then was the style of the ancient Fathers which you not seeing or not caring whom you strike at call a childish fallacy in one of the Leaâ—…ndest Cardinalls the Church ever had Nay the very Arians themselves knowing to their grief Roman and Catholick to be in the common phrase Synonima yet to disgrace Catholicks called them Romanists as you doe now Victor Bishop of â—…ica recounts that Iocundus an Arian said to King Theodoriâ—… If thou put Armogastus to death the Romanists will proclaime him a Martyr And Gregory of Tours records that Theodegâ—…lus an Arian or Pagan King seeing a Miracle done at the Font of a Catholiek Church said to himself Quia est ingeniuâ—… Romanorum this is a device of the Romans Hoc enim nomine vocitant nostrae Religionis homines For so they call men of our Religion 'T is you not we that stand in parallell with the Donatists The Roman Church is spread over the four parts of the world every where the same perfectly agreeing in Faith Sacraments and Discipline Your pretended Church is confined to a small part of Europe as the Donatists to Africa divided into many Sects condemning one another as incapable of Salvation You sought Communion with the Greek Church but were justly repuls'd and so would yet be wheresoever you tri'd there being no Church in the world except the Reformed that will joyn with you in externall communion of Sacraments Liturgies and Church Duties To make your Church swell you are forc'd now a dayes to take in most Hereticks in the world Nestorians Eutychians Monothelites Anabaptists Sacramentarians c. not remembring that famous saying gathered out of S. Austin cited by the most Learned Bishop of Chalcedon in his Treatise of Schisme Catholicks are every where and Hereticks are every where But Catholicks are the same every where and Hereticks are different every wâ—…ere Consequently for want of union cannot possiâ—…ly make up one Church And if they had all the same errours in Faith they would still be Hereticks and no Church of Christ. 28. Behold a reason in brief Though the word Church taken grammatically signifie any Congregation of men yet in the sence of the holy Scriptures Fathers and ancient custome 't is restrained to the sole company of Christians united in Divine Faith Sacraments and obedience to their Pastour Divine Faith therefore being of the essentiall form that makes one a member of the Church how can Hereticks who according to S. Paul have made shipwrack touching Faith be parts of the true Church upon which score the Apostle commands Titus c. 3. to avoid an Heretick because he is subverted and condemned of himself S. Cyprian denied Novatianus to be in the Curch Quando ipse in Ecclesia non sit Optâ—…s Meleviâ—…anus against Parmenian saith that â—…raeter unam Ecclesiam Besides one Church which is the true Catholick Church the rest among Hereticks are thought to be but are not S. Hierome against the Luciferians Nulla Congregatio haeretica potest dici Ecclesia Christi No hereticall Congregation can be called a Church of Christ. Bâ—…t none so â—…xpresse foâ—… this matter as S. Austin who in his 48. Epistle speaking to the Donatists Nobiscum estis You are saith he with us in Baptisme in the Creed in the râ—…st of our Lords Sacraments In ipsa Ecclesia Catholica non estis In the Catholick Church you are not Mâ—…rk that they believed all the Aâ—…ticles of the Creed and consequently your fundamentalls Now all the Congregations in the world disagreeing from the Roman in points of Faith are 〈◊〉 Hereticks and went out of her by known erroâ—…s Therefore no Churches nor parts of the tâ—…ue Châ—…ch 29. The Egyptians Ethiopians and Abyssins not of our Communion are Eutichians holding but one Nature Will and Operation in Christ and were condemned by the fourth General Council of Chalcedon with them side part of the Armenians the â—…acobits Georgians and Copthties The Tartarian Christians under the Turk and Persian in Asia follow Nestorius condemned by the third general Council of Ephesus for holding two Persons in Christ. Yet Baxter blushes not to screw both Nestorians and Eutichians into the Protestant Church under pretence that they 〈◊〉 noâ—… in sense but only in words from the Catholick Church As if the silly Minister understood their meaning better then all the learned Fathers of the two General Councils of Ephesus and Calcedon that condemn'd and cast them out of the Church for Hereticks What will Baxter answer to that Act of Parliament under Queen Elizabeth impowering Bishops to judge any matter or cause to be heretick which by the first four General Councils or any one of them have bin determin'd to be heresies If the opinions of Nestorius and Eutyches were not heresiâ—…s as well in sense as in words what did those two general Councils determin to be heresies The Abyssins reject the Council of Chalcedon to this day and admit circumcision with other ceremonies of thâ—… Iewes The Grecians with their adherents Muscovites and Russians even in S. Athanasius his Creed are excluded from Salvation for denying the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son Of whom your Thomas Rogers upon the 39. Articles pronounced thus This discovereth all them to be impious and erre from the way of truth which hold and affirm that the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father but not from the Son as this day the Grecian the Russians the Muscovites maintain Note that Rogers Book was perused and by the authoritâ—… of the Church of England allowed to be publick 30. Of Luther and Calvin's pretended Churches there is no doubt as holding many aged errours long since condemned by Councils and Fathers for Heresies See the Catalogues of old Heresies collected by Epiphanius Philostratus â—…sidor and S. Austin who for example having rank'd AErius â—…mongst Hereticks for denying Sacrifice and Prayer for the dead ends his Book assuring that whosoever holds any of those Hâ—…resies cannot be a Catholick Much lesse then such as hold with the Pelagians tha Children dying unbaptized may be saved with the Novatians no power in Priests to remit sins with the Manichees no externall Sacrifice or Free-will with certain Hereticks in S. Ignatius the Martyr's dayes no Reall presence with Vigilantius no single life of Priests with Iovinian no difference of merits c. 31. Whence I conclude that since all other Churches in the world disagreeing from the Roman are by sacred Antiquity held and confessed Hereticall and by consequence no Churches The Roman alone with all the Churches of her Communion is the true Church of Christ there being no other upon earth free from errours in Faith and the Roman never yet proved erroneous See 17. other parallells of Protestanâ—…s with the Donatists in Gualcerus hâ—…s Chronicon Seculo 4. 32. Heâ—…e also you have a flâ—…ng at Cardinall Peròn for his want of â—…mory as if he foâ—…got that the Preaching â—…f Châ—…ist
indeed their great disease So it was in very deed For the rot of heresie spreading amongst them how could they but perish rejecting the cure of their supream Pastour But you had recourse to the Scriptures The very Plea of all Heretiques Nolo verba quae non sunt scripta cry'd out an Arian against the Nicene Faith But you reserved to your selves what you deny'd to the whole Church the expounding of Scriptures and what passes all astonishment confessing your selves errable in the interpreting of Scripture yet in despight of all Gods Church you hammer'd out a negative Religion never known to the world before Yes to the Fathers of the Primitive Church say you Find your negative Articles in the Fathers and the matter is ended Mind onely by the way that 't will not suffice to alledge the not finding our positive Doctrines in the primitive Fathers for you do not onely not believe them as neither Turks nor Heathens do but you positively believe their opposite negatives contained expressely in your 39. Articles of Religion as Art 21. No general Council but may erre Art 22. No Purgatory no lawful invocation of Saints no respect due to holy images 28. No transubstantiation 31. No Sacrifices of Masses but blasphemous Fables c. These Negatives therefore being Articles of your Religion must not be bare non entities whereof there be many millions but verities divinely revealed otherwise unfit to be oâ—…jects of Christian Faith Consequently they must be found either in clear and uncontrovertible Scripture or in Scripture so interpreted by the primitive Fathers or in traditionary Doctrines of the same Fathers This you never being able to do 't is in vain to pretend to Fathers of the Primitive Church who never speak of your negatives revealed what ever they do of our positives 22. Sir 't is not the stile of your Progenitours to appeal to the Fathers Luther contemns them I care not if a thousand Austins a thousand Tertullians stand against me Zwinglius slights them Thou begiâ—…n'st to cry Fathers Fathers the Fathers have so delivered but I doe not aske thee Fathers nor Mothers I require the Word of God Iewel appeal'd to the first six hundred yeares but was rebuked for it by Doctor Humphrey He was over liberall c. What haue we to doe with Fathers Whitaker values them not a rush Neither think your self to have proved any thing though you bring against us the whole swarm of Fathers except that which they say be justified not by the voyce of man but by God himself Which is to say that though all the ancient Fathers should agree upon a Text of Scripture yet if Mr. Whitaker disagrees they are all to be rejected S. Austin will tell you that all Heresies are hatcht whil'st good Scriptures are ill understood and what in them is understood amisse is rashly and boldly asserted What greater rashnesse then for one man to pretend the true sence of Scriptures against the current of Antiquity Is it not a stupendious thing that the Bishop of Canterbury should say of King Iames at the Conference of Hampton-Court Undoubtedly his Majesty spake by the speciall assistance of the Holy Ghost and that this assistance should be denied to the whole Church of Christ in her greatest and most sacred Assemblies But if you ever admit of an appeale to the Fathers 't will surely be to such an age wherein few or none treated the matter in question and then the first that mentions it in after ages must be in your judgement a brocher of Novelties though none of those times ever thought so for as what S. Iohn writ in his Gospel beyond other Canonicall Writers stay'd unwritten above threescore yeares after the Ascension till some occasion arose of leaving it upon record and yet in that interim it was doubtlesse known to the Primitive Church So why might not other Doctrines of the Apostles be kept onely by Tradition tâ—…ll some hint was given to the Fathers of ensuing ages to publish them in writing How many things passe long before they are committed to paper 23. At length you separated from our ulcers that is from the three essentials Communion in Faith Communion in Sacraments and the Ministry or Government of our Church and yet left the body or substance undestroy'd But your Perkins will tell you that 't is a notable policy of the Devil which he hath put into the heads of sundry men of this age that our Religion and the present Church of Rome are all one in substance He addes to this that we rase the foundation Be it as 't will either Salvation might have been had in the Church you left or no. If it might as you must say that left her entire in substance 't was a damnable Schisme to separate from her seeing Protestants confesse that no cause but necessity of Salvation can justify such a separation If it might not then 't was no true Church nor had Christ any true Church upon earth able to save men and consequently no Church at all since that in separating from the Roman you divided from all Churches in the world as I shall shew anon and you have never yet shewed what ulcer in particular it was for which you could not escape eternal death in the whole Church of Christ before Luther 24. Here you tell us of a remarkable infirmity obvious in our Writers That they complain you have left their Church but never shew you that Iota as to which you have left the word of God or the Apostles or the uncorrupted and Primitive Church or the four first General Councils As if it were possible to leave the whole Church of God and not to leave the word of God so strictly commanding to hear the Church Saint Austin thought he obey'd the word of God when he obey'd the Church commending the word of God and which otherwise he would not have believed to be the word of God And can you hope to disobey the Church and not disobey the word of God so highly commending the same Church This truth hath been made to shine out as clear as the Sun at mid-day by Bellarmin Peròn Stapleton and others but obstinate blindnesse will not see it You talk of primitive times the first four Councils purest Christians but good Mr. Doctor can you demonstrate out of Scripture that all contests about faith 〈◊〉 arising in future ages were to be decided in those primitive times or in the four first Generall Councils and those decisions by unperishable or unalterable records to be all transmitted to our dayes Can you clearly shew that by Christs command his Church was onely to be heard in her younger age and ever after unheard and slighted If not your appeale to those times is but a desperate shift extorted from you by the force of our Arguments And yet at that very weapon we defie and vanquish you by your own Confessions Hath not
Cardinal Peròn in his Reply to King Iames clearly evinc'd the Pope's Supreamacy to have been acknowldgâ—…d in the first four Councils Doe not those two Learned Books the Protestants Apology and the Progeny 〈◊〉 of Catholicks and Protestants shew undeniaâ—…ly out of your own Authours that the Roman Church remained pure for the first four hundred and forty yeares after Christ giving that reason why the Fathers of those ages Austin Epiphanius Optatus Tertullian and Irenaeus appealed against Hereticks to the succession of the Roman Bishops because saith Doctor Reynolds it was a proof of the true faith at that time And this answer of your Doctors is highly commended by Bishop Morton in the Protestants Appeale pag. 573. Doe not the same two Books farther shew from your own concessions and out of the ancient Fathers that within those 440 yeares even up to Pope Sylvester and Constantine's time and so to the Apostles there were Churches dedicated in the honour of Martyrs Relicks Pilgrimages to Hierusalem forbidding Priests to marry vowed Virginity Invocation of Saints the Primacy of the Roman Bishop the unbloody Sacrifice Reall presence Transubstantiation Confession Prayer for the Dead Fâ—…ee-will Iustification by Works Merit Tradition Purgatory Vowes Evangelicall Councils Monachisme and other Mysteries of Faith What then doe you talke as if none of our tenets or practises in which we differ from you could be trac't by sure footsteps as far as the times of the purest Christians 25. Do not you beat the ayre whilest you labour to prove those Doctrines to be novelties which your own confesse to have had a being in the very times of your appeal the times of purest Christians But if disowning your domestick witnesses you will needs draw down the birth of such pretended Novelties to the sixth age about S. Gregory the Great 's time in whose dayes Popery say yours was undeâ—… full sail then we justly expect that you demonstrate how such a presse of errours either did or could within the narrow compasse of 160. years crowd into the Church without noise or opposition of Nation City Family oâ—… single Person Especially if we consider first the reluctancy of mans nature to accept of any Doctrines so contrary to flesh and bloud as Confession fasting Celibate in the Clergy Beâ—…ef of the Real Presence c. Secondly the perpetual vigilancy of the Pastours Christ left in his Church to watch upon the walls of Ierusalem day and night which duty thâ—… Pastours of those dayes complyed with so exactly that from the year 327. till the year 680. they held against heresies newly rising six General Councils whereof one was call'd only nine years before the said interval as the Council of Ephesus two during the very space of the 160. years to wit that of Calcedon and the second of Constantinople the last fourscore yeares after How is it imaginable that none of these Councils meeting so frequently to suppresse errours should take notice of so many new Doctrines you object if in truth they had been Novelties Thirdly that those Doctrines stole not into the Roman Church alone but spread through all the Christian Churches then extant in the world both East and West with all which S. Gregory held communion as may be seen in his Epistles Can the wit of man conceive such â—…ilfull obstinate dead silence in all Churches at the starting up of so many false Doctrines in so short a space especially all the Fathers holding Novelties in Doctrine for Errours 26. But here comes in a childish fallacy even of our greatest Gyants in dispute that they shut up the Church in Rome as the Donatists in Africa and then call it the Catholick Church not formally but causally faith Cardinal Peròn If Cardinal Peròn were but a Child 't were no great shame to slip into a fallacy but for a Preacher of the Court to deceive his Royal Auditory cannot be excused from an Imposture Doth Cardinall Peròn shut up the Church in the Citty of Rome even causally Doth he not distinguish two acceptions of the Roman Church The first signifies all the Orthodox Churches of the world united in faiâ—…h and charity with the Roman Bishop as with their Head and Supreame Governour under Christ. And in this sence according to Antiquity the Catholick Church not causally but formally is styled the Roman Church as all Nations under the Roman Emperour and not the City and Territories of Rome alone were called the Roman Empire All the twelve Tribes of Israel the Jewish Church and all Nations under the Patriarch of Constantinople the Greck Church as the Muscovites and Russians though not Grecians by birth In this notion S. Austin himâ—…elf saith that against the Pelagians not onely the Councils of Bishops and the See Apostolâ—…ck but also Univer sam Romanam Ecclesiam the whole Roman Church and the whole Roman Empire were most justly â—…ncens'd Now because the Bishop of the Roman Diocesse as Pope that is as S. Peter's Successoâ—… and Vicar of Christ is the head â—…f all Bâ—…shops and by him all Churches are preserved in unity therefore that particular Chuâ—…ch of the Râ—…man Diocesse is the Mother and Mistresse of all Churches whence in a second acception the Roman Church is not improperly callâ—…d the Catholick Church not formally but causally in regaâ—…d of that unity she infuseth into the Catholick Church knitting all the Members thereof in one Body under one supreame Head What ere you think this was the sence of the ancient Fathers Tertullian speaking of Marcion who had offered money to the Roman Church saith Marcion gave his money to the Catholick Church which was rejected both it and himself when he fell into Heresie S. Cyprian speaks thus to Antorianus You writ that I should send a Copy of the Letters to Cornelius Pope to the end that he might understand that â—…ou communicate with him that is to say with â—…he Catholick Church S. Cyprian also wâ—…ites to Cornelius It seemed good to us thâ—…t Letters should be sent to all our Colle gues aâ—… Româ—… that they should firmly embrace yâ—…ur Commâ—…ion â—…at is to say the Catholick Church And S. Ambrose in his Funerall Oration upon the death of his Brother Satyrus writes that Satyrus comming to Sardinia then infected with the Heresie of the Lucifâ—…rians called for the Bishop enquired of him Utrumnam cum Episcopis Catholicis hoc est cum Romanâ—… Ecclesia conveniret Whether he 〈◊〉 iâ—… communion wâ—…h the Catholick Bishops that is with the Church of Rome And â—…ohn Patriarch of Constantinople writes in these words to Pope Hormisâ—… 1000. yeares past We promise hereafter not to recite in the sacred mysteries the names of those that have separated themselves from the Catholick Church that is to say who agree not fully with the See Apostolick Note that in all these places I have cited the words that is or that is to say are not mine but the Authours cited 27. This
Cathedra una monstretur The beginning comes from unity The Primacy is given to Peter that there may be shown one Church of Christ and one Chayre And in the same Treatise He that forsakes the Chayre of Peter upon which the Church is founded do's he trust that he is in the Church Secondly from his 71. Epistle Peter whom our Lord chose first and upon whom he built his Church c. Thirdly from his 40. Epistle There is one God one Christ one Church and one See by the word of our Lord founded upon S. Peter Insomuch that the Centurists famous Protestants reprove S. Cyprian for it saying Passim dicit Cyprianus supra Petrum Ecclesiam fundatam S. Cyprian often sayes that the Church is founded upon S. Peter Fourthly from that the same Centurists blame likewise S. Hierome for the like sayings who upon the 6. of S. Matthew speaking of S. Peter hath these words Secundum Metaphoram Petrae rectè dicitur ei aedificabo Ecclesiam meam superte According to the Metaphor of a Rock 't is rightly said unto him I will build my Church upon thee And in his first Book against Iovinian Inter duodecim unus eligitur ut Capite constituto Schismatis tolleretur occasio Amongst the twelve one is chosen that a Head being establisht the occasion of Schisme might be taken away Which place of S. Hierome is alledged by Doctor Covell above cited page 107. to prove the necessity of one Head for preventing Schismes and Dissentions in the Church Finally from his 75. Epistle when speaking to Pope Damasus Beatitudini tuae saith he id est Cathedrae tuae communione consocior super illam Petram aedificatam Ecclesiam scio c. I am joyned in communion with your Blessednesse that is to Peter's Chayre upon that Rock I know the Church is founded Now Sir by these clear and unquestionable Texts is it not manifest that in your Sermon to the Court you cheated these Fathers out of their true meaning The seventh Demonstration Page 18. 51. If every Patriarch and Bishop be appointed to be chief in his proper Diocesse as the Bishop of Rome is the chief in his then the Pope cannot be chief or Head of the whole Church But so it was appointed by the Canons of the two first General Councils Nicè and Constantinople Therefore the Bishop of Rome cannot be chief or head of the whole Church The Minor is stoutly proved first by the 6. Nicene Canon in which there is not a word of that sense The Canon is this Let the ancient custome held through Egypt Lybia and Pentapolis that the Bishop of Alexandria have power over those Provinces because that also with the Bishop of Rome this is usual or customary that is to allow that power in the Bishop of Alexandria for if this be not the sence how could the Judges in the Council of Chalcedon inferre out of this Canon Omnem primatum all primacy in the See of Rome as we shall presently see The fifth Canon of the second Generall Council runs thus The Bishop of Constantinople must have the honour of Primacy after the Bishop of Rome because it is new Rome Doe not those words after the Bishop of Rome rather prove the absolute Primacy of the Roman See Secondly in the Council of Chalcedon which was the fourth Generall Act. 16. the Judges having heard the recitall of those two Canons concluded thus By what hath been deposed of every one we conceive that all Primacy and chief honour is reserved to the Arch-Bishop of old Rome What Canons I pray but those of the two first Generall Councils you have alledg'd which are so far from equallizing the Roman Bishop with the rest that they give him all Primacy that is both of Order and Jurisdiction For Primacy of Order alone is neither all Primacy nor the chief Honour Primacy of Jurisdiction exceeding it far This Primacy is farther pâ—…oved because the same Council pretending to grant the Bishop of Constantinople a Primacy over the East after the Pope of Rome according to the second Generall Council expressely addes that he should have power to order the Metropolitans in the Diocesses of the East that the Bishops chosen by the Clergy of whatsoever Metropolis of the East be presented to the Arch-Bishop of Constantinople that he might either confirm or reject them as he pleased And both Theodorus Balsamon upon the Council of Sardica cap. 3. 5. and Nilus de Primatu Papae cap. 7. from those two Canons of the second and fourth Generall Councils endeavour to conclude a right in the Bishop of Constantinople to admit of appeales from all the East Wherefore your exposition out of Iustellus concerning primacy of Order alone is manifestly false and against the Text. As therefore the primacy aimed at for the Bishop of Constantinople over the East but never obtained because the Church of Rome alwayes rejected those two Canons as derogatory to the precedence of Alexandria and Antioch established by the first Council of Nice was both of Order and Jurisdiction so much more the acknowledged Primacy of the Pope over the whole Church Whereupon the Fathers of that Council writing to Pope Leo say You presided in this Assembly as the Head to the Members When therefore in the same Council of Chalcedon it is said that the Fathers of the Church had given those priviledges to the See of old Rome because it was the Imperiall City Their meaning is not that the Cities greatnesse was the immediate cause of the Primacy For that was the being S. Peter's Successor as appeares by the Title they gave S. Leo's Epistle in their Speech to the Emperour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the speech of Peter's Chayre and having read that Epistle thus acclaymed Peter spoke by the mouth of Leo And in their relation given to Saint Leo speaking of Dioscorus who had dared to excommunicate the Pope in a false Council called without the Pope's consent which never was lawfull He shewed say they malice against him to whom the custody of the Vineyard was committed The Fathers therefore meant causam causae the remote cause to wit the cause why St. Peter fixt his Seat at Rome as being the head of the Roman Empire to the end saith S. Leo that the light of truth which was revealed for the Salvation of all Nations might from the head of the world be communicated effectually to the whole Body And so the Emperours Theodosius and Valentinian in a Law made six yeares before the Council of Chalcedon comprehend all the causes saying that three things establisht the See Apostolick S. Peters merit who is Prince of the Apostolicall Colledge the dignity of the City and Synodicall authority that is Divine Ecclesiasticall and Civill right 52. The strict injunction you mention of the second Generall Council laid upon Bishops not to meddle but with their own Discesse was not to hinder Hierarchy but confusion And so by setting bounds
return to the Church How then do's this heresie so universally resisted destroy the Infallibility of the Church 64. The Donatists were but a poor crew in Africa condemned first by Melchiades Pope in a Council at Rome and then by two hundred Bishops some say six hundred at Arles in France against which heresie S. Austin fought gallantly with the Sword of the unwritten word laying this principle that Quod universa tenet Ecclesia nec Conciliis institutum sed semper retentum est non nisi authoritate Apostolica traditum rectissime creditur What is not clearly contained in Scripture or instituted by Councils and yet is held by the whole Church is to be believed to have been delivered by the Apostles 65. The Arians 't is true spread for a while by power and violence but were condemn'd by the first Council of Nice and by Iulius Pope in a Roman Council and by the Council of Sardica in Thracia and of Arimini in Italy and in many other Provinciall Councils Neither did that herefie ever reach to the breast of Pope Liberius as I have shewed before At Sirmium 't is true being call'd thither after two yeares banishment he subscribed to the first Confession of Faith in all respects Orthodox except that the word Homoousion was left out as being new and not found in Scripture 66. Of the Millenaries there were two sorts the one held that Christ should reign after the Resurrection for a thousand yeares upon earth in all carnall pleasures of this opinion was Cerinthus and his followers and this is likely to have been condemn'd with the heresie of the Apollinarists in a Roman Council under Pope Damasus as Baronius records An. 373. against which Doctrine Dennis Bishop of Alexandria writ long before in confutation of Nepos a Bishop of AEgypt The others addicted those thousand yeares to chaste and spirituall delights and of this thought were some of the ancient Fathers but not the whole Church For many saith S. Iustin who are of the pure and pious sense of Christians doe not acknowledge that Doctrine 67. These Fathers were drawn to that opinion by Papias Bishop of Hieropolis who as Eusebius recounts said he had it from Aristion and Iohn Priests Auditors of the Apostles A doctrine unknown and rather fabulous saith Ensebius But for my part I think he took the spirituall and mysticall Trâ—…dition of the Apostles mâ—…terially according to the Letter and could not discern what they spoke in figures to sucking Children and little ones Who also by the small works he writ appeares to have been of a mean and lesse capable wit However this Chillianisme as it was never defined by any Generall Council or particular Synod or any Roman Bishop So with Cornelius à Lapide upon the twentieth of the Apocalyps I dare not say 't is an Heresie because I have neither clear Scripture nor Decrees of Councils by which it is condemn'd as Hereticall The same saith S. Hierome upon Ieremy lib. 4. Neither doe we find it in the Catalogues of old Heresies set down by S. Austin Philastrius Isidor or Guido Carmelita 'T is in Epiphanius but as relating to Cerinthus of a carnall reign 68. Communion of Infants was never held absolutely necessary by the whole Church For the ancient Fathers unanimously taught that Baptisme takes away all sin Baptisme saith S. Basil is the the death of sin the regeneration of the Soul the reconciliation of the Kingdome of Heaven Nay Orosius in his Apology S. Prosper in his ninth Answer to the French Objections and S. Fulgentius de fide ad Petrum all three Disciples of St. Austin undoubtedly maintain that Baptisme gives salvation and life everlasting Hold most firmly saith S. Fulgentius that holy Baptisme sufficeth little ones to salvation as long as their age is not capable of reason Where it is to be noted that when Infant-Communion was in use they were first Baptized then Confirmed and lastly received the holy Holy Eucharist as is gathered out of the Laoâ—…icean Counciâ—… held some time before the Council of Nice and confirmed by the Synod of Trull Inunctos etiam sacro Chrismate Divino Sacramento communicare convenit And yet both the Elibertin Council under Pope Sylvester Can. 77. and S. Hierome against the Luciferans affirm that a man dying before confirmation is saved and consequently before Communion Finally as the learned Authour of the Systeme observes neither in any of the British or English Councils nor in S. Gregory's instructions given to S. Austin the Monk is there any mention of this matter 69. As for S. Austin he often attributes a total remission of sins to Baptisme affirming exexpressely that Children when they die are either saved by Baptisme or damn'd for Original sinne Hoc Catholica fides novit This Catholick Faith knoweth And again in his 59. Epistle Infants by the Sacrament of Christian grace without doubt appertain to life everlasting and the Kingdome of Heaven Therefore that so great a Doctor may not contradict himself I say with Cardinal Peròn his meaning to be that Infants must either receive actually or in voto by vow of the Church implicitely containedin Baptisme For by Baptisme the Child is inserted into the mystical Body of Christ which mystical Body is represented by the holy Eucharist Now because Christ our Saviour said that without the eating of his flesh life is not to be had hence the Saint proves against the Pelagians thâ—… absolute necessity of Baptisme not only to enter into the Kingdome of Heaven as they granted but also to life everlasting which they deny'd For without Baptisme none can eat Christs flesh either really as in persons of due age or in voto as in Children This to have been S. Austin's mind is clearly gathered out of these ensuing words which venerable Bede upon the first to the Corinthians chap. 10. and Hugo Victorinus Lib. 2. de Sacramentis cap. 20. attributes to S. Austin None must any wise doubt that every one of the faithful is then made partaker of the Body and Bloud of Christ when in Baptisme he is made a member of Christ or that he is estranged from the Communion of that bread although before he eates that bread and drinks that Cup he departs this life in the union of Christs Body 7. The â—…ame may be said of Pope Innocent the first who in his Epistle to the Fathers of the Melevitan Council rather insinuates that Baptisme it self is the eating of Christs Body Neither do's Maldonat say that infant-Infant-communion was either believed necessary or practised by the whole Church but onely that S. Austin held it as of Faith and as the Tenet of the whole Church Nor do's Maldonat deny that this very thought concerning Faith and the whole Church was St. Austin's private opinion 71. Whence it followes that albeit the practice in some parts of the Church might have lasted six hundred yeares yet neither in the whole Church nor
concerning corruptions intrenching upon fundamentalls whereof you spoke not a word before nor ever told us which they were 116. Why may not all hereticks in the world by this example pretend to let out Schisme and not to introduce it Why not stand to it as you here doe that the actual departure from the Church is indeed yours but the causal the Church's Why not that if a secession be made from the Church 't is in the very selfsame measure that the Church makes one from Christ As if there could be a just cause to depart from the Universal Church We are certain saith S. Austin that no man could justly separate from the Communion of the whole world Epist. 48. And again There is no just necessity of dividing unity lib. 2. cont Parmenia cap. II. And your pretended Arch-Bishop Laud joynes with S. Austin There can be no just cause to make a Schisme from the whole Church Sect. 21. pag. 139. Now Luther Calvin and all their followers separated from all the Churches in the world So Luther confesseth He had none to assist him but was left alone and alone stood in the Battell forsaken of all Praefat in 1 Tom. contra Regem Angliae And for this we have the expresse confession of Chillingworth that seeing there was no visible Church but corrupted Luther forsaking the external Communion of the corrupted Church could not but forsake the external Communion of the Catholick Church c. cap. 5. pag. 274. So Calvin it is absurd that since we have been forced to divide our selves from all the world we should now in our very beginnings disagree amongst our selves Ep 141. So Chillingworth cap. 5. pag. 237. As for external Communion of the visible Church we have without scruple formerly granted that Protestants did forsake it So Perkins giving the reason of the Separation for that during the space of 900. yeares the Popish Heresie spread it self over the whole world and for many hundred yeares an universall Apostacy overspread the face of the whole earth What else I pray For if every point of Faith in which we differ from Protestants as Masse praying to Saints use of Images c. be Heresie and Apostacy all the Churches in the world besides Protestants were both Hereticks and Apostates And what other sense can that insolent vaunt of Luther have in his Letter to the Strasburgians Christum a nobis primò vulgatum audemus gloriari We dare boast that Christ by us was first preached As if none in the whole world had a right belief of Christ before Luther This this was really the Doctrine of your first age though now in the second many of you for very shame disclaime from it and seek with Doctour Usher the first English broacher of this new Heresie in his Sermon at Wansted before King Iames An. 1624. to hook in and matriculate in your Protestant Church the Greeks Abyssines AEgyptians Iacobits though differing never so much amongst themselves and from you and holding Heresies expressely condemned in former Councils You may well affect their Communion but I am sure they will scorn yours 117. I said the first English broacher Forindeed this monster of Doctrine fell first from the Apostate Pen of Marcus Antonius de Dominis who to gratifie the Sectaries forged the distinction of fundamentals and not fundamentals and so made up a Church of all Sects in the world agreeing in fundamentals a Church not to be found either in Scriptures Councils Fathers nay nor any unorthodox Writings of former ages For what Christians upon earth ever taught before that salvation might stand with a voluntary disbelief of the least point of Faith known to be sufficiently proposed by the Church as revealed by God As if the sin of incredulity consisted rather in the greatnesse of the matter revealed then in denying Gods veracity equally engaged in points noâ—… fundamentall 118. Yet still Saint Austin's words stand uncontrollable that no man can justly separate himself from the Communion of the whole world To whom your Doctour Whitaker subscribes lib. 3. cont Dureum Sect. 3. He goeâ—… from the Gospel who sayes the whole world can conspire against Christ. 119. Yea but otherwise Saint Paul had been too blame in that he said to the Corinthians Come ye out from among them and be ye separate 2 Cor. 6. 17. Very true if it were the same to separate from known Heathens and publick Idolaters of whom Saint Paul speaks who are no Church and from the whole Church of Christ against which the Gates of Hell shall never prevaile Neither did the Church thrust you out as you say but as Saint Iohn fitly termes it ex nobis exierunt You went out from us by your wilfull errours Haeretici in semetipsos sententiam dicunt suo arbitrio ab Ecclesia recedendo saith Saint Hierome In Epist ad Tit. cap. 3. Hereticks give sentence against themselves parting from the Church of their own accord Nay but the Church by her hostilities and excommunications departed from you Yes indeed just as the four first Generall Councils departed from the Arians Macedonians Nestorians and Eutychians by their hostilities and anathemaes and not rather as Saint Cyprian sayes of other Hereticks By being excommunicated they received their due punishment not cast out by us but they of their own accord casting out themselves and wilfully thrusting themselves out of the Church Epist. 40. So that if the Devil drive you out as you confesse you were your own selfe-Devils and not the Church which excommunicated you 120. Yet I acknowledge with Saint Austin that every Christian who is excommunicated is delivered up to Satan but how to wit because the Devil is out of the Church as Christ is in the Church and by this he is as it were delivered to the Devil who is removed from the Communion of the Church whence the Apostle demonstrates those to be excommunicated whom he pronounceth to be delivered to Satan In this sense we grant that the holy Church by excommunication thrust out Protestants as the Apostle did the incestuous Corinthian after he had first by that detestable sin given the cause to be expell'd The excommunication was the punishment not the crime You were once under the spirituall government of the Roman Church believed her Doctrine avowed her practises Of your own private 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or election you renounc'd her authority disbelieved her Doctrine cast out her practises Behold Schisme at your door that is a voluntary recession from the former Authority Faith and Discipline of the Church for nine hundred yeares acknowledged in the Land The anathema following was both just as thundring the offenders and wholly necessary to preserve the innocent from your contagion 121. To what you cite in the Margin against Hildebrand or Gregory the seventh Baronius hath fully answer'd Anno Domini 1076. 1077. showing out of approved Authours of the same age that William Bishop of Mastrecht the chief
alone as his reason evinces For he Sacrificeth to God saith the Saint not to them because he is God's not their Priest And against Faustus the Manichaean he farther declares wherein this high invocation consists Which of the Priests saith he serving at the Altar in place of the holy Bodies ever said at any time We offer unto thee O Peter Paul Cyprian This therefore is the invocation which S. Austin denies to Saints 13. Your errour is inexcusable in deriving the Catholick Church's infallibility in matters of Faith either from Gnosticks or Disciples of Marcus whilest you might know that holy Scriptures Councils Fathers and reason convinces the contrary Quae conventio Christi Belial what relation hath Christs promises his spirit of truth abiding for ever teaching his Church all truths making it the house of the living God Pillar and Firmament of truth with the filthy errours and practises of those beastly Heretiques A Preacher of the word of God should abhorre all but especially such abominable untruths 14. Irenaeus in the Book and Chapter you quote having said that Marcus had a Devil at his elbow by whose whispers he prophesied and imparted that guilt to women fit for his purpose because his chief businesse was with Women 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 addes that his Disciples driving the same trade by deceipts corrupted many silly women giving themselves out for perfect men as if none upon earth neither Peter nor Paul could match them for knowledge Is not this a perfect Character of Luther and his Disciples your Reformers They had Devils at their eares by Luther's and Zwinglius's confession they lusted insatiably after women broke vowes of chastity seduced silly Virgins corrupted Nunnes and boasted of their abilities above the whole Church even the Apostles The Gospel is so copiuosly preached by us that truly in the Apostles time it was not so clear saith Martin Luther And again What arguments soever the ancient Orthodox Fathers the Schooles of Divines the authority of Councils and Popes the consent of ages and of all the Christian people can help you to lay them all aside We admit nothing but Scriptures and so that with us alone is the certain authority of interpreting what we interpret that is the sense of the Holy Ghost what others bring though they be many and great men comes from the Spirit of Satan and a distracted brain This indeed is to be Marcists and Gnosticks 15. 'T is also an affected errour to say we take our Purgâ—…tory from Origen and Tertullian doth not Bellarmin prove it out of Scripture alledging near twenty Texts so expounded by the ancient Fathers Nay doth not your own Chemnitius confesse that Dionisius the Areopagite mentions Prayer for the Dead Do's not your Doctor Fulk plainly averre that Tertullian Cyprian Austin Hierome and a great many more doe witnesse that Sacrifice for the Dead is the Tradition of the Apostles Insomuch that Zwinglius being urged with the authority of S. Chrysostome and S. Austin deriving that custome from the Apostles gives this wild answer If it be so as Austin and Chrysostome report I think the Apostles suffered some to pray for the Dead for no othor cause then to condescend to their infirmity But what if the fiâ—…st mention of Purgatory were found in Origen and Tertullian who lived in the beginning of the third age was it therefore a dreame of their own brain or an Heresie of Montanus as if he could commend nothing but errours Did not the Fathers of all ensuing ages follow that Doctrine without contradiction and the whole Church of God embrace it as comming from the Apostles Hoc enim à patribus traditum universa observat Ecclesia saith S. Austin This the universall Church observes as delivered by the Fathers 16. Thirdly you erre prodigiously in affirming that your Reformers in England discovered in the Roman Church horrible corruptions in point of practice and hideous errours in point of Doctrine and that in matter of faith too whereas hitherto no Protestant in the world hath ever been able to shew any one such errour or corruption What you can discover shall appear hereafter in your goodly demonstrations 17. You adde to that another gross errour that those blessed Reformers found by what degrees the several errours corruptions were slightly brought into the Church as well as the severall time wherein the Novelties received their birth and breeding But good Mr. Pierce how often have you Protestants been challeng'd to shew when any such Novelties against faith or manners sprung up in the Church and yet could never doe it How often have you been told that the Roman Church was once a true and pure Church Rom. 1. and that if it fell it must be either by Apostacy Heresie or Schisme Not by Apostacy because she believes in Christ If by Heresie what lawfull Council what Fathers what other Church of Christ ever censur'd or condemn'd her If by Schisme from what other true Church did she ever separate name that Church as distinct from the Roman if you can For I suppose that in a Schisme the rent or wound cannot be mortall to both parts least Christ should have no Church at all upon earth And because such a Church different from the Roman cannot possibly be found therefore some of your Learned Protestants ingenuously confesse it We cannot tell saith Doctor Powell by whom or at what time the enemy did sow the Papists Doctrine c. neither indeed doe we know who was the first Authour of your blasphemous opinions And Doctor Fulk in his Rejoynder to Bristow p. 205. answering the same question about the change of the Roman Church saith I answer my Text saith it was a mystery not revealed and therefore could not be at first openly Preached against 'T is also the confession of Doctor Whitaker in his answer to Campian that the time of the Roman change cannot easily be told And yet this pittifull shift is clearly against that renowned rule of S. Austin in his 118. Epistle and elsewhere that what is held by the Universall Church and not known when it began is to be believed as an Apostolicall Tradition By which maxime Doctor Whitgift proves against Cartwright that the names of Metropolitan Arch-Bishop c. have their originall from the Apostles ' Tâ—…s also against evident reason for if Christs Spirit of Truth abiding alwayes with the Church could permit errours in faith to creep into it unperceptibly such errours even by the principles of Christianity would be irreformable For if they were brought in so slily that their beginning could not be observed nor they perceived till they were universally received in the Church whosoever should attempt to reform them must by the principles of Christianity be held for an Heretick because he opposeth the whole Church of Christ and so were to be thrown out as a Heathen and a Publican For to dispute
against the whole Church is most insolent mâ—…dnesse saith S. Austin Ep. 118. 18. You erre no lesse absurdly when you say that in the fourth Session of the Council of Trent the Roman Church is made to differ as well from her ancient and purer self as from all other Churches besides her self This is meerly begg'd and not prov'd Might not all former Hereticks have said the same of all Generall Councils that condemn'd them Did either the Council of the Apostles Act. 15. or the first four Generall ones make the Church differ from her self by reason of their Definitions or Decrees why then the Council of Trent in particular Because say you that Council defin'd many meerly humane writings and many unwritten Traditions to be of equall authority with the Scripture anathemat zing all that should not receive them The Council of Trent defined no writings to be of equall authority with the Scriptures but such as those Orthodox Fathers by the assistance of the Holy Ghost confirming ancient Tradition judged to be the Word of God nor any unwritten Traditions but such as were either immediately received by the Apostles from the mouth of Christ himself or inspired to the Apostles by the Holy Ghost and so handed down in a perpetuall succession unto them Of such Traditions the Apostle speaks 2 Thes. 2. Hold the Traditions which you have been taught whether by word or Epistle Hence it is clear saith S. Chrysostome that the Apostles delivered not all things by writing but many things also unwritten both which are worthy of equall belief Is not this the very Definition of the Council of Trent And might not all the Hereticks that ever deni'd any part of Scripture as the Cerinthians deni'd the whole New Testament but S. Matthew's Gospel the Marcionists Gnosticks Manichees all the old Testament as Luther the Epistle to the Hebrews S. Iames and the Apocalyps and all that ever denâ—…'d Apostolicall Traditions as Arius Nestorius Eutyches and other Novellers did might not I say all these have used the same plea against the Church or Councils that defined Canonicall Books or Apostolicall Traditions against them A strange objection and stranger reformation that justifies all Hereticks in the world As for the anathema hath it not ever been the Style of all Generall Councils to lay a curse upon the refusers of their Definitions And if the point of Infallibility was both believed and virtually defined by the first Generall Councils justly imposing upon mens consciences an inward assent to their Decrees of Faith upon pain of Anathema why not as well by the Council of Trent 19. But I wonder what you mean in saying that the Roman Church was made to differ from all other Churches besides her self If by the Roman Church you mean not onely the City and Diocesse of Rome but all other Churches united with that particular Church whose Bishops sate voted in the Council of Trent then you speak a Chymera there being but one true Catholick Church in the world which is the Roman that never differ'd from her self in matters of faith except you intend a Heterogenial Church patcht up of all condemn'd Sects in the world opposite one to anothre 20. Upon the premises your Reformers say you met together and concluded a Secession As if Protestants revolted not from the Pope long before the Council of Trent or the pretended new Creed as you call it But let us see the quality of those Reformers to wit your Kings your Clerâ—…y and your Layty too What Kings I pray Hen. the 8. the first broacher of the Schisme with Dalila in his â—…ap Edward the 6. a young Child and Qâ—… Elizabeth a woman fit heads to consult of Religion Yet were they all successively by Acts of Parliament either created or declar'd Supreame heads of the Church of England a Prerogative never châ—…lleng'd by any Christian Prince before The following Kings found the breach made and the Schisme completed What Clergy but Cranmer that Arch-Sycophant who according to Hâ—…story by his whispers in the Kings car was the first au thour of the Secession from the Pope and as â—…e pretended Bishop Bramhill confesses struck the nail home What Clergy but intruders when under Edward the 6. Protestantisme was establishâ—…t in England contrary to the liking of most of the true Bishops of that time And when under Qâ—…een Elizabeth all the Bishops but one were deposed and by Cambdens confession eighty Curates fifty Prebendarics fifteen Presidents of Colledges twelve Arch-Deacons and six Abbots lost their places when also the inferiour Clergy in a Convocation appointed by that very Queen protested against the Reformation What the Laiety too have they against all Antiquity power to define matters of Religion When Theodosius the younger sent his Ambassadour to the Council of Ephesus which was the third Generall one he writ to the Council that he sent him Ea Lege upon that condition that in questions of Religion he should have nothing to doe giving this reason It is not lawfull for him that is not a Bishop to meddle in businesses and consultations of the Church The same said Basil the Emperour to the Laiety in the seventh Generall Council 'T is not lawfull for you to treat in Ecclesiasticall Causes And long before that Iustinian If the businesse be Ecclesiasticall let no Civil Magistrate deale in such questions c. But in fine what Laiety was it but a Cromwell and such like flatterers It was generally conceived and truly as I think saith Weaver in his Monuments pag. 101. that those politick wayes for taking away the Pope's authority and suppressing religious Houses were principally devised by Cromwell And Bishop Gardner in Fox pag. 1344. saith The Parliament was with much cruelty constrained to abolish and put away the Primacy from the Bishop of Rome 21. Yea but these Reformers did not consult flesh and bloud O no! King Henry consulted the spirit when lusting after Anne Bolen he tore himself from the Pope for refusing him the grant of a Divorce and to satisfie his avarice he seized upon all the goods of Monasteries What spirit the Protectour and Parliament under Edward the Sixth consulted whether God or Mammon let Baker tell you There you may read how divers Bishops were committed to prison for misliking the Reformation and all of them dispossessed of their Bishopricks and that which is worse the Bishopricks themselves were dispossessed of their revenues A Parliament was held wherein divers Chantries Colledges Free Chappels Fraternities and Guilds with all their Lands and goods were given to the King which being sould at a low rate enriched many and enobled some and thereby made them firm in maintaining the change thus Baker Queen Elizabeth bred up a Catholick and by a Catholick Bishop consecrated Qâ—…een consulted Eternity when to buy a Crown she sold her Religion Or expect the Church of Rome should have been their Physician which was
to the other Patriarchs and omitting the Roman they shewed their respects to that See as to the Head of all without limit 'T is also false that the Council of Chalcedon decreed to the Bishop of Constantinople an equality of priviledges with the Church of Rome For besides the nullity of that surreptitious Canon evidently prov'd by Cardinal Peròn to in his reply to K. Iames wholy rejected by S. Leo those Fathers meerly renew'd the fifth Decree of the second Generall Council which as we have seen above intended onely the second place of dignity to the Bishop of Constantinople as is insinuated in the Canon even as it lies by the words immediately following which you craftlly suppresse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as being the second after the Roman And Zonaras though a Greek Schismatick discoursing of the sense of these words concludes thus from hence it appeares manifestly that the preposition after signifies submission and inferiority Those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equall priviledges were afterwards foisted into the Decree by the practice of Anatolius to encrease his power The Fathers of that Council never own'd them for when they besought Pope Leo to confirm their Canon they mentioned to him no equall priviledges but onely said We have confirmed the Rule of the 150 Fathers assembled at Constantinople that after your Apostolicall See that of Constaninople should have the second place Meaning thereby that as the Bishop of Rome had the Primacy absolutely and without restraint over all Patriarchs so the Bishop of Constantinople should have it next after him over all the Patriarchs Iustinian the Emperour some seventy yeares after gives the same sence to that Canon saying that as the holy Pope of old Rome is the first of all Prelacy so the Arch-Bishop of Constantinople new Rome should have the second place after the See Apostolick of old Rome and be preferred before all the other Sees Novell 131. and long after Iustinian the Emperour Basilius the younger and Eustathius Patriarch of Constantinople consulting of a re-union with the Latines desired that it might be lawfull for them to obtain with the consent of the Pope that the Church of Constantinople might be call'd Universal in the compass thereof as the Pope of Rome was in the compass of the whole world Finally Nilus writing against the Roman Church confesseth a We are not separated from peace for attributing to our selves the Primacy or for refusing to hold the second place after the principality of Rome For we never contested for Primacy with the Roman Church Good Sir where is now your equality of priviledges The eighth Demonstration Page 19 and 20. 13. Every Pope that refuseth the sole Title of Universal Bishop denies the Primacy of power to govâ—…rn the whole Church But Pope Gregory the Great refused the sole Title of Universal Bishop nay utterly condemn'd it Therefore he deny'd the Primacy of power to govern the whole Church The Major doth so glitter that it cannot be seen For first let the Title be never so true may not a Bishop out of modesty lay it aside but he must needs disown the power it signifies were not the Apostles Masters of the world in regard of their Doctrine and yet our Lord taught them not to affect that Title Be not call'd Masters Matth. 23. 10. Secondly when a Title hath a double notion and may for the litteral one be used in an ill sense may it not be refused without denying what it imports in the best interpretation St. Gregory then considering that the Title of Universal Bishop in a strict Grammatical sense imports Unum in multis one in many and soâ—… might ambitiously be usurped as if there were but one true Bishop in the world If there be one saith he that is Universal Bishop the other are Bishops no more he utterly rejected it in himself and condemned it in Iohn the Bishop of Constantinople But did he therefore deny or reject the Primacy did he not instance in S. Peter himself Totius Ecclesiae principatus ei committitur tamen universalis Episcopus non vocatur The principallity of the whole Church is committed unto him and yet he is not called Universal Bishop Doth he not in sundry places of his works acknowledge this Primacy in himself nay and practise it too over the very Church of Constantinople Quis dubitat who doubts saith he that the Church of Constantinople is subject to the See Apostolick In so much that the Protestants Friccius Carion Peter Martyr Osiander and the Centurists cited by Mr. Breerly in the Protestants Apologie shew out of S. Gregory these particulars That the Roman Church appointed her watch over the whole world That the Apostolick See is the head of all Churches That the Bishop of Constantinople is subject to the Apostolick See That S. Gregory challenged to himself power to command Arch-Bishops to ordain or depose Bishops This and much more is testify'd by the Protestants above cited to which our Doctor Sanders addes many other texts that all Bishops if any fault be found in them are subject to the See Apostolick that she is the head of Faith and of all the faithfull members That all those things are false that are taught contrary to the Doctrine of the Rom. â—…n Church That to return from Schisme to the Catholick Church is to return to the Communion of the Bishop of Rome that they are preverse men who refuse to obey the command of the See Apostolick These and divers other Texts of S. Gregory's works so evidently convince his acknowledgement of the Popes Supremacy that who should deny it merely for what S. Gregory writ against the name of Universal Bishop seems to me saith Doctor Sanders either to have cast off all understanding or sense of man or else to have put on the obstinate perversenesse of the Deuil To decline such a censure Calvin chose rather to confesse that there is no speech in S. Gregory's writings in which he more proudly boasts of the amplitude of his Primacy then this I know not what Bishop is not subject to the See Apostolick when he is found in a fault The ninth Demonstration Page 20. 54. Pope Gregory argues thus against the Title of Universal Bishop if any one were Universal Bishop that is one immediate Bishop over all Diocesses so that other Bishops were only his Deputies there would by consequence be a failing of the universal Church upon the failing of such à Bishop because there would be no true Bishop to govern the Universal Church An argument say you ad homines not easily to be answered Hence is framed this mighty demonstration against the Pope's Headship If the Pope is Head of the Catholick Church then the Catholick Church must be the Body of the Pope because the Head and the Body are the Relative and Correlative and being such they are convertible in obliquo The Consequence unavoidably following is hugely absurd to
liberties and exemptions of the Gallican Church which still acknowledges the Pope's supremacy and the publish'd confessions of Popish writers touching the Papal usurpations and right of Kings put together by Goldastus an heretick prov'd by Gretser to be a lying knave but never denying the Roman Bishops to succeed S. Peter in the spiritual government of the Church will not be able to deny that the Supremacy of the Pope hath this Lying against it that it was not so from the beginning But I must tell you with holy S. Leo that whosoever denieth the Supream Authority of the Roman Bishop cannot deminish the power thereof but puffed up with the spirit of pride plungeth himself headlong into Hell What then have these ten so well contrived Ratiocinations demonstrated nothing at all yes Sir they have demonstrated that you are still guilty of Schisme for disturbing the See Apostolicks quiet possession of Supremacy in England without a demonstration that it was usurpt For'tis evident from our solutions that you have not demonstrated such an usurpation And t is no lesse evident that an authority of so high a concern for the peace and unity of the Church so long a knowledged and obey'd in this Kingdome as of Christ's institution could not without open Schisme be cast out except it had been demonstratively proved an usurpation Against the Infallibility of the Catholick or Roman Church The eleventh Demonstration Page 22. No Church can be infallible to wit as well incapable of errour as not erroneous except it hath that infallibility which is one of Gods peculiar incommunicable Attributes For where there is not omniscience there must be ignorance in part and where ignorance is there may be errour But no Church can have that incommunicable Attribute Therefore no Church can be infallible much lesse the Roman A high and massy discourse As if there were no difference betwixt an intrinsecal infallibility proper to the nature of an infinite Being essentially identify'd with Omniscience and an infallibilility extrinsecally communicated relying upon the perpetual assistance of the Holy Ghost promised by the word of God Had Moyses and the Prophets Gods incommunicable Attribute were the Apostles Omniscient And yet were they not infallible in what they preach'd assisted by the spirit of God was not S. Paul as well incapable of teaching the Church errours as not erroneous whilest he said to the Thessalonians 1. 2. 13. Ye received the word of God which ye heard from us ye received it not as the word of man but as it is in truth the word of God And again Since you seek a proofe of Christ speaking in me 2 Cor. 13 3. Was not the humanity of Christ incapable of errour and sin as it was govern'd by his Divinity and could not teach errours and yet it was not identify'd with the increated Omniscience of God nor with the incommunicable Attribute of infallibility What mean some Protestant Doctours when they grant the Universal Church cannot erre in Fundamentalls Cannot God preserve from errour as well in not-fundamentals taken in your sense as Fundamentalls If so that Church so preserved upon Gods promise will be infallible in the sense intended by the Roman Church and then what is become of your demonstration drawn from the impossibility of the thing Surely S. Cyprian had a better opinion of the Roman Church when he said Lib. 1. Epist. 3. The Romans are they whose faith was praised by the mouth of the Apostle and to whom misbelief can have no accesse S. Ierome had the same sentiment when speaking to Ruffinus Know thou saith he that the Roman Faith commended by the voice of the Apostle admitteth no such delusions and that being fenced by S. Paul's authority it cannot be altered though an Angel should teach otherwise 60. You and yours on the other side denying the Church to be infallible argue Christ of improvidence in not furnishing his Church with undoubtable meanes to compose differences in matters of Faith and preserve unity The Church of Tyranny in obliging men upon pain of damnation to believe her definitions that may be false and the whole Body of Christians of unsettledness in belief as relying upon nothing not subject to errour whether Fathers Councils Church or Scriptures expounded by them If I should say that any one at his pleasure I may resist the Councils I should say well saith Luther expressely against St. Austin's belief in his first Book against the Donanatists chap. 7. who speaking of the rebaptization of those that had been baptized by Hereticks he sayes The obscurity of this question compell'd men of great authority to stagger a long while untill that in a full Council of the whole world it was firmly decreed what was most wholsomly to be held all doubts removed Which he could never have said had he held the Church errable in her Generall Councils Say what you please all your certainty of Faith is finally resolved into the private spirit though you cannot endure to be told so The twelfth Demonstration 61. The Tenet of Infallibility upon earth cannot be true if errours in Faith spring up in the Church But Novatianisme was hatcht at Rome Donatisme spread over the West Arianisme over the East Chilianisme infected the primitive Fathers without contradictionâ—… and the Church of God in S. Austin's and Innocent the third's opinion held the necessity of Infant-communicating which the Council of Trent declared against Therefore the Tenet of Infallibility upon earth cannot be true 62. A sturdy argument indeed if one held every single person of the Church to be infallible Mean while it proves as well that the Church even under the Apostles time was not infallible for that in their time sprung up the Heresies of Simon Magus Diâ—…rephes Cerinthians Ebion Nicolaitans c. and yet the Apostles in their Council at Ierusalem could freely say It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us Was not this Council by the assistance of the Holy Ghost inerrable notwithstanding those Heresies How then doe Heresies prove the Fallibility of Generall Councils lawfully called to beat them down would not such a Principle argue the Fallibility of Christ because his Doctrine was opposed by the Jewes 63. Novatianisme though hatcht at Rome yet the Egge was laid in Africa and this no Authour denies For Novatus after a Schisme raised against St. Cyprian coming to Rome joyned with Novatianus a Roman Priest against Pope Cornelius and both together sowed the heresie held first by Montanus and Tertullian that such as were faln should not be readmitted into the Church after repentance This heresie was presently resisted by Cornelius in a Council held at Rome of threescore Bishops in Africa by S. Cyprian in a Synod of forty two Bishops at Antioch in a Provincial Council And Eusebius addes that every where through all Provinces the Bishops met against that errour Finally the first Council of Nice offered peace to the Novatians if renouncing their heresie they would
So that to receive either unworthily is to be guilty of both because in either you receive both Hence the Apostle addes presently He that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh judgement to himself not discerning our Lords Body Why but because that in receiving the Body under the form of Bread alone you receive also the Blood which is not separated from Christs living Body It was therefore so from the beginning For Christ our Lord Ioan. 6. five times promiseth life everlasting to the Bread of life not mentioning the Cup in those Texts Himself according to divers Fathers gave the Sacrament in one kind to the two Disciples in Emaus The Apostles practis'd the same in breaking Bread without naming the Cup and in your principles a negative argument from Scripture is valid The Primitive Church communicated the Sick under the form of Bread alone S. Ambrose dying received in one kind The Eremits carried the Sacrament to the Desart in clean Corporalls or Linnen called Dominicalia there to receive it fasting the Christians of AEgypt kept it in their Houses Satyrus Saint Ambrose his Brother took an Hoste with him in a Box about his neck to receive it at Sea To sucking Children the Cup was onely given in S. Cyprian's dayes And in the Greek Church they were wont to consecrate the Eucharist onely upon Saturdayes and Sundayes to be received the other dayes in the week during Lent Now in those hot Countreys the consecrated Wine could not be kept so long And it is most evident from Antiquity that the Eucharist was kept under the form of Bread to be distributed as occasion served Insomuch that we find amongst the Lawes of Charles the great 800. yeares ago Presbyter semper Eucharistiam habeat paratam c. Let the Priest alwayes have the Eucharist ready that if any be sick or a Child infirm he may give them the Sacrament that they may not die without Communion Well then seeing neither Christ our Lord in the Institution of the Eucharist nor S. Paul in declaring it excepted any sort of persons as Sick Ermits Children Sea-passengers or Christians in persecution yet the Church from all antiquity had power to administer it to such in one kinde and it was ever thought sufficient to salvation that is a whole Sacrament not a half-Half-Communion as you tearm it You must then either demonstrate out of Scripture the Churches restraint to these alone or confesse her practice towards all to be justifiable Finally Luther himself confesseth that Christus hac de re nihil unquam praecepit Christ never commanded any thing in this matter And Melanchthon held it a thing indifferent Against restraining the holy Scriptures from the common people The seventeenth Demonstration Page 26. 88. If Hebrew to the Iewes was the mother tongue and in that 't was read weekly before the people If the new Testament was first written in Greek because a tongue most known to the Eastern world and if after some hundreds of years it was translated into a few other tongues for the use of the common people then the restraining it from the common people was not from the beginning But the Antecedent supposition is true Therefore the Consequent 89. Yea but in our Saviours time Syriack was and had been 14. Generations before the mother tongue of the Iewes who lost the Hebrew in the long captivity of Babylon in so much that Esdras reading the Law to them was forced to use interpreters The New Testament was in Greck and as S. Ierome sayes read only in Greek all the East over though most of the Eastern Nations had a different Language as it appears by the Acts of the Apostles Ch. 2. How have we heard each man in our own language wherein we were born Parthians and Medians and Elamites and those that inhabit Mesopotamia Iewry and Capadocia Pontus and Asia Phrygia and Phamphilia Egypt and the parts of Lybia that is about Cyrene and strangers of Rome Iewes also and Proselytes Cretensians and Arabians We have heard them speak in our own tongue 90. Moreover S. Matthew writ his Gospel for the Iewes in Hebrew or in Greek not Syriack their vulgar tongue nor is it known that ever the old Testament was by order of the Iewish Church turn'd into Syriack S. Mark writ in Greek at Rome and for the Romans whose vulgar language was Latin so did S. Paul his Epistle to the Romans in Greek also to the Galathians and yet their vulgar was a kind of German Language they have a proper tongue almost the same as those of Trevers saith S. Hierome upon that Epistle lib. 2. in his Preface And if the new Testament 400. years after was translated into some very few other tongues what is that to the beginning were not the common people from the beginning restrained from it at least those 400. years and in those Nations where Hebrew Greek or Latine were not the vulgar tongues And was it then translated by order of the Churches into Hebrew Greek or Latine or put into the hands of the common people as of necessary use or commanded to be read in those new traductions upon that score 91. Neither is it true that the Roman Church keeps the Scripture from the People 'T is at this day extant in all vulgar Languages of Europe and permitted to be read by the Layety with leave of their Pastours who are to judge into whose hands the sword of the Scripture which is the woâ—…d of God is fit to be put Which rule had it been observed in England when after fifteen hundred years the Bible except perhaps the Psalmes was under Henry the 8th translated into English out of Latine so many mad Sects would never have risen in it Against publick Prayers in an unknown Tongue The eighteenth Demonstration Page 27. 92. What is scandalously opposite to the plain sense of Scripture was not from the beginning But the use of publick Prayers in a tongue unknown to the common people is scandalously opposite to the plaine sense of Scripture 1 Cor. 14. Therefore the use of publick Prayers in a tongue unknown to the Common people was not from the beginning 93. The Minor is undenyable because you asâ—…rt it but not a word of proofe which to make good you must demonstrate first that the Apostle by preferring the gift of prophecy before unknown tongues in the Church the only intent of that Chapter speakes of tongues in the publick service and administration of Sacraments proper to Pastours and not rather and solely of tongues in mutual conferences when the first Christians met for edification to communicate with one another their miraculous gifts as inspired Canticles Prophecies Tongues and other graces imparted above Nature both to men and women in those dayes In which assemblies the Corinthians seem to have committed some disorders turning Gods gifts especially that of tongues which was the least
to pride and vanity But in the Liturgy or Publick Service which amongst the Corinthians was in Greek there was no abuse at all nor occasion to complain Secondly you must demonstrate that the Apostle means every kind of tongue unknown to the vulgar though known to most of the better sort For if so he would have contradicted himself by writing in Greek to the Romans a long Epistle of Instruction As therefore S. Paul cannot be rightly said to have spoken to the Romans in an unknown Tongue because Greek was known to most persons well bred though not to the common people So for the same reason is not our Latin an unknown Tongue in the sense of the Apostle Thirdly you must demonstrate that the Apostle speaks even of Tongues that may be learn'd by industry and not of Tongues divinely inspired which neither the Pastours of the Church nor the people nay nor the Speaker himself did understand And so St. Paul saith in that Chapter He that speaks Tongues speaks not to men but to God And again He that speaks Tongues let him pray that he may interpret Why pray for the gift of interpretation if he understood the Tongues for so he might of himself interpret by the help of his naturall Language And again If I pray with the Tongue my spirit prayeth but my understanding is without fruit namely the Spirit that is in me maketh me to pray but my understanding not knowing what is said remaines fruitlesse Now that the Apostle did not wholly dislike the speaking of unknown Tongues in the Church but onely preferre the gift of Prophecy to wit of expounding hard points of Religion before it he coâ—…cludes thus Therefore brethren be earnest to prophecy and to speak with Tongues prohibit not but let all things be done decently and according to order amongst you 94. No question but in primitive times the service of the Church was in the three sacred Tongues Hebrew Greek and Latine as appeares by the ancient Liturgies Hebrew amongst the Jewes though not understood by the common people Greek in all the Churches of the East where severall Nations had a different Language Latin over the West not known to the unlearned but in Italy and some few Roman Colonies as in Africa Spain France Britany Germany Polonia c. But when Greek and Latin grew to be un-vulgar in the Nations where they were first naturall who where by what Churches order were the Liturgies translated into vulgar Tongues read but the modest answer or Epistle to the boysterous Authour of the Animadversions upon FIAT LUX and there you shall finde what Cyrill Arch-Bishop of Trapesond a Grecian answered Dr. Cosins at Paris upon enquiry into the matter to wit that all the Liturgies both those of S. Basil S. Chrysostome and S. Gregory Nazianzen were ever kept in the Learned Greek differing from the vulgar Language and that Masse or Liturgy was and had ever been the great work of their Christianity all over the Greek Church Some particular persons 't is true after the Greek Church was torn with Schismes and Heresies translated the Greek Liturgy into Ethiopian Armenian and some â—…ew other popular Tongues but most of those having by length of time out-liv'd the knowledge of the common people we may truly averre that in our dayes all the Churches in Christendome except some few inconsiderable in regard of the rest have the publick service in Tongues not vulgar Take the testimony of your own men the Authors of that famous 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Bible of many Languages who in the Preface to their Introduction Printed An. 1655. ingenuously confesse that not onely the Scriptures but also the Liturgies and Rituals in most of the Sects of Christians are in Syriack a Tongue unknown but to the Learned amongst them That the Iews in publick prayers use Hebrew of which the common people are ignorant And the Greek Churches the ancient Greek differing as much from the vulgar Greek at this day as Italian from Latin And that amongst the Mahometans prayers are every where publickly said and the Alcaron read in Arabick which they think would be profaned if translated into any other Tongue even where the Arabick is not the vulgar Language With these agrees the Relation of Alexander Rosse in his Review of all Religions The Maronites saith he Cophtes Iaâ—…its Georgians Circassians and others use a Tongue unknown to the people in their Liturgies and publick Service 99. I know no Nation of this age where publick Service in a vulgar Tongue was ever brought in by the Popes approbation as you say In China there are two Languages one for the Learned and another for the generality The Pope onely granted that Masse â—…e said in the Language of the Learned because Latin sounds very harshly in that Nations eares If for such like reasons any former Popes have allowed the translation of the Masse-book into vulgar Tongues 't is an argument that this point of Church Discipline is not indispensable for the Council of Trent sayes only that it seemed not expedient to the Fathers that the Masse should be celebrated every where in the vulgar Tongue which hinders not but that in some places it may be otherwise if it be judged expedient However if God had universally misliked publick prayers for the Church in an unknown Tongue he would never have ordered that no man should be in the Tabernacle when the High Priest went to pray for the whole Assembly of Israel his Language there being neither heard nor understood but by God himself The load of your Margin weighs nothing against our Doctrine Origen if truly cited proves onely that every private Christian prayes to God in his own native Dialect But Doctor is Origen alone primitive Wriâ—…rs the rest you cite I am sure are not nor to the purpose Against prohibiting of Marriage to men in Orders The nineteenth Demonstration Page 27. 28. 96. In the old Law Priests were permitted to have Wives for continuing on the Tribe of Levi of which all Priests were to be but never to use them upon the dayes of Officiating or sacrificing in the Temple or Tabernacle though those Oblations were but beggerly Elements Shadowes and Figures as the Apostle calls them Therefore Priests of the new Law where there is no such restraint to Tribe or Family and where Priests offer daily to God the dreadfull Sacrifice of the Body and Blood of Christ Jesus may have Wives and the contrary was not from the beginning To corroborate this proof are cited in your Margin Thuanus a French Lawyer and as it appeares by the whole thread of his History little better then a Hugonot Bishop Hall a violent Protestant against Catholicks and Zonaras a Greek Schismatick Again 97. Some of the Apostles were married before their calling to the Apostleship but after Priesthood ever abstained from their Wives as witnesseth the second Council of Carthage at which S. Austin was
professedly and at large teaches the contrary assigning out of the Canons three other causes as Sodomy heresie or tempting to any grievous sinne in cap. 5. Matth. vers 32. which you also quote and so could not misse of seeing your imposture In the text you cite out of Maldonat he speakes only of a perpetual divorce which was the present question and asserts with our Saviour that if a man so recedes from his Wife except the cause of Fornication commits adultery though he marry no other because if his wife commits it 't will be imputed to the husband as dismissing her unduly 105. The judgement of Chemnitius a fierce Protestant we value not in this matter The Scriptures he quotes are only effects of the conjugall tye not the knot it self which consists in the mutual right of each party to the other not in the actual exercise of that right which may be hindred many wayes Else if upon businesse the husband be long absent in a forraign Countrey he dissolves the bond of wedlock which to assert is ridiculous 106. But now good Doctour you little think that throwing stones at randome with Diogenes his Boy you have hit your Father Does not Luther your grand Patriarch allow of a Divorce not only temporary but perpetual even with leave to marry again for many other causes then fornication The first is in case the wife be froward refusing conjugal right Si non vult uxor veniat ancilla c. If the wife will not let the maid come put away Vasthi take Hester Serm. de Matrim The second if the husband perswade the wife or the wife the husband to any sinne The third if a rich woman marry a poor man and her friends disapprove the match The fourth if the wife brawle and scold and will not live peaceably in 1 Cor. 7. Ann. 1554. lib. de causis Matrim Ann. 1530. 107. Calvin in his Institutions huggs the same doctrine of Divorce with liberty to take another wife in case one marry without the consent of Parents if a Whore instead of a Virgin if either party be absent a year or will not keep home after three moneths warning lib. 4. cap. 19. And in the Genevian Canons pag. 29 32 40 41. If a husband shall be absent let his wife cause him to be called by the publick Cryer avd if he come not within the time limited the Minister shall licence his wife to take another husband 108. But to come nearer home Martin Bucer a Reader of Divinity in Cambridge under Edward the 6. whom Calvin stiles the most faithfull Doctour of Christs Church The whole University of Cambridge A Man most holy and truly Divine Doctour Whitgift A Reverend Learned painfull and sound Father And Sr. Iohn Cheek Quo majorem vix universus Orbis caperet greater then whom the universall world scarce held 109. Hic vir hic est This is the man that professedly argues against your exposition of Christs words to wit that as there is at this day like hardnesse of heart so the distressed Wives ought to be relieved no lesse now then in times past that the Magistrate now hath no lesse authority in this matter then Moyses had and at this day ought to use the same Neither is it to be believed saith he that Christ would forbid any thing of that which his Father commanded but he commanded the hard of heart that if they would not use their Wives with Nuptiall equity they should then procure a Bill of Divorce and marry again Out of this principle he deduces many particular cases as of parting one from another Theft Homicide Lunacy c. in which Divorce with freedome to re-marry may be lawfull in Matth. 19. fol. 147. de Regno Christi lib. 2. cap. 26. 27. 28. 37. 40. 42. 110. And I am credibly informed that even in England Divorce and second Marriage is granted for Frigidity though contracted after Marriage in pre-contracts where no consummation was and in case either party turnes Catholick However what more common in the whole Island then Divorce from Bed and Board allow'd in certain Cases besides Fornication by the Canons of your Church Where then is the onely Council of Trents heynous offence 111. By these therefore and many more corruptions in point of practice and doctrine too which were no deviations from what had been from the beginning but wrongfully imposed upon the whole Church united with their Head the Roman Bishop and never confess'd by the learned'st or unlearned'st Sons of the same Church in their publick Writings the sensuall part of the Christian world was moved to look for a deformation 112. What if Stapleton laments the vices of some Popes who sate upon the Chayre of Peter as the Scribes and Pharisees upon the Chayre of Moyses Did he therefore acknowledge that corruption of manners either in the whole Church subject to that See or that it was ever approved by the Church S. Austin in 166. Epistle will tell you that Christ hath placed in the Chayre of Unity the Doctrine of Verity and secured his people that for ill Prelates they forsake not the Chayre of wholsome Doctrine in which Chayre even ill men are enforced to speak good things 113. Now because page 31. you ingenuously confesse that corruption of manners in point of practice cannot justifie a separation from the Roman Church and so your Sermon is to no other purpose stuff'd with such pretended corruptions but to spit your venome at the Roman See I pass over what you say of that kinde in the same page and come to your Demonstrations from corruption of Doctrine to evince the lawfulnesse of your Separation But first I must note that this objecting humour Tertullian observed in the Hereticks of his dayes and stopt their mouthes with telling them they were Vitia conversationis non praedicationis Faults of manners not of Doctrine St. Austin discovered the same in the Donatists who had with wicked fury separated themselves from the Roman Church and thus takes up the Heretick Petilian Why dost thou call the See Apostolick the Chayre of Pestilence c. If we listed to retort what a large field opens it self in the lives of your Patriarchs Luther Calvin Beza Zwinglius and others even from your own Concessions Of corruption of Doctrine in matter of Faith The xxi Demonstration Page 30. 114. If the Roman Church's corruptions of Doctrine and that in matters of Faith corruptions intrenching on fundamentalls have been shewed in the former Demonstrations then the Schisme is the Roman Church's who gave the cause of Separation not the Protestants who did but separate when the cause was given But the said corruptions of Doctrine have been shewed in the former Demonstrations Therefore the Schisme is the Roman Church's c. 115. No question if those corruptions of Doctrine have been really demonstrated in which appeares not the least glimpse of evidence no nor of probability neither much lesse
stickler in that Schismaticall Council at Wormes died a while after in despaire roaring out that he was damn'd for adhering to Henry the King against Pope Gregory and that the rest of those Schismaticall Bishops upon repentance both writ to the Pope for pardon and went themselves after the King into Italy to be absolv'd from their Schisme He addes that after the Pope had absolv'd the King he said Masse and before Communion taking the sacred Hoste in his hand in presence of the King and the whole assembly protested that he received it as the judgement of the crimes objected against him by the Schismaticks that if he were innocent he might be free'd from all suspition if guilty be suddenly struck dead upon the place That then the Pope received very confidently half the holy Hoste and after the Peoples loud congratulation of his innocency he turn'd to the King inviting him to receive the other half of the Hoste as a Canonicall clearing himself from the crimes objected also against him but that the King pretending an excuse declined the triall But if all were true that you cite out of Goldastus whom Gretser charges with three hundred lyes 't would onely prove the misgovernment of one Pope and nothing at all against the Roman Church or Supreamacy of Saint Peter's Chayre 122. In the last part of your work where you should have proved the power of particular Nations to reforme the Church in matters of Faith or alter what is ordered by the universall Church for the common good and that by separating from the whole world as Luther did you name not one Nation City Family or Orthodox man that ever did it atempted it or thought of it To sooth your Auditours you rake out of the Channell of sixteen hundred yeares a few examples in matter of fact wherein Princes either intrenching upon the immunities of the Church or asserting a pretended right have sometimes clasht â—…ith the Roman Bishops or medled de facto in Church affaires but have they therefore in their severall Kingdomes made themselves absolute Heads of the Church immediately under Christ as Henry the eighth did ordering Laymen Vicar generals in spirituality As Cromwell was and sate in the Convocation House amongst the Bishops as Head over them all Did they deny or renounce the Supreamacy of Popes in the spirituall government of the Church Have they challenged as born and in-bred to their Crowns Supreame power in all causes both Spirituall and Civill Did they part from the Pope the Papacy the Roman Church and all ancient Christian Churches in the world or ever made Lawes to reverse the Decrees of Generall Councils in matters of Faith and not upon that very score been accounted Hereticks This you shall neither find in Iustinian's Code nor in Zeno's Henoticon nor in Charles the great 's Capitulars 123. The Code was compil'd a nefandissimis hominibus by most wicked men saith Spondanus And that unhappy Emperour by medling too much against his own rule in Ecclesiasticall affaires ruin'd his Empire fell into open Heresie persecuted Orthodox Bishops and died suddenly Yet Baronius and others very probably judge that his Lawes concerning the Church were drawn up by Epiphanius and Menas Patriarchs of Constantinople but publisht in the Emperour's name for the better observance For first he often professeth that in Ecclesiasticall affaires he decreed nothing but according to the holy Canons Secondly Iohn the second Pope in a Letter to him confirmes those Lawes as being informed by two Bishops Hypathius and Demetrius his Legats that they were made by the consent of Bishops in conformity to the See Apostolick and Decreâ—… of the Fathers Thirdly because the Emperouâ—… in the Code Tit. 1. lege 8. sayes he will 〈◊〉 suffer any thing to passe concerning the affaires of the Church which shall not be referr'd 〈◊〉 his Blessednesse the Pope because he is Heâ—… of all the holy Prelates Zeno was a profess'â—… Eutychian who put out a profession of Faith call'd Henoticon in which embracing the Faiâ—… of the three first Generall Councils he left out the Council of Chalcedon He was in fine buâ—…ied alive 124. Charles the Great 's respect to the See Apostolick is most renowned in the Christian world Of devotion to the Church he caused the Ecclesiastical Laws to be drawn out of the sacred Councils and Decrees of Popes into 168. Capitula or Chapters where with much modâ—…sty he excuseth himself saying that he does not prescribe Lawes to Bishops but only minds them to see the Decrees of their fore-â—…athers observed There even as they are in Goldastus his thiâ—…d Tome he sayes The Ecclesiastical and Canonical authority teacheth that Councils must not be held without leave of the Roman Bishop there that by the incitement of the See Apostolick and the Council of Bishops he forbid Church-men to bear Armes there Ordering that according to the Council of Nice suits arising between the Clergy and the Layety be decided in Provincial Councils He addes Yet without prejudice of the Roman Church to whom in all causes reverence ought to be kept Constantine the Great openly profest that he could not judge of Bishops The designes of the two late Emperours Ferdinand the first and Maximilian the second were ever pious and full of devotion to the Roman Church nor can you show that at any time that most Catholick House of Austria had the least thought of reforming the Church in points of Faith by their own authority However they might perhaps by the advice of learned men propose to the Pope what they thought fit in present circumstances for quieting the Empire Of twenty Kings of Iuda some were severely punish't for intermedling in Priestly functions Others as Kings and Prophets too might by Divine instinct reform even in matters of Religion Others not without the consent and aid of Priests destroying Idolatry restored discipline But which of them ever undertook a Reformation against the whole Iewish Clergy or by disowning the High Priests authority Of Cooks fraudulent allegations for our Kings of England see a solid Refutation in Persâ—…s against Cook 's fifth part of Reports where you shall find all Antiquity speaking the great respect of the British and English Kings to the Roman Church See also my Lord of Chalcedon in the Protestants Schisme Page 36. and the pages following 125. In a word Sir by the whole rapsody of your Marginal Transcripts you shew only what was done but quo jure with what right not a tittle If from matter of fact you conclude a power tell me your sense of this illation The long Parliament outed Ministers put down Bishops dissolv'd your Church Therefore they had right to doe it If you abjure this consequence to what end such a crowd in the margin quoting Histories of what was done but proving nothing of the right and power to do it 126. Doe the examples of some few secular Princes unduly handling Church affairs or actually opposing
own motives he retracts it not but sayes onely that Iliacos intra muros peccatur extra Papists are more guilty of this fault then Protestants We approve as just his imputation of falsity and calumny laid upon Protestants but deny his parity as most false till it be proved Now for a farewell tell me in good earnest for the Novelty of what point of our Faith have you quoted truly any one of our ablest Hyperaspistae as you arepleas'd to call them In what leafe page line or margin may we find him you confesse pag. 31. that Corruptions in point of practice cannot justifie a separation Well then amongst the eleven points you object as Novelties let us set aside the Celibacy of the Clergy the Communion under one kind the Scriptures and publick Service in an unknown Tongue for these concern practice and are dispensible by the Church There remain eight other Doctrines of Faith direct me now to one approved Catholick Authour cited in your Sermon clearly testifying that the Pope's Supreamacy the Churche's Infallibility Transubstantiation Sacrifice of the Masse Purgatory Worship of Images Invocation of Saints and the lawfulnesse of a Tempory Divorce for other causes besides Fornication are all or any of them really and truly in their own notions abstracting from the words they are signified by a meer Novelty and not revealed from the beginning This I am sure you can never doe But if you could that mans or mens authority must by your own confession be the evidence and warrant of all the rest that is of what ever you assert in your whole Sermon This then supposed can you possibly perswade any rationall man that the particular authority of one or more private Doctors how able soever is a rigorous evidence convincing the whole Roman Church of errour in Faith and such an evidence as will in the eyes of God and Man justifie a Separation from that Mother Church though thousands of others no less able assert and believe the contrary If this be evidently impossible for you to do as certainly it is Dagloriam Deo and confess the rashness of your engagement to demonstrate our Novelties and return with speed to the House of God that Firmament and Pillar of Truth the Roman Church from which you can never demonstrate any just cause to depart 'T is the hearty wish of Your humble Servant I. S. ERRATA PAge 3. line 10. for Vrbanus read Ioannes line ultima for The Pontif r. Of the Pontific p. 11. l. 22. for Martyr restore r. Martyr Restore p. 13. l. 11. for guilt r. Gift p. 15. l. 12. for slightly r. slily p. 19. l. 24. for Bromhill r. Bramâ—…all p. 33. l. 17. in the margin Statut. 1. Elisab p. 34. l. 11. for Philostratus r. Philastrius p. 53. l. 19. for honour is r. Honour according to the Canons is p. 55. l. 6. for malice r. his malice p. 61. l. 2. for de r. be p. 69. l. 19. blot out Time p. 71. l. ult in the margin â—…or Ed. r. Eccl. p. 93. l. 20. in the margin for Paulus Sixtus r. Paulus Quintus In the Dedicatory for Iune 1. r. Aug. 1. Genes 3. Genes 4. a Synopâ—…is Contro p 76. b Papisto mastix pag. 19â—… c Reformed Catholick pag. 616. Edit 1616. in Folio d In lib. Apologet p. 192. a Vnum tamen audâ—…cter conscientia teâ—…e profiteor quia nusquam honeâ—…iores Clericos vidi quam in Romana Ecclesia aut qui magis avâ—…ritiam deteâ—…arentur b Quâ—… à vestra doctrina dissentit aut Hâ—…reticus aâ—…t Schismaticus est b 〈◊〉 est 〈◊〉 cuâ—… timeâ—…s pedâ—…m Sen. â—…n vita Iacobi Regis Cum a tot Patribus tam Graecis quà m Latinis Purgatorium affirmetur non est verisimile quin ejus veritas per idoneas probationas illis claruisset a Apocalip c. 14. p. 382. b Part 3. examin pag. 197. edit 1â—…14 Lib 5. Cont. Donatistas cap. 1. c De cura pro mort cap. 4. d Tomo 10. edit Parisiensi anno 1635. e Lib. 22. 〈◊〉 Civit. Dei cap. 10. f Lib. 20. cap. â—…1 g Ioan. 14. h 1 Tim. 3. i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 * De Missae privatâ—… Tom. 7. fol. 443. †Tom. 2. lib. de Euchar fol. 249. k Tom. 7. Serm. de Evcrs Hierâ—…lalem l Lib. de Servo arbitrio contra Erasmunâ—… edie prior m Exami part 3. pag. 90. Edit 1614. n Against Purgat p. 302. o Tomo 1. Epicher de cau Missae fol. 186. p De verbis Apostoli c. 34. †Omnes baereses exierunt ab illa tâ—…quam sarmenta inutilia recisa de vite sed ilia manet in sua radice in sua vite S. Aug. de Symb. ad Catechu lib. 1. c. 5. q Considerat of the Papists Supplication p. 43. s Respons ad Rat. 7. Cam 〈◊〉 t Defence c. p. 351. Sess. 4. Quae ipsius Christi ore ab Apostolis acceptae auâ—… ab ipsis Apostolis Spiritu Sanctâ—… dictanâ—…e quasi per manus traditae ad nos usque pervenerant Upon that place Baker in Henr. 8. pag. 4â—… in Edward 〈◊〉 pâ—…g 73 in Eliz. p. 113. Godwin iâ—…â—…a 〈◊〉 Parker iâ—…em a Of Sâ—…hisme p. 44. b In vita Elizab. pag. anno 1559. Iullers Ch. Hist. Centur. 16. p. 55. 56. c Epist. ad Synod Ephes. d 7. Concil Gene. e Iustinia Câ—…it 123. In Edw. 6. pag. 73. f Hilariâ—… lib contr Constant. g Cont. Henricum Octavum tom 2. f. 344 p. 2. h In explan art 4. edit 1581. Tiguri i In vita Iuelli p. 212. k Cont. Sander p. 9. 2. l Neque eniâ—… nate sunt haereses nâ—…si dum Scripturae bonae intelliguntur non bene quod in iis non bene intelligitur temerè audacter asseritâ—…r Tract 18. in Ioann m Pâ—…aker in vita Iacobi n In his Dedicatory of the reformed Catholick o Dr Potter Sect. 3. pag. 73. 〈◊〉 cap. 8. Dr. Laâ—…d Sect. 26. p Câ—…rt Epist. fundameâ—…ti c. 3. 4. q Tract 1. Sect. 3. 1 Lib. 1. c. 5. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pag. 442. See the Centurists 〈◊〉 Centur. 6. verbo Gregorius in Indice Hâ—…spin 〈◊〉 Sâ—…cram lib. 2. pag. 157. Dr. Humphrey Iesuit part 2. 〈◊〉 5. where he sayes that Gregory and Austin brought into England the whole Chaos of Popish superstition a Lib 2. de peccato Originali c. 17. b Contra Marcion lib. 4. c. 4. c Lib. 4. Epist. 2. d Ibidem Epist. 45. ad corâ—…lium e Tomo 〈◊〉 Concil edit 〈◊〉 iâ—…ter epist. Hormisâ—… f Lib 2. de peâ—…see Vandal g Dâ—… gloria Martyr l. 1. c. 25. h See the 4. Catalogues in the eâ—…d of the Protestant Apology Coccius Tom. 1. l. 8. art 4. 7. 8. c. i See Ieremias Patriarch of Constantinople his Answer to the Lutherans k Lib 4. contra Cresconium c. 61. See 〈◊〉 Austin lib. dâ—… Pastorib cap. 8. to the same purpose l Epist. 76. ad 〈◊〉
as held for a point of Faith in the whole Church And if S. Cyprian was confessedly deceived in holding rebaptization of Hereticks an Apostolicall Tradition and as S. Austin sayes would have submitted to a Generall Council defining the contrary why might not S. Austin be mistaken in the Traditions of Infant-Communion and if now living would humbly submit to the Council of Trent defining against it Against Transubstantiation The thirteenth Demonstration Page 23. 72. If the age of Transubstantiation may be measured by the very first date of it's definition the Doctrine of Transubstantiation may be allowed to be as old as the Lateran Council held under Pope Innocent the third somewhat more then four hundred yeares past But according to you if ye be serious and doe not trifle it 's age may be measured by the first date of it's definition Therefore the doctrine of Transubstantiation is but somewhat more then four hundred yeares old and was not so from the beginning 73. Sir I suppose you could not chuse but eveâ—… feel with your hands the lightnesse of this Argument together with the train of bad consequences it drawes after it For hence must necessarily follow that no point of Faith can be elder in it self then the Council that defines it Consequently the Consubstantiality of the Son the Divinity of the Holy Ghost the Unity of Person in Christ consisting with the duality of Natures and the unconfusion of Natures in one Person have no greater antiquity then the four first Generall Councils by which they were first respectively defined above 300. yeares after Christ. As if the age of Divine Mysteries revealed could not prevent their Conciliary definitions occasioned by the emergency of heresies against them For if it can why may not the Doctrine of Transubstantiation have been from the beginning as well as that of the four Mysteries above mentioned though it 's Conciliary definition be much younger 74. Nay but our Lord having said This is my Blood explaineth himself in the same breath by calling it expressely the fruit of the Vine So was Eve called Adam's Bone which then she was not but had been Aaron's Rod whil'st it was a Serpent still call'd a Rod And Angels call'd Men because they appeared like men though substantially no Men. But howsoever there still remained in the Chalice the Accidents of Wine which were truly genimen Vitis a product of the Vine that word signifying not Wine onely or necessarily but whatsoever growes of the Vine the Flowers the Leaves the Grapes c. Pag. 9. in the Margin you wrong Scotus as if he held Transubstantiation not a point of Faith before the Lateran Council whereas he onely sayes speaking of the like Definitions that it was not explicitely believed under the notion of that word till the Councils definition Quae veritas saith he etsi prius eâ—…at de fide non tamen erat prius tantum declarata Which truth though it was before matter of Faith yet it was not before so much declared Is not this to abuse Authours and Auditours The fourteenth Demonstration Making the Romanists asham'd of their Doctrine 75. When two particular Divines disagree in the manner of explaining a Mystery of Faith but agree both in the truth and Faith of the Mystery it self then all those that joyn with them in the belief of the same Mystery are made asham'd of their Doctrine But Aquinas and Bellarmin disagree in the manner of explaining the Mystery of the Eucharist and both agree in the truth and Faith of the Mystery it self Therefore all that joyn with them in the belief of the same mystery as all Romanists doe are made asham'd of their Doctrine 76. Surely this Demonstration will shame none but the owner of it A Schollar and not blush to argue so How many Mysteries doe Christians believe and yet the greatest Divines doe so clash in the explications of them that each party holds the Mystery impossible in the others opinion We all believe the blessed Trinity Now if one should argue thus The Scotists hold the Mystery impossible without a certain distinction which they call Ex natura rei betwixt the Divine essence and the three personalities or Relations The Thomists cry out against that distinction as destructive of the Mystery and importing a quaternity must therefore all Christians be ashamed of their belief of the Mystery it self because those two learned Schooles jaâ—…e in the expounding of it or rather he that makes so wise an argument 77. But in very deed S. Thomas and Bellarmin differ not about the manner of Christs being in the Sacrament as you would make your Auditours believe They both agree that Christ is there definitively all in all and all in every part of the sacred Hoste which way of existing S. Thomas calls Sacramentall Their difference is in a philosophicall Question whether a Body can be in two places at once circumscriptively that is with all it 's locall dimensions answering to the extensive parts of the place S. Thomas holds it cannot as implying a division of the body from it self Bellermine replies with great respect to S. Thomas Haec ratio pace tanti Doctoris dixerim non est solida This reason be it spoken under favour of so great a Doctor is not solid Which having modestly shown Adde to this saith he that if a body cannot be locally in two places truly neither Sacramentally What is here to shame the Catholicks Where is Bellarmine's anger Where his revenge upon the Angelical Doctor I see nothing here but your vanity seeking at the cost of others wrong to purchase applause to your self 78. You seem likewise to be unvers'd in School affairs seeing that Bellarmine's inference in that question is common to all Schoolmen that defend the local existence of a body in two places Had your intent been to evince the impossibility of the Real Presence from the cross opinions of those two Doctors you might perhaps have argued thus According to S. Thomas Christs body cannot be locally in two places at once But according to Bellarmine if it cannot be locally it cannot be Sacramentally in two places at once Therefore according to both it can neither be locally nor Sacramentally in two places at once and consequently not at all in many Hostes. In this Paralogisme no asserter of the Real Presence will be so senseless as to grant both premises but if with S. Thomas he grant the Major with S. Thomas he will deny the Minor And if with Bellarminâ—… â—…e grant the Minor with Bellarmine he will deny the Major And so nothing will follow inconsistent with his Belief The fifteenth Demonstration Page 24. 79. If so long agoe as the time of Pope Nicholas the Second either Transubstantiation was not forged and hammered out into the shape in which we find it nor at all understood by the Pope himself then Transubstantiation as we now find it is a Novelty invented since the time of Berengarius