praier diligence c. Al which though endeauored by vs with al possible care are yet as being actions on our part most clearly not infallible but humane and subiect to (m) Lubbeâ—tus de princip Christian dog l. 6. c. 13. p. 442. Whitaker de Eccles controuer 2. q. 4. p. 221. error And such as the same notwithstanding Luther and many other his followers haue euen according to our aduersaries censures no lesse confessedly then greeuously (n) Whitguift in defence p. penult Bridges in def of the gouernment p. 559. Hospin hist sacram part 2. fol. 14. 44. 55. 49. 57. erred and therin persisted (o) Luther de caen a Domini tom 2. Germ. fol. 174. euenconcerning such pointes of doctrine as they from their owne careful obseruation of these foresaid meanes held for most certaine vndoubted cleare And the like might be exemplifyed in the (p) In their Apol. p. 103. Broumstes (q) Hooker Eccles pol. in pref sec 8. p. 38. Anabaptistes (r) Carrh wright in his second reply part 1. p. 18. 509. Puritanes (s) Caluin Tract theol p. 533. c. Libertines and (t) Colloq Ratisbone Lutheranes whoal of them in like manner haue no lesse carefully conferred and seriously pretended the Scriptures in defence of their so many different errors which each of them seuerally apprehended for vndoubted true and yet the same notwithstanding al of theÌ„ confessedly erred Vpon due consideratioÌ„ therefore had of these premises so necessarily inferring our owne incertanty al foresaid pretence of Scripture to the contrary notwithstanding and like further obseruation that the cheife question of the Canonical Scriptures theÌ„ selues is determined to vs not by Scripture it selfe as haith (*) See here before at e. f. beene shewed nor (u) Whitaker aduersus Stap. l. 2. c. 6. p. 370. l. 2. c. 6. p. 357. by priuate testimony of the spirit but according to the learnedst (x) The author of the treatise of the Scriptures and the Church c. 16. fol. 75. Whitaker cont Staplet l. 2. c. 4. p. 298. 300. Chemnit in examen part 1. p. 69. Lubbertus de princip Christian dog l. 1. c. 4. p. 18. Protestants by iudgement of the Church which confessedly (y) Fulke his answeare to a count Cath. p. 5. Iewel in def of the apol part 2. p. 242. Witaker contra Stap. l. 1. c. 5. p. 69. had the assistance of the holy Ghost in her infallible discerning to vs which bookes of Scripture were sacred and which not wherby also is further argued or rather conuinced her no lesse needful assistance of the same spirit in her like discerning to vs the sense (z) Chemnit in ex am part 1. p. 74. Sarâ—â—ia in defen tract cont Bezam p. 8. of the said Scripture for what auaileth it vs to be made certaine of the bookes and left incertaine of the sense What reason can our aduersaries allegde wherby to acknowledge the Churches priuiledge in the one deny it where it is no lesse needful in the other It cannot therfore I hope in these times of so great doubt question seeme either vnfitting or vnsafe that for our owne more certaine instruction in the doctrine of the Primitiue Church which both parties acknowledge for the true Church we should make humble recourse vnto the receiued and renowmed writinges of S. Austin a principal member of the said church who liuing so long before these our times and being in such respect indifferent to our late since vprisen controuersies is by our learned aduersaries professedly reuerenced as the vndoubted (a) See hereafter c. 1. h. c. best witnes since the Apostles times of Apostolicke doctrine Neither can the perswasion which is oftentimes setled and growen strong in vs by education afford any infallible certanty to your greatest Maiesty or your learned diuines whereby to secure your selues from error as might be made plaine without al further needful discourse by example not onely of sundry auncient Kinges and (b) See the Protest Apol. tract 2. c. 3. sec 6. parag 2. p. 513. at s Emperours who brought vp in Arianisme did thereupon imbrace and by their lawes establish the error therof as a truth most consonant to the Scriptures but also of diuerse moderne Lutheran Princes as of Denmarke Saxony Brunswicke c. who vpon their like education in Lutheranisme do professe as not to be questioned their monster of (c) See Whitguifâ— in his defence of the answeare p. penult Bridges in his def of the gouernement l. 7. p. 559. Hospin in hist Sacram fol. 14. 44. 55. 49. 57. And part 2. fol. 245. 282. 286. 287. vbiquity and other now dissenting opinions condemning therupon the aduerse doctrines of Caluin and Suinglius for (d) Luther Tom. 2. Wittenberg fol. 503. and tom 7. fol. 382. Fulke against the defence of the censure p. 101. 155. Hospin hist saciam part 2. fol. 183. errors most execrable In like sort the reformed Churches so are they (e) By Hooker in Eccles pol. l. 4. sec 8. p. 101. 183. styled of Transiluania Poland and hungary who being Antitrinitaries and yet otherwise (f) See Gratianus Prosper in his instrumen tum doctrinarum c. onely differing from the Caluinistes in the doctrine of the Trinity the Baptisme of infants haue together with their milke sucked the poyson of Arianisme are vpon this like ground euen to this present so carried away against our receiued doctrine of the blessed Trinity that they forbeare not to compare it to the (g) See Osiander cent 16. l. 2. c. 22. p. 209. three headed Cerberus condemning the same in their sundry (h) Gratianus Prosper Socinus Gentilis Seruetus Blandrata and other new Arians published writinges stored with plentiful alledged testimonies of Scripture for the cheifest brand of al Popish and Antichristian (i) See Osiander cent 16. l. 2. c. 22. p. 209. corruption And as we can not assure our selues but that in case of our like supposed educatioÌ„ in those opinions so once in like manner established with the current and countenance of the state our iudgements no lesse then theirs in like sort might haue beene preoccupated and transported with the same errors so their example affordeth vs iust forwarning not to rest secure vpon the appearing probability of any such like setled perswasion whatsoeuer And so much the lesse if we not onely obserue ingeneral the great reuoult of late made by so many of the learnedst Caluinistes from Caluins former receiued so much applauded (k) See Willet in Rom. c. 9. p. 442. Melancth in Con. Theol. part 2. p. 111. Hemingius de vniuersali gratia Snecanus in method de script p. 124. 430. 441. Castalio in his booke hereof de praedest Fox in Apoc. p. 473. sundry others doctrines concerning Reprobation induration vniuersality of grace (l) So did Caluin Beza and the French Protestantes and our now
him selfe c. Lastly Sebastianus Francus concludeth for certaine that (z) Ep. de abrogandis stat Eccles Presently after the Apostles times al thinges were turned vpside downe c. And that for certaine through the worke of Antichrist the external Church together with the faith and Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure that for these 1400. years the Church haith beene no where external and visible c. So peremptorily do they charge the auncient and holy Fathers of the Primitiue Church with Antichristian Apostacy from the faith of Christ Yea they do not forbeare to publish to the world their special booke of that argument entituled (a) His Maiesty in his declaratiâ—n concerning his proceedinges with the states in case of Voâ—stius p. 15. 19. 35. De Apostasia Sanctorum and to send the same to the Arch-bishop of Canterbury and to mantaine further by letter vnto the said Archbishop that the doctrine contained in that booke de Apostasia Sanctorum was agreeable to the doctrine of the Church of England The miserable deceiued author therof and other his complices Napier Brightman Brocard Leigh and sundry other Protestant writers not discerning that by such their pretended Apostacy them selues do in very deed as precursors prepare and make way to that fearful Apostacy which is in their opinion foretould by the (b) 2. Thes 2.3 and see Caluin vpon the same place as also Piscator Apostle to happen before the end of the world for what els is this pretended Apostacy of the Primitiue Church other then a plaine preparation and earnest perswasion to make Apostacy or departure from the doctrine of the Primitiue church and so consequently from the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles So cleare it is that not onely the ages subsequent but also precedent to S. Austin vp to the Apostles are al of them disliked and condemned by Protestants as wholly papistical and Antichristian The conclusion of the whole booke HItherto gentle Reader haue I intertained thy paines and patience in making proofe to thee of S. Austines professed religion from his owne alledged sayinges reported miracles with solution also to the contrary obiections vsually pretended from S. Austin only now in conclusion of al I offer to thy consideration how vnlike it is that I should be able to alledge to thee so many plaine and pregnant sayinges of S. Austin in behalfe of so many seueral pointes of religion and al or most of them for such by the learned aduersary confessed and yet further confirmed with like confessed consenting doctrine of the other auncient Fathers that liued next before in and after his age and al this notwithstanding no such matter as some aduersaries pretend to be by S. Austin therin intended or meant Could he not in some onely one or other but in al the cheife pointes of controuersy speake so plainly with vs and against Protestancy and so likewise acknowledged by Protestants them selues and yet himselfe in those very pointes ioyne in religion with Protestants and against vs Al which being so abundantly hertofore in this treatise examined and proued euen from the sparing and wary confession of the learned aduersaries who acknowledge no more then the racke of truth enforceth them vnto may suffice to satisfy thee studious Reader that hereby is deliuered to thee but as it were the bare out side or naked apparance of thinges in comparison of that far greater proofe and euidence which is in very deede at large abouÌ„ding in the writings of S. Austin the other auncient Fathers If therefore any shal without al forehead seeke to abuse thee with denyal of so euident premises I do therein boldly appeale to the equity of thine owne indifferent iudgement And as for those other who with more plaine dealing but no lesse offence in do ingeniously confesse and acknowledge S. Austines foresaid doctrine to make with vs yet withal contemne and reiect the same for Popish if any I say supercilious forehead of that ranke who (c) Math. 13.13.14 hauing eares to heare and wil not heare eyes to see and wil not see shal oppose against vs his owne late aduerse nouel doctrine as pretended from the Scriptures in the vnderstanding wherof he doubteth not to prefer his owne priuate interpretation before S. Austin and the other Fathers I can but yet not without commiseration pronounce of such a one (d) Apoc. 22.11 Qui sordidus est sordescat adhuc And I must needes apply vnto him those wordes of our Kinges most excellent Maiesty which he worthily deliuered against Vorstius a principal pretender of this Christian liberty As for (e) In his foresaid declaration p. 63. 64. this Christian liberty saith he which Vorstius doth vrge so much certainly he doth it with no other intention but onely vnder this faire pretext c. to abuse the world c. To abuse Christian liberty in presuming to propound a new doctrine to the world in point of the highest and holiest mysteries of God is a most audacious rashnes and impudent arrogancy And againe (f) Ibid. p. 61. 62. If one particular man may take vpon him such singularity as this how shal he be subiect to general national and synodical Councels c. Wherefore he is plainly discouered to be resolued not to be subiect in any sort to the iudgement of the Church c. for he knowes to wel that the auncient Church c. is against him And this is the reason why he wil not in these pointes submit him selfe to the iudgement of any mortal man but vpon this occasion mantaines his Christian liberty Thus far his Maiesty against Vorstius and indeede against al Protestants who being pressed with the aucthority of S. Austin the other Fathers of the Primitiue Church either for the interpretation of the Scriptures or for our knowledge of the practise of those purest times in matters of faith and religion do finally betake them selues to this desperate refuge of contemning S. Austin and al Fathers vpon pretence of this Christian liberty that al controuersies are to be decyded onely by the priuate spirit interpreting the Scriptures Now lastly as to al Catholicke Readers I conclude that seeing the faith which at this day we beleeue and professe is confessedly the same with that of S. Austines and the other holy Bishops and Doctors of the Primitiue Church that therfore amongst the other greatest blessinges of God bestowed vpon vs we euer esteeme this with highest respect of our happy vocation In due requital and gratitude wherto let vs with al exultation of minde accept and embrace what pressures punishmeÌ„ts and torments so euer inflicted vpon vs for our defence therof yea if death it selfe be vrged let vs rather make choice to dye in our Lord with S. Austin S. Ambrose S. Hierome S. Gregory and the other holy Prelates Martyrs Confessors Virgins of those purest times then to dye the death of the wicked with Aerius Iouinian Vigilantius
SAINCT AVSTINES RELIGION COLLECTED FROM HIS owne writinges from the confessioÌ„s of the learned Protestants Whereby is sufficiently proued and made knowen the like answearable doctrine of the other more auncient Fathers of the Primitiue Church Written by IOHN BRERELEY Quod Patres credunt credo quod tenent tenâ—o quod dâ—cent doceo quod praedicant praedico c. Aquiesce istis et quiescis à me Aug. Tom. 7. contra Iulian. Pelag. l. 1. c. 5. prope finem Printed 1620. D. Augustinus Monachus Perrexit Petilianus ore maledico in vituperationem Monasteriorum et Monachorum arguens etiam me quod hoc genus vitae a me fuerit institutum Aug. Tom. 7. contra literas Petil. l. 3. c. 40. post med Disponebam esse in Monasterio cum fratribus c. capi bom propositi fratres celligere compatres meos nihil habentes sicut nihil habebam et imitantes me vt quando ego tenuem paupertatulam meam vendidi et pauperibus erogaut sic facerent et illi qui mecum esse voluissent vt de communi viueremus c. nulli licet in societate nostra habere aliquid proprium Aug. Tom. 10. de diuersis serm 49. de communi vita Clericorum post init Quantum in hac perfectionis via profecerim magis quidem noui ego quam quis quam alius homo c. Et ad hoc proposituÌ„ quantis possum viribus alios exhortor et in nomine Domini habeo consortes quibus hoc per meum ministerium persuasum est Ang. Tom. 2. epist 89. versus finem S. Austines being a Monke is coÌ„fessed by the CeÌ„tury writers cen 5. c. 6. col 701. TO THE MOS HIGH AND MIGHTY PRINCE IAMES by the grace of God King of great Britaine France Ireland defender of the faith my most gracious dread Soueraigne THe much obserued and no lesse commended care wherwith your highnes endeauoreth to enrich your Princely vnderstanding not forbearing so much as at the time of your bodily repast to haue for the then like feeding of your intellectual part your highnes table surrounded with the attendance conference of your graue and learned diuines in which respect you may not vnaptly be tearmed in the very wordes of Eunapius a liuing liberary walking study addeth a more then ordinary lustre of ornament to your royal estate and encorageth my otherwise fearful humble thoughtes more bouldly to approch and salute your highnes with this saying of S. (a) Lib. 8. indict 3. ep 37. Innocentio prope sin Gregory Si delicioso copitis pabulo saginari beati Augustini opuscula legite And although the viandes hereby thus prepared may in reguard of the Cookes plaine or rather vnskilful workmanship in confection seeme vnworthy of your royal preseÌ„ce for so much yet as they be of them selueâ— soueraigne Antidotes whereby to repel the dispersed contagioÌ„ of dangerous infection and are now placed on the table before your highnes by the attendance and seruice of men to your Maiesty not vngrateful or suspected euen the learnedst Protestantes them selues from whose frequent abounding confessioÌ„ the many hereafter ensuing particulars of S. Austines professed religion are collected I am not without hope that your highnes wil in such respect vouchsaife to esteeme them as not vnworthy either of your owne taist or the view and further tryal of your attending learned diuines And pardon great Saueraigne your meanest yet wel meaning subiect but to put your Maiesty in remembrance that seeing our knowledge in this life is but in (b) 1. Cor. 13.9 part euen by a (c) 1. Cor. 13.12 glasse in a darke sort and that the Sciptures a lone are prescribed by your learnedst diuines for the satisfying quieting of our knowlege in al doubts of religioÌ„ whatsoeuer that your Maiesty would plese to take notice that the said sacred Scriptures are not able to afford vs so much as certaine infallible proofe knowledge of them selues for as the titles of the said bookes can be no certaine proofe of their diuine authority considering that many writinges of like title were forged vnder the (d) See Eusebius hist l. 3. c. 19. et lib. 6. c. 10. S. Aug. contra aduers leg et Proph. l. 1. c. 20. Zozom hist l. 7. c. 19. Hmmelmannus de tradit Apost part 1. l. 1. col 251. et part 3. l. 3. col 841. Aâ—d see 2. Thes 2.2 Apostles names and neuer receiued by the Church for Canonical So likewise Protestant writers expresly teach (e) Hooker in Eccles pol. l. 1. sec 14. p. 86. conclude resolutly that of thinges necessary the very cheifest is to know what bookes we are to esteeme holy which point is confessed impossible for the Scripture it selfe to teach And (f) Ibid. l. 2. see 4. p. 102. 146. Couel in his defeÌ„ce of Hooker art 4. p. 31. it is not the word of God which doth or possibly can assure vs that we do wel to thinke it is his word From whence it is that yet to this present Protestantes so importantly differ in the very Canon of the Scriptures for it is wel knowen that the (g) Adamus Francisci in Margarita Theol. p. 448. Chemnit in exam part 1. p. 55. 56. 57. and in Enchirid p. 63. Hafenref in loc Theol. loc 7. p. 292. Osiand Cent. 4. l. 3. c. 38. p. 399. The Centuristes cent 1. l. 2. c. 4. col 54. Lutheran Churches do stil reiect as Apocryphal the Epistle to the Hebrewes the Epistle of S. Iames the second and third of S. Iohn the latter of S. Peter the Epistle of S. Iudas and the Apocalips of S. Iohn with whom agreeth (h) Loc. com c. de iustific parrag 5. p. 250. Wolphangus Musculus a Caluinist in reiecting the Epistle of S. Iames as erroneous in iustification by workes Now if the Scriptures be coÌ„fessedly thus vnable to afford vs but so much as certaine proofe of them selues then in al true consequence of reasoÌ„ much lesse are they able to direct exempt vs in case of al doubt or question infallibly from error And the rather cosidering that in such case as D. (i) Conference c. 2. diuis 2. p. 68. Raynoldes confesseth It is not the shew but the sense of the wordes of Scripture that must decide controuersies and that touching this questionable sense the Scripture howsoeuer infaliible and sufficient in it selfe which none denyeth yet it is not which is the onely point now pertinent and questionable infallibly sufficient as to vs in her instruction therof as not resoluing and instructing vs therein infallibly because not immediatly of it selfe but onely by certaine meanes (k) Whitaker de Scriptura controuer 1. q. 5. c. 9. p. 251. on our behalfe required as (l) Whitaker ib. p. 521. 522. 523. Reynoldes in his coÌ„fer c. 2. p. 83. 84. 92. namely Our skil in the tongues our waighing the circumstances of the text our conferring of places our
120. l. 3. c. 32. p. 673. Dauid George dying at Basil some yeares after his death his heresy was laid open wherefore the senate of Basil commaunded that his dead carcase should be taken out of the graue and should be burned by the executioner or hangman S. Austin likewise acknowledgeth the seueral orders or degrees of Deacons Subdeacons Acolites Exorcistes c. for these are not only al (l) Can. 4.5.6.7 named in the fourth Carthage Councel but also the very ceremonies yet questionable and appertaining to these times are there apointed as namely to the (m) Can. 5. Subdeacon the Patten Chalice Cruet ful of water towel for the Preistes handes to the (n) Can. 6. Acolite a waxen candle that he may know him selfe appointed to lighten the Church lightes and (o) Can. 7. see Aug. Tom. 5. de ciuit Dei l. 10. c. 22. initio englished p. 389. for the Exorcist a booke of Exorcismes In so much as Osiander recyting the seueral Canons hereof condemneth theÌ„ for (p) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 4. 5. trifling and superstitious And wheras Protestants pretend Exorcisme to be a miraculous guift peculiar to the Churches beginning times S. Austin to the contrary placeth it among the other foresaid Ecclesiastical Orders decreeing yet further also to the contrary that (q) Concil 4. Carth. can 90. The Exorcistes do dayly impose handes vpon those who are possessed for which he with that Canon is reproued by Osiander saying (r) Cent. 4. l. 1. c. 1. p. 17. It haith neither commaund nor promise in the Scripture S. Austin also teacheth to the dislik of our aduersaries that who so married a widdow or had him selfe bene twise married should not be afterwardes made Preist for thus he writeth (s) Tom. 6. de bono coniug c. 18. prope init And see Tom. 3. de Eccles dog c. 92. Concilâ— 4. Carthag can 69. Dispensatorem Ecclesia non licet ordinari c. It is not lawful for a minister of the Church to be ordained vnles he be the husband of one wife which they vnderstood more subtilly who thinke that neither is he to be ordained who being a Catechumen or a Pagan haith had an other wife for here is treated of the Sacrament not of sinne seeing in Baptisme al sinnes are forgeuen c. And As the woman though a Catechumen if she be defloured cannot after Baptisme be consecrated amongst the virgins of God so it seemeth not absurd that he who haith had more wines then one haith not committed any sinne but haith lost a certaine rule of the Sacrament not necessary for the merit of good life but for the seale of Ecclesiastical ordination This saying is so recyted confessed and reprehended by (t) De Poligamia 213. 214. Beza And where the like is decreed of Bigamie being a let to Preisthood by the 4. Carthage Councel Osiander condemneth the said Councel for (u) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 14. superstitious herein Lastly he teacheth that Preistes may not marry and so in the 2. Councel of Carthage it was thus decreed (x) Can. 2. It haith pleased vs to decree that the sacred Bishops Preistes of God c. should be continent in al c. that so what the Apostles haue taught and antiquity it selfe haith obserued we keepe by al the Bishops it was said it pleased vs al that Bishops Preistes and Deacons or such as handle the Sacraments kepers of chastity shal coÌ„taine them selues euen from their wiues And the same is decreed in the third (y) Can. 17. 25. Carthage Councel and for such acknowledged by (z) Cent. 4. l. 4. c. 24. p. 526. Osiander As also by the 5. Carthage Councel where the African Fathers renew the decree therof (a) Can. 3. secundum propria statuta according to their owne former decrees In so much as (b) In ep ad Romanos p. 365. Melancthon specially reprehendeth this first Councel and Osiander auoucheth that (c) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 33. p. 156. And see Aug. Tom. 6. de adulterinis coniug l. 2. c. 20. circa med Tom. 10. ad frattes in Eremo ser 37. Possidonius in vita August c. 26. It plainly fighteth with the doctrine of Paul Concerning the Sacrament of Matrimonie taught by S. Austin And that the innocent party vpon Adultery may not marry another and of the Preistes blessing after marriage CHAPTER 12. THat marriage should be a signe of the coniunction of Christ with his Church is so inducing to proue it a Sacrament that therfore such signification therof is deuyed by the Puritans as M. (a) In his 2. part of the answere c. 17. p. 112. p. 147. see the suruey of the booke of common prayer p. 132. Hutton relateth who yet alledgeth against them Chemnitius and the cenfession of Wittenberge assenting to haue marriage called a Sacrament Now S. Austin in this respect writeth (b) Tom. 7. de nupt concupis l. 1. c. 10. initio A certaine Sacrament of marriage is commended to the faithful that are married wherupon the Apostle saith husbandes loue your wiues as Christ loued the Church This doctrine is so cleare in S. Austin the other Fathers that M. Fulke granteth that (c) In Rhem. test in Ephes 5. 32. sec 5. Austin and some other of the auncient Fathers take it that Matrimony is a great mystery of the coniunction of Christ and his Church yea S. Austin expresly tearmeth the marriage of Christians a Sacrament saying (d) Tom. 7. de nupt coÌ„cupis l. 1. c. 17. initio In marriage let the good thinges therof be loued Children Faith Sacrament c. A Sacrament which the husbandes seperated and commiting adulterie do not loose And (e) Tom. 6. de bono coniug c. 24. init The good of marriage c. for as much as concerneth the people of God is in the sanctity of the Sacrament As also (f) Ibidem c. 18. post med In our marriages the sanctity of the Sacrament is of greater worth then the fruictfulnes of the wombe And againe (g) Tom. 4. de fide oper c. 7. prope initium not only the bond of mariage but also the Sacrament is so commended that it is not lawful for a husband to geue his wife to another In these sundry other such sayinges S. Austin distinguishing the marriage of Christians from the marriage of the Gentiles he maketh our marriage a Sacrament not otherwise then in respect of Christ and his Church their other marriage no Sacrament which argueth that he vsed the word Sacrament properly It is likewise the doctrine of S. Austin that in case of diuorse vpon adultery the innocent party may not marrie againe for thus he writeth (h) Tom. 10. in l. 50. homâ—l hom 49. post init By reason of onely fornication it is lawful to dismisse a wife committing adultery but it
the reuelation of Antichrist in Boniface the third Anno. 607. At what time as also yet to this present the Roman Empyre then was and yet is not dissolued but (b) See before c. 16. sec 1. preserued and in being As concerning the person of Antichrist M. Whitaker saith (c) Lib. de Antichristo p. 21 The Fathers for the most part thougt that Antichrist should be but one man but in that as in many other thinges they erred wherof also saith (d) 2. Repl. part 1. p. 508 Carthwright diuerse of the auncient and cheifest of them imagined fondly of Antichrist as of one singular person for which doctrine also the Fathers are charged with error by (e) Hist Antichristi p. 11. Gracerus Now as for the short time of the height of his persecution M. Foxe confesseth that (f) In Apoc. c. 12. p. 345. Almost al the holy and learned interpreters do by a time times and halfe a time vnderstand onely three yeares and a halfe Affirming further this to be (g) Ibid. p. 362. the consent and opinion of almost al the auncient Fathers In further proofe therof also saith Bullinger (h) Vpon the reuel englished in c. 11. ser 46. fol. 142. doubtles al expositors in a manner grounding them selues vpon this text haue attributed to the kingdome of Antichrist and to his most cruel persecutions no more them three yeares and a halfe The Fathers in general are confessed to teach our Catholicke doctrines concerning the Sacrament of Baptisme SECTION 3. IN proofe of the efficacy of Sacraments and of the grace geuen thereby Suinglius writeth (i) Tom. 2. de bapt fol. 70. Here most of the doctors vnderstanding by the name of water that material and external water of Baptisme haue attributed vnto it much more then was fit wherupon it afterwardes came to passe that they ascribed the clensing of soules to the element of water Of which also saith Luther (k) Tom. 2. Witâ—emberg fol. 229. I excuse the Fathers who driuen either by temptation or necessity stoutly denyed sinne to remaine after Baptisme In so much as Caluin acknowledgeth (l) See before c. 6. sec 1. the auncient Churches iudgement coneerning concupisence remaining after Baptisme not to be sinne without our consent therto And he and others also do reprehend (m) See before c. 5. sec 1. the Fathers for preferring the efficacy of our Sacraments before the other Sacraments of the old Testament In like manner concerning the necessity of Baptisme Musculus granteth that (n) Loc. com p. 308. some Fathers amongst whoÌ„ is Austin haue subiected Infantes dying without Baptisme to damnation Of the generality of which opinion we haue spoken (o) See before c. 6. sec 3. before And whereas M. (p) In his appeale p. 244. Morton insteede of answeare hereto obiecteth as from the Fathers their like supposed erroneous necessity of childrens receiuing the Eucharist that this necessity was not as in respect of saluation but by him mistaken I haue showed (q) See before c. 19. sec 7. already Yea the Fathers were so resolute herein that as Caluin testifyeth (r) Instit l. 4. c. 15. sec 20. of them it was vsual many ages since euen almost from the beginning of the Church that in daunger of death Laye people might baptise if the minister was not present in due time And (s) Conference at Hampton court p. 18. the denying of priuate persons in case of necessity to baptise were to crosse al antiquity saith D. Bilson And as for the Ceremonies of Baptisme and the Eucharist Beza saith (t) Ep. theol ep 8. p. 79. I cannot sufficiently admire al that decking wherwith the most auncient thought to adorne Baptisme and the Lords supper And hauing recyted sundry of these ceremonies he calleth them (u) Ibid. p. 80. stagelike fooleries affirming further that those who make the Apostles authors of these fooleries are not worthy of confutation how auncient writers so euer they be Zepperus also hauing mencioned holy water salt Oyle Exorcisme Spitle c. saith hereof (x) Politia Eccles l. 1. c. 12. p. 123. I confesse these superstitious ceremonies are very auncient in the Church being not many ages after the Apostles times wherof also see Echartus (y) Compend theol l. 1. c. 8. p. 204. alledging these ceremonies from the Fathers The Fathers ingeneral are confessed for our Catholicke doctrines concerning the Sacraments of Confirmation Orders and Extreme vnction SECTION 4. COncerning Confirmation it is reported how that M. (a) The conference at Hampton court p. 10. And Downhams defence l. 4. p. 23. Whitguift shewed at large the antiquity of confirmation as being vsed in the Church euer since the Apostles times And the ministers of Lincolne diocesse charge (b) Abripgment p. 41. Tertulian Ciprian Ambrose with error of vsing the Crosse in confirming those that were baptised wherto the Century writers ad the Fathers further confessed vsage of (c) Cent. 4. c. 6. col 478. Chrisme in Confirmation wherin Bucer yet further acknowledgeth that in the Primitiue Church it was done with (d) Scripta Anglicana p. 570. hand-imposing onely of a Bishop As touching Orders D. Field auoucheth that (e) Of the Church l. 5. c. 25. p. 121. and the Centuristes cent 3. c. 7. col 149. 150. there is no question but that the minor Orders of Subdeacons Acolites Exorcistes Lectors and Ostiaries are very auncient alledging further in proofe therof S. Ciprian and many other Fathers And as for Extreme vnction M. Whitaker answearing to the auncient Fathers obiected testimonies in behalfe thereof confesseth saying (f) Contra Duraeum l. 8. p. 650. I acknowledge the superstitious custome of this vnction to haue continued longer in the Church then was meete The Fathers in general are confessed for our Catholicke doctrines concerning Confession satisfaction pardons SECTION 5. THe Century writers speaking of those auncientest times of Ciprian and Tertulian affirme that (g) Cent. 3. c. 6. col 127. and cent 4. c. 6. col 425. they gaue absolution from sinnes thus if any did penance they should first confesse their sinne for so doth Tertulian in his booke de paenitentia greatly vrge confession and it appeareth by certaine places of Ciprian that priuate confession was vsual wherin they confessed their sinnes and wicked thoughtes as in serm 5. de lapsis et l. 3. epist ep 14. 16. where he expresly saith of lesser sinnes also which are not committed against God it is needful that confession be made and this also he often commandeth to be l. 1. ep 3. c. that satisfaction also was accustomed to be imposed according to the offence it appeareth serm 5. de lapsis And wheras M. Morton affirmeth against this confession of the Centuristes that (h) Appeale l. 2. c. 14. parag 2. p. 254. Ciprian mencioneth not sinnes of thought May it please him to read Ciprian serm 5. de
opinion that the bread and wine which Melchisadech brought forth was sacrificed by him and that it was a figure of the Sacrament which they improperly called a sacrifice c. CipriaÌ„ also thouhgt that herein Melchisadech resembled the Preisthood of Christ And that the Fathers taught that this sacrifice of the Eucharist was also propitiatory or satisfactory for sinne the same Crastouius acknowledgeth saying (o) Lib. 1. de opificio Missae p. 167. But the sayinges of the Fathers do not onely import impetration but also a certaine intrinsecal force of appeasing Origen hom 13. in Leuit. saith This is the onely commemoration which maketh God propitious to men Athanasius serm de defunctis cyted by Damascen saith the oblation of the vnbloudy hoast is a propitiation And he alledgeth yet further to the same purpose the like sayinges of S. Chrisostome Ambrose Austin Gregory Bede c. The Fathers also confessedly taught that this sacrifice of the Eucharist was to be offered also for the deade hereof also writeth (p) In tract theol p. 394. Caluin There remaneth another sort of the deade whom the Fathers would haue remembred at the supper that place of rest might be geuen them c. I do not deny that this was a most ancient custome which also was so general that M. Gifford confesseth that (q) DemonstratioÌ„ against Brounistes p. 38. in the Churches publicke worship to pray for the soules of the deade and to offer oblation for the deade was general in the Church long before the day s of Austin as appeareth in Ciprian and Tertulian Zepperus (r) De sacram p. 47. alledgeth S. Austin and diuerse other Fathers by whom saith he sacrifice for the quicke and the deade was made of the holy supper And according to Bullinger (s) De orig erroris fol. 223. And see Decades in english dec 5. serm 9. p. 1082. Austin maketh mencion of oblation for the deade c. in Enchirid. c. 109. c. which I therefore speake of more largely that you may vnderstand this custome of offering for the dead not to be ordained by the Apostles but by the holy Fathers M. Fulke doth not deny but plainly acknowledgeth that (t) Confut. of Purgat p. 362. 303. 393. and Osiander in his refutatio aduersus Costerum p. 73. Tertulian Ciprian Austin Hierome and a great many more do witnes that sacrifice for the deade is the tradition of the Apostles And wheras S. Ciril (u) Catech. Mistag 5. ante med tearmeth the Sacrament the hoast of propitiation and the greatest helpe for soules departed for which it is offered Hospinian hereupon saith (x) Hist sacram part 1. l. 2. c. 7. p. 167. Ciril affirmeth according to the receiued custome of his time that the sacrifice of the Altar is the greatest helpe of soules To conclude not onely the generality of Masse for the 1000. yeares last past is graunted by many Protestant (y) Bacon in his reliques of Rome fol. 344. Danaeus de Antichristo c. 20. p. 101. the Cetâ—ristes cent 6. c. 6. col 336. Hospin concord discord in prologom fol. 3. Hutterus de sacrif Missat l. 1. c. 23. p. 377. writers but they likewise further admit that (z) Ascam in Apol pro caena Dom. p. 31. It cannot be knowen at what time and by what men the super of the Lord was cast out of possession by the Masse Lastly as concerning the mingling of water with wine in the Chalice for the sacrifice by vs houlden necessary not to make the Eucharist a Sacrament wherin M. (a) Appeale l. 2. c. 4. p. 138. 139. Morton deludeth his vnwary reader but as to the bene esse of it or representation so as to omit the same were sinne wherunto D. Morton answeareth nothing M. Whitguift auoucheth that (b) Defenc. tract 8. p. 473. Ciprian was greatly ouerseene in making it a matter so necessary in celebration of the Lords supper to haue water mingled with wine which was at that time no doubt common to more then to him wherto agreeth M. (c) Ibidem p. 525. Carthwright In so much as M. Iewel confesseth of this mixture that (d) Reply to Harding p. 34. and Parker against symbolysing part 1. c. 2. p. 103. Indeede S. Ciprian and certaine old Fathers speake of it and force it much The Fathers ingeneral are confessed for our Catholicke doctrines concerning prayer for the deade Purgatory and Limbus Patrum SECTION 8. DOctor Fulke confesseth that (e) Confut. of Purgat p. 313. and see cent 4. c. 6. col 454. In the burial of Constantine our first christian Emperour is mencion of prayer for his soule according to the error of the time And againe (f) Confut. of Purgat p. 320. 326. Ambrose indeede alloweth prayer for the deade it was a common error of his time with him agreeth M. Gifford saying (g) DemonstratioÌ„ against Brounistes p. 38. this corruption of prayer for the deade was general in the Chuurch long before the dayes of Austin c. It was the practise of the Church ingeneral the corruption so auncient that Tertulian saith it was obserued by tradition from the Apostles c. the doctrine of Purgatory was crept in also wherto might be added sundry (h) Willet in Tetrast part 3. p. 97. Chemnit exam part 3. p. 107. Fulke in his retentiue against Brist p. 106. Hospin hist sacra part 1. p. 155. Caluin instit l. 3. c. 5. parag 10. other testimonies of our aduersaries so likewise reprehending and charging the Fathers with prayer for the dead But M. Carthwright forbeareth not to conâ—esse that (i) 2. Reply part 1. p. 619. Epiphanius a greeke Father esteemed Aerius to be an hereticke for his iudgement that we ought not to pray or make any oblation for the dead and Austin a Father of the Latin Church reporteth this as one of his heresies Of this also saith D. Fulke in the like wordes (k) Answeare to a counterf Cathol p. 44. 45. Aerius taught that prayer for the dead was vnprofitable as witnes both Epiphanius and Austin which they count for an error But D. Fulke saith yet further of (l) Confut. ofâ— Purgat p. 161. Purgatory The error of Purgatory was somwhat rifly budded in Austines time And againe (m) Ibidem p. 78. 194. Austin speaketh of the amending fire in the place by M. Allen alledged he doth so indeede but had no ground of that fire but in the common error of his time In like sort as touching Limbus Patrum M. Iacob for the Puritanes confesseth that (n) In Bilsons ful redemption p. 188. Al the Fathers with one consent do affirme that Christ deliuered the soules of the Patriarches and Prophets out of hel and his comming thither and sospoyled Satan of those that were then in his present possession And D. Barlow confesseth likewise for the Bishops that (o) Defence of the articles of the Prot. relig p. 173.
Councel of Calcedon is therefore reprehended by (z) Cent. 5. l. 3. p. 359. Osiander And as for Nunnes the Century writers report that there were (a) Cent. 4. c 6. col 467. Monasteries of women professing chastity And that there were virgins before Constantines time professing perpetual chastity Iustus Molitor (b) De Eccles milit 8. also saith The Councel of Câ—lcedon contrary to the oracles of the holy Ghost forbad the vse of marriage to Monkes and Nunnes And of the very name of Nunnes the Centuristes say (c) Cent. 4. c. 6. col 470. Hieronimus ad Eustochium Nonnae etiam vocabulo vsus est Hierome vsed the word Nunne And they report that (d) Ibid. col 468. They were cloathed in the Church before the Altar c. candles burning And of the consecration of their Monasteries (e) Cent. 5. l. 3â— c. 13. p. 362. Osiander cyteth the (f) Can. â—4 Calcedon Councel decreeing in these wordes we haue decreed that such Monasteries as are once consecrated c. shal euer so continue c. and that afterwardes they shal not be turned into secular habitations The Centuristes also testify (g) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 709. the obedience of Monkes to be such as that they went not out of their Cel vpon any occasion without licence of their superior whom they called (h) Ibid. col 708. the Abot By al this I hope is sufficiently discouered the extreame bouldnes or ignorance of many (i) Pet. Mart. in com places in engl part 4. c. 1. p. 7. White in his way to the true Church sec 42. parag 11. p. 307. Humfred in Iesuit part 2. rat 5. p. 587. Zepperus in polit Eccles l. 1. c. 8. p. 90. Protestant writers who beare their readers in hand that these auncient Monasteries and Monkes of the Primitiue Church were nothing lesse then Popish as being say they in very deede no other then Colledges of studeÌ„ts such as are yet in vse in CaÌ„bridge Oxford and other vniuersities But this euasion is further plainly confuted by the like confessed (k) Cent. 4. c. 6. col 467. 476. 1335. 1337. Osiand cent 4. l. 4 c. 19. p. 503. 507. Monasteries of virgins which I hope our aduersaries wil not pretend to haue beene Colledges of women students As also by M. Carthwright who in reguard of so euident premisses concludeth to the flat contrary that (l) 2. Reply part 1. p. 502. Monkes are Antichristian notwithstanding their auncienty and that (m) Ibid. p. 500. the Monkes Eremites and Anchorites in Hieromes time were very grosse To speake now of the prescribed fastes approued and vsed in the Primitiue Church wherof Caluin writing saith (n) Instit l. 4. c. 12. parag 19. 20. I cannot altogether excuse the auncient Fathers in this respect but that they laid some seedes of superstition c. the obseruation of superstitious Lent was then euery where in force Chemnitius also acknowledgeth that (o) Exam. part 1. p. 89. Ambrose Maximus Theophilus Hierome and others do affirme the fast of Lent to be an Apostolical tradition wherof also saith Scroderus (p) Opusculum theologic p. 71. almost in the same wordes Ambrose Theophilus Hierome and others do decree Lent to haue descended from Apostolical tradition The (q) Cent. 4. c. 6. col 440. Centuristes also do charge the Fathers of the fourth age with superstitious fasting vpon Wednesday and Fryday In so much as M. (r) In his true Catholicke p. 601. Trig in reguard of such their confessed antiquity professeth to defend vrge against his other Protestant brethren The fast of Lent and solemne weekely fast of Wednesday and Fryday wherto might be added the auncient Churches (s) Heretofore c. 15. sec 1. confessed condemning of Aerius and Iouinian for their contrary doctrine though they be (t) Danaeus de haeres haer 53. p. 177. Fulke in his answeare to a counter Cath. p. 44. Whitak de Eccles p. 305. defended in their errors by sundry Protestants And as for the common obiection of Montanus his condemned fastes and of Socrates reporting the indifferency and liberty of fasting The firster is explained and answeared by M. (u) Eccles pol. l. 5. sec 72. p. 209. 210. and Quaerimonia Eccles p. 110. Hooker and others his brethren and the second touching Socrates and his confessed euident vntruth in this kind it haith beene formerly (x) See Whitguift in his defence Tract 8. c. 2. p. 350. Frigiuelleus Gauius in Palma Christiana p. 103. and Protest Apol. p. 181. c. discouered both by Catholickes and Protestants Lastly as concerning Ceremonies M. Calfhil to omit others affirmeth that (y) In Fulkes Reioynder to Martials reply p. 131. 132. The Fathers declined al from the simplicity of the Gospel in Ceremonies As for D. (z) Appeale p. 53. 324. Mortons obiecting of S. Austin against Ceremonies it is euident that S. (*) Tom. 2. ep 119. Austin spoke not of the Churches ceremonies but onely of such particular (†) Ibid. paulâ— ante med customes as were taken vp of the common people as not instituted by the Church An answeare so cleare that M. Whitguift answeareth (¶) Defence tract 10. c. 2. p. 545. Carthwright agreeably in these wordes Austin ep 119. speaketh but of vnprofitable ceremonies c. neither grounded of the Scriptures determined by Councels nor confirmed by custome The Fathers ingeneral are confessed by Protestants not onely for particular pointes of faith but ioyntly at once for many or most of them together SECTION 12. TO forbeare as now al such like particular further allegation and to comprehend at once many or the most of the pointes in controuersy D. Whitguift discoursing of (a) Defence pag. 472. 473. doctrine taught in any age since the Apostles times affirmeth without any other exception either of age or father that almost al the Bishops and learned writers of the Greeke Church and Latin also for the most part were spotted with doctrines of freewil of merit of inuocation of Sainctes and such like c. Meaning thereby such other like points of our now Catholicke doctrine which his assertion is now sithence specially renewed and made good almost in the same wordes by D. Couel saying (b) Against the plea of the Innocent c. 9. p. 120. diuerse both of the Greeke and Latin Church were spotted with the errors about freewil merits inuocation of Sainctes many thinges might be alledged in this kind if it were any vertue to rip vp their faults whom we ought to honour In like manner concerning the like liberal acknowledgment of the Century writers Caluin and whitakers wheras Cardinal Bellarmine alledgeth the particular sayinges of Caluin and the Centuristes as charging the auncient Fathers with (c) De notis Ecclesiae l. 4. c. 9. nota 6. error in freewil Limbus Patrum denyal of our concupisence without consent to be sinne satisfaction prayer for the deade merit penance
our times was in dislike with greater volumes as al weryed or rather offended with prolixity of discourse In which respect you moued me to vndertake as my health whould permit some such short labour as might become grateful thereupon propounding for matter fitting to be hanled the doctrine of S. Austin concerning the many now controuerted pointes of religion wherof you willed me to collect set downe for euery one some litle And albeâ—t that your thus directing me to such enioyned breuity which in case of the aduersaries answeares thereto lyeth commonly open to the inconuenience of great disaduantage be contrary to that forme of larger discourse which (a) Tom. 2. ep 23. Bonifacio post med S. Austin obserued from Nebriclius for necessary who affirmed that in a great question he hated a short answeare the more yet that I haue sithence considered of your motion the more with al did I as condescending to the necessity of the times incline so breifly as the matter wil permit and without al affected curiosity of wordes to vndertake in satisfaction therof this ensuing labour as receiuing I must confesse no smale encoragement thereto both from auncient writers and Doctors and our moderne Protestant aduersaries them selues al of theÌ„ approuing much commending S. Austin and his (b) Ep. to S. Aug. extant in Austines workes Tom. 2. ep 25. prope initium doctrine S. Hierome saith to S. Austin I haue alwaies reuerenced thy sainctity with that honor which is fitting and I haue loued our Lord and Sauiour dwelling in thee c. increase in vertue thou art famous in the world Catholickes do worship thee as the builder againe of the auncient faith c. S. (c) Extant in S. Austin Tom. 2. ep 31. paulo post initium Paulinus Bishop of Nola in his like Epistle to S. Austin tearmeth him the salt of the earth and the light worthily placed vpoÌ„ the candlestick of the Church (d) Ep. ad quosdaÌ„ Galliarum Epis extant Tom. 1. Con. cil Caelestinus saith we haue alwaies accompted Austin a man of holy memory for his life and merits of our Communion c. whom we haue long sicne remembred to haue beene of so great knowledge that by our predicessors he was alwaies esteemed amongst the best Maisters Prosper (e) Lib. 3. de vita contemp cap. 31. describeth S. Austin to be sharpe of wit c. painful in Ecclesiastical labours cleare in dayly diputations c. Catholicke in his expositioÌ„ of our faith c. yea he slyleth him (f) Ep. de gratia et de lib. arb ad Ruffinum The cheife portion of the Preistes of our Lord of that time And the like deserued prases are largely geuen to S. Austin by (g) In his epistle extant Aug. tom 2. ep 37. Possid in vita Aug. Hil. ep ad Aratum Vic. l. 1. de persec Vand. Cas in prologo super Psalterium Seuerus Sulpitius Possidonius Hillarius Victor Cassiodorus and sundry others But the splendour of his deserts is so shyning as that euen the learnedst Protestants rest in greatest admiratioÌ„ therof So D. (h) Tom. 7. Wittenberg fol. 405. Luther affirmeth that since the Apostles times the Church neuer had a better Dactor then S. Austin And (i) Loc. com clas 4. pag. 45. after the sacred Scriptures there is no doctor in the Church who is to be compared to Austin Doctor (k) Answeare to Iohn Burges pag. 3. Couel affirmeth that he was A man far beyond al that euâ—â— were before him or shal in likelihood follow after him both for diuine and humane learning those being excepted that were inspired With whom agreeth Doctor (l) Of the Church l. 3. fol. 170. Field tearming Austin the greatest of al the Fathers and worthiest diuine the Church of God euer had since the Apostles times which so high commendation made of him is not the onely priuate iudgement of these few for an other (m) Gomarus his speculum verae Ecclesiae pag. 96. Protestant writer acknowledgeth that Austin of al the Fathers is houlden most pure in the opinion of al. And M. (n) Monas Tessagraphica c. in proâ—m p. 3. Forrester styleth him That monarch of the Fathers S. Austin But not onely S. Austin personally but euen the age wherein he liued for sainctity and learning haâ—th beene euer and very specially houlden for most renowmed So D. (o) In his letter to Sir Fraucis Knowles extant in the treatise entituled informations from Scotland p. 80. Raynoldes affirmeth that The time of S. Austin was the most storishing time that euer happened since the Apostles dayes either for learning or zeale Yea saith M. (p) His tryal of the Romish Cleargy p. 293. Wootton The Church in S. Austines time by the blessing of God was so enlarged that it had the possession of many partes of the world And that in comparison of it the Arian heresy was but in corners Caluin (q) Institut l. 3. c. 3. sec 10. him selfe hereupon yet further acknowledging that Austin onely is sufficient to shew the iudgement of the auncient Church In so much as M. (r) His Retentiue p. 85. Fulke forbeareth not to beare the world in hand that to vse his wordes the Popish Church is but an heretical assembly departed from the vniuersal Church long since Augustines departure out of this life wherto D. (s) Answeare to F. Campion in English in the contents fol. a. 2. parag 28. Whitaker addeth that Austin was wholly on the Protestants side Now as it cannot vpon these premises be denyed concerning S. Austines religion ingeneral but that euen in our aduersaries iudgement it vndoubtedly was the same religion which the Apostles pubiished and deliuered to posterity so can I not but ioyne with you in resting hopeful that if I can be able though but breifly yet truly to make it appeare that the particulars of S. Austines doctrine touching the seueral points at this day in controuersy were consonant and agreeable with our now professed Catholicke religion this then wil fal out to be a matter vnto our aduersaries very perswading and to al indifferent readers no lesse then conuincing that our said religion is the very same for truth substance with that vndoubted Primitiue faith which the Apostles them selues first taught and deliuered afterwardes by their successors to S. Austin And for so much as S. Austin liuing so many ages before our times and as then ignorant of our late since vprysing and dayly encreasing controuersies could not foresee to leaue behind him direct and pnuctual resolution to euery of our now occurring particular doubtes or further to entreate of them then as was casually ministred to him by the accidental occasions of those times the due obseruation herof doth premonish the indifferent reader as discerning the sunnes great brightnes though shyning to him but through a slender creuise how to esteeme of that litle in comparison which shal so appeare
remission c. for in this that him selfe telleth to the Preist and ouercommeth shame with the feare of offence the sinne is pardoned And speaking of Cities besiged who ioyned Baptisme and penance together for their releefe he telleth how that in such common danger there is (d) Tom. 2. ep 180. ad Honoratum circa med and see tom 6. de adult coniug l. 1. c. 28. fine tom 10. 50. homil hom 41. concourse of people of al ages some desiring Baptisme others reconciliation others also the doing of penance it selfe c. where if the ministers be wanting what destruction followeth them who dye either not baptised or bound c. but if the ministers be present c. some are baptised others reconciled c. This absolution or reconciliation was geuen by the Preist with imposition of handes and enioyned penance for thus the 4. Councel of Carthage wherat S. Austin was present and subscribed decreed that (e) Cap. 76. he who in his sicknes desired penance c. should be reconciled by imposition of handes c. If he recouered c. he should be subiect to the appointed lawes of penance as long as the Preist who gaue him penance shal thinke good This Canon is confessed and approued by (f) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 15. see the Councel can 78. Osiander And the Centuristes do acknowledge for the practise of this age that (g) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 665. Penitents were absolued with imposition of handes To which purpose also S. Austin aduiseth the sinner that He (h) Tom. 4. de vera falsa paenit c. 15. prope initium put him selfe wholly in the power of the iudge in the iudgment of the Preist reâ—eruing nothing to him selfe that he may be ready to do al thinges for the recouering the life of his soule which he shal commaund And his further aduise is that (i) Tom. 10. de sanctis serm 39. post med we seeke confession with pure heart and performe our penance geuen by the Preistes Of which penance the third Councel of Carthage decreed that (k) Can. 31. by the sentence of the Bishop times of penance should be appointed to penitents according to the difference of their sinnes This Penance or temporary punishment was so enioyned as that somtimes also it was remitted by indulgence or pardon for so the 4. Carthage (l) Can. 82. Councel wherto S. Austin subscribed decreed that penitents should kneele downe euen vpon the daies of pardon And Innocentius who in reguard of the knowen corresspondents betweene him and S. Austin is no obscure interpriter of his doctrine affirmeth likwise (m) Ep. 1. ad Decentium c. 7. of penitents c. who do penance c. that the custome of the Roman Church showeth that the Thursday before Eeaster pardon was to be geuen them In which beleefe S. Chrisostome was so ful as that the Centuristes confesse that (n) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 692. Chrisostome affimeth that there are dayes of pardon and Indulgence And to omit S. (o) Lib. 3. ep 15. 16. 18. Concil Ancyran Can. 5 Concil 1. Nicen can 11. Ciprian teaching pardon of penance enioyned M. Bel acknowledgeth that (p) Suruey of Popery part 3. c. 11. p. 492. Pardons sealed with lead called the Popes Buls were graunted by Pope Adrian Anno Domini 772. S. Gregory also is most expresly reprehended and charged (q) Symonds vpon the reuelatioÌ„s p. 84. Bale in actis pontif Roman p. 46. for graunting pardons to such as frequented Churches on set dayes Pantaleon (r) Cronic p. 48. to this end alleging S. Gregories owne writinges But to conclude our doctrine of penance and confession is so clearly taught by the fathers of those Primitiue times that M. Simondes chargeth (s) Vpon the reuel p. 57. Leo the 1. with auriculer confession The (t) Cent. 3. c. 6. col 127. Centuristes confessing the same of other more auncient Fathers A doctrine also in it selfe so true that (u) In Apol. confes Augustan art 13. de numero sacram fol. 161. Melancton thinketh it easy to iudge which are properly Sacraments c. Therfore saith he Baptisme the Lords supper Absolution are truly Sacramentes c. with whom agreeth Luther saying At the first I denyed 7. Sacramets and onely placed 3. for the time Baptisme Penance bread c. And the like doctrine is taught by (x) Loc. com Tom. 1 fol. 305. Altham in Conciliat loc script pugn loc 191. fol. 211. loc 195. fol. 219. Spang in margaâ—ita theol p. 116. 117. Sarcerius Althamerus Spangburgius al of them Protestant writers Concerning the Sacrament of Extreme vnction wherin is proued the same to be a Sacrament And vsed in the Primitiue Church CHAPTER 10. THough the Sacrament of Extreme vnction be generally impugned by Protestantes yet S. Austin with vs teacheth the same saying of the sicke (a) Tom. 9. de rectitudine Cathol coÌ„uersationis post init Let him aske of the Church holy Oyle wherwith his body may be annoynted according to the Apostle Iames. 5. And againe (b) Tom. 10. ser de temp 215. circa med see tom 9. de visit Infirm l. 2. c. 4. initio Origen hom 2. in Leuit Prosper de praedict l. 2. c. 29. Chrisost de Sacerd. l. 3. c. 6. Let him annoint his body that it may be fulfilled in him which is written is any man sicke Let him bring in the Preistes and let them pray ouer him annoynting him with oyle But in further explication of S. Austines iudgement Innocentius Bishop of Rome then liuing with S. Astine vpon more casual occasion of a demaund propounded to him answeareth concerning the fore mencioned saying of (c) Ep. ad Eugubinum S. Iames c. 5.14 without doubt saith he it is to be vnderstood of the faithful being sicke who may be annoynted whth the holy oyle of Chrisme Affirming yet further concerning not the ministring but the receiuing therof that Not onely Preistes in their sicknes but also Laye-persons in theirs may haue the benefit and vse therof This is so cleare in Innocentius that Bale saith (d) Acta Romanorum Pontif. p. 31. in his pageant of Popes fol. 26. Of the annoyling of the sicke Innocentius haith made a Sacrament Agreeably to whom (e) Speculum pontif p. 33. Szegedin also writeth that Innocentius the 1. and Faelix the 4. haue made a Sacrament of the annoyling of the sicke And for this very cause the epistle of S. Iames which the Fathers and we alledge in behalfe of Extreme vnction is reiected by Luther in these wordes (f) Tom. 2. Witteberg de captiuit Babilon fol. 86. But I say if in any place it be foolishly written in this especially c. but if it were the epistle of Iames the Apostle I would say that it were not lawful for an Apostle by his owne authority to institute a Sacrament c.
This passeth most rife among the Fathers who taking inferi for Abrahams bosome expound it that Christ went thither ad liberanduÌ„ liberandos to conuey the Fathers deceased before his resurrection into the place where now they are wherto might be added like further confession and testimony of D. (p) Contra DuraeuÌ„ l. 8. p. 567. Dan. ad Bellar. disput part 1. p. 176. Bilâ—on in his ful redemption p. 189. and in his suruey of Christes sufferinges p. 656. Iacob in his defence of the treatise of Christes sufferings p. 199. 200. Whitaker Danaeus and sundry others The Fathers in general are confessed for our Catholicke doctrines of inuocation of Sainctes of our reuerent vse of Images reliques and the Crosse SECTION 9. OF the Fathers beleefe concerning inuocation of Sainctes and Angels D. Fulke saith (q) Reioynder to Brist p. 5. I confesse that Ambrose Austin and Hierome held inuocation of Sainctes to be lawful And Chemnitius hauing alledged S. Austin praying to S. Ciprian being martyred before concludeth thus therof (r) Examen part 3. p. 211. Austin did this without the Scripture yealding to the times and custome And againe (s) Ibidem part 3. p. 200. Inuocation of Sainctes began to be brought into the publicke assemblies of the Church about the yeare of our Lord 370. by Basil Nyssen and Nazianzen The (t) Cent. 3. c. 4. col 83. Century writers also speaking of the more auncient times of Ciprian and Origen do confesse that they also containe manifest tokens of the inuocation of Sainctes So litle do these confessions of our learned aduersaries agree with or rather so far do they exceede D. (u) Appeale pâ— 227. Mortons euasion of Rhetorical Apostraphes In more ful confirmatioÌ„ wherof ad only that Chemnitius in this respect doth not excuse with retorical Apostraphes but flatly accuse and reiect (x) Examen part 3. p. 211. most of the Fathers as Nazianzen Nyssen Theodoret Ambrose Hierome c. who saith he did not disputâ— but auouch the soules of martyrs and Sainctes c. to heare the petitions of those that prayed and to carry them to God c. they went to the monuments of martyrs and often inuocated the martyrs by name Of which also saith M. (y) Volum 2. p. 592. Parkins The Fathers especially those after the 400. yeares haue erred in the inuocation of Sainctes As touching the publicke placing of Images in the Church which M. Fulke thinketh to be (z) Defence of the engl translat c. 3. p. 119. against the coÌ„mandement sundry examples or testimonies of the ancieÌ„t Fathers are in profe therof alleged by M. (a) Against sybolising part 1. p 32. Chem. exam part 4. p. 26. 29. 30. Cent. 4. col 409. Parker Chemnitius and the Century writers In so much that in respect of such auncient publicke allowance of images the Protestant Functius affirmeth that (b) Lib. 7. comment in praecedent Chronolog at Anno Christi 494. fol. m. câ— Anno. 494. Xenaias was the first in the Church that stirred vp warre against Images And as for reliques of Sainctes and pilgrimage therto the Century (c) Cent. 4. c. 6. col 456. writers do charge the Fathers of the 4. age with publicke translation of Sainctes reliques And Chemnitius affirmeth that (d) Examen part 4. p. 10. from translations presently were made cicumgestations of reliquâ—s as is to be seene in Hierome and Austin c. yea saith he (e) Ibidem and see cent 4. c. 6. col 457. they made pilgrimages to the places where they heard there were reliques famous by miracles so they went in pilgrimage to the holy land and to Rome to the Churches of Peter and Paul and the like hereof is testifyed by the Century writers Now in more semblable profe yet of Images M. Parkins reporteth coÌ„cerning the reuereÌ„ce in ancieÌ„t times geueÌ„ to the Crosse that (f) Volum 2. p. 596 and Fulke against Heskins p. 657. Paulinus ep 11. saith the Bishop of HierusaleÌ„ yearly at Eaester set forth the Crosse for the people to worship him selfe being the cheife of the worshipers So general and receiued was the vsage therof in the time of Paulinus who according to (g) Cent. 5. l. 3. c. 2. p. 387. Osiander was familiar with Hierome Austin and Ambrose Neither was this reuerence exhibited to the Crosse by the cleargy or vulgar people onely for Prudentius reporteth the like practise therof in the old Emperours saying (h) In Apotheâ—â— Vexillum Crucis summus dominator adorat the greatest commander the Emperour adoreth the standred of the Crosse Danaeus (i) Primae partis alt part ad Bellar. 5. controu resp p. 1415 And Parker against symbolising part 2. c. 7. p. 61. also affirmeth that S. Ciril and sundry other learned Fathers were plainly superstitious and blinded with this enchantment of the Crosses adoration Furthermore M. Burges saith concerning the Fathers opinion of the Crosse with exception onely to the point of adoration which is next heretofore already sufficiently confessed that (k) In Couels answeare to Burges p. 130. 136. there is nothing ascribed to the Crosse in or out of Baptisme by the rankest Papistes but the Fathers are as deeply engaged in the same so as if we wil vse it as the Fathers did c. we take the soule to be fenced with crossing of the body and the Crosse to haue vertue of consecrating the Sacrament driuing away deuils witchcraft c. In proofe wherof he alledgeth sundry auncient Fathers and the like is affirmed by seueral (l) Treatise of the signe of the Crosse p. 21. and see cent 4. col 3â—2 1493. Puritans and the Centuristes In so much that as to the many miracles by vs obiected in this behalfe from the Fathers D. Couel auoucheth that (m) Answeare to Burges p. 138. No man can deny but that God manifested his power to the amasement of the world in this contemptible signe as being the instrument of many miracles The Fathers in general are confessed for our Catholicke doctrines concerning freewil and merit of workes SECTION 10. COncerning the Fathers doctrine of freewil Protestants affirme that (n) Discouery of vntruthes in D. Bancrofts sermon p. 23. the error of freewil deriued from Iustin martyr and Irenaeus was at the time of the Nicene Councel in some ripenes c. we know that euer since the Apostles times in a manner it florished euery where til Martin Luther tooke the sword in hand against it The Centuristes speaking of the times next after the Apostles do thinke (o) Cent. 2. c. 4. col 58. that scarcely there is any point of doctrine which began so soone to be darkned as this of freewil As also (p) Ibidem col 59. and cent 4. col 291. Calu. instit l. 2. c. 2. parag 4. Hamelman de tradit Apost l. 2. c. 7. col 93. after the same manner Clemens euery where affirmeth freewil that it may appeare that not
onely al the Doctors of that age were in such darknes but also that the same encreased afterwardes in the later ages In like manner concerning induration Caluin affirmeth that (q) See before c. 2. sec 2. The auncient Fathers werâ— superstitious and affraid to confesse the truth therof And as for the Fathers doctrine of workes D. Humfrey is fully of opinion that (r) In Iesuit part 2. p. 530. It may not be denyed but that Ireneus Clemens and others whom they cal Apostolical in respect of the time in which they liue haue litle Apostolically inserted into their writinges the opinion of freewil and merit of workes Melancthon also thinketh that (s) In ep ad Romanos p. 391. Origen and many others following him faigned men to be iust for their workes And M. Whitaker houldeth chargable (t) Resp ad rat Camp p. 78. and in Fulkes defence of the engl transl p. 368. with error herein to vse his owne wordes not onely Ciprian but almost al the most holy Fathers of that time The Centuristes speaking of the Fathers of those auncient times say (u) â—ent 3. c. 4. col 79. It seemeth that for the most part this cheifest article of iustification to haue beene obscured for they attributed to workes iustice euen before God Againe (x) Ibidem col 78. and see cent 4. col 292. 293. The doctors of this third age haue declined from the true doctrine of Christ and the Apostles concerning good workes yea they conclude vpon recytal of sundry of the auncient Fathers sayinges thus (y) Ibidem col 293. Now let the godly reader thinke how far this age haith declined in this article from the doctrine of the Apostles Lastly Caluin writeth (z) Instit l. 3. c. â—5 parag 2. I confesse that the writers of the ancient Church haue euery where vsed the name of merit and I would to God that by the abuse of this word they had not geuen to posterity occasion of error yea the Fathers were so ful herein that we haue seene before (a) See before c. â—3 sec 3. their confessed condemning of Iouinianus for his denyal of meritâ—â— The Fathers ingeneral are confessed for our Catholicke doctrines concerning vowes the single life of Preistes Monachisme prescribed fastes and Ceremonies SECTION 11. VVE are not ignorant saith (b) Exam. part 3. p. 41. Chemnitius that the Fathers allowed the vowes of perpetual single life and that they also brought them to be obligatory or to bind in conscience Peter Martir thinketh (c) De votis p. 524. Epiphanius with many other of the Fathers to erre in that they said it was sinne to breakâ— such a vow when neede required and that they badly ascribed it to Apostolical tradittion M. Wootton censureth (d) Defence of Parkins p. 491. this to be one of the blemishes of the auncient writers wherof also saith (e) Instit l. 4. c. 13. parag 17. Caluin they say this was obserued froÌ„ longest memory that those who would dedicate them selues wholly to our Lord should bind them selues with the vow of chastity truly I confesse that this custome was aunciently receiued But I do not graunt that this age was free from al vice (g) Retentiue against Bristow p. 64. Carthw 2. Reply part 1. p. 509. cent 4. col 847. 303. 877. and Cent. 3. col 85. 86. Beza de Poligamia p. 211. 212. 213. 214. But Hospinian affirmeth yet further that (f) De orig monach fol. 102. not onely Austin but other Fathers also erred in the vowed chastity by mutual consent euen of married persons And as for the forbidding of Bigams and marriage vnto Preistes the first is so general and auncient that M. Fulke confesseth that he which haith had two wiues could not be a Preist in Hieromes time And as for the other of the vnmarried life of Preistes M. Iewel saith (h) Defence of the Apology p. 195. and cent 3. c. 6. col 148. and cent 4. col 616. 486. 303. 704 1293. Osiand cent 5. l. 1. c. 33. p. 156. Szeged loc com p. 327. Osiand cent 4. l. 2. c. 27. p. 195. cent 5. l. 1. c. 39. p. 176. p. 45. 30. 298. 395. 406. cent 4. p. 46. 167. Chem. exam part 3. p. 50. 52. 62. Here I graunt M. Harding is like to finde some good aduantage as hauing vndoubtedly a great number of holy Fathers on his side Bucer likewise acknowledgeth that (i) Gratulatio ad Eccles Anglic. p. 35. The Church of the East Aegipt and the sea Apostolicke were accustomed in S Hierom s time not to take for Preistes but either such as were not married or ceased to be by abstaining from their wiues Hereto ad that the defending of Preistes marriage was condemned in (k) Contra Vigilant c. 1. Fulke against Rhem. test in 1. Tim. 3. sec 5 p. 683. 684. and cent 4. c. 8 col 603. Vigilantius and (l) Contra Iouin l. 1. c. 19. 14. et ad Panâ—ach Apol. c. 8. Iouinian by S. Hierome wherof also saith (m) Tom. 6. haer 82. fine and Danaeus de haeresibus haer 82. fol. 230. S. Austin This heresy was quicly trodden dowen and extinguished neither could it euer preuaile so much as to the deceiuing of any Preistes But now to speake of the professed religious life of Monkes and Nunnes M. Carthwright acknowledgeth that (n) In Whiteg def p. 344. Ruffin Theodoret Sozomen Socrates do mencion monkes a most in euery page And the Centuristes do begin a whole special tract the title wherof is (o) Cent. 4. c. 10. col 294. Of the Monkes through Syria Palistine Bithinia and the other places of Asia vnder Constantine the great They do also make another like special tract the title therof being (p) Ibidem col 1306 The Affrican Monkes through Aegipt vnder Constantine the great and yet another bearing this title (q) Ibid. col 1331 Monkâ—s through Europ They also heretofore mencioned their (r) See before c. 15. sec 3. râ—ligious habit and further affirme that many of them (s) Cent. 4. col 471. neither had houses nor did eate bread nor supping meates nor drunke wine but dwelled in mountaines As also abstained (t) Ibid col 474. from al flesh fish egges and cheese Osiander and the Centuristes do also report (u) Osiand cent 4. p. 100. 440. the Centurists cent 4. col 1323. their inclosing or muring vp of them selues in litle strait Celies They affirme also (x) Ibid. col 474. that many of them slept vpon the ground others went barefooted and others weared hairecloth priuatly And as for their professed voluntary pouerty they further say (y) Ibid. col 464. 300. 301. and Osiand cent 5. l. 3. c. 13. p. 356. It is euident that those who were to professe monastical life did distribut their goodes before they entred into the Monastery In like sort concerning the vowed chastity of Monkes the