584. Snecanus saying Hitherto appertayne Ps 72.9 and Esay 49.2.23 60.4 In these places the Prophets describe the Kingdome of Christ vnder the new Testament and the office of the Gentils and especially of Kings flowing to the Church c. that they may be Nurces to the Church of Christ c. vnles therefore our Aduersaries wil accuse God and the Holie-Ghost of lying c. It is necessarie that they grant to the Church of the New Testament her Nurces pious Kings and Queens who shal bowe themselues to Christ c. And these predictions of the Prophets of Kings to be in the Church of Christ may suffice This then supposed as a most certaine truth that the Church of Christ was to conuert Heathen Nations and Princes from their Infidelitie and Idolatrie to the true Faith of Christ That then which resteth to be examined is whether the sayd Conuersions haue been performed by the Roman or Protestant Church But first it is to be granted that during al the time after Christ vntil Constantin's Conuersion the true Church remayned so vnder persecution as that the foresayd glorie and amplitude foretold of her concerning her great encrease of beleeuers and of Kings and Queens to serue her was not as then fulfilled In which respect D. Barlow (13) Def. of the Articles of Prot. Relig p. 34. auoucheth that In the primitiue Nonage of the Church is promise of Kings allegeance therunto was not fully accomplished because in those dayes that Prophecie of our Sauiour was rather verifyed you shal be brought before Kings for my names sake by them to be persecuted euen vnto death c. In like sort saith (14) Against Staplâ—t Mart. p. 51. D. Fulk Let him I say poynt out with his finger what Kings in euerie Age for the space of the first 300. yeares did walk in the brightnes of the Church arising To examine then the subsequent time from Constantine to Luther and to begin with the Protestant Church It is so far from accomplishing the foresayd Prophecies that to the contrarie it is at large acknowledged before (15) See before l. 3. c. 1. to haue been Inuisible itself euen from Constantins time to Luthers And so accordingly D. Barlow (16) Def. of the Art p. 34. being vrged to answer this very point concerning the Protestant Churches bringing forth Kings which should be as Esay prophecyed foster-fathers and Queens to be noursing-mothers to the Church confesseth as before that in the Primitiue nonage of the Church this was not accomplished And speaking of the times succeeding (17) Ib. p. 35 he affirmeth that The promise by Esay prophecyed was accomplished and the number so encreased though stil inuisibly that as her Loue sayd in the Canticles there are threescore Queenes c. But I wil not vrge how absurd it is to affirme that manie Kings Queens and Kingdomes themselues should be conuerted and yet al this to be inuisible It is likewise not vnworthie of obseruation that wheras Martin Bucer (18) De Regno Dei l. 1. c. 1. 3. maketh a special Tract of the sundrie Prophecies by himself alleadged in this behalf he doth not yet in accomplishment of them giue instance though so prouoked thereto by the argument of his sayd Treatise so much as but in anie one heathen King or Kingdome conuerted accordingly by Protestants to the Faith of Christ Yea to the contrarie sundrie ProtestaÌ„ts are enforced through their manifest want of fulfilling the foresayd Prophecies in anie Age before Luthers to referre or rather deferre the Conuersion of Heathen Kings and Countries vnto the now later times wherin their supposed Antichrist is publickly withstood So M. Symondes (19) Vpon the Reuel p. 123. tearmeth these later times The dayes of the seauenth Angel that conuerteth Kings to the Ghospel And M. Willet (20) Synop. Ep. Dedic affirmeth that The Prophecie of Esay is fulfilled in these our dayes who saith concerning the Church Kings shal be thy Nursing Fathers and Queens thy Nursing Mothers Esa 49.23 c. for now who seeth not that many Christian Princes in the world are become the children of the Church c. And the same is taught by (21) In his Apoca in c. 20 p. 656. M. Brightman (22) Playne Euidences c. p. 72. 73. 81. and M. Bernards Yea in this respect Protestants disclayming from al former Conuersions of England Germany Heluetia France and Poland doubt not therefore to make Tindal (23) Epistle to England written from Brasile p. 71. Luther Zuinglius Caluin and Iohn à Lasco the first Conuerters or Apostles of those seueral Nations So M. Stalbridge auoucheth that God raysed vp Wâ—lliam Tindal the first true Apostle of Christ after Iohn Wiccliffe M. Wetenhal (24) Discourse of Abuses p. 134. tearmeth Tindal our English Euangelist And M. Fox (25) Act Mon p 883. styleth him M. William Tindal the true Apostle of our later dayes And yet this so great an Apostle was burned for Heresie in the time of K. Henrie the Eighth In like sort saith Zanchius to Iohn a Lasco (26) In his Epistles l. 2. p 232. God hath hitherto preserued thee that as Luther was the Apostle to his Germanie Zuinglius to his Heluetia Caluin to his France so thou mayst be an Apostle to thy Polonie Therefore the Lord strengthen thee c. vntil thou shalt consummate thy Apostleship c. But al this is most insufficient and impertinent for first euen since Luthers time not so much as anie one King or Kingdome of the Gentils is yet hitherto conuerted from Paganisme by Luther or anie other Protestant euer extant in the world as shal be proued next hereafter in this Chapter Secondly it is incredible to think that the wisedome and goodnes of Christ would suspend the foresayd promises of his Churches happy plentiful Conuersion of Kings and Countries to serue her during both the beginning and midle-time of the same and would but fulfil the same in her most decaying declining and decrepite Age. Lastly this Euasion is plainly reiected and contradicted by al such Protestants as freely confesse and teach the foresayd Prophecies and promises of the Church her conuerting of Kings and Nations to haue been fully accomplished in former Ages Amongst whom (27) Cont. Duraeum l. 7. p. 472. D. Whitaker saith Whatsoeuer the ancient Prophets foretold of the propagation amplitude and glorie of the Church that Historie most plainly testifyeth to haue been performed But now to examine only the time since Luther of the Protestant Churches conuerting of anie one Heathen King or Kingdome to the Faith of Christ I wil first say vnto our Protestants as D. Whiteguift (28) Def. c. p. 33. saith vnto the Puritans and Anabaptists Tel me I pray you in what Church hath any of them setled themselues in but in such wherein the Ghospel hath been wel planted before What Country was euer originally conuerted from Paganisme by the Protestant
same to him c. appoynting in Prouinces his Vicars ouer other Churches to end smaller matters and to reserue the greater causes to himself Caluin (25) Instit l. 4. c. 7. sec 12. auoucheth that There is no word in the writings of Gregorie wherin more proudly he boasteth of the greatnes of his Primacie then this to wit I know not what Bishop is not subiect to the Apostolick Sea when he is found faultie c. He assumeth to himself power to punish those who offend D. Raynolds findeth no better shift for the foresayd Saying of S. Gregorie then impudently to say that (26) Conference p. 547. Either Gregorie wrot not so or he wrot an vntruth to cheer vp his Subiects (27) Cent. 6. p. 289. See Philippus Nicolai de Regno Christi li. 2. p. 67. 351. Osiander acknowledgeth that Augustin was sent from Gregorie the Great Bishop of Rome into England that he might subdue the same to the Iurisdiction of the Roman Bishop (28) Cent. 6. p. 290. and to the lust of the Roman Antichrist for which sayth Osiander Austin was after his death vndoubtedly damned to Hel. Yea D. Morton (29) Prot. Appeal l. 1. sec 28. p. 31. a man most sparing to tel the truth yet yeeldeth thus far saying Whether or how far Two hundred yeares after S. Gregorie did reach his Arme of Iurisdiction beyond the limits of his Diocesse is a question by reason of his diuers obscure speeches and some particular practises diuersly censured of our Authours But besides the cleerest premisses this Question of D. Morton is made none by D. Raynodls teaching that (30) Confer p. 550 The Primacie which Gregorie Leo and others giue to the Sea of Rome doth so exceed the truth that c. And (31) Ibid. p. 545. that Gregorie is somwhat large that way Yea that he and al the Popes for three hundred yeares before him (32) Ib. p. 549 auouch more of their Sea then is true and right in the opinion of Protestants With whom accordeth D. Fulk saying Gregorie (33) In 2. Thess 2. was a great worker and furtherer of the Sea of Antichrist and of the mysterie of iniquitie And (34) In Iohn 21. we go not about to cleer Gregorie from al vsurpation of Iurisdiction more then to his Sea appertayned So certayne and out of al question it is that S. Gregorie the Great was a true Roman Catholick in his Doctrine and practise of the Popes Primacie By the premisses then it is euident that the obiection so much vrged by (35) Contrae Camp rat 6. p 97. FulK in his Answer to a Counterf Cath. Iewel in his Reply art 4. p. 225. 226. 227. Mortons Appeal l 1. c. 2. sec 29. p. 32. D. Whitaker D. Fulk D. Iewel D. Morton and sundrie other Protestants from S. Gregorie his reiecting and disliking of the Title of Vniuersal Bishop is altogeather impertinent seing S. Gregorie reiected the same in that sense which Iohn Bishop of Constantinople applyed to himself to wit that he was the sole Bishop and none Bishop but he A thing so euident that the Protestant (36) De Ecclesia l. 2. c. 10. p. 570. Andreas Friccius whom (37) In his com Places part 4. p. 77. Peter Martyr tearmeth an excellent learned man in like sort expresseth the same saying Some there be c. that obiect the Authoritie of Gregorie who sayth that such a Title pertayneth to the Precursour of Antichrist but the reason of Gregorie is to be knowne and it may be gathered of his wordes which he repeateth in manie Epistles that the Title of vniuersal Bishop is contrarie to and doth gainsay the Grace which is commonly powred vpon al Bishops He therfore that calleth himself the onlie Bishop taketh the Bishoplike power from the rest wherfore this Title he would haue to be reiected c. But it is neuertheles euident by other places that Gregorie thought that the charge and Principalitie of the whole Church was committed to Peter c. And yet for this cause Gregorie thought not that Peter was the forerunner of Antichrist So plainly doth this Protestant answer this so often vrged obiection from S. Gregorie and so euident also it is that S. Gregorie himself claymed and defended the Primacie of the Roman Bishop and Church ouer al other Bishops and Churches whatsoeuer But to arise from S. Gregorie to other Doctours and Fathers more ancient his next predecessour Pope Pelagius is for the self same cause much reproued by Osiāder (38) Cent. 6. p. 242 in these words Pelagius greatly inueigheth against Iohn of Constantinople because he assumed to himselfe the Title of Vniuersal Patriarch and shewed by that prophane Title of Vniuersal to abolish the name of other Patriarchs c. But in the meane time he contendeth the Roman Church to be the Head of al other Churches and he bableth manie things of the Priuiledges giuen by Christ to S. Peter The Centurie-writers speaking of the Fathers errours which liued in the fift Age playnly and at large confesse (39] Cent. 5. col 774. that In this fift Age the Roman Bishops applyed themselues to get and establish dominion ouer other Churches So they acknowledge that Pope Celestin of whom (40) In his Defence p. 588. D. Whitguift sayth He was a godly Bishop gaue priuiledge of vsing the Title of Pope and the Miter to Ciril of Alexandria whom he had substituted in his place to be President in the Councel of Ephesus He is also charged by M. Carthwright (41) In his 2. Reply part 1. p. 512. to haue claymed superioritie ouer al Churches taking vpon him as it were the name of Vniuersal Bishop (42) Cent. 5. col 1246. Osiander affirmeth that He contended in behalf of the Roman Churches Primacie more impudently then did his Predecessours (43) Cent. 5. col 1285. Nestorius the Heretick then Bishop of Constantinople he allotted ten dayes space to repent which if he did not he should not only be excommunicated but his name should be blotted out of the Catalogue of Priests And for the accomplishment of the premises he made Cyril of Alexandria his Legat. The Centurists (44) Cent. 5. col 778. charge the Popes of those times that They vsurped to themselues power of commanding other Bishops that whom they would and should propose in forraine Churches they might ordayne Bishop or whom they would not haue might depose So Celestin in his Epistle to Cyril of Alexandria and Iohn of Antioch and Rufus of Thessalonica commandeth them that they designe Proclus Bishop at Constantinople D. Raynolds affirmeth that the (45) Conference p. 457. Popes of the Second Three hundred yeares after Christ claymed some Soueraintie ouer Bishops And that (46) Ib. p. 383. Sozimus Boniface Celestin did vsurp ouer the churches of Africk while S. Austine was aliue c. (47) Ib. p. 544. They would haue Bishops and Elders appeale to Rome
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
doth yet forebeare altogeather to name him therein but it seemes our Minister ment to make al good flesh that he cast into the pot Fourthly Bertram was a Monke and so continued vntil his dying day not teaching anie one point of Protestancie in his life as may appeare by (m) verbo Bertramus Sander de visibil Monarchia haer 133. Tritemius and others that writ of him Fiftly supposing for the time that Scotus Bertram did both of them beleeue and write directly contrarie to the Real Presence yet what doth this proue that the Roman Church as then did change her Faith or make anie Innouation concerning this poynt But rather that these two dissenting then in this from the whole Christian world did change and begin themselues this their so singular and presently condemned opinion Sixtly the Roman Church is so free in this Age from changing her Faith concerning the Real Presence that the verie Doctrine thereof is formerly 73) l. 2. c. 8. acknowledged by sundrie Protestants to haue been taught by S. Gregorie S. Ambrose S. Hilarie S. Cyril S. Cyprian and sundrie others most ancient and approued Fathers And as for Claudius Taurinensis in this Age resisting images it is graunted as also that he 74) Ionas Aureol de Cultu Imag. Praefat. ad Carolum endeauored to reuiue the Arian Heresie long before dead 75) Cent. 9. c. 10. Col. 498. forgotten but he was presently noted condemned of singularitie and Errour Neither did Claudius resist anie pretended begining or change in the Roman Church but only cast out of the Churches of his Diocesse Images and Crosses which peraduenture were there erected long before Claudius was borne But I need not insist anie longer herein this poynt being fully cleered in the example of Serenus Now as for Lotharius the Emperour reducing Pope Sergius to the obedience of the Empire First this concerneth only gouernment Policie not Faith and Religion which M. White vndertook to shew as it came in euerie Age. Secondly Lotharius was so Roman Catholick as that according to the Centurists 75) Cent. 9. c. 10. Col. 498. themselues Pope Sergius himself crowned him created his Sonne Lewis King of the Longobards And the Sonnes of Lewis being at discord about the Kingdom he pacifyed by his Legats and allowed the partition of the Kingdome Now what signes were these that the Pope was subiect or reduced to the obedience of the Empire but rather to the contrarieâ— that the more 76) Lib. Ponâ—â—siâ—alis in vita Sergij 2. Nâ—uclerus in Chron. Generat 39 in that Lewis being sent by his father Lotharius with diuers Archbishops and Bishops to Pope Sergius at Rome to moue him that he would permit the Roman Nobilitie to sweare fidelitie to him as he had permitted them to do it to his father Lotharius The Magdeburgians report his answer to be this 77) Cent 9. c. â—9 Col. 498. If you desire that this oath be made to Lotharius the Emperour I am content and permit it but that it be done to Lewis his Sonne neither I nor the Nobilitie do consent So litle obedience doth he acknowledge to the Emperour and so false it is that the Pope was reduced to the obedience of the Empire or that he was confuted by the Bishops sent with Lewis After 850. 850. to 900. I name Volutianus a Bishop that wrot to Nicolas the First in the defence of Priests mariage Michael the Emperour and Photius the Patriarch of Constantinople resisting the Popes Supremacie as also did the Bishop of Rauenna But first D. White barely affirmeth this of Volutianus not citing anie Authour or yealding the least proof thereof and therefore it may be suspected to be only his owne inuention And the rather in that no mention at al is made of anie such man either in the Acts of Nicolas the First or in the Records of those times But it may be that our Minister mistaketh Volutianus for Vlricus who hath been often obiected by Protestants to haue written to Pope Nicolas in defence of Priests marriage whereas it is certaine 78) Onuphrius l. de Rom Pontif. Anastas Bibl. de vitis Rom. Pontif. Pantaleon in Chronol p. 70. that Pope Nicolas the First was made Pope Anno 858. and dyed Anno 867. And vlrick was not made Bishop 79) vrsper Chron. Chitraeus in Chro. Pant. Chron. p. 75. of Augusta til after the death of Pope Nicolas to wit Anno 924. and continuing Bishop 50. yeares dyed 80) Beut l. faster p. 209. Pant. Chron. p. 75. Osiander Cent. 9. 10. p. 99. 100. Anno 973. By which accompt this Epistle was written either before that Vlrick was borne or els after that Pope Nicolas was dead So clear it is that this Epistle printed lately at Basil is only forged vnder the name of Vlrick And though it were not Apocryphal yet would it much more presse Protestans then Catholicks for therin is taught that the Roman Bishop is Head of al and that from al obedience is due vnto him As also that he is to compel Priests and Monks not to marry and if they do marry after the vow of Continencie that they are to be separated And as for Michael the Emperour and Photius the Patriarch of Constantinople resisting the Popes Supremacie the truth of that Historie is breifly this related more at large by Nycetas and others both Greek and Latin Writers Ignatius 81) Ioan. Curopalates Nycaetas Nicolaus in diuers Epistles Anastasius Patriarch of Constantinople hauing Excommunicated Bardas one of the principal men vnder Michael the Emperour for dismissing his own lawful wife and taking his own kinswoman in her steed Bardas therevpon being much incensed endeauored by al meanes to cast him out of the Sea of Constantinople to which purpose he suggested vnto the Emperour manie things most false against Ignatius wherevpon the Emperour caused him to be bannished into the Iland Terebinthus through the sollicitation of Bardas appointed that Photius as then a Courtier and Secular man should be ordained and placed in his Sea a man altogeather vnlearned who for his better Confirmation entreated the Emperour that he would send an Embassadour to Pope Nicolas desiring that some Legats might be sent from him for the correcting and redressing of some faults in the Church and in particular he pretended the Heresie of Iconoclasts or breakers of Images signifying further himself by his false letters to the sayd Pope that Ignatius by reason of his old age and infirmities had of his own free accord resigned vp his Sea and betaken himself to a Monasterie in a certaine Iland where he continued much honoured and respected both by the Emperour and the whole Cittie The Embassedours sent by the Emperour were certaine Bishops and a Lay-man named Arsa who carried manie and verie rich Tokens to the Pope of whom being receiued he returned with the two Bishops Rodoaldus and Zacharias for his Legats with particular charge