as Kings and their Courts by the laws But Protestants do not observe that as the interpretation of the laws depends not of them who sue the King but of the ancient practise of his Judges and Courts so the interpretation of Scripture must not be made by tâ—em who sue the Pope and Councels but by the Bishop and the Church who ar to explain it not according to every on 's privat fancy as Protestants do but according to the tradition customs and practises of the orthodox Christians in former Ages And by this we free the Roman Catholick Church and the Councel of Trent from the Protestant calumny of novelty of doctrin not only in this particular of the Canon of Scripture but in all it 's other definitions Proâ—estants confound our new Decrees with new doctrin wheras nothing is more cleer then that old doctrin may be defined by a new Decree that is made more publick and authentick The Councel tels them sess 4. that it only declares what Canon of Scripture the primitive Church held and quotes for it divers ancient Faâ—hers and Councels and therfor it 's Decree maks no new Canon of Scripture but is a promulgation of the old which induceth an obligation of believing what formerly had not bin so generaly known because it had not bin so cleerly and solemnly proclaimed Methinks none ought to carp less at the novelty of our definitions then Protestants if they would reflect vpon their own reformations They pretend that their doctrin is not only renewed but revived because forsooth the whole visible Church had lost that purity of the Primitive faith for many ages which they now have restored Roman Catholicks are more moderat and modest as having a better opinion of the Church and of God's providence they confess that the doctrin defended by the Councel of Trent was never extinguished in the Church but that it lived in the harts and profession of many faithful though many others of the same communion did not hold them-selves obliged to believe it as a doctrin of faith vntil it had bin sufficiently and solemnly proponed by the Definition of the Church in a general Councel as Divine That being don no addition or alteration was made of divine faith For new definitions are not new articles of faith but promulgations of the old faith or declarations of our obligation to believe as articles of faith those things which had bin formerly revealed but not so sufficiently proposed to the whole Catholick Church Wherfore articles of Faith not believed before they be decreed by a general Councel may be aptly compared to laws or ordinances before they ar published as the publication or proclamation of a law maks not a law but declares the obligation of complying therwith so the definition of a general Councel maks not the article of faith but declareth the obligation of believing that doctrin which before the publication or proclamation of the Church had not bin sufficiently proposed as Divine revelation To what purpose then did Doctor Cozins trouble him-self and his Readers with composing a book against the Catholick Canon of Scripture declared in the Councel of Trent when all his arguments are but sayings of men who doubted of books and parts of Scripture before they were declared and only because they were not declared Canonical by a general Councel He would fain impose vpon the world that S. Ierom was so much a Jew and so little a Christian as for the Canon of the old Testament to rely altogeather vpon the Hebrew Rabins and that he set a greater value vpon their testimony then vpon the authority of the Church or of the great Councel of Nice which received into the Canon of Scripture the book of Judith though rejected by the Jews His proof of S. Jerom's judgment being the same with that of Protestants in this controversy is that in some places of his writings he says the contested books of the old Testament are not in the Canon of the Jews nor received as Canonical by the Christian Church to which is answered that S. Jerom altered his opinion as appeareth in his prefaces prefixed to the said books which he translated into latin at the instance of the Churches and Bishops that held them to be Canonical to whose belief S. Jerom at length conformed his own judgment In his preface to the Book of Tobie he says Yee desire me to translate a booke from the Caldean language to Latin the book of Tobie which the Hebrews admit not into the Catalogue of Sacred Scriptures J have satisfied your desire c. The Hebrews reprehend vs c. Because we have translated into latin things against their Canon But I judged it better to displease the judgment of Pharisees then disobey the commands of Bishops c. In conformity to this he says in his preface of Iudith With the Hebrews the book of Iudith is read amongst the Agiographa the authority wherof is judged less fit to decide controversie c. But because the Nicen Synod is read to have computed this book in the number of holy Scripturs J have acquiesced or complyed with your demand Out of which words it is manifest 1. That St. Jerom was not of the same opinion with the Iews concerning these books because he says he displeased or offended their judgment by his translation as a thing against their Canon which would not have â—in vnless his intention in translating and judgment were known to favour the belief of the Bishops and Christians that held them to be Canonical for the translating them only as pious books could not be offensive to the Iews who acknowledged them for such as Cozins with Chemnitius and all Protestants confess though pag. 82. he contradicts him-self having no other shift left to prove St. Ierom a Iew in this particular And his words of the book of Iudith demonstrat that he opposed the authority of the Nicen Councel against the opinion of the Iews to prove that book Canonical and fit to determin controversies of Religion and in case we should grant he doubted whether the Councel numbred it in the Canon yet non can doubt but that he believed the Councel had authority to declare it Canonical which is the point disputed of But Doctor Cozins would willingly make us believe by a notorious fraud and imposture that Cardinal Belarmin doth not only acknowledg St. Ierom to have persisted still in his former opinion of excluding these controverted books from the Canon but also that the Councel of Nice never received that of Iudith into it and to that purpose pag. 45. quotes Belarmin's words de verbo Dei lib. 1. c. 10. vlt. thus Admitto Hieronymum in ea fuisse opinione quia nondum generale Concilium de his libris aliquid statuerat These words the honest Protestant Bishop of Duresme setts down in capital letters and with them concluds Cardinal Belarmin's sentence and sense concerning Hierom's opinion of the book of Iudith and
learned adversary proves had continued the very same notwithstanding many temporal changes from our first conversion vntill K. Henry 8. and Q Elizabeths reigns and was that very faith which we papists now profess rather 〈◊〉 Fox would confess this truth he resolved to falsify and corrupt venerable Bede's Ecclesiastical History and a provincial Synod of the English Clergy held at Hartford by Theodoâ—â—â— Arch-bishop of Canterbury in the year 673. the decrees wherof he doth so alter that comparing them with themselves â—s they are in St. Bede whom Fox pretends to follow they do not seem to be the same and this he doth also to discredit the Catholick Church of England charging it with decreeing a condemned heresy about keeping of Easter The first decree of this synod was saith Fox that Easter day should be vnformally kept and observed throughout the whole realm vpon one certain day videlicet Prima 14. Luna mensis prioris That is to say vpon the first 14. moon or day of the moon of the first month to wit of March which is just as the Iewes do observe it contrary to the Councell of Nice Well then let vs see what the words of St. Bede himself are in this synodical Decree Primum Capitulum saith he relating it out of the words of the Canons themselves vt Sanctum diem Paschae in communi omnes servemus Dominica post 14. Lunam primi mensis The first article of our decrees saith the Councell is that we do all in common observe the holy day of Easter vpon the sunday next after the fourteenth moon of the first month This is quite contrary to that which Fox relateth he putting out Dominica which maketh or marreth all the matter and then for post decimam quartam lunam written at large in Bede he putteth in prima 14. luna short in numbers only to make it more obscure adding prima of his own and putting out post from the words of this Councell more over he addeth of his own these words vpon one certain day which the Decree hath not meaning therby that this 14. day must be observed with such certainty as it may not be altered or differred to any Sunday in which consisteth the heresy of the Quarta decimans and therby to make the ancient Church of England in St. Theodores time guilty of that heresy To favour the doctrin and practice of Protestants in putting away their wives for fornication and marrying an other he quotes the tenth Decree of the same synod and sets down such words only as seemed to authorise his error and then breaketh off as if the Decree ended there Thus he citeth the Canon Tenthly that no man put away his wife for any cause except for fornication 〈◊〉 the rule of the Ghospell and there stops wheras the Canon is Nullus conjugeâ—â— propriam nisi vt sanctum Evangelium docet fornicationis causa relinquat Quod si quisquam propriâ—m expulerit â—â—njugem legitiâ—o sibi matrimonio conjunctam si Christianus esse recte voluerit nulli 〈…〉 sed ita permaneatâ—aut propriae reconcilietur Conjugi Let no man leave his own wife but only as the holy Ghospell teacheth vs for the cause of fornication and if any man should put away his wife that is joyned to him by lawfull marriage if he will be a true Christian let him not marry another but either remain so in continency or be reconciled to his own wife again Hee wasteth much paper in discrediting Pope Gregory the 7. by Protestants called Pope Hildebrand whom notwithstanding the chief writers of his time exceedingly commend for a Saint and a learned man as you may see in Bellarmin But Fox saith Antoninus writeth that Hildebrand as he lay a dying desired one of his Cardinals to go to the Emperour and desire him forgâ—â—â—ness absolving both him and his partners from excommunication c. Which he relateth to the end his Reader might think that the Pope went against his conscience in excommunicating the Emperour and that St. Antoninus believed the same story to be true wheras St. Antoninus his words are that it was reported how Gregory 7. had sent a Cardinal to the Emperour and to all the Church to wish him Indulgence which yet for many causes saith Antoninus I do not believe to be true These words honest Fox omitteth And it is recorded by an Impartiall German Author that Pope Gregory 7. last words lying on his death-bed in Salerno were these Dilexi Iustitiam 〈…〉 iniquitatem propteria morior in exilio c. I have loved 〈◊〉 and hated iniquity and for this do I dy in banishment Being driven away from his Sea by the violence of the Emperour I read and find saith Fox that in a Councell holden â—t Rome by Pope Hildebrand and other Bishops they did 〈◊〉 three things 1. That no Priests hereafter should marry wives â— Thâ—â— all such as were marryed should be divorced 3. That none hâ—â—â—fter should be admitted to the order of Priesthood but should 〈◊〉 perpetual chastity But he quoteth not one Author for 〈◊〉 three lyes and in the lines immediatly following where 〈◊〉 down in English the Copy of Pope Gregory 7. Bull 〈◊〉 this matter he sufficiently proves his own sayings to be lyes for thus saith the Bull If there be any Priests Deacons or 〈◊〉 deacons that will still remain in the sin of fornication which 〈◊〉 is not applicable to marriage we forbid them the 〈…〉 till they amend and repent But if they persever in their sin we charge that none presume to hear their service And â—â—cordingly it 〈◊〉 the Canon Officium Symoniacorum in 〈…〉 scienter nullo modo recipiatis And Tritemius relateth the matter thus Pope Gregory forbad men to hear the mâ—st of such Priests as were known to have Concubines But Fox 〈◊〉 other Protestants would needs face vs down that Hildebrâ—â—d was the first who prohibited Priests marriage wheras Origen above 1400. years ago tells even of the Greek Church 〈◊〉 solius est offerre Sacrificium qui perpetuae se devoverit castitati To him only belongeth to offer sacrifice who hath vowed himself to pâ—â—petual chastity And Eusebius one of the first Councell of Nice 〈◊〉 of them who were made Priests being married that it becommeth them to contain themselves for the time to come from all dealing with wives And Marianus Scotus speaking of Gregory 7. and of that Roman Synod being in his own time saith Pope Gregory 7. having made a Synod did according to the decree of St. Peter and St. Clemâ—â—t his successor and of other holy fathers forbid vnto Clergy men c. to have wives or dwell with women And Pope Alexander 2. and Pope Nicholas 2. Predecessors to Gregory 7. made the same decree that Hildebrand did as appeareth in their Canons yet exâ—ant It were both endless and needless to set down all John Fox his willfull lyes the fraudulent and â—â—olish tricks and devices wherwith he and
of Paris a secular Court would fain have pressed vpon the French Clergy king since and the Jansenists lately but now dare not mention any such thing the Pope having lately censured their presumption of intermedling with matters aboue their jurisdiction and the King not giving them thanks for their officiousness Protestants can not cleere their Religion from the doctrin and danger of deposing Soveraigns and disposing of their Kingdoms NOw that we have cleered 〈…〉 Roman Catholik Religion from the aspersions of our 〈…〉 and shewed how 〈◊〉 dangerous the Pope's spiâ—â—â—ual supremacy can be to the temporal Soveraignty even of protestant Princes I would willingly vnderstand how the protestant and prelatik Clergy can vindicat their own principles 〈…〉 from deposing of as many Monarchâ— and Magistrat◠〈◊〉 did not conform to their Reformations whersoever they pâ—â—vailed Let them name but one protestant Kingdom Principality Commonwealth or Citty wherin protestancy hath not bin promoted by rebellion and exclusion of the lawfull Soveraign or Magistrat let them read the Histories of Germany Geneva France England Holland Suethland Suitzerland Vallies of Saâ—â—y Scotland c. 〈◊〉 they will find that as we do not exaggegrat so they can 〈◊〉 excuse the crime or except any of this number from notorious guilt therof So vniversal a conspiracy against lawfull Sâ—â—eraigns in nations so distant and different agreeing almost 〈◊〉 nothing but in the fundamental grounds of protestancy 〈◊〉 particularly in their maxim of the lawfulness to rayse 〈◊〉 settle the reformation vpon the ruins of all superiority 〈◊〉 spiritual and temporal that will not submit to the arbiâ—â—â—â—â— interpretation of Scripture of every Protestant prevailing 〈◊〉 must needs be a convincing proof that nothing can 〈◊〉 allyed to rebellion then the Protestant Religion which 〈◊〉 content to depose only Catholik Kings for Popery doth 〈◊〉 the same authority against their own protestant Kings 〈…〉 they conform not even their reformed Tenets to the 〈…〉 fancies of an illiterat giddy multitude And even the Cavaleers the wisest and most faithfull 〈◊〉 have given sufficient ground for men to suspect 〈…〉 think it no discredit to their prelatick Religion nor 〈◊〉 to themselves to trouble and question their Kings 〈◊〉 he and his privy Councell should think fit to vse a 〈◊〉 moderation towards Papists their late speeches in the 〈◊〉 of Commons against his Majesties Declaration is too cleer 〈…〉 for this censure Let themselves now be Judges 〈◊〉 the Roman Catholik Religion notwithstanding its 〈◊〉 of the Popes spiritual supremacy be not more 〈◊〉 â—o Kings then the best Protestant Reformations and 〈◊〉 the Papal spiritual Iurisdiction over souls be not 〈◊〉 with a temporal Soveraignty in Kings over their 〈◊〉 They will find this difference between both Religions that the Roman Catholik admits of and submits to Soveraignty however so addicted the Soveraigns are to Protestancy even the most precise Papists allow not of resistance against the royal authority in any case but only in that of forcing conscience by persecution but both Presbyterian and Prelatik Protestants think it lawfull to depose their Soveraigns if the Soveraigns SECT X. That Protestants could never prove any of the wilfull falsifications wherwith they charge Roman Catholik writers but themselves are convicted of that Crime whersoever they attempted to make good their charge against vs. SOME Protestants either out of ignorance or malice confound our Index expurgatorius with wilfull falsifications of ancient Fathers aÌ„d modern Authors wheras the sayd Index is a professed correcting not of the Fathers but of modern Authors opinions and Comments no concealed corrupting of their writings It doth not change any thing in ancient Fathers works though Protestants themselves confess 〈◊〉 of them have ambiguous and erroneous sentences but such are either sufficiently explained or corrected by themselves in other â—â—â—ces or condemned by the ancient Church and the geneâ—â—â— concurrence and consent of the other Fathers teaching and â—â—â—â—ifying the contrary to be Catholick doctrin So that we 〈◊〉 excuse our Adversaries either ignorance or impudence when they say we make the Fathers speake what is most pleasing to vs by our Index Expurgatorius This you may see solidly proved against Bishop Taylors Calumnies and falsifications in his Dissuasive and the thing is evident by the Index it self and the rules therof Kemnitius and other Protestants object some few texts of Scripture in the vulgar latin which they pretend were changed by vs and corrupted But Cardinal Bellarmin answers to all the objections so well that nothing can be replyed and all the world must confess we Roman Catholiks translated not any thing in that version to favor our Religion against Protestants seing our Latin Vulgata hath his vsed in the Church 1â— hundred years before their pretended reformation was heard of Iewell Morton and others object that Zozimus Bonifacius and Celestinus three Popes that lived in Saint 〈◊〉 â—ime and are much commended by him for holy men forged a Canon of the first Councell of Nice in favor of their own supremacy but they are sufficiently cleered from that aspersion by all Catholick Writers who agree in this that the heretiks did corrupt and Conceal some Canons of that Councell which are now wanting But as for that of appeales to the Pope which was the 〈…〉 it is in the Canons of the Councâ—ll 〈…〉 wayes held especialy in the west Church for 〈…〉 of the 〈◊〉 Councell because the same 〈…〉 both And St. Austin himself did appeale to 〈…〉 those three Popes whom Protestants would 〈◊〉 make 〈◊〉 in the cause of 〈◊〉 Bishop of 〈…〉 in his own Epistle about that matter Bellarmin accused by Sutcliff of 〈◊〉 the general Councell of Calcedon 〈◊〉 favor of the Pope's sâ—â—remacy one of the foure first and received in England by act of a Protestant Parliament MR. Sutcliff in his Challenge and defence of the same chargeth Cardinal Bellarmin with many falsifications which you may see reâ—orted vpon himself in Walsingham's Search of Religion I will relate but one which is the third in Sutcliff's order In the same Book and Chapter saith Sutcliff Bellarmin falsifyeth the acts of the Councell of Calcedon And for proof of this falsification he sayes wheras Bellarmin 〈◊〉 that the Councell acknowldedged and called Pope Leo 〈◊〉 Ecclesias Head of the Church Which name saith Bellarâ—â—â— the Councell of Calcedon about 1200. years past doth 〈◊〉 an epistle to Pope Leo saying quibus tu velut membris 〈◊〉 praeras over whom you as head over the members do beare 〈◊〉 And in the first action of the Councell the Roman Church 〈◊〉 the Head of all Churches Sutcliff letting pass this last 〈◊〉 vpon the words quibus tu velut membris caput praeeras saying that this is referred to certain Priests of Leo his order in which Rank he shewed himself principal c. so as he saith that these words of the Councell do acknowledge only that Leo 〈◊〉 of certain Priests but not of the Bishops
the Canon of the Iews as if the Jews might not doubt and omitt to put some books divinely inspired into the Canon as wel as the primitive Christians or as if the Apostles might not supply that defect and declare some books of the old Testament wherof the generality of the Jews doubted to be Canonical SVBSECT I. Doctor Cozins exceptions and falsifications against the Councel of Trent's authority answered The difference between new definitions and new articles of faith explained THe Protestant obstinacy is not excusable by the exceptions made against the number of Bishops that voted in the Councel of Trent or against the pretended novelty of the Canon which they decreed As to their number the authority of defining matters of faith in a general Councel is no more limited or diminished by the absence of members legaly summoned and long expected then the authority of a lawful Parliament by the absence of many Lords and commons especialy if there be a necessity of applying present remedies to the distempers of Church or Common-weal Doctor Cozins doth confess that the Catholick Church stood in need of a reformation and that the Councel was too much diferr'd and delay'd After they had met at Trent Seing the Bishops were not as many as the Pope and his Legats expected and wished for the greater solemnity of so important a decision as that of the Canon of Scripture whervpon they were to ground their further definitions they put of that session for 8. months and at the end of them hearing that besids those who were at Trent many Bishops were setting forth and others in their Journey they differred the definition of Canonical Scripture for three months more to the end as many as could possibly come might be present If through neglect contempt age infirmity or other accidents wherof the Pope was not in fault many Bishops were absent that could no more prejudice the authority of the Councel at Trent then the like circumstances disanull the authority or make voyd the Acts of our Parliaments But sure the learned Protestant Pastors cannot but smile at the simplicity of their illiterat flocks when they consider the zeale and earnestnes wherwith they except against the smal number of Bishops and their presumption forsooth in the Councel of Trent For the declaring the Canon of Scripture and other Divine truths and yet them-selves accept the Canon of Scripture and doctrin of their own Churches vpon the bare word of one Luther Zuinglius Calvin or vpon the sole authority of the 12. or seven men appointed by Parliament in the reign of Edward 6. Besids our Canon of Scripture was confirmed by the whole Councel of Trent afterwards together with the other points of faith therin defined And though Doctor Cozins pag. 208. tels how the Princes and reformed Churches in Germany England Denmark c. immediatly set forth their Protestations and exceptions against the Councel aleadging that the caling of this Councel by the Pop's authority alone was contrary to the Rights of Kings and the ancient Customs of the Church That he had summond no other persons thither nor intended to admitt any either to debate or give their voice there but such only as had first sworn obedience to him that he took vpon him most injustly to be Judg in his own cause c. Yet it is sufficiently manifested to the world by the very Acts of the Councel that the Pope did nothing but what his Predecessors had don and the Catholick Princes and Church had approved in the like occasions and that though Protestants were not admitted to vote at Trent yet they were not only permitted but invited in a most secure and civil manner by the Councel to reason dispute and debate their controversies and answer for them-selves and their doctrin and this way of proceeding is no more vnreasonable in a general Councel then it is in a Parliament not to permit any to vote therin before he taks an oath of alegiance not to say any thing of the oath of Supremacy and much less to admit of Lords or Commons accused of treason or rebellion to sit in the House vntil they prove their innocency or acknowledg their fault and obtain their pardon by a dutiful submission and profession of repentance And granted that nothing had bin resolved in the Councel of Trent by the Fathers therof but what first was canvass't at Rome by the Pope and Conclave which is false yet we conceive that to be no more against the constitution or freedom of a Councel then it is against the constitution or freedom of a Parliament that no Bill pass vnto an Act vnless it be first signed by the King and approved by his Councel and yet we know that to have bin the constant custom in one of his Majesties Kingdoms since the reign of King Henry 7. As for the Pope or Church of Rome being Judg in their own cause it is a prerogative so absolutly necessary for the authority and govermnent of Magistracy and the quiet and peace of the people governed that no Monarchy or Commonwealth can want it without falling into great inconveniences and confusion A subject t' is true may sue the King but the sentence must be given in the King's Courts and by his authority notwithstanding any objected dependency or parciality of the Judg explaining the laws and customs in favor of his Soveraign And he who would not acquiesce in such a sentence but would needs have the cause decided by a foreign Prince or People is a rebel If this be reasonable and just in temporal Courts and fallible sentences how much more in spiritual controversies and infallible definitions of the Church which definitions of the Church if not acknowledged to be infallible the Church can not have any jurisdiction or authority in matters of faith as not being able to satisfie doubts and setle the inward peace of Christian souls either perplexed in them-selves or in daunger of being perverted by others whether hereticks or pagans neither of which can be indifferent Judges or competent Arbitrators between the Catholick Church and her Children And seing doubts and differences are vnavoidable in both Church and Commonwealth and that there can be no appeale to Infidels or Foreigners without doubt it is more agreable to Scripture to the law of nature and light of reason that Parents and Pastors be Judges in any cause of their Children and inferiors then the contrary or that there be no Judg at all nor jurisdiction either spiritual or temporal But that which Doctor Cozins and all Protestants most press against the judicature of Popes and the councel of Trent is that they do not judg according to Scripture and to the right sense therof wheras Kings and their Judges are regulated by the laws of the land even when the suit is against the King or his pretended prerogative To this we answer that Popes and Councels are as much regulated by Scripture in their definitions
of the Councel of Nice and most vnconscionably cuts of the words immediatly following where Belarmin says the quite contrary of what Cozins imposed vpon his Readers to make good his English Canon of Scripture The words immediatly following are Excepto libro Iudith quem etiam Hieronimus postea recepit Except the booke of Iudith which also Hierom afterwards received as Canonical So that where Cozins says Belarmin confesseth that S. Hierom sayd the Councel of Nice declared not the book of Iudith Canonical Belarmin in that very place says the quite contrary And in the same page cap. 12. Belarmin proves by S. Hieroms testimony and words that the book of Iudith was declared Canonical in the highest degree by the Nicen Councel It were to be wished that Ecclesiastical promotions had bin better bestowed then upon 139 men whose labour and learning 〈◊〉 altogeather employed in seducing souls concealing the truth of Religion from their flocks and corrupting the writings of the ancient Fathers and modern Doctors of the Church for no other reason but because they speak so cleerly against the Protestant Doctrine of these times wherby our Prelatick Ministers are maintained vsurping vast revenues from the Crown and come to the greatest preferments both of Church and State I have not seen any one Protestant Writer free from this fault 't is strange that after so manifest and manifould discoverys as have bin made of Mortons Andrews Fox Sutclif Jewell Barlow Whitaker Willet Vsher Lauds and others falsifications frauds and labyrinths there should be men yet found to follow their examples and much more to be wondred that they should thrive by a trade so base vnconscionable and distructive notwithstanding so manifest and frequent discoveries of their impostures As to this work of Doctor Cosins it may be properly called a Cosenage independently of an allusion to his name had not his book bin sufficiently confuted by the absurdity of his fundamental principles denying that the Apostles or Christian Church could declare any book of the old Testament Canonical which the Iews omitted or rejected and affirming that no parts of the New Testament were ever questioned by any Church ancient or modern I should set down many more of his willful falsifications and weake evasions but that labour being rendred superfluous by the incoherency of his own doctrin and by the inconsistency of his principles with including in that Canon of Scripture which he vndertakes to defend the epistles above mentioned of Peter Iohn Paul and Iude and the Apocalyps for it is evident by the quoted testimonies both of ancient Fathers and learned Protestants that these epistles of Iohn Iude Peter and Paul as also the Apocalyps were doubted of by many Christian Churches for three or foure ages I do not think fitt to trouble the Reader nor my self with a more particular confutation of this rather fantastical then Scholastical History of the Canon of Scripture fantastical J say because he fancies to him-self that the authority and sayings of men who writ before this controversy had bin decided by a general Councel and at the same time professed a faith which obliged them so submit ther writings and judgments to the decrees of Councels can be of any force against that general Councel by which the contrary was decided and they would have bin guided by if they had bin now living as St. Austin saith of St. Cyprian in a point of doctrine which was determined by a general Councel against the holy Martyrs opinion long after his death Whosoever can take delight in seing the pittifull shifts and sleights wherby interested writers endeavour to blind mens eyes and vnderstandings let him peruse this book of Doctor Cozins and he will find more sport in observing how he tosses and turns the sayings of the Fathers against them-selves then could be wished in so serious a subject When the Fathers call the books of Macabees Tobie Judith c. sacred and Divine Scripture Canonical Scripture prophetical writings of Divine authority c. Holy inspirations revelations c. he tels you pag. 93. alibi passim all this must be understood in a large and popular sence though the contrary may appeare to any vnbyass'd judgment that will read the words by him cited pag. 92. alibi in the Authors themselves as for example let any one observe how Doctor Cozins mingles and mangles S. Austin's words concerning the controverted books of the Machabees and afterwards see what the St. him-self says he will â—â—rce believe the words are the same and may swear the sense is not For S. Austin lib. 2. de doctr Christ. cap. 8. sets down as his own sense the same Canon of Scripture which the Councel of Trent accepts and confirmeth and he subscribed unto in the third Councel of Carthage And because he knew that this Canon had not bin defined by a general Councel and therfore many Churches and Fathers doubted of some books which he and the 3. Councel of Carthage held for Canonical he gives some instructions how they who do not follow his Canon shall proceed vntill they be more fully informed or the matter decided and these instructions which he sets down for others who doubted and differ'd in opinion from him Doctor Cozins wilfully mistakes and misapplies to St. Austin him-self as if he could be ignorant of his own belief of the Canon He is also troubled that St. Austin doth favour so much the doctrine of Purgatory and the authority of the Catholick Church in declaring books of the Old Testament to be Canonical which were rejected by the Iews as to say lib. 18. de Civit. Dei c. 36. That the books of the Machabees are accompted Canonical by the Church although not by the Jews To weaken this testimony he brings an other that strengthens it and quotes St. Austin's words Ep. 61. ad Dulcitium wherin confuting the error of the Circomcellions who to cloake their self-homicides with text and examples of Scripture excused that doctrin with the examples of Eleazarus and Razias related in the Machabees which pretext St. Austin largly confutes not only in his epistle ad Dulcit but in his 2. book against the epistle of Gaudent cap. 23. not by deminishing the Canonical authority of the books of the Machabees as Doctor Cozins falsly imposeth vpon his Readers pag. 108. seq but by declaring how the Scripture doth indeed relate yet not commend the self-homicide of Eleazarus and Râ—zias nor canonize them Martyrs or propose their deaths to be imitated though it cannot be denyed but that they shew'd great worldly courage and contempt of life Did Doctor Cozins imagin that Dulcitius Gaudentius and other learned Circumcellions were such Coxcombs as to prove their Religion by Scripture and then to quote for Scripture a book which their Adversaries admitted not at least for so Canonical as that controversies of Religion could be therby decided or doth he think that St. Austin would not have put them in
vs as sacred Thus much have I thought good to remember that Volanus may receive answer from himself when he so often inforceth against vs the authority of learned men and the consent of the Church c. And truly Socinus doth defend his error concerning Christ with as many and as cleer texts of Scripture not vnderstood in the sense of the Roman Catholick Church as any point of Protestancy is maintained by other Protestants The Puritans now called Presbiterians vse the same way of arguing against the Prelatiks and with no less success then socinus against Volanus as may be seen in Cartwright in his second reply against episcopacy p. 1. pag. 484. And that it may appear saith he how justly we call this Canon of the Councell the first generall of Nice in the Canon touching the Metropolitan which the Prelatiks vrged in favor of Episcopacy vnto the tuch stone of the word of God let it be considered c. In the same Councell appeareth that to those chosen of the ministery vnmarried it was not lawfull to take any wife afterwards c. Paphnutius sheweth that not only this was before that Councell but was an ancient Tradition of the Church in which both him-felf and the whole Councell rested c. If the ancient Tradition of the Church can not authorise this neither can ancient custome authorise the other The Prelatick Clergy would fain hould Episcopacy by virtue of Tradition and of the authority of the Nicen Councell and yet would have Priests marry contrary to the same tradition and authority In like manner as the same Mr. Cartwright well observeth ibid. pag. 582. the Bishops of the Church of England would needs have the Nicen Councell be of sufficient authority to maintain Arch-Bishops but not the Pope wheras the on is as cleerly expressed as the other and no less necessary for the government of the Church If saith he an Arch-Bishop be necessary for calling a Provincial Councell when the Bishops are divided it is necessary there be also a Pope which may call a generall Councell when division is among the Arch-Bishops for when the Churches of one Province be divided from other as you ask me so I ask you who shall assemble them togeather who shall admonish them of their duties when they are assembled If you can find a way how this may be don without a Pope the way is also found wherby the Church is disburdned of the Archbishop When Prelaticks dispute with Presbiterians about Episcopacy and ceremonies c. they extoll the four first general Councells but when they dispute with Roman Catholicks about the vnmarried life of Priests the Pop's supremacy or any other point of Popery then they extenuate the authority of the same Councells and will admitt of no other rule of faith but Scripture So that a Prelatick Protestant against Presbiterians is a Papist and against Papists is a Presbiterian what he is or would be if both did argue against him at the same time is not well known to me nor as I suppose to him-self but if he admits of the two main pillars wherby protestancy is supported which are the pretended fall and fallibility of the visible Church and the arbitrary interpretation of Scripture he may be any thing he pleases and to speak more modestly of him then Modestinus of Calvinists he is in a faire way to be a baptised Iew Mahometan or Arian and can not miss that way if he will be guided by the Protestant principles and follow the track of the most learned of the reformation Both Luther and Calvin dislik't the word Trinity on sayd it sounded couldly the other barbarously and Luther by omitting in his Translation of the new Testament this Text of Scripture There-be three which give witness in heaven the Father the word and the holy Ghost and these three be one sheweth how little inclined he was to believe that sacred Mystery and by saying that his soule hated Homusion and that the Arians did very well to reject that new and profane word from the rules of faith he declareth how his Protestant rule and reformation doth direct men to heresy and to all kind of infidelity for there is not a more refined heresy then Scripture mis-interpreted and mis-applyed and Scripture may be as easily mis-interpreted and mis applyed against the Trinity or the second Person 's equality and consubstantiality as applied to any on point of Protestancy The Anti-Trinitarians of Poland Transilvania and Hungary think themselves as good Calvinists as any French Hugonots and better Protestants then English Prelaticks or German Lutherans because they not only agree with all reformed Churches in the Fundamentalls of Protestancy that is in supposing the Apostacy of the Catholick Church and in reforming it by privat authority and their own interpretation of Scripture but go a step further in the Reformation by denying the Trinity By the principles of Protestancy and the practise of the first Protestant Reformers it is left to the choyce and discretion of every particular Church and person what articles of Popery are fitt to be rejected by their privat interpretation of Scripture and indeed it is impossible for men not tyed to any rule but to their own fancies of Scripture to agree in the points of Popery what to reject or retain They who confine with the Turk's Dominions venture to deny the Trinity and the Divinity of Christ and laugh at their brethrens arguments against their impiety as deduced only from Tradition Councells and Fathers and call them old Roman raggs long since torn in pieces by the Protestants them-selves in other points of Protestancy c. Hi sunt vetusti panni quos vos laceratis in aliis fidei articulis c. lacerata jamdudum calceamenta Nullus Nemo H. 9. They are say they patcht showes worn out long agon but heer in England France c. where no neighboring Nations deny the Trinity or Incarnation Protestants make those Misteries fundamental articles of faith but in Transilvania and Hungary The principles of Protestancy are not kept in such awe as heer they make bold there to apply Scripture against any mysteries of Christianity Wherfore we must not admire that they as Mr. Hooker tells vs Eccles. Polâ—â— l. 4. pag. 183. Of the reformed Churches of Poland think the very belief of the Trinity to be a part of Anti-Christian corruption and that the Pop's triple Crown is a sensible mark wherby the world might know him to be that misticall Beast spoken of in the Revelation in no respect so much as in his doctrin of the Trinity Nor when they say that St. Athanasius his Symbol is the Symbol of Sathan and brag that Luther did scarce vntile the Babilonian Jower of Rome but that they do vtterly demolish it and dig vp its very foundation By which words they give cleerly to vnderstand that the Protestants of Germany England Denmark c. are but superficial Protestants
1260. years And pag. â—4â— From the time of Constantine vntill these our days even 1260. years the Pope and his Clergy hath possessed the outward visible Church of Christians And their chief Doctors ingeniously acknowledg that their Churches were either so obscure or so opprest that notwithstanding their own serious examinatiâ—â— and diligent search into all histories both sacred and profane they can not find in the space of at least 1300. years as much as a record or Tradition of any on person to beare witness that their faith sense of Scripture or Reformation was preach't by Christ and his Apostles Sebastianus Francus in ep de Abrog Statutis ecclesiast saith Statim post Apostolos c. Presently after the Apostles times all things were turneâ— vpside down c. And that for certain through the work of Anti-christ the externall Church togeather with the faith and the Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure and that for these 1400. years the Church hath bin no wher externall and visible Peter Martyr so much commended by Calvin and sent for by Cranmer to help to frame the Religion of the Church of England pag. 462. of his work de caelibatu votis saith as for the judgment of the Fathers because our Adversaires the Papists both in this and other controversies are accustomed to appeale to them J do not think it the part of a Christian to appeale from the Scriptures of God to the judgments of men And pag. 476. So long as we go no further then the Councells and Fathers we shall always remain in the same errors This Sophister would faine make Protestants believe that the question is whether the Fathers sense of Scriptures ought to be preferred before the sense of the Protestants them-selves confess that both Councells and Fathers are contrary to their interpretation Whitaker on of the learned'st Protestants that ever writ answering Duraeus and acknowledging the truth of the assertion coms off with this poore evasion l. 7. pag. 478. Jt is sufficient for us to know by conferring the Popish doctrin with Scripture that they do not agree let Histories say what they list So litle do the Ecclesiastical Annals favour Protestancy that never any point therof is mentioned without mentioning also how it began and was comdemned as heresy Now let Protestants examin our Roman Catholick witnesses we do not stop as they must at the last age 1500. we produce in every Century of years the most eminent persons for Sanctity and learning that then lived who not only professed our faith living but also dying as by the Traditions of all Christendom their own writings and the confession of our Adversaries is manifest wherof the Divines of Magdeburg hertofore quoted writ copiously in their Centuries These Fathers and Doctors of the Church in each respective Century delivered the Roman Catholick faith to the next succeeding not as a privat opinion of their own but as the publick pure primitive Apostolick saith which they had received as such from the precedent age confirmed by the vnanimous testimony of their known Catholick immediat Predecessours What exceptions or objections can Protestants pretend against the holy and learned Fathers so impartial Iudges and witnesses They could not be ignorant of what was the publick and vniversal faith or Church in their times and they were men of so great integrity that they would not for any temporal interest conceale the truth in a matter wherof depended eternity They were not angry saith S. Augustin disputing against the Pelagians advers Julian l. 2. prope finem lib. 3. c. 17. lib. 4. c. 12. neither at you or vs what they have found in the Church that they have holden they have taught what they have learn't what they have received from their fore-fathers they have delivered to posterity The most learned Protestants decline the Fathers judgment and testimony for no other reason but because they find them to be Roman Catholicks in their writings so that the question is not whether they by for vs but whether their testimony for vs averring that the Roman Catholick sense of Scripture is the same which Christ and his Apostles deliuered ought to be preferred before the contrary testimony of Luther Calvin Cranmer or of the other Convocations and Parliaments of England of Edward 6. and Queen Elizabeth who prove not their reformed sense of Scripture by ancient tradition but by a new arbitrary interpretation of Scripture And in what Court of Judicature would such an vncertain guess pass for a legal proof Wheras tradition is the only evidence wherby the greatest civil controversies even of regal successions and titles are decided in the Protestants Courts Therfore it ought not to be excluded as superfluous or superstitious from the Church SVBSET III. AS to their exception that the Roman Catholick Church is but a part and ought not to be judge of all other Christians we answer that not by all Christians but by on part were all controversies in the Church decided since the Apostles times and the other part which did not submitt to the judgment of that one in matters of faith and disciplin were censured hereticks That the Judgment and censures in all ages were issued but by on part and this the Roman Catholick party that lived in communion with the Bishop of Rome and the Councells that acknowledged his jurisdiction we prove by the confessed examples of every Century In the first the controversy of the legal ceremonies was determined by S. Peter and the Apostles in a Councell wherin S. Peter presided Act. 15. In the second Century the Christians were divided about celebrating E'aster the controversy was decided by S. Victor Bishop of Rome as S. Peter's successor and because the Churches of Asia would not conform themselves to his sentence he excommunicated them Euseb. l. 5. hist. c. 23. 24. And though S. Irenaeus approved not of S. Victor's severity yet he never questioned his jurisdiction or supremacy or the legality of his censures And because some Christians persisted obstinatly in not conforming to the Pop's Decree of celebrating Easter they were for that obstinacy declared hereticks and as such numbred in Catalogues by S. Epiphanius haeres 50. S. Augustin haeres 26. and by Tertullian de praescript in fine and called Quarto-decimans In the third Century by the Pope Cornelius and his Roman Councell the Novatian heresy was condemned Euseb. ex versione Rufini lib. 6. histor cap. 33. and though there were not as many Bishops in that Roman Councell as at Trent yet the whole Church thought the authority sufficient and legal to declare the Novatians hereticks The same Pope and Stephen his Successour condemned such Christians as thought and taught that they who had bin baptised by hereticks ought to be rebaptised In the forth Century the Arian heresy was condemned by the Councell of Nice wherin were but 318. Bishops whose testimony was thought sufficient and legal against a far greater
Protestant Church of England Pag. 62. Cranmer a meer Cotemporiser and of no Religion at all Pag. 63. Who fram'd the 39 Articles Pag. 64. Of the 39 Articles of the Church of England Pag. 67. Protestant Bishops well pleas'd to see themselves Religiously Worship'd Pag. 70. Protestants though they have chang'd their Form of Ordination yet cannot have a true Clergy till they change also the Character of the Ordainers Pag. 80. Of the Effects immediatly produc'd by the 39 Articles Pag. 82. Dudely Earl of Warwick's Endeavours to have his Son to Reign after K. Edw. His Marrying him to the Lady Jane Gray Pag. 83. Queen Mary's Troubles Pag. 84. The Roman Catholicks willing Resignation of the Church Livings to the Crown Pag. 86. An Act of Parliament in the first year of Q. Mary concerning the fraud and force of K. Henry the VIII's unlawful Divorce from Q. Catharine Pag. 88. Other Effects of Protestancy after it was reviv'd in England by Q. Elizabeth to exclude the Royal Family of the Stewards from the Crown And of the Nullity of her Clergies Character and Jurisdiction Pag. 95. Decreed in Parliament that any Natural Issue of Q. Elizabeths Body should enjoy the Crown after her Death and so the Line of Stewards to be Excluded Pag. 100. Reasons why Q. Elizabeth in her 44 years Reign could not make her Prelatick Clergy and Religion acceptable Pag. 103 How Injurious Protestancy hath been to the Royal Family of the Stewards and how Zealous they have been in promoting the same Pag. 109. K. James the I. declared that Catholicks and their Religion had no Hand in Gun-powder Treason Pag. 112. Of K. Charles the First Pag. 112. Part. 2. Of the Inconsistency of Protestant Principles with Christian Piety and Peaceable Government THe foundation whereon all Reformations are built Pag. 117. The Protestant evasion of the clearness of Scripture against Roman Catholick Doctrine and also of the Invisibility of their own Church Confuted And the Incredibility of the suppos'd Change and Apostacy prov'd by the difference of the Roman Catholick and Protestant Principles Pag. 121 Protestants mistaken in the Canon of the Scripture maintain'd by the Church of England and by Dr. Cousins Bishop of Duresin Pag. 131. Dr. Couzins Exceptions and Falsifications against the Councel of Trent's Authority answer'd Pag. 137. New Definitions are not New Articles of Faith Pag. 141. Protestants so grosly mistaken in their Letter and Translation of Scriptures that they cannot have any Certainty of Faith And are forc'd at length by their Principles to question the Truth of Scriptures and of them who writ the Canonical Books thereof Pag. 149. Particular Instances of Protestant Corruptions in the English Bible Pag. 157. Protestant Interpretation is not the true Sense of Script Pag. 163. Protestants Mistaken in the Ministry and Mission of their Clergy in the Miracles of their Church in the Sanctity and Honesty of their Reformers Pag. 168. Calvin's Miracle Pag. 180. Beza's Lasciviousness He prefers his Boy Andibertus before his Girle Candida Pag. 181. Protestants mistaken in the application of the Prophesies of Scripture concerning the Conversion of the Kings and Nations of the Gentils from Paganism to Christianity foretold as an Infallible Mark of the True Church and whereof the Protestant is depriv'd Pag. 183. Calvin sends Ministers to Convert Gallia Antartica from Heathenism And what success they had Pag. 190. Protestants mistaken in the consistency of their Justifying Faith with Justice or Civil Government Pag. 193. The Protestant Doctrine of Justifying Faith most dangerous and Damnable Pag. 198. Protestants mistaken in the consistency of Christian Faith Humility Charity Peace either in Church or State with their making Scriptures as interpreted by private Persons or Fallible Synods or fancied General Councils composed of all Dissenting Christian Churches the Rule of Faith and Judge of Controversies in Religion How every Protestant is a Pope and how much also they are overseen in making the 39 Articles or the Oath of Supremacy a distinctive Sign of Loyalty to our Protestant Kings Pag. 207. How the Fundamental Principles of Protestancy maturely examin'd and strictly followed have led the most Learned Protestants of the World to Judaisme Atheism Arianisme and Mahometanisme c. Pag. 222. The Protestant Churches of Poland Hungary and Transilvania deny the Mystery of the Blessed Trinity Pag. 230. How the Indifferency or rather Inclination of Protestancy to all kind of Infidelity is further demonstrated by the Prelatick Doctrine and distinction of Fundamental and Not Fundamental Articles of Faith The design of their fundamental distinction laid open The Roman Catholick the sole Catholick Church And how it has the Authority of Judging all Controversy of Religion Pag. 233. The Roman Catholick Church is a Competent and Impartial Judge of Controversies of Religion Pag. 241. Of the Justice and Legality of our Roman Censures against Protestancy Pag. 242. All Christians were never Judges of Religion one Party always submitted to the Judgment of the Other that was in Obedience to and in Communion with St. Peters Successor the Bishop of Rome Pag. 247. Gods Veracity is deny'd by Protestancy and by the Prelatick Distinction and Doctrine of Fundamental and not Fundamental Articles of Faith Pag. 251. Protestancy is Heresie Pag. 254. Protestancy contradicts Gods Veracity Pag. 255. The Infallibility of the Roman Catholick Church in Matters of Faith prov'd against Protestants Pag. 256. The Protestant Doctrine of Fundamentals Confuted Pag. 257. The same further demonstrated and prov'd that neither the Protestant Faith nor the Faith lately Asserted in a Book call'd Sure footing in Christianity is Christian Belief Pag. 260. The Resolution of Protestant Faith Pag. 262. The Infallibility of the Church prov'd by Gods Veracity Pag. 268. Heresie Explain'd by Rebellion Pag. 269. The Unreasonableness of them who pretend a private Spirit and refuse to submit to the Authority of the Church for want of Clearer Evidence than the Roman Catholicks hath of Gods Authority Pag. 269. Reasons for Liberty of Conscience And how much both Piety and Policy is mistaken in making Prelatick Protestancy the Religion of the State by continuing and pressing the Sanguinary and Penal Statutes against the Roman Catholick Faith and the Act of Uniformity against Sectaries Pag. 271. Queen Marys and the Inquisitions Severity against Protestancy can be no President or excuse for the Statutes against Popery Pag. 283. Part 3. Containing a plain Discovery of the Protestant Clergys Frauds and Falsifications whereby alone their Doctrine is supported and made Credible The Conscience and Conveniency of Restoring or Tolerating the Roman Catholick Religion Demonstrated THat either the Learned Protestants or Roman Catholick Clergy are Cheats and how every Illiterate Protestant may easily discern by which of the two Clergies he is Cheated And therefore is oblig'd under pain of Damnation to examine so near a concern And to renounce the Doctrine and Communion of that Church wherein he is Cheated Pag. 287. With what Impudency and Hypocrisy Bishop Jewel
do things of themselues good we know he may but when he doth it is always with an euill design and to the end good things may not be well don but that the manner of doing them may vitiat their goodness This Delrius in the place cited by M. r Morton says and proues by many exemples wherof the Mass is one But M. r Morton wilfully conceals and mistakes the truth of the story for Simon the Monk whom the Deuill endeavored to persuade to say Mass was neither Abbot nor Priest but only Diacon as Delrius sheweth and therfore he answered the Deuill that none ought to say Mass without the order of Priesthood and by his aduice to the contrary he was discouered to bee the Deuill though he appeared like an Angell Without doubt this was a Lutheran Deuill and perhaps the same that dissuaded Luther from the Mass because Luther learnd of him amongst other points of the reformation that lay men and euen women are Priests and may consecrat the Sacrament preach and absolue from sins Hauing sincerely related this matter of fact in Luthers own words and not concealed any thing that any of the most learned Protestants could say to interpret or excuse the same and nothing appearing wherby his instruction in protestancy by the Deuill may be denyed or justifyed I leaue it to the consideration of all wise and Religious persons whether it be policy or piety to promote a Religion whose confessed Author or Apostle is Sathan So long as the generality of a people can be made belieue that Luther did seriously and of set purpose belye himself and discredit his own reformation or that the Deuill is a sincere Interpreter of Scripture and Scripture interpreted by him is the word of God so long I say as these Nations can be made belieue so impossible things without doubt both the protestant Church and state may thriue by protestancy but how long so unlikly a persuasion will continue amongst inquisitiue though ignorant people is vncertain as also the greatness grounded thervpon It hath gained more ground in England then could be expected considering the ingenuity of the Natiues but Q. Elizabeths interest went a great way in the begining of her Reign euery Courtier and countrey gentleman expected by giuing his vote in Parliament for reuiuing the Protestant Religion wherby alone she could pretend to be legitimat her fauor and rewards out of the Church liuings and in her long continued gouernment their Children were made belieue that her Reformation was not the work of Cecil but of Christ And euer since their posterity haue bin confirmed in that opinion by false Translations of Scripture and falsifications of Councells and Fathers as shall herafter appeare It s strang so improbable a persuasion can beare such sway and beat down the Catholick truth But as the Deuill insisted most vpon discrediting the Diuine Sacrifice of the Mass in his Disputation with Luther so the Protestant Clergy striue to make that holy Mystery to be lookt vpon by their flock as a blasphemous fable and dangerous deceit We hope notwithstanding that the English Laiety will reflect upon the occasion of their mistake and consider whether it be not a grieuous sin and great folly to preferr Q. Elizabeths temporal interests which now is turned into dust before that of their souls and Whether any thing can be so vnreasonable as to giue more credit to the Deuill and to Martin Luther and his followers debauch't and dissolute Friars and Priests then to the holy Doctors and Martyrs of Christs Church euer since the Apostles in their acknowledgd writings and in general Councels who call the Mass the visible Sacrifice the true Sacrifice the dayly Sacrifice the Sacrifice according to the Order of Melchisedech the Sacrifice of the Body and Bloud of Christ the Sacrifice of the Altar the Sacrifice of the Church and the Sacrifice of the new Testament which succeded all the Sacrifices of the old Testament and that it was offered for the health of the Emperor for the sick upon the Sea and the fruits of the earth for the purging of houses infected with wicked Spirits for the sins of the liuing and dead And this is so undeniable that our learned aduersary Crastoius in his book of the Mass against Belarmin pag. 167. reprehended Origen S. Athanasius S. Ambrose S. Chrysostom S. Augustin S. Gregory the great and venerable Bede for maintaining the Mass to be a propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of the liuing and of the dead And if there can be no policy of state as things now stand in the English Monarchy to make Q. Elizabeths legitimacy and supremacy a matter or ground of Faith I am sure it cannot be Christian piety to press and preferr the reformation which she and her faction introduced for that reason of state against the Stewards before the Religion of all the ancient and learned Fathers of the Catholick Church though we had no other exception against it but that all the wit and learning of Protestants cannot make it probable in any degree that the Deuill is not the Author of Protestancy SECT III. Of the principles and propagation of Protestancy LVther after his Conference with the Deuill hauing resolued upon that Foundation of his Reformation which hee had learnt from so godly a Master endeauored to gaine as many Poets Players Painters and Printers as he could to discredit with Scoffing Ballads Pamphlets Poems and Pictures the Roman Religion which untill then had bin caled and esteemed the only Catholick and Apostolick and to divulge his nâ—w Doctrin amongst ignorant and vicious People For encouragement of the dissolute Clergy to ioyn with him he taught against the doctrin and practise of the whole Church euer since the Apostles as shall be demonstrated that Priests and professed Nuns might mary and to giue them good example he took a professed Nun for his owne wife And prevailed with this doctrin more then Iouinian the heretik For this liberty together with his principle of justification by only faith drew from sundry parts of Europe incontinent Clergymen wherof the chief were Caroâ—stadius Archdeacon of Wittemberg Iustus Ionas head of a College of Canon Regulars Oecolampadius a Monk of S. Brigits Order Zuinglius a parish Priest Martin Bucer a Dominican friar Peter Martyr a Canon Regular Bernardin Ochinus a Capuchin and some Augustin Friars of Luthers own Order Each of these hauing taken a wench were engaged in Luthers quarrel against the whole Church But their course of life and the nouelty of their doctrin being dislik't by all men that were not Libertins and not countenanced as yet by any Princes or Prelates it was thought necessary for their own preseruation and propagation of their Ghospell to make it plausible to the giddy multititude whose ignorance they knew to be as capable of incredible impressions as their nature is impatient of
their own Canon and sense of Scripture and of the falshood of the Canon and sense of Scripture of the Church of England as there is for the English Church to make it self judg of the falshood of the Canon and sense of the Church of Rome As for the authority which the Prelatick religion receives from the laws of the land that gives but little advantage seing the Roman Catholick doctrin hath bin confirmed by the temporal laws of every Kingdom Country and Citty besor and at the tyme that Protestancy succeeded and prevailed and yet that legality was not valued by the Reformers The 35. Article is to authorise some Puritan homilies as the 2. wherin the danger of idolatry in Popery is much insisted vpon as if Christians could easily mistake Images for Idols or Saints for Gods Jews and Hereticks have often endeavoured to confound the one with the other Catholicks never The ancient Fathers as also the second Councel of Nice have long since declared the Protestant Doctrin against Images to be heresy and the Councel of Trent confirms the same decree of Nice and demonstrats how far that the Catholick doctrin of worshiping Images is from any danger of Idolatry The words of the Councel sess 25. are The Images of Christ of the Virgin Mother of God and of other Saints are to be had and retained especialy in Churches and that due honour is to be imparted vnto them not for that any Divinity is to be believed to be in them or vertue for which they are to be worshipt or that any thing is to be begg'd of them or that hope is to be put in them as in tyms past the Pagans did who put their trust in Idols but because the honour which is exhibited to them is referr'd to the first pattern which they resemble So that by the Images which we kiss and before which we vncover our heads and kneele we adore Christ and his Saints whose likness they beare we reverence that which is ratified by the Decrees of Councels especialy of the second of Nice against the impugners of Images In the 36. they make it an Article of Religion that their new form of ordaining Priests and Bishops is valid and containeth all things necessary but since his Majesty's happy restauration they have judged the contrary and therfore thought necessary to add thervnto the words Priest and Bishop Yet this wil not serve their turn for before they can have a true Clergy they must change the Caracter of the Ordainers as wel as the form of ordination a valid form of ordination pronounced by a Minister not validly ordained gives no more caracter then if it had continued invalid and never bin altered The present Protestant Bishops who changed the form of their own Ordination vpon their Adversaries objections of the invalidity therof might as wel submit to be ordained by Catholick Bishops as alow by altering the from after so long a tyme and dispute that it was not sufficient to make themselves and their Predecessours Priests or Bishops In their 37. Article they give a spiritual supremacy to the temporal Soveraign But because the world laught at that vanity and at the statuts 1. 8. Eliz. 1. Wherin is declared that the English Soveraignty is so spiritual as that it may give to any person whatsoever whether man or woman lay or ecclesiastick power and authority to exercise any spiritual function and consecrat Priests and Bishops they would fain make vs now believe that they did not attribut to the Queen and her Successours any power of ministring God's word or the Sacraments notwithstanding that the aforesaid Statuts yet in force certify the contrary And indeed if none can give what himself hath not seing the Kings of England can give power and authority to any person watsoever to consecrat Priests and Bishops and to exercise all kind of spiritual ministery and jurisdiction concerning God's word and Sacraments this power and ministery cannot be denyed to be inherant in themselves In the 38. and 39. articles they endeavour to supress some errors of the Anabaptists which necessarily follow from the foundation and principles of Protestancy for if it be lawfull to deprive men of a spiritual authority and jurisdiction wherof they are in present possession and which their Predecessours had peaceably enjoy'd tyme out of memory the consequence of the lawfulness to deprive men of their temporal jurisdiction Dominions riches and goods is evident by a parity of reason for if peaceable and present possession confirm'd by a prescription of many ages be not sufficient to ground right for the Roman Bishop and Clergy to govern souls and to enjoy the Church livings ther is no temporal Prince or person can be secure or have a right to govern subjects or possess his Dominions So that by the same warrant wherby Prelatick Protestants have taken from the Pope and Roman Clergy their spiritual jurisdiction and temporalities the Anabaptists and all others may evidently demonstrat that all goods are common and no one person can pretend right to Superiority or any thing he doth possess SECT VI. Of the effects which these 39. Articles of Prelatick Protestancy immediatly produced in England and may produce at any tyme in every state wher such principles are made legal and how the Roman Catholick Religion was restored by Act of Parliament of Queen Mary AFter that Prelatick Protestancy had not only bin permitted but established by Parliament in England ensued the destruction of many thousand innocent people as also of the Protector Seamor and K. Eduard 6. togeather with the exclusion of Q. Mary and others the lawful Heires of the Crown and the in trusion of the Lady Jane Grey and in her of Dudly's son and family vnto the Royal throne These were effects of Protestancy not events of fortunc they were designs driven and directed by the principles of the Reformation the like wherof any politick and popular subject may compass as wel as Dudly witness our late long Parliament and Oliver Cromwel's proceedings Though K. Edward 6. was but a Child and his vncle the Protector no great Polititian yet they had a grave and wise Councel but against the liberty and latitude which men are allow'd by the principles of Protestancy no conduct can prevail nor government be safe as appeareth in many examples and in our late Soueraign's Reign and death Jt's in vain to make particular articles of Religion or temporal Statuts if there be a general principle admitted as if it were the word of God wherby both are rendred vnsignificant One of the general principles and indeed the foundation of Prelatick Protestancy is that it is lawful for privat men and subjects such were all the first Protestant Reformers to despise and depose their spiritual Superiours by their own arbitrary interpretations and applications of Scripture notwithstanding the peaceable possession immemorial prescription legality and exercise of their sayd Superiour's authority and jurisdiction From hence it
the Fathers contradicted his protestant doctrin bouldly affirmed the ancient Doctors and Fathers of all former ages to have bin blind and most ignorant in the Scripturs and to have erred all their life time And in Colloq cap. de Patribus Ecclesioe Luther saith of sundry Fathers in particular thus Jn the writings of Jerome there is not a word of true faith in Christ and sound Religion Tertullian is very superstitious J have holden Origen long since accursed Of Chrysostom I make no accompt Basil is of no worth he is wholy a monk I way him not a haire Cyprian is a weak Divine c. Adding further that the Church did degenerat in the Apostles age and that the Apology of his scholler Philip Melancton doth far exceed all the Doctors of the Church and exceed even Austin him self And in his Treatise de formulâ Missae in tom 3. Germ. folio 274. Jf the Councel should in any case decree this the Communion vnder both kinds least of all then would we vse both kinds yea rather in despite of the Councel and that decree we would vse either but one kind or neither notwithstanding Christ's precept and the necessity of that spiritual refection and in no case both But this man's bare word ought not to weigh more then the Testimony of all the Fathers and Councels that went before him or be preferred before the constant Tradition of 15. ages especialy if we reflect vpon the pride and passion which he declares in all his writings not only against the Doctors of the Roman Church but against his own Disciples and as hath bin said how in the begining of his reformation when his spirit was in it's primitive fervor he doth plainly confess that he did favour Idolatry to contradict Carolstadius for anticipating his commands in a point of the reformation viz. for abolishing of the adoration and elevation of the B. Sacrament in his absence I did know saith he the elevation of the Sacrament to be Idolatricall yet nevertheless J did retain it in the Church at Wittenberg to the end J might despite the Devill Carolstadius And yet this wicked friar's authority is the first foundation of protestancy Therfore notwithstanding his known impiety he is termed by their writers Holy saint Luther a man sent of God to lighten the world the Helias Conductor and Chariot of Israel to be reverenced next after Christ and Paul greater then whom lived not since the Apostles tims The Angel and last trumpet of God whose caling was immediat and extraordinary c. Let the most peevish Protestant I say once more be judg whether it be not more probable and possible that one privat proud and passionat man did mistake the true sence of Scripture and misapply the words therof to humour his passion of pride and revenge then that all the primitive Fathers and Christians of the world did conspire to forsake the known true letter and cleer meaning of God's word or if all did not conspire in the Apotasy that there should be no monument left or mention made in record history or tradition of the fidelity of the party that resisted Secondly this supposed change is proved incredible not only by the impossibility of an insensible change in a thing so remarkable and important as the doctrin and Profession of Christian Religion but also by the impossibility that a change and corruption of Christ's doctrin should be made to the detriment of the wary layties temporal interest and to the disadvantage both of the layty and Clergie's liberty For when men resolve to go out of the narrow way which leads to heaven they are not so foolishly wicked as to retire from the wide world into deserts or Monasteries and to impose vpon themselves or their followers an obligation or principles of a more strict course of life then that which they had forsaken as dayly experience doth cleerly demonstrat If protestancy therfor was the primitive and pure Christian Religion the fall from it to Popery must have bin rather condessending then contrary to sensuality and liberty And yet if the doctrin of the reformation and it's exceptions against Popery be considered we shal find that in every particular wherin they differ Protestancy doth favour liberty and vice Popery doth favour temperance and virtue We shal declare herafter to what great crimes and carlesness of life men are encouraged by the Protestant doctrine of predestination and justification by faith alone Christ's sufferings and satisfaction for our sins they apply not to themselves by imitation of his virtues and mortification of the flesh but think it a diminution of his glory and a disrespect to his person that men endeavour by God's grace to help themselves and to cooperat with Christ's passion and vpon thiâ— ground they rayse their batteries against Indulgences Purgatâ—â—y â—â—lgrimages Prayer to Saints Confession of sins Pennance the three Vows and the austerity of a Religious life Works of Supererogation c. and censure Catholicks as guilty of superstition and folly for believing that though Christ's passion be infinitly sufficient to redeem vs from the guilt and penalties of sin yet is it not sufficiently and actualy applied to actual sinners without their own concurrence good works and the Sacraments of the Church As for their pretence that Christ hath satisfied for all they may as wel say that he hath prayed fasted and given almes for all and so discharge men of all such Christian-duties and devotions And as to other particulars we desire to know what can the Protestant Clergy's design be in allowing Priests mariages and a liberty to dissolve mariages change wives and husbands in case of adultery departure infirmity by child-birth or otherwise but lust and sensual liberty contrary to the instition of matrimony and to the purity and practise of Christianity which Roman Catholicks observe From whence proceedeth their allowing of eating of flesh and fish promiscuously on all days of the year but from gluttony Their Clergy's denyall of the Pop's superiority which their betters in virtue birth and learning acknowledg but from want of humility And their placing it in the temporal Soveraign but from excess of flattery Their dulness in confounding the substance with the appearance of bread and wine in the Sacrament but from sensuality Their denial of the Church's infallibility and yet assert in themselves an vncontroul'd authority but from pride and obstinacy Their fond expressions of their own prelatick reformation and doctrin but from want of Christian modesty and from their for-fathers the ancient hereticks whose presumption and obstinacy was neuer more manifestly absurd nor more legaly condemned at Nice Ephesius Calcedon or Constantinople then the Protestant Tenets have bin at Trent as wil appeare to any that wil read the history of those Councels and compare the objections and exceptions made by Arians Nestorians and Eâ—â—tychians e. against the Authority and decrees wherby they
were censured in these four first Councels with the Protestant exceptions and objections against the Councel of Trent especily if they wil pervse but the very first leaves of Cardinal Palavicino his confutation of Fr. Paulo Suarez or Servita his history wherin they wil find above tree hundred lyes and calumnies of that Apostata Friar in matter of fact so notorious and vndeniable that our English Prelatick Clergy wil or ought to be ashamed of the Preface they have set before it and of abusing King Iames and his Subjects with such impostures by their extolling so improbable and infamous a Libel Seing therfore the supposed change and fall from primitive Protestancy to popery hath bin from presumption and pride of a privat and censorious judgment against the publick testimony and sense of the visible Church to submission and humility of an obsequious and prudent belief from notorious rebellion against spiritual and temporal superiours to religious and dutifull obedience from gluttony to abstinence from incontinency to chastity from sincerity to flattery from Cloysters and austerity to Sacrilege and liberty from a pretence of faith alone to the Christianity of faith and good works c. It must be concluded that either Protestancy was not the pure and primitive Religion or if it was that the change therof into popery hath bin for the better and by consequence that the first Papist introduced into the world a more sacred and sincere profession then had bin taught by Christ and his Apostles But this being impious and as impossible as it is that men abandoned by God should exceed God's servants in piety or that they should establish and practice more Godly principles and more zealously promote virtue when they fel from God and the way of salvation then when they were in the same it must be granted that Popery is the pure and primitive Religion taught by Christ and his Apostles and that only weak brains or such tender plants as in their infancy received strong impressions of the possibility and existence of an invisible Christian Church vpon earth can fancy an insensible change of it's doctrin profession and ceremonies into so remarkable and different a worship of God as Popery is compared with Protestancy Congregations of Protestants living in the same Provinces Citties and Parishes with Papists and dissenting from them in the outward and oral profession of faith if they did not profess protestancy which they suppose was Christ's faith with the mouth they were dissemblers and could be no part of the true Church in the Canon and sense of Scripture in the administration and number of Sacraments in Rites and Ceremonies in the substance and language of the Liturgy in adoring the B. Sacrament in worshiping of Images in receiving of the Communion c. such Protestant Congregations I say to be invisible and never heard of in 1500. or 1000. years nor observed nor persecuted by the prevailing Papists among whom they lived is not a thing possible or intelligible much less prudently credible We see by experience in these Kingdoms how impossible it is for a Recusant not to be discerned and discovered Papists are known though not convicted Many of them through the mildn'ss and prudence of the government escape the penalties and rigour of the Law but none the observation of their neighbours and very few the menaces of both ecclesiastical and civil Courts The invisibility therfor of the Protestant Church and the insensibility of it's change to Popery is a fitter subject to ground ther-vpon a ridiculous Romance then a religious reformation Perhaps it wil be sayd that Protestants were vntil the last age among the ten tribes as the Jews of whose appearance ther hath bin of late so much talk but we heare not of Protestants among them neither did Luther Zuinglius Cranmer or Calvin pretend that they came from those Israelits or from Terra australis incognita they were born and bred neerer and they brag'd that them-selves were the first Reformers Now to their Scripture SECT III. Protestants mistaken in the Canon of Scripture maintained by the Church of England and by Doctor Cousins Bishop of Duresme OUr second Argument against the probability or possibility of Protestancy being the word or work of God is taken from the Protestants mistake of Scripture and their altering of the Canon And wheras our learned Adversaries do agree with vs in saying that neither the Scripture it-self nor the privat spirit can determin which parts of Scripture are Canonical or holy but confess that this controversy must be decided by the Testimony and authority of the Church and that above 300. years after the Apostles some of their writings were not held by all orthodox Catholicks to be Canonical which now are comprehended in the Canon and admitted as the word of God by many Protestants it foloweth 1. That the Canon of Scripture was not so sufficiently proposed to the whole Church for the three first ages as to make the denial or doubt therof Heresy 2. That the 6. Article of the Prelatick-Religion of England which admitted only such books of Scripture for Canonical of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church is false and the ground therof fallible For as all men vers'd in the Ecclesiastical History wel know and learned Bilson the Protestant Bishop of Winchester doth acknowledg in his survey of Christ's sufferings c. printed 1604. pag. 664. The Scripturs were not fully received in all places no not in Eusebius his time which was above 300. years after the Apostles he saith the Epistles of Iames Iude the second of Peter the second and third of John are contradicted as not written by the Apostles the Epistle to the Hebrews was for a while contradicted c. The Churches of Siria did not receive the second Epistle of Peter nor the second and third of Iohn nor the Epistle of Iude nor the Apocalips c. The like might be sayd for the Churches of Arabia Wil you hence inferr that these parts of Scripture were not Apostolick or that we need not receive them now because they were formerly doubted of This Argument of Bishop Bilson we apply to the Machabees and to the other books declared by the Church of England to be Apocryphal Doctor Cousins writ a book caled a Scholastical History of the Canon of Scripture for which him-self and his friends think he wel deserved the Bishoprick of Duresme that he now enjoys in defence of the Prelatick Protestant Canon and of the 6. article of the Church of England And because he tels us in his Preface that men of knowledg pressed him to publish it as a piece that would give more ample satisfaction and cleere the passages in antiquity from the objections that some late Authors in the Roman side bring against Protestants then those other writings of home or foreign Divines have don that are extant in this kind I thought fit to give Protestants a proof of the soundness of
their doctrin and of the sincerity of their Doctor And though it seemeth to me impossible for any man to know what parts of the new Testament the 6. Article and Canon of the Church of England declares Canonical it being so intricatly worded that either it must be non sense or els exclude from the Canon the Epistles of Iames the second of Peter the second and third of John the Epistle of Iude the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalips seing the authority of all and every one of these hath bin doubted of in the Church and the 6. Article of the Protestant Religion of the Church of England is that In the name of the holy Scripture we do vnderstand those Canonical Books of the old and new Testament of whose authority was never any doubt of in the Church Though I say it 's impossible for me to comprehend how common sense and Christianity can meet in this Article but that if the words therof signify any thing out of the English Protestant new Testament must be excluded all the aforsaid Epistles and Apocalyps yet leaving this difficulty to the decision of that Church I wil suppose at the present with D. r Cosins that all these Epistles and Apocalyps are included in the English Canon and come to the examination of the Arguments wherby he pretends to defend it He therfor foreseing the impossibility of giving any reason why the parts of the New Testament hertofore doubted of should rather be received by Protestants into their Canon then the Books of the Old Testament no more questioned by the Church of Christ then the aforsaid epistles and the Apocalyps thought to avoyd the force of this pressing parity by flatly denying pag. 5. alibi That ever any intire Church or any National or Provincial Counsel or any multitude of men in their confessions and Catechisms or other such publick writings rejected or doubted of the sayd epistles c. In case so many solemnities had bin requisit for the questioning of Canonical authority which his Lp knows are not necessary It seems his lordship did not peruse Eusebius his works though he quotes them very often or at least did not thinck that the ancient Churches of Syria and Arabia deserve to be called Churches not that the Lutherans of Germany Denmark Suethland c. who stick to Luther's principles and Canon can make one or many Churches It s a gross mistake in the Doctor to say pag. 4. 5. that Luther or his Lutherans recalled or recanted their error concerning the Epistle of St. James he might see the contrary in the very book him-self cites of Chemnitius the famous Lutheran whose authority and words he placeth in his addition of certain Testimonies in the same rank with sentences of St. Augustin and St. Thomas of Aquin c. This Chemnitius in most of his works as in his Enchirid. pag. 63 and in his examin of the Councel of Trent p. 1. pag. 55. 56. declareth his own sense and that of his Church in these words The second Epistle of St. Peter the second and third of John the Epistle of Jude and the Apocalyps of John are Apocryphal as not having sufficient testimony of their authority His lordship might also have bin better informed of Luther's sence and Church by the saying of Illiricus an other pillar and Writer therof whom Mr. Bell in his regiment of the Church pag. 28. termeth a very famous Writer and most worthy defender of the Christian truth his words are Luther in his preface vpon St. Iem's Epistle giveth great reasons why this epistle ought in no case to be accompted for a writing of an Apostolick authority vnto which reasons I think every godly man ought to yeeld Luther's reasons are to be seen in the ancient editions of Jene and are comprehended in these few words of his The Epistle of Iames is contentious swelling dry strawy and vnworthy an Apostolick spirit And because these words and others were omitted in the later editions of Wittemberg by some Divins that would fain reform Luther's Canon Religion and Church the chief Lutheran Doctors mett in a Synod at Altembury complained of their Adversaries corrupting Luther's books and resolved to stick to the ancient editions and to the literal sence of his words So that in case it were true the Canon of Scripture could not be sayd to have bin questioned by any Protestant Congregation whithout declaring their doubt in a publick confession of faith we see the Lutheran doth so as also in their confession of Wittemberg quoted by Belarmin lib. 1. de verb. Dei cap. 7. init which is seconded by all hereticks of these tims saith Belarmin the Calvinist only excepted But the Doctor is so much mistaken in the necessity of such a formality that the Arians were condemned as hereticks notwithstanding that in their publick confessions of faith they endeavored rather to disguise then declare their errors It is wel known that Lutheran Churches in Germany not only do reject from their Canon the Epistles of S. Iames Iude the second of Peter and third of S. Iohn the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalyps but are so obstinat in denying them to be in any wise Canonical Scripture that they do not as much as print them in their Bibles And if my Lord of Duresme thinks that the rigid and moderat Lutherans half Lutherans and other Protestant Congregations wherin are many as learned Ministers and Writers as him-self deserve not the name of a Church he may expect that they wil censure his Church after the same manner and perhaps with as much reason But lett them agree as wel as they can it concerns not vs. Yet I hope he wil not pronounce so severe a Censure against the Greeck and Latin Churches and vn-church both Wherof S. Hierom in epist. ad Dordunum testifieth that the Greeks doubted as much of the Apocalyps against the common consent of the Latins as the Latins did of the Epistle to the Hebrews against the common consent of the Church Seing therfor it is evident by the confession both of ancient Fathers and modern Proâ—estants that in the primitive Church the Canonical Scriptures were not generally received all at once but in so great variety of pretended Scriptures great care and search was requisit to determin which Scriptures were Canonical and which not wherby it came to pass thaâ— sundry books and parts were for a long time misdoubted by some Churches and Fathers and by some Councels omitted or not received which yet afterward vpon greater search and consideration were generally acknowledged it must be very great obstinacy in Doctor Cozins and other Protestants to reject the Canon which the Councel of Trent proposeth and embraceth because forsooth some books therin contained were not as soon believed by all Catholicks to be Canonical as the others Or to deny the authority and authentikness of some books of the old Testament because they were not in
mind of that folly in very cleer termes and excuse farther disputes by telling them plainly and without going about the bush that the Machabees was not Canonical Scripture nor fit to be quoted in matters of Religious controversies But the Doctor argues pag. 110. that St. Austin tells Gaudentius the Christian Church receiveth those books not vnprofitably if they be discreetly or soberly read or heard what then All discreet and sober men say the same not only of the books of the Machabees but of all the other books and parts of Scripture and St. Peter sayth the same in substance of St. Paul's epistles Will the Doctor conclude from thense that St. Paul's epistles are not Canonical Scripture because men may read them indiscreetly and deprave them to their own damnation Or that there is no Scripture at all because he himself or some of his Bishoprick of Duresme do not read the Bible with sobriety and discretion these words of St. Austin in the Doctor 's judgment pag. 108. are so cleerly against the Canonical authority of the Machabees that he says Cardinal Belarmin layd his thumb vpon them and durst not relate them I am sure he pointed at them with his Pen and directed all the world to see and examin them by his quoting the book and Chapter where they are as my Lord of Duresme him-self confesseth in the margent neither could Belarmin Peron or any oâ—her Catholick Writer observe any disadvantage to their cause in those following words of S. Austin Which Doctor Cozins pretends to be so notoriously prejudicial Recepta est ab Ecclesia non invtiliter c. The Machabees is received by the Church for holy Scripture not vnprofitably if it be soberly read or heard That is sayth Doctor Cozins pag. 110. As St. Augustin els wher expoundeth him-self but where Doctor Cozins doth not because he cannot tell If those things that we read there be conferred with the sacred and Canonical Scriptures that whatsoever is therevnto agreeable may be approved and what is otherwise may be rejected According to this acute explanation which Doctor Cozins falsly fathers vpon S. Austin the most profane books and Romances Esop's Fables and Don Quixote may be received by the Church for holy Scripture as well as the Machabees if those things that we read therin be conferr'd with the sacred and Canonical Scriptures and whatsoever is thervnto agreable be approved and what is otherwise be rejected It were too tedious to note all Doctor Cozins his mistakes Let these few serve to know by what a pillar the English Canon and Church is supported SECT IV. Protestants so grossly mistaken in their letter and Translations of the Scriptures that they can not have any certainty of faith and are forc't at length by their principles to question the truth of Scriptures and of them who writ the Canonical books therof THe holy Scriptures were writen by the Prophets Apostles and Evangelists either in Hebrew Greeck or Latin the old Testament excepting some few parts writen in Chaldaick and Syriack was writen in Hebrew the new Testament for the greatest part in Greeck S. Mathew's Ghospel in Hebrew S. Marck's in Latin We have not the original writings of these Prophets and Apostles nor of the 70. Interpreters who translated the old Testament into Greek some 300. years before the comming of Christ we have only Copies for the truth and exactness wherof we must rely vpon the testimony and tradition of the Church which in so important a point God would never permit to err at least it must have bin so infallible therin as that the Copy be sufficiently authentick to be a rule of deciding controversies of faith and of directing men to holiness of life though perhaps no copy is so exact but therin may remain some erratas of the press and pen yet easily discoverable by it's coherency or incoherency with other parts of the Text. Notwithstanding the necessity of admitting some true and authentick copy of Scripture for what can it availe a Christian to believe that Scripture is the word of God if he be vncertain which copy or Translation is true and authentick Scripture Protestants pretend there is no authentick copy of Scripture in the world as may be seen in the preface of the Tigurin edition of the Bible and in all their books of Controversy seing therin they condemn the Councel of Trent for declaring that the old Latin Translation is authentick and yet themselves name no other for authentick and therfore though the Lutherans fancy Luther's Translation the Calvinists that of Geneva the Zuinglians that of Zuinglius the English some times one somtimes an other yet because they do not hold any one to be infallibly authentick it followeth from their exceptions against the infallibility of the Roman Catholick Church in declaring or decreeing a true and authentick copy of Scripture and their confession of the vncertainty of their own translations that they have no certainty of Scripture nor even of faith which they ground vpon Scripture alone Most of the old Testament as it is in the vulgar Latin Translation which the Councel of Trent declares to be authentick was â—ranslated out of Hebrew by St. Hierom and the new Testament had bin before his time translated out of Greek but was by him revewed and such faults as had crept in through negligence of the Transcribers were corrected You constraine me sayth he to make a new work of an old that I after so many copies of the Scripture dispersed through the world should sit as a certain Iudg and determin which of them agree with the true Greek and in this Cathalogue he saith Novum Testamentum graecae fidei reddidi vetus juxta haebraicum transtuli The antiquity and sincerity of the first Interpreter and the great Commendations therof to be seene in St. Austin de Civit. Dei lib. 18. c. 43. Non defuit temporibus nostris Presbiter Hieronymus homo doctissimus omnium trium linguarum peritissimus qui non è Graeco sed ex Haebraeo in Latinum eloquium easdem Scripturas converterit Cujus tamen litterarum laborem Judaei fatentur esse veracem And lib. 2. doct Christi cap. 15. togeather with the eminent Sanctity and learning of S. Hierom forceth our Adversarie Bâ—eza to confess Annotationibus in caput 1. Luc. That the old Interpreter seemeth to have interpreted the holy books with marveilous sincerity and Religion and in praefat novi Testam The vulgar edition I do for the most part embrace and preferr before all others Carolus Molinaeus in nov Testam part 30. I can very hardly depart from the vulgar and accustomed reading which in Luc. 17. he professeth to preferr before Erasmus Bucer Bullinger Brentius the Tigurin Translation and even before Iohn Calvins and all others Doctor Humfrey de ratione interpret l. 1. pag. 74. The old Interpreter seemeth to be much addicted to the propriety of the words and truly with too much
by faith in Christ not by good works which they in no wise did affect We Catholicks do not pretend to have no evill-livers in our Church but this we may say with truth and I hope without offence that the difference between Protestant and Catholick â—â—â—ll-livers is that when Protestants sin they do nothing but what they are encouraged vnto by their justifying faith and the other principles of their Religion but when Catholicks sin they go against the known Tenets of their faith and profession Even our Pardons and Jndulgences how-ever so plenary are so far from encouraging vs to a continuance or relapse of sinning that they involue as a precedent and necessary condition a serious and sincere repentance of our former offences and afirm purpose and resolution of never returning to the like crimes and after all is don we pretend to no such vndoubted certainty of being pardon'd either by confession or Indulgences because we are not certain whether we do al as we ought as Protestants presume to have of their justification and saluation by only faith The nature of this justifying faith and of other Protestant principles considered We Catholicks have reason to thanck God that the prudence â—f the Prince and moderation of his Ministers is so extraordinary that it keeps the indiscreed zeal of a multitude so strangly principl'd if not as much with in the limits of Christianity and civility towards their fellow subjects as were to be wished yet so that the execution of the sanguinary and penal statuts is not altogeather so distructive as the Presbiterians and others endeavor Untill the generality of these Nations reflect vpon the impiety of the first Reformers and vpon their own mistakes in preferring the mad fancies of a few dissolute Friars concerning the nature of Christian faith before the constant Testimony and doctrin of the whole visible Church we cannot expect that they who govern so mistaken a multitude can make justice the rule of the publick Decrees which depend of the concurrence and acceptance of men whose greatest care is to promote Protestancy and persecute Popery SECT IX Protestants mistaken in the consistency of Christian faith humility Charity peace either in Church or state with their making Scripture as interpreted by privat persons or fallible Synods or fancied general Councells composed of all discenting Christian Churches the rule of faith and Iudg of Controversies in Religion How every Protestant is a Pope and how much also they are overseen in making the 39. Articles or the oath of Supremacy a distinctive sign of Loyalty to our Protestant Kings LVther Zuinglius Calvin Cranmer and all others that pretended to reform the doctrin of the Church of Rome seing they could not prove their new Religions or Reformations by testimonies from antiquity or by probability of Reason were inforc't to imitat the example of all Heretiks who as S. Austin says l. 1. de Trin. c. 3. endeavour to defend their falls and deceitfull opinions out of the Scriptures If on shall ask any Heretick saith that ancient Father Vincentius lyr l. 1. cons. Haer. c. 35. from whence do you prove from whence do you teach that I ought to forsake the vniuersal and ancient faith of the Catholik Church Presently he answereth scriptum est It is written and forthwith he prepareth a thousand testimonies a thousand examples a thousand authorities from the law from the Apostles from the Prophets This shift is so ordinary and notorious that Luther him-self postill Wittemberg in 2. con 8. Dom. post Trin. fol. 118. Dom. post Trin. fol. 118. affirmeth the sacred Scripture is the book of Heretiks because Heretiks are accustomed to appeale to that book neither did there arise at any time any heresy so pestiferous and so foolish which did not endeavor to hide it self under the vaile of Scripture And yet Luther Calvin Cranmer c. finding nothing to say for them-selves either in History or Fathers and seing Tradition so cleerly bent against them that they could not name as much as on Parish or person which ever professed their protestant doctrines they appeal'd from the word of God proposed by the visible and Catholick Church and Counâ—â—ls to their own Canon and Translations of Scripture and from that sense of Scripture which the Church and Councells had follow'd for 1500. years to that which their own privat spirit temporal interest or fallacious reason diâ—â—â—ted to them-selves and so did others that followed their examples making every privat Protestant or at least every reforâ—â—d Congregation Judg of Scripture Church Councells and Fathers In so much that Luther tom 2. Wittemberg cap. de Sacram. fol. 375. setteth down this rule for all Protestants to be directed 〈◊〉 The Governors of Churches and Pastors of Christ's sheep 〈◊〉 indeed power to teach but the sheep must judge whâ—â—â—er they propose the voice of Christ 〈◊〉 of strangers c. Wherfore let Popes Bishops Councells c. decree order enact what they please we shal not hinder but we who are Christ's sheep and heare his voice will judge whether they propose things true and agreable to the voice of our Pastor and they must yeeld to us and subscribe and obey our sentence and censure Calvin though contrary to Luthâ—â— in many other things yet in this doth agree as being the ground wherupon all protestant Reformations must rely in his lib. 4. Institut cap. 9. § 8. he says The definitions of Councels must be examined by Scripture and Scripture interpreted by his rules and Spirit The same is maintained by the Church of England as appears in the defence of the 39. Articles printed by authority 1633. wherin it is sayd pag. 103. Authority is given to the Church and to every member of sound judgment in the same to judg controversies of faith c. And this is not the privat opinion of our Church but also the judgment of our godly brethren in foreign Nations And by Mr. Bilson Bishop of Winchester in his true difference c. part 2. pag. 353. The people must be Discerners and Judges of that which is taught How inconsistent this doctrin is with Christian faith is evident by the pretended fallibility and fall of the visible Church which all Protestants do suppose and must maintain to make good the necessity and lawfullness of their own interpretations and Reformations For if the Roman Catholik and ever Visible Church may and from time to time hath erred as the Church of England declares in the 39. Articles no reformed Congregations whether Lutheran Presbiterian or Prelatick can have infallible certainty but that them-selves have fallen into as great errors as those which they have pretended to reform in the Roman Church And if they have not infallible certainty of the truth of their reformed doctrin they can not pretend to Christianity of faith that involves an assurance of truth which assurance is impossible if that the Church can be mistaken in it's proposall So that Christianity of faith including
all Papists in these words what shall J say here O ye principall posts of Religion and ye Arch-Governors of Christ's Church Is this your reverence which you giue to God's word to bid them avant away c. no mervaile if these men dispise us and all our doings which set so litle by God him-self and his infallible saying Thus they write and inveigh against Hosius and all the Roman Church even after they knew and had bin twice admonished that the whole ground was fals and forged by them-selves Hosius his own words are there is sprung vp a certain new kind of Prophets who have not bin afraid by the authority of Scripture to take away all authority from the Scripture Behould whither Satan at length hath brought this matter c. And after Nihil Scripturâ sanctius c. Nothing is more holy then Scripture nothing more noble or excellent there is nothing next to God himself more worthy of all veneration and reverence but what thing can there be so holy which the enemy of man-kind may not abuse to man's destruction c. Thus Hosius how hardly his words could be wrested or mistaken by Iewel and his Confederats all the world may see and ought to detest a Reformation that can not be otherwise maintain'd then by such palpable impostuâ—es SVBSECT IV. Falsificatïons and Frauds against the Bishop of Rome his supremacy JEwel and his Associats cyting a Constitution of the Emperour Iustinian against the Pope's supremacy say The Emperours words stand thus Sancimus c. Senioris Romae Papam primum esse omnium Sacerdotum Beatissimum autem Archi-Episcopum Constantinopolios novae Romae secundum habere locum which words Mr. Iewel Englisheth thus We ordain that the Pope of the elder Rome shall be the first of all Priests and that the most holy Arch-bishop of Constantinople which is named new Rome have the second place Of which Mr. Iewell and the English Church inferr that the Pope's Authority and preeminency in those days consisted only in sitting in the first place and that this dignity also was given him by the secular power of the Emperour First Iewell and his Camerades by â—n c. did hope to make the Emperour spiritual head of the Church and by consequence derive the same prerogative to all secular Princes in their own Dominions for they fraudulently omitted the words wherby the whole matter is cleered the words as they stand in the Constitution of Iustinian are these Sancimus secundum Canonum definitiones sanctissimum senioris Romae Papam primum esse omnium Sacerdotum c. we do ordain according to the determination of the Canons c. But had they not concealed these words they had discovered the weackness of their doctrin of the Queen's supremacy because those few words according to the definition of the Canons import that this ordination or declaration of the Emperour was grounded vpon the authority of the Canons of the Church which he did but confirm and command the execution of the Decrees and Declarations of Councells by his Imperial power The second fraud is that they translate primum esse omnium Sacerdotum thus that he shall be the first of all Priests wheras the Emperour vseth the present tense declaring that the Pope is the Chief of all Priests not shall be By Iewel 's falls Translation they intended to impose vpon such as vnderstand not Latin or at least are so careless as not to compare this Text with the English that Popes had not bin the first or chief of all Priests before that Decree of Iustinian and that spirituall supremacy came to them by vertue therof Not content with this fraud they add an other in the very next words of this Constitution which are these We ordain also that the most Holy Arch-Bishop of Justiniana the first which is our Country shall have for ever vnder his Iurisdiction the Bishops of the Provinces of Dacia Dania Dardania Mysia and Panonia and that they shall be invested by him and he only by his own Councell and that he in the Provinces subject vnto him shal have the place of the Apostolick sea of Rome c. Out of which words Mr. Iewel and his English Prelatick Clergy inferr thus Heere we see the Bishop of Iustiniana set in as high authority and power with in his own Iurisdiction as the Bishop of Rome with in his But had they bin as honest as the Protestant Layty take them to be all the world might have seen the Roman truth and their falshood for they deceitfully cut of the ensuing words that expound and declare the whole matter the words cut of are secundum ea quae sanctus Papa Vigilius constituit we ordain that these things shall be don and observed according to that which the Holy Pope Vigilius had constituted so that as in the former decree the Emperour professeth him-self to have ordained according to the definitions of the Canons so here in particular he professeth to have confirmed the Constitutions of the holy Pope Vigilius who had made the Arch-Bishop of Iustiniana to be his legat and to hould the place of the Apostolicâ— Sea of Rome in those Provinces not vnlike to that of St. Gregory who according to venerable Bede in his history gave the like Authority to St. Augustin our first Arch-Bishop of Canterbury by which Concession they have always bin called Legati nati sedis Apostolicae Not content to conceale the words and the truth of Imperial Decrees and Ecclesiastical Histories Iewel and the English Clergy were neither ashamed nor afraid to corrupt Scripture to the same purpose against the Pope's supremacy For pretending that the words of Christ to St. Peter Thou art a Rock and upon this Rock will I build my Church and again feed my Lambs feed my sheep were spoken as well to all the Apostles as to St. Peter in the Apology of the Church of England is quoted for profe hereof an other saying of our Saviour Quod vni dico omnibus dico that which I say to one I say to all which sentence is not found in Scripture but an otherlike it though to an other purpose to wit about the watchfulness which our Saviour would have all men vse for the day of Iudgment Quod vobis dico omnibus dico vigilate That which I say to you here present I speak to all both absent and to come be watchfull of this day wherof Mr. Iewel and his Collegues could not be ignorant and yet thus he insulted Mr. Harding affirmeth That to the rest of the Apostles it was not sayd at all feed ye c. to Peter and to non els was it sayd feed my Lambs feed my sheep yet Christ him-self saith quod vni dico omnibus dico that y say to one I say to all And quoted for it Marck the 13. SVBSECT V. Frauds and fond devices of the protestant Clergy of England to deny and discredit the Sacrifice of the Mass.
Hampton 〈◊〉 sayd that he vnderstood by the Bishops yea and 〈◊〉 it himself to be true that the papists themselves did never 〈◊〉 any 〈◊〉 or spiritual grace to the sign of the Cross in Baptism Is it possible that lay people can be so ignorantly deâ—â—t and dull as to let a Clergy enjoy millions of reveâ—â—â—â—pon such notoriously fals and forged evidences The protestant Falsification to persuade that the Canon law doth warrant deposition of Kings by the Pope MAster Morton in his discovery pag. 34. hath these words Except saith the Romish pretence there were a way of deposing Apostata Princes God had not provided sufficiently for his Church And for this he citeth the Constitution extravagant of Pope Bonifacius and saith this objection is in your extravagants and so it may be called because it rangeth extra that is without the bounds of God's ordinance c. Heere first this sentence is not in the Popes extravagant at all but only in a certain addition to the ordinary Gloss or Commentary of Iohn Picard which addition was made by Petrus Bertrandus a late writer Secondly this Commentary sayes nothing of deposing Apostata princes but only affirming the foresaid opinion of Canonists to be true that Christ was Lord absolutely in his life over all not only in spiritual authority but in temporal also he inferreth therby Christ should not have sufficiently provided for the Government of his Church and Kingdom vpon earth nisi vnicum post se talâ—â— Vicarium reliquisset qui haec omnia posset except he had left some such one Vicar after him as should be able to perform al these things according as necessity shall require which later clause Mr. Morton cut of as he added the other abouâ— Apostata Princes Bishop Morton in his preamble pag. 110. doth answer thus For citing the extravagant of the Pope an ingenious reader would have vnderstood a figure called Synecdoche where the part is put for the whole as when we say this man shall not come vnder my roof meaning by roof which is but a part of my house the whole house it self so here by extravagants might have bin meant the whole body of their Constitutions which contain both extravagants and Glosses c. This is the first part of his answer that we must vnderstand him by a figure pars pro toto as if a man should say in divinity the Scripture hath this or that because Tyndales Glosses or some Commentaries or annotations vpon it have But indeed here is no Synecdoche but only the figure of plain lying for neither are the extravagant Constitutions of Popes parts of the Glosses nor are the Glosses parts of the Constitutions and much less may additions or annotations be accompted any part at all of the same The second part of his answer is no less fraudulent Pope Gregory 13. saith Morton hath ratified the foresaid Glosses and annotations with priviledge and authority equivalent and answerable to the authority of the Decretals and extravagants themselves wherof he inferreth that whether a man do cite â—â—cretals Extravagants Glosses and annotations all is one for that all have equivalent authority Pope Gregory 13. being demanded licence to print the Canon law a new prefixed an epistle before the decretals of 〈◊〉 with this title ad futuram rei memoriam wherin he 〈◊〉 licence to Paulus Constabilis to review the same and to 〈◊〉 printer to print it exactly according to the Roman exemâ—â—â— saying among other things therupon Vt hoc Iuris Caâ—â—â—ci corpus fideliter incorrupté juxta exemplar Romae impresâ—â—â—â—mprunâ— possit That the Canon law may be faithfully 〈◊〉 without corruption printed according to the Copy set 〈◊〉 at Rome So that Mr. Morton will needs have this 〈◊〉 of printing an equalling the credit and authority of all 〈◊〉 things printed As for his adding the words Apostata princes 〈◊〉 â—yes though they be not in the text of the Glosses yet 〈◊〉 matter handled in that Gloss may be extended to them Protestant Falsification to persuade that Catholiks may cheat any excommunicated persons of their lawfull debts WIll you heare a case or two more saith Parsons out of the Canon law how dexterous Sir Thomaâ— is in corrupting that which he loveth not You 〈◊〉 read in the fourth page of his pamphlet or preamble an ancient decree for so he calleth it alledged by him out of Gratian in the Gloss determining that though a man hath sworn to pay money to one that is excommunicated yet is he not bound to pay the same and he citeth the latin text thus Si juravi me soluturum alicui pecuniam qui excommunioâ—tur non teneor ei solvere If I have sworn to pay money to any man that is excommunicated I am not bound to pay it adding this reason quia qualitercunque possâ—mus debemus â—exare maloâ— vt cessâ—nt a mâ—â—o because we ought to vex evil men by what means soever we may to the end they may cease from doing evil The truth of this matter is that these words be not found in any text of law or decision of any pope or Councell but words of the Gloss that contein only a certain objection vpon a Clause of a Canon concerning promise to be observed to one that is excommunicated after the promise was made and the objection 〈◊〉 doubt is made in these wordâ— by the Author of the Gloss or Commentary 〈…〉 quid 〈◊〉 si juravi c. But what will you say if J have 〈…〉 to any person or have promised the same vnder 〈…〉 and in the mean space be to whom I made the 〈…〉 excommunicated am I bound to pay the same or not 〈…〉 question and then he argueth on both sides and 〈◊〉 for the negative videtur quod non it seems J am not 〈◊〉 the Canon law saith causa 25. q. 6. that we ought 〈…〉 wicked men c. But afterwards coming to give his 〈…〉 solution he saith thus veriuâ— credo quod licet ille non habeat 〈◊〉 petendi tamen debet ei solui I do believe the truer opinion to be that albeit be that is so excommunicated have no right to demand his money yet is the other bound to pay him so that Morton imposeth vpon his 〈◊〉 the objection for the resolution cutting of deceitfully the first words sed quid diciâ— si juraâ—â— c. and alledging the reason of the objection quia qualitercunque possumus c. for the reason of the solution Morton answereth the truth is I took these allegations vpon credit c. of one Stock a learned preacher saith he of London And Stock beginneth his recognisance thus I Richard Stock brought this allegation with some others to the Author of the discovery c. So like honest fellows they divide the same between them Stock for his fraudulent lending and Morton for his beggarly borrowing and without doubt improving of the fraud it being incredible 〈◊〉 Stock would deliver it as Morton sets is
can divert the Layty from entertaining any thoughts of curiosity or scruples of conscience in order to the examination of this matter of so great importance and can make them believe that K. Henry 8. passion to Ann Bullen was a just cause to introduce the Reformation and to assume the Supremacy or that the Earle of Hartfords ambition of being absolutly Protector of England quite contrary to K. Henry 8. Testament and to his own Oath of not assuming any power above his Collegues and Tutors of K. Edward 6. was a divin inspiration to bring in Zuinglius his Sacramentarian Religion into the Realm or that the Duke of Northumberlands poysoning the yong King and excluding the next and lawfull heirs from the Crown to conferr it vpon his own own son and the Lady Iane Grey pretending therby to promote his new Zuinglian Ghospell was the work of the holy Ghost Or that Q. Elizabeths murther of the Q. of Scots and her Parliaments Decrees and endeavors to preferr any natural issue of her body to this Empire before the legitimat and immediat Heirs the Stevards and therby to continue her prelatick Protestancy were things lawfull according to the principles of Christianity and Catholick faith If the Protestant Clergy I say can persuade the layty that all this was lawfull and agreable to the doctrin which Christ and his Apostles did preach either they have an abundance of wit or they that believe them very litle judgment A great wit maintained that they may as well make Mahomets Alcoran a plausible Religion in England and gain therby as great revenues as they do by their Reformation and Protestant Scripture wherof neither the Canon letter or sense is that which God delivered to his Church as heretofore hath bin proved I do not speak in rallery sayd the gentlemen but seriously when I say that men who believe the Protestant Religion to be true may be induced by the same persons and the like reasons to believe that Mahometisme is the true Religion This hath also bin solidly proved by Doctor Reynolds in his Calvino-Turcismus and by others also when they demonstrat that Calvinism and Turcism agree in the principall points and every one knows that the doctrin of the 39. articles of the Church of England is the quintessence of Calvins doctrin and was by him applauded though he said that as to Point of disciplin there were many tolerable fooleries in in that Church and Lyturgy But let us pursue the Gentlemans parallel of Mahomet and his doctrin with our English Reformers and their doctrin and we shall plainly see that there is as much reason to believe Mahometism as prelatick Protestancy and that both these Religious were planted and propagated by the same means nay that it is more to be admired how our Countreymen became Protestants then the Arabians or Armenians became Turcks When Mahomet began to preach his doctrin in the East Christianity there was so discredited by being divided into sects and into so many heresies of Arians Manichees Nestorians c. that men were disposed by that diversity of opinions to follow any new Religion especialy that of Mahomet becaus he borrowed something from every Sect and as the 39. Articles of the Church of England agree in some fundamental points with Catholicks and also with hereticks so Mahomet agreeth in the worship of one God with Iews and Chriâ—tians and in the doctrin and worship of Christ he comes at â—eer to Christianity as most Arians and Nestorians or the Antitrinitarian Protestants of Hungary Poland c. nay as Bp. Morton and some other Prelaticks But when Luther in Germany and Cranmer in England began Protestancy all the west and Latin Church agreed in the Roman Catholick faith no other Religion was regarded and the â—emnants of Wickleff and Hus were hissed out of the world at least were nothing so considerable any where as the above mentioned heresies had bin in the East when Mahomet began there to preach his Alcoran So that if heresy or apostacy can have any excuse Mahometism in its begining was more excusable then Protestancy by reason of the more considerable divisions that then were among Christians in matters of doctrin then when Luther began his Reformation Now let us come to particular reflexions vpon both Mahomet retained some parts of Scripture as well as Protestants and had as good grounds to reject what he did not fancy of the letter and sense therof as Protestants have to be choosers of their own Canon and interpretation Mahomet gives as many rules of Morality as Protestants and though he allows of many wives Protestants do the same with this only difference that Mahomet says t is lawfull to keep many at once Protestants say you must keep but one at a time and that you cannot have the variety of wives men so much desire without the formality of a divorce how litle is requisit for the validity and legality of Protestant divorces we have proved heretofore by the authority and principles of the first Reformers and the dayly practises of their Successors In all other things Mahomets sect is more austere in fasting praying abstaining from wine c. then Protestancy And becaus both agree in the incoherency and absurdity of their principles both also agree in planting propagating and defending their doctrin not by miracles or rational arguments but by force and sanguinary statuts And this is the reason why Catholicks are as litle permitted to dispute or reason for the Roman Religion in these Kingdoms as Christians in Turky and Priests are as much perseeuted for writing books of Controversies as Printers and Stationers and severely punished Thus much as to the paralell of both doctrins But If we compare their persons or vertues we shall find that Mahomet was an honester man and deserved more credit then Luther Calvin Cranmer or any of the first Protestant Reformers He never was baptized at least never professed any Religion vntill he composed his own with the help of an Arian Monk but all the first Reformers had first professed the Catholick faith which afterwards they renounced pretending that God had forsaken his Church for many ages and presumed to say that he had authorised and inspired them to reform without shewing any warrant that doctrin vnto which their betters in learning vertue and judgment actualy submitted as vnto the true Catholick and themselves also had embraced as such vntill their pride and lust prevailed against their conscience Mahomet married a Widdow and had made no vows not to marry the first Reformers married Nuns and themselves also were votaries Calvin only excepted but his incontinency was no less scandalous and notorious then theirs having lived in adultery with a Gentlewoman of Mongis that left her husband at Lansanâ—â— to enjoy Calvins Company at Geneva who attempted also to commit the like sin with the Lady â—ollande of Bredrode wise to a sickly Nobleman called Iames Borgongue Lord of
of England Of his design to reform the principles and liberty of Protestancy intending therby to render it less dangerous to lawfull Soveraigns and Monarchy How K. Charles 1. pursued his Fathers design but his sufferings and death demonstrat the impossibility of confining the Protestant liberty within the rules of Government or reason By the fundamental principles of Protestancy every particular person is a Supreme Iudge in spiritual affairs and may more easely apply and abuse that prerogative to the prejudice of his Soveraign then the Pope can his papal Supremacy Therfore it s a great providence of God when any Protestant King of England escapes to be judged and deposed by his Subjects THE SECOND PART OF the vnreasonableness of Protestancy and of the inconsistency of the principles of Protestancy with Christian piety and peaceable government SECT I. THe vnreasonableness and inconsistency of Protestancy with Christian piety or policy proved by the very fundamental principle of all Protestant reformations which principle is a supposition of the fallibility and fall of the visible Catholick Church from the pure and primitive doctrin of Christ to damnable errors and notorious superstition Such a change is demonstrated both incredible and impossible SECT II. THe Protestants proof of such a change is their pretended cleerness of Scripture It is demonstrated that their Sense of Scripture is not clear in any texts controverted between Catholicks and Protestants That the principles of Protestancy incline to vice the Catholick principles to vertue proved in many particulars The invisibility of the Church a ridiculous comment SECT III. THe Protestant letter and Sense of Scripture is not the word of God Doctor Cossins his Scholastical History of the English Canon of Scripture confuted as also his exceptions against the authority of the Roman Catholick Canon The Lutheran Churches of Germany agree not with the English Canon of Scripture SVBSECT I. DOctor Cossins now Bp. of Duresme his exceptions against the Councel of Trent answered The legality of a Councel as well as of a Parliament may stand with the absence of many members if they were summoned and expected The absurdity of Protestant writers excepting against the want of Bishops in the Councel of Trent wheras themselves made new Religions and reformations by a Single voice of Luther Zuinglius Calvin c. and in England by the vote of the major part of twelve persons named by the Parliament to determin matters of faith and Sacraments seaven men were thought sufficient to do the work and cast the Roman Catholick Religion Protestant Bishops can no more pretend to sit and define in a general Councel then proclaimed rebells can pretend to vote in a lawful Parliament It s as reasonable the Bishop and Church of Rome should condemn hereticks and judge all controversies of faith as it is that a King and Parliament condemn rebells and judge suites in law A new definition of Pope or Councel is no new article of faith it is only a declaration of our obligation to believe that which formerly had bin revealed but not sufficiently proposed Doctor Cossins his egregious falsification of Belarmin his wresting words of St. Austin and St. Hierom. SECT IV. THe Protestant translations of Scripture are fraudulent and fals no certainty of Christian faith can be built vpon them Protestants admit no Coppy or translation to be authentick to the end they may be at liberty to reject what they do not fancy of the letter of Scripture as well as of the sense The vulgar Latin is authentick Scripture How corrupt are all English Bibles How in K. Edward 6. his reign Cranmer and the first Apostles of English Protestancy changed the very text of Christs words This is my body three several times Protestants make the Apostles fallible in doctrin even after receiving the holy Ghost and by consequence must hold their writings or Scripture to be fallible SVBSECT I. MAny particular instances of Protestant corruptions in the English Bibles to asert the Protestant and prelatick doctrin of the Church of England Against images Against Ordination by imposition of hands Against the single life of Priests Against the Sacrifice of Masse Against vowes of chastity To favor the Kings Supremacy How fondly these corruptions are excused by Whitaker and how absurdly Scripture is made speak according to the Protestant translations What small hopes there are that a Clergie which corrupts Scripture or continueth and countenanceth corruptions of Scripture will repent or recant their errors and how little reason the Protestant layty hath to rely vpon their Clergys sincerity or vpon their English Scripture SECT V. THe Protestant interpretation is not the true Sense of Scripture The principal part of Gods word is the sense he delivered to the Church together with the letter It s against reason to believe that the Church would be more carefull of preserving the letter then of preserving the sense of Scripture and therfore Protestants are vnexcusable for taking the letter from the Roman Church and rejecting the sense The holy Fathers bid us receive the Sense of Scripture as well as the letter from the Church An infallible mark of heresy to do the contrary It is at least 16. to one that the Roman Catholick Sense of Scripture is true and the Protestant fals SECT VI. NO Protestant Church hath a true Ministery Miracles Succession of doctrin or Sanctity of life Their extraordinary vocation is ridiculous and incredible it being impossible that God should send Ministers to contradict doctrin confirmed with so many signs of his own authority and approbation as the Roman Catholick is God never sent such vitious men as the Protestant reformers were to reform his Church either in the old or new Testament If the Protestant doctrin had bin true God would have wrought miracles to confirm it for the conversion of the seduced Papists as Protestants confess he doth for the conversion of the Jndians Iaponians and China What wicked men were Luther Zuinglius Calvin Beza Cranmer and the rest of his Camerades that framed the Religion and Liturgy of the Church of England and how little credit in matters of faith deserves the Parliament that confirmed the same Calvins miracle at Geneva foretold by Tertullian SECT VII THe conversion of pagan Kings and Kingdoms to Christianity foretold in Scripture is a more cleer sign of the true Church then any other miracles and not to be found in any other Church but in the Roman Catholick acknowledged by learned protestants Of Barlows three-score invisible Queens converted by protestants No greater an absurdity then their invisible Church The vain endeavors of Calvin and other protestants to convert Heathen nations Bezas despair of Success in that Ministery and his advice to protestants to leave that labor to the Jesuits and rather busy themselves at home Tertullians saying that its a sign of hereticks to pervert Christians not convert pagans may be properly applyed to Protestants Their success in propagating their new Ghospel no
noâ—is Ecclesiae cap 9 Apparatus ad Tom. 1. pag. 49. Sutcliff pag. 199. Sutcliff pag. 279. Instit. lib. 2. cap. 20. Luther de Captiuit Babylon in cap. 15 Ioan. in 6. art against the execrable Bull c. Melancton disp de paenitentia prop. 7. Concil Trid. Sess. 6. c. 8. Catech. ad Paroch de paen Sacram pag. 290. Luther lib. 1. de natura hominis art 4. Luther lib. contra Ambr. Cathar Luther in Concil Germ. cap. de Anti-Christo Calvin lib. 3. Instit. c. 20. â— 21. Calvin Instit. lib. 3. c 4. §. 1. See part 2. 3. Cor. 7. Cyprian ser. de caena Domini See St. Cyril of Hierusalem Cateches Missagog 4. S. Ambros lib. 4. de Sacram. c. 4. de ijs qui Mysterijs initiantur c. 6. St. August vide Canonean do consec dist 2. Answer 85. St. Basil. in Regulis brevioribus Interrogatione 288. St. Ambrose l. de paenit cap. 6. St. Austin hom 49. c. 3. Aug. lib. de vera falsa paenitentia cap. 10. cap. 14. St. Gregory Nyssen orat in eos qui durius alios judicant Petro Francisco Zeno. Interpret Pag. 128. St. Ambrose l. 1. de paenit cap. 2. ser. 10. in psal 128. St. Hierom. in proverb cap. 11. saith it is to be observed that although there be no hope of pardon after death yet be there soâ—e who may be absolved after death from such light sins as they carried with them out of this life They may be absolved I say either by suffering punishment or els by the prayer almes and masses of their living friends But to whom soever these things are don thy are don to them before the last Judgment and for lighter faults De hac quaestione nihil Ecclesia definiuit sunt autem multae opiniones Belarm lib. 12. de purgat cap. 6. initio pag. 178. passim St. Bernard ser. 66. in Cant. St. Gregory Nyssen orat de mortuis Purge me o Lord in ths life c. that I may not stand in need of that ameÌ„ding fire which is for those who shall be saued but so as by fire Aug. in psal 37. It is manifest that they aged persons dying in smaller sins being purged before the day of Judgment by temporary pains which their souls do suffer they shall not be deliuered to the punishment of eternal fire Aug. l. 20. de Ciuit cap. 13. Vsher's Answer pag. 179. Answer pag. 182. See Sir Edward Sands in his relations cap. 53.54 Hieremias Constantinopol Resp. 1. c. 12. 13. Gabriel Alexand ep ad Clem. 8 Hypathius Ruthenorum legatus in professione fidei Graeci Venetiad Card. Guisianum q 10 Zaga Zabâ— Ethiop in Confessione fidei Aethiop Gennadius Scholarius c. Purgatorio sec. 1. 5. Answer pag. 420 Reply against Harding p. 379. St. Austin contra Faust. Manichaeum lib. 20. c. 21. Answer pag. 377. Mathew 4. v. 10 St. Epiphan Haeres 79. parag 6. 7 Ibid parag 2. Vsher translates But thou o Lord and adds interrogations to help his fraud Adjuvent nos eorum merita quos propria impediunt scelera excuset intercessio accusat quos actio qui eis tribuisti caelestis palmam triumphi nobis veniam non deneges peccati Pag. 24. against Fisher Aug. serm 14 de verbâ— Apostoli in fine Laud pag. 33 Ibid. Pag. 34. B. Laud. E. Quae quidê si tam manifesta monâ—ratur vt in dubium venire non possit praeponenda est omnibus illis rebus quibus in Catholicateneor Ita si aliquid apertissimuÌ„ in Evangelis St. Aug. contra Fund c. 4. Pag. 38. Vincent Lirin cap. 23.24 he sayes the Pelagians erred in Dogmate fidei and yet they erred not in a prime maxime but in a superstructure Vin. Lirin cont haer c. 31. Impiorum turpiumerrorum lupanar vbi erat ante castae incorruptae Sacrarium veritatis Bp. Laud pag. 38. Pag. 39. Christi vero Ecclesia sedula cauta depositorum Custos nihil in ijs vnquaÌ„ permutat nihil minuit nihil addit non amputat necessaria non apponit superflua non amittit sua non vsurpat allena Vincent Lirin cap. 22. Se hertofore part 2. Ego vero Evangelio non crederem nisi me Ecclesiae commoveret authoritas Aug. lib. 1. contra Epist. Fund c. 5. Bishop Laud pag. 81. edit 1639. Vbi Ecclesia Catholica Episcopos populos à tempore Apostolorum vsque in hodiâ—rnum diem sibimet succedentium importat sic accipit nomeÌ„ Ecclesiae Augustinus cum asserit quod non crederet Evangelio niâ—â— eum authoritas Ecclesiae c. Ocham Dial. part 1. lib. 1. cap. 4. Hos. 4.15 A.C. pag. 58. Guilielm Malmesbur in prolog lib. 1. de gâ—stâ—s Pontif. Angl. p. 195. St Bed lib. 5. Eccl. Hist. cap. 20. Bede lib. 1. Eccl. Histor. cap. 29. See this Treatise par 1. sec· 1. Concil Afrik Can. 101. Ut Romam liceat Episcopis provocare ut Clericorum causae apud suarum provinciarum Episcopos finiantur etiam litteris nostris ad eundem venerabilis memoriae Zozimum Episcopum datis insinuari curâ— vimus c. Concil African ep ad Bonifac pap to which St. Austin subscribed St. Irenaeus l. 3. cap. 3. Gregor Nazian in Car de vita sua See D Lauds labyrinth p. 135. 136 Hierom. ep ad Evagrium Auferibilis non est usque ad consummationeÌ„ saeculi Vicarius sponsus Ecclesiae â— quin aliquis certus ei praeficiatur c. Gerson Consid 20. A faire offer to Protestants See the petition and instrument of the Catholick Clergyes resignation in Doctor Heylins Ecclesia restaurata pag. 43. and the Stat. 1. Mar. and in this Treatise part 1. No sacrilege to apply the Church revenues to the Crown in some cases See the Sentence of Pope Julius 3. sent to Queen Mary an 1554. And the reasons therof set down by Dr. Burges in his book No Sacrilege nor sin c. 52. 53. wherof the last reason is seeing the goods and possessions of the Church even by the authority of the Canon laws may be aliened for the redemption of Captives and that the same may be don by that Church only to whom such possessions do belong it is fit and reasonable that such dispensations should be granted for continuing of possession already gotten for so great a good of publick concord and vnity of the Church and preservation of the State as well in body as in soul pag. 54. edit 1660. A publick Trial and Conference desired by Catholicks See Doctor Allen in his Apol. for the Seminaries And Persons in his Defence of the Censure Arch. Lauds reason confuted See the Nullity of the Protestant Church and Clergy See also my Erasus junior and an other book of mine called Erastus seni See the late or last EditioÌ„ of the Common prayer book since his Maj. happy restauration and there you shall find the words Priest and Bishop put into this their new form which are not
the Protestant Clergy abuse the layty and illiterat people making 〈◊〉 believe that in all ages there hath bin a Church teaching and professing the Protestant doctrin and because some of the hereticks to 〈◊〉 â—â—ckleffians Hussits 〈◊〉 Lollards whom he names Martyrs and witnesses of his Evangelical truth were condemned not 〈◊〉 by the Church but by Acts of Parliaâ—â—nt he tellâ—â—h you that though the statuâ—s 〈…〉 persons preaching divers sermons 〈◊〉 herelies 〈◊〉 doctrin and 〈◊〉 errors to the blemish of Christian faith c yet notwithstanding whosoever readeth histories and the 〈…〉 of 〈…〉 see these to be no false teachers 〈…〉 the 〈◊〉 c. and to have taught no other 〈…〉 then now 〈…〉 their own preachers in 〈…〉 And 〈…〉 Sr John 〈…〉 is produced by Fox as a witness for the Protestant 〈◊〉 and a chief member of that Church and he in his professiâ—◠〈◊〉 faith said 〈…〉 Church I believe to be divided into three sorts or companâ—â—◠〈…〉 now in heaven c. the second sort are in 〈…〉 of God and a full deliveraâ—â—e of paine The 〈…〉 earth c. Iohn Fox to this speech of Purgatory addeth 〈◊〉 parenthesis of his own as if it had bin part of Oldcastles profession of faith if any such 〈…〉 Scriptures fearing his Reader might take notice how Sr. 〈…〉 was no Protestant And such frauds he vseth in most other occasions as you may see in the three Converâ—â—â—ns of England writ to confute his acts and Monuments and from whence we have borrowed most of what hath bin sayd concerning Fox and his Martyrs Now we will treat of others no less fals and deceitfull in maintaining the Protestant Religion SVBSECT III. Doctor Chark's falsification of St. Austin and how he excuseth Luther's doctrin of the lawfulness of adultery and incest DOctor Chark was so great a pillar of protestancy in Q. Elizabeths days that he was thought the fittest man to dispute against learned Campian in the Tower but 〈◊〉 behaved himself in that occasion very insolently ignoâ—â—â—â— and vncharitably he writ a â—ook in answer to the 〈◊〉 which was published of himself Luther Calvin Beza 〈◊〉 â—any other falsifications of Mr. Chark to defend 〈◊〉 Protesâ—â—nt doctrin his adversary objects pag. 122 â— that 〈…〉 St. Augustin's Text about the doctrin of conâ—â—â—scence where the Censure had alleadged besides the Testiâ—â—ny of many other Fathers one most plain out of that great 〈◊〉 saying concupiscence is not sin in the regenerate if consent 〈◊〉 yeelded vnto her for accomplishment of vnlawfull works Mr. 〈◊〉 alleadgeth another authority out of St. Austin in the same 〈◊〉 that doth as he says expound his meaning for thus 〈◊〉 writeth Augustin's place is expounded by himself afterward saying concupiscence is not so forgiven in baptism that it is not sin 〈◊〉 that it is not imputed as sin where the word sin in the first place is put in by Mr. Chark for that St. Austin's words are Dâ—â—itti Concupiscentiam carnis in Baptismo non ut non sit sed ut in peccatum non imputetur quamvis reatu suo jam soluto manet 〈◊〉 Concupiscence is forgiven in Baptisme not so that it is not or remain not in the regenerat but that it be not imputed as SVBSECT IV. Falsifications of Cranmer and Peter Martyr against Transubstantiation and the Sacrifice of the Mass c. AFter that Cranmer had bin publikly convinced both by Scripture and Fathers 〈◊〉 his disputation at Oxford â—s will appeare to any that will read even his friend 〈◊〉 concerning that subject the Catholick disputants objeâ—â—ed falsifications and corruptions of his in the Books which 〈◊〉 had composed against the real presence one was that wheras 〈◊〉 Martyr who flourished in the beginning of the second 〈◊〉 answering to them who sayd the Christians adored bread 〈◊〉 we do not take this for common bread and drink but like as â—â—sus Christ our Saviour Incarnat by the word of God had flesh and 〈…〉 Salvation even so we be taught the food where-with our 〈◊〉 and blood is nourished by alteration when it is consecrated by the 〈◊〉 of his prayer instituted by him to be the flesh and blood of the same Jesus Incarnat Cranmer thus translated the words of that ancient Father Bread water and wine are not to be taken as other 〈◊〉 and drinks be but they be ordained purposly to give thanks to 〈◊〉 and therfore be called Eucharistia and be called the Body and blood of Christ and that it is lawfull for none to eat and drink of them but that profess Christ and live according to the same and yet that meat and drink is changed into our flesh and Blood and nourisheth our bodys After Cranmer's confessing that the former Catholicks Translation was the right he excuseth his villany saying he did not translate Justin word by word wheras he set down all as Justin's words but only gave the meaning let any Protestant be Iudge whether he gave Iustin's meaning You have corrupted Emissenus saith Doctor Weston to Cranmer for insteed of cibis satiâ—ndus that is to be filled hath pro omni paena for all pain your Book omitteth many things there Thus you see Brethren saith Doctor Weston the truth stedfast and invincible you see also the craft and deceit of hereticks And thus concludeth Fox himself the disputation with Cranmer Doctor Chedley did also object to Cranmer his corruption of St. Hillaries words putting in vero sub Mysterio for verè sub mysterio by which the whole sense was altered because verè sub mysterio sheweth that we do truly receive in the mystery of the Sacrament Christ's flesh and blood and vero sub mysterio proves only the reality or verity of a Sacrament or a mystery not of the body and blood of Christ. To this after many excuses Cranmer answered that the change of one letter for an other was but â— small matter But Weston told that Pastor was a Bishop and â—â—stor a Baker and yet there was but one letters change As for Peter Martyr's falsifications they appear sufficiently 〈◊〉 the places themselâ—â—â— which Fox alleadgeth for him out of 〈◊〉 or twelve Fathers in his disputations at Oxford an 1549. wherof the reader will scarce find one truly cited in all respects but that either the words next going before or immediatly following making wholy against Protestants are purâ—â—sely left out and others put in or mistranslated as hath bin evidently demonstrated part 3. c. 19. 20. 21. of the â—â—eatise of the three conversions of England and therfore we â—â—â—â—eare what every one may see in a Book no less obvious then profitable SECT VI. How some Protestant 〈◊〉 in Q. Elizabeths time seing their fellowes were proved Falsifiers waved the Testimonies of the ancient Fathers and 〈◊〉 the others continued their former course of falsifying both Fathers and Councells THE discovery of Iewell 's 〈◊〉 other mens falsificatiâ—â—â— made some Protestant writers more wary and take an other course for defence