which their Generall Zisca built as a Ciâ—ie of refuge for his men These Thaborites disâ—ented more from the Church of Rome aâ—d came indeed neerer to the puritie of the Gospell then the rest of the Hussites There is in Cochleus a confession of faith made by one Iohn Pezibram a Bohemian who speaking of these Thaborites recordeth these following to have beene some of their tenets namely That materiall Bread remaines in the Sacrament and herein they were very confident insomuch as Procopius one of their Governours saidâ— That if an hundred Doctors should hold the contrary hee would tâ—ll them to their face they were all mistaken Thâ—y held That the Saints now triumphant are not to be prayed unto Hâ—sse his schollers after his death brake downe Images in Churches and Monasteries Prateolus saith They denied Purgatory and by consequent Prayer for the dead They maintained Communion in both kinds to be administred to the Lay-people They held That Christ is the head of the Church and not the Pope as also that the Pope might erre and that divers Popes had beene Heretikes They held The holy Scriptures to bee the Iudge in point of controversie Lastly Husse was condemned by the Councell of Constance for holding That the Congregation of the Predestinates and Elect were the Church of God which yet was the selâ—e same doctrine which Gregory the Great taught For hee held the Church of God to consist of right Beleevers saying That Christ according to the grace of his fore knowledge hath built his holy Church of Saints which shall continue for ever and that All the Elect are contained within the compasse and circuit of the Church and all the Reprobates are without because they doe but only in outward shew come â—o the kingdome of grace So that Gregory saith as well as Husse That the Elect onely are of the Church Now as learned Doctor Field saith This was the meaning of Wickliffe Husse aâ—d others who say that the Elect only are of the Church defining the Church to bee the multitude of the Elect not for that they thinke them only to pertaine to the Church and no others but because they onely pertaine unto it principally fully effectually and finally and in them onely is found that which the calling of grace whence the Church hath all her being intendeth to wit such a conversion to God as is joyned with finall perseverance whereof others failing and comming short they are only in an inferiour and more imperfect sort said to bee of the Church PA. Did the doctrine of Husse and his followers continue any long time PRO. It continneth even unto this day for Cochleus in the yeare 1â—34 Wisheth that he may see the remainders of the Hussites to râ—turne to the Church and the Germans to cast out all nâ—w sâ—cts whereby it is cleere that Husses doctrine was sensibly and apparantly continued not onely unto the dayes of Luthâ—r who began not to show himselfe till the yeare 1517 but even after his time also PA. Had the Hussites any Bishops or Priests of their owne lawfully calleâ— PRO. Hussâ— and Hâ—erome were Priests themselves and whiles they lived they had Priests and Preachers and after their death theâ—r follower Got them a Bishop who was Suffâ—agan to the Archbishop of Prague and by him thâ—y put iâ—to holy Orders as many Clerkes as they would which thing the Archbishop tooke so ill that hâ—e suspended his Sâ—ffragan But it was not long afâ—er that Conradus the Archbishop himselfe became a follower of Husse likewise and under this Conrad President of the Convocation the Hussites held a Councel at Prague and there they compileda Confâ—ssion of their Faith which the said Archbishop and divers Barons of Bohemia did afterwards resoluâ—ely maintaine Besides Sigismund the Emperour in a treaty with the Bohemians Granted that the Bishops should promote to holy Orders the Bohemians even Hussites which were of the Vniversitie of Prague PA. Were there many that followed Husse and were they of the better sort or onely some meane persons PRO. They were neither few nor base had they beene few what needed the Pope call the great Councâ—l of Constance against them What needed Pope Martâ—n the fift publish and proclaime a Croysado against them promising remission of sinne to all such as did either fight against them or contributed towards the warres Our rich Cardinal Henry Beaufort was sent into Germany by the Pope in the yeare 1429 to raise forces against the Hussites in Bohemia Cochleus saith There were forty thousand German Horsemen gathered together to destroy them but upon their approach the Germans turned their backes and fled not without some secret judgement of God as he thinkes Sylviusâ—aith â—aith There were three severall Armies levied against the Hussites entring Bohemia in three places but as thâ— story saith Non visum hostem fugerunt they â—led before they did see the enemie and againe the second timâ— Priusquam hostis ullus daretur in conspectus foedissima coepta fuga they fled away with shame before any enemy came to fight and left their Tents to the Bohemians insomuch as Iulian Cardinal of Saint Angelo marvailes exceedingly at this their sodaine feare and shamefull flight When Pope Eugenius had sent the same Cardinal Iulian his Legate to the Councel of Basil and presently after sent him commandment to dissolve it Iulian laied open unto him by letters how great an injurie he should doe himselfe and brought many reasons against it among others this that the Bohemians who had beene called thither would by good right say Is not heere the finger of God to bee seene Behold Armies have so often fled from before them and now the Vniversall Church also flâ—â—th behold they can neither be overcome with Armes nor by Lâ—arning this must needs appeare a miracle wrought by God to declare that their opinion is true and ours false Neithâ—r were the Hussites any such meane persons for eâ—en the Nobles of Bohemia sent two solemne Ambasâ—ages to the Councel of Constance in the behalfe of Husse and when the Councell neglected their request and dealt ill with them burning their Pastour Husse notwithstanding his safe conduct given him by the Empâ—rour then indeed they defended themselves undâ—r thâ— conduct of Iohn Zâ—scay their Geâ—erall who at one time led foâ—â—â— thoâ—sand â—ouldiers into the field and had such successe in his enterpâ—ises that Aeneas Sylvius reports of him That eleven times in fought battailes hee returned Conquerour out of the field Yea Cochleus wondereth at the strange successe he had saying That scant any historie of the Greekes or Latins or Hebrewes doth mention such a Generall a Zisca was Now for thâ—ir visible Congregations there needes no other Testimonie than this when the Councel of Constance had robbed them of their Minister Husse and nimmed from them the blessed Cup of
but only cast downe some encroachments and improvements of poperie wee have no more erâ—cted a new faith in respect of the substance and essentials thereof than that zealous reformer Iosia built a new materiall Temple when hee cast out the Idols and Idolatrous worship out of the Lords house There is no other difference betwixt the Reformed and the Romish Church then betwixt a field well weeded and the same field formeâ—ly overgrowne with weeds or betwixt a heape of corne now well winnowed and the same heape lately mixed with chaffe And if it be a vaine and frivolous thing to say it is not the same field or the same corne as vaine and frivolous is it to say the Church is not the same it was or in the same place after it is swept and cleansed of the filth and dust or to say the Churches of Corinth and Galatia after their reformation occasioned by Saint Pauls writing were new Churches and not the same they were before because that in them before the Resurrection was denied Circumcision practisâ—d discipline neglected and Châ—isâ—s Apostles contemned which things now are not found in them or to say Naaman was not still the same person because before hee was a Leper and now is cleansed PA. If our Romane Church were so corrupt whence then had you the truth what you had you received from us PRO. Saint Austine saith that the Iewes were to the Christians Library-keepers of the bookes of the Law and the Prophets and might not the Romanists performe the like office to the Protestants The Iewish Church what time it was unsound preserved the Scriptureâ—Canon and by transcribingâ— and reading the same delivered the whole text therof trâ—ly to others And thus the Roman Church though in many things unsound preserved the bookes of holy Scripture and taught the Apostles Câ—eed with sundry parts of divine truth gathered from the same and by these principles of Christianitie preserved in that Church judicious and godly men might with study and diligence finde out what was the first delivered Christian doctâ—ine in such things as were necessary to salvation And herein was Gods gracious providence sâ—ene that even that Church wherein Luther himselfe received his Christianitie Ordination and power of Ministerie should for the benefit of Gods children preserve the Word and Sacraments and deliver them over to us though somewhat corruptly by their adding more Sacraments than ever Christ ordained and abusing those which we retaine with divers unwarrantable rites and Ceremonies In a word we received from you some truth mingled with errour wee have pared away your corruption as a worme out of an Apple and retained the wholsome and substantiall truth PA. Was there any Chucrh in being save our Roman Catholick in thâ— Ages next before Luther if so show uâ— where it was and with whom it held Communion PRO. When Christ came first into the World the Iewish Church was corrupted both in doctrine and manners this Church had in it Scribes and Pharisees as well as Zachary and Elizabeth Ioseph and Mary Simeon and Anna with others these were all of the same outward Communion with the Priesthood for they resorted to the Temple there they prayed and performed such holy rites as God himselfe enjoyned untill they heard farther of the Gospel by Christs manifestation Now I demand were not Ioseph and Mary and such good people â—ound members of Gods Church although the Scribes and Pharisees bore all the sway in the Church and had the Priesthood the word and Sacraments in their dispensing yet even then God had a Remnant of holy people which made up his Church though others went under the name thereof and exceeded them in number Now with these the sound part kept an outward Communion yet did not partake in all their erronious doctrines but condemned their grosser errours In like sort we were all of one outward Communion of one Church wherin salvation was and yet we shared not in those errours which a faction in the Church like the Pharisees of old maintained For as learned Dr. Field saith The errours which wee condemne at this day whereupon the difference groweth betweene us and the Romish faction were never generally received nor constantly delivered as the doctrines of the Church but doubtfully disputed and proposed as the opinions of some men in the Church not as the resolved determinations of the whole Church For had they beene the undoubted doctrines and determinations of the Church all men would have holden them entirely and constantly as they held the doctriâ—e of the Trinity and other Articles of the Faith And I have already showne from age to age that the errours condemned by us never found generall allowance and constant consent in the dayes of our fathers but that some worthy guides of Gods Church ever opposed them And thus was our Church preserved under the Papacie as wheaâ—e is among tares for wee were formerly mingled together like corne and chaffe in one heape until the time of Reformation came and winnowed our wheat from the chaffe of Poperie So that howsoever divers under the Papacie not brooknig Reformation maintained sundry erronious opinions Yet there were other worthies who living within that Communitie were not equally poysoned with errour but firmely beleeved all fundamentall truth and delivered the maine Articles of Christianitie over unto others For Answer then to the Question Where had our Church her being in the Ages next before Luther we say It was both within the Romane Church and without it For as learned Doctor Chaloner saith Our Church had in those dayes a twofold Subsisâ—encie â—he one Separate from the Church of Rome the other Mixt and conjoyneâ— with it Separate so it was in the Albâ—genses and Waldenses a peâ—ple whoâ— so soone as the Chuâ—ch of Rome had inteâ—preted her selfe touching sundry of those maine poynts of dâ—ffâ—rence betweene us and that a man could no lâ—nger Communicate with her in the publicke worship of God by reâ—son of soâ—e Idolatrous rites and customes which shâ— had establishâ—dâ— arose in France Savâ—y and the places neere adjoyning and professed the same substantiall Negatives and Affirmatives which we doe in a state Sepaâ—atâ— from the Church of Rome having Pastours and Congregations apart to themselves even unto this day From these descended the Wicklefisâ—s in England and the Hussites in Germanie and oâ—hers in other Countries who Maâ—gre the â—urie of fire and Sword maintained the same doctrine as they did The state of the Church mixt and conjoyned with the Church of Rome it selfe consisted of those who making no visible separation from the Roman profession as not perceiving the mysterie of iniquity which wrought in it did yet mislike the grosser errours and desired a Reformation To answer then the quâ—stion directly where was the Prâ—testants Church before Luthers time that is where was any Church in the world that taught that doctrine which the Protestants now teach â—
That at Rome no man may say that the Councel is above the Pope nor at Paris that the Pope is above the Councel In a word the Papists are at great odds but they cunningly conceale them insomuch as it is observed that some of them would say to their friends in privat Thus or thus I would say in the schooles and openly Sed maneat inâ—er nos diversum sentio but keepe my counsel I thinke the contrarie PA. We may haply be at ods in some Scholasticke points but not in matters defined by the Pope and a Generall Councel PRO. You would have us beleeve that at the sound of the Popâ—s sentence like frogs in a marish at the falling in of a great log or stone you are all hushed and silenced but it is not so for since the Trent decrees were published divers of your side are divided about the sense thereof iâ—somuch as they differ in the maine points thereof which in your account are fundamental and the deniers therof reputed Hereticks This may appeare by these instances The Pope in the Councels of Trent and Florence decreed the Apocrypha to bee Canonicall Scripture yet since that decree Driedo and Sixtus Senensis have called them in question and rejected them The Pope in the last Councelâ— is decreed to be above a Councel and yet since that time Alphonsus à Castro hath writ the contrarie The Trent Councel teacheth Sess. 6. Iustification by Inherent righteousnes condemning those that beleeve the imputation of Christs Righteousnesse and yet Albertus Pighius defendeth imputed â—ighteousnesse so doth Cardinal Contaren in his treatise of Iustification Again the Pope decreed against the certainty of grace salvation defining Sess. 6. that no man should beleeve these things of himselfe yet Catharinus defended the contrary holding that a man might have the certainty of Faith touching these thingsâ— and when the Trent Councels authority was objected against him he eluded it by divers sleight distinctions The truth is the Papists have a kind of unitie to wit a superstitious and hypocriticall crouching to the popes chayreâ— for so long as they agree to go to mass swear to the popes supremacy other things are tollerated although they coÌ„sent like harp harrow And surely were it not for the great profit and riches which knit the parts of this body together like twinnes that have different heads but tied together by the belly we should see this great body of the papacy would soon be divided scattered and dispersed Howsoever for any differences amongst the Protestants we may thankefully acknowledge that it was the wonderfull Providence of God that so many severall Countries Kingdomes and States abandoning the abuses of the Church or rather Court of Rome and making particular reformation in their owne dominions without generall meetings and consents should have no more nor greater differences than are found amongst them Object It is usuall with you in your Catalogue to say such and such as namely S. Bernard or the like taught for substance as you doe agreeing only with you in some fundamentall points but this will not serve to make them members of your Church for by the like reason the Quartadecimanes Novatians Donatists and Pelagians might pretend to the Catholike Church in as much as they agreed therewith in some fundamentall truths Answer 1 Agreement in one or more fundamentals maketh not a man a Catholike Christian tho disagreement in any one fundamentall joyned with obstinacie makes a man an Heretike 2 To make a man actually a member of the true Church more is required than agreement in the profession of the same fundamentall points of faith for not only heresie but schisme also excludeth a man from Communion with the true Catholike Church 3 Fundamentall points as well conceâ—ne life and manners as faith and he that impugneth the doctrine of the Decalogue is as well an Heretike as he that impugneth the doctrine of the Creed Nicholas directly impugned the one and by evident consequence the other by maintaining his impure communion or rather community of wives 4 The Quarta decimanes who kept Easter on the fourteenth day precisely were of two sorts Some as Polycrates and other Bishops of Asia kept it so meerely in imitation of S. Iohn the Evangelist and those were never condemned for Heretikes Others kept the fourteenth day by vertue of the Mosaicall Law and these by consequent destroyed the foundation as those did among the Galathians who urged Circumcision to whom S. Paul there professeth That Christ should not profit them and that they were fallen from grace 5 Novatians erred in a fundamentall point concerning Repentance and by consequent overthrew that Article of the Creed Credo remissionem peccatorum 6 The Donatists were rather Schismatikes than Heretikes and rather made a rent in the Church then were excluded from it Saint Austin in his seventh tome every where calleth it Schisma Donati in the end they grew to bee heretikes and denied in effect that fundamentall Article Credo Ecclesiam Catholicam 7 The Pelagians erred in divers fundamentall points concerning originall sinnâ— and the necessity of Grace For farther answer we say that the Authors we produce against the Romanists are of two sorts 1 Some we alleadge onely as Testes veritatis in such or such a point or points of faith 2 Others wee produce as members of our reformed Church and fore-runners of Luther Of the first sort is Bernard very orthodoxe in all points against the Pelagians but otherwise tainted and an open enemy to the Albigenses Of the second sort are the Waldenses Wicklifists and Hussites who as appeares by their confessions of faith extant in Orthuinus Gratius and the History of the Waldenses agree with uâ— in all Fundamentals not onely in some as the Heretikes above mentioned agreed with the Church Objection What though Saint Hierome Bernard and others agree with you in some generall truths men of contrarie religions may have divers materials of doctrine common to both now this is but a genericall agreement which is no more than the agreement betweene a man and a beast Answer 1 Saint Hierome and Bernard are not well rancked together Saint Hierome was a through Papist in no point Bernard was in some living in a corrupt age seaven hundred yeeres after Saint Hierome 2 Besides we answer that Waldo Wickliffe and Husse with others agree with us not onely Generically in the common grounds of Christianitie but Specifically in those formall points which we hold at this day against the Romane Church and as for such calumnies as are cast upon them they are already confuted in this treatise neither will any indifferent person regard them for when once that infamous name of Hereticke was fastned upon a man nothing was too heavie for such an one any thing was beleeved of that man and from thence it is without question that we find so many so absurd so senselesse opinions imputed to them
they do meane the Pope for the time being Now to this height the Pope came under pretence of the Churches government the Churches discipline racking the spirituall censure to a civill punishment by the Church solemnities in crowning Emperors by his Excommunications Absolutions and Dispensations he rose to his greatnesse of state by the doctrine of workes meritorious Iubilees Pardons and Indulgences hee maintained his State And now I come to shew out of good Authors that in nine severall weighty poynts of Religion the best guides of Gods Church for the space of 1500 yeares have taught as the Church of England doth THE FIRST CENTVRIE From the first yeare of Grace unto the yeare One Hundred Christ Iesus and his Apostles the Protestants Founders PAPIST WHom doe you name in this first Age that taught the Protestant Faith PROTESTANT I name our blessed Saviour Christ Iesus and his Apostles Saint Paul and his Schollers Titus and Timothie together with the Churches which they planted as that of the Romanes Corinthians and the rest These I name for our first Founders and top of our kin as also Ioseph of Arimathea that buried Christs body a speciall Benefactor to the Religion planted in this land These taught for substance and in the positive grounds of religion as we doe in our Articles Liturgies Homilies and Apologies by publike authoritie established in our Church of England Besides these there were but few Writers in this age whose undoubted Works have come to our hands yet for instance sake I name that blessed Martyr of Christ Ignatius Bishop of Antioch who for the name of Iesus was sentenced to bee dâ—voured of wild beasts which hee patiently indured saying I am the Wheat or graine to bee ground with the teeth of beasts that I may be pure Bread for my Masters tooth let fire rackes pulleys yea and all the torments of Hell come on mee so I may winne Christ. Here also according to the Roman Register I might place Dionysius Areopagita whom they usually place in this first Age as if hee were that Denys mentioned in the Actes whereas indeed hee is a post natus and in all likelihood lived about the fourth Age and not in this first for Denys saith That the Christians had solemne Temples like the Iewes and the Chancell severed with such and such sanctification from the rest of the Church whereas the Christians in this fiâ—st age made their assemblies to prayer both in such private places and with such simplicitie as the Apostles did and as the times of persecution suffered them Againe Denys tells us that when hee wrote Monkes were risen and they of credit in the Churches and many Ceremonies to hallow them whereas in the Apostles time when the true Dionysius lived Monkes were not heard of yea Chrysostome saith That when Paul wrote his Epistle to the Hebrewes there was not then so much as any footstep of a Monke PA. I challenge Saint Denys for ours hee was as our Rhemists say all for the Catholikes PRO. Take him as he is and as he comes to our hands hee is not wholly yours but in some things cleane contrary to you as namely in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper wherein you vary from us most Besides hee hath not your sole receiving of the Priest nor ministring under one kind to them who receive nor Exhortations Lessons Prayers in a tongue which the people understand not he hath not your Invocation of Saints noâ— adoration of creatures nor sacrificing of Christ to God nor praying for the soules in purgatory so that in things of substance and not of ceremony onely he is ours and not yours as I hope will appeare by his Writings for we will for the time suppose him to be a Father of this first age although the bookes which beare Saint Denys his name seeme to bee written in the fourth or fifth age after Christ. PAP Can you proove that Christ and his Apostles taught as you doe PRO. Wee have cleare testimonies of Scripture which appoint Gods people to receive the blessed Cup in the Sacrament and to be present at such a divine service as themselves understand wee have expresse command forbidding Image-worship against Invocation of Saints it is said that Abraham knoweth us not and Isaac is ignorant of us and the blessed Angel refused all religious honour and Adoration Likewise against Merit of workes and workes of Super-erogation it is said that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall bee revealed in us and that wee are unproâ—itable servants when we have done all that was commanded us we have but done that which was our dutie to doe and the like PA. You alleadge Scripture and so doe wee yea in some things the Scripture is plaine for us as where it is said This is my Bodie PRO. What though it make for you in shew so doth it for the Anabaptists where it is said that the Christians had all things common you will not hence inferre that because in such an extremitie their charitie for the reliefe of others made things common concerning the use that therefore we should have no property in the goods that God hath given us It is not the shew and semblance of words but the sense thereof that imports the truth Saint Paul sayes of his Corinths Ye are the body of Christ yet not meaning any Transubstantiation of substance but hâ—reof anon in his due place PA. The Scriptures make not for you but as you have translated them PRO. For any point we hold we referre our selves to the Originalls yea wee say further let the indifferent Christian Reader who hath but tollerable understanding of the Latine Tongue compare our English translations with those which your owne men Pagnine Arias Montanus and others have published and they will finde but little countenance for Poperie and namely for Communion in one kind and Service in a strange Tongue which as is already proved hath bene decreed directly contrary to Gods expresse word but let us come to the particulars Of the Scriptures sufficiency and Canon The Church of England holds that Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation so that theâ—e is no doctrine necessary for our everlasting salvation but that is or may bee drawne out of that Fountaine of truth as being either expressely therein contained or such as by sound inference may bee deduced from thence and this is witnessed by Saint Paul saying that they are able to make us wise unto salvation that the man of God may bee perfited and throughly furnished unto all good workes which they should not bee able to doe if they contained not a perfect doctrine of all such poynts of faith as we are bound to bâ—leeve and duties to bee practised And if it be said that S. Paul speakes of the man of God such an one as
to them nor worship them saith also thou shalt not make to thy selfe any graven Image PRO. Our learned Bishop White hath answered for 〈◊〉 the Ground and Proposition of this argument saith he is falâ—e for worshipping of Images is forbidden as the principall object of that negative precept and as a thing Morally evill in his very kind but making them is forbidden onely when it is a meanes subservient to worship and because it may be separated both in his owne nature and in mans intention from that end and use therefore the one is simply forbidden and the othâ—r is onely prohibited when it becommeth a meanes or instrument to other for we mislike not pictures or Images for historicall use and ornament now this distinction and disparitie betweene making and woâ—shipping is comfirmed by the example of the â—razen Serpent made by Gods owne appointment for when the same was onely made and looked upon it was a Medicine when it was worshipped it bâ—came a poyson and was destroyed To proceedâ— the Church of Rome holds that the Saints raigning with Christ are to be worshipped and prayâ—d unto but this we hold is not warranted by Gods word but rather repugnant to it for we are commanded to invocate God in the name of Christ and our Saviour himselfe inviteth us to approach with confidence to the throne of his grace he is rich in mercie to such as call upon him and more compassionate better able and more willing to helpe us than any Saint or Angel and he is appointed by God to be our Intercessour We reade in the new Testament many examples of people which made supplication immediately unto Christ but not of one which made intercession to the Virgin Mary or to the blessed Saints or Angels And if any question with this our negative concluding from Scripture Saint Hierome upon occasion did the like saying we beleeve it not because we reade it not I will close up this point with that advise which Ignatius gave the Virgins of his time not to direct their prayers and supplications to Saints or Angâ—ls but to the Trinity onely O ye Virgins have Christ alone before your eyes and his Father in your Prayers being enlightned by the spirit Of Faith and Merit The Trent Councâ—l accurseth all such as say that a siâ—ner is justified by Faith onâ—ly or deny that the good workes of holy men doe truly Merit everlasting life our reformâ—d Churches hold that wee are accounted righteous bâ—fore God onely for the Merit of Iesus Christ applyed by Faithâ— and not for our workes or Merits And when we say that we are justified by Faith onely we doe not meane that the said justifying Faith is alone in man without true repentance hope charity and the feare of God for such a Faith is dead and cannot justifie Even as when we say that the eye onely seeth wee doe not meane that the eye severed from the head doth see but that it is the onely propâ—rtie of the eye to see Neither doth this Faith of Christ which is within us of it selfe justifie us or deserve our justâ—fication unto us for that were to account our selves to be justified by the vertue or dignity of something within our selves but the true meaning therâ—of is that although we heare Gods Word and beleeve it although wee have Faith Hope Charity Repentance and the fâ—are of God within us yet we must renounce the Merit of all our vertues and good deedes as farre too weake and unsufficient to deserve remission of our Sinnes and uâ— justification and therefore we must trust onely in Gods mercie and the Merits of our only Saviour and justiâ—ier Iesus Christ. Neverthelesse because Faith doth directly send us to Christ for our justification and that by Faith given us of God we embâ—ace the promise of Gods mercie and the remission of our Sinnes which thing none other of our vertues or workes properly doth therefore the Scripture useth to say that Faith without workes and the ancient Fathers of the Church to the same purpose that onely Faith doth justifie us Now for the Poynt of Merit it is neither agreeable to Scripture nor reason for we cannot Merit of him whom we gratifiâ— not we cannot gratifie a man with his owne now all our good is Gods already his gift his proprietie What have we that we have not received saith the Apostle not our Talent onely but the improvement also is his meere bounty there can be therefore no place for Merit PA. Wee hold the ancient Romane Faith PRO. That is not so as may appeare by these instances Saint Paul taught his Romanes that our Eleâ—â—ion is of Gods free grace and not ex operibus praevisis of workes fore-seene He taught that we are justified by Faith onely we conclude that we are justified by Faâ—th without the workâ—s of the Law which is all one as to say a man is justified by Faith onely He taught that eternall life is the gift of God and therefore not due to the Merit of workes that the good workes of the Regenerate are not of their owne condignitie meritorious nor such as can deserve heaven and the sufferings there expressed are Maâ—tyrdomes sanctified by grace He condemned Images though made to resemble the true God and taught that to bow the knee religiously to an Image or to worship any creature is meère Idolatry He taught that we must not pray unto any but unto God onely in whom we beleeve and therefore not to Saints or Angels since we beleeve not in them He taught that concupiscence is a Sinne even in the regenerate and Possevine the Iesuit confesseth that Saint Paul called it so but saith he we may not call it so He taught that the Imputed righteousnesse of Christ is that onely that maketh us just before God Thus taught Saint Paul thus the ancient Romanes beleeved from this Faith our latter Romanists are departed Here then let the Reader judge whether it be likely that Saint Paul who as Theodoret saith delivered doctrine of all sorts and very exactly handled the Points thereof should neverthelesse writing at large to the Romane Church not once mention those maine points wherein the life of Poperie consists namely the Popes Monarchical Iurisdiction Transubstantiation Communion in one kinde Service in an unknowne tongue Popes pardons Image worship and the like if the Church of Rome were then the same that now a dayes it is Now if these points mentioned were no Articles of Faith in the ancient Romane Church in Saint Pauls dayes when their Faith was spoken of throughout the whole world then they be not Articles of Faith at this day but onely Additions to the rule of Faith such as the corruption of the times hath patched up and pieced it withall for it is a ruled case in the Schooles that the body of Religion
could at the samâ— time dictate unto seven severall Clarkes or Notaries hee was of such esteeme that divers would say Malle se cum Origene errare quà m cum alijs verâ— sentire that they had rather erre with Origen than thinke aright with others hee exhorted others to Martyrdome and from his child-hood was himselfe desirous of the honour thereof but in the seventh persecution under Decius hee fainted and his heart was so overset with feare to have his chaste body defiled with an ugly Ethiopian that hee chose rather to offer incense to the Idoll then to bee so filthily abused for this cause hee was excommunicated by the Church of Alexandria and for very shame fled to Iudea wherâ— he was not only gladly received but also requested publikely to preach at Hierusalem But so it was falling upon that place of the Psalmist Vnto the ungodly saith God why doest thou preach my Lawes and takest my Covenant in thy mouth whereas thou hatest to bee reformed and hast cast my words behind thee Psalm 50.16.17 These woâ—ds so deepely wounded his heart with griefe that hee closed the booke and sate downe and wept and all the congregation wept with him In expounding the Scriptures hee was curious in searching out of Allegories and yet falling on that place Math. 19.12 Some have gelded themselves for the kingdome of heaven hee tooke those words literally and gelded himselfe to the end hee might live without all suspition of uncleannesse whereas hee expounded almost all the rest of the Scriptures figuratively Hee held a fond opinion concerning the paines of devils and wicked men after long torments to bee finished It is usually said of him Vbi bene scripsit nemâ— melius ubi malè nemo pejus where hee wrote wellâ— nâ—ne better so that wee may say of him as Ieremy of his figs the good none better the evill nonâ— worse Ier. 24.2 Cypriaâ—â— was a learned godly Bishop and glorious Martyr he erred indeed in that he would have had such as had beene baptized by Heretikes if afterwards they returned to the true Church to bee rebaptized yet he was not obstinate in his errour hee was as Aâ—stin saith of him not onely learned but docible and willing to bee learned and that hee would most easily have altered his opinion had this question in his life time beene debated by such learned and holy men as afterwards it was so that S. Austin makes this observation touching Cyprians errour hee therefore saw not this one truth touching Rebaptization that others might see in him a more eminent and excellent truth to wit his humilitie modestie and châ—ritie Of the Scriptures sufficiencie and Canon Tertullian though hee stood for Ceremoniall traditions unwritten and for Doctrinall traditions which were first delivered from the Apostles by word of mouth and afterwards committed to writing yet dealing with Hermogenes the Hereticke in a question concerning the faith whether all things at the beginning were made of nothing presseth him with an Argument ab Authoritate negativè Whether all things were made of any subject matter I have as yet read no where saith hee Let those of Hermogenes his shop shew that it is written if it bee not written let them feare that wâ—e which is allotted to such as adde or take away but for himselfe hee professeth that hee adoreth the fulnesse of the Scripture And why may not wee also argue negatively touching divers Tenets of Poperie that from the beginning it was not so Math. 19.8 In the two Testaments saith Origen eveâ—y word that appertaineth to God may bee required and discussed and all knowledge of things out of them may be understood but if any thing doe remaine which the holy Scripture doth not determine no other third Scripture ought to be received for to authorize any knowlâ—dge Origen in his exposition upon the first Psalme faith wâ—e may not bee ignorant there are two and twenty bookes of the old Testament after the Hebrewes which is the number of the Letters among them This is likewise witnessed by Eusebius that as Origen received the Canon of the Iewes so likewise he reiected those sixe bookes which wee terme Apocriphall with the Iewes Of Communion under both and the number of Sacraments Tertullian speaking in generall of Christians saith the flesh feedeth upon the body and blood of Christ that the soule may be fatâ—ed as it were of God hee speakes of the body and blood of Christ as distinct things saying Corpore sanguine and elsewhere he mentions the Cup given to a Lay-woman saying from whose hands shall shee desire the Sacramentall Bread of whose Cup shall shee participate hee speaketh of a Christian woman married to an Infidell and sheweth the inconvenience of such a match whereby the faithfull wife was like to bee debarred of the comfort of receiving the Sacrament and drinking of the Lords Cup. Origen maketh this question What people is it that is accustomed to drinke blood and hee answereth the faithfull people Hereunto Bellarmine saiâ—h the people did drinke but they had no commâ—nd so to doe where hee grants us that communicating under both kinds was the Agend or Church practise in this age besides Origen in this very place alleadgeth Christs praecept for the Cup out of the sixt of Iohn Cyprian speaking of such as in time of persâ—cution had lapsed and not stucke to the truth and therâ—upon were barred from the Communion hee desires that upon their repentance they may bee admitted and hee gives this reason How shall wee sit them for the Cup of Martyrdome if before wee admit them not by right of Communion to drinke of the Lords cup in the Church And againe Because some men out of ignorance or simplicity in Sanctifying the Cup of the Lord and ministring it to the people doe not that which Iesus Christ our Lord and God the Authour and Institutour of this Sacrifice did and taught Where albeit the maine scope of the Epistle bee to prove the necessity of administring the Sacrament in Wine and not in meere water as the Aquarij did yet on the bye he discovers the practice of the Church for both kinds and saith expressely that the Cup was ministred or delivered to the people Tertullian in divers places of his works acknowledgeth the same Sacraments with us to wit Baptisme and the Lords Supper and Beatus Rhenanus in his notes upon Tertullian observes the same and for this hee is brought under the Spanish inquisition and roughly entertained for his paines as appeares by a Censure passed on him and extant in the latter end of Tertullians Works Of the Eucharist Tertullian disputing against Marcion who denied that Christ had a true Body confuteth him by a reason drawne from the Sacrament of the Supper in this manner A Figure of a Body presupposeth a true Body for of a shew or phantasie there can be no Figure But
God would receive our prayers Thus he in his mystagogicall Catechismes Answer The learned doe thinke that Cyril of Hierusalem was not Author thereof but one Iohn Bishop of Hierusalem who lived about the yeare 767 a great advocate of Images and indeed it may seeme so by some idle stuffe we find in them as namely where it is said That the wood of the Crosse did increase and multiply in such sort that the earth was full thereof But be it Cyrils of Hierusalem it makes not for the Romists All he saith is this in effect he supposeth that those holy ones with God doe continually pray unto God which prayers he desires God would mercifully heare and grant unto them for the good of his servants here on earth Lastly he sayth mentionem facimus and so did the ancients in their Commemorations mention the Godly Saints deceased and yet without any direct invoking of them And so Saint Austin saith That the Martyrs were named at the Communion Table but yet not invocated by the Priest Saint Austin flatly opposeth invocantur to nominantur nominantur sed non invocantur so that they might be nominated and mentioned as Cyril speakes and yet not at all invocated Objection Saint Hilary saith that by reason of our infirmitie we stand in need of the intercession of Angels and the like he hath upon the 124 Psalme Answer Hilary speakes onely of Angelicall intercession not a word touching invocation or intercession of Saints And if any intercession be intended it is that in generall for the whole Church In the other place upon the 124 Psalme Hilary speaks neither of Saints praying for us nor of praying to them but sayth That the Church hath no small ayde in the Apostles Prophets and Patriarkes or rather in the Angels which hedge and compasse the Church round about with a certaine guard the ayde therefore he meaneth is the example and doctrine of the Saints departed and the ministerie of the Angels Objection The Emperour Theodosius went in Procession with his Clergy and Laity to the Oratories and Chappels and lying prostrate before the Shrines and Monuments of the Apostles and Martyrs he required ayde to himselfe by the faithfull intercession of the Saints Answer The Emperour did not invocate any Saint or Saints at all onely upon that exigent of the rebellion of Eugenius and his complices he repayres to the Shrines and Chappels of the Apostles Martyrs and other holy Saints there he made his prayers unto God in Christ not unto them desiring God to ayde him against his enemies and the rather upon the prayers and intercession of the Saints on his behalfe now invocation followes not presently upon intercession Reply Sozomen telleth us that the Emperour before he joyned battaile he earnestly intreated to be assisted by Saint Iohn Baptist. Rejoynder The learned Bishop Bishop Mountague answereth that the credit of this story may â—e questioned for Socrates and Thâ—odoret elder than Sozomen have it not and Sozomen himselfe hath no greater warrant for iâ— then heaâ—e say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the report is but who the Author was whaâ— credit it was of is not related But supposing the truth of the story Ruffinus hath the very forme of the Prayer which the Emperour made and there is no mention therein of invocating either Saint or Angâ—l Socrates saith that the Emperor implored Gods assistance and had his desire Theodoret saith that the Eâ—perour prayed to God so that the Emperour had repayre unto God alone without any mediation at all I have consulted with the Originall and there indeed I find that the Emperour being in Saint Iohn Baptist's Church which Theodosius himsâ—lfe had built He called to have Saint Iohn Baptist's assistance in the battaile he did not directly call upon S. Iohn Baptist but he called upon God that he would appoint the Baptist for to aâ—d him But be it that he called upon the Baptist indeed yet this was done in the second place after he had first immediatly called upon God himsâ—lfe Objection Athanasius in his Sermon upon the Annunciation of blessâ—d Virgin sayth to the Virgin Mary Incline thine cares to our prayers and forget not thy people Answer Indeed this speakes home but it is not the true Athanâ—sius but some counterfeits bearing his name and this is confessed by the two Arch pillars of Poperie Bellarmine and Baronius for howsoever Bellarmine to make up his number produce Athanâ—sius for proofe of Saintly invocation yet the same Bâ—llarmine when he is out of the heat of his controversies and is not tied to maintaine â—he invocation of Saints but treateth of other matters then in his Catalogue of Ecclesiasticall wriâ—ers he is of another judgement and saith that this Sermon of Athanasius of the Annunciation of the blessed Virgin seemeth not to be Athanasiusses but some later writeâ—s who lived afâ—er the sixâ—h generall Councel Baronius also is of the same judgement and indeed he that shall consider and wâ—iâ—h what the true Athanasius writes to wit That God onely is to be worshipped that the creature is not to fall downe and worship or supplicate the creature nor to make the Saints being but creatures no creators speciall helpers and opitulators he I say that shall duely weigh these things will easily conceive when he reads this Sermon of the Annunciation that either Athanasius was not constant to his own doctrine which is not to bee imagined or that this Homily alleadged is none of the true Athanasiusses it is so farre different from his other doctrine Objection Bellarmine for proofe of Saintly invocation alleadgeth a place out of Eusebius the testimonie speaketh thus as there it standeth reported out of the thirteenth Booke and seaventh Chapter of his Evangelicall Preparation This we daily doe we honour those heavenly Souldiers as Gods friends we approach unto their Monuments and pray unto them as unto Holy men by whose intercession we professe our selves to be much holpâ—n Answer Eusebius speakes not of particular invocation for particular intercession but of generall mediation of the Saints in heaveÌ„ who pray for Saints on earth in general according to the nature of Communion of Saints without any intercession used to theÌ„ or invocation of them by that other moity of the Church Militant oâ— earth Secondly Eusebiuâ— doth not enlarge his speech to all the Saints departed but unto Martyrs onely whom he calleâ—h Heavenly Souldiers Now the case of Martyrs and other Saints is not equall for in the opinion of the Ancients that of Martyrs was faâ—re above all other depaâ—ted with God as enjoying moâ—e priviledge from God with Christ in glory by some specially enlarged dispensation than they the other holy Saints did as Saint Augustine teacheth 3. Thirdly the place alleadged is taken out of a corrupt translation made by Trapezuntius and afterwards followed by Dadroeus a Doctour of Paris
from other places to Rome the Bishops of Africa not yielding too hastie credit to this allegation debated the matter with Pope Zozimus and his successors Boniface and Celestine for the space of foure or five yeares together at length when the true and authentical copies of the Nicen Councell were searched by Cyril Patriarke of Alexandria and Atticus Bishop of Constantinople and that neither in the Greeke nor Latine copies this Canon touching Appeales to Rome could be found then the African Bishops told the Pope that he should not meddle with the causes of men in their Province nor receive any such to Communion as they had excommunicated For the Councel of Nice say they Did consider wisely and uprightly that all matters ought to be determined in the places in which they began Chiefly sith it is lawfull for any if he like not the sentence of his Iudges to appeale to the Synods of his owne province yea or farther also to a generall Synod to wit of the Dioces Vnlesse there be any perhaps who will imagine that God would inspire the triall of right into one man and denie it to a great number of Bishops assembled in a Synod and so going forward with proofe that the Pope ought not to judge their causes either at Rome himselfe or by his Legates sent from Rome they touched his attempt in modest sort but at the quicke Condemning it of pride and smoakie statelinesse of the world Reply It may be saith Master Brerely that the Arrian Heretikes had corrupted the Nicen Councel and therefore this Canon which the Pope alleadged could not bee found there Answer Had this prâ—tâ—nded Canon made ought against Christ's Divinâ—tie we might have suspected the Arrians to have corrupted it if they could but this concerned the Popâ—s juâ—isdâ—ction in matter of Appeale and trench'd not upon the Arâ—ians tenet Reply Perhaps the Pope when hee alleadged the Nicen Councel meant the Sardican Councel wherein it was decreed That they in Afâ—icke might appeale to Rome Answer The African Fathers say They could not meet with this prâ—tendâ—d Canon in any Synodall of the Fathers and therefore neither in the Niceâ— nor Sardican Councell nor any other that could binde the whole Church Besides Saint Austin who was a principall actour in these African Councells and subscribed to them hee was not ignorant of the Catholicke Sardican Councell for as Binius observes S Austin in his 162 Epistle calls it a plenary or full Councell of the whole Church neither indeed cou'd S. Austin be ignorant therof inasmch as he reaâ— diligently the acts and decrees of every Councell and searchâ—d all Registries by reason of the many conflicts hee had with Heretickes saith Baronius Neither could tâ—e Africâ—n Bishops bâ—e possibly ignorant of this Sardican Councell inasmuch as some thirty sixe of them were present at it and subscribed to it together with Gratus Primate of Carthage Besides it was yet within their memory being held little above fourscore yeares before this African Councell neither could they be ignorant of the Decrees of that Councell inasmuch as they were wont to bring a Copie of such Decrees as were agreed upon in generall Councells as themselves say that Caecillianus brought with him the Decrees enacted at Nice at which hee was present Now if they knew this Sardican Councell and the Decrees thereof and yet knew no such Decree therein for Appealing from Africke to Rome it followeth that the Popâ—s pretenâ—ed Canon for Appeales was no Canon of the holy Sardican Councell and is therefore justly suspected to be forged by some of the Popes Factours who would gladly have brought all the Gâ—iest to his Mill and the maine Sutes of Christendome unto his Court and Consistory Reply Bellarmine saith that the Decree forbad onely the Priests and inferiour sort of the Cleargie to appeale to Rome but not the Bishops Answer This is an idle allegation for the African Bishops provided for the conveniencie of their Priests and Cleargie to hinder them from vexatious couâ—seâ— and wastfull expences in the poynt of Appeale by saving them from unnecessary travailes beyond the Sea and therefore they intended much more that they themselves should bâ—e freed Besides the Decree runs generally and forbids all sorts of Apellants from Africke to Rome as well Bishops as others the tenour of the decree is this It was thought good that Priests Deacons or other inferior Clerks if in their causes they complaine of the judgements of their Bishops and if they Appeale from them they shall not Appeale but to the African Councels or to the Primates of their Povinces but if any shall thinke that he ought to Apâ—peale beyond the Sea meaning to Rome let him not be received any longer into the Communion of the Church of Africke Binnius tells us that the question was not about the right of Appealing to the See of Rome but de modo touching the manner of the Popes admitting Appeales of prosecuting and deciding complaints by his Legates â latere but the decree forbids Appeales from Africke to Rome and condemnes not onely the manner but the matter it selfe Objection You say Saint Austine opposed the Pope but he was in good savour with Zozimus Boniface and Celestine Answer Saint Austine kept good termes with the Bishops of Rome and he had reason for it because they were great Patriarkes and he had occasion to use their helpe and countenance for quelling the Pelagian Heretikes and others and yet notwithstanding when their factors began to usurpe jurisdiction over other Churches then hee might stand for the right of his African Churches and give his vote freely in the Councel And thus we have found opposition made to the See of Rome by a whole nationall Councel in the weighty poynt of Appeales for so Bellarmine makes appealing to Rome and not Appealing from thence a maine proofe of the Popes supremacie Now to proceede about the yeare foure hundred thirtie and one was the third generall Councell held at Ephesus against the Nestorian heresie which divided Christ into two persons it was summoned not by the Pope but by the Emperour Theodosius the younger At his becke and by his command In the yeare foure hundred fiftie and one the fourth generall Councel was held at Chalcedon against Eutyches who in opposition to Nestorius confounded the natures of Christ making of two distinct natures his humane and divine but one nature whereas Nestorius rent is â—under his person making two of one this Councel was called not by the Pope but by the Emperours Edict it was first called at Nice and then recalled from thence and removed to Chalcedon wholly by the disposing of the Emperour yea Leo Bishop of Rome wrote to the Emperour instantly beseeching him to call it in Italie all the Priests saith he doe beseech your clemencie with sighes and teares that you would command a generall
Eleutherius time or in the Apostles dayes for had it beene so the Britaines who changed not their Faith but kept still the substantiall grounds thereof would likewise have held the Popes Supremacie yea doubtlesse those Catholike Bishops of Britaine had they but knowne and believed as now it is given out the Pope to be Iure divinâ— by divine right and Gods appointment the Monarch of the whole Church they would have yeelded obedience to Austine and in him to the Pope but they opposed it as being urged by those of the Romish faction so that it was not then as now it is made one of the chiefe heads of the Romish Faith for now a dayes men are made to believe that out of the Communion of the Romane Church nothing but hell can be looked for and subjection to the Bishop of Rome as to the visible Head of the Vniversall Church Is required as a matter necessary to salvation But this was no part nor Article of the ancient Britaines Creed and therefore they withstood it and if it were no Article of Faith them surely it is none now a dayes To close up this point hereby is overthrowne the maine Article of the Romane Creed For if as the Papists say and sweare there be no salvation out of the Romane Communion then is the case like to goe hard with the one thousand two hundred British Monks of Bangor stiled Saints and Martyrs that died out of the Roman Communion and yet within the Communion of Saints But this Grand Imposture of the now Romane Church is notably discovered by the learned and zealous Bishop of Coventrie and Lichfield Doctor Morton now Lord Bishop of Durham My conclusion shall be this out of the holy Catholike Church of the Creede there is no salvation but out of the fellowship of the Romane Church there hath beene and is salvation as appeares in the case of these our British Martyrs therefore the present Romane Church is not as it is pretended the Catholike Church of the old Creede but a particular of the new Trent Creede THE SEVENTH CENTVRIE From the yeare of Grace 600. to 700. PAPIST PRoceede to name your men PROTESTANT I name Gregory the great whom Bellarmine usually placeth in this seventh Age for that hee lived unto the yeare 605 what time as Trithemius saith he dyed Now also lived his Scholler Isidore Bishop of Sivil in Spaine usually termed Isidore the younger Now also by Bellarmine's account though others make him much ancienter lived Hesychius Bishop of Hierusalem with other Worthies as namely the Britaines of Wales as also Saint Aidan and Finan now also was held the sixth Generall Councell PA. I challenge Saint Gregory hee is ours PRO. Gregorie indeed lived in a troublesome time whiles the Goths and Vandals overranne Italie and Rome was besieged by the Lombards There was then also great decay in knowledge and scarcity of able men to furnish the Church withall and few in Italie as Baronius saith that were skilled both in Greeke and Latine Yea Gregory himselfe proâ—esseth that hee was ignorant of the Greeke tongue yet was he stâ—led the great and yet not so great as godly and modest It is commonly said of him That he was the last of the good Bishops of Rome and the first of the bad ones That he was the first Pope and leader of the Pontifician companies and the last Bishop of Rome Hee was supeâ—stitious in diverse things hee lived in a declining age and as in time so in some truths came short of his predecessours yet he taught not as your Trent Papists doe but joyned with us in diverse weighty poynts of Religion Of the Scriptures sufficiencie and Canon Gregory held the Scriptures sufficiencie saying Whatsoever serveth for edification is contayned in the volume of the Scriptures wherein are all resolutions of doubts fully and plentifully to be found they being like a full Spring that cannot be drawne drye Hee approved the vulgar use of the Scriptures exhorting a Lay-man to study them because saith hee they bee as it were Gods Letter or Epistle to his Creature wherein he reveales his whole minde to him And lest any complaine of the difficulty of the Scriptures he compares them to a River wherein there are as well shallow Foords for Lambes to wade in as depths for the Elephant to swim in And Isidore saith that the Scripture is common to petty Schollers and to Proficients And whereas Heretickes use to alleadge Scripture for themselves Gregory saith they may bee confuted by Scripture it selfe even as Goliath was slaine with his owne sword Gregory held the bookes of Maccabees Apocryphall Wee doe not amisse saith he if wee produce a testimony out of the booke of Maccabees though not Canonicall yet published for the iâ—struction of the Church And Occham accordingly reports Gregories judgement saying The booke of Iudith Tobias the Maccabees Ecclesiasticus and Wisedom are not to bee received for the confirmation of any doctrine of Faith Isidore saith In these Apocryphall although there be some truth to be found yet by reason of the many errours therein they are not of Canonicall authâ—rity Of Communion under both kindes and number of Sacraments Saint Gregory in his Dialogues if they be his tells us of some that were going to Sea some whereof happily were Lay-men carryed with them the consecratâ—d body and bloud of the Lord in the Ship and there received it And againe His body is there recâ—ived his flesh is there divided for the peoples salvation his bloud is not now powred out upon the hands of Infidels but into the mouth of the Faithfull Hee speakes expressely of the Faithfull and of the people And in his Homily touching the Passeover he saith What is meant by the bloud of Christ you have now learned not by hearing of it but by drinking of it which bloud is then put on both posts when it is drawne in both by the mouth of the body and of the heart Herein Gregory resembles the partaking of Christ's bloud in the Eucharist to the bloud of the Paschall Lambe in the twelfth of Exodus striken upon both poâ—ts of the doore thereby noting the mouth and the heart each whereof after their manner receive Christ for with the mouth and corporally wee receive the wine which is the Sacrament of his bloud and with our heart and by faith we receive the thing Sacramentall the bloud it selfe Besides hee speakes expressely of drinking and the termes hee useth hauritur and perfunditur That Christ's bloud is shed and taken as a draught demonstrate that he speaks not of partaking Christ's bloud as it is joyned to his body and inclosed in his veines but as severed from it as my worthy and learned friend Doctor Featly hath observed Isidore saiâ—h The fourth prayer is brought in for the kisse of Peace that all bâ—ing reconciled by charity may
Gregorie held a Purgatorie for some smaller faults PRO. He held not your Purgatorie his was onely for veniall and light faults yours is for such as have not fully satisfied for the temporall punishment due to their mortall sinnes Againe his differeth from yours in situation for you place yours in some quarter bordering on hell but Gregorie tells us of certaine soules that for their punishment were confined to Bathes and such other places here on earth Besides Gregorie in his Dialogues whence you would prove your Purgatorie tells many strange tales as of one Stephen a Priest who had the Devill so serviceable to him as to draw off his hose of Boniface that wanting money procured divers crownes of our Lady and such like stuffe insomuch that your Canus saith Gregorie in his Dialogues hath published such miracles commonly received and believed which the censurers of this Age will thinke to be doubtfull and uncertaine Besides Gregorie had his Purgatorie and Soule masses from visions and feigned apparitions of Ghosts which the Scripture holds unwarrantable And yet Gregorie upon occasion of that place of Ecclesiastes If the tree fall towards the South or the North where it falls there it shall bee makes another inference namely this The just one in the day of his death falleth South-ward and the sinner North-ward for the just by the warmth of the spirit is carried into blisse but the sinner with the revolting Angel in his benummed heart is reprobated and cast away And Olympiodore who lived about the yeare 500 makes the very same inference and Gregorie elswhere to the same purpose saith that at the time of a mans dissolution either the good or evill spirit recâ—ives the soule as it comes out of the cloyster of the body and there without any change at all for ever retaines it that being onâ—e exalted it can never come to be punished and being plâ—nged into eternall paine can never thence be delivered Now if according to these testimonies after death there be no deliverance but that the soule for ever remaines in that degree and order wherein death takes it if there be no change after this life such as the Papists imagine theirs to be from the paines of Purgatorie to the joyes of heaven surely then there can be no Purgatory nothing but heaven or hel whither they that come abide for ever Now let us see what Gregorie held touching the Supremacie PA. Gregorie maintained his Supremacie did hee not PRO. Whatsoever he did Stapleton strives to uphold it by corrupting a place in Gregorie who speaking of Saint Peter and other Apostles saith that they were all members of the Church under one Head meaning Christ as his owne words make it cleere Now Stapleton to make the Pope Head of the Church citeth the words thus They are all members of the Church under one head Peter shuffling in the name Peter but for Saint Gregorie hee knew not your moderne papall Supremacie and when the See of Constantinople challenged the stile of Vniversall Bishâ—p he opposed it PA. He might dislike it in another and yet claime it himsâ—lfe PRO. He disclaimed it in any whosoever Now so it was Iohn Bishop of Constantinople seeing the Emperors seate translated thither and other Provinces governed by Lievtenants as also Rome besieged by the Lumbards thought this a fit season for the advancement of his chayre that the Imperiall City should also have the highâ—st chayre in the Church as the Emperour counted himselfe Lord of the World so he would be stiled Oecumenicall or Vniversall Patriarke in the Church Now when Iohn affected this Title Gregorie complained not that he wrong'd his See by usurping that stile as if it had belonged to the Pope but hee mislikes the transcâ—â—dent power claymed by that stile and he calls it A stile of noveltie and prophannesse such as never any godly man nor any of his predecessors ever used A name of Blâ—sphemie A thing contrarie to the Churches Canons to Saint Peter and to the holy Gospels Yea he pronounceth any one that should presume to challenge the forâ—said title To be the very forâ—runner of Antichrist because herein hee lifts himselfe above his brethren PA. Gregorie forbore this Title in humilitie thereby to represse Iohns insolencie PRO. This is as if a King should renounce his Royall Title to the end that a Rebell challenging it might disclaime it Gregorie indeed was an humble man and as one saith of him When he was in his Iollitie and Pontificalibus hee was not so much delighted therewith as an Hermit was with his Cat that he used to play withall in his Cell Gregorie indeed professeth to bee humble in mind but still so as to preserve the honour of his place Gregorie would lose nothing of his freehold I warrant you PA. Gregorie found fault with this Title in the sense that Iohn desired so to be universall and sole Bishop and the rest to be his Vicars or Deputies PRO. It is not likely the Bishop of Constantinople though he were a proud man would keepe all others from being bishops that is that they should neither ordaine Priests nor excommunicate nor absolve nor sit in Counsell but himselfe alone doe all Besides if Iohn had sought this surely the Greeke Bishops who consented to Iohns title of being their universall Patriarcke in respect of Order though not of Iurisdiction would never have yeelded to have made themselues onely Vicars to that one bishop and so deprive themselves of al Episcopall Iurisdiction Yea the same bishops though they submitted themselves to the bishop of Constantinople and approved his Title yet notwithstanding they exercised their ancient Iurisdiction over their severall Sees they were not degraded by Iohn or his Successor Cyriacus both which affected that Title The true and undoubted meaning then of Gregorie as his words import was this namely that Gregorie by impugning the Title of Vniversall bishop would have no Bishop so principall as to make all others as members subject to his Head-ship and is not the charge of bishops at this day under the Papacie for the most part Tiâ—ular they being wholly at the Popes becke PA. Was the Title of Vniversall Bishop so odious PRO. It was in that sense which Gregory taxed in the bishop othâ—rwise neither he nor wee mislike such Vniveâ—sall bishops as with Saint Paul Have the care of all Churches and in this respect godly bishops when they meete in Councels and in their owne Diocesses whiles by their wholesome advice admonition or reproofe by their writing or teaching they instruct others in the truth prevent Schisme and stop the mouth of Heresie may be called Bishops of the Vniversall Church Thus was Athanasius called a Bishop of the Catholike Chuâ—ch not as it precisely signifieth Vnivâ—rsall but rightly beleeving or holding the Catholike Faith PA. What conclude you out of all this PRO.
with Haymo as indeed his Commentaries on Saint Pauls Epistles are in a manner all taken out of Haymo as Doctor Rivet hath observed It is the report of our Ancestors saith Walafridus Strabo that in the Primitive times they were wont according to Christs Institution to Communicate and partake of the Body and Bloud of our Lord even as many as were prepared and thought fit Regino describeth the manner of Pope Adrians delivering the Communion to King Lotharius and his followers in both kindes The King saith hee takes the Body and Bloud of our Lord at the hands of the Pope and so did the Kings Fallowers Paschasius saith These bee the Sacramentâ— of Christ in the Church Baptisme and Chrysme and the Body and Bloud of Christ and Rabanus hath the selfe same words Now with Baptisme they joyne Chrysme because they used to annoint such as were baptized for otherwise Rabanus speakes precisely of two saying What doe these two Sacraments effect and then hee answers That by the one we are borne anew in Christ and by the other Christ abides in us Of the Eucharist Rabanus saith Bread because it strengthneth the body is therefore called the Body and Wine because it maketh bloud is therefore referred to Christs bloud Haymo saith the same with Rabanus Rabanus farther saith That the Sacrament in one thing and the power thereof another the Sacrament is turned into the nourishment of the body by the vertue of the Sacrament we attaine â—ternall life Hee saith the Sacrament which is the Bread is turned into our bodily nourishment nâ—w spâ—cies shewes and accidents can not nourish but these latter words of Rabanus are razâ—d â—ut whereas the Monke of Malmesbury witnesses that Rabanus wrote accordingly as is alleaged and this razure is observed by the publisher of Mathew of Westminsters Historie Haymo calls the Eucharist A Memoriall of that Gift or Legacie which Christ dimised unto us at his Death Rabanus saith that Christ at first instituted the Sacrament of his Body and Bloud with blessing and thanksgiving and delivered it to his Apostles and they to their Successors to doe accordingly and that now the whole Church throughout the world observes this manner Christianus Druthmarus reporting our Saviours Act at his last Supper sayth Christ changed the bread into his body and the wine into his bloud Spiritually he speaks not of any change of substances Walafridus Strabo saith That Châ—ist delivered to his Disciples the Sacraments of his body and bloud in panis vini substantiâ in the substance â—f bread and Wine When Carolus Calvus the Emperour desired to compose some diffeâ—ences about the Sacrament then on â—oot he râ—quired Bertram a learned man of that Age tâ— deliver hâ—s jâ—dgement in that poynt Whether the body and bloud of Christ which in the Church is received by the mouth oâ— tâ—â— faithful be celebrated in a mystery or in the truth anâ— whether it be the same body which was borne of Mary Whereunto hâ— returnes this answer That the bread and the wine aâ—e tâ—â— body and bloud of Christ figuratively that This body is tâ—e pledge and the â—igure the other the very naturall bodie That for the substance of the Creatures that which they were before consecration the same are they also afterward That they are called the Lords body and bloud because they take the name of that thing of which thâ—y are a Sacrament That there is a great difference betwixt the mystery of the bloud and body of Christ which is taken now by the faithfull in the Church and that which was borne of the Virgin Mary All which he proves at large by Scriptures and Fathers Your wisedome most excellent Prince may perceive saith he that I have proved by the testimonies of holy Scriptures and Fathers that the bread which is called Christs body and the Cup that is called his bloud is a figure because it is a mysterie PA. I except against Bertram his booke is forbid to be read but by such as are licenced or purpose to conâ—ute him PRO. Bertram wrote of the body and bloud of Chrâ—st as Trithemius saith and by your Belgicke or Lâ—w Countrey Index Bertram is stiled Catholicke Now this Index was published by the King of Spaines commandment the Duke of Alva and first printed at Antwerp in the yeare 1571 and often since reprinted Now so it is howsoever he be accounted a Catholicke Priest and much commended by Trithemius yet are this Catholicks writings forbid to be read as appeares by severall Indices the one set forth by the Deputies of the Trent Councel and another printed at Parts under Clement the eight Now these Inquisitors dealt too roughly and therefore the divines of Doway perceiving that the â—orbidding of the booke kept not men from reading it but rather oâ—casioned them to seeke after it thought iâ— better policie that Bertram should be suffered to goe abroad but with his keeper to wit some popish glosse to wait on him Seeing therefore say they we beare with many errours in other old Catholicke writers and extenuate them excuse them by inventing some device oftentimes deny them and â—aine some commodious sense for them when they are objected in disputation with our adversaries we doe not see why Bertram may not deserve the same equitie and diligent revisall lesâ— the Herâ—ticks cry out that we burne and forbid such antiquity as maketh for them and accordingly they have dealt wiâ—h Bertram for by their Recognition We must reade Invisibiliter in stead of Visibiliter and these words The Substance of the Creatures must be expounded to signifie outward shewes or Accidents But this will not serve the turne for Bertram speaking of the consecâ—ated bâ—ead and wine saith that for the substance of the creatures they remaine the same after consecration that they were before Now if they doe so then is not the substance of bâ—ead and wine changed into the substance of the flesh and bloud of Christ as the Trent Councel would have it Nor will it serve to say that by the substance of the Creatures is meant the outward accidents as the whitenesse of the bread the colour of the wine or the like for Bertram speakes properly that the consecrated bread and wine remaine the same in substance And it were an improper speech to attribute the word Substance to Accidents as to say the substance of the colour or rednesse of the wine or the like PA. Master Brerely suspects that this booke was lately set forth by Oâ—colampadius under Bertrams name PRO. This suspicion is cleered by the antient Manuscript copies of Bertram extant before Occolampadius was borne one whereof that great Scholler Causabon saw in the Librarie of Master Iames Gilot a Burgesse of Paris as he witnessed to the Reverend and learned Primate Doctor Vsher. And yet besides these Mâ—nuscripts Bertram
to the ancient custome of the Primitive Church and could not bee induced simply and absolutely to condemne the Articles of Wickliffe but thought many of them might carry a good sense and that the Author of them was a man that carried a good mind howsoever hee might faile in some things and for these and the like tenets and reproofes they were burnt at Constance contrary to the publike faith and safe conduct given by the Emperour yea Aeneas Sylvius afterwards Pope Pius the second saith expresly It was thought good by the perswasion of Sigismund the Emperour that Iohn and Hierome should bee called to the Councell of Constance so that they came not of their owne accord nor yet without their warrantie and safe conduct but the Fathers of the Counsell dealt ill with them breaking the faith of the Emperour and dispencing with the breach of his safe-conduct as being of no force without theirs because forsooth faith was not to bee kept with Heretikes as thâ—y vainely alleadged therefore these poore men must have no priviledge of their Passe-port the Emperour saith Campian in a flourish of his Sealed their Passe but the Christian world to wit the Councell of Constance greater than Caesar brake up the seale and voided the Imperiall warranâ— notwithstanding the Emperour had both called the Councell and in a Citie of his ownâ— where hee onely had authority and Wenceslaus King of Bohemia at the request of the Councell sent thither Iohn Hus under the safe-conduct of the Emperour Now what Master Hus his learning was his workes yet remaining doe testiâ—ie Besides hee translated the Scriptures into the Bohâ—mian tongue which occasioned as Cochleus saith Artisans and Tradesmen to reade them insomuch as they could dispute with the Priests yea their women were so skilled as one oâ— them made a booke and the Priests of the Thabâ—rites were so skilled in arguing out of the Scripture that one of them named Rokyzana who had beene present at the Counsell at Basil undertooke to dispute with Capistranus a great and learned Papist touching Communion in both kinds and that out of the holy Scriptures the ancient Doctors and the Churches Canons and Constitutions as also from the force of naturall reason Aenâ—as Sylvius saith That Hus was an eloquent man and that in the worlds estimation hee had gained a great opinion of holinesse Hierome was a man of that admirable eloquence learning and memory that Poghius the Florentine Historian and Oratour admired his good parts and the same Poghius being an eye-witnesse of his triall at the Councell of Constance saith He was a man worthy of eternall memory that there was no just cause of death in him that hee spake nothing in all his triall unworthy of a good man yea hee doubteth whether the things objected against him were true or no. Besides he was so resolute at his death that when the Tormentor kindled the fire behind his backe he bid him make it in his sight For if I had feared the fire said he I had never come hither and so whiles the fire was a making hee sung Psalmes and went cheerefully to his death The like resolution was in Iohn Husse at his death for whereas his enemies made a crowne of paper with three ugly devils painted therein and this title Arch-heretike set over when Iohn Husse saw it he said My Lord Iesus Christ for my sake were a Crowne of thornes why should not I then for his sake weare this light Crowne bee it never so shamefull I will doe it and that willingly and so hee died constantly and so indeed the storie reports that they went to the stake as cheerefully as it had beene to a banquet Iohn Husse may seeme to have had some propheticall inspiration for at his death hee prophesied saying You roast the Goose now but a Swan shall câ—me after mee and hee shall escape your fire Now Husse in the Bohemian tongue signifieth a Goose and Luther a Swan and this Swâ—n succeeded him just an hundred yeares after foâ— so these two blessed servants of God prophesied saying Wee cite you all to make answer aâ—d after an hundred yeares to give an account of this your doing unâ—o God and accoâ—diâ—gly as they foretold it came to passe for they suffered martyrdome in the yeare 1416. and just an hundred yeares afâ—er to wit in the yeaâ—e 1516. the Lord raysed up Luther who indâ—ed called the Pope and his doctrine to a reckoning Vpon this propheticall speech of Iohn Husse there was money coined iâ— Bohemia with this inscripâ—ion in Latine on the one side Cintum revolutis annis Deo respondebitis et mihi anno 1416 Hie onymus condemnatus that is After an hundred yeares you shall answer to God and to me and on the oâ—her side of the plate was engraven Credo unam â—ssâ— sanctam Ecclesiam Catholicam anno 1415. Io. Husse I beleeve one holy Catholike Church PA Did Husse and his followers teach as you doe PRO For substance of doctrine they taught as wee doe their enemies indeed misreported their doctrine and charged them with that they never held insomuch as Husse solemnely protested even at the point of death That hee never held those Articles which the false witnesses deposed against him but held and taught and wrote the contraâ—y taking it upon his death that hee taught nothing but the truth of the Gospell which hee would then seale with his blood Now touching their doctrine we are driven to takâ— the scaâ—tling of their opinions from the pens of tâ—eir advâ—rsaries by whom wee perceive that it is very pâ—obâ—ble 〈◊〉 Hussiâ—es were instructed and much helped by Wicklâ—â—ss bookes and accordingly wee find that both Aenâ—â—s Sylvius and Cochleus report that the meanes wheâ—â—by â—he Bohemiâ—ns came to know the doctrine of Wicklâ—ffe was for that a certaine noble man studying in Oxford carried thence with hiâ— into Bohemia Wiâ—klifs bookes de Realibus universalibus As if it had beene some rare jewell and Cochleus saith That as a Bohemian brought first into Bohemia Wickliffes bookes de Realibus uniâ—erâ—alibus So there was afterwards one Peter Paineâ— a Scholler of Wickliffes who after the death of his Master came â—lso into Bohemia and brought with him Wâ—â—kliffes bookes which were in quantity as great as Saint Auâ—â—ines Workes many of which bookes Husse did aftâ—rwards translate into their mother tongue Bellarmine jâ—ynes the Hussitesâ— and Waldenses together as holding the same points of doctrine and reproving the same abuses of Rome And Platina saith that Hâ—sse and Hierome were condemned in the Councell of Constance as being followers of Wickliffe Aeneas Silvius saith the Hussites embraced the pâ—ofession of the Waldenses Now wee have already showne the tenets of the Waldenses and Wickliffe But to come to particulars bâ—sides the Hussites there were others also of his disciples which were called Thaborites of the place Thabor
and driven out as an Hereticke Gerson howsoever he thought that the Church might lawfully prescribe the communicating in one kind alone wherein we cannot excuse him yet hee acknowledgeth That the Communion in both kinds was anciently used The Councel of Basil permitted the Bohemians to continue the use of the Communion in both kinds upon condition That they should not find fault with the contrary use nor sever themselves from the Catholicke Church Iacobellus Misvensis a Preacher of Prague being admonished by Petrus Dresdensis after he had searched into the writings of the ancient Doctors and by name Dionysius and Saint Cyprian and finding in them the communicating of the Cup to the Laity commanded hee thenceforth exhorted the people by no meanes to neglect or omit the receiving the Communion of the Cup. Cardinal Bessarion Bishop of Tusculum professeth in expresse termes Wee reade onely of two Sacraments which were plainely delivered in the Gospel Of the Eucharist Waldensis saith That some supposed the Conversion that is in the Sacrament to be in that the bread and wine are assumed into the unitie of Christs person some thought it to be by way of Impanation and some by way of Figurative and Tropical appellation The first and second of those opinions found the better entertainement in some mens mindes because they grant the essentiall preseâ—ce of Christs body and yet deny not the presence of the bread still remaining to sustaine the appearing Accidents These opinions he reports to have beene very acceptable to many not without sighes wishing the Church had Decreed That men should follow one of them Whereupon Iohn Paris writeth That this way of Impanation so pleased Guido the Carmelite sometime Reader of the Holy Palace that he professed if hee had beene Pope he would have prescribed and commanded the embracing of it Petrus de Alliaco the Cardinal professâ—th that for ought he can see the substantiall Conversion of the Sacramental elements into the body and bloud of Christ cannot be proved either out of scripture or any determination of the universal Church maketh it but a matter of opinion inclining rather to the other opinion of Consubstantiation His words are these That manner or meaning which supposeth the substance of bread to remaine still is possible neither is it contrary to reason or to the authoritie of the Scriptures nay it is more easie and more reasonaâ—ble to conceive than that which sayes the Substance doth leave the Accidents And of this opinion no inconvenience doth seeme to ensue if it could accord with the Churches determination And hee addes That the opinion which holdeth the substance of bread to remaine doth not â—vidently follow of the Scripture nor in his seeming of the Churches determination Biel saith It is not expressed in the Canon of the Bible how the body of Christ is in the Sacrament and hereof anciently there have beene divers opinions Cajetaâ— saith that secluding the Churches authoritie there is no written word of God sufficient to enforce a Christian to receive this doctrine of Transubstantiation Saurez the Iesuit ingeniously professeth that Cardinal Cajetan in his Commentâ—rie upon this Article did aâ—â—irme that those words of Christ. This is my Body doe not of themselves sufficiently prove Transubstantiation without the Churches authoritie and therefore by the Commandment of Pius Quintus that part of his Commentarie is left out in the Roman Edition By this it appeares that their learned Councel of Schoolemen who lived in this Age were not fully agreed upon the poynt Of Images and Prayer to Saints Abulensis was so farre from allowing the worship of Images as that he held it a thing unlawfull in it selfe Deut. 4.16 secluding Adoration to make any visible Image or representation of God according to his deâ—ty for hence saith hee these two inconveniences will follow First The Perill of Idolaâ—rie in case the Image it selfe should come to be adored and Secondly Errour and Heresie whiles one shall asâ—ribe to God such bodily shapes and formes as the Trinity â—s usually pictured withall Now that Abulensis with othâ—rs held it unlawfull to picture or represâ—nt the Trinâ—tie is acknowledged by Bellarmine saying It is Calvins opinion in the first booke of his Institutions cap 11. that it is an abhominable sinne to make a â—â—sible and bodâ—ly Image of the invisible and incorporeall God and this opinion of Calvins is also the opinion of some Catholicke Doctors as Abulensiâ— upon 4. Deut. quest 5. and Durand upon 3. dist 9. qu. 2. and Peresius in his booke of â—raditions Gerson condemned all mâ—king of an Image or portraiture appointed or accommodaâ—ed to worship and aadorationâ— saying Thou shalt â—ot adore thâ—m nor worship them which are thus to bâ— distinguished Thou shalt not adore them that is With any bodily reverence or bowing or kneeling to them Thou shalt not worship them with any devotion of mind Images therefore are prohibited to bee either adored or Worshipped The same Gerson disliked the varietie of pictures and Images in Churches occasioning Idolatry in the simple If Christians were in no peâ—ill of Idolatry by worshipping Images why doth Gerson complaineâ— that Superstition had infected Christian Religion anâ— that people like Iewesâ— did onely sâ—eke after Signes and yeeld Divine honour to Images Cassander writeth in this manner The opinion of Thomas Aquinas who holdeth that Images are to be woâ—shipped as their Samplers is disliked by soundâ—r Scâ—oolemen amongst whom is Durand Holcot and Gabriel â—iel Biel reporteth the opinion of them which say that an Image neither as it is considered in it selfe materâ—ally nor yâ—t according to the nature of a Signe or Image is to bee worshipped And he saith well that this opinion of Thomas was disliked of others for besides those already mentioned this was one of the Problems which Picus Mirandula proposed to be maintained by him at Rome namely that Neither the Crosse nor any other Image was to be worshipped with Latria or Divine worship no not in that sense as Thomas would have it And when otheâ—s carped at this and other his Assertions touching â—he Sacrament of the Eucharist himselfe made his owne Apologie and defence Touching Invocation of Saints though Gerson did not absolutely condemne it yet hee reprehendeth the abuses and sâ—persâ—iâ—ious observations then prevailing in the worshiâ—ping of Sâ—ints veâ—y bitterly For in his Consolatoâ—y tract of Rectifying the Heart amongst many oâ—her considâ—rations he complaineth That â—hâ—re is incollerable â—uperstitioÌ„ in the worshipping of Saints innumerable observations without all ground of reason vaine credulitie in beleeving things concerning the Saints reported in the uncertaine Legends of their lives superstitious opinions of obtaining Pardon and remission of sinnes by saying so many Pater nosters in such a Church before such an Image as if in the Scriptures and Authenticall writings of holy men there were not sufficient direction for all
what Church did Luther joyne himselfe and why left hee the Roman Church PRO. Hee joyned himselfe in point of faith to the ancient Primitive and Apostolicke Church that went before him and for his present Communion to that sound part of the Roman Church which then with him hated the corruptions which the Romish faction for the maintenance of their pompe and profit had upheld In particular hee joyned himselfe to those honourable personages the Dukes of Saxony and Wittenberge and the Earle of Mansfield and to such Châ—istian congregations as within their territories began to abandon Poperie and reforme themselves He received Ordination in the Church of Rome this ordination for substance was good and by vertue thereof hee preached tâ—e word and brought the people to see and detest not the Church of Rome but her corruptions from whence hee severed himselfe to wit from the Roman Court and faction therein so that hee leapt not out of the Church hee kept himselfe still within the barne-floore thereof onely he leapt out of the huske of popish errours Now this his separation and ours from errour â—s warranted by Gods word since Gods people are commanded and that upon a grievous penalty to depart out of Babylon and spirituaâ—l Sodome and this we â—ake to be Rome since your owne Iesuites that have commented on the Revelation call Rome Babylon and that this is to be understood not onely of heathâ—n Rome but of Rome Christian after that it had forsaken heaâ—henisme and had received the faith of Christ and turned againe from that unto Antichristianisme PA. If any Protestant Church were in being before or at Luthers appearing then would they upon his preaching have acknowledgâ—d him and joyned themsâ—lves to him but as Bellâ—rmine saâ—th they did not PRO. Alphoâ—sus de Casiro saith Neither did Luther in this age come â—orth alone but accompanied with a grâ—at troope as with a Guard waiting for Lâ—tâ—er as for tâ—eir Captaine and Leader such were Philip Melanchton Conradus Pâ—llicanâ—s â—ambert Fabricius Capito â—siâ—â—der Stuâ—mius aâ—d Maâ—tin Bucer and thâ—se saith he seemed to have â—xpectâ—d him bâ—fore hee came and upon his comming dâ—lclâ—aâ—e unto him so that hee wanted noâ— such as gave him the right hands of fellowship Galat. 2.9 Carolus Miâ—titius being sent from Pope Leo to Frederike professed That all the way as he came having sâ—undâ—d mâ—ns affâ—ctions hee found three to favour Luthâ—r for one that favoured the Pope And Lutâ—er professeth that the applause of the world did much support him most men being weary of the frauds and wicked pâ—actices of the Romanists Neither are these penurious examples to give instance in Melanchton Pellican Bucer and others as Brereley scornefully calleth iâ— for they were as great schollâ—rs as that age affâ—â—ded Pâ—llican was one who made great helpe for râ—viving tâ—e Hebrew tongue and was Luthers ancient and so was Ioâ—n Capnio or Reuchlin who brought Greeke and Hebrew into Germany Now bâ—sides his câ—evals and contemporaries the Waldâ—nâ—es as also Iohn Hâ—sse bare a torch before Luther and shâ—wed him his way PA. Master Brereley saith That Melanchton Pâ—lican and Bucer were originally Catholikes and followed Luthers example in revolting from the Catholike Church PRO. Saint Paul was originally a Pharisee and yet hee did well to forsake the leaven of their traditions and embrace the doctrine of the Gospell And so did Saint Austin the errour of the Manichees and Pelagians and embraced the truth of the Gospell Besides they left not the Catholike but the Roman Church nor that altogether but the faction that was therein to wit the papacie PA. Schlusselburg saith It is impudencie to say that many learned men in Germany did hold the doctrine of the Gospell before Luther PRO. Schlusselburgs words are these Vtenhovius writes impudently that he heard Pellican affirme that many learned men in Germany held the doctrine of the Gospel before Luther appeaâ—ed and that Pellican himselfe impugned the popish purgatory before the name of Luther was heard of Now why may wee not beleeve Vtenhovius and Pellican affirmâ—ng the same and being honest men as well as Schlusselburg denying it Besides admit there were not any in Germany yet there might be elsewhere many thousands as in Bohemia France and England and other parts who bâ—fore Luthers time embraced the doctrine of the Gospell PA. Master Brereley saith out of Luthers workes that upon a conference had with the Devill Luther gave over the Masse and changed his Religion PRO. Suppose this Conference were extant in all the Dutch copies of Luthers workes which yet some make doubt of yet might this conference bee onely imaginary even a strong spirituall 〈◊〉 and not â—ny personall or reall conference now from such a spiâ—ituall conflict dreame or appâ—â—ition you cannot draw any sound proofe But supposing the truth of this conference had not Christ a conâ—â—â—â—nce with Sathan and Saint Bernarâ— a combat with him is theiâ— religion ere a whit â—he worse to be liked Your Romish Saints were very familiar with the Devill Saint Oswald wrestled with him Saint Dunstane tooke him by the nose Christopher in the Legend is said to have served the Devill and Saint Xavier was usually vexed with him after Dinner Supper Recreation and saying of Masse insomuch as the Devill oft times put him into a cold sweat as Hâ—ssenmullerus reporteth of him from Turrian the Iesuite PA. The Devill brought arguments against saying of Masse and disputed against it therefore the Masse is good or else the Devill would not have found fault with it PRO. This followeth not for every thing the Devill mislikes is not therefore good neither is all he moves one unto therefore bad For instance sake he came in the habit of Saint Vrsula and moved one to enter into the Order of Nunnes will you say therefore veiling of Nunnes is bad PA. Luther used the selfe-same arguments against the Masse which Satan did now how could they bee good proofes that were brought in by Satan or why would Luther beleeve him PRO. Luther shewes onely how Satan tempted hâ—m to despaire for that he had beene a Masse-monger which Luther knew to be naught without the Devils prompting Besides all that the Devill speakes is not devillish the Devils that possessed the men confessed and sayd Thou art Christ the Sonne of the living God afterwards they entred into the Heard of Swine now the Heardmen they came into the Citty and told what was done and sayd now what though the Hâ—ard-men told how the Devils confessed this Article of the Christian Faith That Christ was the Sonne of the living God was not this a true confession though the Heard-men had fiâ—st heard it from the Devils and likewise reported it from them Luther heard such and such arguments against the Masse might not those arguments be true though Luther heaâ—d them from Satan Gods Ape It is true indeed that the Devill in telling truth
say it was not onely apparant enough in the Greeke and Easterne Churches and in such as had made an open separation from the Romish corruptions such as were in these Westerne parts the Wâ—ldenses Wickleâ—iâ—ts and Hussites but it was also within the community of the Romish Church it selfe even there as in a large field grew much good corne among tares and weeds there as in a great bâ—rne heape or garner was preserved much pure graine mixed with store of chaffe Object I except against that you have said Master Brereley cals it a Ridle To say your Church was under the Papacie as wheat is under the chaffe and yet the Papacie was not the true Church Answer It is no Enigma or Ridle it being all one in effect as to say the Christian Church at our Saviours comming and after consisting of Ioseph and Mary Simeon and Anna the Shepherds and the Sages Christs disciples and others was in and under the Iewish Church consisting of Scribes and Pharisees who with their false glosses and vaine traditions had corrupted the Law of God was not sanum membrum a sound part of Gods Church but as our Saviour saith Like sheepe without a Shepheard Mark 6.34 Object You say your Church was under the papacie but the papacie was not the true Church by the like reason you may say that the hidden Church of God is preserved among the Turkes can there be a Church without an outward ministerie Answer It followeth not and the reason of the difference is because amongst the Turkes there is not that meanes of salvation inasmuch as they have not given their names to Christ but the true Church of God may bee preserved withiâ— the Romish Church in as much as they have the Scriptures though in a strange tongue as also Baptismeâ— and lawfull ordination and the like helpes which God in all ages used that his Elect might begathered out of the midst of Babylon And whereas you urge an outward and publike ministery this maketh nothing against the Church of England which for substance hath the same descent of outward ordination with the Roman Church neither can any man shew a more certaine pedegree from his great Grand father than our Bishops and Pastors can fâ—om suâ—h Bishops as your Church accounts canonâ—call in the time of King Henry the eight and upward such â—aâ—re evidence can wee produce for an outward and publâ—ke miâ—istery in the Church of England and such ordination wee hold very necessary and yet in case it cannot be had Gods children by their private reading and meditation of that which they have formerly learned may supply the defect of a publike ministery even as some Christians at this day being slâ—ves in Turky or Barbarie may be saved wiâ—hout externall ministery but this is in case of extremity for us we never wanted a standing ministery Neither did the Waldenses Wicklivâ—sts and Hussites for so I call them for distinction sake ever want an outward and lawfull ministery amongst them for the administration of the word and Sacramentsâ— Object You say your Professors communicated with the Roman Church but did not partake in her errours as you call them did they not joyne with them in the Massâ— and the Letanies of the Saints and the like Answer The thing wee say is this that howsoever they outwardly communicaâ—ed with Rome yet divers of them misliked in their heart their grosser erroâ—s they groaned under the Babylonish yoake and desired reformation besides many of them were ignorant of the depth and mysterie of poperie Object If your Protestant Church were in bâ—ing at and before Luthers appearing then did such as were members thereof either make profession thereof or not if they did tell us their names and where they did so if they did not then were they but dissemblers in Religion according to that of Saint Paul Rom. 10.10 and our Saviour Math. 10.33 Answer I will but take what your Rhemists grant and reâ—oâ—t your owne argument they say That the Catholike Church in their time was in England although it had no publike government nor open free exercise of holy function whence I argue thus if their Roman Church had any being at that time in England then their Priests and Iesuits either made publike profession of their faith or not if they made open profession why then did they goe in Lay-mens habits and lurke in corners if they made not open profâ—ssion then were they but dissemblers Besides I have already given you in a Catalogue of our professors who within the time mentioned witnessed that truth which wee maintaine by their writings confessiâ—ns and Martyrdom Now for us wee have rejected nothing but popery wee have willingly departed from the Communion of their errors and additions to the faith but from the Communion of the Church wee never departed In a word there were some who openly and constantly withstood the errours and corâ—uptions of their time and sealed with their bloud that truthâ— which they with us professed others dissented from the same errours but did not with the like courage oppâ—se themselves such as would sâ—y to their friends in private Thus I would say in the Schooles and openly Sed maneat inter nos diversum sentio but keepe my Councel I thinke the contrary PA. Was not the Masse publickly used in all Churches at Lâ—thers aâ—pearinâ— was Protestancie then so much as in being saith Master Bâ—eâ—ely PRO. If by a Protestant Church saith learned Doctor Field we meâ—ne a Church beleeving and teaching in all poinâ—s as Protestants doe and beleeving and teaching nothing but that they doe the Latine or West Church wherein the Pope â—yranâ—ized before Luthers time was and continuâ—d a true Protestant Church for it taught as we doe it condemned the superstition wee have removed it groaned under the yoke of tyranny which wee have cast off howsoever there were many in the midâ—t of her that brought in and maintained superstition and advanced the Popes Supremacie But if by a Protestant Church they understand a Church that not onely dislikes and complaines of Papal usurpation but also abandonâ—th it and not onely teacheth all necessary and saving truth but suffâ—reth none within her jurisdiction to teach otherwise wee confesse that no part of the Westerne Church was in this sort a Pâ—otestant Church till a Reformation was begun of evils formerly dislikâ—d Now whereas it is objâ—ctâ—d that the Masse wherein they say many chiefe poinâ—s oâ— their Râ—ligion are comprehended was publickely uâ—ed at Luthers appearing It is answered by Doctor Field that thâ— usiâ—g oâ— the Masse as the publicke Liturgie is no good proofe inasmuch as manifold abuses in pâ—actice besides and contrary to thâ— word of the Canon and the inâ—enâ—â—â—â— of them that first compoâ—ed the sameâ— have creâ—t into iâ— as also sundry Apocryphall thiâ—gs have slipt into the publicke Service of the Church these things will bâ—tter appeare by â—articular instances Concerning private
Masses wherein the Pâ—iests alone doth Communicatâ— without the pâ—ople it is contraâ—y to â—he Canon of â—he Mâ—sse saying in the â—lurall number Sumpsimus we have â—ecâ—ived anâ— Quoâ—quot ex hoc altaris participatione c. That all wee which in â—he participatâ—on of the Altar have receivâ—d the sacred body and bloud of tâ—y Sonneâ— c. Iohn Hossmeâ—ster a learned man expounding the prayers of thâ— Massâ— hath these wâ—rds The thing it sâ—lfe proclaimeth it thâ—t as wâ—ll in the Greâ—ke as Latine Church not onely the Priest which sacrifâ—â—eth but the other Priests and Deacons also yea and the people or at leâ—st some part of them did Commuâ—icateâ— which custome how it grew out of use I know not but surely wee should labour to bring it in againe By this it appeares that the Priests receiving alone and the neglecting or excluding the communicating of others as noâ— much necâ—ssâ—ry is indeed a poynt of Romish Religion but conâ—rary to the words of the Canon and â—he ancient custome of the Church it proceeded from the iâ—devotion of the people or rather â—he neglâ—gâ—nce or errour of the guides of â—he Church that either failed to stirre them up to the performâ—nce of such a duty or made them belâ—eve their Act wâ—s sufficient to comâ—unicate the benefits of Christs passion to thâ—m but this course was misliked by them of the betâ—er sort Concerning Communion in one kind that is another poynt of Romish Religion supposed to be conteined in the Masse which yet wanâ—s the liking and approbation of the best and woâ—thiest guides of Gods Church then living Cassander saith It is sufficiently manifest that the â—niversall Church of Christ untill this day and the Westerne or Romane Church for more than a thousand yeares after Christ did minister the Sacrament in both kinds to all the members of Christs Church at least in publicke as it is most evident by innumâ—rable testimonies both of Greâ—ke and Latine Fathers It is true indeed â—hat in case of necessiâ—ie as when children or such as were sicke and weake were to â—eceive the Communion thâ—y used to â—ip the mysticall bread into the consecrated wine under preâ—enâ—e of Caâ—efull avoiding the danger of spilling it and greater reverence toâ—ards the holy Sacrament from this customâ— whâ—â—â— yet was â—islâ—ked as appeares by Hildebeâ—◠〈…〉 some proceedâ—d farther and began to teach the people that seeing the body and blood of Christ cannot be separated in that they partake of the 〈◊〉 they partake of the other also and that therefore it was sufficient to receive in one kind alone Nâ—â—thâ—r yâ—t could this give satisfaction for howsoever the custome of communicating under one kind prevailed yet there wanted not such as sufficiently expressed their judgement that communicating in both kinds as Christ first did institute and the Church for a long time observed was fit and convenient perfect and compleat and of more efficacie and cleerer representation than the other under one kind alone Come to another maine point the proper and propitiatory sacrifice for the quicke and the dead and see whether at Luthers appearing before and after all that used that Liturgy had such an opinion of a sacrifice Saint Ambrose and Saint Chrysostome by way of correction say Wee offer the same sacrifice or rather the remembrance thereof Peter Lombard proposing the question whether that which the Priest doth may properly be named a Sacrifice or Immolation answereth that Christ was only once truely and properly offered in sacrifice and that hâ—e is not properly immolated or sacrifised but in Sacrament and Representation onely Lyra saith that If thou say the Sacrifice of the Altar is daily offered in the Church it must be answered that thâ—re is no reiteration of the sacrifice but a daily commemoration of that sacrifice that was once offered on the Crosse. Georgius Wiâ—elius a man much honoured by the Emperours Ferdinand and Maximilian defines the Masse to be a Sacrifice Rememorative and of prayse and thankesgiving where many give thankes for the price of their Redemption The Author of the Enchiridion of Christian Religion publishâ—d in the provinciall Coâ—ncell of Colen saith In that the Church doth offer the true body and blood of Christ to God the Father it is meerely a representative sacrifice and all that is donâ— is but the commemorating and representing of that sacrifice which was once offered on the Crosse. By that which hath beene said it is cleare that the best and worthiest guides of Gods Church both before and after Luthers time taught not any new reall offering of Christ to God the Father as a propitiatory sacrifice to take away sinnes but in effect as wee doe namely that the sacrifice of the Altar is only the sacrifice of praise and thankesgiving and a meere representation and commemoration of the sacrifice once offered upon the Crosse his being the reall sacrifice on the Crosse ours only the Sacramentall Representation Commemoration and Application thereof so that Christ is not newly offered any otherwise than in that hee is offered in the view of God nor any otherwise sacrifised than in that his sacrifice on the Crosse is commemorated and represented And thus the Fathers terme the holy Eucharist an unbloody Sacrifice not because Christ is properly and in his substance offered therein but because his bloody sacrifice upon the Crosse is by this unbloody commemoration represented called to remembrance and applyed Besides these points mentioned I have already produced witnesses in all ages and in all parts of the world rejecting those bookes as Apâ—cryphall that wee doe and showne that even untill Luthers time the Church did not admit the Canon of Scripture which the Romanists now doe nor ever accounted those bookes canonicall which wee thinke to bee Apocryphall and by these instances it may appeare That all were not Papists who held with the Masse Thâ— thing then we say is this that though the Masse was generally in uâ—e at â—nd bâ—fore Luthers timeâ— yet diverâ— poynts belonging thâ—reunto were not beleeved by tâ—e worthieâ—t guides in God Church at and before Luthers time though indeed there were some in the Chuâ—ch â—hat so coâ—ceived of them as the Romanists now doe and the reason hereof is this They were not generally received by all mâ—n nor as the undâ—ubted determinations of the Church not as Dogmata fidei but Dogmata scholae controverted and diveâ—sly disputed among the learned holden with great libertie of Iudgement by the greatest Doctors as appeares by their owne bookes of controversies written by Bellarmine Suaâ—ez Azorius and others which confute their owne writers almost as much as they doe Proâ—estants Besides had they beene the undoubted doctrines and determinations of the Church all men would have holden them uniformly entirely and constantly as they held the doctrine of the Trinity the Creation the Incarnation of the Sonne of God and other Articles of the Faith Objection If these points
Church holding that shee was a pure Virgin both before the birth of Christ and that shee also continued a Virgin all her life after condemned Helvidius for an Heretike now why were the Helvidians adjudged Heretikes surely because they beleeved more than was reveled in the word and would have thrust that on the Church for an Article of faith which had no ground at all And this is your case you over-â—each in your beliefe as the Helvidian Heretikes did witnesse your tenets of Transubstantiation adoration of Images Invocation of Saints Purgatory the Popes supremacie and the like wherein your faith is monstrous like the Gâ—ant of Gath who had on every hand sixe fingers and on every foote sixe toes and so it is with you who in the new Creed of Pope Pius the fourth have shuffled in more Articles of faith than ever God and his Catholike Church made Neither doe wee fall short in our beliefe for wee measure our faith by the standard and rule of Gods written wordâ— now since it jumpeth with the rule it neither faileth in defect nor over-reacheth in excesse Now by this time I hope I have performed the taske which I undertooke PA. You have indeed given in a Catalogue of visible Professors in some part of Christendome but what is this to the whole universall Church PRO. Very much for these particular congregations serve to make up the whole state of Christ his Church militant here on earth now this Church farre and wide dispersed hath in her particular members for substance of doctrine taught as wee doe To begin with the Easterne Church amongst the Grecians and Armenians The Grecians held that the Romane Church had not any Supremacie of Iurisdiction authoritie and grace above or over all other Churches They celebrated the Sacrament of the Eucharist in both kinds as we doe They denied that there was any Purgatorie fire They denied Extreame unction to bee a Sacrament properly so called They reject the Religious use of Massie Images or Statues admitting yet Pictures or plaine Images in their Churches The Armenians denie the true body of Christ to be really in the Sacrament of the Eucharist under the Species of Bread and Wine They denie the vertue of conferring grace to belong to the Sacraments Ex Opere operato They denie the Popes Supremacie and are subject to two of their owne Patriarches whom they call Catholicks They reject Purgatorie They have their publicke Service in their vulgar language The North-east Church amongst the Russians and Muscovites as they were converted to Christianitie by the Grecians so have they ever since continued of the Greeke Communion and Religion They have their divine Service in their owne vulgar language They reject Purgatorie They communicate in both kinds They denie the spirituall efficacie of Extreame unction To proceede now to the south-South-Church amongst the Habassines or mid land Aethiopians the Character of their Religion is this as I find it in Maâ—hew Dresser who reports it from Francis Alvarez a Portugal Priest and sometimes Legat into Aethiopia They communicate in both kinds They use no Extreame unction They reverence the Saints but they pray not unto them they doe much honour the mother of Christ but they neither adore her nor crave her mediation They have their Liturgie or Church Service in their owne vulgar language They have a Patriarcke of their owne who is confirmed and consecrated by the Patriarcke of Alexandria on which See they depend and not on the Romane In the Westerne Church we have the consent of the Waldenses in France the Wicklevists in England commonly called Lollards and Thaborites in Bohemia Here be then the Greeke and Latine Church the Churches in the the East West North and South all of them teaching for substance of doctrine as we doe I know indeed that Bellarmine sleighteth these Churches of Graecia Armenia Russia and Aethiopia saying We are no more moved with their examples than with the examples of Lutherans and Calvinists for they bee either Hereticks or Schismaticks So that all Churches be they never so Catholicke and ancient if they subscribe not to the now Romanâ— Faith are either Schismaticall or Hâ—reticall But we may not be so uncharitable to these afflicted Churches For as learned Bishop Vsher saith if wee should take a survey of these Churches and put by the points wherein they did differ one from another and gather into one body the rest of the Articles wherein they all did generally agree we should find that in those propositions which without all controveâ—sie are universally â—eceived in the whole Christian world so much truth is conâ—eined as being joyned with holy obedience may be sufficient to bring a man unto everlasting salvation Object I except against the Greeke Church for that it denieth the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son of God Answer Every errour denieth not Christ the foundation Indeed it would have grated the foundation if they had so denied the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Sonne as that they had made an inequalitie betweene the Persons but since their forme of speech is that the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father by the Sonne and is the spirit of the Sonne and since as the Master of the Sentences saith Non est aliud It is not another thing to say the Holy Ghost is the Spirit of the Father and the Sonne then that he is or proceeds from the Father and the Sonne in this they seeme to agree with us In eandem fidei sententiam upon the same sentence of Faith though they differ in words Since I say they thus expresse themselves they may continue to bee a true Church though erronious in the point mentioned In like sort Scotus following his Master Lombard saith that The difference betweene the Greekes and the Latines in this point is rather Verball in the manner of speech than Reall and materiall Besides it seemes by the same Scotus that the Greeks held no other Heresie then Saint Basil and Gregory Nazianzene held whom yet no man durst ever yet call Hereticks so that you must give us the famous Greeke Church againe PA. I have yet divers exceptions to take at your Catalogue as also at your English Martyrologie for you have named out of Foxe some for Martyrs who were very meane persons namely Iohn Claydon a Curriar of Leather Richard Howden a Wooll-winder as also some by name Thomas Bagley for a Martyr who was a married Priest PRO. What though some of them were tradesmen did not Peter stay divers daies in Ioppa with one Simon a Tanner Act. 9.43 Was not that godly convert Lydia a seller of Purple Act. 16.14 Hath not God chosen the base things of the world to confound the mighty 1 Cor. 1.27 c. Besides they were no such base people for among others I produced
and differed from you so that they cannot belong to the same Church PRO. Concerning Wickliffâ— Husse and the rest if they have any of them borne record to the truth and resisted any innovation of corrupt Teachers in their times even to blood they are justly to be termed Martyrs yea albeit they saw not all corruptions but in some were themselves carried away with the streame of error Else if because they erred in some things they be no Martyrs or because we dissent from them in some things we are not of the same Church both you and we must quit all claime to Saint Cyprian Iustin Martyr and many more whom we count our ancients and predecessors and bereave them also of the honour of martyrdome which so long they have enjoyed Irenaus and Iustin Martyr held the error of the Millenaries Cyprian many others held Rebaptization necessary for such as were baptized by heretikes S Austin and the greatest part of the Church for sixe hundred yeares held a necessitie of the Eucharist to Infants and in other things differed one from another and from the Church in the aftertimes correcting their errors yet because they all entirely and stedfâ—stly held all the necessary fundamentall principles which these errors did not infringe neither held they these errors obstinatly but only for want of better information they were of the same Church and Religion whereof we are S. Austin saith There be some things in which the most Learned and best Defenders of the Catholike Rule the bond of faith preserved do sometimes not agree among themselves and one in some one thing saith righter than anoher Now if the different opinions of the Fathers in some points hindred not their union in substance of the faith and their being members all of the same Church why should the like or lesser differences now among the Protestants hinder their union in substance of the same faith and their being members all of the same Chuch both among themselves and with the Fathers yea but Wickliffe and Husse with others mentioned in our Catalogue they erred in point of faith it is true but yet their error was not joyned with pertinacy they errâ—d not incorrigibly buâ— for want of better information they erred in that doctrine of faith wherein the truth was not fully scanned declared and confirmed by a Plenary Councell as S. Austin speaketh had it beene we may well thinke the very same of all those holy men which Austin most charitably saith of Saint Cyprian Without doubt they would have yeelded to the truth being manifested unto them by the authority of the whole Church Object We are at vnity but your Protestants are at ods and namely your Lutherans and Calvinists in the point of the Sacrament the one holding Consubstantiation and the other opposing it Answer The Protestants especially we of the Church of England are at unity as appeares by the Harmony of our confessions as also by our joynt subscriptions to the Articles of Râ—ligion established And for the point mentioned the difference is nothing so great as you would have it thought for as the moâ—t learned and judicious Zanchius observeth and our Doctor Field out of him In all necessary points both the parties agree and dissent in one unnecessary which by right understanding one another might easily be compounded Both sides saith Zanchius doe agree that the elements of bread and wine are not abolished in their substance but onely changed in their use which is not onely to signifie but also to exhibit and communicate unto us the very body and blood of Christ with all the gracious working and fruits thereof Both parties agree that the very body and blood of Christ are truely present in the Sacrament and by the faithfull truely and really received Thus farre all parties agree that is in the whole necessary and sufficient substance of the doctrine of this Sacrament for the other matter wherein they differ de modo of the manner how Christ is present in the Sacrament seeing it is not expressed in the Scriptures in the judgement of Zanchius it might well be omitted and they themselves confesse when they have gone as farre as they can to determine it still it is ineffable and not possible to be fully understood It is enough for us saith the same Zanchius to beleeve the body and blood are there though how and in what manner wee cannot define So then in this maine controversie betweene them about Consubstantiation which as Zanchius saith did afterwards occasion that other of ubiquity in both these controversies the main truth on both sides is out of controversie that Christ is really truly exhibited to each faithfull Communicant and that in his whole person he is every where the doubt is onely in the manner how he is in the Symbols and how in heaven and earth Now for other ods amongst us they be but in Ceremonies or at worst in points of no absolute consequence whereas the differences amongst Papists concerne the life of Religion They differ concerning the Supreame authoritie of the Church whether it be in the Pope or in the Generall Councel The Councels of Constance and Basil determined that a Generall Councel was above the Pope the Councel of Florence decreed the Pope to be above a Generall Councel They differ concerning the manner of the conception of the Virgin Mary The Dominican Friers following the Thomists hold that she was conceived in Originall sinne the Franciscans hold the contrary The moderne Popes disâ—gree with the ancient concerning the dignitie of universall Bishop adoration of Images Transubstantiation Communion in both kinds and the Merit of good workes as is already showne in the fifth and seaventh Centurie of this treatise So cleere is it that some doctrines of the later Roman Church were opposed by the ancient Roman Bishops thâ—mselves to wit adoration of Images as also the dignity and title of universal Bishop by Gregorie the Great coÌ„munion in one kind â— as also the merit of good works by Leo the first TransubstantiatioÌ„ by Gelasius the first Besides the Iesuits and Dominicans differ at this day concerning the weighty point of Free-will and Grace The truth is the Popish Faith varieth not onely with their persons but according to time and place so that they can exchange their tenets upon occasion advance or cry downe their opinions at their pleasure as may best serve for their advantage For as Azorius the Iesuit saith It falls out often that that which was not the common opinion a few yeares since now is And that which is the common opinion of Divines in one Country is not so in another As in Spaine and Italy it is the common opinion that Latreia or divine worship is due to the Crosse which in France and Germaâ—y is not so but some inferior kind of worship due thereunto And Navarrus the Casuist sayes
comparison of God for as Iob saith he charged his Angels with folly Iob 4.18 Yea the heavens are not cleane in his sight Iob 15.15 So that Wickliffes comparison was very fit when he said the Saints were but like troubled waters and them remote and a farre off in respect of God who is the pure well-spring and at hand for as the Psalmist saith The Lord is nigh unto all them that call upon him yea all such as call upon him faithfully Of Iustification and Merits Chemninitius hath collected a number of sayings out of the Fathers and Schoolemen for proofe of Iustification by faith onely and amongst the rest for this fourteenth Century he produceth the testimonie of Nicholas Lyra. Wickliffe also taught that Salvationâ— that the merit of Christ is able by it selfe to redeeme all mankind from Hell and that this sufficiencie is to be understood without any other cause concurring PAP Master Brereley saith that the Doctrine of Iustification by onely faith was unknowne to Wickliffe Prot. Apol. Tract 2. cap. 2. sect 4. subdivision 2. PROT. By that which hath beene alleadged it appeares it was knowne to him but what if it were not so fully knowne to him Wickliffe was a long time kept in the mist of popery so that he could not by and by discerne the truth in all points we blame him not for that he saw no more we blesse God for it that he saw so much as he did specially in this darke time of the papacie PAP Walden saith that Wickliffe defended Humane Merits PROT. The same Friar saith that the Wiclevists overthrew the point of freewill if they tooke away freewill how held they humane merits D. Iames shewes out of Wickliffes workes that he refuted the doctrine of merit specially in his Commentaries upon the Psalmes where hee beareth downe those proud Pharisees which said that God did not all for them but thinke that their merits helpeth He taught that we are all sinners not onely from our mothers wombe but in our mothers wombe so that we cannot so much as thinke a good thought unlesse Iesu the Angel of the great Councell send it nor performe a good worke unlesse it be properly his good workes His mercie comes before us that wee receive grace and followeth us helping and keeping us in grace he concludes that it is good onely to trust in God was this man a Pelagian Frier Walden would make men beleeve he was one Howsoever there be other of our Countriemen Bradwardine Occham and Holcot men of speciall note in this age who speake excellently in this point Bradwardine in his defence of the cause of God against the Pelagians of his time disputeth this point at large shewing that Merit is not the cause of everlasting reward and that when the Scriptures and Doctors doe affirme that God will reward the good for their good merits or workes Propter did not signifie the cause properly but improperly either the cause of knowing it or the order or the disposition of the subject thereunto Occham saith No act done in puris naturalibus or proceeding from any created cause whatsoever can be meritorious but by the free promise and acceptation of God Holcot saith that our workes have this worth or value in them not naturally as if there were so great goodnesse in the nature or substance of the merit that everlasting life should be due unto itâ— but legallie in regard of Gods ordinance and appointment even as a little peece of copper of it owne nature or naturall value is not worth so much as a loafe of bread but by the ordinance and institution of the Prince it is worth so much Richard Fitzraufe afterward Archbishop oâ— Armagh in Ireland saith that the reward is rendred not for the condignitie of the worke but for the promise and so for the justice of the rewarder Gregorius Ariminensis concludeth peremptorily that no Act of man though issuing from never so great charitie meriteth of condignitie from God either eternall life or yet any other reward whether eternall or temporall and he giveth his reason out of the Apostle 1 Cor. 4.7 quoniam quilibet talis actus est donum dei juxta illud Apostoli 1 Cor. 4. because every such act is Gods gift every such worke is the gift of God and what hast thou that thou hast not received and if thou hast recâ—ived it why dost thou glory as if thou hadst not received it Durand also is most resolute in this point that which is conferred rather out of the liberalitie of the giver than out of the due of the worke doth not fall within the compasse of merit of Condignitie strictly and properly taken But whatsoever we receive of God whether it be grace or glory whether temporall or spirituall good whatsoever good worke we have before done for it yet we râ—ceive the same rather out of Gods liberalitie than out of â—he debt or due of tâ—e worke Therefore nothing at all falleth within the compasse of Merit of Condignitie so taken And the cause hereof is saith he because both that which we are and that which we have whether they bee good acts or good habits or the use of them is wholy in us by Gods liberalitie freely giving and preserving the same Now because none is bound by his owne free gift to give more but the receiver rather is more bound to him that giveth therefore by the good habits and by the good acts or uses which God hath given us God is not bound to us by any debt of Iustice to give any thing more so as if he did not give it he should be unjust but we are rather bound to God And to thinke or say the contrary is rashnesse or blasphemie and yet the Rhemists in their Annotations upon the sixth chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrewes and the tenth verse goe very farre in the contrary THE FIFTEENTH CENTVRIE From the yeare of Grace 1400. to 1500. The Benefit of Printing PAPIST WWhat say you of this fifteenth Age PROT. In this Age knowledge increased by the meanes of Printing which was found out at Strasburg in Germany by one Iohn Guttenburg And indeed the benefit of Printing was great for hereby the languages were divâ—lged bookes were farre easilier now dispersed than formerly the Manuscripts could be and learning and good letters were generally communicated Besides that in this Age God raised up divers Worthies who by their confessions writings and martyrdome witnessed the truth of the Gospell as namely Iohn Husse and Hierome of Prague PA. Were Hus and Hierome men of learning and a godly life and withall were they Martyrs as you would seeme to make them PRO. Indeed they bitterly inveighed against the ambition pride covetousnesse and negligence of the Clergie they urged the necessitie of oftner preaching then was usuall in those times and desired to have the Communion in both kinds according