Lent the vnmarried life of Priests Baptisme of Lay-persons in case of necessitie the manner of Sacrificing c. D. Whitaker answering thereto iustifyeth the same saying 67) De Eccles cont Bellarm. Contr. 2 q. 5. p. 299. Bellarmin alledgeth certain testimonies from Caluin and the Centurie-writers as noting certain errours of the ancient Fathers which were common to them with the Papists as namely Free-wil Merit Lymbus Inuocation of Saints the vnmarried life of Priests Satisfaction and certain other such like c. before mentioned by Bellarmine I answer thereto that it is true which Caluin and the Centurie-writers haue written that in manie things the ancient Church erred as in Lymbus Free-wil Merit of works and in al the residue of those other before recited 24. In like sort M. Brightman hauing named S. Athanasius S. Basil S. Chrysostom S. Ambrose S. Hierom S. Augustin c. affirmeth of them al that 68) In Apoc. in c. 14. p. 382. in words they condemned Idolatrie but in deed they established it by Inuocation of Saints Worshipping of Relicks and such other wicked Popish superstitions 25. Beza speaking of the times of S. Cyprian S. Austin and S. Chrysostom auoucheth that 69) Praef. in Nou. Test ad Princip Cond Then Sathan layd the first foundations in Greece of Inuocation of the Dead whereto some of the chiefest Bishops were so far from resisting c. others c. did not only not represse open superstitions arising but did also nourish them c. Hence those opinions of Free-wil of Faith
Apostles withal and the Euangelists themselues euen after their receauing of the Holie-Ghost did write teach and defend seueral errours how can anie Christian build an infaillible sauing Faith vpon the Ghospels or other Apostolical writings How then can they be acerteyned of anie one true sentence of God's Word if the writers and deliuerers therof were not infallibly guided by the Holie-Ghost into al truth and so freed from al errour ignorance misprision or falshood And if some peraduenture except that these so Atheistical and Sacrilegious reproaches imposed vpon the sacred Scriptures and the Blessed Euangelists and Apostles be not the ordinarie opinions or practise of Protestants but peraduenture only of some few either ignorant or not endowed with the spirit the falshood and vanitie of this euasion is most apparent for who of forraine Protestants were euer reputed more learned or more enlightned with the spirit then Luther Caluin Beza Chemnitius Islebius Illiricus with the other Centurie-writers Castalio Zuinglius Musculus Brentius Andreas Friccius Adamus Francisci Bullinger and sundrie such others al of them highly esteemed of by their other Protestant Brethren Or who at home more honoured then Tyndal Iewel Goad Fotherbie Fulk Whitaker c. and yet al of those being indeed the primest men that euer they had do ioyntly conspire in this greatest impietie of censuring controuling correcting or reiecting some one part or other of the forenamed Canonical Scriptures or els of condemning the Euangelists and Apostles of seueral errours infirmities and sliding in matters of faith and Religion Which foule proceeding of so manie and so learned Protestants doth euidently according to D. Fulk's Rule conuince them to be perfect Hereticks For (88) Confut. of Purgatorie p. 214. whosoeuer sayth he denieth the authoritie of the Holy Scriptures thereby bewrayeth himself to be an Heretick Laus Deo B. V. Mariae FINIS A TABLE OF THE BOOKES AND CHAPTERS THE FIRST BOOKE WHERIN IS PROVED BY THE Confession of Protestants that the Catholick Roman Church hath continued Euer most Knowne and Vniuersal euen from Christs verie Time vntil the Date hereof THE antiquitie of the true Church and the force of the Argument drawne from the Authoritie thereof As also of these great necessitie of finding-out this true Church chap. 1. fol. 1. That the present Roman Church and Religion for the last thousand yeares after Christ haue stil continued most Knowne and Vniuersal throughout the Christian world chap. 2. fol. 4. A further confirmation of the vniuersal continuance of our Roman Church Religiō for these last thousand yeares is taken from the Confessed belief and profession of such Persons as liuing within the foresayd time were most Famous and Notorious in one respect or other chap. 3. fol. 8. That the faith of S. Gregorie S. Augustin and whereto England was by them conuerted was our Roman Catholick and not Protestant chap. 4. fol. 10. That the present Roman Church and Religion continued and flourished during the whole time of the Primitiue Church contayning the first six hundred yeares after Christ chap. 5. fol. 20. A further proof of the present Roman Religions Continuance from the Apostles time to these dayes is taken from the Christian belief of the Indians Armenians Grecians and Brittans al of them Conuerted in the dayes of the Apostles chap. 6. fol. 27. THE SECOND BOOKE Wherin is proued through al the chief Articles of Religion and that by the Confessions of Protestants that the same Faith which is now taught by the Roman Church was anciently taught by the Primitiue Church of Christ THat General Councels do truly represent the Church of Christ And of the Credit and Authoritie giuen by Protestants to the sayd Councels chap. 1. fol. 1. That the argument drawne from the Authoritie of the Primitiue Church of Christ and of her Doctours and Pastours is an Argument of force And for such approued by sundrie learned Protestants chap. 2. fol. 3. That the Fathers and Doctours of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught that S. Peter was ordayned by Christ the Head of the Apostles and of the whole Church and that the Church was founded vpon S. Peter it is Confessed by Protestants themselues chap. 3. fol. 8. It is Confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued taught the Bishop of Rome to succeed S. Peter in the Primacie of the whole Church chap. 4. fol. 11. It is confessed by Protestants that the Primitiue Church of Christ beleeued the Bookes of Tobie Iudith Ester Sapientia Ecclesiasticus and two first of Machabees to be truly Canonical Scripture chap. 5. fol. 25. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued taught our now Catholick Doctrine concerning Traditions chap. 6. fol. 30. It is Confessed by Protestants that according to the Fathers of the Primitiue Church the Sacraments do truly conferre Grace and Remission of sinnes And that they are in number seauen chap. 7. fol. 32. It is Confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught the Real Presence of Christs true Bodie and Bloud in the Eucharist As also our further Catholick Doctrines of Transubstantiation Adoration Reseruation and the like chap. 8. fol. 35. Protestants confesse that the Primitiue Church of Christ beleeued taught practised the Sacrifice of the Masse as also that it is a Sacrifice according to the order of Melchisedech and truly Propitiatory for the liuing the dead chap. 9. fol. 41. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church taught and beleeued the Power of Priests to Remission of Sinnes The necessitie of Auricular Confession The Imposition of Pennance and satisfaction to God thereby As also our Roman Doctrine of Pardons or Indulgences chap. 10. fol. 46. It is granted by Protestants that the Catholick Doctrine of Purgatorie of Prayer and Sacrifice for the dead was beleeued taught and practised by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church chap. 11. fol. 50. It is confessed by Protestants that the. Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught our Catholick Doctrine of Christs Descending into Hel. chap. 12. fol. 55. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and practised our Catholick Doctrine of praying to Angels and Saints chap. 13. fol. 57. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed the vse of Christs Image and his Saincts placing them euen in churches and Reuerencing them chap. 14. fol. 60. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church did specially honour reuerence the holie Relicks of Martyrs and other Saints carrying them in Processions and making Pilgrimages vnto them at which also manie Miracles were wrought chap. 15. fol. 63. It is confessed by Protestants that the holie Doctours of the Primitiue Church not only vsed the signe of the Crosse but likewise worshiped the same attributing great efficacie power and vertue thervnto chap.
16. f. 65. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed and practised the vow of Chastitie and that they neuer allowed such as were of the Clergie afterwards to marrie or such as had been twice married to be admitted to holie Orders without special dispensation chap. 17. fol. 69. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Promitiue Church allowed practised the Religious State of Monastical life and that manie Christians of those purest times both men and women did strictly obserue and professe the same chap. 18. f. 74. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed practised prescribed fasts and abstinence from certaine meats vpon dayes and times appointed holding the same obligatorie vnder sinne condemning also our Puritan Sabboath Fasts chap. 19. fol. 80. It is admitted by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church expresly taught our Catholick Doctrine concerning Free wil. chap. 20. fol. 84 It is granted by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church taught not only Faith but likewise Good works truly to iustifye that the sayd works are meritorious of Grace and Glorie chap. 21. fol. 86. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Ceremonies now vsed in the Roman Church in the ministring of seruice or Sacrifice as also of the Sacraments were formerly vsed by the Bishops Priests and Fathers of the Primitiue Church chap. 22. fol. 89 THE THIRD BOOK WHERIN is proued that the Church of Protestants was neuer knowne or in Being before the d yes of Luther And that the Articles of Religion now taught by the Protestant Congregation were Heresies condemned by the Primitiue Church of Christ IT is confessed by Protestants that from the dayes of the Apostles vntil the tyme of Luther themselues neuer had any knowne Church or Congregatiō in anie part of the vniuersal World chap. 1. fol. 1. A Further conuincing proof of the Protestant Churches not being during the first 600. yeares is taken from the Fathers Condemning in the ancient Hereticks the chiefest articles of the Protestant Religion and our Protestants Confessing the same And First Concerning the Sacraments chap. 2. fol. 6. That the Fathers condemned in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning the Scriptures and the Church Militant and Triumphant chap. 3. fol. 9. That the Fathers condemned in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning Monachisme the mariage of Priests and prescribed Fasts chap. 4. fol. 12. That the Fathers condemned in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning Free-wil Faith Good works the Commandments sinne and the knowledge and Death of Christ chap. 5. fol. 14. Protestants Vsual recrimination of obiecting old Heresies to the Catholick Roman Church is cleerly examined discouered confuted by their owne acknowledgements chap. 6. fol. 17. A Further trial is Made Whether Catholicks or Protestants be true Hereticks and this by sundrie knowne badges or markes of Heresie chap. 7. fol. 23. A brief Suruey of D. Whites Catalogue wherin contrary to the Confessed truth in the precedent Chapter of no knowne beginning or change of our Romane Faith in anye Age he vndertaketh according to his Title therof to shew That the present Religion of the Roman Church was obserued resisted in al Ages as it came in and increased naming withal the Persons that made the Resistance And the poynts wherin And the time when from fiftie yeares to fiftie through-out al Ages since Christ chap. 8. fol. 35. THE FOVRTH BOOK WHERIN is proued by the Confession of Protestants that according to the Sacred Scriptures the Roman Church is the true Church of Christ And so to haue euer continued from his time vntil the Date hereof And of the contrary the Protestants Church to be only a Sect Heretical and neuer to haue been before the dayes of Luther PRotestants flying to the sacred Scriptures in proof defence of their Church and Religion it is shewed the sayd flight not only in itself to be dishonourable but also to be the ordinarie flight of al moderne Hereticks chap. 1. fol. 1. That euen the Sacred Scriptures themselues do most plentifully testify our Romane Church to be the Church of of Christ and the Congregation or Church of Protestants to be no true Church but a Sect Heretical most contrarie to the said Scriptures And that first by the Churches necessarie continuance and vniuersalitie chap. 2. fol. 5. The second Proof from sacred Scriptures in cōfirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Euer visibilitie of Christ's Church chap. 3. fol. 10. The third Proof from Sacred Scriptures in Cōfirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Churches Pastours which must euer continue with lawful Calling and Succession and with Administration of Word and Sacraments chap. 4. fol. 13. The fourth Proof from sacred Scriptures in confirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Conuersion of Heathen Kings and Nations to the Faith of Christ chap. 5. fol. 24. A Discouerie or brief Examination of sundrie sleights and Euasions vsed by Protestant Writers in Excuse of the manifest confessed want of their Churches fulfilling the foresaid Scripiures concerning the continuance vniuersalitie and visibilitie of Christs true Church chap. 6. fol. 33. THE FIFT BOOK WHERIN is shewed that Protestants in the Decision of Controuersies between them and Catholicks do absolutly disclaime from Antiquitie reiecting the Ancient Fathers and Councels for Papistical and the Sacred Scriptures for erroneous THat Protestants Disclaime from al Antiquitie since the Apostles and further reiect and condemne as Papistical the Ancient Fathers and General Councels chap. 1. fol. 1. That the Protestant Church disclaimeth from the Fathers of the Primitiue Church it is further proued by the Protestants condemning al the ancient Fathers in general for beleeuing teaching and practising the seueral particular actions of our Catholick Roman Faith and Religion chap. 2. fol. 12. That Protestants do not only disclaime from al the ancient Fathers as Papists but do further reiect the authoritie of the sacred Scriptures and of the Apostles themselues as being erroneous and that therefore they do not found their Faith or Religion vpon Sacred Scriptures or Christ his Apostles chap. 3. fol. 18. A TABLE SHEWING THE particular matters handled in this Booke A. AELfricus no Protestant l. 3. c. 8. pag. 51. Albigenses taught sundrie errours lib. 1. c. 3. pag. 12. Almaricus his errours l. 3. c. 8. p. 55. Antiquitie commended Praef. to the Reader and lib. 5. c. 1. pag. 1. 2. Antiquitie reiected by Protestants as a Popish Argument l. 1. c. 5. pag. 26. Anthonie the Monk commended l. 2. c. 18. Apostles according to Protestants erred in Faith euen after the comming of the Holie-Ghost l. 5. c. 3. p. 23. 25. Apocalyps reiected by Protestants lib. 5 c. 3. p. 24. Armenia conuerted by the Apostles lib. 1. c. 6. p.
And so D. Whitaker confesseth 46) Resp ad Camp Rat. 7. p. 101. That the time of the Roman Churches change cannot easily be told Yea wel foreknowing the impossibilitie of anie such time to be assigned he only euadeth by affirming That Protestants 47) Lib. 3. Cont. Dur. p. 277. are not bound to answer in what Age Superstition crept into the Church And It is not needful for Protestants to search out in Histories the begining of this change With whom agreeth Buchanus saying 48) loc com p. 466. It belongeth not to vs to assigne what time the Church begunne to fade away But if this be not needful for D. Whitaker or other Protestants to finde out why did D. Whitaker before teach that no man denyeth but that it much auayleth for the confuting of Heresis to haue knowne their beginning So forcible is the truth of the Roman Churches neuer changing in Faith and Religion D. Field being vrged to giue Instance of anie Contradiction made against the Roman Church vpon the example but of anie one first known change in Doctrine in steed of answer acknowledgeth that 49) Of the Church l. 3. â— 13. p. 89. the aberration in the Church of Rome in matters of Doctrine was in such things and so carried in the beginings that the Authours of these new and false opinions were not disclaimed and noted as damnable Hereticks Yea the Authours of these errours and they that were free from them were notwithstanding these differences both of our Communion and therefore the Circumstances of the first Authour and his Contradiction c. cannot be shewed Here though it pleased M. Doctour to tearme our Catholick points of Doctrine errours yet is he further pleased in our behalfe plainly to acknowledge that no first Authour or begining can be shewed of these pretended errours which is the point we desire D. Fulk likewise being vrged to giue anie example of the time when or by whom our Roman Faith was contradicted or charged with Innouarion only sayth 50) Rtioinder to Bristow p. 265. I answer my text sayth it was a Mysterie not reuealed and therefore could not be openly preached against But though the Iniquitie or Apostasie foretold by 51) 2 Thess 2.7 S. Paul whereof D. Fulk speaketh be a Mysterie in tâ—e prediction yet this nothing letteth but that it may be conspicuous and most markable in he euent as the accomplishment of al predictions are Yea this truth of no knowne begining or change in our Roman Faith is so certaine as that sundrie Protestants earnestly labour to finde out seueral pretenses or excuses why anie such change or Innouation was neuer noted or obserued so supposing and granting their ignorance of al such imaginarie change and only seeking to euade by mere fallacies and impertinent examples Thus D. Fulk examining why our Religion entred the Primitiue Church without Contradiction resolueth 52) Answ to a Conterfaite Cath. p. 43. that it entred by smal degrees at the first and was therefore lesse espied by the true Pastours who were earnestly occupyed against greater Heresies as the Valentinians Marcionists and Manichees And therefore 53) Against Purgatorie p. 256. either had no leisure to espie or els made lesse account to reforme the same But this is most idle for the Fathers were most watchful and readie to suppresse al errours euen of much lesser importance in themselues then are or were our Catholick Doctrines of Masse Real Presence Adoration of the Sacrament Confession Iustification by work c. tâ—ough we should for the time suppose them to be errours Examples hereof might be giuen about the keeping of Easter-day 54) Ignat. Ep. ad Philip Euseb l. 2. c. 22. 23. in the time of Victor and before about prescript dayes of 55) Epiph. haer 75. fasting about mingling of water 56 with wine in the Chalice about the verie ceremonies 57 of Exorcisme and Exufflation in Baptisme and sundrie such like which I purposely pretermit D. Couel himself granting that 58) Examination c. p. 64. 65. great and violent dissentions haue risen in the Church for Ceremonies and that Councels haue condemned some as Hereticks only for being opposit in this kinde But D. Fulk vrgeth further that some of our opinions as namely Prayer for the dead 59) Answer to a Count. Cath. p. 39. deceiued simple men the sooner because it had a pretence of charitie and shew 60) Against Purgat p. 386. of pietie confirmed by custome wherby it was at length allowed of by Austin and others who neuer weighed the matter by Scripture But what errours had more pretence of pietie or charitie then Origens for the Saluation of Diuels Tertullians for chastitie S. Cyprians against Baptisme by Hereticks Montanus for austere Fastings and Papias for Christs raigninge vpon earth a thousand yeares aster the Resurrection and yet al these Montanus only excepted being principal men and of special deseruings in the Church of Christ were greeuously contradicted and reproued by the Catholick Doctours of theirs and succeding times for these verie errours But M. Woton persisteth saying to Catholicks 61) Trial of the RomaÌ„ Clergie p. 378. It is ridiculous for you to challenge vs to shew when the Faith receiued by the Church of Rome from the Apostles began to faile in it it was done as our Sauiour speakes in the like case while men slept And the same sleepie argument is vrged by D. White 62) Way to the true Church p. 371. But this is cleerly to contradict God himself who sayd 63) Isa 62.6 vpon thy walles ô Hierusalem haue I set watch men al the day and al the inght for euer they shal not hold their peace Now if they were al asleep when so manie and so great pretended errours of Catholick Doctrines as are supposed to haue begun and that in seueral times and Ages how could they be more silent or how could they be sayd to watch either day or inght How could that saying of S. Austin be true 64) Ep. 119. c. 19. The Church of God beset with chaffe and cockle although she tolerate many thinges which she is not able to redresse yet such things as be against Faith or good life she neither alloweth nor passeth ouer in silence Or how is that verified of D. Fulk 65) Answ to a Count. Cath. p. 11. and 92. that the true Church hath alwayes resisted al false opinion with open reprehension Or how is that true which White himself auoucheth saying q) Way to the true Church Ep. Ded. sec 8. The primitiue Church and al the Doctours thereof would neuer yeeld I wil not say in an opinion but not so much as in a forme of speech or in the change of a letter sounding against the orthodoxal Faith c. Yea r) Ib. sec 6. the vigilancie zeale courrage of the Primitiue Bishops was admirable c. There could no Heresie harbour vnder them
but they droue it out So cleer it is that the true Churches Pastours are neuer so sleepie as to suffer anie errours to be published or practised without their resistance But D. White M. Woton and other Protestants obseruing that this pretence of sleeping would nothing auayle them do therefore acknowledge that such was the nicenes of our imagined Inuentions that they could not be seene or discerned so faith M. Wooton 66) Trial of the RomaÌ„ clergy p. 383. You presse vs that if there had been anie alteration of Religion it would haue been recorded but how should it haue been recorded when it was not seen The alteration grew so nicely that few or none could discerne it D. White exemplifyeth this saying 67) Way to the true Churhc p. 370. The Romish Faith came into the true Church as sickenes doth in to the bodie and ruin to a house which appeareth not by and by at the first but then when it is ripened D. Whitaker instanceth in the haires of a 68) Cont. Camp Rat. 7. p. 101. 102. mans head which waxe not white suddainly and in slifters entring into a building at first not to be perceiued But to omit that as Peter Martyr confesseth 69) Epist anex to his com plac in Engl. p. 131. vnles a man do diligently examine similitudes he shal easily be deceaued by them This argument being taken froÌ„ excrements diseases and ruines is no lesse vnworthie infirme and ruinous itself for first in none of these is the change made instantly and at the first but by degrees and in successe of time whereas in Doctrine euerie opinion is at the first either true or false Secondly the first whitnes of haires or the first decay in health or building cannot at the first he discerned though they were most precisely regarded which is euidently otherwise in change of Doctrine and practise thereof Thirdly none are specially appointed neither is there anye such vrging necessitie to marke the first change of the haires and the like whereas it is the special charge and command not of few but of al the Churches Pastours not only to obserue but also publickly to withstand the other with the vttermost of their power and learning But admitting for the time that the foresaid similitudes were pertinent and that we were not to vrge Protestants to shew the first begining of our so great a change as is by them imagined Yet we are in al reason to expect that as though the first white haire or slifter or degree of disease be not discerned yet the further degrees and encrease of them being most markable to be seen that therefore they are to discouer describe to vs some sensible proceedings encrease of this our supposed change And if they wil say it was not made al at once but by litle litle sometimes in on point of Faith sometimes in an other then stil must we vrge them to shew those seueral litle changes as what points of doctrine were so by degrees changed Who were the Authours of the change What Popes begun or first allowed them by what Doctours and Pastours were they first contradicted Or els they in al these being most silent we may most strongly conclude that our Roman Church being thus free from al knowne change or Innouation since the Apostles times that therefore she is not anie Heretical sect Going out or departing from a former Church nor her doctrine Heretical no one Article thereof being lyable to that foulest stayne of Innouation Whereas to the contrarie the verie first beginings changes and Apostasies made by Waldo Wicclif Husse Luther Suinglius Caluin or anie other pretended Protestant in anie Age whatsoeuer were euer so obserued contradicted and condemned by the watchful Pastours of the Roman Church as that euerie particular both of Person time place and opinion are euerie where to be seene in sundrie Writers both Catholick and Protestant But to reach M. D. Morton yet an other scantling of an Heretick we must obserue that this name Christian giuen at first to al beleeuers was especially taken to distinguish them from the Iewes and Gentils which beleeued not at al in Christ But when Hereticks began to arise from among the Christians who professed stil Christs name and sundrie Articles of Faith the name Christian was too general to seuer Hereticks from true beleeuers And therefore the Apostles imposed the name Catholick vpon al such as in al points were obedient to the Churches Doctrine Hereof saith expresly M. Wotton 70) Trial of the Romish clergy p. 285. 286. The reason of the name Catholick was at first that there might be a title to distinguish sound Christians and true churches from Hereticks And of the contrarie in al Ages it was euer vsual that euerie Sect or Companie embracing new Doctrine though but in some one or other point contrarie to the Catholicke fayth receiued thervpon the like answerable alteration of name sometimes from the Doctrines so newly embraced sometimes and that more vsually from the first Authour and Inuentour himself And it was thought meet saith M. Woton 71) Ib. p. 286. That Hereticks should be called by some special name either of their Authour or of some points of errour which they held In like sort D. Field doubteth not to say 72) Of the Church l. 2. c. 9. p. 57. Surely it is not to be denyed but the naming after the names of men was in the time of the Primitiue Church peculiar and proper to Hereticks and Schismaticks only Neither 73) Apologie c. p. 30. 31. do I see saith M. Parker anie sufficient reason why those among vs whom singularitie in affection and noueltie in faction haue denomitated Puritans should not be distinguished by that name c. for in truth such new names haue in al former Ages for distinction sake been attributed vnto al such who defended new opinions either deuised by themselues or others contrarie to the receiued doctrine of the whole Church Thus from the erroneous Doctrines which they broached defended were named the Heretical Monothelites Aquarians Agnoites Theopaschites Catabaptists c. And according to Hospinian 74) Concord dâ—scord f. 131. the Enthusiastes Anabaptistes Antimonians and Sacramentaries And from that Authours themselues were named the Nicolaites the Manichees the Arians the Pelagians the Donatists the Nestorians the Eutichians the Waldenses the Wiccliuists the Hussites the Lutherans the Caluinists the Suinglians To examine now both Catholicks and Protestants about this point The name Catholick we haue seen was imposed to distinguish sound Christians and true Churches from Hereticks and was for the same cause inserted into the Creed by the Apostles themselues and so accordingly it hath been vsed and vnderstood by al Fathers 75) Cyril Catech. 18. Aug. Cont. Ep. fundam c. 4. de vera Rel. c. 7. Patianur Ep. ad Sympron and Writers in former Ages And as for the name Papist as it was neuer heard of