that (22) Antilog p. 273. In King Henries the Eight time the Masse continued and the whole bodie of the Roman doctrine the Supremacie excepted Sleidan also sayth of K. Henrie (23) Sleidan in Engl. l. 13. fol. 174. He exiled the name of the Bishop of Rome but kept stil his doctrine Yea saith M. Fox (24) Act. Mon. p. 1472. He set forth and by ful consent of Parlament established the book of Six Articles contayning the summe of Popish Religion In which he was so resolute as that himself in Person not only (25) Ib p. 530. disputed but also commanded (26) Ib. p. 533 Sentence to be pronounced against the Protestant Lambert And this notwithstanding the Popish Church vnder his Raigne is by D. Fulk (27) Against HesKins c. p. 564 acknowledged to be a true Church and the King himself to be (28) Ib. sect 82 And Humf. Iesuit part 2. p. 304. A member of the Catholick Church of Christ yea sayth M. Hal the Church as then was A true (29) Apologie against Brownists c. 11. p. 30 visible Church of God And for asmuch sayth (30) Consecration of English Bish. p. 67. M. Mason as it is the custom of Papists to brand the Raigne of King Henrie the Eight with the odious name of Schisme let me a litle dispel those clouds and mists wherwith they darken the glorie of that Heroical Prince So gratefull are they to K. Henrie though wel they know that sundrie of their Protestant Predecessours he burned for their Heresies In the Age next before Luther and K. Henrie liued Iohn Husse who though some Protestants through their greatest penurie make bold to challenge for a member of their Church yet is it to the contrarie confessed by (31) In Colloquiis Germ. c. de Antichristo Luther himself that The Papists burned Iohn Husse when as yet he departed not a finger-breadth from the Papacie for he taught the same which the Papists do only he found fault with their vices and wicked life against the Pope he committed nothing Agayne They do not wel sayth (32) Explicaet Art 30 Luther who make me a Hussite for he held not with me (33) Tom. 1. p. 493. He taught horrible and diuelish blasphemies Agreably sayth (34) In Apoc. c. 11. p. 290. M. Fox The Papists traduce Husse and Hierom of Prague who liued in the same Age as Hereticks why so I beseech you c. I adde further if he be an Heretick who varieth from the Decrees of the Roman Church what dit Husse at any time teach or defend in the Councel wherin he did not rather seem superstitiously to consent with the Papists What did the Popish Faith decree concerning Transubstantiation which he likewise with the Papists did not confirme Who celebrated Masse more religiously then he or more chastlie obserued the vowes of Priestly Chastitie Adde further that in doctrine of Catholicks concerning Free-wil Predestination Informed Faith the cause of iustification and Merit of good works what other thing did he hold then is taught at Rome what Image of any Sainct did he euer cast out of his Church at Bethlem c. what therfore shal we say him to haue committed for which he is not togeather with the Roman Sea to be condemned or with it to be absolued In like ful sort sayth D. Field (34) In his Appendix to the 5. booKe of the Church part 1. p. 87. touching Iohn Husse and Hierom of Prague I could neuer yet find in what poynt of Faith they dissented from the doctrine of the Church then constantly resolued on but they bitterly inueighed against the Ambition Pride Coueteousnes and negligence of the Clergie And more in particular M. Fox (35) Act. Mon. p. 216. confesseth that Husse beleeued the seauen Sacraments and (36) Act. Mon. p. 209. 197. Transubstantiation M. Iacob (37) Def. of the Churches c. p. 13. And Act. Mon. p. 227. 216. addeth the Popes Primacie wherof also sayth (38) In Assertionibus art 30 Luther Iohn Husse seemeth not to withstand but that the Monarchie of the Pope may be yea he further there affirmeth that Husse attributeth much to the Roman Idol Lastly Husse being a Catholick Priest (39) Def. of the Churches c. p. 13. M. Iacob affirmeth that he sayd Masse to his dying day So manifest it is that in the Age of Iohn Husse the publick Seruice of the Church was the Sacrifice of the Masse and the Religion then knowne and beleeued by Husse and others was our present Roman Where I can not but much admire the absurditie and beggerie of M. Fox and others in (40) Act. Mon. p. 190. 241. And D. Downham of Antichrist p. 40. registring Iohn Husse for a most holie Martyr of their Protestant Church and further (41) In Apoc. c. 11. p. 249. affirming that It can not seem otherwise but that Iohn Husse and Hierom of Prague are without al controuersie the two witnesses c. wherof the Prophet speaketh properly and expresly in this place to wit of the Apocalipse wheras it is most certain that Husse was condemned and burned chiefly (42) See Simō de Voyon vpon the Catalog of Doctours p. 159. Fox Act. Mon. p. 230. Osiand cent 15. p. 469. for his vrging of Communion to the Lay-people vnder both kindes and for maintayning Wicclifs seditious Doctrine against Princes Priestes and Bishops if they committed mortal Sinne in other poynts of Faith liuing and dying a Roman Catholick In the Age precedent to Iohn Husse liued Iohn Wiccliffe who was a Catholick Priest (43) Stows Annales p. 464 euen the Parson of Lutterworth in Lecestershier who according to M. Stow (44) Ib. p. 425 first inueighed against the Church for that he had been depriued by the Archbishop of Canterburie from a certain Benefice c. And hauing vpon this occasion seuered himself from the Church in which he formerly was He with his Disciples went barefooted and basely cloathed in coorse russet garments downe to the heeles and (45) Ib. p. 426 seemed to contemne al temporal goods for the loue of eternal riches adioyning himself to the begging Friars approuing their pouertie and extolling their perfection Reteyning stil his former Catholick opinions concerning (46) Vviccleus de Blasphe c. 17 Holie-water (47) Vviccl de Euchar. c. 9. the Worshipping of Relicks and Images the (48) Serm de Assumptione Intercession of our B. Lady S. Mary the (49) De Apostasia c. 18. Rites and Ceremonies of the Masse wherof (50) In Professione fidei c. 28. Przibauus an Heretick who liued neer the same time sayth Iohn Wiccliffe in his booke of Apostacie and eighteenth chapter alloweth al the Rites of Masse from the beginning almost to the end c. (51) In 1. ad Cor. c. 1. Wiccliffe himself calleth Extreame Vnction a medecine to cure sinne as appeareth sayth he Iames. 1 And he affirmeth that it
keeping of holie dayes in honour of Saincts And lastly The Popish Masse and Ceremonies To come now to the Armenians (11) Cent. 15. p. 477. Osiander confesseth that In the yeare On thousand foure hundred and thirtie Pope Eugenius then called a Councel at Florence c. To which Councel the Grecians Armenians Iacobins assented M. Marbeck (12) Com. Places p. 258. acknowledgeth that at the Councel of Florence the Christians of Armenia and India consented to the Roman Church and that the Greeks agreed And where as (13) Vol. 2. Generat 39. Nauclerus recordeth that Anno. 1145. The Embassadours of the Armenian Bishops as also their Catholick that is their vniuersal Metropolitan who hath vnder him more then a thousand Bishops came to Pope Eugenius being at Viterbo and hauing ended their iourney after a yeare and a half they offred their Subiection to the Apostolical Sea the same historie is mentioned by M. Symondes (14) Vpon the Reuel p. 223. 150. 250. And See Volater Geograph l. 10. and other Writers And of the great agreement between the Armenians and the Roman Church we may read Gomarus (15) Speculum Ecclesiae p. 163 172. and (16) l. 2 c. 23. fol. 183. Villamont in his voyages printed in French But D. Philip descendeth more particularly and sayth of the Armenians They haue their blemishes For in the forme of their Liturgie mention is made of Inuocation (17) Comment de Regno Christi l. 1. p. 35. And see Cathol Tradit p. 207. and Intercession of Saincts and of oblation of the Sacrament As also (18) Ibid. p 22. Let the Christian Readers know this that not only the churches of the Graecians but also Rutans Georgians and Armenians and Indians Aethiopians who are become Christians do hold the true and Real Presence of the Bodie and Bloud of our Lord wheresoeuer the Eucharist is celebrated c. And (19) Ibid. p. 56. agayne There are not wanting who think that as yet there remayne in sundrie places of Arabia some Mozarabes Christians whom it is euident in Africk and Spayne in former Ages to haue embraced the Religion of Christians not much vnlike to the Popish Rites By al which it appeareth that the anciēt Armenians receiuing their Religion from the Apostles do agree with vs Catholicks in Inuocation of Saincts (21) Cent. 16. p. 970. The Real Presence The oblation or Sacrifice of Christs Bodie In acknowledging their obedience to the Church of Rome and in brief in their Religion in general not much vnlike to that of the Papists Now as touching the Grecians (20) Estate of the Church p. 253. Crispinus affirmeth that (23) Acta Theologorum Vvittemb Ieremiae Patriarchae Constantinop de Augustana Confes p. 55. 102. 128. Anno. 870. the Greek and Latin Churches became diuided only for the Primacie and diuersitie of Ceremonies so fully did they at that time consent in al other poynts Osiander speaking of the other Oriental Churches further remote auerreth that Anno 1585. the Christians who inhabit neer to Mount Libanus became at last conquered and subiect to the Turkish Empire Neither is that to be maruailed at for the Christians in the East haue not sincere Religion but are in most part of Articles Popish Sir Edwin Sandes (22) In his last leafe but fiue in his Relation of the State of Religion vsed in the West partes of the world auoucheth that The Greek Church doth concurre with Rome in opinion of Transubstantiation and generally in the Sacrifice and whole bodie of the Masse In praying to Saincts and Auricular confession in offring Sacrifice and prayer for the dead Purgatorie and worshiping of Pictures c. Yea the Protestant Diuines of Wittemberg do fully testify that the Greek Church yet to this day professeth and teacheth Inuocation of Saincts and Angels (24) Ib. p. 243. 368. Reliques (25) Ib. p 243. 244 247. 251. Worshipping of Images (26) Ib. p. 86. 96. 100. 240. 380. Transubstantiation (27) p. 102. 104 And see Cath. Tradit p. 129. 137. Sacrifice The signifying (28) p. 97. 99. 100. Ceremonies of the Masse (29) p. 87. 10. in Prefat Auricular Confession (30) p. 79 89. Inioyned Satisfaction (31) p. 78 238 Confirmation with Chrisme (32) p. 242. 326. Extreme Vnction (33) p. 77. 242. And Cath. Trad. p. 197. and al the seauen Sacraments Also (34) p. 93. 102. 109. Prayer for the dead (35) p. 93. 104. Sacrifice for the Dead (36) p. 93. 109. Almes for the dead (37) p. 224. 296. 367. Freewil (38) p. 132. 257. Monachisme (39) p 111. 129. 135. vowes of Chastitie (40) p 126. The fast of Lent and other set Fasting-dayes That (41) p. 129. Priests may not marry after Orders taken And lastly to omit manie others That (42) p. 131. 138. 142. the Tradition and doctrine of the Fathers is to be kept So plainly in al these chief Articles of Faith doth the Grecian Church remayne vnchanged and wholy consonant with the Roman But now at last to come to our Neighbours the Britans whom we haue proued before to haue been conuerted in the Apostles times concerning them I wil only declare two things First that the Faith which at first they receaued they kept for six hundred yeares euen vntil the comming of S. Augustin into England vnchanged and the same in al matters of weight and substance The Second that the Faith and Religion which S. Augustin taught in England and which is formerly confessed to haue been altogether Catholick or Romish was the self same Faith and Religion which the Britans beleeued and professed some Ceremonies excepted Now as touching the First M. (43) Pageant of Popes Cent. 1. c. 70. Bale confesseth that The Brittans being conuerted by Ioseph of Arimathia held that Faith at Austins comming And (44) Cent. 1. c. 90. There was alwayes amongst the Brittans preaching of Truth most sure Doctrine and such Worship as was by Gods commandment giuen of the Apostles to the Churches wherupon he calleth the then Brittan Church (45) Cent. 1. c. 73. the true Church of Christ D. Fulk (46) Answ to a Counterf Cath. p. 49. affirmeth that The Brittans before Austins comming continued in the Faith of Christ euen from the Apostles times yea he calleth the Brittans of S. Austins time (47) In 2. Cor. 12.12 Catholicks c. with whom Christian Religion had continued in Succession since the Apostles time M. Fox (48) Act. Mon. p. 463. auoucheth that The Brittans after the receiuing of the Faith neuer forsook it for anie manner of false preaching of other nor for torments and that (49) In his Protestat Religion remained in the Brittans vncorrupt and the Word of Christ truly preached til the comming of S. Austin But M. Midleton (50) Papisto-mastix p. 202. confirmeth this poynt further by succeeding testimonies of the
to examine matters but to define nothing before his notice and withal not to communicate with Photius as a Bishop but only as a Secular man being ordayned contrarie to the Canons and hauing vniustly deposed Ignatius which when Photius perceuied he hindred the sayd Legats for conferring with anie but only their own followers and withal assembled a Synod wherein through the power of the Emperour he further confirmed the Deposition of Ignatius and his own Creation threatning also the Popes Legats that vnles they also would subscribe to the sayd Councel the Emperour would bannish them into remote Countries where for verie hunger they should be inforced to eate lice Through which terrours and also through bribes from Photius the Legats contrarie to the Popes command subscribed to the condemnation of Ignatius and establishment of Photius Which when Pope Nicolas truly vnderstood assembling a Councel in Rome he excommunicated Photius and his own Legats and deposed them al restoring Ignatius to his Sea Which Basil the Emperour succeding Michael according to the Popes determination fully executed Now what doth anie of this make against the Popes Supremacie but rather confirme the same seing that both Michael and Photius sent Embassedours to the Pope entreating that he would send Legats from himself for the redressing of abuses at Constantinople And when themselues were found cheifly faultie the Emperour was seuerely reprehended by the Pope and Photius excommunicated and deposed Adde hereunto that the Greek Writers themselues do generally testifye that both Michael and Photius were men extremely addicted to manie and most enormous vices and therefore their resisting the Pope is of no greater Authoritie then of an offender or Rebel resisting his lawful Iudge or Prince So likewise concerning the Bishop of Rauenna's resisting the Pope Anastasius cited by M. White in proof thereof reporteth (81) In Nicolao 1. that sundrie Persons going to Pope Nicolas with manie complaints of greiuous wrongs and dommages done vnto them by the sayd Bishop the Pope therevpon did by his Legats and letters admonish him to surcease the same and to make satisfaction Which the Bishop neglecting and adding stil more to his former impieties he further commanded him to repaire to Rome there in the Synod to answer in his own behalf which he likewise refusing and contemning to do he was therevpon Excommunicated by the same Councel Yea the Pope himself vpon the earnest intreatie of the people of Rauenna went to the same Cittie where presently he restored manie things taken wrongfully by the Bishop who hauing Intelligence before hand of the Popes comming was fled to Papia there to desire Ludonicus the Emperours help and backing against the Pope But as the people there in the streets did eschew his companie hearing that he was Excommunicated by Pope Nicolas so the Emperours answer was only this by his Messenger Let him go and laying pride aside let him humble himself to the Pope to whom both we and al the Church are subiect Which when the Bishop heard despayring of al other meanes he went to Rome where submitting himself to the Pope and promising reformation and performance of sundrie matters enioyned him and commanded by the same Pope he was therevpon absolued from his Excommunication and suspension from saying Masse This being the truth of the Storie concerning the Bishop of Rauenna his resisting the Pope I referre it to the Iudgement of anie impartial Reader whether this doth not strongly confirme the Primacie of the Bishop of Rome But to proceed after 900. 900. to 950. 950. and so forward D. White vrgeth sundrie abuses noted as then in the Church of Rome But those by him specifyed concerning only matter of life and manners are altogeather improper and insufficient to proue any change in Faith and Doctrine which was the only point pertinent to be proued Yea Baronius by him alleaged speaketh only of such abuses as were brought into the Church by Anti-Popes and Intruders not by true Popes And whereas further it is obiected that certaine of the English Clergie maintayned the Sacrament to be only a figure of the Bodie bloud of Christ against the Real Presence then increasing Besides that the confirmation hereof dependeth vpon the testimonie of the old Fabler Fox I haue shewed heretofore in the Examples of Scotus and Bertram that our Catholick Doctrine of Real Presence was confessedly beleeued and taught in the purest times of the Primitiue Church After 950. 950. to 1000. we haue fayth D. White Otho the Great that deposed Iohn the Pope and assumed into his hands the nominating and making of Popes hereafter c. But this only proueth what was done not with what right it was done for though through the solicitation of a false Synod Otho assented to the deposition of Iohn by reason of manie crimes obiected against him Yet the proceeding therin was in sundrie respects not Iuridical but directly contrarie to the much more ancient practise and decrees of the Church as Baronius proueth at large Anno 963. Neither is it true that Otho assumed into his hands the nominating and making of Popes hereafter for no sooner was Iohn deposed but immediatly in the hearing of the Emperour the Bishops assembled iâ— the same Synod sayd We choose Leo our Pastour that he may be the cheif and vniuersal Pope of the Roman Church to which though the Emperour afterwardes assented yet did he neither first nominate or elect him In this Semi-centurie M. White further vrgeth that Aelfricus Archbishop of Canterburie preached and published his Homilies against the Real Presence comming in But first Aelfricus the Archbishop of Canterburie was so Roman Catholick that D. Godwin testifieth (n) Catal. of Bishops p. 23. that he was brought vp in Glassenburie And M. Bale assureth vs that he was Schollar to S. Ethwald and Abbot of Abingdon and for his craftie (x) Cent. 2. c. 41. sayth he in promoting Papistrie made Archbishop of Canterburie Secondly the Protestants which (*) In the Preface before it published that Sermon confesse that the Authour thereof was no Archbishop of Canterburie And it is more likely to be true which M. Fox (y) Act. mon. p. 1148 1040. sayth that it was Aelfrick surnamed Bara an Heretick who as S. Dunstan appearing to one in a vision sayd as reporteth Osberne attempted to disinherit his Church but I haue stopped him sayth S. Dunstan and he could not preuaile Thirdly that Sermon diligently read maketh as much for Transubstantiation as against it Lastly though we should suppose for the present that Aelfricus did preach or publish such Homilies yet was that doctrine so far from comming in as then as that the best and ancientest Fathers of the Primitiue Church are formerly confessed and reproued for the same doctrine by sundrie Protestant Writers In like sort though Arnulphus a man vicious inueighed against the Pope vrging that if he be voyd of charitie puffed vp only with knowledge he is Antichrist
Learning and Iudgment c. So willing indeed is M. Doctour to detract from the Authoritie and testimonies of his owne deare Brethren M. Napper and M. Brocard And where he would gladly mince the matter by affirming that they were but Two the perusal of this Chapter and other parcels of this booke wil clearly discouer that there were manie more Twoes of this opinion Wherfore to proceed M. Brightman (11) Apoc. p. 503. thus vrgeth Bellarmine As concerning the continuance of the Apostacie from the true Faith we haue learned by the Apocalypse that the same hath preuayled more then 1260. yeares and that more cleerly then anie of your Subtilties can euade (12) Ibid. p. 539. And againe Antichrist hath raigned from the time of Constantin the Great to this day wherof the Apocalypse affordeth such Demonstrations as neuer anie Iesuit can confute Yea (13) Ibid. p. 477. further The Pope of Rome is the Beast which 1300. yeares receiued power c. therefore from 1300. yeares he is the Antichrist So certain it is by M. Brightmans strongest Demonstrations grounded vpon Scripture that the present Roman Religion hath continued for these last 1300. yeares during which time the Pope in his opinion hath raigned as Antichrist Answerably herevnto (14) Against Staplet Martial p. 25. D. Fulk relateth that some Protestants haue written that the Pope hath blinded the world these manie hundred yeares some say 1000. some 1200. some 900. c. And (15) In Apoc. p. 263. Winckelmanus speaking of the begining and end of the Churches persecution by Antichrist reporteth that there are some Protestant Writers who make the end Anno 1517. when M. Luther first began and so the beginning should be Anno 257. others place the end Anno Christi 1521. when Luther at the Assemblies at Wormes excellently gaue testimonie to the truth and so the beginning should be from Anno Christi 261. c. (16) De Antichristo p. 96. Danaeus also speaking of Antichrists first coming confesseth that some Protestant Writers teach that he came in the Yeare 1000. others 500. others 400. from Christs birth So clear it is that the Pope of Rome for these 1300. yeares in the opinion of Protestants hath raigned as Antichrist But as the Popes for these last 1300. yeares are thus censured for Antichrists so are the most ancient and first Christian Emperours condemned for Papists and fauourers of Antichrist For though D. Morton speaking of the Popes authoritie affirmeth that it hath been (17) Prot. Appeal p. 661. often and notoriously contradicted in Antiquitie c. by right Christian and renowned Emperours Yet M. Brightman speaking of the verie first most ancient and Christian Emperours auerreth the contrarie saying (18) Apoc. p. 344. Into which Catalogue come Constantin the Great Constantius Constans Constantin and their Sonnes Iulian Iouinian Valentinian Gratian Valentinian the Second Theodosius c. for these then raigning the Beast was notably defended and his dignitie much increased Agreably sayth (19) Reioynd to Bristow p. 2. D. Fulk I neuer ment to acknowledge the Emperours Constantin Iouinian Valentinian c. to be such as I would wish for For both in their Religion and manners diuers things are found which I could wiâ—h had been more agreable to the Word of God So that for the second 300. yeares after Christ it resteth euident and for such acknowledged that The Pope and his Clergie possessed the outward visible Church of Christians neuer suffring for 1000. yeares after Syluester the First anie to be seen vouchable or visible of the Protestant Church For which verie cause al the Popes of those Ages are censured for Antichrists and the verie first Christian Emperours for their fauourers and defenders To make now the like trial of the Roman Churches Continuance and her vniuersal and publick profession and practise of her Faith and Religion for the first 300. yeares after Christ to wit from his blessed Apostles to Pope Siluester the First and Constantin the Great Wheras our Catholick Writers do often obiect the Custom of the ancient Fathers in prouoking the Hereticks of their times with the Succession of the Roman Bishops according to the example of Ireneus Cyprian Tertullian Optatus Hierom Augustin and Vincentius Lyrinensis (20) Against Purgat p. 373. D. Fulk for his best answear is enforced to confesse saying That these men specially named the Church of Rome it was because the Church of Rome at that time as it was founded by the Apostles so it continued in the doctrine of the Apostles (21) ConfereÌ„ce vvith M. Hart. p. 442. D. Raynolds being prouoked in the like kind acknowledgeth in like manner that The succession of the Roman Bishops was a proof of the true Faith in the time of Augustin Epiphanius Optatus Tertullian and Irenaeus c. (22) Instit l. 4. c. 2. sec 2. 3. And Caluin himself setting downe our foresayd Allegation affirmeth of Catholicks that They indeed set forth their Church verie gloriously c. They report out of Irenaeus Tertullian Origen Augustin and others how highly they esteemed this Succession wherto he giueth the like answear and reason saying Considering it was a matter out of al doubt that from the beginning euen vntil that time nothing was changed in Doctrine the forsayd Doctours took in argument that which was sufficient for the ouerthrowing of al new errours to wit that the Hereticks oppugned the doctrine which euen from the verie Apostles themselues had been inuiolable and with one consent retayned And in his book of Institutions set forth in French he writeth expresly that It was a thing notorious and without doubt that after the Apostles Age vntil those foresayd times no change was made in doctrine neither at Rome nor other Citties In like sort sayth Zanchius (23) De vera Relig. p. 148. In times past the Roman Church and the succession of their Bishops vntil the times of Irenaeus Tertullian Cyprian Some others was such as that not vndeseruedly these Fathers were accustomed to prouoke and cite the Hereticks of their time to her and others such like (24) De Ecclesia p. 278. D. Whitaker speaking of certain Apostolical Churches and amongst them of Rome by Name collecteth thus From whence we vnderstand why Tertullian prouoked to these Churches to wit because as then by perpetual succession they kept the Doctrine of the Apostles Agreably to which almost in the same words sayth (25) Against Purgat p. 374 D. Fulk The Church of Rome retayned by succession vntil Tertullians dayes that Faith which it did first receiue of the Apostles (26) Fox his Act. Mon. p. 1359. M. Ridley auoucheth that The Patriarch of Rome in the Apostles time and long after was a great maintayner and Setter forth of Christs glorie in the which aboue al other Countries and Regions was preached the true Ghospel the Sacraments were most duly administred c. After the Emperours became Christians
did formerly auouch that the sayd Rule was of Credit euen with the Protestant Writers of our time namely with M. Suinglius M. Caluin and M. Gualter and that he thinketh no learned man doth dissent from them Yet M. Morton who would take it vnkindly and that deseruedly to be censured for Vnlearned doth thus far aduenture directly to discredit and disauthorize the foresayd Rule as shamefully to curtle it both in bredth and depth The (44) Ibid. p. 345. bredth sayth he though most vntruly reacheth no further then vnto matters of Ceremonies and other Customes of the Church c. Secondly the depth of the same position if it be rightly sounded wil be found to be a truth of strong Probabilitie only and not of an absolute infallibilitie which is to say in good English that the sayd Rule only concerneth trifles and matters of smal moment as also that it is not a certain true Rule but peraduenture true and peraduenture false which strongly implyeth that our Doctour in matters of faith and moment now disputed between Catholicks and Protestants would be loath to be squared and tryed thereby And so in substance acknowledgeth that which he reproueth in M. Carthwright that thereby a window is open to bring in al Poperie So euidently in deed doth the forsayd Rule prescribed by S. Austin and approued by so manie of the learned Protestants strongly confirme and conuince the vninterrupted Current and continuance of our Roman Religion from the Apostles themselues to these our dayes Agreably to the premisses (45) Consideration of the Papists supplication p. 43. M. Powel expresly and ingenuously confesseth We can not tel by whom or at what time sayth he the enemie did sow the Papists Doctrine c. Neither indeed do we know who was the first Authour of euerie one of your blasphemous opinions (46) Reioynder to Bristow p. 265. D. Fulk answering to the demand of the Roman Churches change sayth thereto I answer my Text sayth it was a mysterie not reuealed and therefore could not be at first openly preached against c. And though D. Whitaker taught before that No man denyed but that it much auayled for the confuting of Heresies to haue knowne their beginning Yet the same (47) Resp ad Rat. Comp. p. 101. D. Whitaker is inforced to confesse that The time of the Roman Churches change can not easily be told Yea to such absurdities are Protestants brought in this poynt that Vrbanus Rhegius being vrged to shew wherin the Roman Church had changed her Faith at last betaketh himself to this desperat boldnes saying (48) In lib. Apologet. p. 192. But to conclude though it were true that the Roman Church had changed nothing in Religion would it therefore presently follow that she were a true Church I think not sayth he And yet I think hardly any one Protestant can be picked out so ignorant or impudent as wil openly auouch that the Roman Church was not a true Church when S. Paul writ vnto the Romans in these words (49) Ep. Ad Rom c. 11. vers 5.6.7.8.9.11.12 By Christ we receaued Grace and Apostleship for obedience to the Faith in al Nations c. among whom are you also the called of Iesus Christ. To al that are at Rome the beloued of God called to be Saints Grace to you and Peace from God our Father and our Lord Iesus Christ. First I giue thanks to my God c. for al you because your Faith is renowned in the whole world c. without intermission I make a memorie of you alwayes in my prayers c. And I desire to see you that I may impart vnto you some spiritual grace to confirme you that is to say to be comforted togeather in you by that which is common to vs both your Faith and mine Now if the Roman Churches Faith was once thus the same with S. Paules Faith then if she neuer changed her sayd Faith as this Protestant supposeth she must needs continue a true Church Al this Sun shine notwithstanding D. Morton wil needs defend his brother Rhegius herein because (50) Prot. App. p. 675. diuers Hereticks who liued in the Apostles times such as were the Simonians Basilidians Nicolaitans albeit they liued in the dayes of the Apostles yet did they not professe the Doctrine of the Apostles which sufficiently demonstrateth the infirmitie of the Consequence But I must confesse I did not expect such weake Demonstrations from D. Morton for the Consequence was not that Hereticks liued in the Apostles dayes therefore their Doctrine is the doctrine of the Apostles as our Doctour would abuse an vncautelous or vnlearned Reader but as himself before thus confessed The Church of Rome hath not altered anie article of Faith since the Apostles times ergo the now Faith of the Church of Rome is the same with that which was taught by the Apostles This Consequence is so cleer supposing that the Church of Rome in Saint Pauls time professed the true Faith which I haue formerly proued and no Protestant dare deny as that al further proof would discouer no lesse tediousnes in the Writer then the denying therof hath bewrayed ignorance and temeritie in M. Doctour So cleer it is that no Protestant whosoeuer is able to assigne anie knowne beginning of our Roman Religion since the Apostles times Wherefore in playne tearmes they ascribe the beginning therof to S. Pauls time To this effect sayth D. Willet (51) Synopsis Controu 2. q. 3. p. 56. Therefore S. Paul calleth Papistrie a mysterie of iniquitie which began euen to work in his dayes M. Midleton (52) Papisto-mastix p. 193. auoucheth that we are sure that the Mysterie of inquitie did work in Pauls time and fel not a sleep so soone as Paul was dead waking againe 600. yeares after when this Mysterie was disclosed c. And therfore no maruaile though perusing Councels Fathers and Stories from the Apostles forward we find the print of the Popes feet c. M. Parkins desiring 53 Reformed Cath. p. 329. To stop the mouths of Papists who demand of vs sayth he where our Church was foure-score yeares before Luther They are answered sayth he that our Church hath been since the dayes of the Apostles and that in the verie midst of the Papacie So supposing the Papacie or Roman Church to haue continued since the dayes of the Apostles Lastly the truth hereof is so certayne that the same is acknowledged by our seuerest (54) Suruey of the BooK of common prayer in the Preface to the King p. 18. Puritans who speaking to the Kings Maiestie giue this wholsome persuasion Let not your Maiestie be now deceiued by the Popish Argument of supposed Antiquitie as Ioseph was with the old and mouldie bread of the Gibeonites c. And the rather ô christian King take heed because Antichrist began to work euen in the Apostles dayes So vndoubted and to be supposed it is that the Argument drawne from
the longest Continuance and greatest Antiquitie is a Popish Argument And the Doctrine of the Pope or Church of Rome was so timely working as that it was in being euen in the Apostles dayes For our Conclusion then we haue it here confessed that euer since the time of Constantin and Pope Siluester which contayneth some 1300 yeares al Popes and the Church of Rome haue been so agreable in Doctrine and Faith with our Present Pope and Church that therefore they are al censured for Antichrists Rome for Babylon the imagined Protestant Church during the same time not hauing anie one visible member in the world And not only this but that euen our first Christian Emperours are reproued by Protestants in regard of their very Religion and their honouring and defending of the foresayd Popes And as for the Roman Churches continuance from Christs time vntil the Raygne of Constantin it is plentifully acknowledged that as she was founded by the Apostles so she continued in the doctrine of the Apostles euen vntil the verie times of S. Augustin who flourished almost 100. yeares after Constantin in so much as during al the sayd time the verie Succession of Roman Bishops is granted by Protestants to haue been a good proof of the true Faith And wheras S. Austins Rule of making al such Doctrine truly Apostolical as hath no knowne beginning since the Apostles is approued and applauded by the learnedst Protestants yet themselues likewise confesse that the allowance of this Rule is the opening of a window to bring in al Poperie so truly Apostolical is the Doctrine of Papists Adde lastly that the Antiquitie of our present Papistrie is confessedly no lesse gray-headed then the times of S. Paul and the other Apostles and the continuance therof euer since such as that perusing Councels Fathers and Stories from the Apostles we stil find the print of the Popes feet Now my kindest Aduocats in this so important a Plea are no other then Caluin Suinglius Zanchius Danaeus Beza Winckelmanus Sebastianus Francus Rhegius Brocard Brightman Leigh Napper Parkins Whitaker Powel Fulk Raynolds Ridley Iewel Bunnie Carthwright Parker Field Whitguift Fotherbie Willet Midleton and Morton al of them Protestant Writers and men much renowned by their other Brethren A FVRTHER PROOF OF THE PRESENT ROMAN Religions Continuance from the Apostles times to these dayes is taken from the Christian belief of the Indians Armenians Grecians Brittans al of them Conuerted in the dayes of the Apostles CHAPTER VI. IT is recorded by sundrie Historiographers and acknowledged for most true by the learnedst Protestants that manie Heathen Nations were conuerted by the Apostles themselues to the Faith of Christ whereof peculiar instance is giuen of India Armenia Graecia Britanie c. The Conuersion of India is confessed by (1) Cent. 1. p. 37. Osiander and (2) Comment de Regno Christi p. 45. Nicolaus Phillippi affirmeth S. Thomas to haue been their first Apostle Chemnitius (3) Exam. part 2. p. 7. teacheth that S. Bartholomew preached the Ghospel to the Armenians And as for the Conuersion of Greece it clearly appeareth by Saint Pauls Epistles to sundrie of that Nation as to the Corinthians Ephesians Thessalonians and by the Apocalypse chap. 1. vers 11. Now as concerning the first Conuersion of Britanie it was so vndoubtedly Apostolick as that (4) Britannia c. p. 40. M. Cambden auoucheth that It is certayne that the Brittans receiued the Christian Religion in the verie infancie of the Church In proof wherof he there alleageth sundrie ancient Authorities (5) Ibid. p. 157. And See M. Hal in his Apologie against the Brovvnists p. 58. Further also teaching that in Britannie flourished the Monasterie of Glassenburie which taketh its ancient beginning from Ioseph of Arimathia c. for this the ancientest Monuments of this Monasterie do testify c. Neither is there cause why we should doubt thereof In like sort sayth (6) Description of Britanie annexed vnto Holinshead c. v. 1. p. 23. M. Harison That Ioseph preached here in England in the Apostles times his Sepulchre yet in Glassenburie and Epitaph affixed thereto is proof sufficient (7) Remedie against Schisme p. 24. M. Henoch Clapham is so confident of the Britans conuersion in the Apostles times as that he auoucheth that our Schismatikes may aswel ask me what assurance I haue there was a King Henrie as demand what assurance I haue of the other (8) Against Rhem. Test in 2. Cor. 12. fol. 316. D. Fulk thefore calleth them The Catholick Brittans with whom Christian Religion had continued in succession since the Apostles times This then supposed that al the former Countries were conuerted to Christianitie by Christ his Apostles and disciples themselues The next point to be examined is whether the sayd Faith and Religion which as then they learned receaued and beleeued and which for sundrie succeding Ages they practised and professed is more agreable to the present Roman or Protestant Faith And first as concerning the Indians (9) Comment de Regno Christi l. 1. p. 45. 46. D. Philippus Nicolai relateth that India in sundrie places is inhabited by them in great number who receiued the doctrine of the Ghospel from S. Thomas the Apostle c. vpon the seauenth day according to our custome they meete in the Churches that they may be present at the Sacrifices heare Sermons they vse in their Sacrifices wine made of dryed Grapes giuing bread they not only giue the bodie of Christ but also by drinking of the consecrated Chalice they giue his bloud hauing before made confession of their sinnes c. At the entrance of the church like vnto the Papists they are sprinkled with holie water with the same rite and the same religion they burie the dead c. praying vnto Christ for their eternal Saluation c. The Priests are so shauen vpon the head that they haue vpon the crowne the Image of the Crosse Amongst them there are Societies of Monks and companies of Sacred Virgins shut vp in seueral houses Chastitie is kept by al them with a great desire of honestie abstinence and religion c. They strictly obserue the fasts of Aduent and Lent c. And In the honour of S. Thomas they keep a Festiual day Yea he further writeth (10) Ibid. p. 64. of the remote Cataians of India that they haue their chappels in which for the safetie of their Marchants trauayling in strang countries Sacrifice is offred with Popish ceremonies and Masses Now by this testimonie of so learned a Protestant it appeareth that the Indian Christians first conuerted by S. Thomas retayne yet and practise these Catholick poynts of Faith The real presence of Christs Bodie and Bloud in the Eucharist Confession of sinnes before Receiuing Sprinkling with holie water prayer for the dead Shauing Priestes Crownes The Image of the Crosse Companies of Monks and Nunnes their Chastitie and abstinence The Feasts of Aduent and Lent The
from a Partie in his owne cause And M. Carthwright (97) In his 2. Reply part 1. p. 501. auoucheth that Iulius Bishop of Rome at the Councel of Antioch outreached in claiming the hearing of causes that appertayned not to him The (98) Cent. 4. col 529. Centurists confesse that The Roman Bishops made a Law that they might command al things first to be written to them as appeareth by the Epistle of Iulius in Athasius Apologia secunda For Iulius sayth Are you ignorant this to be the custome that first we be written vnto c. (99) Vpon the Reuel c. 5. p. 53. And see Mornay of the Church in English p. 264. M. Symonides testifyeâ—h that Iulius decreed that whosoeuer suspected his Iudge might appeale to the Sea of Rome In so much that wheras the Arians had expelled Athanasius Bâ—shop of Alexandria Paulus Bishop of Constantinople and diuers other Catholick Bishops of the East Church it is (100) Cent. 4. col 530. testifyed that Iulius commanded the Arians to come to Rome and appoynted also a day to Athanasius Theodoret. l. 2. c. 4. c. where hearing euerie mans accusations and (101) Cent. 4. col 550. complâ—ynt He restored euerie one of these wronged Bishops to his owne place or Bishoprick and that not by intreatie or arbitrably but as the (102) Cent. 4. col 550. 530 Centurists confesse by Prerogatiue of the Roman Sea Al which might as ye be made much more euident by Iulius his vndoubted Epistle extant in Aâ—hanasius his second Apologie and alledged by the Centurists (103) Cent. 4. col 735. who mention their (104) col 737 742. Citation euen vnto Iudgement (105) col 739. 740. and at a certayne day and greatly reprehending this (106) col 529 And see D. field of the Church l 5. p. 178. Saying of Iulius Are ye ignorant this to be the custome that first we be written vnto that from hence that which is right may be defined c. for what we haue receaued froÌ„ the blessed Apostle Peter that I signify vnto you To coÌ„clude this of Pope Iulius Doctour Philippus Nicolai (107) De Regno Christi l. 2. p. 149. auoucheth that Pope Iulius as Socrates and Sozomene relate sent letters to the Eastern Bishops in which as the letters witnes he often affirmeth the right of calling general Councels by a certain singular Priuiledge euen by Diuine Precept to belong to himself alone who as he sayth is the Prelate of the first Sea He also affirmeth that it no lesse appertayneth vnto him being the Bishop of that Cittie that he be acquaynted with the affaires of Bishops and other waightie businesses of that kind After the same manner and with like ambition Damasus c. and afterwards Innocentius c. Thus far the Protestant Philippus To whom I wil only adde M. Fox confessing that (108) Act. Mon. l. 1. p. 1. The Church of Rome in al those Ages aboue specifyed from the Apostles challenged to it self the Title and ring-leading of the whole vniuersal Church on earth by whose direction al other Churches haue been gouerned And (109) Ibid. p. 8. whatsoeuer was done in other places coÌ„monly the manner was to write to the Roman Bishop for his approbation The testimonie of the Roman Bishop was sometimes wont to be desired in those dayes of Pope Iulius for admitting Bishops in other Churches wherof we haue examples in Socrates l. 4. c. 37. when Bishops of anie other Prouinces were at anie dissension they appealed to the Bishop of Rome Neither was this only the priuate opinion of some particuler Popes of those times but it was the general receaued doctrine of other Bishops and Fathers In so much as the Councel of Sardis which M. Bel (110) In his Regiment of the Church p 158. tearmeth The famous and ancient Councel of Sardis coÌ„sisting of 300. Bishops and aboue assembled from Spaine (111) Cent. 4. col 747. Theodoret. hist. l 2. c. 8. FraÌ„ce Italie Greece AEgipt Thebais Palestine Arabia c. and most other parts of the Christian world wherat sundrie Fathers of the Nicene CouÌ„cel were (112) Carion in his Chron. p. 282. present (113) Cent. 4. col 764. decreed Appeales to the Bishop of Rome Insomuch as the (114) Ibid. Centurists and (115) Epitome p. 294. Osiander do both of them acknowledge and recite this 7. Canon of that Councel It hath seemed good to vs that if a Bishop be accused if the Bishops of the Prouince assembled togeather haue iudged the matter and haue depriued him if the Partie depriued do appeale and fly to the Bishop of Rome c. if the Partie accused desiring his cause to be heard once againe do intreate the Bishop of Rome to send Legats à latere suo from him it shal be in the power of the Bishop to do as he shal think good c. (116) Antich Disp bipart p. 31. sect 103. Tilenus speaking hereof auoucheth that The Decree of the CouÌ„cel of Sardis of Appealing to Rome made the Roman Bishop more bould And in regard of this Decree this so ancieÌ„t a Councel is much reproued (117) Instit l. 4. c. 7. sect 9. by Caluin (118) In his com places in English p. 4. p. 39. Peter Martyr (119) Palma Christiana p. 30. 122. 124. Frigiuilleus Gaunius and (120) Cent 4. p. 294. Osiander But to end this Centurie wherin our first Christian Emperour Constantin the Great liued ruled The Protest writer (121) Palma Christiana p. 35. Frigiuilleus Gaunius plainly confesseth that the sayd Constantin himself attributed Primacie to the Roman Bishop before al. that (122) Ibid p. 34. Therby it appeared to be fatal that CoÌ„staÌ„tin would giue power to the Beast which Pope Iulius forthwith put in practise for Constantin the Great carryed in his Ensignes the Dragon for his Armes c. so that he was the Dragon Apoc. 13.2 (123) Fidelis Relatio c. p. 19. Bibliander acknowledgeth that Constantin the Great raigning c. Siluester the Bishop of Rome began to lay the foundations of the Papistical Monarchie c. M. Bale hath almost the same words saying (124) Cent. 1. c. 36. In these times of CoÌ„stantin Syluester began to lay the foundation of the Popes Monarchie and finding the key of the depth he opened the pit if it be true which Papists write of him Yea al the Popes after Syluester to Bonif. 3. he tearmeth Mitred Bishops preparing by their CanoÌ„s and Decrees the seat for the great Antichrist The (125) Cent. 4. col 549. CeÌ„turists coÌ„fesse in general that In this age the Mysterie of iniquitie was not idle (126) Cent. 4â— col 550. And that The Bishop of Rome challenged by Ecclesiastical Canon the dissallowing of those Synods wherat they were absent So cleer it is that the Fathers Bishops and Councels of this Age agreed with vs Catholicks in the
his 2 Epistle he nameth himself the Bishop of the vniuersal Apostolick Church And willeth others to appeale to the Apostolick Sea as to the Head Whereby it is euident that the ancient Popes Victor Anacletus Xistus and our Gregorie xv do wholy agree in their due clayme of Primacie In like māner holie Ireneus who according to Hamelmanus (146) De Traditionibus col 528. might yet remember the Apostles owne liuelie preaching affirming l. 3. c. 3. that It is necessary that al Churches do accord to the Roman Church in regard of a more powerable principalitie is charged for the same by the Centurists (147) In the Alphabetical Table of the 2. Cent. at the word Ireneus with a corrupt Saying concerning the Primacie of the Roman Church But to arise yet euen to the times of the blessed Apostles themselues wheras Papias as appeareth by the testimonie of Ireneus alleadged by the Centurists (148) Cent. 2 col 172. liued in the Apostles time as D. Fulk (149) In his Answ to A Counterf Cath. p 35. confesseth was Schollar to S. Iohn yet doth M. Midleton (150) Papisto-Mastix p. 200. charge him saying Papias was the first Father and Founder of Traditions and Peters Primacie or Romish Episcopalitie (151) De Scrip. Auth. l. 2. c. 20. fol. 166. Bullinger reporteth that forthwith from the verie times of the Apostles especially from the gouernment of Constantin the Great vnder whom some say the first poysen was powred into the Church the desire of gouerning was often put in practise by certain Roman Bishops c. D. Downeham (152) Antichristi l. 2. c. 8. p. 79. acknowledgeth though not the then open Exercise of the Popes vniuersal Dominion yet the priuate Doctrine therof saying The Antichrist which is to be destroyed at the second coming of Christ was come euen in the Apostles time although he was not reuealed by exercising openly a Soueraigne and vniuersal Dominion M. Midleton (153) Papisto-mastix p. 193. affirmeth confidently that we are sure that the Mysterie of iniquitie did work in Pauls time and fel not a-sleep so soone as Paul was dead waking againe six hundred yeares after when this Mysterie was disclosed c. And therefore no maruaile though perusing Councels Fathers and Stories from the Apostles foreward we find the print of the Popes feet c. But Philippus (154) De Regno Christi p. 221. Nicolai vndertaking to speak of the beginning and increase of the Popes Dignitie auoucheth yet further that The desire of Primacie was the common Infirmitie of the Apostles (155) Catal. Testium veritatis Tom. 1. p. 27. and of the first Bishops of the Cittie of Rome Yea some Protestants doubt not to deriue from S. Peter himself as being the prognosticon or type therof the confessed clayme of his Successours the Bishops of Rome saying to this purpose It can not be denyed but that Peter sometimes was subiect to ambition and desire of Rule c. By which infirmitie of Peter it was vndoubtedly signifyed that these Bishops who boasted of Peters succession were to be subiect to the like yea to greater ambition by infinit degrees c. wherfore this so corrupt ambition of Peter and ignorance and negligence of diuine matters c. without douht did foreshew that the Bishop of Rome in that he wil be the Chief and the Heire of Peters Priuiledges was to be ignorant and a contemner of heauenlie things and a louer of human riches power and pleasures And D. Whitaker blusheth not to write that (156) De Concil p. 37. The mysterie of iniquitie did work in the Sea of Rome in Peters time and did shew itself in Anicetus Victor Cornelius Sozimus Bonifacius Celestinus Now if it be true which Caluin affirmeth that (157) Resp ad Sadoletum It is playne conspicuous both to learned and vnlearned that the Kingdome of Christ by which he meaneth the Protestant Church was ouerthrowne when the Primacie of the Roman Bishop was erected then seing the sayd Primacie confessedly began in S. Peter himself and since hath euer continued in his Successours the Bishops of Rome it followeth that therfore the Protestant Church hath been ouerthrowne and ruinated euer since the time of S. Peter then which what can be produced more conuincing in proof that the Protestant Church indeed neuer was But to conclude this with that Princely testimonie of K. Henrie Luther (158) In Assertione 7. aduersus Luther Art 2. cannot deny sayth he but that al the Church of the faithful acknowledge and reuerence the holie Roman Sea as their Mother and Chief if they be not debarred accesse by distance of places or by dangers in the Way And yet if they speak truth which come hither from India the verie Indians themselues distant by so manie parts of the Earth of the Seas of the deserts do yet submit themselues to the Bishop of Rome Therefore if the Pope hath obtayned neither by the commandment of God nor by the assent of men so great and so vniuersal power but hath challenged the same to himself by his owne power Let Luther tel me when he burst into possession of so great Dominion Can the beginning of so great power be obscure especially if it began within the memorie of man but if he say that it was aboue one or two Ages agoe let him make vs remember the same out of Historie for otherwise if it be so ancient that the beginning of so great a matter be blotted out let him know that it is prouided by the Lawes that whose right or Title so surpasseth al memorie of men that it cannot be knowne what beginning it had it is iudged to haue had a lawful beginning And it is clearly forbidden by the consent of al Nations that those things be not changed which haue long continued without change So vndoubted it is that this our Catholick doctrine of the Bishops of Romes Primacie hath been generally taught and practised time out of mind euen from S. Peter himself euen to the end of the Primitiue Church and euer since as hath been formerly proued To come now to the Gouernment of the Church before Christs time The Puritans themselues do confesse that (159) Engl. Puritan p. 16. And Hook Eccl. Pol. l. 5. p. 235. The high Priest of the Iewes was typically and in a figure the supreame Head of the whole Catholick Church which though say they it were visible only in the Prouince and Nation of Iewrie yet those of other Nations and Countries as appeareth by the Historie of the Acts euen though they were Aethiopians were vnder this High Priest and acknowledged homage vnto him So that he was c. in verie deed an Oecumenical vniuersal Bishop of the whole world yea sayth M. Iacob (160) Reasons taken out of Gods word p 5. The Iewish Church vnder the Law was National and only One in the world vnder one high Priest
Cyprian erroneously maketh necessarie Chemnitius (30) Exam. part 2 p. 58 also reprehendeth S. Cyprian for saying of Baptisme and Confirmation Then they may be clearly sanctifyed and become the sonnes of God if they be borne of both Sacraments 31) Against Symb p. 133. M. Parker reproueth (32) Ep. ad Iubaianum S. Cyprian for tearming The Oyle Signaculum Dominicum our Lords Seale And Chemnitius (33) Exam. part 2 p. 58. 64. 65. chargeth not only S. Cyprian but also the Laodicen Councel Melchiades Cornelius and Tertulian for the Sacrament of Confirmation For which also Danaeus (34) Resp ad Tom 2. Bell. p. 451. 452. reciteth and reiecteth sundrie of the ancient Fathers Concerning holie Orders to omit that already it is confessed here that S. Cyprian Tertulian and S. Denis did teach them to be truly a Sacrament numbring them amongst the rest the verie Minores Ordines inferiour Orders of Deacons Subdeacons Readers Exorcists Acolytes are so plainly taught in the Primitiue Church that D. Field maketh (35) Of the Church l. 5. p. 121 OsiaÌ„d cent 1. p. 131. no question but these Minour Orders were verie ancient alledging in proof therof the testimonies of Cyprian Cornelius and Ignatius And for the same the 36) Cent. 4. col 873. p. 874. Centurists alledge the Fathers of the Fourth Age. (37) Tom. 6. Wittemb fol. 53. But Luther confesseth that S. Denis S. Pauls Scholler affirmeth that there are in the Church Bishops Deacons Subdeacons Lectours Exorcistes c. Lastly as touching Extreame vnction Innocentius is reproued by (38) PageaÌ„t of Popes fol. 26. Szeged in Speculo Pontif. p 33. M. Bale Szegedine for that he affirmed Anoyling of the Sick to be a Sacrament Wel then the Poynts here confessedly taught by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church are that the Sacraments do not only signify but truly conferre Grace Iustification and Remission of sinnes That Infants dying vnbaptised can not be saued That in case of necessitie Lay-persons may baptize and that the Sacraments are seauen in number Now the Fathers produced and reproued by Protestants for these Poynts are S. Austin Innocentius Cyprian Origen Tertulian Iustin Clement Vrban the Councel of Laodicea Melchiades Cornelius Ignatius S. Denis The Protestants charging the foresayd Fathers are Luther Caluin Musculus the Mâ—gdeburgians Zuinglius Sarcerius Bucer Bullinger Scultetus Rhegius Chemnitius Danaeus Osiander Whitaker Carthwright Humfrey Parker Field Bale So euident it is that the Primitiue and our now Roman Church do most truly agree in the Doctrine number of the holie Sacraments It is Confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught the Real Presence of Christs true Bodie and Bloud in the Eucharist As also our further Catholick Doctrines of Transubstantiation Adoration Reseruation and the like CHAPTER VIII IT is the (1) Conc. Trid s ss 1â— c. 1. 4. certaine and general Decree of the Catholick Church that in the Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist after the Consecration of bread and wine our Lord IESVS CHRIST God and man is truly really and substantially contayned vnder the formes of those sensible creatures And that the whole Substance of bread is conuerted into the Substance of Christs Bodie and the whole substance of wine into the substance of his Bloud which Conuersion is fitly called Transubstantiation Protestants herein being much diuided amongst themselues The (2) Luth. l. de Captiuit Babyl c. de Euchar. Chemn l. duabus Christi naturis Lutherans teach the Real Presence no lesse plainly then Catholicks only with this difference that they think withal the bread and wine to remayne after Consecration with the Bodie and Bloud which alteration is called Consubstantiation (3) Zuingl l De vera falsa Relig. Zuinglians are of opinion that Eucharist is only a signe figure or remembrance of Christs Bodie no wayes truly contayning the same Caluinists (4) Cvlu l. de Coena Domini Beza de Caena Domini seem in shew more liberal admitting the Bodie of Christ to be truly and really in the Sacrament and that the Sacrament is not only a Signe or figure or that thereby is only giuen to vs the fruits merits of Christs Bodie but euen the Bodie itself yet with this qualification that the same is not receiued by the bodilie mouth of the CoÌ„municant but only by his Faith Neither that the bread wine cease to be or are conuerted into the Bodie and Bloud of Christ but that when the bread and wine are receaued with the bodily mouth at the same time the bodie bloud of Christ are receaued spiritually mystically and by Faith Now in one thing herein I wil accord with D. Morton that (5) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 105. This question of Transubstantiation being of so great consequence that if it be defensible Protestants must stand chargeable of Heresie but it may be confuted the Romanists must necessarily be condemned of Idolatrie That therfore we both think it our bounden dutie to consult more exactly with the Senat of Antiquitie which I wil now only performe from the free grants confessions of D. Morton's owne Brethren And so to begin with S. Gregorie D. Humfrey (6) Iesuit parr 2. rat 5 p. 627. speaking of him and S. Augustin demandeth what Gregorie and Augustin brought into the English Church To which himself answereth that They brought with manie other Catholick poynts by him there recited Transubstantiation To arise to S. Chrysostome the Centurists (7) Cent. 5. col 517. confesse that he seemeth to teach Transubstantiation And Musculus (8) Loc. com p 336. reciteth and reproueth a Saying of S. Chrysostom's for the Real presence The Centurists (9) Cent. 4. c 10 col 985 295. likewise affirme that Eusebius Emissenus did speak vnprofitably of Transubstantiation And 10) Antony de Adamo in his Anatomy of the Masse f. 222 And see Cent 4. c. 4. col 295. Oecolamp lib. Epist p. 756. VadiaÌ„ de Euchar. Aphor. l. 5. p. 150 151 many Protestant Writers do greatly reproue the Bookes of Sacraments truly ascribed to S. Ambrose for affirming the opinion of Christs bodilie Presence in the Sacrament Insomuch that the Centurists (11) Cent 4. c. 4. col 295 charge S. Ambrose for not writing wel of Transubstantiation and Application for the dead In this respect also Peter Martyr (12) In de fens obiect Gardin p 4. p. 124. professeth to dislike the iudgement of S. Cyril And (13) In his Epistles annexed to his Common Places ep to Beza p. 106. p. 98 further annexeth I wil not so easily subscribe to Cyril who affirmeth such a Communion as thereby euen the Substance of the Flesh and Bloud of Christ first is ioyned to the blessing for so he calleth the holie bread c. Insomuch as in his second Alphabetical Table at the word Heresie is set downe Heresie of Cyril touching our Communion
others do report And that The manner was to send it by the Deacons to them that by sicknes or other necessarie impediment were forced to be absent to strangers Yea for this purpose they did in such places where they communicated not euerie day reserue some part of the sanctifyed Elements to be sent to the Sick such as were in danger of death Yea as then was vsual the Pixe for the reseruing or carrying therof in so much that (59) Assert Theol. part 2 sec 47. Marbachius confesseth that S. Basile reserued the Eucharist in a golden Doue And wheras D. Harding obiecteth for the Pixe the plaine testimonies of Symmachus Gregorius Romanus Gregorius Turonensis Theodorus the same are acknowledged by M. Iewel (60) In his Reply Art 9 p. 420. Fulk against Staplet p. 150 151. D. Fulk Lastly the Roman Church doth so directly follow the Doctrine and practise of the Primitiue Church in this so waightie a matter of the Eucharist as that she obserueth the external forme or figure therof vsed in the ancient Church D. Bilson (61) In his true Differ p. 4. p. 566. acknowledgeth from S. Epiphanius in Ancorato that the Eucharist was round in figure And M. Carthwright (62) In Whytguift Def. p. 593 And see Proet de Sacram p 287. 281. confesseth that it was a round wafer-cake brought in by Pope Alexander which Pope liued as Osiander (63) Cent. 2. p 10. Whitgift in his Def. p. 594. and D. Whiteguift confesse Anno Christ 111. which is now aboue 500. yeares Hospinian (64) Hist Sacram. l. 4. p. 370. auoucheth that It can not certainly be knowne when Christians first began either at home or in the Churcheâ— to prepare of floure or bread litle round Hostes morcels like peeces of siluer c. Epiphanius maketh mention of round bread in the Supper c. The ancient Iew s also did most plainly foretel the Real presence of Christs Bodie in the Eucharist and the Sacrifice therof for wheras Duraeus vrgeth from Galatinus the Hebrewes most plaine and plentiful Sayings iâ— behalf therof D. Whitaker answering thereto neither confesseth nor yet denyeth but only shufleth them off saying (65) Cont. Dur. l. 9. p. â—18 In this matter we do not desire thy Peter Galatin neither do we need those testimonies of the Hebrewes so not denying but rather supposing the truth of the forsayd testimonies euidently foreshewing and affirming the Real presence and Sacrifice of Christs blessed Bodie in the Sacrament And thus we see the Fathers and Doctours of the Primitiue Church to haue symbolized with vs Catholicks in the doctrine of the Eucharist teaching expresly First Transubstantiation itself Secondly and prescribing a most diligent care that no part therof do fal vpon the ground Thirdly yea and adoring it with special reuerence Fourthly and in that regard vsing Eleuation therof at Masse time as we stil continue Fiftly for which case they receaue fasting Sixtly the Marryed Laytie also forbearing the Companie of their wiues for some tyme before Receiuing Seauenthly Besides they not only kept and reserued the same for the sick and other such necessities But also vsed the verie forme figure of a round wafer-Cake obserued at this day Now the Fathers produced and reproued by Protestant Writers for the forsayd poynts are S. Gregorie Chrysostom Eusebius Emissenus Cyril Ambrose Hilarie Austine Nazianzene Basile Hierom Siricius Innocentius Calixtus Vrbanus Symmachus Gregorius Turonensis Epiphanius Cyprian Origen Tertulian Ignatius the Fathers in general The Protestants citing and confessing the foresayd Fathers are the Centurists Musculus Oecolampadius Vadian Anthonie de Adamo Peter Martyr Caluin Melancthon Bucer Osiander Vrsinus Hamelmanus Adamus Francisci Hâ—spinian Bucanus Chemnitius Chytreus Crispinus Marbachius Pelargus Altkircherus Zepperus Humfrey Whitaker Fulk Parker Parkins Carthwright Willet Iewel Field and Beard And now I appeale to al indifferent Readers whether Protestants themselues haue not sufficiently confessed that by the Sentence or Doome of the Senate of Antiquitie D. Morton and his Brethren are chargeable with Heresie as also the Romanists acquitted of Idolatrie Protestants confesse that the Primitiue Church of Christ beleeued taught and practised the Sacrifice of the Masse as also that it is a Sacrifice according to the order of Melchisedech and truly Propitiary for the liuing and the dead CHAPTER IX IT is the general (1) Conâ— Trident. sess 22. c. 9. and certaine Decree of the Catholick Church that Christ our Sauiour at his last Supper instituted a true and proper Sacrifice of his owne Bodie Bloud and that he gaue power and authoritie to his Apostles and to Priests their Successours to offer the same aswel for the Liuing as the Dead Protestants (2) Luth. de Capt Babyl c. de Eucha Chemnit Exam part 2. Caluin Instit l. 4. c. 18. §. 1. 2 deny al true proper and external Sacrifice to be ordained by Christ or to be vsed in the time of the Ghospel but only the spiritual Sacrifices of Prayse thankes-giuing and the like Now because D. Morton wisheth that (3) Prot. Appeale l. 2. p. 169. These two questions whether the Eucharist be a true essential Sacrifice whether it be properly Propitiatorie auaylable in itself for remission of Sinnes or no might be decided amongst other meanes by the verdict of ancient Fathers I wil therfore ioyne with him therein and that only from the verdict giuen by his owne Brethren S. Gregorie the Great is much reproued by manie Protestant Writers for his Doctrine and practise of the Sacrifice of the Masse M. Beacon (4) The Reliques of Rome p 344 affirmeth that the Masse was fully finished by Pope Gregory the first about Anno Domini 600. Melancthon (5) l. 4 Chr. in Henri i. 4 fol. 186. 187 confesseth that He allowed by publick Authoritie the Sacrifice of Christs Bodie Bloud not only for the liuing but also for the dead D. Humfrey (6) In Iesuit part 2. rat 5 p. 5 627. acknowledgeth that S. Gregorie S. Austin brought into England the Archbishops Palle for Solemne Masses Carion (7) Chr. l 4. p 567. 568. auoucheth that Gregorie c. approued the oblation of the Bodie Bloud for the dead M. Bale (8) Cent. 1. p. 68. granteth that Gregorie ordered the verie Ceremonies of the Masse made vp the Canon therof And that He commanded (9) Act. Rom. Pontif. p. 44. 45. 46. 47. Masses to be celebrated vpon the dead Bodies of the Apostles And the (10) Cent. 6 col 369. 370 69â— 694. Centurists charge him with Celebration of Masse Szegedine writeth that Gregorie is sayd to be the first Authour of this propitiatorie Sacrifice about the yeare Six hundred for he appoynted certain dayes in which Sacrifice should be offred with Solemnitie in the Church (11) Graues aliquot Quaestiones printed with Brunlerus fol. 161. 162. promised ardon of sinnes to such as came
Antichrist part 2. sec 8 p. 128 I know right wel that within the 200. yeares after Christ there were crept into the Church manie idle Ceremonies c. There began in this mixt Age Exufflation of the Baptised Consecration of the Font with Oyle Crosse Oyle in Baptisme The reseruing of the Sacrament Exorcisme Offring Prayer for the dead Fasting on certaine dayes with opinion of necessitie Satisfaction and the seed of Monkerie See then sayth M. Parker among what weeds the Crosse grew vp and in what a danged soyle of manie Superstitions c. (103) Ib. part 1. p. 152. And part 2 p 131. Yea he further alleageth Nazianzene reporting that Iulian agreably to our present Protestants laught at the Sufflations of Baptisme But Beza (104) In Epist Theol. ep 8. p. 79. sayth in general I can not sufficiently admire al that decking wherwith euen the most ancient Fathers thought they could adorne Baptisme the Lordes Supper And hauing recited sundrie of the former Rites vsed as himself confesseth euen by the most ancient he yet tearmeth them Stage-playes follies And further thus concludeth Verily those that make the Apostles Authors of these follies need no confutation though they be neuer so ancient Writers So insinuating the former Ceremonies to be ascribed euen to the Apostles themselues by most ancient Writers But to conclude so great was the respect which ancient Fathers had to holie Ceremonies as that with the planting of true Faith religiō special care was had of Sacred Rites Ceremonies as an external ornament therof (105) Iesuit part 2 〈◊〉 5. p. 5. 627. D. Humfrey demanding what Gregorie Austin brought into the English Church answereth A burden of Ceremonies c. They brought in the Archbishops Palle for the Solemnities of Masse Purgatorie c. The oblation of the wholesome Host prayers for the dead c. Reliques c. Transubstantiation c. new Consecrations of Temples c. of al which what els was sought then that Indulgences Monachisme Papistrie the whole Chaos of Popish Superstition should be built These things Augustin the grea◠Monk taught by Gregorie the Monk brought vnto the English But yet more particularly saith (106) Cent. 6. p. 289. 290. Luke Osiander Augustin thrust vpon the English Churches the Roman Rates and Custome◠to wit Altars Vestments Images Masses Chalices Crosses Candlesticks Censors Bāners Sacred vessels Holie waters and euen the bookes of Roman Ceremonies Accordingly saith (107) Prot Appeal l. 1. p 53 58. D. Morton In the Innouating and multiplying of new Rites Gregorie himself was not the lea◠Agent As also Be it knowne to al our Aduersaries that the too manie Ceremonies vsed by S. Gregorie can not excuse their now far more multitudes nor can some of his not good iustify their 〈◊〉 worse Rites c. (108) In Praef. noui Testam ad Principem Condenser Beza speaking of the times of Augustin Chrysostome Cypria◠affirmeth that 91) Cent. 4. col 417. 418 419. cent 3. col 114. 115 116. And see Eobanus in his libel Theolog. p. 230. Some Bishops c. applyed themselues to the building of Statelie Temples c. 〈◊〉 the increasing of Ceremonies c. And that others would not only not represse open Superstitio◠arising but also would mayntaine them And a litle after he aoucheth directly that At th◠same time c. the multitude of Ceremonies increased But I wil end with M. Calfehil who as (109) In his Reioynd to Martials Reply p. 131. 132 D. Fulk relateth of him auoucheth is general that The Fathers declined al from the Simplicitie of the Ghospel in Ceremonies And with (110) In 1. Cor. c. 3. Melancthon who auerreth that presently from the beginning of the Church the ancient Fathers obscured the doctrine concerning the iustice of Faith encreased Ceremonies and deuised peculiar worships So disliking to our Protestants was the Doctrine and Ceremonies vsed by the Fathers euen from the beginning of the Church of Christ Here then we haue besides the former more substancial poynts of Faith Religion euen the verie outward semblance face of our present Roman Church confessedly most like or agreeing to the ancient Primitiue both of them teaching vsing First Hallowing or Consecration of Churches Secondly Dedication also of thē to Christ or some of his Saincts Thirdly Seuering thē also with vestries Chancels Fourthly Placing in them Altars Fyftly with wax-candles lamps burning in the day time Sixtly which also were vsed at Burials Seauenthly there were also in the Church placed Images of Christ his Saincts Eightly At the Altars serued Priests who offered the Sacrifice of the Masse who at their Consecration were specially anoynted hauing afterwards their Crownes shauen Ninthly the vestments vessels vsed by the Priests in administration of the Sacrifice and Sacraments were so peculiarly reuerenced as that they were not to be touched by the Laitie Tenthly the Priests in time of Sacrifice sayd some prayers secretly others audibly Eleuenthly they kept also the Canonical Houres of Prime Third Sixt Ninth Tweluethly with prayer also they hallowed water bread oyle ashes sundrie other creatures Thirteenthly as also the Font water of Baptisme vsing in Baptisme the signe of the Crosse Anoyling Exorcismes sundrie such like vsed euen at this day by the Roman Church though greatly impugned and contemned by the Protestant Congregation Now the Doctours alleadged reiected by Protestants for the foresayd points are S. Gregorie Ambrose Optatus Petrus Alexand. Augustin the Fathers of the Laodices Councel Hierom Theodoret Naziazene Cyril Basil Chrysostom Eusebius Sixtus Cyprian Athanasius Stephen Tertulian Origen and S. Denys Scholler to S. Paule The Protestans producing and reiecting the foresaid Fathers are the Centurists Crispinus Carion Osiander Hospinian Peter Martyr Praetorius Chemnitius Schultetus Zepperus Bullinger Mornay Hamelmanus Caluin Gesnerus Beza Melancthon Humfrey Brightman Fulk Raynolds Bale Carthwright Iacob Hutton Spark Willet Whiteguift Whitaker Beard Parker Morton Mason Calfehil and Parkins THE THIRD BOOK VVHERIN IS PROVED THAT THE CHVRCH OF PROTESTANTS vvas neuer knovvne or in Being before the dayes of Luther And that the Articles of Religion novv taught by the Protestant Congregation vvere Heresies condemned by the Primitiue Church of Christ IT IS CONFESSED BY PROTESTANTS that from the dayes of the Apostles vntil the tyme of Luther themselues neuer had any knovvne Church or Congregation in anie part of the vniuersall Vvorld CHAPTER I. SEING contraries placed togeather do more clearely appeare hauing hither to offred to the view of the indifferēt Reader the clearest continuance of our Catholick Church from the Apostles tymes to these our dayes as also the cōfessed agreement throughout particular Congrouersies betwene our present Roman and the ancient Primitiue Church of Christians I will now in further manifestation of the truth no lesse clearely discouer the Protestant Churches inuisibilite or rather nullitie not-being during the
Apostles withal and the Euangelists themselues euen after their receauing of the Holie-Ghost did write teach and defend seueral errours how can anie Christian build an infaillible sauing Faith vpon the Ghospels or other Apostolical writings How then can they be acerteyned of anie one true sentence of God's Word if the writers and deliuerers therof were not infallibly guided by the Holie-Ghost into al truth and so freed from al errour ignorance misprision or falshood And if some peraduenture except that these so Atheistical and Sacrilegious reproaches imposed vpon the sacred Scriptures and the Blessed Euangelists and Apostles be not the ordinarie opinions or practise of Protestants but peraduenture only of some few either ignorant or not endowed with the spirit the falshood and vanitie of this euasion is most apparent for who of forraine Protestants were euer reputed more learned or more enlightned with the spirit then Luther Caluin Beza Chemnitius Islebius Illiricus with the other Centurie-writers Castalio Zuinglius Musculus Brentius Andreas Friccius Adamus Francisci Bullinger and sundrie such others al of them highly esteemed of by their other Protestant Brethren Or who at home more honoured then Tyndal Iewel Goad Fotherbie Fulk Whitaker c. and yet al of those being indeed the primest men that euer they had do ioyntly conspire in this greatest impietie of censuring controuling correcting or reiecting some one part or other of the forenamed Canonical Scriptures or els of condemning the Euangelists and Apostles of seueral errours infirmities and sliding in matters of faith and Religion Which foule proceeding of so manie and so learned Protestants doth euidently according to D. Fulk's Rule conuince them to be perfect Hereticks For (88) Confut. of Purgatorie p. 214. whosoeuer sayth he denieth the authoritie of the Holy Scriptures thereby bewrayeth himself to be an Heretick Laus Deo B. V. Mariae FINIS A TABLE OF THE BOOKES AND CHAPTERS THE FIRST BOOKE WHERIN IS PROVED BY THE Confession of Protestants that the Catholick Roman Church hath continued Euer most Knowne and Vniuersal euen from Christs verie Time vntil the Date hereof THE antiquitie of the true Church and the force of the Argument drawne from the Authoritie thereof As also of these great necessitie of finding-out this true Church chap. 1. fol. 1. That the present Roman Church and Religion for the last thousand yeares after Christ haue stil continued most Knowne and Vniuersal throughout the Christian world chap. 2. fol. 4. A further confirmation of the vniuersal continuance of our Roman Church Religiō for these last thousand yeares is taken from the Confessed belief and profession of such Persons as liuing within the foresayd time were most Famous and Notorious in one respect or other chap. 3. fol. 8. That the faith of S. Gregorie S. Augustin and whereto England was by them conuerted was our Roman Catholick and not Protestant chap. 4. fol. 10. That the present Roman Church and Religion continued and flourished during the whole time of the Primitiue Church contayning the first six hundred yeares after Christ chap. 5. fol. 20. A further proof of the present Roman Religions Continuance from the Apostles time to these dayes is taken from the Christian belief of the Indians Armenians Grecians and Brittans al of them Conuerted in the dayes of the Apostles chap. 6. fol. 27. THE SECOND BOOKE Wherin is proued through al the chief Articles of Religion and that by the Confessions of Protestants that the same Faith which is now taught by the Roman Church was anciently taught by the Primitiue Church of Christ THat General Councels do truly represent the Church of Christ And of the Credit and Authoritie giuen by Protestants to the sayd Councels chap. 1. fol. 1. That the argument drawne from the Authoritie of the Primitiue Church of Christ and of her Doctours and Pastours is an Argument of force And for such approued by sundrie learned Protestants chap. 2. fol. 3. That the Fathers and Doctours of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught that S. Peter was ordayned by Christ the Head of the Apostles and of the whole Church and that the Church was founded vpon S. Peter it is Confessed by Protestants themselues chap. 3. fol. 8. It is Confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued taught the Bishop of Rome to succeed S. Peter in the Primacie of the whole Church chap. 4. fol. 11. It is confessed by Protestants that the Primitiue Church of Christ beleeued the Bookes of Tobie Iudith Ester Sapientia Ecclesiasticus and two first of Machabees to be truly Canonical Scripture chap. 5. fol. 25. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued taught our now Catholick Doctrine concerning Traditions chap. 6. fol. 30. It is Confessed by Protestants that according to the Fathers of the Primitiue Church the Sacraments do truly conferre Grace and Remission of sinnes And that they are in number seauen chap. 7. fol. 32. It is Confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught the Real Presence of Christs true Bodie and Bloud in the Eucharist As also our further Catholick Doctrines of Transubstantiation Adoration Reseruation and the like chap. 8. fol. 35. Protestants confesse that the Primitiue Church of Christ beleeued taught practised the Sacrifice of the Masse as also that it is a Sacrifice according to the order of Melchisedech and truly Propitiatory for the liuing the dead chap. 9. fol. 41. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church taught and beleeued the Power of Priests to Remission of Sinnes The necessitie of Auricular Confession The Imposition of Pennance and satisfaction to God thereby As also our Roman Doctrine of Pardons or Indulgences chap. 10. fol. 46. It is granted by Protestants that the Catholick Doctrine of Purgatorie of Prayer and Sacrifice for the dead was beleeued taught and practised by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church chap. 11. fol. 50. It is confessed by Protestants that the. Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught our Catholick Doctrine of Christs Descending into Hel. chap. 12. fol. 55. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and practised our Catholick Doctrine of praying to Angels and Saints chap. 13. fol. 57. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed the vse of Christs Image and his Saincts placing them euen in churches and Reuerencing them chap. 14. fol. 60. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church did specially honour reuerence the holie Relicks of Martyrs and other Saints carrying them in Processions and making Pilgrimages vnto them at which also manie Miracles were wrought chap. 15. fol. 63. It is confessed by Protestants that the holie Doctours of the Primitiue Church not only vsed the signe of the Crosse but likewise worshiped the same attributing great efficacie power and vertue thervnto chap.
p. 23. Primacie Ecclesiastical denyed to Emperours by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 4. p. 23. l. 3. c. 3. p. 9. 10. Priests ordained by Bishops l. 2. c. 22. Priests are to liue chast l. 2. c. 17. p. 69. Hereticks impugning the same condemned l. 2. c. 17. l. 3. c. 8. p. 42. 48. Priests anoynted at their Consecration l. 2. c. 22. Priests haue power from God to remit sinne l. 2. c. 10. p. 46. Priests crownes shauen in the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 22. The Primitiue Church her authoritie l. 2. c. 2. p. 3. seq To the Primitiue Church some Protestants pretend to appeale l. 2. c. 2. p. 3. 4. Other Protestants dislike the foresaid Appeale l. 5. c. 1. p. 2. Protestant Church inuisible at S. Gregorie's time l. 3. c. 1. p. 1. Inuisible al these last 1000. yeares Ib. p. 1. at Luther's time Ib. p. 2. at Wicklifes time Ib. p. 3. at at Waldo's time Ib. p. 4. at Constantine's time and since Ib. p. 4. 5. In the Apostles time and after to Constantine Ib. p. 5. Protestants went out of the Catholick Church l. 3. c. 7. p. 24. Protestants neuer wrought miracles l. 4. c. 4. p. 22. 23. Protestants confessed external dissimulation in matters of ReligioÌ„ l. 4. c. 6. p. 38. Protestant Writers preferred by Protesstants before S. Peter and S. Paul l. 5. c. 3. p. 22. 23. The name Protestant from whence first l. 3. c. 7. p. 32. The name Puritan from whence first Ib. 32. Protestants are enforced to vse diuers names for distinction of their Religion and opinions Ibid. p. 33. The name Papist whence Ibid. p. 31. Purgatorie Prayer and Sacrifice for the dead confessedly taught by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 11. p. 50. seq l 5. c. 2. p. 14. Purgatorie belieued by the ancient belieuing Iewes l. 2. c. 11. p. 53. Purgatorie denyed by Aerius and he condemned for the same by the Fathers l. 2. c. 11. p. 52. l. 3. c. 3. p. 11. R. RElicks confessedly reuerenced by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 15. l. 5. c. 2. p. 15. By Relicks miracles wrought l. 2. c. 15. To Relicks Pilgrimages made in the Primitiue Church Ibidem Relicks translated Ibidem Relicks impugned by Vigilantius and he condemned for the same by the Fathers l. 3. c. 3. p. 10. Roman Church continued confessedly a pure Church for the first 600. yeares l. 1. c. 5. p. 21. 22. l. 2. c. 2. Roman Church continued vniuersally these last 1000. yeares l. 1. c. 2. p. 4. Roman Church continued vniuersally since Constantine l. 1. c. 5. p. 26. Roman Church continued the first 300. yeares after Christ l. 1. c. 5. p. 22. Roman-Church hath no knowne beginning since the Apostles l. 1. c. 5. p. 26. Roman Church her beginning is ascribed to the Apostles times Ib. p. 20. S. SAcraments to conferre grace is the confessed doctrine of the Primitiue Church l 2. c. 7. p. 32. Seauen Sacraments taught by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 7. p. 32. Saints to be prayed vnto is the confessed doctrine of the ancient Fathers l. 2. c. 13. p. 57. Saints to be prayed vnto was taught by the ancient Iewes l. 2. c. 13. p. 59. Vigilantius and Aerius denying the same were condemned by the Fathers l 2 c. 13 p. 58. l. 3. c. 3. p. 10. Scotus obiected against the Real presence and answered l. 3. c. 8. p. 46 47. Scriptures appealed vnto by al Hereticks l. 3. c. 3. p. 9. l. 4. c. 1. p. 2. Scripture hath seeming repugnances l. 2. c. 5. p. Scriptures discerned for Canonical by the Church l. 1. c. 1. p. 2. Simeon the Monk commended l. 2. c. 18. p. Sinne attributed to God as the Authour condemned l. 3. c. 5. p. 15. Sigebert l. 3 c. 8. p. 52. T. TRaditions confessedly taught by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 6. p. 30. Traditions taught by the ancient belieuing Iewes Ibid. p. 31. Transubstantiation confessedly taught by the Fathers of the Priuitiue Church l. 2. c. 8. p. 34. V. VEstments Vessels consecrated to Church vses l. 2. c. 22. Vow of Chastitie approued and practised by the Primitiue Chuch l. 2 c. 17. p. 69. Iouinian condemned for denyal therof l. 3. c. 4. p. 13. W. WAldo no Protestant l. 1. c. 3. p. 12. Wales conuerted to Christianitie in the Apostles times l. 1. c. 6. p. 18. The VVelch-men or ancient Brittans were Roman Catholicks l. 1. c. 6. p. 28. They changed not their Faith before S. Austin's coming l. 1. c. 6. p. 30. VViccliff no Protestant l. 1. c. 3. p. 11. 12. VVorkes to iustifye and merit confessedly taught by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 21. p. 86. Heretiks denying the same condemned l. 3. c. 5. p. 14. FINIS FAVLTS ESCAPED Epist Ded. Parag. Now supposing for plainly read painfully Lib. 1. c. 1. pag. 2. lin 26. for Ccclestical read Ecclesiastical p. 3. for ea read and. cap. 2. p. 4. lin antepen for Confirmation read Confutation Lib 2. c. 1. p 2. lin vlt. for Church read Churches c. 4 p. 17. lin anteantep for which read with p. 18. lin 18. for Athasius read Athanasius p 19. lin 40. for 20 read second hundred cap. 5. p. 26. lin 42. for Churches read Councels p. 29. lin 33. for only not read not only cap. 8. p. 37. lin 10. for purposely to read purposely profâ—sseâ—h to p. 38. lin 13. for or read of cap. 10 p. 48. for command read commend Lib. 3. c. 1. p. 4. lin 21. for thy read this cap. 4 p. 13. lin 34. for Arians read Aerians cap. 6. p. 2. lin 14. for roriter read writer cap. 7. p. 23. lin ante p adde 9 p. 26. lin 6. for with read which p. 31. lin 24. for that read the. p. 32. lin 14. for the read that cap. 8. p. 37. lin 36. for Turctisme read Turcisme p. 48. lin 1. for contracted read contradicted lin 17. for 66 read 26 p. 43. lin 29. for noâ— worthie read not vnworthie Lib. 4. c. 2. p. 5. lin 25. v. Dauid adde 7 lin 27. v. Church adde 8 p. 6. lin 2. v. Vvittemberg adde 17 p. 7. lin 36. v. VvhitaKer adde 34 p 8. lin 1. for often read after lin pen for Scriptures read Scriptures cap 4. p. 13. lin pen. p. 14. lin 27. for Vzias read Ozias lin 9. p. 20. lin 9. for had read and p. 24. lin 3 for ad read al lin 35. for Chapter 4. read Chapters Lib. 5. c. 1. pag. 3. lin 1. sor read sort c. 1. pag. 4. lin 3. ad read and. pag. 10. lin penult beshabken read beshaken lib. 5.
licence Valentine dost thou ouerthrow my fountains c. It is my possession long since I possessed it I possessed it first Yea he prescribeth in general (18) lib. cont Prax. that to be true which is first that false which is later Answerably vnto which writeth S. Hierome of the Luciferians (19) Cont. Lucifer fin In this that they are afterwards begun they shew themselues to be those which the Apostle foretold were to come to wit Hereticks of whome he demandeth further (20) Ep. ad Pamach et Ocean Why doe you go about after 400. yeares to teach that which we knew not before vntil this day the world was Christian without that doctrine With whome agreeth S. Gregorie Nazianzen saying (21) Ep 2. ad Chelid They tel vs as Protestants stil doe of a wisdome hidden since Christ a thing deseruing teares For if Faith began within these 30. yeares seing almost 400. yeares and as I may now say 1600. yeares are past since Christ was openly knowne so long then was the Ghospel in vaine in vaine also our fayth in vaine Martyrs suffred death in vaine also such and so great Bishops did gouerne the people From this verie Argument of Innouation S. Athanasius confuteth the Arians in these words (22) de Decret Nycen Synod Behold we haue proued this doctrine to haue been deliuered to vs from fathers to fathers But you new Iewes and the sonnes of Caiphas what progenitours of your name are you able to shew Of whome also sayth S. Hilarie (23) Lib. 6. de Trin. ant med This our fourth Age hath brought forth ouer late for me these pretended most godlie Doctours S. Austin writing against Donatus vp braydeth his new or late birth in this manner (24) Lib. 3. de Bap cont Donat. c. 2. From whence hath Donatus appeared Out of what earth hath he budded From what sea hath he swum From what heauen hath he fallen And he obiecteth thus vnto the Manichees (25) de Vtilitate Cred. c. 14. But you being so few so turbulent and so new euerie man knoweth you can produce nothing worthie of credit In like sort writing against the Pelagians he vrgeth (26) Cont. Iulian. Pelag l. 2 c. l. that Christian people ought to preferre the sayings of Saints before your profane Nouelties and rather choose to adhere to them then to you Yea Cassiodorus relateth that the (27) Diuin Instit lib. 1. p. 11. most holie Fathers not suffering the true Faith to be wronged ordayned Ecclesiastical Rules in the Councel of Chalcedon striking with the Diuine sword of Excommunication the obstinate Inuentours of new Heresies And Decreing that none ought to bring-in new questions but content with the authoritie of the old approued Doctours should obey the holesome Decrees without deceipt and falshood for there are some who thinke it commendable if they can conceaue anie thing against the ancient writers and inuent something new wherof they may be deemed skilful But I wil cōclude this with this sweetest saying of S. Bernard (28) Ep. 174. Against the custome of the Church nothing at al wil please me presumed Noueltie the mother of Temeritie the sister of Superstition and the daughter of Leuitie What I haue receaued from the Church I securely deliuer So secure it is in al arising difficulties to recurre to Antiquitie and to eschew Noueltie And as thus we haue seen from Scriptures and Fathers the special account euer made of reuerend Antiquitie or Ancestrie and the sharp reprehensions of prophane Noueltie so are there none who seeme more ioyfully to applaude and approue the force of the foresayd Argument then the learnedst Protestants of these our dayes amongst whome for breuitie in a Case so manifest to produce only one of our owne domesticks who for his supposed worth in iudgement and learning may suffise for manie D. Morton affirmeth (29) Appeale for Protestants p. s 11. See also White in the Way to the Chur. Pref. to the Reader n. 17. that our Sauiour Christ by his Parable of the diuers seedes first wheate in the day and then tares in the night doth teach vs that Truth may challenge prioritie of Errour yealding principalitie vnto Truth sayth Tertulian and posteritie vnto lying And so it must needs be because as there must be first iron before there can be rust which canckereth the iron so must there be a virgin-truth before errour which is nothing else but an adulteration therof So that Primum and Verum that is primarie Antiquitie and Truth are both inseparable twins begot and bred in the same instant And againe (30) Ibid p. 512. But tel vs what is Noueltie When the Apostle exhorted his Timothie to keepe that which was committed vnto him and to take heed of profane Nouelties he did in effect instruct him to preserue the doctrine receaued not to suggest anie doctrines newly conceaued as sayth Lyrinensis who accounteth it according vnto Salomon's description a whorish trick to cal anie out of the ancient and beaten way and to say Come vnto me In like sort [31] Ibid p. 679. As it becometh the children of God who commanded that the first-borne euen of the woman that was hated should be respected before the yonger sonne of the beloued wife we albeit hated by our Romish Aduersaries yet only desire that they would hold as S. Chrysostome teacheth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is euerie Noueltie a vanitie and in al Controuersies suffer the first-borne to finde a preheminence by preferring each doctrine according vnto the prime antiquitie Now in this desire of preferring Antiquitie al Catholicks most ioyfully wil ioyne hands with M. Doctour Morton desiring nothing more then that al Questions at this day controuerted between the Roman Church and the Protestant Congregation might strictly be examined and finally decided by the square of Antiquitie And for this cause haue I compiled this Treatise following intending thereby to set downe the true Progenie both of Catholicks and Protestants from what Ancesters they are lineally descended and of what continuance their names and families haue formerly been And although the guard and strength of Truth in this point of Antiquitie is euer such that she resteth stil accompanyed attended and fortified with surest friends strongest towers and best munition yet neuer may she repose in greater quiet or more gloriously appeare with greater honour then when her soueraigne right titles and prerogatiues are plainly admitted granted and acknowledged by the sworne and professed enemies of Truth And yet according to that of S. Austin (32) Cont. Donatist post collat c. 24. Truth is more forcible to wring out confession then anie rack or torment No wit of man can finde out Arguments more conuincing in themselues the truth of Religion then the plaine Texts and literal sense of holie Writ the infallible decrees of the Church and General Councels the vnanimous consent of ancient Fathers and Histories and often the common light of Nature
of al General Councels the credible Histories of al times and places the surest records of al Lawes and Countries yea al monuments of greatest Antiquitie doe ioyntly contest and depose not only for the vniuersal and vninterrupted continuance of our Roman Faith from Christ's verie time vntil the Date heerof but also for the sympathie or rather Identitie of our same Faith with the Faith of the Apostles and their first Disciples M. Brierlie often obseruing al these our honours and helps to haue been so strangely defaced blemished and obscured by the art and malice of the foresayd Emissaries as that their true face and beautie were neuer suffred to be seen or knowne to vulgar Protestants purposely therefore forbare to presente Antiquitie only in her natiue colours and chiefly to rest contented with that stayned dye and luster which the Protestant pencil through her clearest splendour durst not denye her producing to that end the plentiful and clearest testimonies of almost al the primest Writers that euer Protestancie brought forth al of them as it were conspiring in flat charging reprouing and impugning the learnedst Doctours and most renowned Bishops of the eldest and purest times for the self-same doctrines and practise of Religion which the Roman Church at this day exerciseth Now supposing M. Brierlie his sincere and faithful demeanour heerin what could the wit of man produce more palpable and concluding for our foresayd harmonie with the Primitiue Church For if the volumes of Fathers and Councels be so clear in themselues for our Catholick Roman and Papistical Faith that the learnedst Protestans most playnly studying and perusing the same are finally enforced through euidence of their words and deeds to acknowledge and reproue the self-same Doctours and Bishops for Roman Catholicks then M. Brierlie his desire and intent of prouing our Roman Faith and Church to continue most agreable with the Primitiue Faith and Church of Christ and his Apostles is fully accomplished And that M. Brierlie his candour may more clearly shine and his so vnanswerable Arguments be the better conceaued I wil therefore dispel those thick clowdes wherewith yourself M. Morton hath most painefully laboured to couer or darken the foresayd brightnes What then must we expect from you for an Answer pertinent and direct and as proceeding from a iudicious and learned Doctour yea from a Minister of simple truth but either ingenuously to confesse with the Puritans and so manie your other Protestant Brethren cited by M. Brierlie that the sayd Primitiue and purest Church of Christ was one and the same for Faith and Religion with our now Roman or else that M. Brierlie had cunningly corrupted maymed and defaced the sayings and writings of your foresayd Brethren in his owne behalf If you seing the first to be most true would haue honestly subscribed therunto as manie more learned Protestants then yourself had formerly done then your Answer or Appeale had been altogeather needles The second you durst not auouch knowing right wel that M. Brierlie his affected nicenes and precisenes in so particularly quoting his Aduersaries Bookes Chapters Pages lines or letters would ouer strongly contest for his Religious integritie industrie and fidelitie in handling the same What then is imaginable for you M. Doctour to answer against such pregnant testimonies of other Protestant Doctours Nothing at al but what M. Brierlie foresaw and accordingly premonished and wherof yourself also taketh notice in the beginning of your Appeale would be only trifeling vnworthie extrauagant and impertinent As first when your other Brethren are plentifully produced confessing and reprouing the Fathers for teaching our Roman Faith yourself often very honestly ioyne with them acknowledging the same in our behalf and against yourself so that in this Case in steed of Answer or Appeale you make a strong Apologie for M. Brierlie and the Romish Church Doe not you yourself speaking of the Antiquitie of our Doctrine concerning the Popes Primacie confesse and say [1) Prot. Apol. p. 72. Be it granted for so it is that the Papal Primacie beginning in Boniface the Third is now 900. yeares old Doe you not arise and write of S. Gregorie that (2) Ibid. p. 31. whether or how farre c. S. Gregorie did reach his arm of Iurisdiction beyond his Dioces is a question by reason of his diuers obscure speaches and some particular practises diuersly answered of our Protestant Authours Doe you not charge S. Leo to haue been in this respect (3) Ibid p. 283 285. peremptorie and ambitious and that he was so 4 Ib. 294. 295. peremptorie that for his presumption he found in his time brotherlie checks Yea doe you not confesse that certain (5) Ib. 294. 295. Sentences of S. Cyprian may seeme at their first view vnto the vnexpert Reader to obserue in the Church of Rome both a Grace of impossibilitie of erring and also a prerogatiue of the Mother-Church of al others But though yourself may be deemed an Expert Reader yet no otherwise doe you euade those cleerest sentences then by affirming that such like speaches are but the languages of Rhetorical Amplification which commonly the Fathers vse by way of perswasion rather then by asseueration And seing you admit that the Fathers did commonly vse such speaches by way of perswasion you must needs admit that they being holie and learned men did also beleeue and affirme the same Yea you approue such (6) Ib. pag. 300. Protestant Authours as reprehēd Victor for arrogācie transgressing the bounds of his Iurisdiction in Excōmunicating the Churches of Asia Lastly wheras in proof of Antichrist's short raigne (7) Ib. pag. 143. M. Brierlie produceth M. Fox teaching that almost al the holie and learned Interpreters doe by a time times and half a time vnderstand only three yeares and a half affirming further this to be the consent and opinion of almost al the ancient Fathers Doe not you likewise subscribe therunto and say (8) Ib pag 144. Now therefore c. why might not these Fathers be sayd to haue erred in prefining the time of Antichrist c. So that you are inforced to confesse that in the Fathers opinions al our precedent Popes are cleered from being Antichrists In like sort concerning Vnwritten Traditions you grant that S. Gregorie vseth (9) Ib. pag. 62. to confirme some things by Tradition and that the ancient beleeuing Iewes (10) Ib pag. 377. pretended vnwritten Traditions As teaching Purgatorie and Prayer for the Dead you reproue S. Gregorie touching that (11) Ib pag. 19. 20. the Sacrifice of the Altar is profitable for the Soules departed And againe (12) Ib p. 498. S. Austin speaketh with a Peraduenture but S. Gregorie kindled the fire with a Credo But you somewhat passed Peraduenture when you writ that Protestant (13) Ib. pag. 495. Authours haue obserued S. Augustin to haue been the first who opened the window vnto the doctrine of Purgatorie by whose owne direction say you we
conscience and true knowledge would also dedicate your further labours I doubt not but you would become a dutiful Child to your Mother-Church and a paineful labourer in Christ's Vinyeard for which I wil not cease to entreate his Infinit Goodnes and wil euer rest Yours in him N. N. THE FIRST BOOKE WHERIN IS PROVED BY THE CONFESSION OF PROTESTANTS THAT THE CATHOLICK ROMAN CHVRCH hath continued Euer most Knowne and Vniuersal euen from Christs verie Time vntil the Date hereof THE ANTIQVITIE OF THE TRVE Church and the force of the Argument drawne from the Authoritie thereof As also of the great necessitie of finding-out this true Church CHAP. I. AS we may not doubt but that the Church of God speaking in general is equal in Ancestrie with our first Parents in Paradise so in regard of her Birth-right prime Antiquitie long precedent and preferred before the Scriptures themselues so euen of the Church of Christians it may not be denyed but that as in the same instant with Christ her Head and Spouse she receaued her first being life and birth in this world according to that of (1) Ad c. 3. Lucae S. Ambrose God built his Church in the chief Corner-stone CHRIST IESVS so was this her greatest nobilitie of birth not only to cōtinue for some few generatiōs but euer to remayne for al posteritie Agreable to which the Prophet Daniel foretold of the Church (2) cap. 2.4 that it is A kingdome that shal neuer be destroyed but shal stand for euer And so shal be according to Esay as (3) cap 60.15 An eternal glorie and ioy from generation to generation So that in steed of further discussing the Ancientest Birth-right and not-interrupted continuance of Christ his Church I wil now only treat of the force of that Argumēt which is drawne from the Authoritie Determinatiō of the sayd so Noble Anciēt a Church Wherein for greater expeditiō I wil pretermit most plentiful proofes both from sacred Scriptures and learnedst Fathers in steed therof wil for the present rest satisfyed with the freest Grants and ample Acknowledgements of the learnedst Protestants who first as they euer pretend to build their whole Faith Religion vpon the Written Word so do they further aknowledge the same to be only knowne and discerned from forged and adulterat Scriptures by the sacred Authoritie and Testimonie of the Church of Christ In which respect (4) Ans to a Counterf catho pag. 5. D. Fulk auoucheth that The Church of Christ hath Iudgemēt to discerne true writings from counterfait and the Word of God from the writings of men and this Iudgemēt she hath of the Holie-Ghost With whom accordeth (5) Def. of the Apolog. p. 201. D. Iewel affirming that The Church of God hath the Spirit of wisdome whereby to discerne true Scriptures from false In like sort M. (6) Ecc. Pol. pag. 86. Hooker teacheth that of things necessarie the verie chiefest is to know what books we are bound to esteeme holie which point is confessed impossible for the Scripture itself to teach Whereof he further sayth (7) Ib pa. 102. It is not the Word of God which doth or possibly can assure vs that we do wel to think it is his word for if anie one Book of Scripture did giue testimonie of al yet stil that Scripture which giueth credit to the rest would require another Scripture to giue credit vnto it Neither could we come vnto anie pause whereon to rest vnles besides Scripture there were something which might assure vs c. which something afterwards he acknowledgeth (8) Ib. pa. 146. 116. And see Aretius his examen p. 24. And Bachmanus his Centuriae tres c. p. 267. To be the authoritie of Gods Church Agreably hereunto D. whitaker doth confesse that this weightiest controuersie concerning Canonical Scriptures is to vs determined not by (9) Cōt Staplet p. 370. 357. HooK Eccl. Pol. p. 147. Testimonie of the Spirit the which sayth he being priuat and secret is vnfit to teach and refel others but as he further teacheth (10) Ibi. p. 300. 298. 24. 25. And against Raynolds p. 44. by the Ecclestical Tradition An argument whereby may be argued and conuinced what books be Canonical and what not And another Protestant Writer (11) Auth. of the scripture and the church f. 71 72. 73. 74 75. much commended by (12) Ibid. in the Preface Bullinger affirmeth that The church is endued with the Spirit of God and that The diligence authoritie of the Church is to be acknowledged herein which hath partly giuen forth her Testimonie of the assured writings and hath partly by her Spiritual Iudgement refused the writings which are vnworthie Yea he further assureth vs with (13) Tom 6. cōt ep fund cap. 5. Tert. lib. 1 de Praescrip cap. 6. S. Augustin and Tertullian that (14) Scrip. and the church p. 72 74. 75. And see Melancthon in epist ad Rom cap. 14. pa 358 359. we could not beleeue the Ghospel were it not that the Church taught vs and witnessed that this doctrine was deliuered by the Apostles So that the authoritie of Gods true Church is so great as that by her warrāt we are only assured of the Written Word of God itself and for such by her wisedome giuen by the Holie-Ghost discerned to vs from al forged Apocryphal and counterfait writings A power and authoritie then which none stronger seing the certain knowledge of the true word of God is the chiefest foundation of our Christian Faith Now if in this question so important we may securely follow and beleeue the Sentence and Determination of the Church how much more then in other doubts of smaller respect Adde further hereunto in surest confirmation of the Churches authoritie that it is likewise granted and taught by the learnedst Protestants that the true visible Church can not wholy erre in matters of Faith Insomuch as they expresly confesse of this verie point that (15) Bertr de Loque in his discourse of the church p. 198. Phil. Act. mon. p. 1401. Bilney ibid. p. 464. Ridley 16. pag. 1361. 1286. Baynhā ib. p 493. Fox ib. pag. 999. Bancroft in his sermon preached 8. Febr. 1588. pag. 42. 43. The Diuines of Geneua in their Propositions and Principles disputed c. p. 142. Zanchius de Relig pa. 157. Rhegius in Discus The. p. 213. Hunnius in Act. Colloq Ratisb fol. 205. KecKermannus in System Theol. pag. 387. Povvel of things indifferent p. 7 The controuersie c. is not of the Catholick or vniuersall Church for we al agree say they herein that she cannot orre touching Faith c. wherefore this question is touching only a particular church Now if the true Church can not erre in matters of Faith Religion then is her Authoritie sacred her Decrees infallible her Children secured and al difficulties arising easily composed Yea from hence also may we iustly collect amongst al
continuance of our now Roman Church and Religion for these last thousand yeares is taken from the Confessed belief and profession of such Persons as liuing within the foresayd time were most Famous and Notorious in one respect or other CHAPTER III. IN further euidence then of our Catholick Churches Raigne and general Dominion for these last thousand yeares I wil descend to particular statioÌ„s or periods of time and such especially as for some importaÌ„t respect are most knowne and notorious And first I wil begin with the time of Luther himself at his first appearing Protestant when I find the whole face of the world to be so RomaÌ„ Catholick as that himself was an (1) Tom. 7. Vvitt f. 228 anoynted Priest and an (2) SimoÌ„ de Voyon in his discourse vpoÌ„ the Catalog c. p. 180. and Luther ad Gal. c. 1. fol. 35 after the English translation Augustin-Friar c. And liued in his Monasterie punishing his bodie with watching fasting and prayer (3) Luther ibidem Honoured the Pope of meer conscience Kept Chastitie Pouertie and ObedieÌ„ce And whatsoeuer sayth he I did I did it with a single hart of good Zeale and for the glorie of God But when he fel into his Apostacie so directly contrarie to the then present or precedent profession of Religion ouer the world his troubled conscience burst out into these words (4) Luth. to 2. Germ. fo 9. and tom 2. Vvittemb de AbrogaÌ„da Missa priuata fol. 244. How often did my trembling hart beate within me and reprehending me obiect against me that strong argument Art thou only wise Do so manie worlds erre Were so manie Ages ignorant What if thou errest and drawest so manie into errour to be damned with thee eternally And (5) Tom. 5. Annot. breuiss againe Dost thou ô sole man and of no accoÌ„pt take vpoÌ„ thee so great matters What if thou being but one offendest If God permit such and so manie and al to erre why may he not permit thee to erre Hitherto appertayne these arguments the Church the Church the Fathers the Fathers the Councels the Customes the Multitudes and Greatnes of wise men whom do not these Hils of arguments these Clouds yea these Seas of Examples ouerwhelme sayth Luther And againe (6) Tom. 1. Vvitemb Pref. At the first I was alone (7) Tom. 2. fol. 63. and alone rolled the stone yea (8) Loc. com class 4. cap. 30. pag. 51. vndertook so great a busines vpon me alone And confessed it is that Luther at his first reuolt from being a Catholick Fryar was the first sole and only man that began Protestancie thereby departing as himself confesseth from the Church from Fathers Councels and so many Worlds so many Ages precedent This poynt is so certain that M. Iewel (9) In his Apologie of the Church of Eng. part 4. c. 4. And in his Def. of the Apol. pa. 426. confesseth That the Protestant truth was vnknowne at that time and vnheard-of when Martin Luther and Hulderick Suinglius first came vnto the knowledge and preaching of the Ghospel And Bucer (10) In Epist An. 36. ad Episc Heref. praefix Enarrat Buceri in 4. Euang. calleth Luther The first Apostle to vs of the purer Ghospel yea the Lutherans (11) Schlusselburge Theol. Caluin li. 2. fol 130. do affirme it impudencie to say that manie learned men in Germanie before Luther did hold the doctrine of the Ghospel (12) In Augustan confes explic Arti 7. de Eccl. p. 137. 138. Georgius Miluis argueth that If there had been right beleeuers that went before Luther in his office c. there had then been no need of a Lutheran Reformation therefore we say that Luther was raysed-vp by Gods special appointement and extraordinarily So likewise (13) Trac de Eccl. pag. 145. Morgensterne iudgeth it ridiculous to think that in the time before Luther anie had the puritie of doctrine and that Luther should receaue it from them and not they from Luther Considering sayth he it is manifest to the whole Christian world that before Luthers time al churches were ouerwhelmed with more then Cimmerian darknes and that Luther was diuinely raysed vp to discouer the same and to restore the light of true doctrine In so much as (14) Epist ad Argentinenses in Praef. in corp doctrinae Luther sayth of himself we dare glorie that Christ was first made knowne by vs. And he tearmeth (15) In Deutronom in pref fol. 2. his doctrine resurgens vel potius oriens Euangelium the Ghospel rising agayne or rather first beginning A truth so clear that (16) De fraetruÌ„ Orthodox Eccl. pa. 264. Camerarius auouching Wicliffe to haue been holpen or instructed by the waldenses and Husse by Wiccliffe speaking yet of Luther affirmeth to the contrarie that Luther receiued his doctrine neither from Husse or Wiccliffe but was instructed of himself as he declareth of himself in his writings In whâ—ch respect also sayth M. Wotton Luther might truly say that he was the first which had in these times published Christ especially in the chief poynt of the Ghospel which is (17) In his Trial of the Romish Clerg Title pa. 392. Iustification by faith in Christ and in this respect it is an honour to Luther to haue been a Sonne without a Father a Disciple without a Maister Agreably wherunto also sayth M. (18) Act Mon. pa. 770. Fox Luther pluckt downe the fondation of Papistrie by opening one veine long hid before the touchstone of al truth and the only principal origen of our saluation which is our free Iustification by Faith only yea Luther is so confessedly the first Authour or Beginner of Protestancie that one of his owne Brood writeth that (19) Prognostica finis mundi The Spirit which telleth things to come worketh not but in time of the Ghospel which Luther as it is confessed towards the end of the world did first bring-in And againe (20) Ibid. pa. 13. The seduction of false Prophets is not manifest but vnder the Ghospel which before Luther as we sayd neuer went since the Primitiue time of the Apostles Some Protestants (21) In his Articles Art 19. p. 130. Doue in his Recusancie pa. 32. sayth D. Couel make Luther and Caluin Authours of the Religion among vs. By al which it appeareth that Luther was borne and bred a Catholick and that at the same time the Religion knowne and practised ouer the Christian world was the present Roman from which Luther then reuolting confesseth himself to be the sole and only man who first preached the Protestant Ghospel and so is confessed by other Protestants to be the first Authour of their Religion to be their first Apostle and to be a Sonne without a Father a Disciple without a Maister At the same time of Luther raigned here in England King Henrie the Eight in whose time our Roman Religion was so vniuersal that D. Willet confesseth
is made with oyle of oliue consecrated by a Bishop (52) In Postilla super ca. 15. Marci and super 1. Cor. 1. yea he els-where numbreth and mentioneth al the seauen Sacraments And lastly in his epistle to Pope Vrban written not three yeares before his death endeauouring to purge himself to the Pope he plainly acknowledgeth that the Bishop of Rome is the Vicar of Christ vpon earth Adding thus further If I haue erred in anie of these poynts I wil submit my self to correction euen by death if necessitie so require By al which we may see that Iohn Wiccliffe in al the former poynts now contradicted by Protestants was wholy Catholick As also the Age wherin he liued A truth so euident that Osiander (53) Cent. 6. 10. 11. p. 439. confesseth that Wiccliffe had no companions of the same time who might brotherly admonish him c. and D. Humfrey (54) In vita Iuelli p. 263. acknowledgeth that In these last times he was almost the first Trumpeter of this Ghospel of Protestants So litle did the fame or infamie of Protestancie sound in the Christian world at Wiccliffs first beginning In the Age before Iohn Wiccliffe liued the Hereticks Albigenses who because they were in opinion and Sect wholy (55) FulK de successione Eccles cont Staplet p. 332. 333. SparK in his Ansvv to Albines p. 58. Abbots against D. Hil. p. 57. More in his Tables p. 173. agreing with the Waldenses and only differing in Titles and Names according to the diuersitie of places and times wherin they liued I wil therefore omitting them come to the Waldenses who receiued their name from Waldo a Catholick Lay-man (56) Act. mon. p. 628. a rich Marchand of Lyons and one so vnlearned sayth M. Fox that he gaue rewards to certaine learned men to translate the holie Scriptures for him and certain other workes of the Doctours by which he did conferre the forme of Religion in his time to the infallible Word of God wherupon sayth M. Fox Further (57a) Act. Mon. p. 41. sprung vp the doctrine and name of those which are called Waldenses But Waldo being destitute of al ordinarie calling and despayring to obtayne it from the Church of Rome out of which he was gone forth contemning the same he taught that (57b) Illiricus in Catal. Test veritatis p. 731. 732. 740. 745. Lay-men and women might consecrate the Sacraments and preach for the practice wherof the Waldenses and Albigenses were (58) Simons on the Reuel p 165. excommunicated by the Pope And yet this their reuolt from the Roman Sea notwithstanding (59) In Iesuit part 2. rat 3. p. 270. Fox Act. Mon. p. 628. D. Humfrey and M. Fox do both grant that Waldo did forsake al things that being poore he might follow Christ and the Euangelical perfection which D. Fulk (60) Against Rhem. Test. in Math. 19. f. 38. ParKins in his Reform Cath. p. 241. and M. Parkins reiect for Popish In so much that (61) Chronogr p. 94. Pantaleon affirmeth that he and his followers were a very order or Profession of begging Fryars wherupon according to M. Fox (62) Act mon. p. 41. 629. they were called The poor men of Lyons professing as (63) In Iesuit part 2. p. 270. D. Humfrey vrgeth a kind of Monastical life wherin they were so forward that they afterwards made (64) Vrsperg in chron Ar. 12â—2 meanes to Innocentius the Third then Pope to haue their Order by him confirmed but could not preuayle It is further confessed by [65] In ep 244 p 4â—0 Caluin that they beleeued the Real presence and by (66) Against Symbolizing part 1. c 3. p. 162. M. Parker that they retayned the Signe of the Crosse in the blessing of their meates And (67a) De Ecclesia p 24. Morgensterne speaking vnto them sayth You confirme the decree of Antichrist concerning the number of the Sacraments though that you haue also often done in other articles as in the Doctrine of Single life of Vowes of the sacred Scripture of good Workes of Iustification Baptisme of Children and Purgatorie Now from these premises it euidently ensueth that Waldo immediatly before his Apostacie was a Roman Catholick and not a member of anie other Church to him then knowne or in being and so his first proceedings are confessed by (68a) Of the Estate of the Church p. 338. Crispinus to haue been in time of thick darknes of Poperie and as a first and litle beginning of the instauration of the Christian Religion to wit the Protestant So vndoubted it resteth that the Religion vniuersally and publickly professed in the time of Waldo was not anie Protestant but the Roman Religion In the same Age liued S. Bernard of whon sayth D. Whitaker (67b) De Eccl. p. 369. against Rainolds p. 125. 126. I do think Bernard was truly a Sainct And other Protestants ackdowledge that he was (68b) Osiand cent 12. p. 309. A verie good man (69) Pasquils Returne into England p. 8. 130. A good Father and one of the LaÌ„ps of the Church of God D. Morton demandeth (70) Prot. Appeal p. 458 Why may not Protestants acknowledge S. Bernard for his life a Saint and for his doctrine a Lamp c. This then so true a Sainct good man and clearest Lamp was so wholy Roman Catholick as that D. Whitaker speaking to vs sayth (71) Resp ad Camp p. 105. Bernard whom your Church these manie yeares hath brought forth one godly man c. And Gomarus alleageth him to vs (72) In speculo Eccl. Bernard your Sainct Yea he was (73) Simon de Voyon in his catal p. 126. the Abbot of Clarauaux and so deare to the Pope that M. Bel tearmeth him (74) Challeng c. p. 148. And see Abbot in his 3. parte of the def c. In his Aduertisment therto annexed pag. 20. Vvotton in his Trial of the Romane clergie p. 265. Tossanus in Synopsi de Patribus p. 58. The Popes deare Monk and Reuerend Abbot Osiander and Hospinian report that (75) Cent. 12. p. 309. Hospini de origin Monach. f 175 He was the founder of a hundred and fortie Monasteries And Danaeus affirmeth that (76) 1. part alt parte cont Bellar. p. 440. Hierom and Bernard were Monks and Authours and fauourers of that errour And though D. White (77) Vvay to the true church p. 388. blush not to obiect his Authoritie against the Popes Primacie yet his Writings Doctrine and Practice were so direct to the contrarie that therefore he is expresly reproued by (78) Against Rhem. Test in Luc 22. F. 133. VvhitaK li. 2. cont Dur. p. 154. D. Fulk and D. Whitaker The Centurists also auouch that (79) Cent. 12. Col. 1637. He worshipped the God of Maozim euen vnto the last breath of his life he was a most sharp defender of the Sea of Antichrist c. For which by other ProtestaÌ„ts he
is tearmed (80) Lib. German quo causas recusati concilij Trid. reddunt f. 257. An impudent Writer heauing the Pope vp into an Idol a corrupter of Gods honour and preacher of Antichrist Yea so sincerely was he affected to the Pope and the Church of Rome that the Centurists report him to (81) Cent. 12. Col. 1639. say to the Count of Aquitaine whatsoeuer is out of the Roman Church that by Gods iudgement is of necessitie to perish euen as those things which were out of the Ark were drowned in the Deluge c. As also he that persecuteth the pope of Rome whom the Centurists here cal Antichrist he persecuteth sayth S. Bernard the Sonne of God himself Neither was anie of this Papistrie noted as then to be singular in S. Bernard but to the contrarie it is confessed by M. Iewel and M. Whitaker that S. Bernard liued in the midst of the Popes Rout and Tyrannie D. Morton as formerly calling S. Bernard for his life a Sainct and for his doctrine a Lamp to preuēt obiections thereby arising against him prouidently addeth that he neither was Sainct nor Lamp (83) Prot. Appeal p. 458. Simply as vnspotted with errours but Comparatiuely or c. in his generation that is in respect of the Age wherin he liued when a deluge of iniquities and mist of Popish Superstition had ouerspred the outward face of the Church So truly Papistical was S. Bernard At this time of S. Bernard liued also S. Malachias of whom Osiander writeth thus (84) Cent. 12. p. 315. 256. Malachias an Archbishop in Ireland from his childhood was giuen to learning and Religion and at length intreated and much inforced he vndertook to be the Archbishop of Ireland He was verie familiar with S. Bernard admiring and imitating his Monachisme and embracing Popish superstitions He worshipped the Pope of Rome for God To him verie manie miracles are ascribed c. So truly Roman Catholick was S. Malachias (82) Def. of the Apol. p 557. Vvhit cont Dur. l. 2. p. 154. In the Age precedent to these liued Berengarius who being a Catholick Priest and the Archdeacon of Angiers dissented afterwards from the Roman Church in the Doctrine of Transubstantiation which yet before his death he so fully (85) Fox Act. Monu p. 13. Vvestphalus his Apologetica c. fol. 6. Osiand Cent. 11. p. 158. Centurie-writers Cent. 11. col 458. recanted and conformed himself to the Roman Church as that the same is plainly acknowledged by M. Fox by Westphalus Osiander and the Centurists who record his recantation verbatim as it was Before him liued the most renowned Emperour Charles the Great who was so wholy deuoted to the Roman Religion as that the same is plentifully aknowledged by (86) Osiand in ep cent 8 p. 101. Cowpers Chron. fol 173. Fox in Apoc. p. 436. Crispinus of the Estate of the Church p. 221. Bulling in 2. Thess p. 533. Osiander D. Cowper M. Fox Crispinus and Bullinger In somuch that (87) In Epist Dedic Hist Sacram. Hospinian affirmeth that The Emperour Charles the Great commanded not only by publick Edicts that the Ceremonies and Rites as also the Latin Masse of the Roman Church and the other Decrees Statutes and Ordinances of the Roman Bishop should be obserued but himself also by imprisonnents and other kindes of punishments compelled Churches to the same Yea such was the vnion between the Popes of Rome and Charles the Great in matters of Faith and friendship as that according to D. Cowpers (88) Chron. f. 174. relation there were Certain Bishops sent by Adrian to Charles who held a Councel in France against the condemnation of Images c. And of the other side wheras Paulus (89) Lib. 2. Hist Franc. Aemilius relateth that Charles the Great sent twelue Bishops vnto a Councel holden at Rome by Pope Stephen in confutation of the errour of the Greeks against Images the same is so true that the like report therof is made by the (90) Cent. 8. col 570. Centurie-writers So assured it is that this Age in the opinion of Protestants was most superstitious and Papistical Before Charles liued S. Bede whom (91) Cent. 8. p. 58. Osiander tearmeth a good man and D. Cowper (92) Chron. f. 171. confesseth that he was Renowned in al the world for his learning and godly life For which he was also priuiledged with the Surname of Reuerend (93) Hollinsh Chron at An. 735. Covvpers Chron. at An. 724 fol. 168. Fox Act. Mon. p. 128. and by D. (94) Iesuit part 2. p. 326. Humfrey is specially registred among The Godlie men raised-vp by the Holie-Ghost D. Morton sayth (95) Prot. Appeal l. 1. p. 70. Although we deny not that Bede did hold diuers Romish Doctrines yet do we find sufficient cause in his writings why we may allow him his Title of Venerable and good man M. Bale further testifyeth that S. Bede (96) Cent. 2. c. 1. was so practised in prophane Authours that he scarce had his match in that Age He learned Physick and Metaphysick out of the purest fountaines He knew the Mysteries of the Christian Faith so soundly that for his exact knowledge both of Greek and Latin manie preferred him before Gregorie the Great There is scarce anie thing worth reading to be found in al Antiquitie which in due places is not read in Bede If he had liued in the times of Augustin Hierom Chrysostom I doubt not but he might haue contended for Equalitie with them He put forth manie bookes ful of al kind of Learning M. Fox acknowledgeth that (97) Act. Mon. p. 127. He was a man of worthie and memorable memorie and famous learning The whole Latin Church at that time gaue him the Maistrie in Iudgement and knowledge of the holie Scripture M. Bel granteth (98) Downfal that Bede for vertue and learning was renowned in al the world And M. Cambden recordeth that Bede (99) Descrip Brit. p. 670. the singular glorie of England by Pietie and Erudition obtayned the name of Venerable wrot many volumes most leardnedly So truly godlie learned and renowned was S. Bede euen in the iudgement of Protestants But now to obserue in particular whether the Faith and Religion taught beleeued and practised by this so worthie a man was Roman Catholick or English Protestant [100] Cent. 8. p. 58. Osiander who before called him A good man in expresse tearmes confesseth that Bede was wrapped in al the Popish Errours wherin we Protestants at this day dissent from the Pope For he admired and embraced the worship of Images the Popish Masse Inuocation of Saincts c. In which respect also M. Fox (101) Act. Mon. p. 128. 129. acknowledgeth that he liued in great credit and esteem with the Popes of that Age whom M. Fulk (102) Retentiue ag Bristovv p. 278. tearmeth Antichrists and therupon reiecteth S. Bedes authoritie saying The last Testimonie out of Bede
who liued vnder the Tyrannie of Antichrist I wil not stand vpon M. Sanders may haue great store of such For (103) Against Rhem. Test in Heb. 10.11 Bede liued in a superstitious time long after Antichrist did openly shew himself c. He affirmed that Men vnderstood that the healthful Sacrifice auayled to Redemption both of bodie and soul euerlasting and (104) Ib. in 1. Pet. 3.19 In some things was carryed away with the errours and corruptions of his time By which it clearly appeareth that in the Age of S. Bede the Popes of Rome were so Roman Catholick and the external gouernment of the Church thereto so answerable that our moderne Protestants do therfore traduce those ancient Popes for Antichrists and their Gouernment for Tyrannie In the Age before S. Bede liued the two most famous Brethren named Eualdi whom M. Bale tearmeth (105) In Catal. Scrip. c. Cēt. 14. p. 145. Osiand Cent. 7. p. 559. Papistical Martyrs suffring for Papistrie And though D. Morton (106) Prot. Appeal p. 67. 68. endeauoureth to obscure this by affirming that Protestant Writers were doubtful whether the sayd Brethren dyed by the hands of Christians or Infidels which later himself thinketh more probable yet this hindreth not but according to his Brother Bale and Osiāder cited by himself that they dyed for our Roman Faith Yea so litle was this doubt that D. Morton himself sayth If notwithstanding Catholicks shal insist in their clayme of these Two suffring death in maintenāce of Papal Iurisdiction ouer forraine Churches miserable wil be their issue especially considering that we haue manie Twoes to oppose against these euen a thousand and two hundred religious Britans who in a resolute resistāce of that Iurisdictiō and Authoritie of Austin the Legate of S. Gregorie dyed vnder the hands of Pagans and as Galfrid speaketh suffred Martyrdome But to omit that Protestants (107) Carthvvright in his 2. Reply part 1. p. 475. themselues charge this Galfrid with vntruth and too too childish errours wherof his owne (108) See l. 8. c. 19. l. 9. c. 4. l. 10. c. 3. l. 12. c. 4. c. writings wil be best witnesses as also that D. Morton doth vntruly and vndeseruedly referre the death of these religious Britans occasionally to S. Augustin I can not yet but obserue the greatest penurie of ancient Protestant Martyrs when D. Morton is glad to clayme for such those who liued and dyed Catholick Monks euen the Monks of Bangor So great a Bangor doth our Doctour make in making Protestants Ministers and Martyrs of Religious Monks THAT THE FAITH OF S. GREGORIE AND S. Augustin and whereto England was by them conuerted was our Roman Catholick and not Protestant CHAPTER IV. TO arise euen to the height or beginning of these last thousand yeares and first to examine the Faith of S. Gregorie and his time Concerning him D. Morton writeth (1) Prot. Appeal p 5. wee willingly cōfesse that S. Gregorie was an happie Father of the Faith of manie and deliuered to thē the sauing knowledge of Christ crucifyed And as cōcerning our Countries Conuersion by him he further sayth (2) Prot. Appeal p. 60. This happines of our English Conuersion to the Faith of Christ and worthines of our Conuerter S. Gregorie we could easily acknowledge without anie further adoe c And againe our Protestants Authours looking on their right hand beholding how Pagans and Heathnish people c. by the light of the Ghospel through the Ministerie of Austin the Legat of S. Gregorie were brought vnto the Fold of Christ did togeather with the Angels of heauen reioyce in remembrance of this their happines and therefore called it a gratious Conuersion And that most iustly seing our sayd Conuersion was confessedly from Paganisme to the true Faith of Christ for so Hollinshead testifyeth that (3) Description of Britannie l. 11. c. 7. S. Austin was sent by Gregorie to preach to English-men the Word of God who were yet blind in Pagan superstition And Anno 596. Gregorie sent Austin into this Ile to preach the Christian Faith vnto the English Saxons which Nation as yet had not receaued the Ghospel Agreably also hereunto sayth M. Cambden (4) Descript Britan. p. 104. Austin hauing rooted-out the Monsters of Heathnish superstition ingrafting Christ in English-mens minds with most happie successe conuerted them to the Faith And the like is acknowledged by M. Fox (5) Act. Mon. 110. 115. 172. Bale Cent. 1. c. 73. Cent. c. 1. VvitaKer cont Dur. p. 394. Cooper chron anno 599. Stovv 596. M. Bale D. Whitaker D. Cowper Now this Faith was so certainly the Faith planted by Christ and his Apostles that M. Fox calleth it (6) Act. Mon. p. 111. 120. 122 The Christian Faith (7) Ib. p. 115. 116. the Faith and Doctrine of Christ (8) Ib p. 121. Christs Religion and that Church The Church of Christ and The (9) Ib. p. 112. perfect Faith of Christ Cowper styleth it (10) Chron. anno 636. The right Beleef Stow (11) Chron. p. 9. The Christian Faith and (12) Ibid. p. 72. pure and incorrupted Christianitie Cambden (13) Descript Brit. p. 519. The true Religion of Christ (14) In vit Paulin. Godwine The Ghospel and sundrie such like Now this our Conuersion to this Faith of Christ by the meanes of Saint Gregorie was in truth a Blessing so great that (15) Cont. Duraeum l. 5. p. 394. 502. 397. D. Whitaker most humbly thus writeth therof we wil euer most gratefully remember that great benefit which Gregorie bestowed vpon vs And I confesse S. Gregorie to haue been a good and holie man c. He was a learned and holie Bishop (16) Iesuit p. 2. p. 624. D. Humfrey tearmeth him therefore Gregorie in name Great and indeed Great and M. Bel (17) Suruey of Poperie p. 187. calleth him S. Gregorie surnamed the Great the holie and learned Bishop of Rome According to (18) Cent. 1. c. 68. M. Bale He was the most excellent of al the Bishops of Rome for learning and life That against his wil and striuing to the contrarie and at last compelled he succeeded Pope Pelagius That he was a learned and good man founded Hospitals inuited Pilgrims to his Table sent things necessarie to the Monkes of Hierusalem and maintayned three thousand Virgins (19) Ibid. c. 7. He reduced the Gothes from Arianisme to the Church professed himself by writing the Seruant of Gods seruants that thereby he might appeare most far from al Ambition and desire of command In like sort is S. Augustin honoured by M. Godwine (20) Catalog of Bish. p. 7. and See Cābd Descript Brit. p 515. 178. Bale Cent. 13. c. 7. Cent. 14. c. 13. with the Title of our Apostle Wherof also sayth M. Mason (21) Consecration of English Bishops p. 57. 58. for as much as Lethardus gathered but a few clusters and the mayne Vintage was reserued
the first Fathers of superstition and Captaines and Ring-leaders of Popish Diuines Sir Edward Hobbie tearmeth him (50) In his Letter to M. Higgons p. 92. Proud and insolent Augustin your Great Gregories delegate M. Price styleth him that (51) Aâ—sw to Leech l. 1. c. 4. p. 69. Proud pettie Monk Austin And M. Iewel affirmeth that Austin was (52) Reply Art 3. p. 185. Neither of Apostolick spirit nor anie way worthie to be called a Sainct but an Hypocrite a superstitious man cruel bloudie and proud aboue measure M. Mason affirmeth that His superfluitie of ceremonies might wel haue been spared He was too forward to display the Popes Banner (53) Consecration of Eng. Bishops p. 58. and his behauiour towards the Brittans was ful of Pride and disdaine The (54) Cent. 6. c. 10. col â—49 Centurists write when Austin had troubled the Britan Churches Thirteen yeares and subdued them to the Roman Antichrist he dyed c. But (55) Cent. 6. p. 290. Osiander proceedeth much further affirming that He Subdued England to the lust of the Roman Antichrist and therfore after his death went vndoubtedly to Hel there to receaue his reward A reward vniust and a Sentence ouer-cruel for so great benefits as he bestowed vpon vs euen by D. Whitakers and other Protestants most grateful former aknowledgement But hence it clearly appeareth that the Faith of S. Gregorie S. Austin and whereto England was by them conuerted was Roman Catholick Neither was this pretended Popish superstition the priuat opinions of S. Gregorie and S. Austin but the vniuersal Doctrine and beleef of that Age. Insomuch that (56) Hist Sacram l. 2. p. 157 Hospinian confesseth that In the Age of Gregorie the Great al kind of superstition and Idolatrie as a certain Sea owerflowed ouerwhelmed and wholy ouerdrowned almost al the Christian world No man not only not resisting but al adding and affording rather what strength they could And (57) Defence of the Answ to the Admonition p. 442. D. Whitguift speaking of Anno Domini 659. so wholy distrusteth the Doctours of those times that he resolutely auoucheth He would be loath to alleage anie Councel of that time to proue anie thing in Controuersie So confessedly was the vniuersal Church of Christians at the time of S. Gregorie S. Austin and Englands Conuersion in the opinion of Protestants altogeather Popish Antichristian and Romish and indeed the One Holie Catholick and Apostolick Church prescribed by our Creed The Sect of Protestants during the same time being not so much as diuised stamped heard-of or being in anie though most base or obscurest part of the world Now al this as wel of the high and most deserued prayses giuen to S. Gregorie and S. Austin for their vertue learning and other singular guifts as also that the Faith and Religion which themselues professed and whereto they conuerted this our Natiue Countrey from execrable Paganisme was truly the perfect Faith of Christ and pure and incorrupted Christianitie And lastly that this so pure Faith was our now Roman Catholick Faith I haue here conuinced by the testimonies and acknowledgments euen of her greatest Enemies as namely by Osiander Danaeus the Magdeburgians Hospinian Hollinshead Cambden Foxe Bale Whitaker Cowper Humfrey Bel Godwine Bilson Stow Mason Abbots Fulk Harison Ascham Wotton Carthwright Willet Hobby Price Iewel Whitguift and Morton al of them Protestant Writers THAT THE PRESENT ROMAN CHVRCH AND Religion continued and Flourished during the whole time of the Primitiue Church contayning the first Six hundred yeares after Christ CHAPTER V. HAuing thus prooued the confessed being and publick general practice and profession for these last thousand yeares of our Roman Faith and Religion I wil now endeauour the selfe same proof and confirmation for the first Six hundred yeares after Christ Which for greater perspicuitie I wil diuide into two seueral Stations or times The First from Constantin the Great to Gregorie the Great the Second from Christ and his Apostles to Constantin agayne In which behalf I find it affirmed by (1) Vpon the Reuel f. 110. M. Brocard that The Pope fel from Christ in the time of Syluester who liued with Constantin and that for a ThousaÌ„d two hundred and sixtie yeares the Church was oppressed and troden downe by the Papacie euen from Syluesters time to these dayes In like sort auoucheth M. Brightman (2) In Apoc. p. 462. that euer since the time of Constantin the Great Rome hath been the whore of Babylon and the Roman Bishop hath been the Beast and Antichrist (3) Ibid. p. 471 And againe sayth he As aboue we haue made manifest it necessarily followeth since the time of the Heathen Emperours the Pope of Rome to haue been that greatest Antichrist of whom the Scriptures haue so diligently forewarned and the Cittie of Rome from that time to haue been the Whore c. foretold in the Apocalypse M. Leigh (4) Great Britanies great Deliuerie f. B. 2 addeth hereunto that The Popes euer since the first Three hundred yeares after Christ haue been Diuels But no man speaketh more plainly then M. Napper whom (5) Vpon the Reuel p. 262. M. Dent tearmeth a learned Writer and an excellent man This so learned a Writer plentifully acknowledgeth (6) Vpon the Reuel p. 68. And See p. 43. that Between the yeare of Christ 300. and 316. the Antichristian and Papistical raigne began raigning vniuersally and without anie debatable contradiction 1260. And that (7) Ibid. p. 145 Euen 1260. yeares the Pope and his Clergie hath possessed the outward visible Church of Christians (8) Ibid. p. 239 Neuer suffring for the space of 1000. yeares after Syluester the First anie to be seen vouchable or visible of the true Protestant Church c. I wil not here stay to confute the wilful vanitie of D. Morton who for his best answer to this so cleer testimonie of M. Napper writeth thus (9) Prot. Appeale p. 72. But this witnes alas for the darknes of Iudgement of these Apologists speaketh not of the whole Profession of the Romish Church but only of one article predominant therin namely the Doctrine of Popedom c. But seing he speaketh in general of the outward visible Church of Christians which includeth al Poynts beleeued by that Church and that the same Church during the sayd time was so wholy possessed by the Pope and his Clergie that not so much as anie one of the Protestant Church was then to be seen I may more iustly say Alas for want of honestie or learning or both in D. Morton And this the more I might inculcate seing his owne guiltie Conscience at last bewrayeth himself saying (10) Ibid. p. 662. If one of our Aduersaries themselues when six of their principal Doctours were produced against him was licenced to except against them c. how much more lawful might it be for vs to deny the testimonies but of two Authours not of eminent note for
ancient Fathers almost in euerie Age before that in which Gregorie liued saying The Religion cleerly taught in the Word of God brought hither first by Simon Zelotes Niceph. l. 2. c. 4. Ioseph of Arimathia Gildâ—s S. Paul the Apostle Theodoret de Curand Graec. affect l. 9. al or some of them was watred stil on in the dayes of Tertullian l. cont Iudaeos Origen in Ezech. hom 4. Athanasius Apol. 2. Hilarie l. de Synod cont Arian Chysostom hom quod Christus sit Deus Theodoret Hist l. 1. c. 10. l. 4. c. 3. Al which Ancient Fathers speak honourably of the Church Religion and Prelates of Brittanie So exceeding far were the Brittans from being changed in their Religion before the time when S. Augustin came into England Therfore to come to the second and mayne point which is the true harmonie and agreement between the Apostolick Faith of the Brittans and the Catholick Roman Faith of S. Augustin D. Morton labouring purposely to shew (51) Prot. Appeal p. 75. what and of how great importance the differences were between the Brittan Bishops and the Church of Rome at Austins comming can only instance in the difference of Ceremonies or ministring of Baptisme in keeping of Easter and in denial of Subiection vnto Austin which though he much endeauour to proue to be matters of great importance yet if they be considered in themselues and without pertinacie in the Defenders they may with M. Brierlie most truly be sayd to be few and smal points And the more if they should once be compared with our other Roman Articles of Real Presence Adoration of the Sacrament Masse Confession Freewil Merit c. In anie one wherof D. Morton was not able to giue the least Instance of difference between the foresayd Brittans and S. Austin Wherfore to proceed in this same poynt It is reported by Hollinshead out of S. Bede hist. l. 2. c. 2 that S. Austin by the help of King Edilbert obtayned a meeting with the Brittish Bishops and Doctours where he sayd vnto them (52) Beda hist l. 2. c. 2. Hollinsh vol. 1. p. 103. Godwine in his Catalogue of Bish. p. 6. If you wil obey me in these three things That you wil celebrate Easter at the due time That you wil minister Baptisme wherwith wee are borne againe to God according to the custome of the Roman and Apostolick Church That you wil preach with vs the Word of God to the Nation of the English Al other things which you doe though they be contrarie to our customes we wil peaceably suffer In like sort sayth the (53) l. 3. c. 13. p. 133. Authour of the Historie of Great Brittanie The Brittan Bishops conformed themselues to the doctrine and Ceremonies of the Church of Rome without difference in anie thing specially remembred saue only in the Celebration of the Feast of Easter c. (54) Ibid p. 219. And See CaÌ„bdens BritaÌ„ in English p. 578. And agayne when they perceaued the Saxons in some measure to approue it they began to make open Profession of it as seeming therin to agree euen with their Enemies the Saxons howsoeuer otherwise in respect of language situation or Law of Nations they were diuided Yea the (55) Beda hist l. 2. c. 2. Hollinsh vol. 1. p. 102. Brittan Bishops after conference had with S. Austin confessed that they vnderstood that it was the true way of iustice which Austin preached Wherupon as (56) Confut. of Purgat p. 335. D. Fulk acknowledgeth Saint Austin did at the last obtayne the ayde of the Brittish Bishops to the Conuersion of the Saxons (57) Catalogue of Bishops p. 11. Lastly D. Godwin writing of Theodore who was Archbishop of Canterburie some Fiftie or Sixtie yeares after S. Augustin auoucheth that vnto him al the Brittish Bishops and generally al Britanie yealded obedience and vnder him conformed themselues in al things vnto the Rites and discipline of the Church of Rome So euidently doth that Primitiue Faith of the Brittans in al most substantial poynts wholy agree with that Faith which S. Austin taught vs and which the Protestants haue fully acknowledged to be Catholick Roman or Popish And yet is the sayd Faith taught vs by S. Gregorie and S. Austin tearmed by (58) Chron. f. 161. D. Cowper the right beleefe And by (59) Act. Mon. p. 112. M. Fox the perfect Faith of Christ (60) Ibid. p. 124. and the true Faith of Christ And thus from the premisses it necessarily followeth that our present Roman Religion being so consonant or rather the same with that first Faith which the Indians Armenians Graecians and Brittans receiued from the Apostles themselues that therfore no lesse ancient or continuing is our Roman Religion then the Religion of the Apostles M. Brierly hauing produced diuers testimonies of Protestants in proof that the Indians Graecians and Armenians were conuerted to the Faith of Christ in the Apostles times as also that the remnant of Christian Religion which they yet preserue is Roman Catholick not Protestant M. Morton directing a large Reply hereto doth not so much as answer to any one of the foresayd testimonies of his Brethren Osiander excepted of whom he sayth (61) Prop. Appeal p. 79. We approue not Osianders censure c. concerning the Christians in Mount Libanus tearming them Popish for some flying speach But he may now aswel say we do not only not approue Osianders censure but neither the Censures and opinions of D. Philip Nicolai Gomarus Willamont Crispinus the Diuines of Wittemberg Cambden Harison Hollinshead Hal Clapham Fulk Marbeck Symondes Sandes Bale Foxe Midleton Godwine and Cowper al of them Protestants and yet al of them thus affording their helping hands for the proof of our agreement in Faith and Religion with the Doctrine deliuered by the Apostles themselues THE SECOND BOOKE WHERIN IS PROVED THROVGH AL THE CHIEF ARTICLES OF RELIGION AND THAT BY THE Confessions of Protestants that the same Faith Which is now taught by the Roman Church vvas anciently taught by the Primitiue Church of Christ THAT GENERAL COVNCELS DO TRVLY represent the Church of Christ And of the Credit and Authoritie giuen by Protestants to the sayd Councels CHAPTER I. AS in Politick gouernement our Parlament consisting of Prince Peeres Knights and Burgesses doth truly represent the whole Bodie of the Common-wealth and withal is endowed with ful power and authoritie to enact and establish Lawes which euerie particular Subiect is bound to obey and obserue So in gouernement Ecclesiastical a General Councel consisting of the Head of the Church the Bishops and Pastours doth truly represent vnto vs the whole Bodie of the Church itself and in like sort is enriched with plenarie power and vertue to create Decrees and Statutes which may bind the soules and consciences of euery particular member of the sayd Church To which purpose D. Whitaker confesseth expresly that (1) De Conciliis p. 1. 10. The Church is represented in a General
Councel And agayne (2) Ib. p. 19. Neither is that speach altogeather to be disliked that a Councel is the Church Representatiue M. Ridley further auoucheth that (3) Act. Mon. p. 1288. Councels do indeed represent the vniuersal Church and being so gathered togeather in the name of Christ they haue a promise of the guift and guyding of his Spirit into al truth And the same Doctrine is proued by D. Bilson saying (4) Perpetual Gouernement p. 392. As in Ciuil Policie not al Persons are called togeather but certayne Chiefe to represent the State and consult for the whole Common-wealth So in the Gouernement of the Church it is as sufficient in right that some of euerie place excelling others in dignitie should be sent from euerie Realme far distant and by that meanes they had the consent of the whole world to the Decrees of their Councels The Councel thus liuely representing the Church it is herevpon further granted by D. Bilson that as (5) Ib. p 372. To haue no Iudge for the ending of Ecclesiastical contentions were the vtter subuersion of al peace so according to him (6) Ib. p. 370 Synods are an external iudicial meanes to discerne errour the same being as he teacheth (7) Ib. p. 372. strengthned with the Promise of our Sauiour and accordingly obserued by the ancient Fathers who sayth he (8) Ib. p. 374. In al Ages aswel before as since the great Councel of Nice haue approued and practised this course as the surest meanes to decide Doubts With whom agreeth Melancthon saying (9) In Concil Theol. par 2. p. 1. Let them assemble General or National Councels c. Because it is written Tel the Church This was the custome in the Church from the verie beginning c. And Councels are the proper Iudgements of the Church And (10) Ib. p. 2. And see l. 1. Epist. p. 211. It is requisit that there be Iudgements in the Church neither can other Nations but be scandalized if they shal heare that we refuse the Iudgements of al Synods And wheras some obiect that Councels may erre M. Hooker (11) Ecc. Pol. p. 27. answereth therto himself and further concludeth that (12) Ib. p. 28. The wil of God is to haue vs do whatsoeuer the Sentence of Iudicial and Final Decision shal determine yea though it seeme in our priuate opinion to swarue vtterly from that which is right c. And that without this it is almost impossible we should auoyd confusion or euer hope to attayne peace And this Sentence sayth he (13) Ib. p. 28. is ground sufficient for anie reasonable mans conscience to build vpon whatsoeuer his owne opinion were as touching the matter before in question The same truth is taught by his dearest friend D. Couel assuring vs that If (14) Modest Examination p. 110. Synods want the Church neither at anie time was nor indeed can safely be without Tempests yea sundrie Protestants do ioyntly teach and gather from the Councel of the Apostles mentioned in their Acts (15) Act. 15.2 c. the necessitie of Councels (16a) Vvhite in his Def. p. 661. Carthwr 16. p. 678. Raynolds in his Confer p. 254. 255 Bilson in his Perpet Gouern. p. 373. for the deciding of Controuersies and further acknowledge the presence and assistance of the (16b) Bilson ib. p. 372. 373. 374. Ridley Act. Mon. p. 1288. Holie Ghost in direction of them into al truth From hence it is that sundrie Protestants do nothing doubt to submit themselues and their writings to the Iudgement and Determination of a general Councel So their learnedst Beza in a Preface (17) Ad Acta Colloq Montisbel Resp p. 1. p. 2. to one of his books thus submitteth himself Let al these be submitted to the Iudgements of al true Doctours and Orthodoxal Diuines and especially of a free holie and lawful Synod if God shal grant it at anie time M. Hooker testifyeth that (18) Pref. to Eccl. Pol. p. 28 2◠M. Beza in his last book but one professeth himself to be now wearie of such combats and encounters whether by word or writing insomuch as he findeth that Controuersies are therby made but brawles and therfore wisheth that in some common lawful assemblie of Church al these strifes may be at once decided (19) Diuers Degrees of Ministers in his Epistle to the Ministers of the Low-countries B. 3. fine I hartily wish sayth D. Sarauia that there may be a general Councel that as it becommeth me I refuse not to be iudged of my Iudgement But if otherwise c. Let vs expect the Iudgement of God And another Protestant Writer testifyeth of himself and of his other Brethren that (20) Authour of Cath. Traditions p. 57. And see Hospin Concord Discord fol. 186. The learned and greatest men among them do protest to submit themselues to a general and free Councel In like sort D. Sutclif auoucheth in behalf of Protestants in general that (21) Reuievv of Kellisons Suruey p 42. It is false that Protestants wil admit no Iudge but Scriptures For we appeale sayth he stil to a lawful general Councel c. And In the meane time we content ourselues with National Councels and their Determinations As also (22) Ib p. 102. Priuate men do submit themselues to the Determination of a free general Councel and in the meane while to their National Churches Lastly the authoritie of general Councels is so great and the scandal in contemning them so offensiue that a Protestant Writer ingenuously confesseth that (23) Cath. Traditions p. 58. A man can not now adayes read the writings of the ancient Fathers nor the Histories of the Apostolick Churches no not the holie Scripture it self without finding verie manie ceremonies and fashions of speaking not vsed among the Protestants of France from whence it hapneth that manie do change their beleef being offended at the contemning of Councels c. From al which I wil briefly conclude that seing by the free testimonies of so manie of the learned Protestants both strāgers and neighbours General Councels do truly represent the Church of Christ and are the surest meanes for the deciding of Ecclesiastical Controuersies being therin directed and inspired by the Holie-Ghost himself and so freed from errour in the decrees of Faith and manners And seing also for these strongest Reasons Protestants pretend to submit themselues their writings and their doubts finally also to their Determination that therfore for the decision of Controuersies in Religion Catholiks and so manie learned Protestants do ioyntly agree herein That the Authoritie of Oecumenical Councels is sacred infallible and most powerful and for such acknowledged and respected by the humble submission thereto of either Partie THAT THE ARGVMENT DRAVVNE FROM the Authoritie of the Primitiue Church of Christ and of her Doctours Pastours is an Argument of force And for such approued by sundrie learned Protestants CHAPTER II. THere is
no period or difference of time wherin the Church of Christ hath more gloriously shined either for puritie of Faith or Sanctitie of life then during the time of her primitiue being which according to the accompt (1) Ievvel in his Sermon at Paules Crosse And in his Reply p. 1. Humfrey in vita Iuelli p. 123. 124. VvitaKer Resp ad Ranones Campiani p. 90. of the learnedst ProtestaÌ„ts extended itself to the ful tearme of the first six hundred years after Christ our Sauiour his glorious Ascension In greatest confidence wherof D. Iewel whom M. Mason (2) Consecration of English Bish. p. 267 styleth and esteemeth a Iewel made his so aduenturous a Challenge when he publickly exclaimed at Pauls Crosse O Gregorie O Austin O Hierom O Chrysostom O Leo O Denis O Anaclet O Calixt O Paul O Christ If we be deceaued you haue deceaued vs this you taught vs c. And As I sayd before so I say now againe I am content to yeald and subscribe if anie of our learned Aduersaries or if al the learned men that be aliue be able to bring anie one sufficient Sentence out of anie old Catholick Doctour or Father or out of anie old General Councel c. for the space of 600. yeares after Christ which maketh agaynst anie one of 27. Articles by him there repeated and defended And this he protested to preach not as carryed away with the heate of Zeale but as moued with the simple truth This proffer of D. Iewel was so pleasing to D. Whitaker that he most valiantly renewed it in behalf of al Protestants (3) Resp ad Rat. CaÌ„p p. 90. And see p. 9. saying to our glorious Martyr Campian Attend Campian the speach of Iewel was most true and constant when prouoking you to the Antiquitie of the first six hundred years he offered that if you could shew but anie one cleare and playne Saying out of anie one Father or Councel he would grant you the victorie It is the offer of vs al The same do we al promise and we wil performe it With like courage steppeth forth (4) Of the Church l. 5. in his Appendix therto Part. 1. p. 33. D. Field We say sayth he with Bishop Iewel in his worthie Challenge that al the learned Papists in the world can not proue that either Gregorie or Austin held anie of these twentie seauen Articles of Popish Religion mentioned by him Neither wil D. Morton yeald a foot herein stoutly auouching that (5) Prot. Appeal p. 354. It hath been the common and constant profession of al Protestants to stand vnto the Iudgement of Antiquitie for the continuance of the first foure hundred years and more in al things Yea he further publickly professeth that (6) Protest Appeale p. 573. 574. Protestants in oppugning Doctrines which they cal new and not Catholick c. are so far from suffring the limitation of the first 440. years that they giue the Romanists the scope of the first fiue hundred or six hundred years as our Aduersaries themselues do acknowledge For D. Stapleton writing of the opinion of Luther Caluin and Melancthon sayth that they did yeald vnto the tryal of truth by the testimonie of Antiquitie for the space of the first Fiue or Six hundred yeares M. Campian a Iesuit reporting the Challenge of Bishop Iewel for the mayntenance of these Articles which he then propounded for Catholik sayth that he appealed vnto the Iudgement of Antiquitie for the first six hundred years And againe (7) Ibid. p. 512 Protestants in the disquisition of truth do not absolutely bound the name of Antiquitie within the compasse of the first Centurie of years but are content to allow it a longer extent and therfore in al Doctrines which are truly Catholick c. they refuse not to be tryed by the testimonies of the ancient Fathers in the first fiue hundred years after Christ Yea (8) Ib. p. 680. we repose our securitie in those two impregnable fortresses of the Catholick Faith one is the ancient Tradition of the Primitiue Church as the Protestants are confessed to professe c. So willingly do the learned Protestants prouoke and appeale to the Primitiue Church of Christ for the certayne tryal of truth in matters of Faith and Religion Al which they pretend to do because as Luther sayth (9) Tom. 2. Germ. f. 243. Epist ad Marchionem Branâ—eburg It is dangerous and horrible to heare or beleeue anie thing which is contrarie to the vnanimous testimonie of Faith and to the doctrine of the holie and Catholick Church which she from the beginning agreably kept for aboue One thousand fiue hundred years And as Chemnitius truly obserueth (10) Exam. par 1. f. 74. No man doubteth but the Primitiue Church receaued from the Apostles and Apostolical men not only the Text of Scripture but also the right and natiue sense therof wherupon sayth he (11) Ibid. p. 64. we are greatly confirmed in the true and sound sense of Scripture by testimonie of the ancient Church Which according also to other Protestants (12) Harmonie of Confess p. 400. Is the true and best Mistresse of Posteritie and going before lâ—adeth vs the way Yea sayth D. Beard (13) Retractiue from Romish ReligioÌ„ p. 372 without al question al truth was taught by the Apostles to the Primitiue Church and no part therof was left vnreuealed c. Besides it is as certayn that that Church which next succeeded the Apostles was the most pure and absolute Church whether for doctrine or manners matter or forme that euer was in the world and therefore to degenerate from that must needs be to degenerate from the puritie and sanctitie of Religion And againe it can not be denyed that c. though the Primitiue Age of the Church after the Apostles was most pestered with Hereticks yet euermore the truth preuayled both in regard of birthright and predominance D. Morton Declareth that (14) Protestant Appeale p. 513. In the maine question of discerning the true bookes of holie Writ the Protestants do appeale c. vnto the IudgemeÌ„t of the Primitiue Church attributing vnto it the right and Authoritie of assigning and determining what is the perfect Canon of Scriptures With whom agreeth Chemnitius saying (15) Exam. part 1. p. 69. Andradius affirmeth that the testimonie of the Church is either alwayes to be reiected or alwayes to be receaued I answer c. where the Fathers set downe this Tradition of the books of Scripture they proue it by testimonies of the Primitiue Church if with the same course of certayntie they shal do the like of other Traditions wherof sometimes they make mention it is to be respected and they are to be receaued by the same law D. Sarauia confirmeth the authoritie of the Primitiue Church from her special assistance by the Holie-Ghost saying The (16) De diuersis Ministrorum Gradibus p. 8. Holie-Ghost who gouerneth the Church is the best interpreter
of Scriptures from him therfore is the true interpretation to be sought and seing he can not be contrarie to himself who ruled the Primitiue Church and gouerned it by Bishops it is not agreable to truth now to cast them off D. Iewel acknowledgeth in general that (17) Def. of the Apologie p. 35. The Primitiue Church which was vnder the Apostles and Martyrs hath euermore been accounted the purest of al others without exception D. White testifieth that (18) way to the Church Ep. Dedic nu 8 The Primitiue Church and al the Doctours therof would neuer yeald I wil not say in an opinion but not so much as in a forme of speach or in the change of a letter sounding against the Orthodoxal Faith wherof he further giueth sundrie pertinent examples concluding that So religious were they that had Religion that they would not exchange a letter or a Syllable of the Faith wherwith our Sauiour had put them in trust And in another place he auoucheth that (19) Ibid. p. 385. In the first six hundred yeares there was no substantial or fundamental innouation receiued into the Church So plentifully are the deseruedst prayses of the Primitiue Church during the first six hundred yeares freely giuen and set forth by our greatest Protestants thus much acknowledging and admiring the puritie of her Doctrine and appealing to her Tribunal for the Determination of their doubts And I can not but here admire the potent force violence of truth which racketh from her deadliest Enemies the true Confession thereof For what Church during those primitiue and purest times was euen in the iudgement of Protestants so faithful so chast so constant in soundnes of Faith and sinceritie of manners as the Catholick Roman Church What Bishops euer so renowned either for feeding of their flocks or for patient suffring of so manie and so cruel torments yea and death it self as the Popes and Bishops of Rome (20) Ep. Ded. of F. Persons in his Ansvv to him Doth not Sir Ed. Cooke himself say We do not deny but that Rome was the Mother Church and had thirtie two Virginal Martyrs of her Popes arow What Doctours what Fathers what Pastours more duly honoured by al Posteritie then such as were strictly linked in Faith and Communion with the then Roman Church D. Whitaker being to answer D. Sanders his truest assertion that the Roman Church was not changed during the first six hundred yeares after Christ through clearest euidence of truth acknowledgeth the same saying (21) l. De Antichrist p. 35. c. During al that time the Church was pure and flourishing and inuiolably taught and defended the Faith deliuered from the Apostles D. Iewel confesseth that (22) Reply to Harding p. 246. Aswel S. Austin as also other godlie Fathers rightly yealded Reuerence to the Sea of Rome c. for the puritie of Religion which was there preserued along time without spot And that The Godlie Fathers of those gray-headed times sought to the Church of Rome which then for puritie in Religion and constancie in the same was most famous aboue al others Sundrie other such like testimonies duely dignifying the ancient Roman Church I willingly pretermit hauing treated elsewhere of the same subiect more at large But who likewise more peremptorily pretend the truest harmonie between their Doctrine and the Doctrine of the ancient Fathers as also the iust defence and patronage of their due credit and esteeme then our Moderne Protestants For to omit D. Iewels former complaint that if Protestants be deceaued it was Gregorie Austin Hierom Chrysostom c. that deceaued them not anie one Sentence in anie one Father or Councel of the first six hundred yeares making in his opinion against Protestancie D. Sutcliffe confidently auoucheth that (23) Examination of Kellisons Suruey p. 17. The Fathers in al poynts of Faith are for vs sayth he and not for the Pope D. Willet maketh his solemne Protestation (24) Antilog p. 263. I take God to witnes before whom I must render accompt c. that the same Faith and Religion which I defend is taught and confirmed in the more Substantial Points by those Histories Councels and Fathers that liued within fiue or six hundred yeares after Christ. And againe (25) Ib. p. 264. It is most notoriously euident that for the grossest poynts of Poperie as Transubstantiation Sacrifice of the Masse Worshipping of Images Iustification by workes the Supremacie of the Pope Prohibition of Mariage and such other they to wit the Papists haue no shew at al of anie euidence from the Fathers within fiue hundred yeares after Christ. Pierre de Moulin a French Protestāt is so vndertaking herein that (26) Defenc. against Coefteau p. 139. In this Challenge sayth he I wil lay downe my Ministers cloake readie to be frocked in a Monks Cowle if I shal find a man that wil satisfy me in this point Melancthon sayth (27) Ep. ad Cratonem for the setling of our minds I think the consent of Antiquitie to be of great force c. The best Maisters and guides to vs may be Ireneus Tertullian Augustin who left to Posteritie manie things of this kind And (28) Epist. ad Frider. Miconium As I willingly aduise with such writers liuing as haue some vse of Spiritual things So I think these Ancients whose writings are approued are likewise to be consulted For I think the Church generally beleeued that which they haue writen And it is not secure to depart from the common opinion of the old Church Yea others tearme it in some of their Brethren Paradoxical to disclayme and dissent from the ancient Fathers wherof one sayth (29) The Authour of a Brief Answ to certaine obiect ag the Descension of christ into Hel. p 1. where you say we must build our Faith on the Word of Faith tying vs to Scripture only you giue iust occasion to think that you neither haue the ancient Fathers of Christs Church nor their Sonnes succeding them agreeing with you in this point which implyeth a defence of some strange Paradox D. Bancroft doubteth not to preferre the ancient Fathers before the learnedst Protestants (30) Suruey p. 378. p. 64. For M. Caluin and M. Beza I do think of them sayth he as their writings deserue but yet I think better of the ancient Fathers I must confesse it Yea he purposely vndertaketh their iust defence against the Puritans for where S. Austin sayd to Iulian the Pelagian (31) Contra Iulian. l. 2. c. 10 Truly I haue what to do I haue whither to fly for I may prouoke from these Pelagian darknes to these so cleare Catholick Lights of the Fathers which I now do But tel me what wilt thou do whither wilt thou fly I from the Pelagians to these thou from these to whom c. But thou darest cal them blind And hath time so confounded lowest things with highest Are darknes called light and light darknes
that Pelagius Celestius Iulianus al of them Hereticks do see and Hilarie Gregorie Ambrose c. are blind This so worthie a Saying of S. Austin being alleaged against the Puritans by D. Bancroft he therupon inferreth (32) Suruey p. 352. 353. 351. Surely I do not perceiue why I may not without offence apply the same wordes to those men in those dayes c. Were there neuer learned men before you were taught the Principles of the Geneua Discipline c. Do you know what was in the Apostles times better then they who succeded the Apostles c. Is the light that shewed it self so manie wayes in the Ancient Fathers become such darknes that Carthwright Trauerse Fenner to whom I might as truly adde Luther Zuinglius Caluin Beza c. and such like should be thought so clearlie-sighted And shal Ireneus Tertulian Cyprian Ambrose Hierom Chrysostom Austin Gregorie Hilarie and al the rest of those whorthie men be reckned blind So cleerly doth D. Bancroft the Protestant late Primate of England acknowledge the shining light and glorie of the ancient Fathers and defend their authoritie from the imputations of Nouelists D. Morton ioyfully acknowledgeth (33) Prot. Appeal p. 33. That the ancient Fathers c. did obtayne in the Church of Christ honourable Titles as Augustin the great Mall or hammer against Hereticks Basil the light of the world Chrysostome The Doctour of the whole world Athanasius the Pillar as it were of the Church Nazianzene by a phrase of excellencie the Diuine Origen the Maister of the churches Cyprian the President of the whole world And lastly Ambrose A man called by God vnto an Apostolical Presidencie Now as for the Confidence which Catholicks place in the ancient Fathers D. Morton testifyeth for vs that (34) Ib. p 348 Neuer did the ancient Iewes more boast of their original and descent from father Abraham then do the Romanists glory in their pretended consent of ancient Fathers And though it be true that the ancient Fathers were men yet (35) Eccl. Pol. p. 115. The strength of mans Authoritie in M. Hookers iudgement is affirmatiuely such that the weightiest affaires in the world depend therupon Yea (36) Ib. p. 116. whatsoeuer we beleeue concerning saluation by Christ although the Scripture be therin the ground of our beleef yet is mans Authoritie sayth he the key that openeth the doore c. The Scripture could not teach vs these things vnles we beleeued men And wheras the sacred Scriptures do foretel sundrie things to be performed by the Church of Christ in succeeding Ages the answerable accomplishment therof in particular being matter of fact can be to vs at this day no otherwise made knowne then vpon the Credit of humane Testimonie commended to vs by Ecclesiastical Histories In which respect D. Whitaker truly teacheth that (37) Cont. Duraeum l. 7. p. 472. Historie plainly testifyeth al that to be accomplished which the ancient Prophets haue foretold concerning the Propagation amplitude and glorie of the Church So that there is no doubt sayth he but that Ecclesiastical Historie doth strengthen the Predictions of the Prophets Now from the Premisses we may briefly remember that not only al Catholicks but euen the Primest ProtestaÌ„ts that euer were do thus willingly appeale for the decision of Controuersies in Faith and Religion to the Censure and Determination of the Church of Christ which for the first six hundred yeares was confessedly sincere holie and religious Acknowledging withal the integritie and puritie of the Roman Church during the sayd time and professing to beleeue and teach no other Faith and religion then that which was taught and beleeued by the ancient Fathers of the same Church This then supposed I wil now descend in particular to the chiefest articles of Faith disputed at this day between Catholicks and Protestants And wil only examine whether the Roman or Protestant Church is now more agreable with the confessed Faith and Religion of the Fathers of the Primitiue Church in the foresayd poynts And for the cleerest preuenting of the manifold shiftes and euasions vsed by ProtestaÌ„ts when they are vrged in this kind I wil only produce such proofe from the Primitiue Church and Fathers as is recorded and confessed by Protestants and by them disliked and reiected as agreeing with our Roman Faith and condemning Protestancie THAT THE FATHERS AND DOCTOVRS OF the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught that S. Peter was ordayned by Christ the Head of the Apostles and of the whole Church and that the Church was founded vpon S. Peter it is Confessed by Protestants themselues CHAPTER III. BEcause the deciding of this present Controuersie of the Churches Primacie is indeed the speediest and most certaine meanes for the final dissoluing of al doubts in Religion either already begun or hereafter to arise I wil therfore more particularly and at large set downe the manifest and confessed Doctrine and practice of the Primitiue Church concerning the same And first as al gouernment whether Politick or Ecclesiastical the more it reseÌ„bleth the gouernment of this world by the Creatour therof ONE GOD or the gouernment of the Church during our Sauiours aboad vpon earth by ONE CHRIST the more it is to be approued coÌ„mended and followed so nothing is holden more Soueraigne or more needful for the procuring or preseruing of vnitie and concord in anie Bodie or Communitie then the vnitie of one Head or gouernment Monarchical Herevpon the (1) Bel. de Rom. Pont l. 1. c. 10. l. 2. c 12. Catholick Church doth beleeue and teach That S. Peter was ordayned by Christ the Supreme Ecclesiastical Head not only ouer the rest of the Apostles but euen ouer the whole Church And that the Bishop of Rome succeedeth him in the same Power and Authoritie The direct (2) Luther l de Potestate Papae in assertione Art 25. Calu. l. 4 Instit c 6. Morton in his Appeale l. 2. c. 5. Sect. 11. Negatiue wherof is not only taught by the Protestant-Church but withal it further beleeueth maintayneth that the Bâ—shop of Rome in steed of being the true Successour of S. Peter and the Vicar of Christ is the true Antichrist or Man of Sinne wherof so much is foretold in the sacred Scriptures To discouer now the Faith and practise of the Primitiue Church and to begin with the confessed Primacie of S. Peter And first that for the preseruing of vnitie and preuenting of Schismes he was appoynted by Christ the Supreme Head of that slender Bodie or litle Church of the twelue Apostles Wheras S. Hierom l. 1. cont Iouinianum teacheth that Amongst the Twelue one is chosen that a Head appoynted the occasion of Schisme should be taken away From hence (3) In his Examination c. against the Plea of the Innocent p. 106. 107. D. Couel hauing spoken of the necessitie of One aboue the rest to suppresse the seed of dissention thus argueth most strongly If this were the Principal
doctrine practise of the Popes Primacie Now as cōcerning the Age next ensuing the 20. yeares after Christ in which persecution so raged as the Churches gouernment was thereby much the more obscured yet it is confessed (127) Cent 3. col 168. that Pope Stephen in this Age did threaten Excōmunicatiō to Helenus Firmilianus al others throughout Cilicia Cappadocia for rebaptizing Hereticks (128) Apocalypsis c. c. 7. p. 193 yea M. Brightman is of opinion that scarcely would anie beleeue those proud brags of the Roman Sea wherwith the Decretal Epistles abound not to haue been forged by succeding Popes and so falsely ascribed to the more ancient they are so impudent and vayne but that Firmilianus assureth they were theyr owne at least a great part of them whose names they beare for speaking of Stephen then Bishop of Rome who sayth he so braggeth of the place of his Bishoprick and contendeth himself to hold the Succession of Peter vpon whom the foundations of the Church were placed and he declareth abundantly how boasting the Bishops then were amongst the Epistles of Cyprian ep 75. The (129) Cent. 3. c. 7. col 168. Centurists confesse that Dionysius Bishop of Rome through the false accusation of some excommunicated Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria but Dionysius of Alexandria made his Apologie and refuted the errours falsely obiected vnto him as Athanasius reporteth Hereby appeareth not only the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome in excommunicating but also the obsequiousnes of the Bishop of Alexandria in not contemning but making his Apologie vnto him They (130) Cent. 3. col 84. likewise reproue S. Cyprian for teaching that There ought to be one Bishop in the Catholick Church And for his calling (131) Ibid. Peters Chayre the principal Church from whence Priestly vnitie ariseth (132) Vpon Iude p. 285. M. Trig reprehendeth S. Cyprian saying Cyprian giueth more priuiledges to the Roman Church he calleth it the chief Church from whence Priestlie vnitie began c. And to which infidelitie cannot haue accesse Wherupon M. Trig thus inferreth Here we may note what certaintie it is to build our Faith on the Fathers c And the (133) Cent. 3. col 84. And See Brightman in his Apocalypsis in c. 13. p. 343. Centurists charge him for teaching say they without anie foundation of Scripture that the Roman Church ought to be acknowledged of al other for the Mother and root of the Catholick Church Yea D. Morton (134) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 294. 295. professing willingly to admit S. Cyprians Iudgement as Vmpier in this controuersie is yet inforced to say Although the next sentences of S. Cyprian may seem at their first view vnto the vnexpert Reader to obserue in the Church of Rome both a grace of Impossibilitie of Erring and also a Prerogatiue of the Mother Church of al others and are therefore censured by our Centurists for speeches inconuenient Yet no man exercised and conuersant in his writings and other Fathers can be ignorant that such like speeches are but the languages of Rhetorical Amplification which commonly they vse by way of persuasion rather then by asseueration But what testimonie though neuer so cleer in anie matter whatsoeuer may not easily be euaded if it wil suffice to answer that it was but the language of Rhetorical Amplification or demy-lying Or for what cause should S. Cyprian and other Fathers vtter the foresayd Sayings by way of Persuasion in behalf of the Roman Churches Prerogatiues if they had thought in their owne Iudgements and Consciences that the sayd Prerogatiues had not been due vnto her So vndoubted it is that S. Cyprian and the other Fathers of his Age beleeued and acknowledged the Primacie of the Roman Church But as touching the Age next after the Apostles themselues wherof as M. Hutton (135) In his ansvver to the 2. par of the Reasons of Refusal to Subscription p. 105. obserueth but few Monuments are now remayning As then liued Pope Victor who in D. Whiteguifts (136) In his Defence c. p. 510. opinion was a godlie Bishop and Martyr and the Church at that time in great puritie And yet of him sayth D. Whitaker (137) Cont. Duraeum l. 7. p. 480. FulK in his Ansvv to a counterf Cath. p. 36. with D. Fulk The first that exercised Iurisdiction vpon forraine Bishops was Victor Insomuch as he excommunicating the Bishops of Asia for not obseruing the Feast of Easter-day according to the vse of the Latin Church D. Fulk (138) Ibid. chargeth him that He passed the bounds of his authoritie Amandus Polanus )139) In Sillog Thes Theol. p. 165 accuseth him to haue shewed a Papal mind and arrogancie And M. Spark (140) Against Iohn de Albines in his Answer to the Preface And see Osiander cent 2. p. 87. 96. affirmeth that somewhat Pope-like he exceeded his bounds when he took vpon him to excommunicate the Bishops of the East Beza (141) Pref. ad Princip Condensem before his Translation of the New Testament tearmeth Victor the most foolish and most ambitious Bishop of Rome And (142) Of the state of the Church p. 47 Crispinus speaking of this Age auoucheth that The Roman Bishops now became more audacious to forge new Ceremonies yea and to force vpon other Churches c. Victor in his 2. Decretal calleth himself Archbishop of the Roman and vniuersal Church D Fulk (143) Against the Rhem. Test in 2. Thess 2. sec 9. p. 659. maketh the Mysterie of iniquitie to work in Peters Sea in the times of Anicetus Victor and Cornelius In like sort D. Morton iustifyeth such Protestant Authors as (144) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 300. reprehend Victor for arrogancie and transgressing the bounds of his Iurisdiction in excommunicating the Churches of Asia c. The Centurists record that (145) Cent. 2. c. 7. col 159. Anacletus in the Epistles which heare his name in the general regiment of Churches so loyneth them togeather that to the Roman Church he attributeth Primacie and excellencie of power ouer al Churches and ouer the whole flock of the Christian People and that by the authoritie of Christ saying to Peter Thou art Peter and vpon this Rock wil I build my Church c. The Bishop of Rome is placed first as the supreame Head of the Church who though he erre yet wil he not haue him to be iudged of others c. He sayth also that certaine Citties receaued Primates from the Blessed Apostles and from S. Clement c. He prescribeth that If greater difficulties arise or causes fal out among the Bishops and Primates themselues let them be brought to the Sea Apostolick if such Appeale be made for so the Apostles ordayned by the appoyntment of our Sauiour that the greater and harder questiōs should alwayes be brought to the Apostolick Sea vpon which Christ built his vniuersal Church Math. 16. In like sort they say of Xistus that In
for our present Controuersie and manie others that M Carthwright (6) In Whit. Def. p. 103. And in his 2. Reply against Whit. part 1 p 84-85 86. sayth therof To allow of Austin's Saying is to bring in Poperie againe And if S. Austins Iudgement be a good Iudgement then there be some things commanded of God which are not in the Scriptures and therupon no sufficient doctrine contayned in the Scriptures Caluin also acknowledgeth the same words of S. Austin yet confesseth (7) Inst l 4. c. 10. § 20. not to respect them affirming also that Austin hath nothing besides coniectures In like sort S. Chrysostom in expresse words teaching (8) In 2. Thes hom 4. that The Apostles did not deliuer al things by writing but manie things without these be as worthie of credit as the other D. Whitaker (9) De sacra Scriptura p. 678. in answer hereto sayth I answer that this is an inconsiderat speach and vnworthie of so great a Father And wheras Epiphanius haer 6â— teacheth that we must vse Traditions for the Scripture hath not al things and therfore the Apostles deliuered certain things by writing and certain by Tradition with whom agreeth S. Basil de Spiritu Sancto c. 27. saying Some things we haue from Scripture other things from the Apostles Tadition c. both which haue like force vnto Godlines D. Raynolds (10) In his Conclusions to his Conf. Conc. 1. p. 689. his answer to these foresayd Sayings of S. Basil Epiphanius is I take not vpon me to controle them but let the Church iudge if they considered with aduise enough c. In like sort Eusebius affirming l. 1. Demonstr Euang. c. 8 that the Apostles published their Doctrine partly by writing partly without writing as it were by a certaine vnwritten Law D. Whitaker (11) De sacra Scriptura p 668. sayth hereof I answer that this Testimonie is plaine enough but in no force ta be receiued because it is against the Scriptures Chemnitius (12) Exam. part 1. p. 87. 89. 90. reproueth for their like testimonie of vnwritten Traditions Clemens Alexandrinus Origen Epiphanius Ambrose Hierom Maximus Theophilus Basil c. And M. Fulk (13) Against Purg. p. 302 303. 397 And agâ—inst Martial p. 170. 178. Anâ— against Bristowes Moâ—â—â—s p. 35. 36. confesseth as much of Chrysostome Tertulian Cyprian Augustin Hierom c. Schrederus (14) Opusc Theol. p. 72. acknowledgeth that Origen and Basil in his book of the holie-Ghost and Hierom against the Luciferians do relate manie Customes which they cal Doctrines receaued by Tradition without writing as Threefold immersion in Baptisme Prayer towards the East the words of Inuocation when the Bread of the Eucharist is shewed c. prohibition to Fast on Sunday c. Sacrifices for the dead c. And D. Whitaker (15) De sacra Script p. 678 681. 683 685. 690. 695. 696. 670. 668. acknowledgeth and reproueth for their like doctrine of Traditions Chrysostom Epiphanius Tertulian Cyprian Augustin Innocentius Leo Basil Eusebius c. The Centurists (16) Cent 4. p 299. condemne al the Fathers of the Fourth Age one by one reciting their Sentences and reiecting them Chemnitius reciting and reiecting the Sayings of Origen (17) Exâ—m part 1. p. 87. concludeth thus So Origen iudgeth that there are Apostolical Traditions And D. Fulk 18) Agaâ—â—st Purg. p. 393 confesseth that Tertulian taught Sacrifice and prayer for the dead vpon Traditions from the Apostles D. Whitaker (19) De sacra Script p. 685. being to answer S. Cyprians playne Sayings for Traditions writeth thus I answer first Cyprian was no Apostle and therefore his words are to be examined and not al things forthwith to be receaued c. therfore let vs not regard what he sayth c. Lastly wheras S. Dyonisius de Eccles Hierarchia c. 1. S. Paul's Schollar affirmeth that the Apostles did deliuer their Doctrine partly by writing partly without writing c. D. Whitaker (20) De sacra Script p. 655. deuoyd of al answear or euasion sayth I do acknowledge that Dionisius is in manie places a great Patrone of Traditions And D. Fulk (21) In his Answear to a Count. Cath p. 35. confessing that Papias was Scholler to S. Iohn yet M. Midleton 22) Papisto-mastix p. 200. affirmeth that Papias was the first Father and Founder of Traditions But Before al these liued the ancient Iewes of whom Paulus Fagius writeth that (23) Comment in Cap. Patrum The Iewes are of opinion that Moses receiued from God in Mount Sinai a double Law the one which they cal the Law deliuered in writing the other which they cal the Law which is in the mouth or deliuered by word of mouth And this last they affirme to be deriued by Moyses to posteritie by a certain order of Succession And the self same is confessed by D. Beard (24) Rotract from Rom. Relig. â— 73 74. M. Rollock likewise auoucheth that (25) Treatise of Gods effectual calling p. 241. The Church after Moyses had both the Tradition or sound of a liuely voice and of the Scripture and written Word of God And the same Doctrine of Traditions in the Iewes is confessed by Buxdorfius (26) Synagoga Iudaica p. 13 21. 48 67. a Protestant Hebrew Reader in Basile D. Morton admitteth that (27) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p 377. The Protestants wil as readily confesse that the Iewes pretended vnwritten Traditions as could either Egesippus or Anatolius but whether they did make that boast vniustly or iustly that sayth he is worthie our m st diligent Scanne Wel then the Fathers here confessed and disliked by Protestants for our Catholick Doctrine of Traditions are S. Gregorie Austin Ambrose Hierome Chrysostom Epiphanius Basil Eusebius Maximus Theophilus Innocentius Leo Cyprian Origen Tertulian Clemens Alexandrinus Dionisius Areopagita Papias and the faithful Iewes before Christ The Protestants citing and reprouing the sayd Fathers herein are Chemnitius Caluin Schrederus Buxdorfius Whitaker Carthwright Morton Beard Rollock Fulk and Rainolds So Apparent it is that our present Roman Church in the Doctrine of Traditions doth stil insist in the steps of the Primitiue Church It is Confessed by Protestants that according to the Fathers of the Primitiue Church the Sacraments do truly conferre Grace Remission of sinnes And that they are in number seauen CHAPTER VII PRotestants (1) Luth. in Assert 1. Articuli teaching Faith alone to iustify do consequently affirme the Sacraments to be but bare Signes not causes of our Iustification seruing either euen as preaching for an obiect to stir vp and nourish our Faith or for certaine markes whereby the Faithful are discerned from Infidels But contrarie hereto the Catholick Church (2) Conc. Florent ln Institut ArmenoruÌ„ Trid sess 7. can 1. hath defined the Sacraments to giue or conferre Grace to the worthie receiuer and that they joyntly with Faith and other vertues concurre to our
Iustification In like sort where Protestants teach only Baptisme and the Lords Supper to be Sacraments the Catholick Church beleeueth Seauen to wit Baptisme Confirmation Pennance Eucharist Orders Matrimonie and Extreme Vnction To examine now what is confessed herein from the Faith and Doctrine of the Fathers of the Primitiue Church and first concerning the efficacie of Sacraments S. Austin expressing the difference between the Sacraments of the Old Testament and ours affirmeth that (3) In Ps 73 And cont Faust l. 19. c. 13. In Ps 72. In Io tract 11. 41. The Sacraments of the New Testament giue Saluation whereas The Sacraments of the Old Testament did but promise the Sauiour This his saying is so direct against Protestants that Musculus blusheth not to say (4) loc com p. 299. It was spoken by Austine without consideration And the like reprehension is made by Caluin But (5) Inst l. 4 c. 15. Sect. 7 Musculus not satisfyed with reproof only of S. Augustin reprehendeth further the Fathers in General for that sayth he (6) loc com p. 299. They attribute greater efficacie to our Sac aments then to the Sacraments of the Old Testament affirming ours to be effec ual signes of Grace not oâ—ly signifying the same as the others did but also conferring and giuing Grace and Saluation This efficacie or conferring of Grace the Fathers exemplify in Baptisme insomuch that the Centurists write thus (7) Cent 3. c. 4. col 82. Cyprian dareth to affirme that the person baptizing giueth the Holie-Ghost and inwardly sanctifyeth him that is baptized And (8) Cens. 3. col 247. Cyprian thinketh al sinnes to be taken away in Baptisme And (9) Cent. 3. col 260. Origen truly taught concerning the effect of Baptisme that the filth of Sinne was taken away thereby Trac 35. in Math. and hom 15. in Iosuam In like sort of other Fathers most ancient as Iustin Clement c. it is confessed by the Centurists that they (10) Cent 2. c. 4. col 47. Thought Regeneration to be wrought by baptisme the word vnto which two ioyned togeather they attribute efficacie that is to say remission of sinnes But Zuinglius auoucheth in general that (11) Tom. 2 de bap f. 70. And see Luth. To 2. fol. 229. It was a great errour of the old Doctours in that they supposed the external water of Baptisme to be of anie value towards the purging of sinne But the Fathers were so ful herein that as D. Whitâ—k r (12) l 10. cont Dur. p. 883. Sarc loc com â—om 1. f. 232 and Sarcerius acknowledge they condemned the Manichees amongst other errours in that They did deny that sinnes were remitted and Grace conferred in Baptisme From hence the ancient Doctours taught so great necessitie of Baptisme that they firmely beleeued that ChildreÌ„ dying vnbaptised could not be saued M. Carthwright testifyeth that (13) In Whitguift Def p. â—22 S. Austin was of mind that children could not be saued without baptisme For which his opinion he further chargeth him with (14) Ibid. p 516. Absurditie And the same is acknowledged by (15) Disp Ratisb p 398. Bul. Dec. 5. Ser. 8. p. 1049. Dil. Disp breu p. 4. 5. Bucer Bullinger Dilingam who alledgeth to this end sundrie particular Sayings of S. Austin And Musculus confesseth 16) Loc. com p. 308. that Austin and some other Fathers were of the same opinion S. Cyprian also is reproued for the same Doctrine by Scultetus 17) Medulla Theol. p 370 saying These blemishes are noted in Cyprian c. that he thinketh Baptisme to be absolutely and simply necessarie Vrbanus Rhegius affirmeth that (18) In parte 1. oper in Catechismo min. f. 105. The Scripture and Authoritie of the ancient Church constraine him to beleeue that litle children dying vnbaptized are damned And by reason of this necessitie the Fathers doubted not as Caluin sayth (19) Inst l 4 c. 15. sec 20. almost from the verie beginning of the Church to vse the Baptisme of Lay-persons in danger of death Concerning the number of the Sacraments it is to be obserued that the Fathers not foreknowing our present Controuersie therof did but speake of them as also of other poynts of Faith casually as occasion was ministred and so accordingly S. Austin sometimes mentioneth but one sometimes two and sometimes more (20) In Ps 103. Con. 1. De Bap. cont Don. l. 5. c. 20. ep 119. c. 7. therfore it is sufficient if the Fathers in this sort do make mention of al our Sacraments And yet in our behalf the testimonie of Luther is verie strong who writing of this poynt obiecteth thus (21) Tom 2. Wittemb de Capt. Babyl f. 84. But thou wilt say what do you answer to Dionisius who numbreth vp six Sacraments c. I answer sayth Luther that he alone of the old Writers is to be had for seauen Sacraments although omitting Matrimonie he only reciteth six And the like is confessed by him of D. Humfrey (22) Iesuit part 2. p. 519. who affirmeth that S. Dionisius in this respect displeased Luther (23) Exam. part 2. p. 7. Chemnitius confesseth out of S. Cyprian that he numbrelh fiue Sacraments and only euadeth that the Sermon de Ablutione Pedum is not S. Cyprians but forged vnder his name In like sort where Tertulian casually mentioneth diuers of our Sacraments namely Baptisme Extreme Vnction Confirmation Orders the Eucharist saying most wittily (24) l. De Resur Carnis c. 8. The flesh is washed that the soule may be cleansed the flesh is annoyled that the soule may be consecrated the flesh is signed that the soule may be armed The flesh is couered with Imposition of hands that the soule may be enlightned with the Spirit the flesh eateth the Body and Bloud of Christ that the soule may be fatted to God This Saying is so displeasing to Protestants that M. Parker in great choller demandeth (25) Against Symb. part 1 sec 11. p. 77 p. 2. sec 10. p. 132. Who can brooke it But more in particular concerning Chrisme or Confirmation sundrie Protestants (26) Ministers of Lincolne Dioc. in their Abridgment p. 40. And see Park against Symbol p. 1. p. 133. reproue Tertulian Cyprian Ambrose with errour of vsing the Crosse in Confirming those that were baptised M. Parkins sayth (27) Vol. 2 p 653. This vnction pertayned to Baptisme in the West til aboue Three hundred yeares after Christ for then was there another Confirmatorie vnction deuised by Melchiades or as some say before him by Vrbane the first who liued about Anno 223. S. Cyprian teaching that 28 l 1. ep 12 It is necessarie that he who is Baptised receiuing Chrisme should also be annoynted the (29) Cent. 2 col 125. Centurists reproue him for the same affirming further that in these ancient times vnction and imposition of hands followed Baptisme of which Tertulian c. which custome
opinion The Adoration of the Sacrament And wheras Nazianzene orat 11. telleth how his diseased Sister Gorgonia prostrated herself beforâ— the Aulter and calling vpon him who is worshipped on it O miracle sayth he she departed presently receauing health D. Fulk (35) In Resp ad Stapleton de Successâ—one Eccl. p. 230. merely trifleth in his answear hereto being inforced to say that The Eucharist vpon the Aulter was not adored by her although it was had in great reuerence and peraduenture not without Superstition But Hospinian (36) Hist Sacr. part 1. p. 470. plainly tearmeth Gorgonia's fact wicked and Superstitious S. Ambrose in orat praepar ad Missam (31) In his Reioynder to Bristow answere to Sanders p. 687. is so plaine in this poynt that the Centurists (37) Cent. 4. col 437. do therfore affirme of those prayers of S. Ambrose that They contayne the Adoration of the Bread in the Sacrament And the same is acknowledged by M. Parkins (38) In his Probl p. 21. Crispi of the Church p. 87 Crispinus And yet are those prayers acknowledged and alledged for the writings of S Ambrose (39) In his true Differ par 4. p 622. by D. Bilson Lastly the general custome of the Primitiue Church in this poynt is acknowledged 40) Assert Theol part sec 47. by Marbachius in these words As concerning the most ancient custome which the Church vsed in shewing to the People the Eucharist to be adored in the Masse c. Thirdly In regard of this Adoration Consecration being made the Eucharist was Eleuated that the people might see and adore it accordingly as is now vsed in the Roman Church Insomuch that the Protestant Pelargus (41) Schola fidei Art 10. fol 1. 5. relateth that Basile maketh mention in his book of the Holie-Ghost or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or shewing but this was no other then the Papists Eleuation vsed in the times of Basil c. And Altkircharus (42) De Mystico Inâ—ruento Saerifiâ—io p. 79. 348. reciting these words of S. Basile de Spiritu Sancto c. 27. who hath left in writing the words of Inuocation when the bread of the Eucharist and Cup of benediction is shewed affirmeth the answerable performance therof to be In Eleuatione in the Eleuation yea he alledgeth (43) Ibid. p. 105. both S. Basile S. Chrysostome as mentioning and affirming the holie Eleuation Fourthly from the same root of Real presence proceeded that ancient custome in the holie Fathers of receiuing the Eucharist fasting according to that of S. Austin ep 118. c. 6. It pleased the Holie-Ghost and was vniuersally obserued that our Lords Bodie should enter into the mouth of a Christian before other meates and that for this reason sayth he In honorem tanti Sacramenti In honour of so great a Sacrament (44) Hist Sacr. part 1. l 2 p 48. Sepperus de Saâ—r p. 804. Hospinian hauing alledged this verie Saying affirmeth therof that Austine insinuateth not obscurely this fast to haue been an Apostolical Tradition And wheras Tertulian l. 2. ad Vxor. affirmeth that the Eucharist is to be receaued before al meate the same is confessed in him by the (45) Cent 3 col 132. Centurists Fiftly in those ancient times in due Reuerence to this most holie Sacrament the Laytie before Receiuing forbore for some time the companie of their wiues A Doctrine so manifest in S. Hierome that D. Fulk (46) Against Heskins Sanders c. p. 458. in this case acknowledgeth Hieroms admonition giuen to marryed persons to abstayne from companie with their wiues c. which he there tearmeth vnworthie and Popish Diuinitie And yet Hospinian (47) Hist Sacr. part 1. l. 2. p. 46. see OsiaÌ„d Cent. 4 p. 180. confesseth in general that In the Primitiue Church the Eucharist was receiued chastly And this particularly he demonstrateth in sundrie ancient Fathers for which verie poynt also Zepperus (48) De Sacram p. 805 reprehendeth the Elibertine Councel Tertulian Hierome and S. Hieroms sundrie Sayings to the same effect are confessed and reprehended by the (49) Cent. 4 c. 7. col 487. Chemnit Exam part 3. p. 61. Centurists Chemnitius (50) Exam. part 3 p. 50. 58. for the same reproueth Origen But Hos inian (51) Hist Sacr part 1. l. 2. p. 132. reprehendeth and alledgeth herein Siricius Innocentius Calixtus Vrbanus the 2. Councel of Arles the Councels of Neocesarea Carthage Sixtly wheras according to Protestants Doctrine the Eucharist is no Sacrament vnles it be receaued our contrarie Catholicâ— Doctrine and practise of Reseruation is so agreable with the Primitiue Church that D. Fulk (53) Against Heskins c. p 77. confesseth hereof saying That the Sacrament of some was reserued in the elder dayes of the Church is not so great a Controuersie as whether it ought to be reserued And Caluin (54) Instit l. 4. c. 17. sec 39. acknowledgeth The Reseruation of the Sacrament to be the example of the ancient Church Chemnitius (55) Exam. part 2. p. 102. also testifyeth that witnesses of this custome of priuate Reformation of the Eucharist are Tertulian Cyprian Ambrose Hierome Basile c. And that certain of the ancient Fathers greatly commended the same as Nazianzene Ambrose c. And that it was an ancient Custome spread abroad and long continued Insomuch as Peter Martyr can not but acknowledge that by the testimonie of Cyril the Anthropomorphites were specially condemned for their impugning of the Sacraments Reseruation For wheras S. Cyril ad Calosyrium sayth I heare they say that the mystical blessing if anie remnants therof do remayne til the next day following is vnprofitable to sanctification but they are mad in so saying for Christ is not made another neither shal his Bodie be changed but the vertue of blessing and liuelie Grace doth alwayes remayne in it Peter Martyr (56) Contrae Gardiner de Euchar. obiect 213. col 838. mentioning this verie sentence of S. Cyril affirmeth therof that wheras it is added that the Remnants of the Eucharist reserued til the day following doe not cease from Sanctification this I think belongeth to a certaine receaued custome c. which Custome though it sauour of some Superstition yet Cyril and others subscribed vnto it for forthwith euen from the times of the Apostles by litle litle it began to degenerat from that ancient simplicitie of Gods worship (52) Willee in his Synop. p. 460. Crispinus (57) Of the Estate of the Church p. 87. speaking of Constantins time affirmeth that Such as made anie great voyage by Sea or Land carryed the Eucharist D. Field confesseth that (58) Of the Church l. 3. c. 34. p. 149. In the Primitiue Church the manner of manie was to receaue the Sacrament and not to be partakers of it presently but to carry it home with them and to receiue it priuatly when they were disposed as Tertulian
ridiculously that reason truth compelleth vs to dissent from them And agayne (55) In omnes Pauli Epist in Hebr. 7. p. 924. How much the more do I admire so manie old Doctours of the Church to be possessed with this opinion that they wil persist in the oblation of Bread wine for thus they say Christ is a Priest according to the order of Melchisedech but Melchisedech offred bread wine therefore the Sacrifice of Bread and wine agreeth to the Sacrifice of Christ D. Fulk (56) Against Hoskins c. p 100. admitteth that It is granted that Cyprian thought the bread wine brought forth by Melchisedech to be a figure of the Sacrament that herein also Melchisedech resembled the Priesthood of Christ And agayne (57) Against Heskins c. p. 99. And see against Rhem. Tâ—st in Hebr. c. 7. sec 8. f. 405. Whitak cont Dur. p. 818. 819. more in general I confesse that diuers of the old Fathers were of opinion that the bread wine which Melchisedech brought forth was sacrificed by him that it was a figure of the Sacrament which they improperly cal a Sacrifice (58) De opificio Missae l. 1. p 28. It is not lawful sayth Chrastouius for Christian Pastours to cast away the consent harmonie of Interpretation that both for the neernes of the Apostolical Age as also for the singular agreement of al which is had in al places c. Al as it were conspiring that the Sacred oblation of Melchisedech is proposed that not only it may be thought to be offred to the Souldiers of Abraham but also an vnbloudy Sacrifice to God The ancient Iewes also were so agreable with vs herein that the Protestant Bibliander doubteth not to affirme that (59) De S. Trinitate l. 2. p. 89. with the Ancient Iewes it was a most receiued opinion that at the câ—ming of the blessed Messias al Legal Sacrifices were to cease only the Sacrifice Thoda of thankes-giuing to be celebrated c. and that to be done with bread wine (60) In his Defence c. p 473. See Parker against Symbolizing part 1. c. 2. p. 103. euen as Melchisedech King of Salem Priest c. brought forth bread and wine The Fathers also likewise much vrge the necessitie of mingling water with wine in the Chalice before oblation and consecration D. Whitguift affirmeth that Cyprian was greatly ouerseen in making it a matter so necessarie in Celebration of the Lords Supper to haue water mingled with wine which was at that time no doubt Common â—o more then to him Carthwright (61) In Whitguift Def. p. 525. acknowledgeth that In the mingling of water with wine a necessitie great mysterie was placed as may appeare both by Iustin Martyr Cyprian And M Iewel (62) In his Reply p. 34. See Schultetus in Med. Theo. p. â—70 also confesseth that Indeed S. Cyprian certain old Fathers spake of it force it much wheras not one new Protestant doth either allow or practise the same But D. Morton (63) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 142. is content to refer this new Romish Custome vnto Pope Alexander the supposed Authour thereof sayth he But may not D. Morton blush to cal it New Romish Custome and yet referre it to Pope Alexander who liued almost within a Hundred yeares after Christ Here then we may conclude that our Sacrifice of the Masse was not only allowed and vsed by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church but withal acknowledged by them to be truly a Sacrifice Propitiatorie for the remission of sinnes As also that the same was truly represented by the Sacrifice of Melchisedech offring bread and wine Now the Fathers confessed and reproued by Protestants for our forsayd doctrine of Masse are S. Gregorie Gregorie Turonensis Pelagius Symmachus Leo Austin Ambrose Nyssene Cyril Arnobius Athanasius Cyprian Origen Tertulian Ireneus Alexander Clemens Anacletus Ignatius As also the Councels of Ephesus Antioch the Second and Fourth of Carthage of Constantinople of Arles the Fathers in general The Protestants acknowledging and reprouing the forsayd Fathers are the Centurists Caluin Melancthon Carion Szegedine Hospinian Chitraeus Musculus Marcus Pelargus Osiander Chrastouius Chemnitius Sebastianus Francus Zepperus Schultetus Fox Whitaker Symonides Ascham Fulk Field Whiteguift Iewel Morton It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church taught and beleeued the Power of Priests to Remission of Sinnes The necessitie of Auricular Confession The Imposition of Pennance and satisfaction to God thereby As also our Roman Doctrine of Pardons or Indulgences CHAPTER X. COncerning the Sacrament of Pennance the (1) Bellarm. de Paenitent l. 1. c. 10. l. 3. c. 2. l. 4. c. 5. Catholick Church teacheth First That God hath giuen truly and properly to Bishops and Priests as his instruments Power and Authoritie to forgiue sinne Secondly That sinners are bound to confesse their Sinnes in particular to Priests Thirdly That the sayd Priests are to impose Pennance or punishment vpon the Penitent after Confession of his Sinnes and that the Penitent in satisfaction is to performe the same by Prayer Fasting Almes-deeds and the like Now the Protestant Church hauing no true Subsistence but being a mere Negation or denial of true Religion directly (2) Instit l. 4 c. 19 §. 15 B za in CoÌ„f. fiâ—â—ci 7. art 11. denyeth al the foresayd Poynts taught and practised by the Roman Church What the Primitiue Church beleeued and practised herein I wholy referre to the plentiful Confe sions and testimonies euen of Protestant Writers And to begin with S. Gregorie Osiander (3) Cent. 6. p. 288. chargeth him that he teacheth vntruly of Pennance And the Centurists (4) Cent. 6. c. 10 p. 748. reprehend him for his opinion of Confession c. Pennance Satisfaction D. Morton acknowledgeth that S. Gregorie (5) Prot Appeale l. 1 sec 23. p. 26. indeed requireth that after man hath confessed his sinnes he should take reuenge of himself by penitential exercises c. S. Hierome tearming Pennance The second Table after Shipwrack Caluin (6) Inst l 4. c. 19. §. 17. reproueth him saying But it is the Saying of Hierome whose soeuer it is it can not be denyed but that it is plainly impious if it be expounded in their sense And as concerning the Power and Authoritie of Priests to remit sinne the denyal therof was reprehended in Acesius by the Emperour Constantin for the Centurists (7) Cent. â— col 653. report that Acesius his opinion was that al men should be exhorted to Pennance but the hope of remission of sinnes should be expected not from Priests but from God But when Acesius had sayd these things the Emperour added â— Acesius set a Ladder and clime alone to heauen This Historie is likewise confessed by Osiander (8) Cent. 4. p. 119. Chemnitius (9) Exam. part â— p. 188 part 2. p.
193. Now because Priests without knowledge and Confession of sinnes can not discerne or iudge when or what Sinnes are to be remitted or retayned It is further likewise confessed that in the Primitiue Church Confession auricular and particular of sinnes to the Priest was taught and practised And though (10) Contra Duraeum l. 7. p. 490. D. Whitaker doth affirme that Innocentius the Third was the first that instituted Auricular Confession for necessarie yet S. Leo who liued almost eight hundred yeares before this Innocentius is charged with like Innouation by M. Symonides (11) Vpon the Reuel p. 57. saying Leo the First first brought-in Auricular Confession And then presently after he citeth S. Leo his owne words for Auricular Confession And wheras long before Innocentius the Iacobites were condemned for affirming that we are to confesse our sinnes to God only And that Confession of Sinnes to a Priest is not needful this is acknowledged by the Protestant (12) p. 126. Authour of Catholick Traditions But to clear also S. Leo of al Nouellisme in this hehalf It is confessed by the Centurists (13) Cent. 4. col 425. And see col 426. that euen in the time of Constantin who liued aboue One hundred yeares before S. Leo that the Christians as then To this end had a Priest c. appoynted to whom those coming who had sinned should confesse the sinnes they had committed c. And the Priest vpon that condition absolued those who Confessed that they should desire from him Pennance for their Sinnes Yea they arise higher and plainly confesse (14) Cent. 3. c. 6. col â—27 that in the times of Cyprian Tertulian priuat Confession of thoughts and lesser sinnes was vsed and thought necessarie and their words are these Absolution from sinnes was so giuen that those who did Pennance first confessed their sinnes For so doth Tertulian greatly vrge Confession in his book of Pennance and that priuat Confession was vsual wherein they confessed their crimes as also their wicked thoughts it appeareth by some places of Cyprian as in the Fift Sermon de Lapsis third book of Epistles ep 14. 16. where he plainly sayth Euen for lesser sinnes which are not committed directly against God it is needful to go to Confession and this he commandeth to be done often l. 1. ep 3. c. Thus far the Centurists Confession being made by the Penitent to the Priest the Centurists (15) Cent. 3. col 127 81. 38. 49. 82. And see Caluin Instit l. 4. c. 12. §. 8. And Conc. Laodicenum Can. 2. apud Osiand ceÌ„t 4 p 386. further confesse that Pennance or Satisfaction was enioyned according to the offence And that the Priest (16) Cent. 4. col 425. 426. And see col 491. 834. 868. did absolue those who confessed their sinnes vpon that condition that they would demand punishment for the same And D. Whitaker (17) Cont. Camp rat 5. p. 78. acknowledgeth that Cyprian Tertulian thought by such their external discipline of life to pay the paynes due for sinnes and to satisfy Gods Iustice And that Not Cyprian only but almost al the most Holie Fathers of that time were in that errour So likewise Melancthon (18) In his Libelli aliquot fol. 10. 11. 16. disliketh that Cyprian vrgeth Canonical Pennance c. and confirmeth the opinion as though they were necessarie that for them sinnes are forgiuen c. In like sort the whole Nycene Councel ouercome with the consent of the multitude and time approued the Canons of Pennance And for the same doctrine he reproueth the (19) Ibid. fol. 19. 28. Carthage Councel S. Chrysostome Chemnitius (20) Exam. part 4. p. 68. chargeth the Fathers in general saying I am not ignorant that the Old Fathers do sometimes ouer largely and with words ouer loftie command that Canonical discipline As that Tertulian sayth by these Satisfactions sinnes are purged Cyprian sayth by them sinnes are redeemed washed cured Ambrose by them the paynes of Hel are recompensed Augustin God by them is pacifyed for sinnes past And such like Sayings there are which with true Faith neither can nor ought to be taken as they sound And Hamelmanus auoucheth that Cyprian seemeth fouly to haue erred concerning Satisfaction Yea sayth Caluin (22) Pref. Inst ad Reg. Galliae And see Inst l. 3. c. 4. §. 38. Those things which euerie foot occurre in the works of the Old Writers or Fathers touching Satisfaction moue me but litle (21) De Tradit l. 2. c. 7. col 97. for I see that diuers of them I wil say simply as it is almost al whose works are extant either haue erred in this matter or haue spoken ouer crabbedly hardly And agayne (23) Inst l. 3 4 c. 12. §. 8. The immoderate Austeritie of the ancient Fathers can no wayes be excused it differed wholy from the Commandment of our Lord was verie dangerous here their wisdome was to be required As also (24) Inst l. 3 c 3. §. 16. The ancient Writers exceeded measure with â—mmoderat prayses they commended that corporal Discipline They were more seuere in exacting chastisements then Ecclesiastical lenitie doth permit And the Centurists speaking of the Third Age affirme that (25) Cent. 3. p. 81. Most of the Doctours of this Age do wonderfully depraue the doctrine of Pennance yea they spare not to say of the Age next to the Apostles that (26) Cent. 2. p. 62. Euen then this part of Doctrine concerning Pennance began to be weakned Now as concerning Indulgences or Pardons of temporal punishment It is confessed by M. Symonides (27) Vpon the Reuel p. 84. that S. Gregorie remitted Canonical Penance promised clean remission of sinnes to such as frequented Churches on set dayes M. Bale (28) In Act. Rom. Pontif. p. 46 47. affirmeth that Gregorie confirmed by Indulgences Pilgrimages to Images for the deuotion of the people And that He was a defender of Pardons yet not a seller As also that He first granted Pardons for set dayes and to such as visited Churches In like manner Pantaleon (29) In Chr. p. 48. auoucheth of him that He first granted pardon of sinnes to the people visiting Churches vpon set dayes In Decret in 3. psal Paenit (30) In his Euseb Capt. published by Pâ—zelius vnder the Title of Act. 1. diei de Indulgentijs fol. 48. Hieronymus Marius thinketh that Gregorie the First and Boniface the Eigth were the chief authours of Pardons Cyprian (31) In his Treatise of the liues of Popes Engl. p. 32. also Valera confesseth of S. Grogorie that he granted Pardons but sold them not And D. Humfrey (32) In Iesuit part 2. rat 5. p 5. 627. repeating sundrie Catholick poynts of Faith taught and brought into England by S. Gregorie S. Austin inferreth from them in these words From al which what els is intended but that Pardons Monachisme Papistrie
and euen the whole Chaos of Popish Superstition be builded vp But to cleare S. Gregorie of al Innouation in this point of Doctrine The Centurists acknowledge that (33) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 692. S. Chrysostom mentioneth dayes of Indulgence and Pardon And D. Field (34) Of the Church l. 1. c. 17. p. 33. confesseth that The Ancient Bishops were wont to cut off great partes of enioyned Pennance which remission was called an Indulgence Now to conclude Confession being made and Pennance inioyned the Priest as the Centurists confesse for the practise of the Third Age did afterwards absolue the Penitent euen with the now-like vsed ceremonie of imposing his hand So that the Primitiue and our present Roman Church do confessedly agree in the doctrine of Pennance First As that Priests haue truly Power to remit Sinnes Secondly that Auricular Confession is necessarie Thirdly that after Confession Pennance is to be imposed Fourthly (35) Cent. 3 col 127. that the same is truly Satisfactorie Fiftly after Pennance Absolution is giuen with Imposition of hands Sixtly yea Pardons and Indulgences are acknowledged to be granted and vsed in those purest times of the Church Primitiue Now the Fathers cited and reproued by Protestants for our foresayd doctrines are S. Gregorie Leo Chrysostom the Doctours in the Age of Constantin Ambrose Augustin Cyprian Tertulian the Carthage Councel the 1. Councel of Neece and the Fathers in general The Protestants accusing them are the Centurie-writers Caluin Chemnitius Melancthon Hamelmanus Osiander Hieronimus Marius Pantaleon Valera Symonides Bale Humfrey Field Morton and Whitaker It is granted by Protestants that the Catholick Doctrine of Purgatorie and of Prayer and Sacrifice for the dead was beleeued taught and practised by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church CHAPTER XI WHAT more generally disliked by Protestants then our Catholick doctrine of Purgatorie and our charitable pracise of Praying Sacrificing for the dead And yet what more generally confessed by Protestants to haue been the beleef and custome of the Primitiue Church then Purgatorie Prayer and Sacrifice for the dead Concerning S. Gregorie D. Humfrey (1) In Iesuit part 2. rat 5 p. 5. 627. acknowledgeth that he taught vs Englishmen by the preaching of S. Austin the doctrine of Purgatorie c. the oblation of the healthful Sacrifice Prayers for the dead (2) In Chro. l. 4. p. 567. 568. Carion confesseth that he approued the opinion of the oblation of Christs Bodie Bloud to be made for the dead Iohn Bale (3) In Act. Rom. Pontif. p. 44. 45. 46. 47. is of opinion that he made his foure books of Dialogues for the vpholding of Purgatorie c. and admitted euen Masses for the dead The Magdeburgians (4) In the Index of the 6. Centurie at the word Gregorie charge him out of his owne writings with the Doctrine of Purgatorie c. (5) Cent. 6. col 373. and with oblation of Sacrifice for the dead D. Fulk (6) Ag. Rhem. Test in 1 Cor. 3. sayth In the dayes of Gregorie c. the opinion of Purgatorie had gotten some ground in the Latin Church c. yet in the place by the Rhemistes quoted he granteth it but for very smal offences D. Sutcliffe auoucheth that Gregorie (7) Subuersion c. 4. vsed Litanies allowed Purgatorie c. And wheras D. Whitakers confidently auoucheth that (8) Contra Duraeum l. 7. p. 480. He that first deliuered Purgatorie for a certaine Doctrine was Gregorie the Great Yet M. Symonides (9) Vpon the Reuel p 83. only chargeth him not with beginning but with increasing two pernitious things in the Church Inuocation of the Dead and Prayer for the dead yea D. Morton confesseth that S. Gregory (10) Prot. Appeale l 1. Sec. 17. p. 19. â—0 frameth thus his conclusions Because such Soules departed appearing after desire the help of the liuing the Sacrifice of the Altar is profitahle for them Wherupon our Doctour concludeth saying This doth giue vs cause to obserue in him a deep plunge into Superstition And againe S. Augustin spake with a Peraduenture but S. Gregorie kindled the fire with a Credo c. And now of late the Romanists haue blowâ—e the flame with an Anathema So hotly do Roman Catholicks follow the Sent giuen by S Gregorie and S. Augustin But to clear S. Gregorie of al Innouation in this poynt (11) Ibid. p. 498. I wil ascend to his predecessours and Ancients And to begin with S. Augustin whom though D. Morton pretendeth to speak hereof only with a Paraduenture or doubtfully yet Bullinger hauing perused diuers places of S. Augustins writings concerning this poynt auoucheth (12) De origâ—â— Erroriâ— f. 223. That not in one but in manie places Augustin maketh mention of Sacrifice for the dead c. in Enchirid. c. 109. for it is not to be denyed sayth he but that the Soules of the dead are releeued by the pietie of their liuing friends when the Sacrifice of the Mediatour is offered for them c. And in his 32. sermon de Verbis Apostoli This sayth he deliuered from the Fathers the whole Church obserueth that prayer be made for them who dyed in the Communion of the Bodie and Bloud of Christ when in their place they are remembred in the Sacrifice and the Sacrifice also is offered for them This therfore sayth Bullinger I set downe more at large that thou mayst vnderstand this custome of Sacrificing for the dead to be ordayned not by the Apostles but by the holie Fathers D. Willet affirmeth That diuers of the ancient Fathers (13) Tetrastylon part 3. p. 97. did incline too much to maintayne and commend prayer for the dead with which errour sayth he S. Austin seemeth somewhat to be infected Augustine sayrh Caluin (14) Instâ—t l. 3. c. 5. § 10 in his books of Confessions telleth that his mother Monica earnestly desired that Memorie of her might be made at the Altar in performing the mysteries An old womans desire sayth Caluin which her Sonne squared not by the rule of Scripture but through affection of Nature would haue it approued to others D. Fulk confesseth that (15) In his Confut of Purgat p. 1â—0 Austin de Ciuitate Dei l. 21. c. 13. concludeth verie clearly that some suffer temporal paynes after this life this may not be denyed Yea he boldly auoucheth that Austin (16) Ibid. p 313. blindly defended prayer for the dead D. Morton affirmeth that Protestant Authours (17) Prot. Appeal p. 495. haue obserued S. Augustin to haue been the first who opened the window vnto the doctrine of Purgatorie by whose owne direction sayth he we haue a good warrant to dissent from him c. So admitting S. Austin for Purgatorie but most disgraciously insinuating that therin he is contrarie to himself which as most palpably vntrue I forbeare to confute and only proceed cleerly to shew that neither S. Austin was first nor the sole man that opened
the window herein as our Doctour with his other Brethren haue blindly obserued To which effect D. Fulk acknowledgeth that S. Ambrose (18) In his Confutation of Purgat p 78. 320. 326 202. allowed prayer for the Dead and that it was the common errour of his time As also (19) Ibid. p 194. And see Cent. 5. c. 6. col 675. that Chrysostom Hierome allowed prayer for the dead And Chemnitius confesseth the same of Ambrose (20) Exam. part 3. p. 93. 94. Prudentius Hierome and further reprehendeth S. Epiphanius (21) Ibid. p. 107. as not daring to refute such opinions of the common people as also S. Augustin S. Chrysostom for yeelding ouer much herein to the custome of the time and the receaued opinions of the vulgar (22) De Ratione Refor Eccl. Edic Gal. I do not deny sayth Caluin these prayers for the Dead to haue been receiued by S. Chrysostom Epiphanius S. Austin and such others because they had them from their Predecessours c. But these good men whom I haue named with ouer much credulitie without al discretion Iudgement followed that which within short time had gotten authoritie Osiander testifyeth that 23 Pelagius the Second decreed that Memorie of the dead should be made in euerie Masse after the Eleuation of the healthful Hoste Which decree is obserued euen vnto this day Melancthon chargeth the whole Councel of Carthage herewith saying (24) In his Libelli aliquot c. f. 19. and see Apol. Conf Aug c. de vocabulis Missae f. 216 The fourth Carthage Councel contayneth a Decree of Prayer Sacrifice for the dead in these words c. D. Fulk acknowledgeth that this forefather (25) In his Answer to a Counterf Cath. p. 44. Aerius taught that prayer for the Dead was vprofitable as witnes sayth he both Epiphanius Austin which they count for an errour Hereunto agreeth Hospinian saying (26) Hist Sacr part 1. fol. 155. It was the common opinion of the vulgar that the Soules of the dead might something be holpen by the prayers Almes Sacrifices which are done vpon earth as is euidently vnderstood by the disputation of Epiphanius with Aërius D. Fulk not only reprehendeth (27) In his Confut. of Purgat p. 320. 294. 326. 349. Ambrose Chrysostome Austin for allowing Prayer for the dead but withal he admitteth that it (28) Ibid. p. 320. 326. 34â— 78. was the common errour of their times and that the errour of Purgatorie was somewhat rifely budded in Austins time (29) Ibid. p. 161. Yea answering to D. Allen he granteth that (30) Ibid. p. 78. Austin speaketh of the Amending fire in the place by M. Allen alledged He doth so indeed sayth D. Fulk but Austin had no ground of that fire but in the common errour of his time So confessedly was the Amending fire of Purgatorie the common doctrine of S. Austins time A truth so certayne that Chemnitius for the self same doctrine reprehendeth (31) Exam. part 3. p. 92. Clemens Alexandrinus (32) Ibid. p. 93. Ambrose Hierom (33) Ibid. p. 94. Prudentius (34) Ibid. And Fulk speaking of Constantin the Great who liued somewhat before these Fathers affirmeth that (35) In his Confut of Purg. p. 313. In the burial of Constantin there is mention of Prayer for his soule according to the errour of his time In like sort the Centurists obserue that (36) Cent. 4. col 454. a great multitude of people powred out their prayers with teares for the Soule of the Emperour And for the same doctrine of Purgatorie they accuse (37) Cent. 4. c. 4. p. 304. Lactantius Prudentius S. Hierome D. Beard speaking of Those fathers (38) Retractiue from Romish Religion p. 414. which do patronize Purgatorie mentioneth from Bellarmine Athanasius Basil Gregorie Nazianzene Neither was this so general practise of the people or vniforme consent in doctrine of these ancient Fathers anie Innouation or first beginning errour of their times For it is further confessed by D. Fulk that the doctrine of Purgatorie not began but (39) In his Retentiue c. p. â—06 preuayled sayth he within three hundred yeares after Christ And M. Gifford (40) In his DemoÌ„stratioÌ„ that our Brownistes be ful Donatistes p. 38. granteth that In the Churches publick worship to pray for the Soules of the dead and to offer oblation for the dead was general in the Church long before the dayes of Austin as appeareth sayth he in Cyprian Tertulian which was before him and neerer to the times of the Apostles So likewise Caluin (41) Inst l 3 c. 5. sec 10. acknowledgeth that aboue One thousand three hundred yeares since it was vsual that prayers should be made for the dead whatsoeuer hereof is read in the Ancient Writers was yeelded to the publick custome and to the ignorance of the people c. I confesse they were drawne headlong into Errour euen as inconsiderat Credulitie doth vsually depriue the minds of men of Iudgement And relating the Custome of making Commemoration of the dead in the Supper or Sacrifice that place of ease light and peace might be giuen to them he further sayth I do not deny this to haue been a most ancient Custome and because great is the force of Custome or rather Tyrannie therfore I confesse these prayers to haue been approued by Chrysostome Epiphanius Augustin and the like because as by hands they were deliuered to them from their Ancestours Beza speaking of the times of Cyprian Austin and Chrysostom confesseth that as then (42) Praef. in nouum Test ad Princ. Cond Prayers for the dead were begun to be vsed more freely The Protestant (43) In Apoc. p. 206 Ioannes Winkelmannus auoucheth that Origen decreed a Purgatorie wherin after this life some sinnes are purged The Centurists (44) Cent. 3. col 87. report that Thou mayst see some seedes of Purgatorie spread abroad in some places of Origen as hom 2. in psal 36. yea in the same place they alledge sundrie of Origens sayings affirming Purgatorie And (45) Cent. 3 col 265. in another place they acknowledge that Origen in his bookes de Principijs decreeth Purgatorie to be the punishment of Sinnes And for the same doctrine they reprehend (46) Cent. 3. col 138. 139. both Cyprian and Tertullian Yea other Protestants affirme of S. Cyprian S. Augustin S. Iohn Damascene in that they defend Prayer for the dead that (47) Clypeus fidei Dial. 11. p. 449. they are mere fooleries which they haue written of this matter And that such their doctrine is to be ascribed to ihe rash stupiditie wherewith their heades were moued seing they were deuoyd of the Holie-Ghost Chemnitius granteth that in the writings of Dionysius the Areopagite who was conuerted by the Apostles mention is made of Prayer (48) Exam. part 3. p. 110. for the dead in the Church And the like
is acknowledged of Dionysius by Melancthon (49) In aliquot libel c. fol. 23. D. Fulk 50) Against Purgatory p. 353. which D. Fulk in plainest words teacheth that Tertulian (51) Against Purgat p. 3â—2 see p 303. 393. Cyprian Austin Hierom and a great manie more do witnesse that Sacrifice for the dead is the Tradition of the Apostles Wherunto Bucer accordeth (52) In Enarrat in Sacra quatuor Euangel in Math. c. 12. p 311. affirming that prayer and almes were made for the dead almost from the verie beginning of the Church Lastly Zuinglius being impugned for denying Prayer for the dead and pressed with the Authoritie of Fathers especially of S. Chrysostom S. Augustin who deriue this Custome from the Apostles answereth thus (53) Tom. 1. Epicheroe de Can. Miss f. 186. And see Tom. 2. in Elench contra Anabap f. 10. If it be so as Augustin and Chrysostom report I think that the Apostles suffred certayne to pray for the dead for no other cause then to condescend to their infirmitie So insimulating the Apostles wilfully to haue permitted others to erre according to the errours of Protestants in praying for the Dead which they could not do without errour in themselues Yea the Doctrine of Purgatorie and Prayer for theÌ„ dead was beleeued and practised by the ancient true beleeuing Iewes For whereas M. Morton speaking of the Church before the coming of Christ affirmeth the doctrine then taught by the Iewes to be now knowne among other Reasons (54) Treat of Israel the Church p. 93. 94. By the open Confession of the Iewes in al Ages since the coming of Christ For sayth he it is plaine that they hold euen to this day those opinions which they receaued from their Ancestours and were commonly held of that Nation Yea say the Centurists (55) Cent. 8. col 885. The Iewes are constant in their opinions And Pet. Martyr writeth that (56) Com. plac in Engl. part 2. p. 599. The Iewes as yet continue and kept in so great aduersities in so diuers and griâ—uous Captiuities and Dispersions they hold stil their Religion Doubtles no ancient Troians Lumbards Hunnes or Vandals haue so held their owne c. and could shew their original Historie set forth in most true writing and being euerie where dispersed as they were could neuertheles keep their owne Ordinances c. Now concerning these Iewes so constant in their Faith and admitting the bookes of Machabees but only for a true Historie it is euident thereby that Iudas Machabeus a holie and iust man procured (57) 2. Machab 2.43.45 Sacrifice for the dead and that the Priests of Hierusalem then true beleeuers offred the same wherein also our later Iewes are so conformable that D. Whitaker confesseth the same in these words (58) Cont. Dur. l. 1. p. 85. I know that the Iewes haue libros memoriales books of Commemorations which they read in their Synagogues and I am not ignorant that now they are accustomed to vse certaine prayers for the Dead Insomuch that Buxdorsius also reporteth their knowne and confessed doctrine of Purgatorie (59) Synagoga Iudaica p. 24. 505. 506. 508. 275. D. Beard auoucheth that (60) Retractiue from the Romish Religion p. 77. The Romanists are like vnto the Iewes in their doctrine and practise of Prayer for the dead for they hold and teach that prayer Sacrifice is to be offered for the dead grounding their opinion partly vpon the example of Iudas Machabeus who as they affirme procured Sacrifice to be offered by the Priests for the dead c. and partly vpon the Thalmudical Traditions of diuers of their ancient Rabbins From the Premisses then we may remember that the ancient Fathers did confessedly beleeue a place of Purgatorie after this life Secondly wherin Sinnes were punished and remitted Thirdly for which Remission they vsed to Pray giue Almes and offer the most precious Sacrifice of Christs Bodie and Bloud Now the Fathers acknowledged and reprehended by Protestants for the forsayd Poynts are S. Gregorie Austin Ambrose Hierome Chrysostom Prudentius Epiphaenius Pelagius the Fourth Carthage Councel Cyprian Tertullian Origin Clemens Alexandrinus Dionysius the Areopagite the Apostles and the ancient beleeuing Iewes The Protestant Writers obseruing and disliking in the sayd Fathers the forsayd Poynts are Caluin Beza Bullinger Zuinglius the Centurie-writers Carion Chemnitius Osiander Melancthon Hospinian Winkelmannus Buxdorsius Bucer Symondes Bale Sutcliffe Humfrey Fulk Whitaker Gifford Willet Morton It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught our Catholick Doctrine of Christs Descending into Hel. CHAPTER XII ACcording to the Article of our Creed He descended into hel Catholicks generally teach that the Soule of Christ presently after his death descended into Hel or Lymbus Patrum or Abrahams Bosome there to deliuer and redeeme the Captiue Soules of the holie Patriarks Prophets and other Iust who liued before his time But Protestants being diuided amongst themselues (1) Buâ—er in c. 27. Mat. Beza in c. 2. Act. some of them teach that by the foresayd Article is only vnderstood that Christ descended to his Graue (2) Calu. Instit l. 2. c. 16. § 8 9. 10. 11. 12 others that he suffred the paynes of the Damned Soules Now do decide this Controuersie by the beleef and Doctrine of the Fathers of the Primitiue Church and that by the confessed acknowledgement of our Aduersaries who in a case so euident liberally confesse the general streame of ancient Doctours to be most aduerse vnto them in this verie Article of our Faith wheras that most holie and euer renowmed Cardinal Bellarmine in proofe of this Article alledged (3) Tom. 1. l 4. de Chri. Anima c. 14 the plaine testimonies of the Greek Fathers as namely of Iustin Ireneus Clemens Origen Eusebius Basil Nazianzen Nyssen Epiphanius Chrysostome c. And of the Latin Fathers Tertulian Hypolitus Cyprian Hilarie Gaudentius Prudentius Ambrose Hierome Ruffinus Austin Leo Fulgentius c The Protestant (4) Ad Bellarm Disput part 1. p. 176. Danaeus in answer to so manie most famous Fathers testimonies most barely affirmeth that As concerning them they were not instructed out of Gods word neither do they confirme their opinion from it but only from their owne coniectures c. Thus supposing their Catholick opinion herein and therefore reiecting al their iudgements as confirming their Faith only by their owne coniectures in Danaeus his opinion which as no lesse absurd in itself then improbable to al Iudicious I omit as an answer purely Protestantical In like plaine manner (5) Conc. Dur. l 8. p. 567 And see p. 773. D. Whitaker in answer to the like testimonies of the Fathers vrged by our Catholick Writer Duraeus writeth thus That which thou couldest not do by Scriptures no doubt thou wilt performe by the testimonies of the Fathers of whom that I may freely and briefly answer thee what I
think one litle word of Scripture hath more weight with me then a thousand Sayings of Fathers without Scriptures Therfore thou art not to expect that I seuerally wash away those errours of the Fathers So according to the custome of al Hereticks for their last refuge appealing to only Scripture and disclayming from the Doctrine of the ancient Fathers M. Iacob (6) In Bilsons ful RedeÌ„pt p. 188 And see Iacob in Def. of the Treat of Christs fuffringes p 199. 200. honestly acknowledgeth that Al the Fathers with one consent affirme that Christ deliuered the Soules of the Patriarcks and Prophets out of hel at his coming thither and so spoyled Satan of those that were in his present possession with whom agreeth herein D. Bilson (7) Vbi sup p. 189. And in his Suruey p. 656. And D. Barlow (8) Def. of the Articles of Prot. Relig p. 173. testifyeth that This passeth most rife among the Fathers who taking Inferi for Abrahams bosome expound it that Christ went thither ad liberandum liberandos to conuey the Fathers deceased before his Resurrection into the place where now they are A French Protestant (9) Catholick Tradit p. 112. 113. Writer not only affirmeth this to be the doctrine of Chrysostom a very true sayth he Catholick teacher but also of the now present Apostolick Churches of the East whereto sayth he In likelyhood the Christians of Affrick do consent And wheras S. Ignatius (10) Ep. ad Trallianos post med doth cleerly teach the same Doctrine the same is acknowledged in him (11) Def. of his Article c. fol. 22 Bislons Suruey p 657. 658. by D. Hil D. Bilson yea the Poloman (12) De Russorum c. Religione p. 122. 123. Protestant Lascicius doubteth not to affirme and deriue the Doctrine therof not only from S. Ignatius S. Iohns Scholler but also from S. Thadaeus one of the twelue Apostles (13) Math. 10 3. And withal answerably testifyeth herein the opinion and doctrine of the Hebrewes (14) Vbi sup p. 123. of the remote Christians both in Syria Aethiopia And the like acknowledgement of S. Thadaeus his opinion herein is made by (15) Palma Christiana p. 74. And see Eus Hist l 1. c vlt. Frigiuillaeus Gruuâ—us who speaking therof affirmeth that we haue the testimonie of Eusebius Pamphylus who in the Historie of Agbar King of the Edessens testifyeth Thadaeus the Apostle to haue preached before Agbar and others amongst other things the Descension of Christ to Hel c. And then further defending this Historie for Authentical he concludeth No man of mature iudgement wil impugne those things which Eusebius deliuereth of the preaching of Thadaeus at Edessa and the conuersion of Agbar to Christ Finally this testimonie of the holie Apostle Thadaeus is further defended by D. Bilson and sundrie times alledged and vrged by D Hil. The ancient Iewes did so certainly beleeue the Doctrine of Lymbus Patrum and the same is so cleerly taught (17) c. 24. 37. in the booke of Ecclesiasticus that D. Whitaker for his best answer finally betaketh himself to the reiecting (18) Conc. Dur. l. 8. p. 567. of the sayd booke for not Canonical But the falshood herof being formerly (19) See bef l. 2 c. 5. proued (16) Suruey of Christs suffrings p. 653. 654. 657. 660. 661. c. Hil Def. of this Art Christ DesceÌ„d c. and that from the Confession of other Protestants it sufficeth for this present that the sayd booke being but a true Historie doth yet fully manifest the Doctrine herin of the Ancient Iewes who liued before Christ In which regard also D. Beard (20) Retractâ—ue from Rom. Relig p. 78. affirmeth Catholicks to Iudaize in their doctrine of Lymbus Patrum and Purgatorie This Article then of our Creed that Christ after his death truly descended into Hel we see was the confessed Doctrine of S. Austin Leo Fulgentius Chrysostom Prudentius Hierom Ruffine Ambrose Hilarie Gaudentius Epiphanius Iustin Clemens Hippolytus Irenaeus Ignatius Thadaeus the Apostle and of al the Fathers and the ancient Iewes Now the Protestants producing and acknowledging the Fathers Doctrine herin to be Roman Catholick are Danaeus Lascicius Frigiuillaeus Gruuius Whitaker Bilson Hil Iacob Barlow Beard and others IT IS CONFESSED BY PROTESTANTS THAT THE Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and practised our Catholick Doctrine of praying to Angels and Saints CHAP. XIII ALthough the glorious Angels and blessed Saincts do not require or need in regard of themselues anie human Apologie for their deserued honour they being seated in the highest and strongest turrets of the kingdome of Heauen wherin new Triumphs they dayly winne against their Enemies and being as (a) l. de Mortalitate S. Cyprian sayth now secure of their owne immortalitie are yet careful of our securetie Yet if we respect either the general Calumnies and contempts of our modern Hereticks against them or our bounden duties by reason of so manie celestial Graces through their charitable suffrages bestowed vpon vs it may iustly be thought expedient or rather necessarie in their due defence and for sa isfaction of the Aduersarie briefly to set downe the confessed Doctrine and beleef of the Primitiue Church honouring and inuocating the sayd Angels and Saincts as Intercessours agreably as the Roman Church stil doth directly contrarie to our Modern Protestants refusing and impugning the same First then touching S. Gregorie the Great the Protestant Chronicler Carion affirmeth that (1) Chron. l. 4. p. 567. 568. Gregorie ordaâ—ned the publick Rite of Inuocation of Saincts M. Symonds only auoucheth that (2) Vpon the Reuelations p. 83.84.85.86 Gregorie increased two pernicious things in the Church Inuocation of the Dead aâ—d Prayer for the dead And that he wrote to Leontia to make S. Peter Protectour of the Empire in earth and Intercessour in Heauen c. He Sent Austin into England to conuert the English they which were sent spread forth a Banner with a painted Crucifix and so came in Procession to the king singing Litanies in a strange tongue Now one chief part of the Litanie contayneth Inuocation of Saincts Luke Osiander (3) Cent. 6. p. 288. reciting manie Catholick poynts of Faith taught and beleeued by S. Gregorie numbreth amongst the rest that He approued cloaked and defended the Inuocation of Saincts and their worship (4) In the Index of the sixt Century at the word Gregory The Centurie writers numbring vp in like sort the pretended Popish Errours of S. Gregorie charge him with Inuocation of Saints Wâ—th whom agreeth (5) In Iesuitis part 2. r at 5. p. 5. 627. D. Humfrey reprehending S. Gregorie for publick Inuocation of Saints and their worship (6) Cent. 6. c. 131. col 17. And the Centurists further confesse that Gregorie the Great reciteth manie miracles c. which plainly confirme Superstition as confidence in Saints Inuocation of the dead c. Wee need not therefore
sayth D. Morton (7) Prot. Appeal l. 1. sec 24 p. 27. be greatly moued with the contrarie Doctrine of S. Gregorie allowing praying to Saincts c. And agayne Neuertheles as we find in him very rarely anie prayer vnto Saints c So desiring to mince but not daring to deny a truth so manifest and for such confessed by so manie of his other Brethren of S. Gregorie his defending Inuocation of Saints But to ascend from S. Gregorie to other more ancient Doctours (8) Exam. part 3. p. 211. Chemnitius alleageth S. Austin inuocating S. Cyprian and coÌ„cludeth saying therof These things did Augustin without scripture yeelding to the times and custome Prudentius I grant sayth D. Whitaker (9) Answer to Campian Reas 5. p. 140. 141. as a Poet somtims called vpon the Martyrs whose Acts he describeth in verse And the superstitious Custome of praying to Saints had now taken deep root in the Church which as a Tyrant haled somtimes the holie Fathers into the same errour [10) In his Reioynder to Bristow p 5. D. Fulk spareth not to speak thus plainly I confesse sayth he that Ambrose Austin and Hierom held Inuocation of Saints to be lawful And that (11) Against the Rhem. Test in 2. Pet. c. 1. sec 3. fol. 443. In Nazianzene Basil and Chryostome is mention of Inuocation of Saints And that Theodoret also speaketh of prayers vnto Martyrs As also that Leo ascribeth much to the prayers of S. Peter for him And in brief that manie of the ancient Fathers held that the Saints departed pray for vs. (12) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 675. The Centurists charge S. Chrysostom's Lyturgie with Inuocation of our B. Ladye by name Chemnitius (13) Exam. part 3. 200. auoucheth that About the yeare of our Lord three hundred and seauentie Inuoâ—aâ—ion of Saints began to be brought into the publick assemblies of the Church by Basile Nyssen and Nazianzene (14) Ibid. p. 211. And he reprehendeth for the same Doctrine Theodoret and Hierome A French Protestant answering to the testimonie of S. Gregorie Nazianzene writeth (15) Clypeus fidei Dial. 8. p. 258. In that thou citest S. Gregorie praying to S. Basil dead that he would pray for him I wil let thee know that Gregorie knew not what he sayd when he sayd so Belike this Protestant thought that greatest Diuine S. Gregorie Nazianzen to haue been ouertaken with drinke when he prayed so as we may iustly suspect this giddie French Protestant was when he writ thus But the Centurie-writers (16) Cent. 4. col 295. 296. 297. alledge sundrie examples of prayer to Saincts Athanasius Basil Nazianzene Ambrose Prudentius Epiphanius and Ephrem (17) Apocal. in c. 14 p. 382. M. Brightman hauing named Athanasius Basil Chrysostom Nazianzen Ambrose Hierom Austin c. reproueth them as in words condemning Idolatrie but indeed establishing it by Inuocation of Saints worshipping of Relicks and such like wicked Superstitions c. sayth he And wheras D. Bishop alleageth S. Chrisostom affirming the Emperour Constantin to haue prayed to Saincts (18) p. 17. M. Wotton in his book against D. Bishop only answereth by barely reiecting the Saying for suspected and forged yet (19) In his Ansvver to D. Bishop p. 174. D. Abbot acknowledgeth the contrarie saying We deny not Chrysostom to be authour of the words And then inuenteth an answer no lesse false then impertinent to wit (20) Ibid. that Chrisostom thereby meaneth the Emperour Arcadius who was Emperour aboue sixtie yeares after Constantin but of Constantin it is sayth he that we enquire for what others did after the time of Constantin Superstition more and more increasing is nothing concerning him But yet to omit al other answere this may so much concerne anie indifferent man that it may sufficiently assure him that Inuocation of Saincts was confessedly vsed in the Church at least about Anno Domini 398. when Arcadius raigned Yea this Doctrine was so general and so certainly beleeued in the Primitiue Church that the holie Fathers are reproued by our young Protestant writers for condemning the contrarie Protestant Doctrine as Heretical in Vigilantius and Aerius D. Fulk sayth (21) In his ansvver to a counterf Cath. p. 46 Last of al Vigilantius shal be brought in who wrot against the Inuocation of Saincts c. Him Hierom reprooueth And (22) In defen tract de Diuers p. 349. D. Sarauia and Beza (23) Ibid. p. 346. do both of them affirme that Aërius was likewise charged and condemned by the Fathers for his then affirming that the Saincts departed are not to be prayed vnto But to arise yet somwhat higher and a litle to view the times neer Christ and his Apostles Beza speaking of the times of Cyprian Austin and Chrysostom acknowledgeth that (24) Prefat nou Test ad Princip Condens then preuayled Inuocation of the Dead The Centurie writers speaking of (25) Cent. 3 col 84. S. Cyprian say thus Verily Cyprian in the end of his first Epistle of his first book doth not obscurely think that Martyrs and Saincts departed do pray for the liuing (26) Cent. 3 col 83. Yea they further charge Origen for praying O holie Iob pray for vs wretches And for teaching hom 1. in Ezech. that Angels are to be prayed vnto But to auoyd tediousnes in reciting the other particuler Fathers of that Age they in grosse confesse (27) Cent. 3. c. 4. col 83. that There are manifest steps of Inuocation of Saincts in the Doctours of that ancient Age which was the third Age or hundred yeares after Christ And wheras (28) l. 5. c. 19. S. Ireneus termeth the B. Virgin Marie Eues Aduocat some Caluinists auouch that these were the words (29) Clypeâ—â— fidei Dial. 8. p. 277 Ediâ— Gall. rather of some Idolater or if they were the words of Ireneus Ireneus had not the true vnderstanding of the confession of the holie Faith of Christian Religion But if so ancient and holie Ireneus wanted true vnderstanding of Faith and Christian Religion we may assure our selues that new borne Protestants are wholy blind therin But without al restraint of Age or time (30) In his Examination c c. 9. p 120. D. Couel affirmeth that Diuers both of the Greek and Latin Church were spotted with errours about Free-wil Merits Inuocation of Saincts c. Yea D. Whitguift discoursing of (31) In h is Def. c. against the Reply of Carthwright p. 472. 473. Doctrine taught in anie Age since the Apostles time affirmeth without any exception either of Age or Father that to vse his owne words (32) Ibid. p. 473. almost al the Bishops and learned writers of the Greek Church and Latin also for the most part were spotted with Doctrines of Free wil of Merit of Inuocation of Saincts and such like Now the Doctrine and practise herof in the ancient Iewes is so cleerly recorded in the books of (33) c. 5.
recorded by (25) Libro de Passione Imaginis Christi And although some doubt be made vvhether this book be made by S. Athanasius yet it is cited as a most ancient historie by the seauenth Synod Act. 4. S. Athanasius of a certaine holie Image of Christ our Sauiour left in a house where a Christian had inhabited a litle before and at his remoual had forgot the same which the Iewes finding in derision of Christ Crucifyed spit vpon it buffeted it with their hands nayled the hands and feet vpon a Crosse offred it vineger mingled with gaul crowned it with a crowne of thornes strock the head therof with a reed and at the last pearced the right side therof with a lance from whence forthwith issued out water and bloud Which the Iewes perceiuing caused a vessel to be set vnder which presently was filled But they remouing it into theyr Synagogue intending therby to offer the greatest disgrace to Christ our Lord assembled thither al the disease and infirme which they could find which annoynting therwith there were cured the Sick of the palsie the blind the lame the deaf the dumbe the leapers and others Which the Iewes themselues seeing beleeued in Christ our Lord and went vnto the Catholick Church in that Cittie where prostrating themselues at the feet of the Metropolitan Bishop confessed their Sinnes and related al the Historie passed Wherupon the Bishop caused the Christian who had inhabited the house before to be brought vnto him and enquiring of him how he came to the Image he answered Nicodemus who came to Iesus by night made it with his owne hands and dying gaue it to Gamaliel who dying left it to Iames and Iames to Symeon and Symeon to Zachaeus and so by theyr Successours it continued in Hierusalem vntil two yeares before the Subuersion therof by Titus and Vespasian When the Christians admonished by the holie-Ghost left the cittie and comming into Syria they brought with them al things which belonged to the worship of Religion At which time the Image being brought amongst other things which concerned the Church remayned vntil this day in Syria which I receauing from my Parents departing this life haue vntil this time possessed by right of inheritance The Bishop hearing this was verie ioyful and instructing the Iewes in the Christian Doctrine after three dayes fast baptised them al and at their intreatie consecrated their Synagogue into a church in honour of the Sauiour of the world Afterwardes consulting what to doe with the sacred liquour of water and Bloud in the vessel resolued to send the same in bottles of glasse made of purpose to al churches through Asia Africa and Europe Exacting this of them that euerie yeare vpon the ninth of Nouember the like Solemnitie should be vsed as vpon the dayes of Christmas and Easter This sayth S. Athanasius is the true and verie credible Historie of the bloud of the side of our Sauiour which issued out of his holie Image which was crucifyed in Syria in the citie Berithus Here wil I leaue our Protestants condemning S. Athanasius of Credulitie and Superstitious Papistrie Now to proceed Functius confesseth that (26) Lib. 7. commentariorum in praeced chron fol. 6. Anno 494. Xenaias was the first in the church that stirred vp warre against Images So quiet possession had they in the Church before that time (27) Exam. part 4 pa. 26. Chemnitius sayth In one and only Tertulian I haue obserued the historie of the Sheepheard calling and seeking his wandring sheep to be paynted and grauen vpon holie Chalices In like sort sayth D. Beard (28) Retractiue from Romish Religion pag 401. Indeed we confesse that there was in these primitiue times of the church an historical vse of Images as may appeare by that Statue of our Sauiour at Cesarea mentioned by Eusebius and the pictures of Peter and Paul in the same Authour And of the good shepheard feeking the lost sheep paynted vpon the Chalices in Tertulian Another Protestant discoursing of the Religion taught and professed publickly by the Graecians and Abissines reciting amongst the rest their hauing (29) In his Catholick Tradictions pag. 212. 214. Pictures in their Churches and inclining and howing before the Images of Saints doth from thence conclude in these words (30) Ibid. pa. 216. It seemes that this is the greatest accusation which Protestants haue against the Churches of the East and Africa neuertheles c. the ancient Doctours which destroyed the Pagans Idolatrie haue approued it their deuotion did lead them vnto it c. So cleerly therfore may we conclude that our Catholick vsage of Pictures in placing them in Churches and reuerencing them doth most truly accord with the like practise and Deuotion of S. Gregorie Leo Paulinus Prudentius Austin Chrisostome Nicephorus Sozomene Athanasius Tertulian Lastantius Witnesses wherof are the Protestant writers the Centurists Osiander Chemnitius Peter Martyr Hospinian Functius Symonds Bale Fulk Parker Parkins Beard and Morton IT IS ACKNOWLEDGED BY PROTESTANTS that the Fathers of the Primitiue Chuch did specially honour and reuerence the holie Relicks of Martirs and other Saincts carying them in Processions and making Pilgrimages vnto them At which also manie Miracles were wrought CHAP. XV. AS it is to be supposed that such Hereâ—icks as deny the due worship and Inuocation of Saincts wil much more deny al reuerent respect or worship to be giuen to the Relicks of their dead Bodies So we may as confidently expect that al holie fathers who so confessedly before exhibited honour to the Blessed Saincts or Soules in Heauen wil likewise performe their answerable respect to their sacred Bodies vpon earth And to begin with S. Gregorie It is acknowledged by (1) In Act. Rom. Pontif. p. 44. c. M. Iohn Bale that Gregorie the great c. commanded Masses to be celebrated ouer the dead bodies of the Apostles And Carion (2) Chron. l. 4. p. 567. 568. auoucheth that He dedicated Churches to the bones and Ashes of Saincts (3) Cent. 6. Col. 381. The Centurie-writers charge him with Translation of Reliques (4) In Iesuit part 2. rat 5. p. 5. 627. And D. Humfrey reciting sundrie particular poynts of Catholick Doctrine which S. Gregorie and S. Austine brought into England amongst the rest doth number Relicks D. Fulk auoucheth that (5) Ag RheÌ„ Test in Apoc. 6. Gregorie liuing so neer the Reuelation of Antichrist it is no maruaile though he be more superstitious in Relicks And Againe (6) Ib. in 1. Tim. 4. Gregorie indeed willeth c. Altars to be built and Relicks to be layd-vp Gregorie indeed did send manie Superstitious tokens c. He sendeth a litle Key froÌ„ the bodie of S. Peter for his blessing in which is enclosed the iron of his chaynes c. Such was the practise and reuerence giuen to the Relicks of Saincts by S. Gregorie But to proceed S. Ambrose hauing made a godlie speech about the pious honouring of Martyrs Tombes the
Centurists thus censure therof (7) Cent. 4. p. 301. Let the godlie Reader consider how horrible these things are vttered by Ambrose And wheras (8) Contra vigilans S. Hierome auoucheth that The Emperour Constantin translated the holie Reliques of Andrew Luke and Timothie to Constantinople at which sayth he the Diuels roare Bullinger disliking the same affirmeth that (9) De origin◠Erroris fol. 67. and fol. 58. Hierom is ouer ful in that he sayth that Diuels roare at the holie Reliques of Andrew Which Saying is likewise acknowledged and reproued by (10) Exam. part 4. p. 8. Chemnitius But (11) De origin◠Erronis p. 67. Bullinger further alledgeth and reprehendeth S. Hierom saying Hierom saith If it be not lawful to translate the Reliques of Saincts and to lay them in Golden coffers Then was Arcadius with Constantine Sacrilegious yea al Bishops were to be censured not only as Sacrilegious but also as foolish who carryed in a Vessel or Reliquarie of God and silk a thing sayth Bullinger most vile and loose Ashes Now to this opinon of S. Hierom and to the practise of Constantin Arcadius and the Bishops of those times Bullinger only answereth I wil not obscure the renowned glorie of those holie men of God Constantino diuo Arcadio Sancto Holie Constantin and Holie Arcadius c. but I testify for them that they haue the loue of God not according to knowledge so acknowledging their Sanctitie and censuring their knowledge which how euil it becommeth an ignorant Minister I leaue to the censure of an indifferent Reader This Deuotion of Constantin to holie Reliques was so certaine that (12) Exam. part 4. p. 8. and see Crispinus of the Estate of the church p. 93 Chemnitius auoucheth that Translation of Reliques began vnder Constantin the Great And M. Brightman (13) In Apoc. in c. 12. p. 325. And see Hospiniā de Templis p. 109. 110. 111. speaking of Constantins comming in affirmeth that then was the time of seeking the Reliques of Saincts and consecrating Churches to Martyrs c. The Centurie-writers likewise reproue him for that say they (14) Cent. 4. Col. 15.29 with like Superstition Constantin is sayd to haue translated to Constantinople certayne Reliques of the Crosse found by Helen that the Crosse might preserue the cittie And as now in Catholick Countries it is vsual in their greatest feasts and Solemnities to carry in their Processions the holie Reliques of Saincts so was the same likewise practised in the Primitiue Church as witnesse both S. Hierom and S. Austin alledged and reproued by Chemnitius in these words (15) Exam. part 4. p. 10. From Translation of Reliques forth with was vsed the carying of them as is to be seen in Hierome and Austin c. Neither is confessed testimonies of Pilgrimages to Reliques and holie places wanting D. Beard freely grāteth (16) Retractiue from Romish Religion p. 207. that vowes Pilgrimages vnto places famous for the Relicks of Martyrs were in old time profitable whilst that the Memorie of the Martyrs was yet fresh and certayne and as long as God by vndoubted Miracles did manifest that their Soules did liue who were thought to be dead So supposing vowes and Pilgrimages vnto places famous for Relicks to haue been vsual and allowed in old time and that Miracles were wrought thereby And the (17) Cent. 4. col 457. see also Cripspinus of the Estate of the Church p. 111. and Hosp detēplis p. 365. Centurists record Concerning Pilgrimages to holie places that in this Age Vnder Constantin first began the places of the Holie Land c. to be had in esteem c. Helen Mother of the Emperour in Hereticks opinion a Superstitious woman going thither to worship c. And Chemnitius (18) Exam. part 4 p. 10. And Osiander cant 4 p. 393. and cent 4. col 457. acknowledgeth that the Christians of those times made Pilgrimages to such places where they heard were Relicks famous and renowned with Miracles D. Beard auoucheth that (19) Retractiue from Romish Relig. p. 197. 198. In former times c. they placed the Relicks of Saincts vnder the Aultar as Ambrose whom he calleth (20) Ibi. p. 181. This good father witnesseth of the Relicks of Geruasius and Protasius Christ was vpon the Aultar who suffred for al the Relicks of them vnder the Aultar who were redeemed with his Bloud c. Yea he further confesseth that The first bringers-in of that custome c. placed them vnder the Aultar in a Religious manner And indeed the reuerent respect hereto was such from the holie and ancient Doctours as that they not only earnestly defended the same but withal censured and condemned the despisers thereof for Hereticks (21) Epit. cēt 4 p. 506. and see the centuristes cent 4. col 1250 Osiander hereupon reproueth S. Hierom for that sayth he S. Hierom did foolishly contend that the Relicks of Saincts were to be worshiped And D. Fulk sayth (22) In his Ansvver to a counterf cath p. 46. and see cent 4. col 1250. Osiand cent 4. l. 4. p. 506. Parker against Symbolizing vvith Antichrist part 4. p. 74. 83. Crispinus of the Estate of the Church p. 131. Last of al Vigilantius shal be brought-in who wrot against Inuocation of Saincts Superstition of Relicks and other Ceremonies Him Hierom reproueth Lastly plentiful are the reports confessed from the Fathers of manie miracles wrought at the Monuments and Relicks of Saincts (23) Exam. part 4 p. 10. Chemnitius confesseth that Mention is made in Augustin that a blind woman receaued sight at the Translation of the Relicks of Stephen And sometimes certaine Miracles were wrought at Relicks e. The (24) Cent. 4. col 457. Centurists acknowledge that If we beleeue Ambrose the sick were cured by touching with the hand the garments of Saincts and the obsessed were deliuered c. (25) De Sacramentis p. 738. Zepperus reporteth that At the memories of Martyrs certayne Miracles were wrought which without doubt sayth he God himself wrought c. And I do not think those Miracles vayne sayth (26) Com. Duraeum l 10. p 866. D. Whitaker which are reported to be done at the Monuments of Martyrs (27) In his Eusebius Captiuus act 2. diei de Imaginibus fol. 104. Hieronimus Marius confesseth that Miracles were done by God at the Sepulchers of Martyrs and other Saincts of Christ c. That by these signes God himself might testify of their Doctrine Faith and Sanctitie M. Fox (28) Act. Mon p. 61. And see Crispinus of the Estate of the Church p. 133. reporteth out of S. Chrisostom l. contra Gentiles and Theodoret l. 3. c. 9. how that after the bringing of the dead bodie of Babylas Martyr into the Temple of an Idol the Idol ceased to giue anie more oracles saying that for the bodie of Babylas he could giue no more answeres But to conclude the antiquitie of this Reuerence giuen to
(3) Bellar. de Monach. l. 2 c. 20. c. Monkes and other Religious concerning Chastitie Pouertie and Obedience and their strick order of life are likewise lawful holie and laudable Directly (4) Luth. l. de Votis Monasticis Caluin Inst l. 4 c. 13. c. 12. contrarie to al which is the Doctrine and practise of the Protestant Church which First teacheth that no vowes are to be made to the honour of God but such as are of things already commanded Secondly that it is lawful for the Clergie or Ministerie euen after Orders taken to marry wiues Thirdly that the Vowes of al Religious Persons with their manner of life are impious vaine Superstitious and not to be kept Now how repugnant are our Moderne Libertines herein to the ancient Fathers and wholy agreable our present Roman with the Primitiue Church let these few lines following serue for fullest proof Luke (5) Cent. 6. p. 208. Osiander numbring vp manie Catholick poynts of Faith wherwith he chargeth S. Gregorie the Great to haue been fouly and Popishly deluded amongst the rest affirmeth that he Sharply vrged the single life of the Ministers of the Church D. Morton accordingly sayth hereof (6) Prot. Appeal l. 1. sec 52. p. 38. The Apologists do truly obiect that our Osiander noted S. Gregorie to haue been a vehement vrger of Single life of the Clergie And concerning such of the Clergie as were married before their Orders taken M. Symondâ— (7) Vpon the Reuel p. 83. 84 85. 86. reproueth him for that He decreed that the Clergie should not haue knowledge of their wiues c. Carion (8) Carion in Chron. l. 4 p 567. 568. reciting his seueral pretended Catholick errours repeateth his errour of Vowes and Single life But to leaue S. Gregorie and to arise to S. Augustin other ancient Fathers I know sayth (9) de Votis p. 524. Peter Martyr declared no lesse to my Auditours in Oxford that Epiphanius with manie others of the Fathers erred in that they hold it a Sinne to break the Vow of virginitie they do il to number it amongst the Apostolical Traditions Chemnitius (10) Exam. part 3. p. 41. 40. 42. in general confesseth saying We are not ignorant that the Fathers allow the vowes of perpetual Chastitie acknowledge them to be obligatorie Insomuch as he doth specially recite and reiect in this behalf the seueral sayings of S. Basil S. Ambrose S. Chrysostome S. Epiphanius S. Austin and S. Innocentius And Iustus Molitor (11) De Ecclesia Milit. p. 80. reproueth the whole Councel of Chalcedon which was most famous and ancient for that It forbad to Monks and Nunnes the vse of Mariage In like sort S. Augustin and al the Fathers assembled with him in the Carthage Councel are reiected by Danaeus (12) Contrae Bellarm. 1. part alterae parte p. 10 11 for that sayth he they abused manifestly the Word of God saying vpon the Apostles words If anie widowes how young soeuer c. haue vowed themselues to God left their Laical habit and vnder the testimonie of the Bishop Church appeared in Religious weed if afterwards they go to Secular mariage they shal according to the Apostle haue damnation because they dared make voyd the vow of Chastitie which they made to God And Osiander (13) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 20. for the same respect confesseth and at large reprehendeth the forsayd Canon of the Carthage Councel Yea the Councel of Nice wherof D. Whitguift (14) In his Def. p. 330 sayth That notable famous Councel of Nyce which is of al wise and learned men reuerenced esteemed and imbraced next to the Scriptures themselues this so famous a Councel did as M. Carthwright (15) In his 2. Reply part 1 p. 485. D. Bancroft in his Suruey c. p. 386. Centurists Cent. 4. c. 9. col 656. D. Fulk against Rhem. Test in Math. 8. fol. 14. and sundrie other Protestant Writers acknowledge affirme and teach that vnto those that were chosen to the Ministrie vnmarryed it was not lawful to take anie wife afterwards only being marryed before entrance into the Ministrie it was lawful for them to vse the benefit of that precedent Marriage And Paphnutius one of the Councel sheweth coÌ„cerning Priests vnlawfulnes to marry after Priesthood vndertaken that not only this was before that Councel but was also yet further an ancient tradition of the Church in which both himself and the rest of the Councel Thus farre M. Carthwright Luther (16) Tom. â— Germ Ienae f 97. de Concil part 1. p. 92. like wise much disgusted with the forsayd Councel of Neece reiecteth the same saying I do not acknowledge the holie Ghost in this Nicene Councel because it forbiddeth him who hath gelded himself to be made Priest and also commandeth the Clergie to haue none dwelling with them but their Mother Sister c. Had the Holie Ghost no other thing to do in Councels but to bind his Ministers to such imposed dangerous and not necessarie Lawes Frigiuillaeus Gaunius (17) Palma Christiana p 103. reprehendeth Socrates and Sozomene for their report of Paphnutius saying Socrates added this report rashly of his owne deuising c. wâ—th like falshood did he wrest the Saying of Paphnutius in the Nicene Councel c. And Sozomene following after Socrates followeth his explication in maintenance of the doctrine of Diuels coÌ„demned by Paul 1. Tim. 4. And the Centurie-writers (18) Cent. 4. c. 9. col 656. D. Fulk (19) Ag. Rhem. Test in Math. 8. sec 3 fol. 14. doe both of them confesse that Paphnutius though he thought that Priesthood did not dissolue Mariage contracted before Orders giuen yet he affirmed to the Nycene Councel that Those who were made Priests before they were marryed should not afterwards marry alledging for this veterem Ecclesiae consuetudinem the ancient Tradition of the Church In like sort say our Puritans 20) A brief Discouery of vntruthes in D. Bancrofts serm p. 21. We must needs confesse that not only this Gouernment of the Church but also manie other poynts of greatest weight in Religion fel to decay long before the councel of Neece c. besides manie other Corruptions which wâ—re past ouer yea and established at that Councel c. Paphnutius alone was inforced to stand vp against the whole Synod in the cause of the Mariage of Miniâ—â—ers which notwithstanding he c. so defended that he would not haue him that were a Minister being vnmarryed euer after to be ioyned to a wife Agreable hereunto sayth D. Morton (21) Prot. Appeal p. 480. The Councel of Neece restrayneth them from mariage who were vnmarryed when they entred into Orders But to proceed the Magdeburgians (22) Cent 4. col 704. And see further Crispinus of the Estate of the Church p. 107. confessing that the second Synod of Arles being celebrated in the time of the
(76) Luc. 1.15 Neither drink wine nor strong drink Al which his austerities and stricter Course of life are thus specially described by the holie Euangelists to his greatest Commendation Yea in these regards the ancient Father tearming him (77) Chrys hom 1. in Marc. hom de Io. Bapt. Hier. ad Eustoch de virg Seruanda Sozom. hist l. 1. c. 12. Cass col 18. c. 5. The Prince or beginner of Monastical life they are therfore reproued by (78) Cent. 5. col 711. Fulk ag Def. of the cens p. 82. Hospin de Origine Monach l. 2 f. 17. Osiand cont 3 p 84. Park in Problem p. 225. the Centurists by D. Fulk Hospinian Osiander M. Parkins Thus then we see that the Religious of these dayes haue taken their Institute and manner of life from their worthiest Predecessours of the Primitiue Church First who no lesse then now did confessedly build Monasteries both for men and women Secondly which also they specially consecrated or hallowed Thirdly the Monks and Nunnes wearing a distinct habit from Secular people Fourthly vsing extraordinarie Austeritie in their Apparel Diet Bed and the like Examples wherof are acknowledged in S. Antonie S. Symeon Fiftly they likewise vowed Chastitie the violating wherof was holden most sinful punishable Sixtly yea such was their Sanctitie that the cōfessedly shined with the Guifts of Miracles Seauenthly and so highly were they reuerenced in these best times that their Impugners and despisers were condemned by the Fathers for wicked Hereticks Eightly adde hereunto that sundrie truly beleeuing Iewes both before since Christ did likewise practise a kind of Monastical life and were therfore as it were the Prototypon of our future Religious Now the Fathers cited and reiected by Protestāts for the foresayd poynts are S. Gregorie Augustin Ambrose Hierom Ruffine Theodoret Sozomene Socrates the Fathers of the Councel of Chalcedon Basil Nazianzene Antonie Symeon Macarius and the ancient beleeuing Iewes The Protestants summoning them are Luther Caluin the Centurists Carion Osiander Hamelmannus Hospinian Iunius Molitor Crispinus Beza Chemnitius Bale Humfrey Carthwright Raynolds Willet Hal Parkins Morton Beard and Whitaker It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed and practised prescribed fasts and Abstinence from certain meates vpon dayes and times appointed holding the same to be obligatorie vnder sinne Condemning also our Puritan Sabaoth fasts CHAPTER XIX COncerning fasting The Doctrine of the Catholick Church is contayned in foure seueral poynts First that fasting (1) Bellar. de bonis eperihus in Partical l. 2. c 5 6. 7. 23. in general is commanded by God Secondly that fasting vpon certain dayes and from certain meates is not only lawful but being appoynted and commanded by the Church is also obligatorie vnder sinne Thirdly that no meates of their owne nature are vncleane or vnlawful to be eaten Fourthly that in honour of Christ our Sauiours Resurrection Sunday is not fasted The Protestant Church herein teacheth First (2) Caluin Inst l. 4. c. 12 Chemn Exam. part 4 p. 440. that fasting is not commanded by God but left free to the wil and deuotion euerie man Secondly (3) Caluin l 4 Instit c. 12. Luth de Libertate Christiana that the Church hath no Authoritie to command certaine dayes or abstinēce from certaine meates nor Christians bound to obey her therin Thirdly (4) Chemn Exam part 4. p 400 Protestants falsely teach that Catholicks forbeare certaine meates as of their owne nature vncleane or vnlawful Fourthly the most refined Protestants do keep their strictest Fastes vpon the Sunday Now what the Primitiue Church taught and practised concerning fasting I wil appeale to Protestants as witnesses impartial and free from al exception in this case First then M. Bale (5) Iu Act Rom Pontif. p. 44 c. confesseth that S. Gregorie the Great consecrated the beginning of Lent-fast with sprinkling of ashes c. And forbad to those that fasted the vse of flesh milk cheese butter and egges M. Symonides reporteth that (6) Vpon the Reuel p. 85 86. He wrote to Austin that the Clergie should in Quinquagesima abstaine from flesh milke and egges c. Wheras S. Ambrose (7) Serm. 25 34. 36. teacheth that It is sinne not to fast in Lent he is reproued for the same by M. Carth-wright 8) In Whit. Def p. 100. And Melancthon (9) In libelli aliquot c. fol. 9. affirmeth that Ambrose sayth of the fast of Lent c. This is of necessitie This opinion sayth Melancthon is stubble added to the doctrine of Faith He likewise reprehēdeth (10) In Ep. ad Rom. c. 14. p. 389. S. Austin for teaching abstinence from flesh wine in Lent For which verie poynt the Centurists (11) Cent. 4. col 1057. reiect Theophilus Alexandrinus D. Morton speaking of the fast of Lent sayth (12) Prot. Appeal l. 2 p 303. This fast we confesse was of great Antiquitie and c. had in general vse and obseruation which S. Ambrose teacheth to haue been ordayned by the diuine Institution of Christ c. And S. Augustin doth sometime write of the fortie dayes fast that it hath a diuine Authoritie c. M. Trigge not only alloweth himself prescribed and appoynted dayes of fast but alledgeth for the same S. Cyril (14) In his true Cathol p. 600. as also S. (13) Ibid. p. 304. Ambrose (15) Ibid. 601. 602. for fasting in Lent wednesdayes fridayes and withal sayth I would to God at this day al Christians would solemnly euerie week fast wednesday friday c. let vs obserue the fast of Lent and of wednesdayes fridayes c. The Centurists confesse that Epiphanius affirmeth haer 75. that the fast of wednesdayes fridayes vntil the Ninth houre was decreed in al Countries of the world (16) Cent. 4 col 440. and that he referreth the authoritie of that Decree vnto the Apostles They likewise (17) Cent. 4 col 44. admit that Gregorie Nyssen relateth the fasting from flesh wine in Lent And speaking of the Fourth Age (18) Cent. 5. col 44. in general they acknowledge that Histories testify that Christians of this Age did obserue fastes and that more Religiously or say the Centurists more superstitiously then in former Ages But the Fathers in this poynt were so resolute as that they doubted not to condemne Aerius for his contrarie Protestant Doctrine D. Fulk (19) In his Answer to a counterf Cath. p. 44. 45 and see Pantaleon in his Chron. p. 28. sayth I wil not dissemble that which you think the greatest matter Aerius taught that prayer for the dead was vnprofitable as witnesse both Epiphanius Austin which they count for an errour Also he taught that fasting dayes are not to be obserued D. Field (20) Of the Church l. 3. c. 22. p 138. likewise writeth The eleuenth is the heresy of Aerius c. He disliked set Fastes c. He was
Ireneus and are repugnant to the Scriptures In like sort Osiander 22) Cent. 2. p. 5. 6. And see the Centurists Cent. 2. col 207. reproueth Iustin saying Iustine extolled too much the libertie of mans Wil in obseruing the Commandments of God And it is granted 23) Cent. 2. c. 4. col 59. And see Caluin Inst l. 2 c. 2 §. 4. that Clemens euerie where defendeth Freewil so that it may appeare say they that not only al the Doctours of that Age were in such darknes but also that the same after increased in the later Doctours D. Abbots 24) In defence of the Reformed Catholick part 1. p. 114. speaking of the booke of Hermes entituled Pastor and some others forged according to his opinion in the Apostles times sayth The poyson which Satan had conueyed into such counterfaite books was receiued as wholesome food and sundrie errours and superstitious fancies of vowed Virginitie and Prayer for the dead of Freewil of Inuocation of Saincts of Antichrist and the Assumption of Marie and such like by litle and litle got footing in the Church And here was indeed sayth Abbot the true beginning of manie doctrines of Poperie c. The Centurists 25) Cent. 2. c. 4. 4 coâ— 58. speaking of the times next after the Apostles doe acknowledge That almost no poynt of Doctrine began so soon to be obscured as this of Freewil Yea it is confessed 26) So say the Puritanes cyted in D. Bancrostes Sermon p. 23. that the Protestants know that euer since the Apostles time in a manner it flourished euerie where vntil Martin Luther took the sword in hand against it A true so euident that D. Humfrey 27) Iesuit part 2. p. 530. thinketh It may not be denyed but that Ireneus Clemens and others quos vocant Apostolicos whom they cal Apostolical in respect of the time in which they liued haue in their writings the opinions of Freewil c. Yea sayth M. Caluin 28) Instit l. 2. c. 2. § 9. Al Ecclesiastical Writers excepting Augustin haue written so ambiguously and differently in this matter of Freewil that nothing certain can be gathered from their wrytings And they were ouer ful in extolling Freewil Lastly D. Whiteguift 29) In his Defence against the Reply of Carthwright p. 472. 473. discoursing of Doctrine taught in anie Age since the Apostles time affirmeth without anie other exception of Age or Father that to vse his words almost 30) Ibid. p. 473. And see the lyke in Whitak de Eccl. Con. Bellar. Controu 2. p. 299. al the Bishops and learned Writers of the Greek Church and Latin also for the most part were spotted with doctrines of Freewil of Merit of Inuocation of Saincts and such like And the same also almost in the same words is confessed by D. Couel saying 30) In his Exam. c. 9. p. 120. Diuers both of the Greek and Latin Church were spotted with errours about Freewil Merits Inuocation of Saincts c. Yea the ancient Iewes did so firmely beleeue our Doctrine of Freewil that to omit the 31) c. 15. 12. 15. 16. 17. cleerest words of Ecclesiasticus which D. Whitakers had no other wayes 32) Resp ad Camp Rat. 1. p. 15. to euade but by denying the sayd booke to be Canonical Scripture D. Fulk tearmeth 33) Defence of the Eng. Transl p. 320. The Iewish Rabbins Patrons of Freewil which D. Morton 34) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 371. iustifyeth and further sayth 35) Ibid. p. 370. What if it be confessed that some Rabbins maintayned the libertie of mans Wil as Rabbi Moses did Yea M. Hal chargeth the Pharisees 36) Pharisaisme p. 50. with Freewil and Merit which is more then either Christ or his Apostles did who yet in other respects spared not to discouer their true Errours Wel then our Catholick Doctrine of Freewil is the Primitiue Doctrine taught by S. Gregorie Hierome Epiphanius Nazianzene Basil the Councel of Nice Chrysostome Athanasius Lactantius Cyprian Origen Tertulian Theophilus Iustine Athenagoras Tatianus Clemens Alexand. Ireneus Hermes and by al the Fathers since the Apostles vntil Luthers time Our strongest witnesses herof are the Protestant Writers The Centurists Beza Osiander Hamelmannus Schultetus Calum Humfrey Abbot Hal Morton Whiteguift Fulk and Whitaker Jt is graunted by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church taught not only Faith but likewise Good works truly to iustify And that the sayd works are meritorious of Grace and Glorie CHAP. XXI COncerning Good-works It is the general (1) Se Bellarmin De Iustificatione l. 1. 4. 5. and receiued doctrine of the Roman Church First that the works of the iust are truly good and not of their owne nature sinne Secondly that not only Faith but likewise good works doe truly iustifie a man obtaine remission of sinnes Thirdly that the same good works do truly merit or deserue Grace in this world and glorie in the next Directly 2) Luther in Assert art 31. 32. 36. Caluin Instit l. 3. c. â—◠§ 4. and c. 41. §. 9. c. 19. §. 2. 4. 7. c. 15. § 2. contrarie to al the forsayd poynts concerning Good-works is the ordinarie doctrine of our new Protestants First affirming that the best works of the iust are of their owne natures deadlie sinne Sâ—condly that only Faith doth iustify Thirdly and lastly that works do neither merit Grace nor glorie To come now to the doctrine and Faith of the Primitiue Church The 3) Cenâ— 6. c. 10. col 748. Centurists making a Catalogue of S. Gregories pretended errours amongst the rest number his Errour of good workes and Iustification And 4) Cent. 6. p. 288. Osiander much reproueth him for that he attributeth ouer much to good works S. Augustin is reiected by 5) In Confess Wittemb Brentius for that the taught Affiance in mans merits towards remission of Sinnes The 6) Harmony of Confess in English sec 16. p. 509. Diuines of Wittemberg affirme that These reasons which Augustin bringeth for his opinion of Purgatorie doe seem to leane to this foundation That we obtaine remission of our sinnes and life not only for Christ his sake through Faith but also for the merits of our works And for the same doctrine of Merit of works he is further reprehended by 7) Cent. 4. p. 520. Osiander the 8) Cent. 5. col 507. 1133. Centurists 9) Instit l. 3. c. 11. § 15. Caluin 10) l. 1. Ep. p. 290 in Consil Theol. p. 240. And see Colloq Altemberg fol. 307. Field of the Church l. 3. c. 42 p. 170. Melancthon and D. Field So likewise the 11) Cent. 5. col 1178. Centurie-writers speaking of S. Chrysostom affirme that Chrysostom handleth impurely the doctrine of Iustification and attributeth merit to works They likewise say of Prosper 12) Cent. 5. c. 10. col 1363. that he retayned not a few freckles of his Age Such an
one is that Faith only doth not iustify Luther 13) In Gal. c. 4. And after the English Translation fol. 220. tearmeth S. Hierom Ambrose Austin and others Iustice-workeâ—s or as the English Translation therof hath Merit-mongers of the old Papacie And because he and his children confirme their doctrine of sole Faith by certaine sentences especially taken out of S. Pauls Epistles to the Romans and Galathians which they wrest to another sense then euer was giuen by the ancient Fathers hence he maketh this complaint saying 14) In Colloq Conuiual c. de Patribus Ecclesiae Neither are there anie works extant of the Fathers vpon the Epistle either to the Romans or to the Galathians in which anie thing pure and sincere may be found But of S. Hierome in particular because he contrarieth his Exposition of the sayd Epistles he auoucheth that 15) Tom. 5. in Ep. ad Gal. c. 3. f. 348. Tom 2. de seruo Arbitrio f. 473. Et in Ep. ad Brentium quae praefixa est Brentii Com. in Oseam And see him in c. 5. ad Gal. he was deceaued by Origen and that he vnderstood nothing at al in S. Paul but depraued the Iustice of only Faith And that this one errour of his was so great that it alone was sufficient to destroy the Ghospel by which if it had not been saith Luther through the singular Grace of God Hierome had merited rather Hel then Heauen The Centurists hauing proued at large that neither Lactantius Chromatius Ephrem Theophilus S. Hierome S. Gregorie Nyssene S. Gregorie Nazianzene S. Hilarie nor S. Ambrose euer acknowledged their manner of Iustification by Faith only inferre therupon 16) Cent. 4. col 292. 293. Now let the Godlie Reader imagine with himself how far this Age touching this Article went astray from the doctrine of the Apostles And see the Fathers of the Fourth Age further disliked therein by 17) Cent. 4. p. 102 506 520. 430. 70 Osiander and 18) Exam. part 4. p. 110. Chemnitius But to arise to the Third Age 19) In Rom. p. 391. Melancthon affirmeth that Origen and manie others following him imagined that men were iust by reason of their workes The 20) Cent. 3. col 265. 266 Centurists plainly confesse that Origen made good workes the cause of Iustification 21) Ibid. col 79. And speaking of the Fathers of that Age they acknowledge that They attributed to good works Iustice before God as Origen l. 1. in Iob. c. And that as then for the most part this cheefest article of Iustification seemeth to haue been obscured 22) In Apoc. p. 206. Winkelmannus doth cleerly grant that Origen ascribeth to works the cause of Iustification Yea the Centurists 23) Câ—nt 3. col 80 affirme that Origen in manie places ascribeth to works the preparation and cause of Saluation as trac in Math. hom â—4 in Iosuam 26. he ascribeth to our merits Gods dwelling in vs by his Grace In which respect also Beza accuseth Origen 24) In Act. c. 10 46. of horrible blasphemie The Centurists speaking of this Third Age auouch that 25) â—ent 3. c. 4. col 53 79 80 8. Cent. 4. c. 4. col 292. Cent. 5. c. 4. col 504. c. 10. This Article of Iustification by only Faith was almost altogeather obscured and that the Doctours of that time declined more from the true doctrine of Christ and of the Apostles then of the Age before Hence among others of this and the succeeding Age that they pretend to haue erred herin they name S. Clement Tertulian Origen S. Cyprian S. Augustin S. Ambrose S. Hierome S. Chrysostom S. Cyril Theophilus Lactantius Eusebius Chromatius Ephrem S. Gregorie Nyssene S. Gregorie Nazianzene S. Hilarie S. Leo Saluianus Esichius Prosper Maximus and Paulinus In like sort they report of S. Cyprian that He attributeth ouermuch to good wooks And 27) Medulla Theol. p. 370. Schultetus reprehendeth him for that In his Sermon de Lapsis he ascribeth forgiuenes of sinnes to Satisfactions And the 28) Cent. 3. col 240. Centurists confesse the same in the selfe same words of Tertulian But D. Whitaker 29) In Resp ad rat Cam. rat 5. p. 78 with Chemnitius 30) Exam. part 4 p. 110. and Melancthon 31) In suis libelli aliquot fol. 25. do al of them auouch that Not Cyprian only but almost al the most holie Fathers of that time were in that errour as thinking so to pay the paine due to sinne and to satisfy Gods Iustice Melancthon acknowledgeth that 32) In 1. Cor. c. 3. Presently from the beginning of the Church the ancient Fathers obscured the doctrine concerning the Iustice of Faith c. So likewise in general it is confessed by the 33) Cent. 3. col 80. Centurists that The Doctours of this Age declined from the true doctrine of Christ and his Apostles concerning works But to ascend yet higher The Centurists speaking of the second Age after Christ affirme that 34) Cent. 2. c. 4. col 60. 61. The Doctrine of Iustification was deliuered more negligently and obscurely by the Doctours of this Age. As also This Article the highest and chiefest of al by litle litle through the craft of the Diuel began to be obscured And againe say they It appeareth out of the writings of Clemens Alexandrinus that in his Age the Doctrine concerning the end of good workes began to be obscured Finally The times ensuing declare sufficiently that the doctrine of Faith iustifying without works began forthwith to be more and more varied and obscured Schultetus 35) Medulla Theol. p. 48. 122. 151. And see Cent. 2. c. 4. and Cent. 3. c. 4. confesseth the Doctrine of Merit of works in Clemens Alexandrinus Theophilus Cyprian Iustin Martyr c. And D. Humfrey 36) Iesuit part 2. p. 530. his opinion is that 26) Cent. 3. col 247. It may not be denyed but that Ireneus Clemens and others called Apostolical haue in their writings the opinions of Freewil and Merit of works Schultetus 37) Medul Theol. p. 467. also chargeth the booke of Hermes entituled Pastor with Merit and iustification of works And 38) In his Defend of Parkins p. 339. 340. M. Wotton not forbeareth to taxe for this verie poynt of Merit Ignatius cyting for the same his Epistle to the Romans and only answering in this vnworthie namer I say plainly this mans testimonie is nothing worth because he was of litle iudgement in Diuinitie But what may then be thought of M. Woottons no diuinitie or of Woottons greatest impudencie thus censuring that ancientest Martyr of Christ and schollar of S. Iohn Yea this Doctrine of Merit was so vniuersal as that D. Couel 39) In his Exam. c. 9. p. 120. writeth that Diuers both of the Greek and Latin Church were spotted with errours about Freewil Merits c. Luther after his Censure giuen agaynst diuers of the
Fathers in particular pronounceth of them in general thus 40) In Col. Conuiual c. De Patribus Ecclesiae See ye what darknes there is in the Fathers writings concerning Faith for when that Article of the Iustification of men is couered with darknes it can by no meanes be that greater errours he auoyded Bullinger doth 41) In Apoc. Serm. 87. fol. 270. acknowledge that The doctrine of Merits satisfaction and Iustification of works did incontinently after the Apostles time lay their first foundations Caluin affirmeth in general that 42) Inst l. 3. c. 25. §. 2. The ancient Writers of the Church vsing euerie where the word Merit gaue occasion of errour to posteritie therby Adde lastly that D. Whiteguift 43) In his Def. against the Reply of Carthw p. 472. 473. treating of Doctrine taught in anie Age since the Apostles time affirmeth without al other exception either of Age or Father that Almost al the Bishops and learned Writers of the Greek Church and Latin also for the most part were spotted with doctrines of Freewil of Merits c. And the same is likewise taught by 44) De Eccl. cont Bellar. p. 299. D. Whitakers Now concerning the ancient Iewes The Books of 45) c. 12 9. 4.10 Tobie and Ecclesiasticus 46) c. 3. 33. are so pregnant for the Merit of works that sundrie Protestants say therof 47) Minist of Lincolne Dioces in their Abridgment p. 76. The two places of Tobie and Ecclesiasticus tend dangerously to the Iustifying of the Merit of Almes-deeds And others writing against the booke of Homilies say 48) â—ilenced Ministers in the 2. Part of Def. p. 164. The book of Homilies whereto we are required to subscribe c. expoundes Tobie saying that Almes is profitable to purge the soule from the spots of sinne alleaging these words of Tobie 4.10 and 12.19 c. and out of Ecclesiasticus c. Yea they further say This 49) Ib. p. 166. place of Tobie were it Canonical c. is verie pregnant for the Merit of works and as strong for it as the Scriptures are for the merit of Christ Buxdorfius also writeth of the Rabbins that 50) Synagog Iudaica p. 23. They perswade themselues that they may satisfy for their sinnes by doing pennance vpon their skinnes and that they may easily merit eternal life by keeping of the Commandments and Good works And the same also is acknowledged in them by 51) Pharisaisme p. 13. 50. M. Hal. I may then conclude that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church are our firmest Patrons for our Catholick Doctrine concerning Good-works confessedly teaching First that Good-works do truly iustify Secondly Meriting Grace and Remission of sinnes in this life and eternal glorie in the next For which verie doctrine the Fathers acknowledged by Protestants are S. Gregorie Chrysostom Augustin Prosper Ambrose Hierom Nyssene Nazianzene Hilarie Ephrem Cyprian Origen Tertulian Theophilus Lactantius Iustin Clemens Alex. Ireneus Hermes Ignatius and the ancient beleeuing Iewes The Protestant Writers producing and charging the forsayd Fathers are Luther the Centurists Brentius the Diuines of Wittemberg Osiander Caluin Melancthon Chemnitius Winkilmamus Schultetus Bullinger Buxdorfeus Wotton Whitaker Humfrey Couel and Whiteguift It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Ceremonies now vsed by the Roman Church in the ministring of seruice or Sacrifice as also of the Sacraments were formerlie vsed by the Bishops Priests and Fathers of the Primitiue Church CHAP. XXII HAuing thus passed through so manie particular Controuersies of greatest weight and finding in al of them a perfect agreement and sweetest harmonie between the ancient most holie and Primitiue Church and the present Roman Catholick Church and this by no weaker proofes or euidences then the free grants Confessions and acknowledgments of our sworne and professed Aduersaries I wil now for my Conclusion in this kind only examen one poynt further which being not purely Doctrinal but most sensible and external wil therby not only prooue most accommodate to the sense and capacitie of the meanest Reader but withal wil most euidently declare and make manifest the outward gracious and beautiful face of Christian Religion practised by the ancient learned and holie Bishops Doctours and people of the Primitiue Church Nothing is better knowne either to those of greater yeares who as yet may wel remember the Ecclesiastical rites and Customes of our owne kingdome or to others more moderne who haue trauailed forraine Nations then the external Ceremonies vsed in Material Churches in Celebration of Seruice and Administration of the most holie Sacraments For who knoweth not that when Catholick Churches are erected they are specially consecrated and dedicated either to Christ or some of his Saincts That in them are seueral Chancels and Vestries as also Altars Candles Reliques and Images that there are truly Priests who offer daily external Sacrifice at the Altar Whose Vestments and vessels are specially hallowed who likewise obserue Canonical houres saying some prayers in Secret others with a loud voice sometimes giuing the people their benediction and burning Incense at the Altar In the Church likewise there is a Font specially hallowed for the administration of Baptisme which is holden necessarie to Saluation and the same is ministred with the Signe of the Crosse with holie Oyles and sundrie other Ceremonies hereafter specifyed And to omit sundrie other In the Church is blessed by the Priest Holiewater Holie-bread Candles Ashes c. I need not describe the naked walles of Protestants Churches or the bare black coates of their wedded Ministers both of them deuoyd of al grace ornament puritie and state duly befitting places and persons Ecclesiastical And therfore I hasten to the confessed practise of the Primitiue Church Wherein I first find that when Material Churches were first built they were specially hallowed by the Bishop so much as S. Gregorie and S. Austin are reproued by D. Humfrey 1) In Iesuit part 2. rat 5. p. 5. 627. for bringing into England the new Consecration of Churches And the 2) Cent. 6. col 364. 365. Centurie-writers do charge S. Gregorie out of his owne writings with Consecration of Churches D. Morton affirmeth that he vsed 3) Prot. Appeal l. 1. p. 53. Superstitious manner of Consecration of Churches Yea the 4) Cent. 4. col 408. further confesse that Athanasius in his Apologie to Constantin plainly sheweth that Christians did not assemble togeather in Churches not consecrated And that in the Fourth Age the Fathers vsed 5) Cent. 4. col 497. Sumptuous Churches consecrated and Superstitious Insolencie in celebrating of Masse appointed to be sayd in no places but such as were hallowed by a Bishop 6) Cent. 4. col 497. Yea they reprooue Constantin himselfe for that say they concerning Consecration of Churches new built proud adorning of them and other Superstitious things the greatest part Constantine inuented and spread abrode in many Churches And wheras Sozomene hist l. 1. c. 8.
forsayd time from the Apostles to Luther The Proof whereof for these last thousand yeares is so easie obuious as that (1) Reioynder to Bristovv p. 341. D. Fulk plainly teacheth that the Reuelation of Anti-Christ vvith the Protestant Churches flight into vvildernes was Anno 607. And [2.] Catalogue of Doctours in the ep to the Reader Simon de Voyon affirmeth that Anno 605. vvhen Pope Boniface vvas sealled in the Papal throne then falsehood got the victorie c. then was that vniuersal Apostasie from the Faith foretold by Paule (3) Hist. Sacram. l. 2. p. 157. Hospinian assureth vs that in the Age of Gregorie the Great al kind of superstition and Idolatrie as a sea ouerflovved ouervvhelmed and vvholy ouerdrovvned almost the vvhole Christian vvorld no man not only not resisting but al rather adding and affording vvhat strength they could So cleare it is that in the verie time of S. Gregorie no one Protestant was known to the Christian world and much lesse was seene to resist or hinder the swelling sea of Roman Religion But to proceed [4] Expositio of the Creed p. 307. M. Parkins auoucheth that during the space of 900. yeares the Popish Heresie for so do Hereticks stile it hath spread itself ouer the vvhole earth and the faithful seruants of God vvere but as a handful of vvheat in a mountaine of chaffe vvhich can scarse be discerned (5,) Idib p. 400. And againe vve say that for the space of manie hundred yeares an vniuersal Apostasie ouerspred the vvhole face of the earth and that our Prot. Church vvas not then visible to the vvorld but lay hid vnder the chaffe of Poperie M. Bale affirmeth that from the yeare 607. puritie of Heauenlie or Protestāt doctrine [6.] Cent. 1. p. 69. vanished in the Church [7.] Cent. 1. p. 65. And that after Gregorie the First puritie of doctrine perished And that from Phocas the Emperour who liued Anno 602. til the renevving of the Ghospel by Luther the doctrine of Christ vvas for that space among Idiots and in lurking holes [8] In hypotes pos Theolog. l. 3. p. 110. 111. Brumlerus acknowledgeth that the Prot. Church begunne to lie hid An. 800. an vniuersal Apostacie being made Antichrist being placed in the Temple of God the Church fled into the desert and there fed by God for a time times and halfe a time And whereas the true Church cannot consist without true Pastours [9] Tract Theolog. p. 374. and preaching yet M. Caluin confesseth that so for some Ages the Prot. Church was torne and pulled in sunder that she had no true Pastours and that for some Ages the pure preaching of the word vanished away Now if I should demand of Caluin or anie his Followers how the pretended Protestant people of those Ages could possibly beleeue and so be saued if during those Ages they neither had preaching nor Pastours to preach and minister Sacraments I might expect for my best answer the deepest silence But the more I wade herein the lesse do I find anie bottome of the Protestant Churches latencie or not-being For examining the verie time of Luthers first beginning I find it directly cōfessed by [10.] Apologie of the Church of Engl. part 4. c. 4 And his defen of the Apol. p. 426. D. Ievvel that the Protestant Truth vvas vnknovvne at that time and vnheard of when Martin Luther and Vlderick Suinglius first came vnto the Knovvledge and preaching of the Ghospel (11.) In August Cōfess explicat c. 7. de Eccle. p. 137. Miluius argueth thus If there had bene right beleeuers that vvent before Luther in his office c. there had then been no need of a Lutheran reformation [12) De Eccl. p 145. Morgensterne censureth it ridiculous to thinke that in the time before Luther anie had the puritie of doctrine and that Luther should receiue it from them and not they from Luther Considering saith he it is manifest to the whole Christian world that before Luthers time al Churches were ouerwhelmed with more then Cimmerian darkenes ‖13.‖ Liber Apologet. p. 176. Regius being vrged to tel what Congregation or Protestant Clergie Luther found in the world at his reuolt answereth that before Luther there was a Clergie of the true Religion which agreed with Luther in al things But being to answer where this Congregation was then to be found he hath no other help but to confesse that is was not knowne by the Papists neither through the Tyrānie of the Pope could peraduenture be visibly showne A strāge answer that it should be vnknowne to the Papists yet the persecution by the Pope should make it vnknowne as though Fairies inuisible could be persecuted by Papists But he goeth forward saying Therefore when the Iesuites vrge that Luther should shew verae Religionis asseclam Ecclesiam his fellow-Church of the true Religion they wil that Luther demonstrate contradiction in tearmes and that he proue that which is inuisible to be visible So cleare a Contradiction to the truth it is to affirme the Protestant-visibilitie at Luthers first beginning To the former demand the like answere is giuen by (14‖ In Apocal c. 11. p. 283. M. Brightman (*) Contra Bell. contr 2. q. 5. p. 261. saying The Church before Luther was in Gods hidden Vestrie and by (15.‖ Vpon the Reuela p 199. M. Dent affirming that as then Christ had his little flock in the wildernes and by D. (16) Tom. Vvittemb in praefat see Tom. 2. Vvitēb fol. 63 Tom. 3. fol. 555. Whitaker teaching that the Church then lay hid in the wildernes But none acknowledgeth this truth more plainly then Luther himself saying At the first I was alone And I dare glory that Christ was made first knowne by me but with the denial hereof Suinglius doth dishonour me Yea (18) Loc. com class 5. c. 15. p. 50. speaking of the Sacramentaries he glorieth and sayth without vs and before vs they were nothing truly they durst not mutter now puffed vp with our victorie they bend their force against vs. And in this regard (17) In praefat in corpus doctrinae Lypsiae 1561. Epist ad Argentinēses (19) Ep. ad Episcop Hereford praefix Enarrat Euceri in Euang and see his scripta Anglicana p. 675 Bucer tearmeth Luther the first Apostle to vs of the purer Ghospel Yea (20) Epist 141 p. 273. Caluin speaking of the same times sayth Seing we are compelled to make a departure from the whole world it is absurd one to disagree with another So clearly was the Protestant Religion as then dissenting from the Religion of the whole world In like ful manner sayth (21) Epist. Iesuit part alt p. 49. Cannerus The poyson of the Arrians infected not some litle part but almost the whole world c. we are come vnto those times which euen exceed the confusion of the Arrian furie Errour hath possessed not
one litle part or other but Apostasie hath auerted the whole bodie from Christ By which it appeareth that euen at these first beginnings of Luther not only one member or parcel but euen the whole bodie of Christianitie was auerted from Protestancie the Church of Protestants as then not being being knowne to haue the least Being in the smalest parcel or member of the same bodie The like obscuritie or nullitie of the Protestant Church at Wicclifs first reuolt from the Catholick Faith is confessed by (22) Act. mon p. 85. M. Fox in these wordes Out of al doubt al the world was in a desperate and vile estate and lamentable ignorance and darkenes of Gods truth had ouershaddowed the whole earth when Iohn Wiccliffe stepped forth as the morning starre in the midst of a cloud And againe (23.‖ Act. mon p 391. In times of horrible darkenes when there seemed in a manner to be no one so litle sparke of pure Protestant doctrine left or remaining Wiccliffe by Gods prouidence rose vp through whom the Lord would first awaken and raise vp againe the world c. ‖24‖ Estate of the Church p. 418. Crispinus also auoucheth that Ihon Wiccliffe beganne as from a deepe night to draw out the truth of the doctrine of the Sonne of God And D. ‖25‖ Vita Iuelli p 263 Humfrey affirmeth that Ihon Wiccliffe in these last times was almost the first Trumpeter of this Ghospel In so much that ‖26.‖ Cent. 9. 10. 11. p. 439. Osiander confesseth that he as then had not so much as anie Companions of that time brotherly to admonish him So assured we may rest that at Wiccliffs time the Protestant Church was ouershaddowed with horrible darkenes not so much as one litle spark of pure Protestancie appearing in the world But yet neither was Wiccliffe himself Protestant for besides his sundrie Catholick opinions before proued it is testifyed of Wiccliffe to the contrarie by Melancthon ‖k‖ Ep. 〈◊〉 Frider. micō inter ep Suinglii p. 612. saying I haue looked into Wiccliffe who maketh a great ado about this Controuersie of the Eucharist but I haue found manie other errours in him by which we may iudge of his Spirit surely he neither vnderstood nor held the Iustice of Faith which onlie point is so necessarie to the Saluation of Protestants that Luther sayth therof ‖l‖ Praefat. Ep. ad Gal. If article of Iustification by onlie Faith be once lost then is al true Christian doctrine lost And as manie as hold not that doctrine are Iewes Turkes Papists or Hereticks Againe by this only doctrine the Church is built and in this it consisteth ‖m‖ In c. 1. ad Gal. If we neglect the article of Iustification we loose al togeather For ‖n‖ In c. 2. ad Gal. it is the principal article of al Christian doctrine al other articles are comprehended in it It is the foundation sayth M. ‖o‖ Act. mon p. 840 Fox of al Christianitie and the ‖p‖ Ibid. p. 770. only origin of our Saluation It is the ‖q‖ Tovver Desp soule of the Church sayth D. Chark Now this soule foundation principal Article of Protestancie Wiccliffe did not beleeue Yea such were the demerits of Wiccliffe that D. ‖r‖ Antiqu. l 2. p. 268. Caius obiecteth him to the Oxonians as a disgrace to their Vniuersitie And Melancthon censureth him to haue been ‖s‖ Loc. com Tit de Pot. Eccl. A mad man and sundrie his grosse errours and Paradoxes condemned both by Catholicks and Protestants wil discouer hereafter so litle cause haue the Protestants to appeale to Wiccliffe for the continuance of their Church in his time Now as concerning Waldo 27‖ Estate of the Church p. 338. Crispinus confesseth Waldo his beginning to haue been in time of thick darkenes and as a first little begining of the instauration of Christian Religion But whereas Father Campian Rat. 3. affirmeth that the Protestants cannot for manie Ages togeather giue exāple so much as of anie one Cittie village or house professing their doctrine ‖28‖ Resp. ad rat Cāpiani rat 3 p. 48. D. Whittaker coming to answer thy very point telleth in general that in the worst times manie Faithful were found and that all Histories do witnesse this But being prouoked to giue particular instance out of anie one Historie either of time or person he becometh mute affirming in the same place directly to the contrarie that In the times of the Apostles al Churches al Citties al Townes al Families embraced the same Religion which we Protestants professe Afterwards by litle and litle the purritie of doctrine began to be corrupted and much superstition more and more to be spred abroad to which yet the most holie Fathers resisted what they could vntil that mysterie of iniquitie which tooke roote euen in the Apostles Age went through al the partes of the Church and so at last possessed the whole Church So true it is that for manie Ages togeather insteed of anie Instance of the Protestant Churches being Popish pretended superstition possessed euen the whole Church But some may say the Protest Churches inuisibilitie for these last 1000. yeares is a point vndoubted and for such by themselues formerly and fully confessed But it is the Primatiue Church of the first 600. yeares wherein they glory their Church was most splendent knowne and conspicuous Now of al the Ages of the Primitiue Church none is more famous or better knowne or wherein Christian Religion more clearly shined ouer the whole face of the earth then the Age of Constantin whereof say the ‖29‖ Cent. 4 Ep. dedic Reginae Elizabeth Centurists The state of the Church at Constantins time illustrated the whole world with her splendour And D. Morton styleth Constantin himself The ‖a‖ Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 328 great and first Christian Emperour so greatly honoured in the first and most famous Synode of Nice And yet in so great a Sun-shine of Christs true Church it was impossible as then to see a Protestant Chappel for M. ‖30‖ In Apocalyp in his synopsis before the Booke A 1. § 11 Brightman teacheth that the Protestant Church from the times of Constantin for 1260. yeares was hid c. And ‖31‖ Ib A. 2 §. 14. And see p. 383. againe for 1000. yeares from Constantin the was conuersant with Christ in most hidden dens Yea as 32) Ibid. p. 326. then there were no Protestant publick assemblies wherein the Diuine Institutions did wholy flourish So Constantin a sonne of the Church saith he did more hurt then an Enemie As 33) Ibid. p. 577. see p. 341. also the want of publick Religion hath been manie Ages to wit from Constantin the Great to this day al which time Antichrist raigned whilst the Woman the Protestant Church liued in the desert To the same effect sayth M. Napper 34) Vpon the Reuelat. p. 161. From the yeare of Christ 316. God hath withdrawne his
the Armenians and the present Protestant Church THAT THE FATHERS CONDEMNED in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning the Scriptures and the Church Militant and Triumphant CHAPTER III. TO examine now such doctrines as concerne the sacred Scripures and the Church both Militant and Triumphant It hath been obserued in al Hereticks to pretend only Scripture in defence of their errours therby to euade the manifest and most conuincing arguments from Councels Fathers and Histories So S. Hilarie 28) Orat. 2. cont Constantium wisheth vs to remember that there is no Heretick which doth not faigne that the blasphemies which he teacheth are according to the Scripture And S. Austin 29) L. 1. de Trinit c. 3. affirmeth that al Hereticks endeuour to defend their false and deceiptful opinions out of the Scriptures Yea he reproueth 30) L. 1. con Maxim Maximinus the Arian for saying as Protestants now do If thou shal bring anie thing from the sacred Scripture which is common to al it is needful we heare you But these wordes which are out of the scripture in no case are to be receaued of vs. In like sort sayth S. Vincent 31) L. 1. coÌ„t haeret If one shal aske anie Heretick c. from whence do you proue from whence do you teach that I ought to forsake the vniuersal and ancient Faith of the Catholick Church Presently he answereth for it is written and forth with he prepareth a thousand testimonies a thousand examples a thousand authorities from the Law from the Apostles from the Prophets c. Agreeably herevnto the Arrians denied the Sonne of God to be consubstantial to his Father because the word Consubstantial is no where in the Scriptures as S. Athanasius S. Austin and S. Hierome testifie in sundry places writing against them The Macedonians 32) Basil de Spiritu Sancto c. 25. l. 1. contr Eunomium and Eunomians denyed the Holie-Ghost to be equal with the Father and the Sonne because in their opinion it is no where expresly set downe in the Scriptures The 33) Cyril Socrates and others writing of the Nestorians Nestorians denyed the B. Virgin Marie to be the Mother of God because these wordes are not expresly in Scripture And the selfe same pretense of only Scripture is stil vsed now by Protestants as I haue proued at large els-where The continuance and visibilitie of the Church of Christ was denied by the Donatists of whom S. Austin affirmeth that they vsed to collect certaine places of Scripture and to wrest them against the church of God that so it might be thought to haue fayled and perished out of the whole world And as Protestants say now of the Church before Luthers time 34) de vnita Eccl. c. 2. so sayd the Donatists before 35) August in Ps 101. Conc. 2. The Church hath reuolted and perished out of al Countries But this saith S. Austin say they who are not in it Or impudent speech The claime of Ecclesiastical Primacie was condemded in the Emperour Constantius to whom Osius 36) Athan. Epist ad Solit. vit agentes Ambr. Ep. 32. 33. Sozom. l. 6. c. 7. Conc. 3. Carthag can 9. Aug. Ep 48. 50. 162. 165. sayd I. beseech thee cease and remember thou art mortal be fearful of the day of Iudgement keepe thyself pure against that day do not intermedle in Ecclesiastical affaires neither commande vs in this kind but rather learne those things from vs. God hath committed the Empire to thee and to vs those things which belong to the Churches Take heede least drawing vnto thee such things as concerne the Church thou be guiltie of great crimes And againe for who seeing him in decreeing to make himself the Prince of Bishops and to be cheef Iudge in Ecclesiastical Iudgement wil not iustly say that he is that abhomination of Desolation which was foretold by Daniel Herof also the 37) Cent. 4 col 549. Polanus in Symphonia p. 836. 837. 8â—8 839. 841. 842. 843. 844. 849. Cartwright in whiteg def p. 700. Osiand cent 4. p. 477. Centurists Emperours also sometimes vnfittingly assumed to themselues the Iudgement of matters of Faith which thing Athanasius reprehendeth in Constantius and Ambrose in Valentinian c. The denial of Inuocation of Saints was condemned in Vigilantius the Heretick of whom 38) Answer to a Count. Cath. p. 46. Par. against Symb. part 1. p. 74. 83. Cent. 4. col 1250. Crisp his Estate of the Church p. 131. Osian cent 4. p. 506. D. Fulk sayth Last of al Vigilantius shal be brought in who wrot against Inuocation of Saints Superstition of Reliques and other Ceremonies him Hierome reproueth And the same is confessed of Vigilantius by M. Parker the Centurists Crispinus and Osiander In like sorte D. Sarauia and Beza do both of them affirme that Aerius was likewise condemned by the Fathers for his then teaching that the Saincts departed are not to be prayed vnto The which also is acknowledged by 40) Loc. com p. 514 Bucanus against Aerius The denial and contemning of Saincts Reliques is condemned in Eunomius and Vigilantius whereof sayth 41) De Ecl. dog c. 73 see Chemnit Exam. part 4. p. 7. S. Austin We beleeue that the bodies of Saincts and especially the Reliques of Blessed Martyrs are most intirely to be honoured if anie man contradict this he is supposed not to be a Christian a but an Eunomian and Vigilantian So likewise the Arrians and Vigilantius denying the Diuels to be tormented by the Reliques of Martyrs are condemned therefore the first by S. Ambrose 42) Ser. 93. De Inuent corpo S. Geruasij Protasij the second by 43) Contr. Vigil c. 4. S. Hierome The denial of the Images of Christ and his Saincts was condemned in Xenaias of whom sayth 44) Hist Eccl. lib. 16. c. 27. Nicephorus That Xenaias first ô audacious soule and impudent mouth vomited forth that speech That the Images of Christ and those who haue pleased him are not to be worshipped According to which the Protestant 45) Comment in proc Chronol l. 7. at Antichr 494. see Cedemus in Compend hist Functius confesseth that 39) Defen Tract de diuersi p. 349. 346. Xenaias first raised warres in the Church against Images The denial of the signe of the Crosse was condemned in some ancient Magicians of whom thus writeth 46) Hist li. 3. c. 3. Theodoret The Diuels appearing in their accustomed shape feare compelled Iulian the Emperour to signe his forehead with the signe of the Crosse whereupon the Diuels beholding the figure of our Lords victorie and remembring their owne ruine forthwith vanished away c. Iulian affirmed that he greatly admired the vertue of the Crosse and that the Diuels fled away because they could not endure the signe therof to whom the Magician sayd Do not so think for they do not feare for that reason which you alleage but detesting your fact they withdrew themselues
from our sight Wherupon sayth Theodoret so wretched Iulian was deceaued by him c. And yet the Protestant 47) Cent. 4. p. 326. Osiander is not ashamed to iustify this foresayd speech of the Magician affirming of this example that the Diuels by dissembling their flying away would confirme the superstition of the people as though sayth he Diuels were driuen away by the signe of the Crosse And whereas manie miracles haue been wrought in the Church by the signe of the Crosse by the Relicks of Saincts and sundrie other such holie helpes the Arrians vsed to attribute the same to witchraft and deceits of the Diuel hereof sayth 48) Serm. 93. de SaÌ„ctis Geruasio Protasio S. Ambrose The Diuels say to Martyrs you are come to destroy vs the Arrians say these are not true torments of Diuels but only faigned and affected scoffes For the same cause 49) Cont. Vigil c. 4. S. Hierome reproueth Vigilantius saying According to the custome of the Gentils and of wicked Porphorie and Eunomius thou faignest these to be the sleights of the Diuels and that the Diuels do not truly crye but only counterfaite their torments c. And 50) De persecut Vandal l. 2. Victor reporting how the Catholick Bishop Eugenius hauing restored sight to one Felix that was blind signing his eies with the Standard of the Crosse a thing sayth he manifest to al the Congregation he farther reporteth that the Arrian Bishops sayd that Eugenius did this by witchcraft And the selfe same answer is giuen to S. Martius Miracles by the Centurie writers and to the Miracles of holie Symeon by 52) Animaduers p. 612. 613. 614. Hosp de monach fol. 24. Funius and Hospinian and to the Miracles of B. Aman by 53) In Ep. Parte alt Part. Cont. Bellar. 1066 Daneus The denial of Purgatorie of prayers and Sacrifice for the dead was condemned in Aerius by S. Austin 54) Haer. 53. Epiph. haer 75. and S. Epiphanius wherof sayth D. Fulk 55) Answ to a counterfait Cath. p. 44. 45. I wil not dissemble that which you thinke the greatest matter Aerius taught that prayer for the dead was vnprofitable as witnesse both Epiphanius and Austin which they count for an errour 51) Cent. 5. col 1393. 56) Cent. 4. p. 434. Osiander reciting the condemned errours of Aerius amongst the rest numbreth this That we ought not to pray or offer Sacrifice for the dead And D. Field sayth The eleuenth is the Heresie of Aerius he condemned the custome of the Church in naming the dead at the Altar and offring of the Sacrifice of the Eucharist c. He was iustly condemned And the same errour in Aerius is expresly confessed by 58) Chrono p. 28. Bul. de enigm erroris fol. 222. Hosp hist Sacr. par 1. p. 155. Abb. in Defence of the refor Cath. part 3. in his aduertisment therio annâ—xed p. 106. Pantaleon by Bullinger by Hospinian and D. Abbot From the premisses then we may obserue First that our moderne Protestants appealing to only Scripture are condemned in the Arrians by S. Austin and in other Hereticks by S. Hylarie and other Fathers and in the Macedonians and Eunomians by S. Basil and in the Nestorians by S. Cyril Secondly their denying the visibilitie of Christs Church was condemned in the Donatists by S. Austin Thirdly their giuing Ecclesiastical Primacie to temporal Princes was condemned in Constantius by S. Athanasius and in Valentinian by S. Ambrose Fourthly their denying of Inuocation of Saints was condeÌ„ned in Vigilantius by S. Hierome Fiftly the dishonouring of Saints Reliques was condemned in Eunomius and Vigilantius by S. Austin and S. Hierome and in the Arrians by S. Ambrose Sixtly the denying of holie Images was condemned in Xenaias 57) Of the Church li. 3. p. 138. by Nicephorus Seauenthly the denying of the signe of the Crosse and the vertue thereof was condemned in Magicians by Theodoret. Eightly denying of Miracles and imputing them to witchcraft and the deceipts of the Diuel was condemned in the Arrians by S. Ambrose in Vigilantius by S. Hierome Ninthly the denial of Purgatorie and Praier for the dead was condemned in Aerius by S. Austin and S. Epiphanius Now let the Iudicious Reader make choice whether in the foresaid points of doctrine he wil ioyne in vnion of Faith with S. Athanasius S. Ambrose S. Hierome S. Austin S. Hilarie S. Basil S. Cyril Theodoret Socrates Sozomene Vincent and the present Roman Church or with the condemned Hereticks Arrians Macedonians Eunomians Nestorians Donatists Vigilantians Aerians Image-breakers Magicians and the present Protestant Church THAT THE FATHERS CONDEMNED in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning Monachisme the mariage of Priests and prescribed Fasts CHAPTFR IIII. TO make the like trial of such articles as concerne the state of perfection as Euangelical Counsels Vowes Mortification and the like And first concerning Monks and Montastical life 59) In Ps 132. S. Austin reproueth the Cercumcellians for that they accustomed to say what meaneth the name of Monks And againe what then say they who insulte against vs for the name of Monks c. who say vnto vs shew where the name of Monks is written in the Scriptures And writing 60) Cont. liter Petil l. 3. c. 40. against Petilianus he affirmeth That he proceeded with cursed mouth in dispraise of Monks and Monasteries In like sort 61) Cont. Vigil prope fin S. Hierome answereth Vigilantius saying Whereas thou affirmest those to be better who vse their goods and by litle and litle diuide the fruits of their possessions to the poore then those who selling their possessions giue al at once thou shalt be answered not from me but from our Lord If thou wilâ— be perfect go and sel al which thou hast and giue to the poore and come follow me He speaketh to him who wil be perfect c. That degree which thou praysest is the second and third which we also allow whilest yet we know to preferre the first before the second and third Neither are Monks to be terrified from their studie or labour by thy viperous tongue and cruel byting against whom thou arguest and sayest If al shal shut vp themselues and be in the deserts who shal frequent the Churches This reproofe of Vigilantius by S. Hierome is so certaine that it is further plainly confessed by 62) Of the Estate of the Church p. 131. 132. Crispinus Concerning Virginitye the equalling of marriage therewith was condemned in Iouinian by 63) L. 1. coÌ„â— Iouin c. 2. S. Hierome saying Iouinian taught that Marriage and Virginitie were of equal merit A point so certaine that M. Wotton in defence of Iouinian boldly 63) Def. of Parkins p. 500. auoucheth that herein the Christian Fathers delt vnchristianly with Iouinian (r) Retractiue from Romish Religion p. 312. againe Iouinian worthily denyed al difference of merit betwixt a married and single life which no enemie of
D. Willet Some of these as they are imputed to Protestants we deny to be Heresies at al as that of Vigilantius that Relickes are not to be adored of Iouinians that neither fasting nor Virginitie is meritorious of Aerius that prayer is not to be made for the dead c. 113) Tetrastylon p. 97. And if Aerius held no worse opinions we see no cause why they should condemne him for an Heretick c. 112) Antilog p. 23. 11 But neither was Vigilantius an Heretick nor his opinions Heresies 115) Loc. com loc 42. p. 513. Bucanus demandeth whether the Fathers deseruedly numbred amongst Hereticks the opinion of Aerius who sayd there was no difference between a Bishop and a Priest 114) Ib. p. 99. Wherto himself answereth no truly no more then these which were his opinions First that we ought not to pray and Sacrifice for the dead Secondly that Saincts departed are not to be prayed vnto Thirdly that certaine dayes of Fasts are not to he appointed Of which last sayth 116) Cont. Dur. l. 9. p. 830. D. Whitaker Aerius taught nothing concerning fasting different from the Catholick Faith whereby he meaneth the Protestant Faith Yea Aerius and his errours are further defended against the Fathers by D. Fulk 117) Answ to a Count. Cath. p. 45 Dan. de haeres f. 175. 177. Osiand cent 4. p. 434. Park against Sym. part 1. p. 60 cent 4 Col. 401. by Daneus Osiander M. Parker and the Centurie-Wr ters And Iouinian is defended against S. Hierome and S. Austin by the 118) Cent. 4. Col. 381. Dan. Part. alt p. 938. Lut. Thom. 2. f. 282. Centurists by Daneus and Luther as also Vigilantius against S. Hierome by the Magdeburgians and by D. Morton a) Prot. Appeal p. 583. saying Concerning that Vigilantius intended only the honour of God by expelling Idolatrie then may we wish that S. Hierome had been a Vigilantius in the case of Relicks of Saints Yea saith D. Fulk *) Against Rhem. Test in apoc 6. Hierome in this case is a partial witnes inueighing against Vigilantius which was as good a Catholick as he c. who did iustly mislike the superstious estimation of Relicks and write a booke against it which Hierome doth not confute with arguments so much as with rayling c. S. Hierome defending against Vigilantius the Christian custome of burning Candles at the Monuments of Saints is therfore censured by the French Protestant for 6 an Idolater and defender of Idolatrie who also further addes that Vigilantius laughing at that custome did proue himself more Christian and more faithful to God then Hierome c. Yea if I knew Hierome to haue dyed in that errour I would neuer cal him Sainct but as damned as the Diuel In like forte S. Hierome writing against Vigilantius for prayer to Saints the same Protestant sayth c) Ibi. p. 239. I thinke Hierom when he writ these words against Vigilantius 119) Cent. 4. col 601. was driuen into rage and depriued of sense and vnderstanding So greeuously displeasing was S. Hierome to both old and new borne Hereticks The Armenians not mingling water with wine in the Chalice are defended by D. Fulk 120) Def. of the English Transl c. 17. p. 458. saying The Armenians are commendable in this point that they would neuer yeald to custome Lastly the Magician himself is defended against Theodoret by Osiander 121) Cent. 4. p. 326. for denying the signe of the Crosse b) Clypeus fid Dial. 8. p. 223. and the vertue and power therof against Diuels So cleere it is euen by the ful confessions of our Protestants them selues that the doctrines condemned in the old Hereticks by the Doctours and Fathers of the primitiue church are now renewed defended and beleeued by Protestants themselues PROTESTANTS VSVAL RECRIMINATION of obiecting old Heresies to the Catholick Roman church is cleerly examined discouered and confuted by their owne acknowledgements CHAPTER VI. PRotestants being vnable to cleere themselues of so foule a stayne as teaching and beleeuing so manie absurd and condemned Heresies do subtilly endeauer to diuerte or extenuate their so great reproach by falsly intruding vpon the Roman Church the like defense of sundrie condemned errours But for our easy disburdning thereof It is to be obserued that Heresie is not an open Enemie to truth and religion but a subtile Deprauer thereof by subtracting from it or adding therto So as Truth Errour hauing but one obiect are diuided though euer really yet oftentimes but as it were by a seeming slender nicetie or difference of words In which respect he that wil obiect pertinently in this kinde must obiect not anie resemblance or likelihood but an Identitie of opinion for otherwise as D. Couel 1) Def. of Hooker p. 49. teacheth not vnaptly to this purpose The neernes oftentimes to euil is warrant enough for suspicion to accuse of euil and because al errours are not equally distant from truth some men as now in this case we Catholicks are in their true assertions by weak Iudgements of such like as the vulgar Protestants supposed not to differ at al from errours And hence I take it to be that D. Morton as but dareth to beginne his obiection in this kind against vs with a neerenes 2) Prot. Appeal p. 675. vnto Heresie As also sayth he vnto Catholicks Let 3) Ib. 675. 676. them tel vs whether they haue not we say not an absolute but yet a greater affinitie with those foresayd Heresies then haue the Protestants c. Where for M. Doctours better satisfaction I wil tel him that sundrie of his other Brethren nothing inferiour to himself haue plainly acknowledged in the precedent Chapter an absolute Identitie in steed of Affinitie with former Hereticks therevpon not sparing bitterly to reproue the learnedst and most ancient Fathers for their so censuring and condemning our Protestants true Progenitours the ancient Hereticks And that al pretended affinity between our Catholick Religion and old condemned Heresies is nothing els but the ignorant or malitious traducement of Protestant Writers this present Chapter shal fully demonstrate First then D. Fulk 4) Answ to a Counterf Cath. p. 22. obiecteth vnto vs To make the Images of Christ and of the Apostles and to cense them you learned of the Hereticks called Gnostici and Carpocratites Epiph. L. 1. Tom. 2. Secondly of the Valentinians you learned to haue in price the signe of the Crosse Thirdly of the Heracleonites you learned to annoint men at point of death and to cast water vpon dead men with Inuocation Epiphan Her 36. Fourthly of the Cainans you learned to cal vpon Angels Epiph. Haer. 38. Fiftly of the Marcionists you learned to giue women leaue to Baptize Epiph. Haer. 42. Sixtly of the Collindians you learned to make Images of the Virgin Marye and to worship them and her with offring of Candels as they did of Cakes Epiph. Haer. 79. Seauenthly of the Messalanians you
assigned the third place to Hereticks who haue Gone out of the elect people of God but were not of them So that Scriptures Fathers and Protestants do al of them agree That the Going out or departing from the Church is the Badge of Heresie and Persons so Going out are thereby marked Hereticks Examples heerof we haue in al former Hereticks in Arius Macedonius Nestorius Pelagius Eutyches Donatus waldo Wicclif Husse c. who al of them being at first Roman Catholicks through Innouation of opinions afterwards seuered themselues from their mother Church going out from her to new Congregations But now to apply this to Catholicks and Protestants and breefly to examine whether companie hath gone or departed out of a former knowne Church the true Church of Christ and first to giue M. D. Morton a short scantling concerning himself his Brethren his owne neighbour M. Mason answering certaine demands of Catholicks in this kinde saith a) Consecrat of English Bishopes p. 41. When it pleased him which causeth the light to spring out of darknes we did spring from yourselues being stil content to be yours so you would be Christs In like sort sayth a) Apol. p. 288. D. Iewel We haue indeed gone from the Pope we haue shaken of the yoake of the Bishop of Rome It is true sayth b) Act. mon. p. 3. M. Fox we are remoued from the Church of Rome And D. Rainolds c) In his Conclusions annexed to his Conference maketh this one of his Conclusions That the reformed Churches in England Scotland France Germanie and other kingdomes and Common-wealthes haue seuered themselues lawfully sayth he from the Church of Rome And as for Luther himself he was at first so Roman Catholick as that sayth he (d) In Ep ad Gal. fol. 38. and see 37. 188. I did so highly esteeme the Popes authoritie that to dissent from him euen in the least point I thought it a sinne worthy of euerlasting death and would my selfe in the defence of the Popes Authoritie haue ministred fire and sword Caluin speaking of Protestants in general expresly sayth 20) In Ep. 141. p. 273. we were inforced to make a departure from the whole world yea we 21) Instit l. 4. c. 6. § 1. haue departed sayth he from her to wit the Roman Church And so accordingly it is so euident that Waldo Wicliffe Husse Luther Caluin Zuinglius c. were first borne baptised and brought vp in the Catholick Church from whence afterwards through Noueltie Libertie they went out became Apostates as that to endeauour anie special proof therof might iustly be censured of no lesse idle vanitie then to seeme to deny it of greatest ignorance or impudencie And so leauing our Protestants thus confessedly Going out of our former Catholick Roman Church and thereby branding themselues with the infamous Mark of Hereticks I wil examine what Protestants think of the Roman Church in this behalf And indeed this crime of Going out is in it self so foule a blemish as that some Protestants much desire to stayne our Roman puritie therewith So D. Fulk would haue the world to thinke That 22) Retentiue p. 85. the Popish Church is but an Heretical Assemblie departed from the vniuersal Church long since Augustins departure out of this life With whom agreeth his Brother blindbyard D. Sutclif affirming That 23) Suruey of Poper p. 315. the Papists are a sect going out of Christs Church and rising long after Christs time But these great Doctours speake much but proue nothing for it behoued them to assigne a former Church from whence the Papists thus reuolted as also the persons who the time when with other Circumstances of al which they rest silent Wherefore to cleere our Roman Church of this so foule Imputation that to the perfect sight of the blearedst eye And first to omit al former testimonies plentifully exhibited in proof of her confessed knowne and vn-interrupted Conrinuance from the Apostles times to these of ours as also to forbeare that ancient Doctours and Writers in al Ages do specially mention and register vp al notorious departures made by any Hereticks from the true Church not insinuating the least concerning our Roman Our Innocencie herein is so notoriously apparent as that sundrie Protestants being prouoked in this kind to giue the least Instance of anie such departure in our Roman Church are euer inforced in their answer therunto only to fly to our pretended departure from the sacred Scriptures so passing ouer al precedent Ages without anie colour of Examples to be vrged against vs. So M. Knewstubs 24) Answer to certaine assertions c. p. 35. answereth you require to know if our doctrine were the same which they in the Primitiue Church professed who they were that did at that time note our Going out c. This question is altogeather vnnecessarie for when an offender is taken with the manner it is needlesse to stand vpon Examination of them who were at the deed doing We haue taken you with the manner that is to say with Doctrine diuerse from the Apostles and therefore neither Law nor conscience can force vs to examine who were witnesses of your first departing With whom agreeth M. Powel only answering that the Roman Church is 25) Consideration of the Papistes supplication p. 36. fallen from the doctrine comprehended in the writings of the Apostles But to omit that this answer is a base and shameles begging of the thing it self in question to wit that we are departed from the Scriptures which as most vntrue we euer do deny It is further most impertinent to the point now vrged which is whether the Roman Church hath gone out from anie other knowne Church yea it most strongly argueth the contrarie seing they much desiring to exemplify against vs herein for want of al Instance during these 1600. yeares constrained to iumpe them ouer and only to insist in the writings of the Apostles then which what more strongly can be vrged in our behalf And yet in like sort for want of better answer D. Sutclif 26) Answer to the mass Priestes supplicat c. 7. sayth Neither is it material that the Roman Church neuer went out of anie knowne Christian Societie So insinuating her neuer Going out with is the only thing I here desire to proue But if this be not material with D. Sutclif yet is it most material and conuincing with al men of iudgement for if the Roman Church or anie other Church hauing once been confessed members of the true ancient visible Church of Christ did neuer depart or Go out of the sayd true Church then are they stil yet within it and members of it Now that the Romam Church was not only a true Church in the Apostles times but also vnto the time of S. Austin and further it is abundantly already confessed and therefore seing she hath confessedly neuer departed out the sequele is euident that stil she continueth tâ—e
And so D. Whitaker confesseth 46) Resp ad Camp Rat. 7. p. 101. That the time of the Roman Churches change cannot easily be told Yea wel foreknowing the impossibilitie of anie such time to be assigned he only euadeth by affirming That Protestants 47) Lib. 3. Cont. Dur. p. 277. are not bound to answer in what Age Superstition crept into the Church And It is not needful for Protestants to search out in Histories the begining of this change With whom agreeth Buchanus saying 48) loc com p. 466. It belongeth not to vs to assigne what time the Church begunne to fade away But if this be not needful for D. Whitaker or other Protestants to finde out why did D. Whitaker before teach that no man denyeth but that it much auayleth for the confuting of Heresis to haue knowne their beginning So forcible is the truth of the Roman Churches neuer changing in Faith and Religion D. Field being vrged to giue Instance of anie Contradiction made against the Roman Church vpon the example but of anie one first known change in Doctrine in steed of answer acknowledgeth that 49) Of the Church l. 3. â— 13. p. 89. the aberration in the Church of Rome in matters of Doctrine was in such things and so carried in the beginings that the Authours of these new and false opinions were not disclaimed and noted as damnable Hereticks Yea the Authours of these errours and they that were free from them were notwithstanding these differences both of our Communion and therefore the Circumstances of the first Authour and his Contradiction c. cannot be shewed Here though it pleased M. Doctour to tearme our Catholick points of Doctrine errours yet is he further pleased in our behalfe plainly to acknowledge that no first Authour or begining can be shewed of these pretended errours which is the point we desire D. Fulk likewise being vrged to giue anie example of the time when or by whom our Roman Faith was contradicted or charged with Innouarion only sayth 50) Rtioinder to Bristow p. 265. I answer my text sayth it was a Mysterie not reuealed and therefore could not be openly preached against But though the Iniquitie or Apostasie foretold by 51) 2 Thess 2.7 S. Paul whereof D. Fulk speaketh be a Mysterie in tâ—e prediction yet this nothing letteth but that it may be conspicuous and most markable in he euent as the accomplishment of al predictions are Yea this truth of no knowne begining or change in our Roman Faith is so certaine as that sundrie Protestants earnestly labour to finde out seueral pretenses or excuses why anie such change or Innouation was neuer noted or obserued so supposing and granting their ignorance of al such imaginarie change and only seeking to euade by mere fallacies and impertinent examples Thus D. Fulk examining why our Religion entred the Primitiue Church without Contradiction resolueth 52) Answ to a Conterfaite Cath. p. 43. that it entred by smal degrees at the first and was therefore lesse espied by the true Pastours who were earnestly occupyed against greater Heresies as the Valentinians Marcionists and Manichees And therefore 53) Against Purgatorie p. 256. either had no leisure to espie or els made lesse account to reforme the same But this is most idle for the Fathers were most watchful and readie to suppresse al errours euen of much lesser importance in themselues then are or were our Catholick Doctrines of Masse Real Presence Adoration of the Sacrament Confession Iustification by work c. tâ—ough we should for the time suppose them to be errours Examples hereof might be giuen about the keeping of Easter-day 54) Ignat. Ep. ad Philip Euseb l. 2. c. 22. 23. in the time of Victor and before about prescript dayes of 55) Epiph. haer 75. fasting about mingling of water 56 with wine in the Chalice about the verie ceremonies 57 of Exorcisme and Exufflation in Baptisme and sundrie such like which I purposely pretermit D. Couel himself granting that 58) Examination c. p. 64. 65. great and violent dissentions haue risen in the Church for Ceremonies and that Councels haue condemned some as Hereticks only for being opposit in this kinde But D. Fulk vrgeth further that some of our opinions as namely Prayer for the dead 59) Answer to a Count. Cath. p. 39. deceiued simple men the sooner because it had a pretence of charitie and shew 60) Against Purgat p. 386. of pietie confirmed by custome wherby it was at length allowed of by Austin and others who neuer weighed the matter by Scripture But what errours had more pretence of pietie or charitie then Origens for the Saluation of Diuels Tertullians for chastitie S. Cyprians against Baptisme by Hereticks Montanus for austere Fastings and Papias for Christs raigninge vpon earth a thousand yeares aster the Resurrection and yet al these Montanus only excepted being principal men and of special deseruings in the Church of Christ were greeuously contradicted and reproued by the Catholick Doctours of theirs and succeding times for these verie errours But M. Woton persisteth saying to Catholicks 61) Trial of the RomaÌ„ Clergie p. 378. It is ridiculous for you to challenge vs to shew when the Faith receiued by the Church of Rome from the Apostles began to faile in it it was done as our Sauiour speakes in the like case while men slept And the same sleepie argument is vrged by D. White 62) Way to the true Church p. 371. But this is cleerly to contradict God himself who sayd 63) Isa 62.6 vpon thy walles ô Hierusalem haue I set watch men al the day and al the inght for euer they shal not hold their peace Now if they were al asleep when so manie and so great pretended errours of Catholick Doctrines as are supposed to haue begun and that in seueral times and Ages how could they be more silent or how could they be sayd to watch either day or inght How could that saying of S. Austin be true 64) Ep. 119. c. 19. The Church of God beset with chaffe and cockle although she tolerate many thinges which she is not able to redresse yet such things as be against Faith or good life she neither alloweth nor passeth ouer in silence Or how is that verified of D. Fulk 65) Answ to a Count. Cath. p. 11. and 92. that the true Church hath alwayes resisted al false opinion with open reprehension Or how is that true which White himself auoucheth saying q) Way to the true Church Ep. Ded. sec 8. The primitiue Church and al the Doctours thereof would neuer yeeld I wil not say in an opinion but not so much as in a forme of speech or in the change of a letter sounding against the orthodoxal Faith c. Yea r) Ib. sec 6. the vigilancie zeale courrage of the Primitiue Bishops was admirable c. There could no Heresie harbour vnder them
but they droue it out So cleer it is that the true Churches Pastours are neuer so sleepie as to suffer anie errours to be published or practised without their resistance But D. White M. Woton and other Protestants obseruing that this pretence of sleeping would nothing auayle them do therefore acknowledge that such was the nicenes of our imagined Inuentions that they could not be seene or discerned so faith M. Wooton 66) Trial of the RomaÌ„ clergy p. 383. You presse vs that if there had been anie alteration of Religion it would haue been recorded but how should it haue been recorded when it was not seen The alteration grew so nicely that few or none could discerne it D. White exemplifyeth this saying 67) Way to the true Churhc p. 370. The Romish Faith came into the true Church as sickenes doth in to the bodie and ruin to a house which appeareth not by and by at the first but then when it is ripened D. Whitaker instanceth in the haires of a 68) Cont. Camp Rat. 7. p. 101. 102. mans head which waxe not white suddainly and in slifters entring into a building at first not to be perceiued But to omit that as Peter Martyr confesseth 69) Epist anex to his com plac in Engl. p. 131. vnles a man do diligently examine similitudes he shal easily be deceaued by them This argument being taken froÌ„ excrements diseases and ruines is no lesse vnworthie infirme and ruinous itself for first in none of these is the change made instantly and at the first but by degrees and in successe of time whereas in Doctrine euerie opinion is at the first either true or false Secondly the first whitnes of haires or the first decay in health or building cannot at the first he discerned though they were most precisely regarded which is euidently otherwise in change of Doctrine and practise thereof Thirdly none are specially appointed neither is there anye such vrging necessitie to marke the first change of the haires and the like whereas it is the special charge and command not of few but of al the Churches Pastours not only to obserue but also publickly to withstand the other with the vttermost of their power and learning But admitting for the time that the foresaid similitudes were pertinent and that we were not to vrge Protestants to shew the first begining of our so great a change as is by them imagined Yet we are in al reason to expect that as though the first white haire or slifter or degree of disease be not discerned yet the further degrees and encrease of them being most markable to be seen that therefore they are to discouer describe to vs some sensible proceedings encrease of this our supposed change And if they wil say it was not made al at once but by litle litle sometimes in on point of Faith sometimes in an other then stil must we vrge them to shew those seueral litle changes as what points of doctrine were so by degrees changed Who were the Authours of the change What Popes begun or first allowed them by what Doctours and Pastours were they first contradicted Or els they in al these being most silent we may most strongly conclude that our Roman Church being thus free from al knowne change or Innouation since the Apostles times that therefore she is not anie Heretical sect Going out or departing from a former Church nor her doctrine Heretical no one Article thereof being lyable to that foulest stayne of Innouation Whereas to the contrarie the verie first beginings changes and Apostasies made by Waldo Wicclif Husse Luther Suinglius Caluin or anie other pretended Protestant in anie Age whatsoeuer were euer so obserued contradicted and condemned by the watchful Pastours of the Roman Church as that euerie particular both of Person time place and opinion are euerie where to be seene in sundrie Writers both Catholick and Protestant But to reach M. D. Morton yet an other scantling of an Heretick we must obserue that this name Christian giuen at first to al beleeuers was especially taken to distinguish them from the Iewes and Gentils which beleeued not at al in Christ But when Hereticks began to arise from among the Christians who professed stil Christs name and sundrie Articles of Faith the name Christian was too general to seuer Hereticks from true beleeuers And therefore the Apostles imposed the name Catholick vpon al such as in al points were obedient to the Churches Doctrine Hereof saith expresly M. Wotton 70) Trial of the Romish clergy p. 285. 286. The reason of the name Catholick was at first that there might be a title to distinguish sound Christians and true churches from Hereticks And of the contrarie in al Ages it was euer vsual that euerie Sect or Companie embracing new Doctrine though but in some one or other point contrarie to the Catholicke fayth receiued thervpon the like answerable alteration of name sometimes from the Doctrines so newly embraced sometimes and that more vsually from the first Authour and Inuentour himself And it was thought meet saith M. Woton 71) Ib. p. 286. That Hereticks should be called by some special name either of their Authour or of some points of errour which they held In like sort D. Field doubteth not to say 72) Of the Church l. 2. c. 9. p. 57. Surely it is not to be denyed but the naming after the names of men was in the time of the Primitiue Church peculiar and proper to Hereticks and Schismaticks only Neither 73) Apologie c. p. 30. 31. do I see saith M. Parker anie sufficient reason why those among vs whom singularitie in affection and noueltie in faction haue denomitated Puritans should not be distinguished by that name c. for in truth such new names haue in al former Ages for distinction sake been attributed vnto al such who defended new opinions either deuised by themselues or others contrarie to the receiued doctrine of the whole Church Thus from the erroneous Doctrines which they broached defended were named the Heretical Monothelites Aquarians Agnoites Theopaschites Catabaptists c. And according to Hospinian 74) Concord dâ—scord f. 131. the Enthusiastes Anabaptistes Antimonians and Sacramentaries And from that Authours themselues were named the Nicolaites the Manichees the Arians the Pelagians the Donatists the Nestorians the Eutichians the Waldenses the Wiccliuists the Hussites the Lutherans the Caluinists the Suinglians To examine now both Catholicks and Protestants about this point The name Catholick we haue seen was imposed to distinguish sound Christians and true Churches from Hereticks and was for the same cause inserted into the Creed by the Apostles themselues and so accordingly it hath been vsed and vnderstood by al Fathers 75) Cyril Catech. 18. Aug. Cont. Ep. fundam c. 4. de vera Rel. c. 7. Patianur Ep. ad Sympron and Writers in former Ages And as for the name Papist as it was neuer heard of
Sect to be Heretical seing the reducing of an Heresie to it begining is confessedly a confuting of it But now some Protestants hereby perceauing our Roman Church to be thus free from al noted change or Innouation as also their owne errours to be easily traced to their first beginings and first Authours for their preuenting hereby that so odious name of Hereticks they endeauour to proue euâ—n against their other Brethren that a Sect or Heretical profession may be published or followed without note of anie known begining either of the doctrine or the Authour So D. Fulk obiecteth that 88) Against Purgat p. 388. There was an Heresie of them that were called Acephalt because there was noe Head knowne of them But D. Fulk bewrayeth here most grosly his ignorance for these Hereticks were so named of Seuerus 89) Conc. Nycen 2. p. 62. Tom. 3 Niceph. l. 16 c. 27. l. 28 c. 45. Acephalus Bishop of Antioche who was their Head and they were but a part of the Eutychians whose Head was Eutyches In so much as the Protestant Pappus sayth most directly contrarie to D. Fulk 90) Epist Hist Eccl. p. 494. And see Omerod in his picture of a Puritant p. 12. The Acâ—phali were so named not because the first Authour of their Errour was vnknowne but becâ—use c. But besides though their first Authour could not be named yet is this no proof that their first begining is not knowne which begining being otheâ—wise proued the naming of the first Authour needeth not the Authour being only sought for thereby to know the begining In like sort where D. Fulk alleageth there also the example of the Chiliasts the Ophites the Caineans the Scethites the Adamites the Melchisedacheans the Apostolicks the Emerobaptists c. whose first Authours cannot be named this in like respect is most impertinent as wel in that these and manie other Heresies receiued their name not from their first Authour but from the errour it self as also for that the point here cheifly insisted vpon is not so much of the first Authour being knowne as of the first begining being known and therevpon contradicted Which begining and contradiction being discouered the naming of the first Authour is not necessarie we only seeking the Authour as is sayd before therby to know the begining now that al these had a known secondarie begining after the Apostles times and ware therevpon contradicted appeareth by S. Epiphanius and S. Austin in their seueral Bookes of Heresies the same is confessed by the 91) Cent. 2. 3. c. 5. Pap. Epist Hist Eccl. p. 324. 325. 326. 327. 328. 340. Centurie-writers and their Brother Pappus The like obiection is made by D. Field producing sundrie 92) Of the Church l. 3. c. 14. p. 89. Examples whose first Authour saith he cannot be named But besides that diuers of them such is his want are not matters of Faith or such as by the Church are not hitherto determined yet in that himself alleageth Contradiction to haue been made against al such as were material himself therein affoardeth most ful answer to his owne obiection Wherefore seing manie Articles of our Catholick Faith in the opinion of Protestants are most grieuous errors and yet they not able to shew when anie one of them first came in with Contradiction but in al want thereof are inforced to betake themselues to the obscure ExaÌ„ples of other opinions neuer taught but impugned by the Roman Church neither euer generally diuulged but abortiue and perished in their first Birth most of them also arising in the Churches begining when by reason of the general persecutions then raging and the want of printing few monuments of those times are now remaining and yet al this notwithstanding their begining with Contradiction is now to vs knowne and testifyed Whereupon I may conclude that it is more then probable that if so manie of our foresayd Catholick Doctrines hauing been so generally dispersed had euer so begun with Innouation contradicted the same would then haue been in some one point or other in some one countrie or other by some one man or other knowne discerned and recorded So cleer it is that the Roman Church thus confessedly neuer going out of anie other known Church not anie change or begining of anie point of her Faith euer obserued or contradicted that therfore according to the former scantlings giuen and squared euen by Protestants themselues she cannot be a Church nouel and Heretical And so of the contrarie the Protestants Sect most apparantly and confessedly going out of our Roman Church as also the first Authours begining and progresse thereof being at al times knowne contradicted and condemned the sequel is euident that Protestancie according to al the former scantlings is a Sect Heretical And so according to D. Mortons former description She is the Helene of Greece engendring dissention for carnal respects the Diuels Concubine conceiuing deformed shapes of errour an Adder writhing itself into perplexed senses and Contradictions and an Ape imitating only the tearmes of truth May not Protestants now be much ashamed and confounded to be patterned by those so odious Hieroglyphicks A BRIEF SVRVEY OF D. WHITES CATAlogue wherin Contrary to the Confessed truth in the precedent Chapter of no knowne beginning or change of our Romane Faith in anye Age He vndertaketh according to his Title therof to shew That the present Religion of the Roman Church was obserued resisted in al Ages as it came in increased naming withal the Persons that made the Resistance And the poynts wherin And the time when from fiftie yeares to fiftie throughout al Ages since Christ CHAPTER VIII HERE I must confesse M. Doctour giueth vs a goodly Brauado and if his deeds do answer what his words engage him the foyle shal be mine and the feild his but if he only barke and doth not bite and lurke away when he should enter the list then shal ignorance falshood temeritie shame confusion be al of them his For trial then of his strength and art in this combat vndertaken I do intend him a double assault first by discouering in general his weake performance and then by answering in particular his shaddowed blowes First then where he vndertaketh in the verie Title of his Challenge to shew that the present Religion of the Roman Church was obserued and resisted in al Ages since Christ as it came in and increased and that for more precisenes by Semicenturies or euerie fifty yeares at the first iumpe he ouerleapeth the first 600. yeares after Christ confessing that (2) Ib. p. 385. in the first 600. yeares there was no substantial or fundamental Innouation receiued into the Church wherevpon he beginneth his Catalogue thus After 600. yeares were expired that the seueral points of the true Faith began one after another to be more grossely corrupted and changed by the Church of Rome In the first fiftie I name c. Now how was it possible for this great
Champion by one only blow to giue a greater aduantage to vs or more dangerous wound to himselfe then at the verie first footing or encounter to yeeld so much homage and honour to the Roman Church as that for the first 600. yeares entire she remained constant and immoueable in her Faith receiued from Christ and his Apostles And that more especially and altogeather vnanswerably seing the very particulars of our Roman Faith wherein D. White cheifly insisteth for his pretended Innouation and change as our Doctrines of Images of Primacie of the vnmarried life of Priests of Real presence of merits c. are al of them (3) See before l. 2. acknowledged by the most of the learnedst Protestants to haue been the verie Doctrines beleefe and practise of the Primitiue Church not some few only but al or most of the ancient Fathers being therefore reproued in general as agreeing with vs Catholiks in the points forenamed The second thing I intend to obserue is the strange indiscretion or palpable ignorance discouered in M. White by his thus appealing to these last 1000. yeares for proofe of change and noueltie in our Roman Faith for what period of time is more generally confessed by al other Protestants to haue been wholy Papistical then these last 1000. yeares (4) See before l. c. 2. Do not D. Fulk M. Parkins M. Powel and manie others al of them confesse that for these 1000. yeares to speake in their Dialect the Popish Heresie hath spread itself ouer the whole earth the Protestant Church during that time being not visible to the world but lying hid vnder the chaffe of Poperie Yea do not our Protestants further confesse to the contrarie saying (5) See before l. 1. c. 5. Between the yeare of Christ 300. and 316. the Antichristian and Papistical Raigne began raigning vniuersally without anie debatable contradiction 1260. c. neuer suffring for the space of 1000. yeares after Syluester the First anie to be seen vouchable or visible of the true Church And it is so cleare that during the foresayd time our Roman Church was not resisted or charged with anie Innouation by anie imagined Protestant that directly likewise to the verie contrary it is acknowledged that the faigned Protestants of those times did in al external shew and profession conforme (6) See hereafter l. 4. c. 6. themselues to the Roman Church whereof to omit others D. White sayth himselfe (7) Way to the true Church p. 371. Protestants did not alwayes abandon the Communion of the Roman Church c. the Tyrannie of Rome suppressed them so that they could not manifest abroad to the world their dislike c. but by force and violence were constrained to deuoure their owne sorrow in the societie of their aduersaries So sociable and good fellowes were those Platonical Protestants who insteed of resisting the Roman Church for anie conceited Innouation according likewise to Osiander (8) Cent. 8. Ep. Ded. p. 3 with a common Custome as with a violent streame were carried away to do the same things with the Papists Which things he numbreth to be their (9) Cent. 16 p. 1073. cent 8. Ep. ded p. 2. Communion in the Ministerie of the Ghospel or preaching in the Bible in Baptisme in the Lords supper in taking of Orders c. such saith he as those times did affoard Then which what can be sayd more forcible to free our Roman Church from al change or contradiction during the foresayd times Thirdly it is to be obserued that whereas D. White vndertaketh to shew that the present Religion of the Roman Church was obserued and resisted in al Ages as it came in and increased naming c. to that end the time when it so came in and increased he faileth so fouly in his performance thereof that among so manie examples by him produced he doth not nor could giue Instance of the first noted begining of anie one or of the first contradictioÌ„ made therevnto In clerest conuiction whereof I wil euidently shew here after that euerie particular point of Doctrine by him instanced for our pretended first change and Protestant resisting was formerly in much more ancient Ages taught and beleeued in the Roman Church and so consequently that D. White doth not performe his promise made of naming The time when our present Religion of the Roman Church was obserued and resisted in al Ages as it came in and increased Now to passe from the Time to the Persons which D. White nameth to haue made the Resistance himself diuideth them into three parts or ranks saying (10) Way to the true Church p. 393. one part of them is the Greek Church an other part is some ancient Diuines of their owne Church a third part is such as the Roman Church persecuted The first sayth he are sound and lawful witnesses being the true Church of God to this day though polluted with some errours The second though Papists in manie points yet shew against al exception those points wherein they were no Papists to haue been no part of the Catholick Faith so called in their time for then they would not haue resisted them but embrace them as they do al the rest The third part I graunt the Church of Rome then persecuted and now calleth Hereticks to wit vs Protestants but that is the question c. But now to examine the force of the argument thus taken from this triple testimonie produced by our Doctour First I do constantly auerre that no one part of the three no nor anie one man of that one part can be assigned which was not originally at his first birth and breeding a Roman Catholick and not Protestant And therefore though Going out of the Roman Church he afterwardes contradicted the same in some one respect or other yet this nothing proueth that the Roman Church did change her Faith but only that the sayd maÌ„ so Going out from her did change his Faith which she had formerly taught him he beleeued Secondly I do as resolutely auouch that not anie one man of al those which D. White produceth as obseruers impugners of the pretended change of Roman Church was not only at the first but neuer after through his whole life truly Pâ—otestant dissenting much more in Doctrine and profession of life from moderne Protestants then from Roman Catholicks And therefore if their testimonie be good against vs in regard of some one or other opinion wherein they haue Apostated from vs agreing yet in the rest how much more forcible wil it be against Protestants from whom they wholy disclaime in most and most important Articles of Faith For example the first part of D. Whites Spyes which obserued and resisted our conceited change is the Greek Church which sayth he are sound and lawful witnesses being the true Church of God to this day c. Now concerning these so sound witnesses first it is certaine that as there haue been seueral
(11) Nicephonus Zonoras Glicas Humbertus and Crispinus Of the Estate of the Church p. 364. 253. OsiaÌ„d cent 9. 10. 11. c p. 144. 156. 261 262. Spark ag Albineâ— p. 158 Keckerman System Theol. p. 68. 69. defections of the Greek Church from the Roman in these later times yet haue the Grecians at manie seueral times reformed submitted themselues to the Roman Church though at the last falling againe they were therevpon oppressed with barbarous Turckisme Secondly their few errours wherein they dissent from vs are most notorious both for their first begining and the contradiction made vnto them So their denial of subiection to the Roman Church was begun by Ihon of Constantinople but therein he was contradicted by S. Gregorie (12) l. 4. Ep. 34. 36. l. 7. Ep. 36.64 and by (13) Ep. vniuersis Episcopis Pelagius Their denial of prayer for the dead was begun by Aerius but it was contradicted in him by S. Epiphanius (14) haer 75. a Grecian as also by S. Austin (15) haer 53 a Latin Doctour and yet in both these doctrines they conformed themselues to Rome as witnesse M. Spark (16) Ag. Albines p. 1â—8 Osiand cent 1â— p. 477. Crisp of the Estate of the Chur. p. 451. Osiander and Crispinus In like sort their defence of marriage of Priests was contradicted in them by S. Epiphanius (17) haer 59 and particularly in Theodorus by S. Chrisostome (18) Ep 6. ad Theodor. mon. also a Grecian Their denial of the Holie-Ghost proceding from the Father and the Sonne was begun and coÌ„tracted about Anno 764 as testifieth Keckermanus (19) System Theol p. 68. Their denial of vnleauened bread in Celebration of the Eucharist was begun about Anno 1053. as appeareth by Leo (20) Ep. ad Michael Episc Constantinop c. 5. the Ninth Osiander 21) Cent. 11. p. 156. the Centurists 22) Cent. 11. c. 8. Other few and lesser errours they had which according to Crispâ—nus 23) vbi supra p. 253. did Anno Domini 870. consist but only in the Primacie and diuersitie of Ceâ—emonies But now as the Grocians did differ in the former points from Catholicks wherin yet was their inconstancie most notorious as also their first begining and contradiction euen by the learnedst Grecians euer markable so did they incomparably much more differ from Protestants as I haue formerly 24) l. 1. c. 6. proued more at large agreing with vs as Sir Edwin Sandes 25) Relation of Religion in the last lease but fiâ—e confesseth In opinion of Transubstantiation and generally in the Sacrifice and whole bodie of the Masse in praying to Saints in auricular confession in offring Sacrifice and prayer for the dead Purgatorie and worshiping of Pictures c. To which other Protestant Writers before added al the seauen Sacraments Relicks Freewil Monachisme Vowes of Chastitie Fast of Lent and other set fasting-dayes that Priestes may not marry after Oâ—deâ—s taken and others Yea at this day they so much detest Protestant Religion as that therein they vtterly refused 66 al Commerce and Communion which with great sollicitation and submission was offred them by Protestants And now hence to returne to D. White whose first part of sound and lawful witnesses against the Roman Church was the Greek Church the same being sayth he the Church of God to this day For first how can those be sayd to be sound and lawful witnesses for those verie points wherein they dissent from vs Wherein may they be more iustly disclaimed from or suspected of partiality then when they speake in their owne Cause and in behalfe of their owne opinions Of what Credit and authoritie with Protestants is the opinion and Doctrine of a Catholick Or wil they possibly esteeme him a sound and lawful witnes against themselues If not how can the Greek Church be produced as a sound and lawful witnes against the Roman for those verie doctâ—ines wherin she hath departed from her and for which she was contradicted by the cheifest Doctours and Pastours both of the Greek and Roman Church and in which also as seing her errour she hath often recanted and submitted her self 26) See hereof l. 4. c. 6. And againe with what Iudgement doth D. White appeal to the Greek Church as sound and lawful witnesses in defence of his owne and against the Roman which detesteth and refuseth al spiritual Communion with the Protestant sect as being nouel and contrarie to the ancient Fathers and which agreeth wholy with our Catholick Church their former few errours only excepted And lastly how could the Doctour afford the Greek Church so high a Title of being the true Church of God to this day seing that it accordeth much more with the Roman then the Protestant Church and yet dissenteth from both But al this was to point out his sound and lawful witnesses against vs whereas indeed in the most and weightiest Controuersies they may be truly tearmed his sound and lawful Aduersaries And thus much of the first part of D. Whites sound witnesses summoned by him for the making of his Catalogue of his Protestant Doctours obseruing and resisting the present Roman Religion as it came in and increased in al Ages To come now to the second part of witnesses who though Papists saith he in manie points yet shew against al exception those poâ—nts wherein they were no Papists to haue been no Part of the Catholick Faith so called in their time for then they would not haue resisted them but embrace them as they do al the rest Here our Doctour dealeth plainly with vs confessing that these his witnesses are Papists in manie points but he might if it had pleased him haue coupled the Grecians with them who are confessedly no lesse Papists in most points then these But it seemeth he was willing to rayse vp the number which yet being examined wil end in A. O. For first if these be lawful witnesses for the Protestant Church because in some points they dissented from the Roman then much more may they be sound witnesses against Protestants themselues seing from them they dissent and continue aduerse in most most weightie points whatsoeuer And whereas M. White vrgeth that Against al exception these points wherin they were no Papists were no part of the Catholick Faith because then they would not haue resistâ—d them but embrace them as they do al the rest this is so subiect to al exception and answer that euerie child may except against it for whether is it more likelie that but some one or other man thus resisting the Roman Church did innouate himself and change and depart from his former Faith or that the whole Church did alter or change from the sayd man and his singular Faith For example if I should argue thus in behalf of Puritans that though they be Protestants in manie points yet they shew against al exception those points wherein they are no Protestants to haue
answer After 750. 750. to 800. I name saith he the Councel of Constantinople vnder Constant Copronymus and of Franckford vnder Charles the Great against Images and the booke yet extant that he caused to be made against the 2. Nicene Councel with another set forth by Ludonicus his Sonne to the same effect A great tooth stil hath our Minister against Images but it neuer biteth for tâ—is Councel of Constantinople was likewise neuer confirmed but expressely condemned in the Seauenth Synod (47) Act. 6. Paul Diac. l. 21. 22 de Rib. Rom. Zonoras in Annalibus And being assembled only of Grecians who in the doctrine of Images were manie of them diuided from the Roman Church the testimonie thereof is of no force as I haue shewed before But besides it is not worthie of obseruation that as neither of these Councels of Constantinople so often vrged by our Doctour were euer confirmed by the Bishop of Rome without whose allowance according to the first Councel (48) Socrat. l. 2. c. 13. of Nice it was not lawful to assemble General Councels so neither did anie of the Patriarchs themselues euer assent vnto them as is manifest by Zonoras Cedrenus Paulus Diaconus and other Writers hereof Yea further al Authours who write of General Councels as Psellus Photins Zonoras Nicephorus Cedrenus Nycetas Paulus Diaconus Rhegino Ado Sigebert Abbas Vspergensis and others do either not number these two of Constantinople amongst the Councels of the Church or els do expressely reproue them and the 2. Councel of Nice which was truly General and plenarie did directly abrogate and condemne them Adde hereunto in fauour of our Doctour who is so far in loue with these Councels that in that vnder Constantin is decreed (49) Can. 15. those to be accursed who do not inuocate the B. Virgin Marie As also 50) Can. 17. those who do not worship and Inuocate the rest of the Saincts And 51) Can. 18. those who do not beleeue that God wil giue eternal life for merits of works according to the iust waight of his Iudgement al which Catholike Canons are 52) Cent. 8. c. 9. col 639 recited by the Centurists Now if M. White wil vrge this Councel against Images in which respect it was impugned and contradicted by seueral means why may not I much more vrge it for these other poynts wherein it was neuer reproued by any Councel or other Writers Now as concerning the Councel of Franckford vrged here and by sundrie other Protestants against Images First the a) Cen. 8. c. 9. col 639. Magdeburgians themselues acknowledge that Pope Adrian then Bishop of Rome neuer consented vnto it but both himself and his Legates resisted it Now neuer 53) Galasius Temo de vinâ—ulo Anathematis was there anie one Councel holden lawful whereunto the Roman Bishop resisted In so much that this Councel of Franckford itself decreed 54) In lib. Catolino That the last Iudgement of Controuersies belonged to the Roman Bishop and with this verie argument cheifly it endeauoured to confute the seauenth Synode imagining this to haue been assembled without the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome So that this Councel of Franckford by the testimonie of the Centurists destroyeth it selfe Secondly the Centurists in the same place teach that the 2. Nicene Synod was confirmed by Pope Adrian but the Councel of Franckford reiecteth only such Synods as are assembled without the Popes Authoritie wherefore according to the Magdeburgians not the Councel of Nice wherein Images were approued but some other was reproued by the Councel of Franckford Thirdly The Centurists further confesse that the Councel of Franckford did not decree that Images should be taken out of the Churches but remayning in the Churches that they should not be adored Wherefore then do Protestants pul down Images and break them Wherefore do not themselues obserue the Decree of the Councel Yea this verie Councel thundreth Anathema 55) l. Carol. Hincmarus Magdeburg to al such as deface break pul down Images how then wil our Protestants escape this bolt Fourthly the Councel of Franckford did indeed impugne 56) l. Carol. Hincmarus two Councels one of Constantinople which decreed against Images and the other of Nice which was for Images But the impugning of this latter was only through errour and materially euen as the Councel of Ariminum condemned the word Homousios for the Authour of the Bookes vnder the name of Charles had obtruded vnto the same Councel of Franckford two vntruths 57) In praef lib. Carol. First that the Councel of Nice had decreed that Images should be worshipped with the honour of Latria or that which is due only to God 58) l. Carol. The second that this decree was made by the Grecians without the consent of the Bishop of Rome Now these two lyes supposed for truths it is no wonder though the Councel of Franckford resisted the Councel of Nice And that these were mere Impostures falsly imposed vpon the Councel of Nice it is euident aswel in that the Legates of the Roman Bishop subscribed to euerie Act as also in that the Epistles of Pope Adrian himself for Images 59) Act. 2. were read in the Councel it self And so likewise that the sayd Councel did not decree Images to be worshiped with Latria is further manifest in that Basil of Ancyra who was formerly an Heretick being now conuerted and professing the Catholick Faith the (60) Act. 1. whole Councel hearing him and approuing him affirmed that he did worship Images but not with Latria seing that was due only to God And the like (61) Act 3.4.7 was professed by Constantin Bishop of Constance and other Bishops in the Seauenth Synode Neither let it seeme improbable that such vntruths could be forged against a general Councel so lately before celebrated Wheras most Protestants dare now affirme that Catholicks adore Images as Gods whereas almost thousands of Catholick Writers and the General Councel of Trent celebrated in the Confins of Germanie do declaime the contrarie what wonder then if the like be forged of a Greek Synod which few could read and vnderstand and which was celebrated in the Oriental parts being far distant Lastly it is to be remembred that though this Councel of Franckford did erre yet was it not in matter of Faith but only in fact condemning vpon false information the Councel of Nice neither was it euer confirmed but expressely reiected by the Bishop of Rome and therefore the errour thereof doth nothing preiudice the infallible authoritie of lawful approued General Councels So manie wayes doth it appeare that this thredworne Argument from the Councel of Franckford against Images is altogeather impertinent And now to come to the bastard Booke fathered vpon Charles the Great First the Booke of Adrian the First to Charles is extant whereby it appeareth that the sayd Booke was written by some Heretick and sent from Charles to Adrian
the Emperour doth nothing proue any Innouation in the Roman Church but rather to the contrarie doth plainly shew his vnion and Communion therewith in matters of faith and Religion In like sort where he obiecteth that S. Bernard freely noted diuers Corruptions then comming in it is so vnprobable yea so grossely vntrue as that to the contrarie (90) L. 2. Cont. Dur. p 154. Fulk against Rhem. Test f. 133. D. Whitaker and D. Fulk both of them confesse that he taught the Popes Supremacie and D. Whitaker (91) Ad Rat. Camp rat 7. p. 105. aknowledgeth that he was of our Church (92) In specul Eccl. p. 23. Gomarus calleth him our S. Bernard The Centurists affirme that he was 93) â—ent 12. c. 10. col 1637. a most earnest Defender of the Sea of Antichrist Bel (94) Challenge c. p. 148. tearmeth him Bernard the Popes deare Monk and reuerend Abbot Yea the Centurists further report That he sayd 95) Cent. 12. col 1939. to the Duke of Aquitaine whatsoeuer is out of the Roman Church by the Iudgement of God is certainly to perish euen as those things which were out of the Ark were drowned in the diluge As also he that persecuteth the Pope of Rome persecuteth the Sonne of God Now by this al of it confessed by sundrie and much more learned Protestants then M. White it more then cleerly appeareth that S. Bernard was no fit witnes to be produced against the Roman Church nor that he himself did differ in anie one point of Faith from her much lesse did note anie pretended corruption of Faith comming in And as for the feast of the Conception or the Doctrine concerning the Virgin Maries freedome from original sinne it is not yet to this day defined by the Church as a matter of Faith But where he further vrgeth that S. Bernaâ—d was against Merits Iustificatâ—on by works Freewil keeping the Law Seauen Sacraments and vncertantie of our Saluation and the Popes greatnes in Temporalities it is al of it most vntrue as himself might haue plainly shewed if he had been pleased to haue set downe the answers out of Cardinal Bellarmine as he was to haue his obiections In like sorte that which he obiecteth concerning Arnulph pertaineth only to matter of life and manners not to Faith or doctrine and therefore it maketh nothing to proue anie Innouation or change in our present Roman Religion As also though as then one preached in Antwerp against the Real Presence yet I haue before freed our Church from al Innouation therein in far more ancient times And as for Honorius his noting the bringing in of Wafers into the Sacrament in this Age it is so vntrue that M. Cartwright (96) See before l. 2. c. 8. confesseth that it was brought in by Pope Alexander who liued Anno 111. which is some thousand yeares before the time now obiected After 1150. to 1200. I name saith M. White the Emperour Frederick Barbarossa forbidding Appeales to Rome and the comming of Legats from Rome into Germanie c. But though the Emperour did this being as then at discord with the Pope yet his fact was so faultie as that he was thervpon and for other iniuries Excommunicated From which 97) Baron Anno 1160. num 31. 32. Anno 1168. num 60. after vpon his submission 98) Baron Anno 1177. num 22. and promise of obedience he was absolued and permitted to come to the Pope whose feet the Emperour kissed and bowing his head receiued reuerently his benediction And that the Roman Church as then made no Innouation concerning Appeales or sending of Legats it is most cleere by general practise allowance thereof in the purest times of the Primitiue Church proued at large 99) Before l. 2. c. 4. heretofore And as for Lincolniensis noting as then the Noueltie and Heresie of Friars M. White only barely saith it without al further proof yea though as then the Institution of Friars had been but new yet neither was it in anie thing Heretical nor proued anie Innouation in the Church in Faith and doctrine But to come to the Waldenses who according to D. White were dispersed ouer al this part of the world and in most substantial poynts resisted the Papacie c. as it is not denyed but that in some poynts they reuolted from the Roman Faith so haue I shewed 100) Before l. 1. c. 3. before that in sundrie other weighty Articles of Religion they agreed with Catholicks against Protestants And it is verie easie further to proue that indeed they beleeued sundrie grosse errours though M. White would make the world to think That the sayd errours were falsly imposed vpon them 103) Ibid. p. 729. 747. 760. For Illiricus himselfe 101) Catal. Test verit p 731. 745. 730. 732. testifyeth that they taught That Laymen and women might Consecrate the Sacrament and preach That Clergie men should haue no possessions or proprieties That 104) Ibid. p. 731. 743. married Persons mortally sinned who accompanied togeather without hope of Issue That neither Priest 105) Ibid. p. 760. 740. Osiand Cent. 9. 10. 11. p. 440. nor Ciuil Magistrat being guiltie of mortal sinne did enioy their dignitie or were to be obeyed And to omit many 106) Ibid. p. 734. others they went to the Catholick Churches dissembling and offered confessed and communicated dissemblingly And now must M. White either charge his owne Brother Illiricus to haue falsely imposed these errours vpon them or els must he confesse that these so dissembling and ignorant witnesses are altogeather insufficient to proue anie change in the Roman Church out of which themselues went out After 1200. 1200. to 1250. I name sayth M. White Almaricus a Doctour of Paris that was buâ—ned for withstanding Altars Images c. It is not denyed but that Almaricus was an Heretick falling from the Roman Church But yet I hope D. White wil be ashamed to clayme him for a Protestant for he was condemned first by the Vniuersitie of Paris after by Innocentius and a Synod at Rome for these propositions following (o) Cesarius Dial. l. 5 That there is no Resurrection of bodâ—es Secondly that there is no Paradise norhel Thirdly that the bodie of Christ is no more in the Sacrament after the words of Consecration then in a stone or horse Fourthly that God spake as much in Ouid as in Austin and other such to the number of 20. for which he was burned openly in Paris with certaine other blasphemous Hereticks against the Persons of the B. Trinitie sayth (p) Lib. 6. Hist Franc. and see Gers Tract 3. in Math. Aemilius li. 6. Hist Gal. Genebrad in Chro. Anno 1208. Gagninus Besides I haue (107) Before lib. 2. c. 14. 22. proued before that the foresayd Catholick poynts vrged to be denyed by Almaricus were yet al of them taught and beleeued by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church so that no
Innouation therein could be obserued or reproued by Almaricus In like sorte though Robert Bishop of Lincolne withstood the Popes proceedings in England yet this nothing proueth anie change or first comming in of anie point of Faith in the Roman Church obserued or resisted by the sayd Robert Besides D. Godwine reporteth that a Cardinal sayd to the Pope concerning him He (a) Catalo of Bishop of England p. 240. is for Religion a Catholick as wel as we And so dying he gaue al his bookes an excellent Librarie vnto the Friar Minors at Oxford So charitable was he to Friars and consequently so Roman Catholick euen at his verie death And where he affirmeth that Ioakim Abbas sayd that Antichrist was borne at Rome and should sit in the Apostolick sea It is so vntrue that in his Epistle prefiged to his Exposition vpon the Apocalypse he submitteth his writings to the Censure of the Sea Apostolick affirming further that he firmely beleeueth that the Gates of Hel cannot preuaile against the Roman Church and that her Faith shal not perish before the end of the world Yea in his Exposition vpon the 6. Chapter and 11. verse he calleth such the Sonnes of Babylon who impugne the Church of Peter And vpon the 7. Chapter and 2. verse by the Angel ascending from the East hauing the signe of the liuing God he vnderstandeth the Bishop of Rome who with his fellow-Bishops with the signe of the Crosse wil arme the Elect in that last tribulation which Antichrist shal rayse So litle cause there is to vrge this Abbot against the Pope And indeed al that truly can be vrged against him is that being an old man and half out of his wits he was censured by the Pope for certaine fonde Prophecies and some errours also about the B. Trinitie as appeareth by the Decree extant in the Canon Law against him and by other Authours that haue written of him And as for Fidericus the Second Emperour resisting the Popes Supremacie it proueth no more but that euen the most vicious Emperours were most aduerse to the Pope For he being a Prince of most scandalous and wicked life was after due admonitions excommunicated as also deposed by Pope Innocent the Fourth in a general Councel holden at Lyons so that his resisting in this regard the Supremacie is only a guiltie and conuicted Persons resisting of al such lawful Authoritie whereby he is censured and punished Concerning Arnoldus Villanouanus speaking against Friars the Sacrifice of the Masse and Papal Decrees This M. White only proueth by the testimonies of the Magdeburgians and Osiander which being Protestants are no competent witnesses against Catholicks But besides I haue proued (107) l. 2. c. 9. 4. before that the Sacrifice of the Masse and the Popes Authoritie were beleeued and practised in much more ancient times As also that the Institution of Friars proueth no Innouation in Faith and Religion Euerardus broaching those foule and false reproaches against Pope Gregorie the Seauenth called Hildebrand proueth nothing but his owne disobedience and impatience hauing been by the same 108) Greg. 7. Ep. 18. Pope for his owne demerits iustly suspended from his Episcopal function After 1250. 1250. to 1300. I name Gulielmus de S. Amore withstanding Friars and their abuses but how impertinent this is I haue shewed sufficiently before The Preachers also saith he in Sweden that publickly taught the Pope and his Bishops to be Hereticks But M. White receiuing this Relation from Illiricus no further answer wil be requisit Dante 's also saith he writ that the Empire descended not from the Pope But Dante 's being only a Poet intermedling in other matters committed (109) See Bellar. in Append. ad lib. de Sum. Pont c. 14. manie grosse errours for which his bookes are condemned and prohibited by the Church yea he liued in faction against some (110) Ibid. c. 12. Popes and therefore his writing against them is of no force As for Gulielmus Altisiodorensis M. White producing nothing in particular out of him against the Roman Church but only affirming that in his Summes are found manie things confuted that then were comming in no further particular answer can be expected and though he referre himself for particulars to this his own Booke yet citing no page or place thereof I hould it vnworthie of so paineful search it being also wel knowne that Altisiodorensis only differed from other Schoole-men in matters disputable and not defined After 1300. 1300. to 1350. I name sayth he Marcilius Patauinus that wrot against the Popes Supremacie But he being a knowne condemned Heretick a flatterer of the Schismatical Emperour and his Bookes condemned by the Church as also the Popes Primacie being formerly acknowledged in the Primitiue Church his testimonie is sundrie wayes insufficient And the like is to be answered to Ocham (111) Tritheâ—nius Genebrard l. 4. Chron. who was purposely hyred by the Emperour to write against the Pope who was also Excommunicated and his Bookes prohibited Gregorius Ariminensis his differences were only in Schoole points not determined by the Church And as for the Vniuersitie of Paris condemning the Popes Pardons it is most vntrue and therefere M. White did wel to father it only vpon his Brother Illiricus whom he knew to be expert in the art of forging After 1350. 1350. to 1400. I name sayth he Aluâ—rus Pelagius who wrot a Book of the L mentation of the Church wherein he reproueth diuerse abuses of his times But who denyeth but that in the Militant Church consisting of good and euil there are manie abuses in life and conuersation But as for abuse or Innouation in matter of Doctrine and Faith Aluarus maketh no mention at al in his sayd Booke And as for Montziger disputing against â—ransubstantiation and Adoration of the Sacrament and Cesenas calling the Pope Antichrist besides that the truth hereof dependeth only of the testimonie of Fox and Illâ—ricus both of them Protestants I haue sufficiently before cleered both these poynts from al Innouation in Ages much more ancient Now as for Iohn Wiceliffe as I haue shewed (112) l. 1. c. 3. before that in sundrie poynts of Faith he agreed with Catholicks which Protestants now impugne so it is euident that he taught sundrie grosse errours which both Catholicks and Protestants do detest as that If a (113) Fox Act. Mâ—n p. 96. Bishop or Priest be in deadly sinne he doth not Order consecrate or Baptize that Al (114) Osiand cent 9. 10. 11. p. 459. oathes are vnlawful That (115) Osiand cent 15. p. 457. al things come to passe by absolute necessitie That there 116) Ib. p. 454. is no Ciuil Migistrate whilest he is in mortal sinne and sundrie others in regard of which Protestants 117) Pant. Chronol p. 119. Mathias Hoe in his Tract duo Tract 1. p. 27. themselues ranke him in the Catalogue of Hereticks So that smal Credit or succour wil M. White
purchase for producing Wiccliffe as one of his witnesses against the Roman Church After 1400. 1400. to 1450. I name sayth he the Lollardes in England c. that were persecuted at that time And that very iustly M. White for besides that they held the former Heresies of the Wiccliuists they further (118) Trithem in Chr. Anno. 1315. impugned the Sacraments of Baptisme and the Eucharist they held that Lucifer with the rest of his Angels were iniuriously thrust out of Heauen by Michael and his Angels and consequently to be restored againe at the day of Iudgement and that Michael and his Angels are for the sayd iniurie to be damned from the day of Iudgement for euer That our B. Ladie could not beare Christ and remaine a Virgin That anie thing done vnder the earth in Caues and Cellars is not punnishable with other such like Which if M. White did know in them and remember greatly might he be ashamed to number them amongst his sound and lawful witnesses for the Protestant Church Now as for Plowmans tale reporting that Chaucer expressly writ the Pope and his Clergie to be Antichrist as vnworthie of other answer I leaue it for a Tale fit for Plowmen to tel in a winters night hauing also spoken of this point before Neither doth Nilus his writing against Purgatorie and the Popes Supremacie anie thing aduantage the Protestant Church or impugne the Roman for both these Doctrines I haue formerly proued to haue been the general beleef of the Primitiue Church Besides Nilus was one of the Greek Church which sometimes in the foresaid points was diuided from the Roman yea he was condemned for an Heretick and therevpon enrolled by Illiricus (119) Catalog Test verit Tom. 2. p. 876. amongst the witnesses of the Truth of Protestancie Concerning Iohn Husse and Hierome of Prage D. White confessing that their Doctrine was the same with that of the waldenses the former answer to them may serue also for this Besides I haue (120) l. 1. c. 3. conuinced heertofore that Husse wholy agreed with Catholicks in sundrie Articles earnestly now impugned by Protestants As for Sauanarola his writings are condemned by the Church of Christ Neither did he impugne anie one point of our Catholick Faith which I haue not formerly shewed to haue been taught by the ancient Fathers And therefore his resisting the Roman Church doth nothing proue anie change or Innouation made by her And the selfe same answer is to be giuen to Wesselus Groningensis whose Bookes are prohibited As also to Ioannes de Vessalia who defended the Heresie of the Grecians concerning the proceeding of the Holie-Ghost who yet in the end recanted al his opinions held against the Church of Rome And where M. White further affirmeth that in England also and Bohemia liued those which followed the Doctrine of Wiccliffe and Husse continuing the same til Luther Supposing this for true the contrarie whereof I haue proued (121) l. 1. c. 3. already at large yet doth it proue no more then the Examples of Wiccliffe and Husse themselues which lately we haue seen to proue nothing at al in behalf of Protestants And when 1500. 1500. yeares were expired arose sayth M. White Luther Suinglius Tindal and diuers others whom God raysed vp to cal his people out of Babylon c. These I must confesse were faithful witnesses for M. Whites Church and great Resisters of the Roman But I cannot confesse that God but the Diuel only raised them vp for so Luther confesseth (122) Tom 7. Wittem l. de Missa f. 443. that Satan disswaded him from the Masse And (123) Tom. 2 l. de subsid Euchar. f. 249. Suinglius acknowledgeth that he was instructed in the night by an Admonisher whether white or black he remembreth not And the same might be shewed of sundrie others first broachers of Protestancie But as now I wil purposely for beare hauing waded ouer long in this so vnsauourie a Pudle of D. Whites Catalogue In which as he hath not proued by anie one Instance anie knowne begining or change in our present Roman Faith since the Apostles times so I cannot but obserue that amongst al the witnesses by him produced against the Roman Church not one can be picked out which was not a man vitious and of a scandalous life or els infected with Schisme and Heresie for which he was euer noted reproued and condemned euen by the Doctours and Writers of the same time wherein he liued And so I stil conclude that our Roman Church hauing neuer Gone out of anie other Church nor euer been noted of Innouation and change in Faith that therefore she is not anie Nouel or Heretical Sect but the One True Catholick and Apostolick Church of Christ THE FOVRTH BOOK WHERIN IS PROVED BY THE CONFESSION OF PROTESTANTS that according to the Sacred Scriptures the Roman Church is the true Church of Christ And so to haue euer continued from his time vntil the Date hereof And of the contrarie the Protestants Church to be only a Sect Heretical neuer to haue been before the dayes of Luther PROTESTANTS FLYING TO THE sacred Scriptures in proof and defence of their Church and Religion it is shewed the sayd flight not only in itself to be dishonourable but also to be the ordinarie flight of al moderne Hereticks CHAPTER I. HAVING laboured thus far with al diligence to search for the finding out of Christs true Church and her necessarie continuance and visibilitie through-out al Ages and euer finding the present Roman Church and Religion to haue been at al times the only knowne publick and professed Church of Christians in al Countries whatsoeuer The Protestant Congregation in the meane time being indeed not in Being and by their owne former acknowledgments not knowne visible or heard-of in the Christian world I begun further to think with myself what strange euasion colour or pretence our Protestants could inuent for their further maintaining of their new-sprong Faith And reading casually in (1) l. 7. p. 478. D. Whitakers book against the Iesuit Duraeus I found him expresly to hold and teach that it is sufficient for vs Protestants by comparing the Popish doctrine and Scriptures togeather to know their difference and disagreing we leave it free for Historiographers sayth he to write what they list And agreably hereto I since found (2) In Bancroftes Suruey p. 219. Beza to say If any shal oppose against my exposition the authoritie of certaine of the ancient Fathers I do appeale to the word of God So that the Protestants last refuge and appeale is to the only written word of God distrusting and renouncing al proof or testimonie either from ancient Councels Fathers or Histories for they willingly (3) Midleton in his Papisto-Mastix p. 193. confesse that perusing Councels Fathers and Stories from the Apostles forward they find the Print of the Popes feet Now for the clearer discouerie of the grosse absurditie and greatest
al faith Into such miserable streights manifest coÌ„tradictions are the learnedst Protestants driuen through want of their Churches continuance and vniuersalitie Yea vpon the self same ground of the Protestant Churches not fulfilling the predictions of the Churches continuance (35) In his Preface of the great Latine Bible dedicated to K. Edward the Sixt. Castalio bursteth out into these words Verily we must confesse either that those things shal be performed hereafter or haue been already or that God is to be accused of lying If any man answer that they haue been performed I wil demand of him when If he say in the Apostles time I wil demand how it chanceth that neither then the knowledge of God was altogeather perfect and often in so â—bort space vanished away which was promised to be eternal and more abundant then the flouds of the Sea And agayne The more I do peruse the Scriptures the lesse do I find the same performed howsoeuer you vnderstand the sayd Prophecies But (36) Apcalypsis insignium aliquot Haerâ—siarcharum fol. 4. nu 8. Dauid George a Protestant at Basile proceeded much further vpon the self same cause as is recorded by one of his brethren who introduceth him disputing thus If the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles had been most true and most powerful to Saluation the Church by their Doctrine they had framed and confirmed should not haue been torne asunder for against the Church the Gates of Hel Christ himself witnessing can not preuayle But now it is euident that the building of Christ and his Apostles is vtterly ouerthrowne by Antichrist as is abundantly seen in the Papacye From whence he necessarily concludeth the Doctrine of the Apostles to haue been torne and discontinued c. To the same effect it is reported in his Historie (37) Historia Georgij Dauidis published by the Diuines of Basile that he thus disputed If the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles had been true and perfect the Church which they planted c. should haue continued c. But now it is manifest that Antichrist hath subuerted the Doctrine of the Apostles and the Church by them begun as is euident in the Papacie therefore the Doctrine of the Apostles was false and imperfect Not much lesse dangerously writeth (38) In praef suorum Dialogorum Bernardine Ockin When I did consider how Christ by his power wisdome and goodnes had founded and established his Church washed it with his bloud and enriched it with his Spirit And againe discerned how the same was vtterly ouer-throwne I could not but wonder and being desirous to know the cause I found there had been Popes So playne it is that the Church of Protestants which themselues suppose to be the Church of Christ directly contrarie to the forsayd Scriptures hath not continued but hath been vtterly ouerthrowne A truth so certaine and plaine that therfore Christ his Apostles and Doctrine are al of them accused of lying through want of accomplishment of the forsayd Prophecies in the Protestant Churches continuance and vniuersalitie And heer I can not but admire the follie and impudencie of D. White (39) The way to the Church p. 85. who directly contrarie to his other brethrens coÌ„fessions to al Histories writeth thus audaciously We confesse the Church neuer ceaseth to be but continueth alwayes without Interruption to the worlds end and against al Papists we make it good that this verie Faith we now professe hath successiuely continued in al Ages since Christ and was neuer interrupted so much as one yeare moneth or day and to confesse the contrarie were sufficient to proue vs no part of the Church of God c. And yet the Contrarie is plainly confessed by D. Whitaker before affirming the mysterie of Iniquitie to haue possessed the whole Church by Cannerus confessing Apostacie to haue auerted the whole bodie of the Church from Christ by M. Paâ—kins confessing for manie hundred yeares an vniuersal Apostacie by D. Willet defending that the Church in which the Word is truly preached and Sacraments administred hath not alwayes been by Castalio confessing that the Prophecies of the Churches Continuance he cannot find performed in the Protestant Church by Dauid George confessing that the Protestant Church hath been vtterly ouerthrowne not continued and by Bernardine Ockin teaching the very same So cleer it is that the Church of Protestants is not the Church of Christ which according to the Shriptures is euer to continue euen from Christs time vnto the end of the world But now to examine whether in our Roman Catholick Church the forsayd Scriptures are truly verifyed by her perpetual Continuance euen from Christs time to these our dayes I hold it superfluous seing I haue proued the same at large heretofore through euery Centurie or Age and that by no weaker proofes then the plainest acknowledgements of manie and the learnedst Protestants as namely (40) See before l. 1. c. 2. for these last 1000. yeares by M. Parkins Powel Wotton Tindal Iohnson Doue Beacon Fulk Downham Whitakers Luther Caluin the Centurists Osiander Hospinian Danaeus and sundrie others And for the like Continuance of our Roman Church for the first 600. yeares (41) See before l. 1. c. 5. by Zanchius Zuinglius Caluin Beza Danaeus Francus Rhegius Broccard Brightman Napper Fulk Powel Leigh Morton Midleton Parkins Bunnie Iewel and manie others Now whereas the Apostles in their Creed do giue to the Church the Surname of Catholick and that for this verie reason according to (42) The Harmonie of Confess p. 307. Clapham in his Soueraigne Remedy p. 23. Protestants themselues because it is vniuersal spread abroad through al parts and quarters of the world and reacheth vnto al times c. This name Catholick is so peculiar and appropriat to the Roman Church and her Professours as that it is applyed only vnto them by their greatest Enemies (43) Act. Mon. p. 613. M. Fâ—x tearmeth our aduersaries Protestants and vs Catholicks (44] l. 7. fol. 96. l. 10. fol 127. Sleydan recordeth that Luther and others differed only in opinion touching the Lords Supper which the Catholicks reioyced at and the rest much lamented And the same name is applyed to vs by M. (45) Reâ—soÌ„s taken out of Gods word p. 5. 23. 24. 73. 74. Willet in his Obedience c. p. 29. Humfrey vita Iuelli p. 202. Iacob D. Willet D. Humfrey and others Yea the sayd name is so dissorting from the Prot. Church so agreable to the Roman that therefore it is hateful and disliked by Protestans Insomuch as Luther translating the Apostles Creed into Dutch thrust out the word Catholick and in steed therof put-in Christian And of the like course obserued by Lutherans (46) Against Rhem. Test in Act. 11. fâ—l 377. D. Fulk himself acknowledgeth and saith It is not to be allowed Yea in the Synod holden at Altemberg betweene the Diuines of the Palsgraue of Rhene and the Duke of
that the Church must be visible (15) Compend loc 24. p. 201. Gesnerus auoucheth that The external and visible Companie of those who are called Baptized and professe the name of Christ whereof Christ speaketh Math. 1.14 was neuer hid And a litle before he affirmeth that It can not be hid and be obscure (16) Serm. 4. fol. 90. M. Web likewise in his Sermons vpon the 2. Psalme inferreth the like from Math. 1.4 Crāmerus (17) Scholae Propheticae p. 381. teacheth that The State of the Church is painted out by similitude of a Mountaine whereby the Church is signified which neuer was nor can be hid but as a high Mountaine easily yeeldeth itself to be seen of al as Christ Math. 5.14 saith of a Cittie which placed vpon a Mountaine can not be hid These and sundrie other Protestants do not only defend the Churches Euer-visibilitie but they defend the same euen from the Scriptures themselues condemning the contrarie opinion of the Churches Inuisibilitie as contrarie to Scriptures and al ancient and moderne Writers From this so certaine and confessed a truth of the Churches Euer-visibilitie sundrie Protestants of special note do further inferre and teach the absolute necessitie of the Churches Euer-visibilitie to the remission of Sinnes and the Saluation of man plainly condemning to eternal damnation al such as liue and dye out of the visible Church of Christ To this end (18) Instit l. 4. c. 1. Sac. 4. Caluin writeth Because I intend to dispute of the visible Church let vs learne though with this one testimonie of our Mothers prayse how profitable yea how necessarie is the knowledge of her vnto vs seing there is no other entrance into life except she conceiue vs in her wombe except she bring vs forth except c. to conclude she defend vs vnder her custodie and gouernment vntil we dying c. Adde hereunto that out of her bosome no remission of sinnes is to be hoped for M. Parkins (19) Vol. 1. p. 308. teacheth that The Arke out of which al perished figured the Church out of which al are condemned c. out of the Militant Church there are no meanes of Saluation no preaching of the Word no Inuocation of Gods name no Sacraments and therefore no Saluation For this cause euerie man must be admonished euermore to ioyne himself to some particular Church c. D. Humfrey (20) Iesuit part 2. p. 242. cōfesseth that Secret aboades are not the Christian Conuocation c. because this Cōmunion of Saints is an open testification of Christianitie which open testification is necessarie to Saluation (21) De Ecclesia Milit. p. 36. 38. Molitox testifyeth that The inuisible Church of the Elect is latent in the visible Church and out of it can not be found as it is truly sayd out of the Church to wit the visible Church there is no Saluation c. Keckermanus (22) System Theolog. p. 408. vrgeth that The Church of the new Testament by reason of her Markes and external forme must alwayes be sensible and visible that so other Nations who are yet out of the Church may know to what Church they ought to adhere c. (23) Meth. Theolog. p. 552. Hiperius thus iustly demandeth Verily except these Signes were and that the true Church could be apprehended by Senses how could a man know to what Companie he should adhere for the obtayning of Saluation (24) Of the Church l. 1. c. 1. p. 3. Philip Mornay auoucheth that Into the visible Church al must retire themselues in this world that wil be gathered in the inuisible Church in the world to come Al this supposeth the necessarie visibilitie of the Church in al Ages seing in al Ages God hath prouided sufficient meanes for man's Saluation Yea it further conuinceth that supposing the Church could be inuisible at anie time that as then al the Professours and members therof dying should incurre damnation seing according to the truth and the iudgement of so manie Protestants out of the visible Church there is no Saluation To apply then this so certaine and necessarie Doctrine to the Roman and Protestant Church I haue formerly proued the Inuisibilitie of the Protestant Church in al Ages before Luther As namely euen at Luthers first appearing (25) See before l. 3. c. 1. by the testimonies of Luther himself of Morgēsterne Rhegius Miluius Bucer Caluin Camierus Dent Brightman Whitaker and Iewel as also in al Ages for these last 1000. yeares by the (26) See aboue l. 3. c. 1 confessions of D. Fulk Parkins Bale Bramlerus Simon de Voyon Powel and others And that it was no lesse inuisible during the time of the Primitiue Church (27) See before l. 3. c. 1. it is formerly acknowledged by M. Brightman Nappeir Carthwright Beza Fulk Cario Francus others Now to the contrarie the cleerest visibilitie of our Roman Church during al Ages since Christ is most plentifully testifyed and first for these last 1000. yeares (28) See before l. 1. c. 2. by Powel Symon de Voyon Parkins Fulk Danaus Whitaker Dowaham Wotton Hospinian and manie others And for the first 600. yeares (29) See before l. 1. c. 5. by Broccard Brightman Leigh Napper Winckelmanus Danaus Fulk Raynolds Caluin Zanchius Whitaker Ridley Iewel Bunnie Morton Parker Francus Field and seueral others So that my Conclusion may truly be that seing according to plaine Scriptures and the answerable acknowledgemēts of Protestant Writers the Church of Christ must euer continue visible in al Ages and times which the Roman Church hath euer the Protestant neuer performed that therefore not the Protestant but the Catholick Roman Church is the only true Church of Christ described in the Scriptures The third Proof from sacred Scriptures in Confirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Churches Pastours which must euer continue with lawful Calling Succession and with Administration of Word and Sacraments CHAPTER IIII. THE sacred Scriptures do plentifully further shew the necessarie Being Continuance Calling and Succession of Ecclesiastical Pastours In which respect God himself thus promiseth to his Church (1) Esay 59 2◠My Spirit which is vpon thee and the words which I haue put in thy mouth shal not depart out of thy mouth nor out of the mouth of thy seed nor out of the mouth of thy seeds seed from henceforth for euer As also (2) Ps 45.16 In steed of fathers children shal be borne to thee thou shalt make them Princes through al the earth (3) Esa 62.6 And vpon thy walles Ierusalem I haue appoynted watchmen al the day and al the night for euer they shal not hold their peace S. Paule (4) Ephes 4.11.12 assureth vs that our Sauiour hath placed Pastours to continue in his Church to the Consummation of Saincts til we al meet in vnitie of Faith that is for euer according to the exposition hereof by D.
11.26 As often as you shal eate this Bread and drink the Chalice you shal shew the death of our Lord vntil he come to wit at the day of Iudgement Answerably to these Scriptures Protestants teach concerning Preachers that (33) Fulk in his Answ to Counterf Cath. p. 100. The truth can not be continued in the world but by their Ministrie that therefore (34) Propositions disputed in Gen. p. 845. The Ministerie is an essential Mark of the true Church M. Deering (35) Vpon the Epist to the Heb. c. 3. lect 15. 16. teacheth that Saluation springeth in preaching of the Ghospel and is shut vp againe with ceasing of it And that Take away preaching you take away Faith for which he citeth manie Scriptures D. Fulk (36) Answ to a Counter Cath. p. 11. 92. affirmeth that the Churches Pastours shal alwayes resist al false opinions with open reprehension And M. Deering (37) VpoÌ„ the Hebr. in c. 2 lect 10. is of opinion that The Religion being of God no feare of man shal keep them back because that were to kâ—ep the honour of God for corners and solitarie places For as the (38) Rom. 10.10 Apostle prescribeth with the hart we beleeue vnto Iustice but with the mouth Confession is made to Saluation (39) SermoÌ„s vpon the Canticles Englished p 79. 80. Beza confesseth that there must be Pastours and Doctours to the end of the world for the administration of the Word and Sacraments And (40) See the Survay of the Holy preteÌ„ded c p. 440. 441. The Ministrie of the Word and Sacraments are in absolute degree of Necessitie to Saluation D. Whitaker (41) Cont. Duraeum l 3 p. 260. assureth vs that they are Essential Notes of the Church (42) Ibid. p. 249. which being present they do constitute a Church and being absent do subuert it And D. Willet (43) Synopsis p. 71. auoucheth that These Markes can not be absent from the Church and it is no longer a true Church then it hath these Markes for 44 Ib. p. 69 as he further saith The only absence of them do make a nullitie of the Church Lobechius (45) Disput Theo p. 213. speaking of these Markes and of the Church affirmeth that They are coupled togeather with so streight and indissâ—luble a knot that in the assemblies of those who are called the one can not be without the other and the one denyed the other of necessitie is to be denyed Hiperius (46) Meth. Th p. â—48 557. teacheth that These Notes are needful to distinguish the true Church from the false that men careful of their Saluation may know where the true Church is and to which Companie chiefly they ought to adioyne themselues By the premisses now it is euident aswel by the sacred Scriptures as by the manifest Confessions of Protestant Writers that the Church of Christ must euer haue in her Ecclesiastical Pastours and Preachers which must be lawfully sent and ordinarily called by the Church and which must preach the true Word and Faith and administer the holie Sacraments The only poynt therefore resting to be examined is whether the Roman or Protestant Church hath euer had in al Ages the forsayd Pastours lawfully called and succeeding one another truly preaching the holie Word and administring the Sacraments And first concerning the Protestant Church Al personal Succession of Pastours hath been so interrupted or rather altogeather wantâ—ng that in steed of anie Successiâ—n of Pastours to be named it is at large confessed before (47) Before l. 3. c. 1. that their Church hath been wholy Inuisible and vnknowne for manie hundred of yeares togeather Yea Caluin [48) In Lascicius de Russor c. Râ—lig p. â—3 And see Caluin Inst l 4. c 3. sec 4. Danaeus Isagog part 4. p. 36. plainly confesseth that Through the Tyrannie of the Pâ—pe the true Succession of ordination was broken off in the Protestant Church And agayne (49) Tract Th. p. 374. The Church of God for some Ages was so torne and pulled a-sunder that she was destitute of true Protestant Pastours (50) Ep. Theol. ep 5. Beza acknowledgeth that among them ordinarie vocation was no where extant And (51) Disputationes Theol. p. 719 Sadel relateth that sundrie Protestants who acknowledge the doctrine which their Church doth embrace to be true and grounded vpon the expresse word of God do yet affirme the Ministers with them to be destitute of lawful calling as not hauing a continued visible Succession from the Apostles times which they do attribute only to the Papists In like sort saith Bullinger (52) Vpon the Apocalyps ser 145 fol. 137. Sâ—e Libauius in his Gretzerus triumph p. 102. and knewstubs in Confut. of the principal pointes of Popery p. 38 Albeit we can not at this day referre our calling to the Pope and Bishops which brag of lawful Succession yet for so much as we can proue that our Doctrine is Christs Doctrine and therefore that our Ministerie is lawful we care not a whit c. So confessedly is the Protestant Church destitute of lawful Calling And to touch breefly the Calling and Succession of our English Ministerie wheras D. Barlow in his Sermon before the King at Hampton Court publickly taught that The Apostles reserued Ordination to themselues and conueyed it to Bishops c. Neither would the Church of Christ succeeding admit anie other but Bishops to that busines as not iustifyable for the Presbiters either by reason example or Scripture c. Not one Example sayth he is to be showed through the whole Storie Ecclesiastical that anie besides a Bishop did it if some one of the inferior rank presumed to do it his act was reuersed for vnlawful It is so certaine that our Catholick Bishops after the death of Queen Marie were so far from Consecrating those other which were for such named by Q. Elizabeâ—h at her entrie to the Crowne and from whom sithence al the Protestant Clergie of England deriueth itself that the (53) p 177. Protestant Writer of The Assertion for true Christian Church-Policie auoucheth that It cannot be proued that anie Lord Spiritual was so much as present in Parlament or gaue anie assent to the Enacting of Statutes made Anno primo Elizabethae Yea in supply therof there was a Statute made An. 8. Eliz. c. 1 the Title therof being An Act declaring the manner of making and Consecrating Archbishops of this Realme to be good And towards the end of that Statute it is enacted that Al Acts done by anie Person about anie Consecration c. by vertue of the Queens Maiesties Letters Patents shal be good c. And that al Persons that haue been or shal be Consecrated Archbishops c. shal be Archbishops c. But the then Parlament or her late Highnes Letters Patents could not enable the first Protestant Bishops to be true Bishops because that function is not Ciuil but Spiritual and ex
woman (67) Act. Mon. p 1037 to whom saith Fox it is supposed he was maryed yet certaine it is that no shew therof was made in K. Henries time when he carryed her vp and downe in a trunck marying her afterwards in K. Edwards time He was also most treacherous to his Prince for albeit he had been so greatly exalted by K. Henrie and by him appoynted one of the Executours of his Wil yet presently after his death he assented to the breaking thereof And after K. Edwards death endeauoured al he could to the aduancing of Q. Iane and vtter excluding from the Crowne of K. Henries lawful daughter Queene Marie To whose dis-inheriting he first subscribed as also to that rebellious letter which he and his complices sent to Queen Marie and which to his euerlasting infamie and confusion (68) Act. Mon. p. 1299 Fox himself hath recorded And although from his cradle he was a Roman Catholick vntil his being Archbishop which honour he receaued from the Pope taking the vsual oath of fidelitie vnto him Yet in the next yeare after K. Henrie by Parlament procuring himself to be tearmed Head of the Church he also forsook the Pope and forswore himself in that poynt agreing yet as also the King in al other with him and both by words and deeds persecuting Protestants as is euident in the death of Lambert and others written by M. Fox Yea in K. Edwards time as Stow (69) Chron. p. 594. reporteth The French King being deceased c. also the Church of S. Paul in London being hanged with black and a sumptuous Herse set vp in the Quire a Dirge was there song and on the next morrow the Archbishop of Canterburie Cranmer assisted of 8. Bishops al in rich Miters and other their Pontificals did sing a Masse of Requiem c. yet after this he fel to Lutheranisme publishing a Catechisme wherin with Luther he taught the Real Presence which not long after impugning he turned with the Duke of Somerset to Zuinglianisme setting forth another Catechisme against the Real Presence And yet after al this vnder (70) Act. Mon p. 1710 Q. Marie he recanted for hope of life al his Protestantisme both by tongue pen professed the Roman Catholick Faith But perceiuing that he must dye choosing rather to dye in the opinion of vulgar Protestants a Martyr then in the true iudgement both of ProtestaÌ„ts and Catholicks as a Malefactor and Traytour he finally dyed in Zuinglianisme being both condemned for Heresy against God and for Rebellion against his Prince as M. Fox (71) Act. Mon p. 1698 confesseth So infamous was the life and death of the first Protestant Bishop that euer England had and from whom al our English Ecclesiastical frie do deriue their Ordination and other good conditions not vnlike vnto his But to returne from whence we haue digressed al this begging by M. Mason and the rest forenamed of Protestant Orders from the Church of Rome is directly contradicted and loathed by others of their Brethren as thinking the Bishop of Rome to be Antichrist himself and the Roman Church to be the whore of Babylon M. Powel (72) De Antich p. 6. 310. tearmeth our Catholick Orders the Mark of the Beast D. Downham (73) Of Antichrist l. 2. p. 108. spareth not to say I say their Priesthood is Antichristian The Diuines of Geneua (74) Propositions Disputed c. p. 245. affirme that There is in Babylon thereby meaning the Roman Church no holie Order or Ministrie indeed no lawful Calling but a meer vsurpation M. Penrie writing against the Protestant Calling disputeth thus From whence haue they their calling had they it not from those which sit in the Chaire of Antichrist (75) Vpon the 122. Ps fol. D. 8. yea how manie are in al Christendome c. but their ordination haue come from Popish Prelacie within three or foure generations at the most c. Can an vnlawful calling bring forth a lawful though it descend from one to another a hundred or thousand times Therefore vnles they can approue the lawfulnes of their calling vnder some other title then that which they now haue by the Clergie it wil fal out there shal hardly be found a Minister duly called in al the world c. In like sort D. Fulk (76) Answ to a Counterf Cath. p. 50. answereth to vs Catholicks you are highly deceaued if you think we esteeme your offices of Bishops Priests and Deacons anie better then Lay-men and you presume to much to think that we receiue your ordering to be lawful And agayne (77) Retentiue p. 67. with al our hart we defy abhorre detest and spit at your stinking greasie Antichristian Orders c. In like modest sort saith Beza (78) Apud Sarauiam in Defens Tract c. p. 56. Popish Orders are nothing els then the impurest buying and selling of the Roman Stewes And (79) Consideration of the Papistes Reasons p. 71. M. Gabriel Powel auoucheth that The Popish ordination is nothing els but mere prophanation c. there is no true Ecclesiastical Vocation in the Papacie We iudge no otherwise saith D. Whitaker (80) Cont. Dur p 635. of your Priests then of Christs Aduersaries and enemies of his Priesthood (81) Ibid. p. 662. You haue neither lawful Bishops nor Priests nor Deacons And according to D. Sutcliffe 82) Answ to Eyâ—â—pt p. 82 The Pope himself is neither true Bishop nor Priest for he was ordayned Priest but to offer Sacrifice and to say Masse for the quick and the Dead But this Ordination sayth he doth not make a Priest nor had true Priests and Elders euer anie such Ordination Therefore (83 Ib p. 87 And see his Chaâ—leng p. 35 The Romish Church is not the true Church hauing no Bishops nor Priests at al but only in name Now if the Protestant Clergie wil not deriue their Vocation and Ordination from the Church of Rome as the former Protestants do refuse and in reason they cannot supposing their absurd Doctrine of the Pope being Antichrist for what more ridiculous then that Christs Ministers should receaue their spiritual power and Commission from Antichrist Then stil we are to demand from whence the Protestant Clergie hath their Calling and Commission seing according to the former Scriptures the true Churches Past ours must be lawfully called sent and ordayned In these so extreme straytes some Protestants acknowledge and defend their Ordination and calling to be from the Laitie itself as from the temporal Magistrate and their hearers followers (84) His two Letters conâ—erning the Earl of Lauale Eng. fol. c. 3. D. Tilanus teacheth that Farel had his sending of the people sf Geneua who had right had authoritie saith he to institute and depose Ministers And The reformed Churches and their calling partly from God and partly from the people as by lawful instruments M Dilingam (85) p. 78. writing against M. Hil
saith our Preachers were called by Christian Magistrates whose allowance they had which to be warrantable you can not deny D. Sutcliffe 86] Against D. Kellison p. 5. is not abashed to teach that in case of necessitie such as Protestants had at Luthers first reuolt The multitude of Christians without Ministers haue power to appoynt Ministers among themselues And M. Symondes (87) Vpon the Reuel p. 123. auoucheth A Calling to preach by the Ciuil Magistrate A holie and sufficient calling saith he in the time of these confusions Now according to this strange Doctrine hath been the answerable practise of Protestants for M. Mornay (88) Treatise of the Church p. 371. saith Some of our men in such a corrupt State of the Church as we haue seen in our time c. did at first preach without this former calling and afterward were chosen and called to the holie Ministerie by the Churches which they had taught A practise preposterous and directly contrarie to the order set downe by S. Paul (89) Rom. 10.14 saying How shal they inuocate in whom they haue not beleeued How shal they beleeue whom they haue not heard How shal they heare without a Preacher And how shal they preach except they be sent So euidently is sending or calling and Ordination precedent in order to preaching Yea agreably hereunto writeth M. Mason (90) Consec of Engl. Bishops p. 3. It is cleere that the Presbâ—terie here mentioned ordayned Timothie by Imposition of hands which no Lay-men may do But besides how absurd is it to affirme that mere Lay and temporal men as Shoomakers Taylours Bâ—acksmithes and the like can bestow vpon others that most Spiritual and highest power and Iurisdiction of preaching true Faith and administring the most holie and celestial Sacraments wherof they are wholy deuoyd destitute themselues The indignitie disgrace and absurditie then of this base begging of Calling from the Laitie being discerned by other Protestants as much ashamed therof they wholy disclayme from it as also in al other ordinarie and Mediate Calling and Succession betaking themselues for their last refuge to extraordinarie and immediate Vocation from God So D. Fulk (91) Against Staples c. p. 2. confesseth that The Protestantâ— that first preached in these last dayes had extraordinarie calling And (92) Retentiue c. p. 300. In the State of the Church so miserably deceaued as in Luthers time God sendeth extraordinarily immediatly from himself as Elias and Elizeus and the Prophets were sent c. So Christ sent his Apostles and Euangelists and so was Luther and such as he sent to repaire the ruines of the Church c. Agreably hereunto are those words of M. Cartwright (93) In Whiteg Def. p. 217. When the Churches haue been by Antichrist euen razed from the foundation God hath stirred Euangelists euen immediatly by his Spirit without any calling of men to restore his Church againe as Wiccliffe Husse Luther Zuinglius In like words saith M. Parkins (94) In his works printed 1605. fol. 916. The calling of Wiccliffe Husse Luther Oecolampadius Peter Martyr c. was extraordinarie Ramus (95) Commentaries of France English p 74. reporteth the French Protestants to say We beleeue it is vnlawful for anie of his owne authoritie to take vpon him gouernment of the Church without lawful Election if so it may be had We add this if because some-time as in our time also when the Church hath been persecuted manie haue been constrayned without ordinarie calling by motion of the Spirit c. Caluin (96) In Lascicius de Russor c. Relig. p. 23. Calu. Inst l. 4. c. 3. sec 4. also writeth Because the true Succession of Ordination hath been broken off by the Tyrannie of the Pope a new help is now needful c. and therefore this office was altogeather extraordinarie which the Lord hath enioyned vnto vs. And Beza (97) In Sarauia his Def. tract c. p. 56. 60. 74. in the Conference at Poysie being demanded of the Calling of himself and his other then Associats affirmed the same to be Extraordinarie (98) Ep. Theol. ep 5. p. 49. And in his Epistle to Alemannus he further vrgeth Verily thou canst not pretend ordinarie Vocation for who chose thee therefore let vs see of Extraordinarie But to this then only do we giue place when there is none or almost no ordinarie vocation as hath happened in our times in the Papacie when ordinarie Vocation which was no where neither ought nor could be expected So that in the opinion of Beza Caluin Fulk Parkins and sundrie other Protestants al the calling which the first Protestant Preachers had was only extraordinarie immediate from God But now to discouer the great insufficiencie and manifest falshood of this their last Euasion and thereby plainly to discouer al our Protestant Clergie euen to this day to be destitute of al lawful Calling and Mission and so to proue al our Ministers to be vsurpers intruders and meer Lay-men First according also to Beza his former Doctrine it is certaine that extraordinarie Vocation taketh not place but when ordinarie is wanting which is also taught by M. Parkins (99) Vol. 1. p. 738. vsing the same words Extraordinarie calling neuer hath place but when ordinarie calling fayleth Wherefore our Protestants pretending for themselues extraordinarie calling do thereby disclayme and debarre themselues of al ordinarie which is directly against the former Scriptures and sundrie of their learnedst Brethren before cited amongst whom Luther sayd God calleth vs at this day to the Ministerie of his Word not immediatly by himself but by man Secondly extraordinarie Calling is alwayes accompanied confirmed by extraordinarie signes and wonders So saith (100) Loc. com class 4. c. 20 p. 58 Luther whom our Protestants most pretend to haue been extraordinarily called Try this whether they can proue their Vocation for neuer hath God sent anie but either called by man or declared by signes no not his owne Sonne 101) Tom. 5. Ien. Germ. fol. 491. And againe From whence commest thou Who sent thee Where are the Seales that thou art sent from men Where are the Miracles which testify thee to be sent from God (102) Tom 3 Ien. Germ. f. 455. 456. In like sort he admonished the Senat of Milhouse against Munster the Anabaptist saying If he say he was sent from God and his Spirit as the Apostles were let him proue this by working of Signes and Miracles or els do not suffer him to preach for wheresoeuer God doth change the ordinarie way there alwayes he worketh Miracles In like manner are the Anabaptists vrged by Bullinger (103) Cont. Anabap. l. 3. c. 7. If you say you haue a peculiar Vocation like vnto the Apostles proue it by signes and Miracles c. but this you wil neuer do therefore your calling is of no worth yea it is pernicious to the Church of Christ D. Sarauia (104)
light vpon anie tooth of this dead Lion they tread vpon it with contempt Neuer considering that as out of the (119) Iudg. 14 14. Strong came sweetnes so in those Sentences of Luther which they most traduce there is commonly inclosed the most Sacred truth ful of as diuine comfort as man's hart can ruminate vpon But if the former and innumerable such like Sentences of the Protestants Lyon Luther be so comfortable to D. Morton sure I am that they are odious and loathsome to chast and Christian eares and for such are taxed by sundrie (120] See Ezecanomiê° de corruptis moribus Wygandus de bonis malis Germ. Hospin â—oÌ„c discord 99. Couel Dâ—f of Hook p. 101. Saying Tom. 2. in Resp ad Conf. Luth. f. 458. sundrie lothers of his owne brood euen Protestant Writers who rested much scandalized thereby And therefore M. Morton patronizing so vnpardonable errours may giue ouer iust suspicion of his owne guilt in the like But to returne from the Premisses therefore it euidently followeth our Protestant Clergie to be wholy destitute of al lawful Calling seing it is already proued euen by their owne confessions that their Succession hath been interrupted and that they haue not ordinarie Calling and therefore do fly to extraordinarie which also they are deuoyd of through their confessed want of Miracles and truth of Doctrine or freedome from errour which doth euer certainly accompany the same Now the sacred Scriptures concerning the Churches Pastours Calling preaching and administration of Sacraments not being fulfilled and performed in the Protestant Church It only remayneth to be examined whether the same are verifyed and accomplished in the Catholick Roman Church And first the same is confirmed by ad such Arguments as (121) Before 4. 1. c. 23. 4. heretofore we haue vsed in prooff of the Roman Churches Euer-visibilitie which doth euer suppose the like coÌ„tinuance of Ecclesiastical Pastours with administration of Word and Sacraments Secondly the same is euidently supposed and confessed by al such Protestants as (122) See Before l. 3. c. 4. formerly acknowledged deriued their Succession and Ordination from the Church of Rome for if the Roman Pastours succession Ordination were not good or interrupted then were it fruitles and absurd for the Protestants Clergie to deriue their owne succession Ordination from them Thirdly the Centurie writers of Magdeburg in the tenth Chapter of euerie seueral Centurie do make special mention of the Bishops and Doctours of the Roman Church who liued ahd flourished in euerie Age. Fourthly (123) De rebus grauiss contr Disp p. 719. M. Sadel plainly confesseth sundrie ProtestaÌ„ts not only to affirme the Ministers with them to be destitute of lawful Calling seing they haue not a perpetual visible Succession from the Apostles to these times but also they attribute this only to the Papists whom therefore in this question they preferre before vs. In like direct sort D. Fulk (124) Answ to a Count. Cath p. 27. And in his Reioynder to Bristow p. 343. acknowledgeth vnto vs saying You can name the notable persons in al Ages in their government and Ministrie and especially the Succession of the Popes you can rehearse in order vpon your fingars M. Mason granteth that (125) Cons of the Engl. Bish. p. 52. The Church of Rome c. was planted by two so great Apostles Peter and Paul And that (126) Ibid. p. 41. The Priesthood which the Apostles conferred c. being conueyed to Posteritie successiuely by Ordination is found at this day in some sort in the Church of Rome in regard wherof you may be said to succeed the Apostles c. So certaine it is that the Bishops of the Roman Church haue euer successiuely continued in al Ages euen from Christs time to this and that true Ordination hath been euer in the sayd Church since the Apostles The poore Protestant Familie being meerly Laical as being confessedly destitute of al Calling either ordinarie or extraordinarie The fourth Proof from sacred Scriptures in Confirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Conuersion of Heathen Kings and Nations to the Faith of Chtist CHAPTER IIII. IT is most cleerly taught vs by the sacred Scriptures that the Church of Christ shal conuert manie Heathen Kings Countries to the Faith of Christ The Prophet Esay (1) Esa 60.16 speaking of the Church of Christians saith Thou shalt suck the milk of the Gentils and the breasts of Kings And (2) Esa 60.11 Their Kings shal minister to thee and thy gates shal be continually open neither day nor night shal they be shut that men may bring to thee the riches of the Gentils And that their Kings may be brought c. (3) Esa 49.23 Kings shal be thy nursing Fathers and Queens thy Mothers vpon which place in the Annotations of the English Bible of Anno 1576. it is sayd The meaning is that Kings shal be conuerted to the Ghospel and bestow their power and authoritie for preseruation of the Church Yea God almightie hath further promised that (4) Esa 2 2 Al nations shal flow vnto it And that (5) Psal 2.8 He wil giue the Heathen for thy inheritance and the end of the earth for thy possession Yea it was sayd to (6) Apoc. 10.11 S. Iohn and in him to other Pastours Thou must prophecy againe vnto Nations peoples tongues and manie kings (7) Es 62 2. As also The Gentils shal see thy Iustice and al Kings thy glorie and thou shalt be called by a new name which the mouth of our Lord shal name (8) Ps 102.15 Then the Heathen shal feare the name of our Lord and al the Kings of the earth his glorie These and sundrie other such places are so coÌ„uincing for the CoÌ„uersion of the Heathen Kings and Nations by the Church of Christ that Protestants themselues do endeauour to confirme the same truth from the sacred Scriptures Luther (9) Tom. 4. Wittemb in Es 60. fol. 234. writing vpon the Prophet Esay chap. 60. affirmeth that Kings shal obey and beleeue the Ghospel c. the Church is in perpetual vse of conuerting others to the Faith c. for this is signifyed by her gates being continually open And Oecolampadius (10) In Hier. c. 33. writeth vpon Hieremie that God speaketh heer of the eternitie of Christs Kingdome c. he shal haue Kings and Priests and that for euer and not a few but as the stars of heauen c. for their multitude (11) Tabulae Analyticae in Es c. 60. p. 126. Szegedine affirmeth that the Prophet Esay fortelleth that Gentils and Kings shal embrace with great desire the religion of Gods people which ought to be referred to the Kingdome of Christ where he foretelleth the coming of the Gentils and that in such number as that it should make the beholders amazed In like sort teacheth (12) Meth. Dâ—script p. 583.
the Eunuch c. yet the Protestant (8) Syntagma ex veteri Test col 1232 1233. Wigandus sheweth by very manie examples of Scripture that the Iewish Synagogue before Christs time was dispersed in sundrie other Nations besides that of the Iewes Now amongst these the Church might in Elias time be visible though it had been then inuisible among the Iewes Fiftly though those 7000. of that one special time were vnknowne as then to Elias yet this proueth not which is the poynt only pertinent to be proued that therfore they should be as then vnknowne also to al others of the same time And much lesse therfore can this particular example proue that al the Faithful not of one special time only but also of so manie seueral hundred yeares as are heer (9) See before l. 3. c. 1. before confessed for the Prot. Churches inuisibilitie should al of them during al those Ages continue so generally latēt vnknowne not to one Elias only but to the whole world as that there should remayne no memorie or notice of the needful preaching administration of Sacraments to haue been performed so much as by one of them in anie one Nation of the earth for anie one moment of al those times Sixtly this obiection of Elias maketh fully for vs against our Aduersaries for it is euident that Elias flying (10) 3. Reg. 19 2.3.8.9 theface of Iesabel wife to Achab who sought his life lay thervpon secret in a Caue vpon Mount Horeb at the time of his complayning that he was left alone the which cōplaynt he made in regard only of that Countrey of Israel which was the kingdome of Achab wherin he then a strāger lay secret as appeareth most plainly aswel in that God himself accordingly answered his sayd complaint with like respect to that only Countrey saying I haue left to me in Israel 7000. c. Of one hundred wherof Elias himself had then special 11 3. Reg. 18.13 notice giuen him before by Obedias to whom therefore the Church was thē euen in that verie Countrey knowne visible which only poynt quite dissolueth al the supposed force of this so often re-enforced obiectiō Besides in those verie times the Church flourished in the next adioyning Kingdome of Iuda and was there as then to Elias both knowne visible vnder two good Kings Asa and Iosaphat who raigned euen in the time (12) 3. Reg. 22.41 of Achab At what time the number of the Faithful was there so exceeding great that the Souldiars only were numbred to (13) 2. Par. 14.8 9. 17.14.15.16.17.18 19 manie hundred thousands And thus is this very obiection answered by M. Henoch (14) Soueraigne Remedy c. p. 17. 18. Clapham saying our ignorāt Reformists say the Church was inuisible in the time of Elias but The Holy Ghost recordeth Elias to haue spoken this against Israel not against Iuda for as he knew that good Iosaphat at that time raigned in Iuda so he wel knew that there was not only the Church visible but also mightily reformed yea )15) In Corpore Doctrinae p. 530. 532 And in Morgensterne Tract de Eccl. p. 4. Melancthon expoundeth those verie words obiected I haue left to me 7000 c. of the visible Church And wheras (16) Def. of the Answ p. 645. Whitguift writeth that Sometimes the Church of God is where there is no good Pastour as in the time of Elias (17) Last part of the 2. Reply p. 63. M. Carthwright answereth This is vntrue for there were an hundred Prophets then kept of one man alone 1. Reg. 18.13 So manie wayes is it euident that the Church in the time of Elias his complaint was visible not only in Iuda but also in Israel Now wheras our Aduersaries do make for the reason of their Churches inuisibilitie Persecution This poore euasion implyeth in termes for what maketh the Church more knowne famous then Persecution Or who can be persecuted but men knowne seen to others Doth not M. Iewel (*) Reply p. 506. And Def. of the Apolog. p. 33. 34. hereupon affirme that The Church is placed vpon a mount her persecutions can not be hid Doth not M. Carthwright (18) In Whytguift Def p 174. And see D. Babington vpō Exodus p 10. cōfesse that the Church vnder Persecutiō is visible and sensible for els sayth he how could it be persecuted As also what a Conclusion is this the Churches were few in number because they were vnder the Crosse c. To let passe both Scriptures and Stories Ecclesiastical haue you forgotten what is sayd in the first of Exodus that the more the children of Israel were persecuted the more they increased But in cleer demonstration hereof is it not further euidēt that though the Primitiue Church during the first 300. yeares after Christ endured (19) Fox Act. Mon. p. 34. c. The Centuristes Cent. 1. col 24 c. Cent 2. col 10. c. Cent. 3. col 10. c. incomparably the most vniuersal violēt persecutions that euer were yet the same notwithstāding euen Protestāt writers (20) Cent. 1. 2. 3. throughout Pantaleon in Chronogr Functius in Chr. Osiand cent 1. 2 3. Dresserus in Millen 5. p. 11. 12. Fulk de Successione Eccl. p. 246. do at this day take certaine particular notice of the Catholick Bishops and Pastours by name in euerie one of those Ages of their administration of the Word and Sacraments and their open impugning of Heresies But besides al this al sides must acknowledge of the Church vnder Persecution that either she doth make Professiō of her Faith as also openly refrayne the external communion of al Idolatrie false doctrine and Sacraments or els that she doth not professe and refrayne as before sayd If the latter then as is heretofore proued she is not the true Church for as D. Field (22) Of the Church l. 3. p. 19. further saith Seing the Church is the multitude of them that shal be saued no man can be saued vnles he make Cōfession vnto Saluation for faith hid in the hart concealed doth not suffice it cannot be but they that are of the true Church must by the Profession of the truth make themselues knowne in such sort that by their profession and practise they may be discerned from other men If then the first then is she thereby made most knowne visible for besides her foresayd Profession consisting in administration of the Word Sacramēts impugning of errours which being done though neuer so priuatly is impossible to be in so manie seueral Countries kept secret for anie smaller time much lesse for so manie Ages togeather wherof D. Humfrey (23) Iesuit part 2. rat 3 p 241. saith most truly Whilst Ministers teach others learne they administer Sacraments these communicate al cal vpon God professe their Faith Who seeth not these things is blinder then a Mole I
say besides this her only open refrayning or Recusancie whereto she is euen by the iudgement of Protestants (24) Willet Synop. p. 612 613 614 Act. Mon. p. 1283. 1150. 1151. Melancth in Consil Theol. p. 628 Pet. Mart. ib. p. 634. 635. Buâ—er 16. p. 632. 633 634. Caluin ib p. 635. And Caluin Tract Th. p 584. The Deuines of Germany in Sleydans Comment Engl. f. 87. no lesse in dutie bound lyeth euermore most open easie to be discerned yea by how much the persecution is more grieuous so much the lesse can this Recusancie be kept secret or vnespyed as appeareth most plainly in the example only of our owne times Nations for if during but these last 20. yeares we of this one Nation in coÌ„parison but few could not so escape the search of ProtestaÌ„t Magistrats but that by our only Recusancie we were dayly discerned presented indited coÌ„uicted sundrie wayes persecuted some Martyred Could then a ProtestaÌ„ts pretended to be dispersed throughout so manie Nations of the world escape for so manie hundred yeares togeather that Inquisition of the Roman Church which Protestants affirme to haue been vniuersal and far more grieuous Wherefore to end this inexplicable contradictorie poynt of the ProtestaÌ„t Churches Being or continuance but yet vnknowne inuisible for many hundred yeares togeather that through the greatest persecutions therof by the Pope of Rome I wil only demand with D. Field (25) Of the Church l. 1. p. 19. How possibly there should be a Church in the world the perpetuitie wherof al most constantly defend and none found seene or knowne to professe the Sauing truth of God Or as M. Iewel 26 saith of Heresie so in his words wil I say of his Church It must needes be a very strange Church that had neither beginning nor ending nor defender nor reprouer nor mouth to vtter it nor eare to heare it nor pen to write it nor time to last in nor place to rest in of which straÌ„ge kind of Church was our preteÌ„ded ProtestaÌ„t Church for manie hundred yeares togeather no knowne beginning being assigned of her Inuisibilitie no man defending or reprouing her during the sayd latencie no Pastour of hers preaching or sheep hearing her doctrine no pen writing her MonumeÌ„ts or her pretended pressures suffrings no one houre knowne wherin she had being or corner or cottage in the world wherin she râ—sided Wherefore the absurditie and insufficiencie of this former answer being in so manie respects so easily discouered other Protestants disclayming from this do auouch that their Church according to the Scriptures hath euer continued and that visible and knowne in al former Ages but now sithence through the late violence of the Pope and his Clergie al testimonie MonumeÌ„t Record therof is vtterly suppressed and made away But the idle vanitie of this naked conceipt is manie wayes appearing for first this is but a mere Imagination destitute of al testimonie or proofe in confirmation therof Secondly al proofe experience is directly to the contrarie seing the very books of Husse and Wiccliffe are yet extant to our aduersaries as also the Epistle of Vlrick in defence of Priests marriage the pretended books of Charlemaine against Images Bertram concerning the Eucharist the like And yet in none of these is the least mention afforded of anie ProtestaÌ„t Congregation though neuer so slender to haue been formerly residing in anie caue or corner of the earth though neuer so streight And yet these are the ancientest Records wherin they can insist either in defence of themselues or impugning of vs. Thirdly our General and Prouincial Councels holden in most seueral Nations did euer recite and condemne al new arising Sects Heresies coÌ„trarie to the Roman Faith and yet in none of these is there the least mention or Record to be found of the Church of Protestants Fourthly our Catholick Writers in euerie Age haue plentifully recited and at large coÌ„futed al appearing doctrines contrarie to the Roman Church yet as for anie ProtestaÌ„t Religion knowne before Luther they are wholy sileÌ„t Fiftly from hence do sundrie Protestant Writers take notice and in their owne writings (27) The Cent. Pant. in Chron. OsiaÌ„d Epit. Eccl. Hist Illiricus Catalogus Testam c. Whitak cont Dur. p. 276. 469. make meÌ„tion of the daily opinioÌ„s not passed ouer in sileÌ„ce or wholy suppressed from the view of Posteritie but directly to the contrarie most expresly mentioned recorded and condemned in euerie Age by the Church of Rome Of which opinions certaine also which maketh this point most euident were oftentimes euen some one or other special Doctrine now sithence taught by Protestants and heretofore seuerally professed by some one or other particular condemned person of those times And yet was neuer Protestant hitherto euer able to nominate or assigne a Protestant Church before the dayes of Luther truly agreing in matters of Faith and Religion with our now reformed Church of England Sixtly this confessed general suppression of the Protestant Church and al her Records for so manie hundred yeares doth euidently conuince the sayd Church not to be the Church of Christ but some Heretical Conuenticle for the Scriptures testify of the true Church that her (28) Esa 60.20 Sunne should not be set nor her Moone hid that she (29) Dan. 2 44. should not be giuen ouer to another people but should stand for euer as an (30) Esa 60.15.16 eternal glorie and ioy from generation to generation Lastly euerie vprising Sect though neuer so grosse may as easily and with as much probabilitie pretend for itself the continuance visibilitie of their Church for al former Ages only adding with our Protestants the Imagiginarie suppression and ruine of al testimonies proofes and Records of the same through the power and malice of the Church of Rome then which nothing more dangerous to affirme or more absurd to maintayne The falshood of the two former Answers being thus easily displayed and seene to be most palpable and sensible euen to the meanest iudgements a third remayneth in matter and substance of no greater force then the former but through affected obscuritie of words more difficult and perplexed to an ignorant Hearer As namely that during al those confessed manie Ages wherin no knowledge is had of the Protestant Church her Pastours or administration of Word or anie one Sacrament (*) Whitak de Ecelesia p. 165. Perkins in his Reformed Cathol p. 328. 329. OsiaÌ„d Cent. 16. part alt p. 1072. Calu. l. epist ep 104. p. 222. Rhegius lib. Apolog. p. 95. Beza in ep Theol. ep 1. p. 15. The Protestant Church was in the Papacie and the Papacie was in the Church and yet the Papacie was not the Church An answer not much vnlike to that Censure giuen vpon D. Playford his strange diuiding the Text of his Sermon to wit that it was as A Pye A Pudding A Pudding and a Pye A Pye pudding And a
ancient Papists In like for argueth Mr. Carth wright saying That (9) Reply part 1. p. 18. the argument of the authoritie of men which haue interpreted the Scriptures is the best reason in Controuersies of Diuinitie was neuer heard of but by Papists whose strongest towers are in the testimonies of the Doctours c. There is nothing more Papistical then this Assertion So that if Protestants commit themselues to the trial by Fathers they yeeld themselues prisoners to the strongest Towers and Castles of the Papists their Enemies wherin what can they expect but ruine and confusion D. Whitaker affirmeth (10) Cont. Dur. li. 6. p. 423. The Popish Religion to be a patched couerlet of the Fathers errours sowed togeather Wel then if our Religion was beleeued by the Fathers from them deliuered to vs I am perswaded that D. Whitaker admitting this would place litle hope in appealing to Fathers for Confutation of Popish Religion And though he falsely tearmeth our Religion the Fathers errours yet therby he plainly granteth the Fathers to haue beleeued and taught the same Religion which we now professe and Protestants impugne Now the ancient Fathers being thus acknowledged for Papists I do not wonder that Protestants contemne their authoritie and seeke their disgrace with al contumelies possible Why may not D. Luther affirme (11) To. 2. Wittemb l. de Seruo Arb. p. 434. And the same booke printed in 8. p. 72. 73. 276. 337. The Fathers of so many Ages to haue beene plainly blind and most ignorant in the Scriptures to haue erred al their life time and that vnles they were amended before their deaths wherof neuer Protestant had yet the least intelligence they were neyther Saints nor pertayning to the Church but no doubt according to Luther damned Papists Why might not he further auouch That (12) In Colloq mensalibus c. de Patrib Ecclesiae in the writings of Hierome there is not a word of true faith in Christ and sound Religion Tertullian is very superfluous I haue houlden Origen long since accursed Of Chrysostome I make no account Basil is of no worth he is wholy a Monk I weigh him not a haire Cyprian is a weake Diuine c. See how our old Papists are betrampled by a yong Protestant And yet no lesse resolute against them is (13) In Ionam Pomerane Our Fathers whether Saints or no I care not ô zeale and reuerence Protestantical they were blinded with the Spirit of Montanus by humane traditions and the doctrines of Diuels c. they teach not purely of Iustification c. neither are they careful to teach IESVS CHRIST according to his Ghospel Stil are the Fathers reiected as men blinded with Papistical opinions The Centurists endeauouring to discredit the whole multitude of Doctours and Fathers in euerie Age begin euen with the first Age next after the Apostles saying 14) Cent. 2 c. 4. p. 55. Albeit this Age was neerest to the Apostles yet the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles began to be not a litle darkned therin and many monstrous and incommodious opinions to Protestants are euerie where found to be spread by the Doctours therof Perhaps some cause therof may be for that the guift of the Holie Ghost in these Doctours did begin to decay for the ingratitude of the world towards the Protestant Truth Now as for the Doctours of al Ages succeeding they make a Principle that The 15) Cent 3. c. 4. p. 17. further we go of from the Apostles Age the more stubble shal we find to haue been added to the puritie of Christian doctrine So that al Doctours and Fathers since the very first Age of the Apostles are discarded by the Centurists for stubble and Papistical But Luther wil not rest vntil he hath brought these stubble-Doctours to Hel for teaching Papistrie (16) In Deut. c. 13. p. 102. Sathan sayth he hath hitherto deluded vs by signes and lying wonders c. whilst contrarie to the Ghospel we haue admired Pilgrimages Apparitions of Spirits and cures at certaine Sepuchers in so much that Saints also erred herin as Augustin Bernard Hierome and many others c. certainly damned as Wicclif sayd vnles they repented So that if Papists be damned for beleeuing the Catholick faith they haue for their Companions Hierome Augustin Bernard and many others most renowned Doctours of Christs Church and Saints From this true conceipt of the ancient Fathers being Roman Catholicks Protestants further disclayme from their Interpretations and expositions of Scripture refusing to stand to their iudgments for the true vnderstanding therof Thus then they write The Sacred Scripture saith Polanus (17) Symphonia c. 1. Thes 6. p. 56. is not to be interpreted by Fathers neither is the Interpretation of Scripture to be iudged by Fathers the Fathers are not the rule of expounding the sacred Scripture c. what is here sayd of euerie Father alone is to be vnderstood of al the Fathers ioyned togeather as also of Councels That is though al Fathers and Councels conspire togeather in their Expositions of Scripture agreably to the Doctrine and beleef of the Catholick Roman Church yet Protestants wil not subscribe or admit the same but wil valiantly maintayne al such expositions though most contrarie therto as are last coyned at Geneua or Wittemberg or newliest extracted by some Brother more illuminated In like and most prouident manner argue our English Puritans against Doctour Downham obiecting against them That none of the Fathers did euer vnderstand the Text then in question as Puritans do (18) The Puritans in their answ to D. Downham Doth not Mr. Doctour know say they that to argue negatiuely concerning the sense of Scriptures from the authoritie of Fathers is the practise of Papists only and taxed by learned writers against them c. If that manner of disputing be good we shal often loose more truth in taking their Interpretations c. Carthwright tearmeth the seeking into the holy Fathers writings a 19) In Bancrofts suruey of Pretend Discipl p. 331. 337 and see chap. 4. p. 64. Raking of ditches and the bringing in of their authorities the mouing and summoning of Hel. Parker assureth vs that (20) Pref. to his Answer Limbomastix and see Iacob's Treatise p. 1. 3 54. 81. 68. Bilson's sermons Ps 323. Answ to Broughâ—on's Letter p. 17. If you alleadge the ancient Fathers against them they wil tel you roundly that their opinions are nothing els but the corrupt fancies of vaine Imaginations of men toyish fables fond absurd without sense and reason And some stick not to cal the Fathers of the Latin Church the plague of Diuinitie Hence it is that the French Protestants haue enacted it for a (21) Disciplina Magistrorum Galliae art 4. law that no place be giuen to the writings of the old Doctours for the iudgement ad determination of Doctrine So cleerly is Protestancie at an end if the Fathers Interpretation of Scriptures may stand for
good But yet further they doubt not to affirme the argument or consequence vrged from the (22) Puricans Answ to D. Downham's ser p. 92. receiued opinion in the Church of God euen from the Apostles time vnto our Age to be lyable to iust exception So that though the Fathers of al Ages vp to the Apostles themselues do al of them ioyntly agree with our Roman faith in their Expositions and deliuerie of the sense of Scripture yet may one illuminated Protestant except contemne and reiect them al as not hauing the Spirit nor interpreting according to the Analogie of the Protestant faith But O most miserable and lamentable times O insolencie most impious and incredible What the receiued opinion in the Church of God euen from the Apostles time vnto our Age to be lyable to iust exception The Fathers of al Ages during 1600. yeares of al Countries though most distant in place and different in language and other conditions of nature and gouerment al of them to conspire in one opinion of truth doctrine and yet al of them so fowly and so grosly to erre as that a new-found Protestant is able to discouer it This this may a Protestant often declaime but no man of iudgement can possibly beleeue him Yea our Protestants are so far out of loue and liking with the Fathers as they painfully labour to make the world to think that their Cōmentaries books and beleef were directly contrarie to the Sacred Scriptures and therefore to these they wil euer appeale from the writings of men Captaine Luther 23) L. contra Henricum 8. Regem Angliae saith Against the sayings of Fathers Men Angels and Diuels I place not ancient consent nor the multitude of men but the Ghospel being the Word of One Eternal Maiestie which themselues are enforced to allow Here I stand here I sit here I abide here I glorie here I triumph here I insult ouer Papists Thomists Henricians and al the Gates of Hel much more ouer the sayings of men though neuer so holy and deceauable custome The word of God is aboue al Diuine Maiestie maketh with me so that I care not if a thousand Augustins a thousand Tertullians a thousand Henries or Papistical Churches should stand against me God can not erre and deceiue Austin and Cyprian as also al the Elect may and haue erred My Doctrines shal stand the Pope shal fal Here we haue a man of liuelie Faith but yet heare him further 24) In Comment in ep ad Gal. No other doctrine is to be deliuered or heard in the Church then the pure word of God that is the Sacred Scripture Let other Doctours and Auditours be accursed with their learning but here wanteth Charitie Neither is Luther in this alone for Zuinglius likewise declaymeth 25( In Explanat Artic. 64. Presently thou beginnest to cry Fathers Fathers the Fathers haue so deliuered But I do not ask of thee Fathers or Mothers but I require the word of God In like sort Peter Martyr 26) De Votis p. 462. As concerning the Fathers iudgement because our Aduersaries the Papists are accustomed in this and other Controuersies alwayes to prouoke to them I therfore declare that to me it seemeth not the part of a Christian to prouoke to the iudgements of men from the Scriptures of God Yea saith he 27) Ibid. p. 476. As long as we rest in Councels or Fathers we shal alwayes be conuersant in the same errours And the like is taught by Summerus saying 28) Contr. Carolum l. 1. c. 1. Antiquitie by which they affirme we are condemned is of no force for if they speak of a right beleeuing Antiquitie by which we vnderstand Christ and his Apostles the matter itself cryeth that it is for vs but if they wil vnderstand the same of the authoritie of the Fathers we do not take it il that the word of God is condemned by them Agreably heerunto writeth D. Whitaker 29) Contra Sander p. 92. If you argue from the testimonies of men be they neuer so learned and ancient we yeeld no more to their words in cause of Religion then we perceiue to be agreable to Scripture Neither think your self to haue proued any thing though you bring against vs the whole swarme of Fathers except that which they say be iustifyed not by the voice of men but by God himself And againe 30) Answ to Camp Reas 2. p. 70. And see the like in Abbots in his Answ to His. Reas 10 p. 371. We are not the Seruants of the Fathers but the Sonnes when they prescribe vs anie thing out of the Law and Diuine authoritie we obey them as our parents if they enioyne anie thing against the voice of the heauenlie truth we haue learned not to hearken to them but to God You Papists as vassals and base seruants receiue whatsoeuer the Fathers say without iudgement or reason being affrayd as I think either of the whip or the halter if euerie thing they speake be not Ghospel with you Againe 31) Against Sanders de Antichristo p. 21. We repose no such confidence in the Fathers writings that we take any certain proof of our Protestant Religion from them because we place al our Faith and Religion not in humane but in Diuine authoritie If therefore thou bring vs what some one Father hath thought or what the Fathers vniuersally altogeather haue deliuered the same except it be approued by testimonies of Scriptures it auaileth nothing it gaineth nothing it conuinceth nothing for the Fathers are such witnesses as they also haue need of the Scriptures to be their witnesses If deceiued by errour they giue forth their testimonie disagreeging from Scriptures albeit they may be pardoned erring for want of wisdome we can not be pardoned being green-witted Protestants if because they erred we also wil erre with them Thus doth this Protestant Doctour defend his reiecting the ancient Fathers as writing contrarie to the Scriptures and vpbrayd vs Catholicks for our due estimation of the same and so do Protestants stil labour in derogation of the Fathers to oppose the Sacred Scriptures and holie Fathers as contrarie one to another But al in vaine for who euer more duly reuerenced or more carefully preserued those heauenlie writings then the ancient Bishops and Doctours of the Primitiue Church Who more truly translated them to their greatest paines for the good of al succeeding Ages then those learnedst Fathers Who in searching the deepest difficulties so frequent in them did more submit and captiuate their iudgements then these holy Fathers Who euer more pressed Hereticks with the weight of God's word then those zealous Fathers Who euer writ more large or more learned Commentaries and explanations therof then the aged Fathers And is it then possible that the sayd Fathers should so directly contradict the Sacred Scriptures as our Protestants pretend But this so desperate so vnworthie dealing against the Fathers doth cleerly conuince that
Fathers were no Protestants but meerly Papists wherin we may glorie as reuerencing their sanctitie admiring their learning and honouring their Antiquitie Neither is it true as Protestants vse to suggest that Catholicks distrusting their cause if it be committed to trial by Scripture do therefore fly from it to Fathers and Doctours for as for al such poynts as are contayned in Scripture to Scripture we appeale it is that we vrge her literal sense and words hath made vs Papists We therefore only recurre to Fathers eyther for the better finding-out and vnderstanding the true meaning of sundrie difficult passages and texts of Scripture or for the true discerning of seueral Ecclesiastical Traditions and doctrines taught and practised by the Church and yet no where mentioned in the Writen Word And as this is not most impiously to oppose Fathers to Scriptures or to fly from Scriptures to Fathers So is it in these respects the most assured meanes to giue vs satisfaction For as none euer left more liuelie Monuments of rarest wit profundest knowledge or more shining testimonies of greatest puritie and sanctitie in life or more astonishing wonders and miracles in confirmation of their Faith and doctrine then these ancient Fathers so were there none euer furnished with so good means eithers of knowing the Apostles or the Apostles preaching as the Apostles first heires and next successours the sweetest fruits of their labours our holie Fathers But to prosecute yet further this so lunatick proceeding of Protestants against these grauest Sages of Christ's Catholick Church what more indigne or iniurious can be vttered then that these so great Doctours al of them vnited members of one Catholick Church should be at deadlie warres and dissention amongst themselues in important articles of Faith Religion Yea that one and the same Doctour should contradict himself that in matters fundamental of greatest consequence And yet Caluin blusheth not to say 32) In Inst in Praef. ad Reg. Galliae p. 7. Those holie men were ignorant of manie things they often fight amongst themselues and sometimes with themselues Beza likewise speaking of the ancient Fathers in Theodosius his time sayth 32) In Inst in Praef. ad Reg. Galliae p. 7. I confesse as then there were most learned Bishops 33) In nou Test Praef. ad Princip Condens p. 4. but this also I affirme c. that scarce anie of them can be named who dissenteth not both from himself and others in manie things and those of greatest moment A thing incredible in such learned Bishops if Caluin and Beza were not the Broachers who seldome tel truth 34) Ep. ad Rom. c. 14. p. 419. Melancthon also thus writeth of the Fathers Seing they sometimes speak contrarie things they must pardon vs if we reprehend certain things in them And 35) Devotis p. 463. Though the Fathers were wise and learned and saw many things sayth Peter Martyr yet they were men and could erre And that chiefly is to be obserued that the Fathers do not always agree amongst themselues and sometimes one dissenteth from himself Those Fathers saith 36) Retractiue from Romish Religion p. 223. 224. D. Beard that liued in the next two hundred yeares after the first speak of this mater of Inuocation of Saints very variously and doubtfully as if it were a Doctrine which they knew not what to say to and were not fully resolued in Thirdly of those Fathers which he alleadgeth though in some places they seeme to allow that custome which was then brought into the Church yet in other places they disallow the same yea and they are disapproued also of others that liued in the same Age. Thus true Athanasius condēneth Inuocation of Saints c. false Athanasius alloweth it c. Basil approueth it but Nazianzene doubteth of it and Epiphanius c. vtterly condemneth it Chrysostome in some places seemeth to allow of it in others he speaketh against it and so doth Augustine and the rest The like contradition D. Whitaker instanceth in S. Basil saying 37) De Sacra Scrip. p. 670. Basil fighteth with himself And 38) De Princip Christ Dog l. 2. c. 10. p. 675. I oppose saith Lubbertus Basil against Basil And 39) Ib. p. 678. Damascene is contrarie to himself Yea 40) Ib. p. 676. I oppose Chrysostome against Chrysostome of whom also saith Whitaker 41) De Sacra Scrip. p. 678. he is at variance with himself And 42) Ibid. p. 676. Let vs not attend what Cyprian sayd but let vs examin him by his owne law Yea of S. Augustin Whitaker blusheth not to say 43) Ibid. p. 690. Although in this he may be thought to fauour Traditions yet in other places he defendeth earnestly the perfection of the Scriptures Of whom also sayth D. Beard 44) Retractiue from Romish Religione 413. Augustin whom they challenge for the greatest Patrone of this fire yet defineth nothing determinately of it but speaketh doubtingly and problematically and if he affirme it in some one place he leaueth it in suspence in others and vtterly denyeth it in a third D. Morton acknowledgeth that Protestants 45) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 201. 202. haue particularly and by name obserued that Iustinus Ireneus Clemens Tertullian Origen Cyprian and others albeit manie times they pleaded for the free wil of the corrupt nature of man yet were they sometime reduced vnto the more Orthodoxal hold writing therof more commodiously belike as denying Free-wil But this being only a Protestant or lying obseruation I must inferre that as this so base proceeding against the Fathers doth euidently demonstrate and discouer the vnablenes of Protestants in alleadging the Fathers further against vs then they are pretended to be against themselues which al of iudgement wil confesse to be nothing So doth it alfo no lesse cleerly conuince that Protestants in their owne consciences do find and know the Fathers directly to condemne their opinions and to patronize Papistrie for otherwise they would neuer endeauour so fowly to blemish them by vrging contradiction with themselues which the meanest Writer though in triuial matters doth euer scorne as too cleer an argument of grosse obliuion or worse inconstancie Now from this conceipt of the Fathers ignorance and contradiction to themselues Protestants doubt not to preferre their owne moderne writers for iudgement knowledge and learning before the greatest ancientest Doctours of the Primitiue Church So Luther in his Protestant humilitie thus speaketh of himself 46) Lib. ad Ducem Georgium And see Colloq lat c. de Consolatione Since the Apostles times no Doctour or writer hath so excellently and cleerly confirmed instructed and comforted the consciences of the secular States as I haue done by the singular grace of God This certainly I know that neither Austin not Ambrose who are yet in this matter the best are equal to me heerin 47) Tom. 7. Serm. de Euersione Hierusalem f. 271. The Ghospel
is so copiously preached by vs that truly in the Apostles time it was not so cleare And seing 48) Tom 2. lib. Cont. Reg. Angliae f. 344. God's word is aboue al the Diuine Maiestie maketh for me So that I passe not if 100. Austins 1000. Cyprians 1000. King Harrie 's Churches stood against me Wherefore 49) Lib. de Seruo Arb. And see Cnoglerus his Symbolatria p. 152. Cast you off what armour the ancient Orthodoxal Fathers shal afford or the schooles of Diuines the authoritie of Councels Bishops the consent of so manie Ages of al Christian People we receiue nothing but Scriptures but yet so that the infallible authoritie of interpreting is only in vs what we expound that the Holy-Ghost thinketh what others though great though manie bring it commeth from the spirit of Sathan and a mind distracted Yea the Pope 50) L. aduersus Papatum Romae à Satana fundatum f. 1. knoweth saith Luther that by the singular guift and bountie of God I am more learned in the Scriptures then himself and al his Asses But if Luther himself doth so fully mouthe his owne prayses and deserts we may presume his disciples and followers are not sparing in the like And so indeed writeth Alberus 51) Contra Carolostadianos l. 7. I doubt not but that if Austin were now liuing he would not be ashamed to professe himself Martin Luther's Scholler But Musculus lasheth far further for 52) Praef. in Libellum Ger. de Diaboli Tyramide since the Apostles times saith he there liued not in the world a greater then Luther And it may be sayd that God powred al his guifts vpon this only man and that there is as great difference betwixt the ancient Doctours and Luther as betwixt the light of the Sunne and of the Moone Neither is it to be doubted but that the ancient Fathers euen those that are chief and best among them as Hilarie and Austin if they had liued and taught in the same time with Luther would without blushing haue carried the lanterne before him as his Schollers or Ministers And another professeth that 53) In Hos in Hist Sacra part alt f. 346. He preferreth one leaf in Luther before the writings of al Fathers So that if we beleeue either Luther or his Schollers not only Austin and Hilarie and Ambrose but euen al the Fathers since the Apostles times must giue place to Luther in regard of his profoundest knowledge and learning But not only Luther himself thus far excelleth the ancient Fathers but in his opinion the onlie 54) In Col. mensa c. de Patribus Eccl. Apologie of Philip Melancthon doth far excel al the Doctours of the Church and exceed euen Austin himself Beza in like sort affirmeth 55) Praef. in nouum Testament dicat Principi Condiensi Caluin to haue far exceeded al the ancient and later writers in interpreting of the Scriptures wth varietie of words and allegation of reasons Yea saith he 56) Epist Theol. ep 1 p. 5. I haue been accustomed to say and not without cause as I take it that whilst I compare those verie times next the Apostles with our times they had then more conscience lesse knowledge And on the other side we haue now more knowledge and lesse conscience This is my opinion c. Agreably herevnto saith D. Whiteguift in his 57) Defence c. p. 472. Brief Comparison between the Protestants Bishops of our time and the Bishops of Primitiue Church The doctrine taught and professed by our Bishops at this day is much more perfect and sound then it commonly was in anie Age after the Apostles times 58) Ibid. p. 473. Surely you are not able to reckon in anie Age since the Apostles time anie company of Bishops that taught and held so perfect and sound doctrine in al poynts as â—he Bishops of England do at this time Yea in the truth of doctrine our Bishops be not only comparable with the old Bishops but in many degrees to be preferred before them In like sort saith Zanchius 59) De Sacra Scriptura p. 411. Christ hath now giuen to vs more excellent Interpreters then euer heretofore stnce the Apostles Yea saith M. Iacob 60) Defence of Treatise of Christ's sufferings p. 146. And see the Answ to Downham's sermon p. 20. this is the profit that comes by ordinarie flanting with the Fathers c. if in this case we were to looke after anie man surely we haue more cause to regard our late faithful teachers rather then those of old who being equal with the best of them in anie of the excellent graces of God's Spirit c. By which we may see the smal account made by Protestants of ancient Doctours not blushing thus to equal yea much to preferre their owne latest Writers before al the Fathers since the Apostles times But what should I vrge thus much their dislike disclaiming and disgracing of ancient Fathers when they spare not to reiect and contemne the authoritie of al Councels though neuer so general neuer so ancient And first doth not Luther affirme in general 61) In Asser Articulorum per Leonem X. damnat Art 29. That the way is made to vs Protestants of weakning the authoritie of Councels and of freely contradicting their decrees and of iudging their Acts and of confessing confidently whatsoeuer seemeth true to Protestants whether it be approued or reproued by anie Councel Doth not Beza affirme that 62) Praef. in nouum Testam ad Princ. C ndiens euen in the best times the ambition ignorance and lewdnes of Bishops was such that the verie blind may easily perceaue how that Sathan was president in their assemblies or Councels Doth not D. Humfrey disclaime from the Councels celebrated in the first 600. years saying 63) De vita Iuelli p. 212. What concerneth it vs what the false Synods of Bishops as then shal ordayne And doth not M. Carthwright reiect as erroneous euen the first Nycene Councel saying 64) 2. Reply part 1. p. 509. We haue good cause to hould for suspect whatsoeuer either in gouernment or doctrine those times left vnto vs not confirmed by substantial proofs out of the Word c. This appeareth in the first Councel of Nyce where the most errours decreed vpon c. besides the vngodlie custome which may appeare to haue occupyed almost al the Churches touching the forbidding of the second Marriage of Ministers before that Councel And againe 65) Ibid. p. 484. In the same Councel appeareth that to those chosen to the Ministerie vnmarried it was not lawful to take anie wife afterwards c. Paphnutius sheweth that not only this was before that Councel but was an ancient Tradition in the Church in which both himself and the whole Councel rested c. If the ancient Tradition of the Church saith Cartwright cannot authorize this neither can ancient custome authorize the other to wit of Metropolitans Luther
stileth the Canons of the sayd Councel of Nyce 66) Luther l. de Cōcilijs part 1. p. 92. hay straw wood stubble and demandeth whether the the Holie-Ghost hath nothing els to do in Councels but to bind and burden his Ministers with impossible dangerous and vnnecessarie lawes So absurd was the Councel of Nyce in Luther's iudgement affirming further That more light is brought to a Christian by that Catechisme which children do learne then by al the Councels Caluin calleth the Fathers of the sayd Councel of Nyce 67) Lib. de vera Eccl. reformat opuscul p. 486. And Inst l. 4. c. 9. 3. 10. Phanaticos that is men Phanatical or deluded by the Diuel and withal giueth leaue to euerie priuate man to examin the decrees of Councels by the Scriptures saying 68) Inst l. 4. c. 9. §. 8. 9 11. Let no names or authorities of Councels Pastours Bishops hinder vs but that we may examin al Spirits of al men by the rule of the Word of God And againe 69 Ib. 3. 14. I deny that Interpretation of Scripture to be alwayes true and certain which is receaued by the consent of a Councel But I cannot heer but obserue the strange giddines of this primest protestant Caluin who directly contrarie to his former Assertions writeth thus 70) Inst l. 4. c. 9. §. 8. Those ancient Synods as Nyce Constantinople the first of Ephesus of Chalcedon and the like which were assembled for the confuting of errours we do willingly embrace and reuerence as Sacred for as much as concerneth doctrines of Faith For they containe nothing but the pure and natiue Interpretation of Scripture which the holie Fathers with spiritual wisdome applyed to the vanquishing of the Enemies of Religion which then appeared But to leaue him thus fighting with himself and to come to the Ministers of the Church of Scotland 71) In the end of the Harmonie of Coafes p. 19. And see the sayd Harmonie sect 1. p. 14. Without iust examination we do not receaue say they whatsoeuer is obtruded vnto men vnder the name of a General Councel for plaine it is that as the men assembled were men so haue some of them manifestly erred and that in matters of great weight and importance So far then as the Councel proueth the determination and commandment that it giueth by the plaine word of God so soone do we reuerence and embrace the same Heervnto also do accord our English Protestants teaching that 72) Articles of faith agreed vpon in the Conuocations of A. 1562. 1604. art 21. General Councels c. may erre and sometimes haue erred euen in things pertaining vnto God Wherefore things ordained by them as necessarie to saluation haue neither strength nor authoritie vnles it may be declared that they be taken out of holie Scriptures So vnwilling or rather truly fearful are Protestants to appeale vnto General Councels for the decision of Controuersies But D. Luther proceedeth further seriously expecting exacting that al Councels shal be subiect to his Censure determination 73) Tom. 2. wittenberg f. 375. The Rectours of Churches saith he the Pastours of Christ's sheep haue indeed power to teach but the sheep ought to iudge whether they propose the voice of Christ or of strangers c. Wherefore let the Pope Bishops Councels c. decree appoynt and ordaine what they wil we wil not hinder them but we who are the sheep of Christ and heare his voice wil haue it in our power to iudge whether they propose things true and agreable to the voice of our Pastour or no and they are to yeald subscribe and obey our Censure and Sentence Now if Councels be subiect to the Censure of Luther or anie other such rotten sheep then lesse is the authoritie of Councels then of Luther himself then the which nothing can be spoken more absurd or ridiculous In like sort saith Peter Martyr in general 74) De votis p. 476. As long as we rest in Councels Fathers we shal be euer conuersant in the same errours Yea saith M. Carthwright 75) In whiteg Tract 2. p. 95. If this be a sufficient proof to say such a Councel decreed such a Doctour sayd so there is almost nothing so true but I can impugne nothing so false but I can make true And wel assured I am that by their meanes the principal grounds of our Protestant Faith may beshabken But to conclude 76) De Concil contr Bellar. 9. 6. Fulk Answ to a Counterf Cath p. 89. 90. Will. Syno 92. D Whitaker D. Fulk D. Willet and most other Protestants teaching that General Councels may erre in Faith and manners it is no wonder though they reiect their authoritie but yet it euidently conuinceth that in matters of Faith and Religion Protestants dare not relye and submit themselues to the decrees and definitions either of ancient or moderne General Councels So that though Ministers in their Pulpits where none wil gainsay them do florish and flaunt forth the ancient Fathers prayses approue their authoritie applaud them as Protestants and appeale to those primitiue Doctours as Maisters and Patrons of their errours yet when they are pressed by Catholicks with cleerest euidence of their particular writings sayings and practise and with the answerable acknowledgements of the learned Protestants then their tone is changed bitterly exclaming that The argument drawne from Antiquitie is a Popish argument that To appeale to the Primitiue Church is to iniurie the Protestant Congregation That for Protestants to fil their books with the authorities of Fathers is dangerous and to be eschued That in al Councels Fathers and Stories since the Apostles the print of the Popes feet is to be found That the Papists strongest towers are in the testimonies of the Doctours That the Fathers were blind and ignorant in the Scriptures That they were certainly damned for their Papistical opinions vnles they repented That their interpretations of Scripture were aduantagious to Papists and preiudicial to Protestants That their books and Commentaries were contrarie to Scripture Yea that the Fathers did contradict one another and often one and the same himself That Luther and sundrie other Protestants are much to be preferred for learning before S. Austin S. Ambrose and al the other Fathers That the Doctrine now taught by the Bishops of England is much more sound then euer was taught by any Bishops since the Apostles and therefore that our Bishops are in manie degrees to be preferred before them that euen in the best times Sathan was president in Councels And lastly that al decrees of Popes Bishops and Councels are to yeeld and obey the Censure of Luther Dot not al this most strongly confirme that in the verie harts and consciences of Protestants themselues the ancient Fathers were Roman Catholicks and most aduerse to Protestants and that therefore and only therefore they are thus reiected contemned disgraced and wronged by them euen by Luther Caluin Beza
Acontius Pomeran Zuinglius Peter Martyr Sommerus Melancthon Lubbertus Polanus Alberus Musculus Hospinian Zanchius Humfrey Willet Midleton Carthwright Whiteguift Iacob Fulk Beard Morton and Whitaker THAT THE PROTESTANTS CHVRCH disclaimeth from the Fathers of the Primitiue Church it is further proued by the Protestants condemning al the ancient Fathers in general for beleeuing teaching and practising the seueral particular actions of our CatholicK Roman Faith and Religion CHAPTER II. HAVING in the former Chapter so plentifully displayed our Protestants free confessions for the ancient Fathers Papistrie least some should yet obiect that not al but only some few of the Fathers were reprouable therin or that not in al but only in some few points and those of lesser moment they were so faulty I wil now make manifest through al the principal points of our Catholick Religion at this day controuerted with Protestants that either al the Fathers indefinitly or sundrie of them at once are acknowledged and reproued by our Protestant Aduersaries as agreing with vs Catholicks in the foresayd Articles And first concerning the holie Sacraments and Sacrifice 1. as touching the efficacie or Grace truly giuen by Sacraments Zuinglius saith 1) Tom. 2. de Bap. f. 70 Here most of the Doctours by the name of water vnderstanding that material and external water of Baptisme haue attributed more thereunto then was meet Wherupon it came to passe tbat after they ascribed the cleansing of the Soule to the element of water Luther saith in general 2) Tom. 2. Witten f. 229. I hold the Fathers pardonable who through temptation or necessitie stifly denyed sinne to remaine after Baptisme Musculus reproueth the Fathers in general for that 3) Loc. com p. 299. They attribute greater efficacie to our Sacraments then to the Sacraments of the old Testament affirming ours to be more effectual signes of Grace not only signifying the same as the others did but also conferring and giuing Grace and Saluation And Vrbanus Rhegius confesseth that 4) In part 1. operum in Catechismo minore f. 105. the Scripture and authoritie of the ancient Church constraine him to beleeue that litle children dying vnbaptised are damned In which respect 5) Inst l. 4. c. 15. §. 20. Caluin acknowledgeth that Manie Ages since almost from the verie beginning of the Church it was vsual that in danger of death Lay people might Baptize if the Minister were not present So cleer it is that the ancient Fathers did generally teach that the Sacraments of Christ did truly giue grace as Catholicks beleeue and not only signifie the same as Protestants pretend Secondly as concerning the Sacrament of Pennance or Confession the Centurists 6) Centur. 3. c. 6. col 127. speaking of the general vse therof in the ancient times of Tertullian and Cyprian report that They gaue absolution from sinnes thus If any did pennance they first confessed their sinne for so Tertullian greatly vrgeth Confession in his book of Pennance And that priuate Confession was vsual in which they confessed their sinnes and wicked thoughts it appeareth by some places of Cyprian c. And that Satisfaction or Pennance according to the quantitie of the fault was accustomed to be enioyned it appareth in his fift sermon de Lapsis So vsual was Auricular Confession and Pennance in those ancient times which Pennance also was sometimes by Pardons or Indulgences in part remitted For thus writeth D. Field 7) Of the Church l. 1. c. 17. p. 33. The ancient Bishops were wont to cut off great parts of enioyned Pennance which remission was called an Indulgence And wheras D. Field would euade this our so strong argument for Pardons and Indulgences by affirming that the enioyned Pennance thus remitted was not then imposed as in satisfaction of God's Iustice it is so euidently against the Fathers doctrine and practise that D. Whitaker himself confuteth it in these words 8) Cont. caÌ„p rat 5. p. 78. The Fathers thought by their external discipline to pay the paines due for sinne and to satisfy God's Iustice And that not Cyprian only but almost al the holy Fathers of that time were in that errour and depraued the Doctrine of Pennance 9) Ib. p. 78. Yea saith Melancthon 10) Libelli aliquot c. fol. 11. al the Councel of Nyce ouercome with the consent of Multitude and of the time approued the Canons of Pennance So that our Catholick Doctrine of Confession Pennance and Pardons is the general confessed Doctrine of the ancient Fathers Thirdly as concerning the Real Presence in the Sacrament of the Eucharist I haue shewed 11) lib. 2. c. 8 before that S. Gregorie Eusebius Emissenus S. Ambrose S. Cyril S Hilarie S. Cyprian S. Chrysostome Tertullian Origen and S. Ignatius are al of them acknowledged and reproued by Protestants for our Catholick doctrine of Real Presence and Transubstantiation Yea some Protestants confesse that 12) Adamus Francisci in Margar. Theol. p. 256. Transubstantiation entred early into the Church And that they 13) Antony de Adamo in his Anotomy of the Masse p. 236. haue not yet hitherto been able to know when this opinion of the Real Bodilie being of Christ in the Sacrament did begin But Bucer speaking of the Fathers in general professeth in this point 14) Scripta Eruditorum aliquot virorum de Cena Domini p. 37. to auoyd their sayings as being saith he seruiceable to Antichrist and ouer-much varying from the scriptures Whereby it is euident that the ancient Fathers were wholy agreable to our Roman Church in this weightiest Article of Real Presence 4. Concerning Holie Orders D. Field auoucheth 15) Of the Church l. 5. p. 121. And se the like Cent. 3. c. 7. Col. 149. 150 That there is no question but that the Minor Orders of Subdeacons Acolyths Exorcists Lectors Ostiaries are verie ancient In proof wherof he alleadgeth S. Cyprian and manie other Fathers 5. As touching Extreme-Vnction D. Whitaker answering to the sundrie ancient Fathers obiected testimonies in behalf therof confesseth saying 16) Contra Dureum l. 8. p. 650. I confesse the superstitious vse of this vnction to haue continued longer in the Church then was meet 6. Our sacrifice of the Masse was so generally beleeued and offred by the Fathers that Caluin himself affirmeth that 17) In Heb. c. 7. p. 924. And devera Eccl. Refor extant in Tract Thel p. 389. The ancient Fathers forged a sacrifice in the Lord's supper without his commandment and so adulterated the supper with adding of sacrifice Chrastouius witnesseth that 18) De Opifiâ—io Missae l. 1. p. 28 58. 102. 171. The Fathers thought the Eucharist to be a Sacrifice according to the Order of Melchisedech And 19) Against Hoskins c p. 99. 100. I confesse saith D. Fulk that diuers of the old Fathers were of opinion that the bread and wine which Melchisedech brought forth was sacrificed by him and that it was a figure of
chief of the worshippers so general and receaued was the practise heerof in the time of Paulinus who as Osiander relateth was 45) Cent. 5. p. 387. familiar with Hierom Austin and Ambrose 16. Concerning the Vow of Chastitie Chemnitius confesseth that 46) Exam. part 3. p. 41. we are not ignorant that the Fathers allowed the Vowes of perpetual Chastitie and that they thought them to be obligatorie I know sayth Peter Martyr that 47) De Votis p. 524. Epiphanius with manie other Fathers erred in that they affirme it to be sinne to breake this Vow when need shal require and that he referreth the same naughtily to Apostolical Traditions Yea sayth M. Wotton it is one of the blemishes 48) Defence of Parkins p. 491. of the ancient Writers 17. The Chastitie or single life of Priests was so generally prescribed and practised by the ancient Fathers who were Priests also themselues that M. Iewel speaking of this point 49) Def. of the Apol. p. 195. saith Heer I grant that M. Harding is like to find some good aduantage as hauing vndoubtedly a great number of holie Fathers on his side Bucer likewise acknowledgeth that 50) Gratul ad Eccles Angliae p. 35. in the time of S. Hierome the Churches of Aegypt of the East and of the Sea Apostolick were not accustomed to receaue for Priests but such as either were not married or abstained from their wiues 18. Monastical life was so general with the Fathers that M. Cartwright confesseth that 51) In Whiteg Def. p. 344. Ruffin Theodoret Sozomen Socrates do mention Monks almost in euerie page And the Centurists do begin a whole special Tract the title wherof is 52) Cent. 4. c. 10. col 294. Of the Monks through Syria Palestina Bythinia and the other places of Asia vnder Constantin the Great as also the title of another Tract is 53) Cent. 4. c 10. col 1306. The African Monks through Aegypt vnder Constantin the Great And the title of another Tract is 54) Ib. col 1331. The Monks through Europe So that in those purest and ancientest times Religious or Monastical life was generally practised ouer the whole face of the Christian world euen through Asia Africk and Europe 19. Prescribed times for fasting are so ancient and general that Chemnitius confesseth that 55) Exam. par 1. p. 89. Ambrose Maximus Taurinensis Theophilus Hierome and others do affirme the Fast of lent to be an Apostolical Tradition And Caluin professeth that 56) Instit l. 4. c. 1 2. §. 19. heerin he dareth not excuse the old Fathers but that they sowed some seeds of superstition And that 57) Ib. §. 20. euerie where the obseruation of superstitious Lent was in force 20. Concerning Free-wil some Protestants say 58) A Discouer of vntruthes contained in D. Bancrofts serm p. 23. 59 We know that euer since the Apostles times in a manner it flourished euerie where til Martin Luther took the sword in hand against it The Centurists speaking of the times next after the Apostles say 59 In like sort Clemens affirmeth euerie where Free-wil that it may appeare not only al the Doctours of that Age to haue been in such darknes but that it likewise encreased in their successours 21. Merit of works was so generally belieued by the ancient Fathers that D. Whitaker chargeth with errour therin 60) Resp ad Camp p. 78. not only Cyprian but almost to vse his owne words al the most holie Fathers of that time And 61) Iesuit par 2 p. 531. It may not be denyed saith D. Humfrey but that Ireneus Clemens and others called Apostolical haue nothing Apostolically inserted into their writings the opinions of Free-wil and Merit of works 22. And as for the vse of Ceremonies in the Church M. Calfhil affirmeth that 62) In Fulks Reioynder to Martials Reply p. 131. 132. the Fathers declined al from the simplicitie of the Ghospel in Ceremonies Melancthon also affirmeth that 63) In 1. Cor. c. 3. Presently from the beginning of the Church the ancient Fathers obscured the doctrine concerning the iustice of Faith encreased Ceremonies and deuised peculiar Worships 23. But to include manie in one D. Whiteguift a prime Metrapolitan amongst Protestants discoursing 64) Defence c. p. 472. 473. of Doctrine taught in anie Age since the Apostles time affirmeth without anie exception either of Age or Father that almost al the Bishops and learned Writers of the Greek Church and Latin also for the most part were spotted with doctrines of Free-wil of Merit of Inuocation of Saints and such like c. Meaning thereby such other like points of our Catholick Religion which his Assertion hath since been renewed by D. Couel who speaking of the ancient Fathers vseth these like words as 65) Exam. against the Plea of the Innoc. p. 120. Diuers both of the Greek and Latin Church were spotted with the errours about Free-wil Merit Inuocotion of Saints Manie things expressing their Papistrie might be alledged in this kind if it were anie vertue to rip vp their faults whom we ought to honour And wheras Bellarmin alledgeth 66) De Not. Ecclesiae l. 4. c. 9. the particular sayings of Caluin and the Centurie-writers as charging the ancient Fathers with our doctrine of Free-wil Lymbus Patrum Denyal of our Concupiscence without consent to be sinne Satisfaction Prayer for the Dead Merit Pennance the Fast of Lent the vnmarried life of Priests Baptisme of Lay-persons in case of necessitie the manner of Sacrificing c. D. Whitaker answering thereto iustifyeth the same saying 67) De Eccles cont Bellarm. Contr. 2 q. 5. p. 299. Bellarmin alledgeth certain testimonies from Caluin and the Centurie-writers as noting certain errours of the ancient Fathers which were common to them with the Papists as namely Free-wil Merit Lymbus Inuocation of Saints the vnmarried life of Priests Satisfaction and certain other such like c. before mentioned by Bellarmine I answer thereto that it is true which Caluin and the Centurie-writers haue written that in manie things the ancient Church erred as in Lymbus Free-wil Merit of works and in al the residue of those other before recited 24. In like sort M. Brightman hauing named S. Athanasius S. Basil S. Chrysostom S. Ambrose S. Hierom S. Augustin c. affirmeth of them al that 68) In Apoc. in c. 14. p. 382. in words they condemned Idolatrie but in deed they established it by Inuocation of Saints Worshipping of Relicks and such other wicked Popish superstitions 25. Beza speaking of the times of S. Cyprian S. Austin and S. Chrysostom auoucheth that 69) Praef. in Nou. Test ad Princip Cond Then Sathan layd the first foundations in Greece of Inuocation of the Dead whereto some of the chiefest Bishops were so far from resisting c. others c. did not only not represse open superstitions arising but did also nourish them c. Hence those opinions of Free-wil of Faith
16. f. 65. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed and practised the vow of Chastitie and that they neuer allowed such as were of the Clergie afterwards to marrie or such as had been twice married to be admitted to holie Orders without special dispensation chap. 17. fol. 69. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Promitiue Church allowed practised the Religious State of Monastical life and that manie Christians of those purest times both men and women did strictly obserue and professe the same chap. 18. f. 74. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed practised prescribed fasts and abstinence from certaine meats vpon dayes and times appointed holding the same obligatorie vnder sinne condemning also our Puritan Sabboath Fasts chap. 19. fol. 80. It is admitted by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church expresly taught our Catholick Doctrine concerning Free wil. chap. 20. fol. 84 It is granted by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church taught not only Faith but likewise Good works truly to iustifye that the sayd works are meritorious of Grace and Glorie chap. 21. fol. 86. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Ceremonies now vsed in the Roman Church in the ministring of seruice or Sacrifice as also of the Sacraments were formerly vsed by the Bishops Priests and Fathers of the Primitiue Church chap. 22. fol. 89 THE THIRD BOOK WHERIN is proued that the Church of Protestants was neuer knowne or in Being before the d yes of Luther And that the Articles of Religion now taught by the Protestant Congregation were Heresies condemned by the Primitiue Church of Christ IT is confessed by Protestants that from the dayes of the Apostles vntil the tyme of Luther themselues neuer had any knowne Church or Congregatiō in anie part of the vniuersal World chap. 1. fol. 1. A Further conuincing proof of the Protestant Churches not being during the first 600. yeares is taken from the Fathers Condemning in the ancient Hereticks the chiefest articles of the Protestant Religion and our Protestants Confessing the same And First Concerning the Sacraments chap. 2. fol. 6. That the Fathers condemned in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning the Scriptures and the Church Militant and Triumphant chap. 3. fol. 9. That the Fathers condemned in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning Monachisme the mariage of Priests and prescribed Fasts chap. 4. fol. 12. That the Fathers condemned in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning Free-wil Faith Good works the Commandments sinne and the knowledge and Death of Christ chap. 5. fol. 14. Protestants Vsual recrimination of obiecting old Heresies to the Catholick Roman Church is cleerly examined discouered confuted by their owne acknowledgements chap. 6. fol. 17. A Further trial is Made Whether Catholicks or Protestants be true Hereticks and this by sundrie knowne badges or markes of Heresie chap. 7. fol. 23. A brief Suruey of D. Whites Catalogue wherin contrary to the Confessed truth in the precedent Chapter of no knowne beginning or change of our Romane Faith in anye Age he vndertaketh according to his Title therof to shew That the present Religion of the Roman Church was obserued resisted in al Ages as it came in and increased naming withal the Persons that made the Resistance And the poynts wherin And the time when from fiftie yeares to fiftie through-out al Ages since Christ chap. 8. fol. 35. THE FOVRTH BOOK WHERIN is proued by the Confession of Protestants that according to the Sacred Scriptures the Roman Church is the true Church of Christ And so to haue euer continued from his time vntil the Date hereof And of the contrary the Protestants Church to be only a Sect Heretical and neuer to haue been before the dayes of Luther PRotestants flying to the sacred Scriptures in proof defence of their Church and Religion it is shewed the sayd flight not only in itself to be dishonourable but also to be the ordinarie flight of al moderne Hereticks chap. 1. fol. 1. That euen the Sacred Scriptures themselues do most plentifully testify our Romane Church to be the Church of of Christ and the Congregation or Church of Protestants to be no true Church but a Sect Heretical most contrarie to the said Scriptures And that first by the Churches necessarie continuance and vniuersalitie chap. 2. fol. 5. The second Proof from sacred Scriptures in cōfirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Euer visibilitie of Christ's Church chap. 3. fol. 10. The third Proof from Sacred Scriptures in Cōfirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Churches Pastours which must euer continue with lawful Calling and Succession and with Administration of Word and Sacraments chap. 4. fol. 13. The fourth Proof from sacred Scriptures in confirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Conuersion of Heathen Kings and Nations to the Faith of Christ chap. 5. fol. 24. A Discouerie or brief Examination of sundrie sleights and Euasions vsed by Protestant Writers in Excuse of the manifest confessed want of their Churches fulfilling the foresaid Scripiures concerning the continuance vniuersalitie and visibilitie of Christs true Church chap. 6. fol. 33. THE FIFT BOOK WHERIN is shewed that Protestants in the Decision of Controuersies between them and Catholicks do absolutly disclaime from Antiquitie reiecting the Ancient Fathers and Councels for Papistical and the Sacred Scriptures for erroneous THat Protestants Disclaime from al Antiquitie since the Apostles and further reiect and condemne as Papistical the Ancient Fathers and General Councels chap. 1. fol. 1. That the Protestant Church disclaimeth from the Fathers of the Primitiue Church it is further proued by the Protestants condemning al the ancient Fathers in general for beleeuing teaching and practising the seueral particular actions of our Catholick Roman Faith and Religion chap. 2. fol. 12. That Protestants do not only disclaime from al the ancient Fathers as Papists but do further reiect the authoritie of the sacred Scriptures and of the Apostles themselues as being erroneous and that therefore they do not found their Faith or Religion vpon Sacred Scriptures or Christ his Apostles chap. 3. fol. 18. A TABLE SHEWING THE particular matters handled in this Booke A. AELfricus no Protestant l. 3. c. 8. pag. 51. Albigenses taught sundrie errours lib. 1. c. 3. pag. 12. Almaricus his errours l. 3. c. 8. p. 55. Antiquitie commended Praef. to the Reader and lib. 5. c. 1. pag. 1. 2. Antiquitie reiected by Protestants as a Popish Argument l. 1. c. 5. pag. 26. Anthonie the Monk commended l. 2. c. 18. Apostles according to Protestants erred in Faith euen after the comming of the Holie-Ghost l. 5. c. 3. p. 23. 25. Apocalyps reiected by Protestants lib. 5 c. 3. p. 24. Armenia conuerted by the Apostles lib. 1. c. 6. p.
reuiled by Protestants Ibid. p. 3. Fathers disclaimed by Protestants in their Exposition of Scriptures Ibid. p. 4. Fathers opposed by Protestants to Scripture Ibid. p. 5. Fathers by Protestants made contradictorie to themselues and other Fathers Ibid. p. 6. 7. Protestants by Protestants preferred before Fathers Ib. p. 8. Fathers challenged by Protestants for theirs l. 2. c. 2. p. 6. Fathers authoritie approued by Protestants l. 2. c. 1. p. 1. c. 2. p. 6. Fathers by Protestants preferred before Protestants Ibid. p. 7. Force of the Argument drawne from Man's authoritie Ibid. p. 7. 8. Frederick the Emperour no Protestant l. 3. c. 8. p. 54. Free-wil taught by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 20. Free-wil taught by the ancient belieuing Iewes Ibid. Free-wil denyed by the Manichees l. 3. c. 5. p. 14. G. GRecia conuerted by the Apostles l. 1. c. 6. p. 27. Grecians in these times Catholicks not Protestants l. 1. c. 6. p. 29. l. 3. c. 8. p. 37. Gregorie the Great commended by Protestants l. 1. c. 4. p. 16. Gregorie a Roman Catholick l. 1. c. 4. p. 17. Guilelmus de Sancto-Amore no Protestant l. 5. c. 8. p. 36. H. HEresies described l. 3. c. 7. p. 23. Hereticks named by their first Authour or Doctrine l. 3. c. 7. p. 31. Ancient Herâ—ticks defended by Protestants against the Fathers l. 3. c. 5. p. 16. Ancient Heresies confessedly differ from Catholick doctrine l. 3. c. 6. p. 17. 18. Hereticks goe out of the Church l. 3. c. 7. p. 23. 24. Henricus 5. Imperator no Protestant l. 3. c. 8. p. 53. Henricus 8. king of England no Protestant l. 1. c. 3. p. 10. Hildebrand defended against Protestants l. 3. c. 8. p. 52. Howers Canonical vsed in the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 22. p. 89. Husse no Protestant l. 1. c. 3. p. 10. I. S. Iames the Apostle charged with errour by Protestants l. 5. c. 3. p. 23. S. Iames his Epistles reiected by Protestants for Apocryphal Ib. p. 23. 24. Images worshipped by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 14 Images as then placed in Churches Ib. By Images Miracles wrought Ibid. Images impugned by Hereticks these therefore condemned by Fathers l. 3. c. 3. p. 10. c. 8. p. 40. 43. 47. India conuerted by the Apostles l. 1. c. 6. pag. 28. Indians in these dayes Catholicks not Protestants l. 1. c. 6 p. 28. Innouation or first Beginning noted a Badge of Heresie l. 3. c. 7. p. 27. Iob his Booke reiected by Luther for Apocryphal l. 5. c. 3. p. 20. S. Iohn's Ghospel charged by Protestants with errour Ib. p. 21. S. Iohn's Epistles reiected by Protestants as Apocryphal Ibid. p. 24. S. Iohn's Apocalyps reiected by Protestants as Apocryphal Ib. p. 24. S. Iude's Epistle reiected by Protestants as Apocryphal Ibid. p. 24. Iustice inherent denyed and condemned in ancient Hereticks l. 3. c. 5. p. 15. L. LAtria and Dulia confessedly taught by S. Austin l. 2. c. 14. Lollards their errours l 3. c. 8. p. 57. Lotharius the Emperour obiected against the Pope's Primacie and answered l. 3. c. 8. p. 46. 47. At Luther's first reuolt the whole Christian world was Roman Catholick l. 1. c. 3. p. 8. Luther taught manie errours l. 4. c. 4. p. 23. Luther confessedly wrought no miracles Ibid. p. 22. S. Luke's Ghospel charged by Protestants with errour l. 5. c. 3. p. 21. Lymbus Patrum confessedly taught by the ancient Fathers l. 2. c. 12. p. 55. 56. Lytanies vsed by the ancient Fathers l. 2. cap. 22. M. MAchabees Tobie c. approued for Canonical by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 5. Obiections against them answered l. 2. c. 5. p. 25. Marsilius Patauinus a coÌ„demned Heretick l. 3. c. 8. p. 56. Malachias a Roman Catholick l. 1. c. 3. p. 13. Masse generally vsed these last 1000. yeares l. 1. c. 2. p. 6. Masse confestedly taught and vsed by the ancient Fathers l. 2. c. 9. p. 41. seq Masse belieued to be Propitiatorie by the ancient Fathers Ibid p. 44. Masse celebrated for the dead l. 2. c. 11. p. 50. seq Masse a Sacrifice according to Melchisedech p. In Masse water mingled with wine l. 3. c. 2. p. 8. Hereticks impugning the Masse condemned Ibidem S. Mathew's Ghospel charged by Protestants with ersour l. 5. c. 3. p. 21. S. Mark 's Ghospel charged by Protestants with errour Ibid. Michael the Emperour obiected against the Popes Primacie answered l. 3. c. 8. p. 48. 49. Miracles attributed by Hereticks to wichcraft l. 3. c. 3. p. 10. 11. Miracles confessedly neuer wrought by anie Protestant l. 4. c. 4. p. 22. 23. Miracles wrought by manie Catholicks l. 4. c. 5. p. 32. Monachisme approued and vsed by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 18. p. 74. seq Monks had special Consecration Ib. p. 75. Monks habit Ib. p. 76. Austeritie Ibidem Monks vowed Chastitie Ibidem Monks wrought miracles Ibidem Monks defended by the ancient Fathers against Vigilantius l. 3. c. 4. p. 12. Monastical life in some sort professed by the belieuing Iewes l. 2. c. 18. N. NIlus a condemned Heretick l. 3. c. 8. p. 58. Noueltie reiected Praef. to the Reader Nycetas obiected against the Pope's Primacie and answered l. 3. c. 8. p. 51. O. OCcham no Protestant l. 3. c. 8. p. 57. Orders l. 2. c. 7. p. Otho obiected against the Pope's Primacie and answered l. 3. c. 8. p. 50. P. PArdons and Indulgences taught by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 10. p. 48. S. Peter ordained by Christ Head of the Apostles for vnitie l. 2. c. 3. p. 8. seq Vpon S. Peter Christ built his Church Ib. S. Peter's seas of Rome Alexandria and Antioch preferred before others Ib. S. Peter charged by ProtestaÌ„ts with errour l. 5. c. 3. p. 23. Phocas coÌ„ferred not Primacie to Boniface l. 3. c. 8. p. 41. Photius obiected against the Pop's Primacie and answered l. 3. c. 8. p. 48. Pope of Rome S. Peter's successour l. 2. c. 3. p. 9. 10. c. 4. p. 11. Pope's Primacie was Christ his ordinance l. 2. c. 4. p. 12. Pope's Primacie confessedly allowed and practised vniuersally these last 1000. yeares l. 1. c. 2. p. 6. Pope not Antichrist l. 2. c. 4. p. 24. l. 5. c. 2. p. 14. Al Popes for these last 1000. yeares censured by Protestants to haue been Antichrists l. 1. c. 2. p. 6. Pope's Primacie defended by S. Gregorie l. 2. c. 3. p. 9. 10. c. 4. p. 12. l. 3. c. 8. p. 41. by Pelagius Ib. p. 14. by Celestine Ib. by Leo Ib. p. 15. by Gelasius Ibid. p. 16 by Sixtus Ib. by Innocentius Ib. by Siricius Ib. by Zosimus Ibid. by Councels Ib. by Constantine Ib. p. 17. by Damasus others of the fourth Age. Ib. by the Fathers of the third Age. Ib. p. 19. by the Fathers of the second Age. Ibid. p. 20. by S. Peter and the Fathers of the first Age. Ib. p. 21. 21. by the Iewes Ib.