Learning and Iudgment c. So willing indeed is M. Doctour to detract from the Authoritie and testimonies of his owne deare Brethren M. Napper and M. Brocard And where he would gladly mince the matter by affirming that they were but Two the perusal of this Chapter and other parcels of this booke wil clearly discouer that there were manie more Twoes of this opinion Wherfore to proceed M. Brightman (11) Apoc. p. 503. thus vrgeth Bellarmine As concerning the continuance of the Apostacie from the true Faith we haue learned by the Apocalypse that the same hath preuayled more then 1260. yeares and that more cleerly then anie of your Subtilties can euade (12) Ibid. p. 539. And againe Antichrist hath raigned from the time of Constantin the Great to this day wherof the Apocalypse affordeth such Demonstrations as neuer anie Iesuit can confute Yea (13) Ibid. p. 477. further The Pope of Rome is the Beast which 1300. yeares receiued power c. therefore from 1300. yeares he is the Antichrist So certain it is by M. Brightmans strongest Demonstrations grounded vpon Scripture that the present Roman Religion hath continued for these last 1300. yeares during which time the Pope in his opinion hath raigned as Antichrist Answerably herevnto (14) Against Staplet Martial p. 25. D. Fulk relateth that some Protestants haue written that the Pope hath blinded the world these manie hundred yeares some say 1000. some 1200. some 900. c. And (15) In Apoc. p. 263. Winckelmanus speaking of the begining and end of the Churches persecution by Antichrist reporteth that there are some Protestant Writers who make the end Anno 1517. when M. Luther first began and so the beginning should be Anno 257. others place the end Anno Christi 1521. when Luther at the Assemblies at Wormes excellently gaue testimonie to the truth and so the beginning should be from Anno Christi 261. c. (16) De Antichristo p. 96. Danaeus also speaking of Antichrists first coming confesseth that some Protestant Writers teach that he came in the Yeare 1000. others 500. others 400. from Christs birth So clear it is that the Pope of Rome for these 1300. yeares in the opinion of Protestants hath raigned as Antichrist But as the Popes for these last 1300. yeares are thus censured for Antichrists so are the most ancient and first Christian Emperours condemned for Papists and fauourers of Antichrist For though D. Morton speaking of the Popes authoritie affirmeth that it hath been (17) Prot. Appeal p. 661. often and notoriously contradicted in Antiquitie c. by right Christian and renowned Emperours Yet M. Brightman speaking of the verie first most ancient and Christian Emperours auerreth the contrarie saying (18) Apoc. p. 344. Into which Catalogue come Constantin the Great Constantius Constans Constantin and their Sonnes Iulian Iouinian Valentinian Gratian Valentinian the Second Theodosius c. for these then raigning the Beast was notably defended and his dignitie much increased Agreably sayth (19) Reioynd to Bristow p. 2. D. Fulk I neuer ment to acknowledge the Emperours Constantin Iouinian Valentinian c. to be such as I would wish for For both in their Religion and manners diuers things are found which I could wiâ—h had been more agreable to the Word of God So that for the second 300. yeares after Christ it resteth euident and for such acknowledged that The Pope and his Clergie possessed the outward visible Church of Christians neuer suffring for 1000. yeares after Syluester the First anie to be seen vouchable or visible of the Protestant Church For which verie cause al the Popes of those Ages are censured for Antichrists and the verie first Christian Emperours for their fauourers and defenders To make now the like trial of the Roman Churches Continuance and her vniuersal and publick profession and practise of her Faith and Religion for the first 300. yeares after Christ to wit from his blessed Apostles to Pope Siluester the First and Constantin the Great Wheras our Catholick Writers do often obiect the Custom of the ancient Fathers in prouoking the Hereticks of their times with the Succession of the Roman Bishops according to the example of Ireneus Cyprian Tertullian Optatus Hierom Augustin and Vincentius Lyrinensis (20) Against Purgat p. 373. D. Fulk for his best answear is enforced to confesse saying That these men specially named the Church of Rome it was because the Church of Rome at that time as it was founded by the Apostles so it continued in the doctrine of the Apostles (21) ConfereÌ„ce vvith M. Hart. p. 442. D. Raynolds being prouoked in the like kind acknowledgeth in like manner that The succession of the Roman Bishops was a proof of the true Faith in the time of Augustin Epiphanius Optatus Tertullian and Irenaeus c. (22) Instit l. 4. c. 2. sec 2. 3. And Caluin himself setting downe our foresayd Allegation affirmeth of Catholicks that They indeed set forth their Church verie gloriously c. They report out of Irenaeus Tertullian Origen Augustin and others how highly they esteemed this Succession wherto he giueth the like answear and reason saying Considering it was a matter out of al doubt that from the beginning euen vntil that time nothing was changed in Doctrine the forsayd Doctours took in argument that which was sufficient for the ouerthrowing of al new errours to wit that the Hereticks oppugned the doctrine which euen from the verie Apostles themselues had been inuiolable and with one consent retayned And in his book of Institutions set forth in French he writeth expresly that It was a thing notorious and without doubt that after the Apostles Age vntil those foresayd times no change was made in doctrine neither at Rome nor other Citties In like sort sayth Zanchius (23) De vera Relig. p. 148. In times past the Roman Church and the succession of their Bishops vntil the times of Irenaeus Tertullian Cyprian Some others was such as that not vndeseruedly these Fathers were accustomed to prouoke and cite the Hereticks of their time to her and others such like (24) De Ecclesia p. 278. D. Whitaker speaking of certain Apostolical Churches and amongst them of Rome by Name collecteth thus From whence we vnderstand why Tertullian prouoked to these Churches to wit because as then by perpetual succession they kept the Doctrine of the Apostles Agreably to which almost in the same words sayth (25) Against Purgat p. 374 D. Fulk The Church of Rome retayned by succession vntil Tertullians dayes that Faith which it did first receiue of the Apostles (26) Fox his Act. Mon. p. 1359. M. Ridley auoucheth that The Patriarch of Rome in the Apostles time and long after was a great maintayner and Setter forth of Christs glorie in the which aboue al other Countries and Regions was preached the true Ghospel the Sacraments were most duly administred c. After the Emperours became Christians
the longest Continuance and greatest Antiquitie is a Popish Argument And the Doctrine of the Pope or Church of Rome was so timely working as that it was in being euen in the Apostles dayes For our Conclusion then we haue it here confessed that euer since the time of Constantin and Pope Siluester which contayneth some 1300 yeares al Popes and the Church of Rome haue been so agreable in Doctrine and Faith with our Present Pope and Church that therefore they are al censured for Antichrists Rome for Babylon the imagined Protestant Church during the same time not hauing anie one visible member in the world And not only this but that euen our first Christian Emperours are reproued by Protestants in regard of their very Religion and their honouring and defending of the foresayd Popes And as for the Roman Churches continuance from Christs time vntil the Raygne of Constantin it is plentifully acknowledged that as she was founded by the Apostles so she continued in the doctrine of the Apostles euen vntil the verie times of S. Augustin who flourished almost 100. yeares after Constantin in so much as during al the sayd time the verie Succession of Roman Bishops is granted by Protestants to haue been a good proof of the true Faith And wheras S. Austins Rule of making al such Doctrine truly Apostolical as hath no knowne beginning since the Apostles is approued and applauded by the learnedst Protestants yet themselues likewise confesse that the allowance of this Rule is the opening of a window to bring in al Poperie so truly Apostolical is the Doctrine of Papists Adde lastly that the Antiquitie of our present Papistrie is confessedly no lesse gray-headed then the times of S. Paul and the other Apostles and the continuance therof euer since such as that perusing Councels Fathers and Stories from the Apostles we stil find the print of the Popes feet Now my kindest Aduocats in this so important a Plea are no other then Caluin Suinglius Zanchius Danaeus Beza Winckelmanus Sebastianus Francus Rhegius Brocard Brightman Leigh Napper Parkins Whitaker Powel Fulk Raynolds Ridley Iewel Bunnie Carthwright Parker Field Whitguift Fotherbie Willet Midleton and Morton al of them Protestant Writers and men much renowned by their other Brethren A FVRTHER PROOF OF THE PRESENT ROMAN Religions Continuance from the Apostles times to these dayes is taken from the Christian belief of the Indians Armenians Grecians Brittans al of them Conuerted in the dayes of the Apostles CHAPTER VI. IT is recorded by sundrie Historiographers and acknowledged for most true by the learnedst Protestants that manie Heathen Nations were conuerted by the Apostles themselues to the Faith of Christ whereof peculiar instance is giuen of India Armenia Graecia Britanie c. The Conuersion of India is confessed by (1) Cent. 1. p. 37. Osiander and (2) Comment de Regno Christi p. 45. Nicolaus Phillippi affirmeth S. Thomas to haue been their first Apostle Chemnitius (3) Exam. part 2. p. 7. teacheth that S. Bartholomew preached the Ghospel to the Armenians And as for the Conuersion of Greece it clearly appeareth by Saint Pauls Epistles to sundrie of that Nation as to the Corinthians Ephesians Thessalonians and by the Apocalypse chap. 1. vers 11. Now as concerning the first Conuersion of Britanie it was so vndoubtedly Apostolick as that (4) Britannia c. p. 40. M. Cambden auoucheth that It is certayne that the Brittans receiued the Christian Religion in the verie infancie of the Church In proof wherof he there alleageth sundrie ancient Authorities (5) Ibid. p. 157. And See M. Hal in his Apologie against the Brovvnists p. 58. Further also teaching that in Britannie flourished the Monasterie of Glassenburie which taketh its ancient beginning from Ioseph of Arimathia c. for this the ancientest Monuments of this Monasterie do testify c. Neither is there cause why we should doubt thereof In like sort sayth (6) Description of Britanie annexed vnto Holinshead c. v. 1. p. 23. M. Harison That Ioseph preached here in England in the Apostles times his Sepulchre yet in Glassenburie and Epitaph affixed thereto is proof sufficient (7) Remedie against Schisme p. 24. M. Henoch Clapham is so confident of the Britans conuersion in the Apostles times as that he auoucheth that our Schismatikes may aswel ask me what assurance I haue there was a King Henrie as demand what assurance I haue of the other (8) Against Rhem. Test in 2. Cor. 12. fol. 316. D. Fulk thefore calleth them The Catholick Brittans with whom Christian Religion had continued in succession since the Apostles times This then supposed that al the former Countries were conuerted to Christianitie by Christ his Apostles and disciples themselues The next point to be examined is whether the sayd Faith and Religion which as then they learned receaued and beleeued and which for sundrie succeding Ages they practised and professed is more agreable to the present Roman or Protestant Faith And first as concerning the Indians (9) Comment de Regno Christi l. 1. p. 45. 46. D. Philippus Nicolai relateth that India in sundrie places is inhabited by them in great number who receiued the doctrine of the Ghospel from S. Thomas the Apostle c. vpon the seauenth day according to our custome they meete in the Churches that they may be present at the Sacrifices heare Sermons they vse in their Sacrifices wine made of dryed Grapes giuing bread they not only giue the bodie of Christ but also by drinking of the consecrated Chalice they giue his bloud hauing before made confession of their sinnes c. At the entrance of the church like vnto the Papists they are sprinkled with holie water with the same rite and the same religion they burie the dead c. praying vnto Christ for their eternal Saluation c. The Priests are so shauen vpon the head that they haue vpon the crowne the Image of the Crosse Amongst them there are Societies of Monks and companies of Sacred Virgins shut vp in seueral houses Chastitie is kept by al them with a great desire of honestie abstinence and religion c. They strictly obserue the fasts of Aduent and Lent c. And In the honour of S. Thomas they keep a Festiual day Yea he further writeth (10) Ibid. p. 64. of the remote Cataians of India that they haue their chappels in which for the safetie of their Marchants trauayling in strang countries Sacrifice is offred with Popish ceremonies and Masses Now by this testimonie of so learned a Protestant it appeareth that the Indian Christians first conuerted by S. Thomas retayne yet and practise these Catholick poynts of Faith The real presence of Christs Bodie and Bloud in the Eucharist Confession of sinnes before Receiuing Sprinkling with holie water prayer for the dead Shauing Priestes Crownes The Image of the Crosse Companies of Monks and Nunnes their Chastitie and abstinence The Feasts of Aduent and Lent The
11.26 As often as you shal eate this Bread and drink the Chalice you shal shew the death of our Lord vntil he come to wit at the day of Iudgement Answerably to these Scriptures Protestants teach concerning Preachers that (33) Fulk in his Answ to Counterf Cath. p. 100. The truth can not be continued in the world but by their Ministrie that therefore (34) Propositions disputed in Gen. p. 845. The Ministerie is an essential Mark of the true Church M. Deering (35) Vpon the Epist to the Heb. c. 3. lect 15. 16. teacheth that Saluation springeth in preaching of the Ghospel and is shut vp againe with ceasing of it And that Take away preaching you take away Faith for which he citeth manie Scriptures D. Fulk (36) Answ to a Counter Cath. p. 11. 92. affirmeth that the Churches Pastours shal alwayes resist al false opinions with open reprehension And M. Deering (37) VpoÌ„ the Hebr. in c. 2 lect 10. is of opinion that The Religion being of God no feare of man shal keep them back because that were to kâ—ep the honour of God for corners and solitarie places For as the (38) Rom. 10.10 Apostle prescribeth with the hart we beleeue vnto Iustice but with the mouth Confession is made to Saluation (39) SermoÌ„s vpon the Canticles Englished p 79. 80. Beza confesseth that there must be Pastours and Doctours to the end of the world for the administration of the Word and Sacraments And (40) See the Survay of the Holy preteÌ„ded c p. 440. 441. The Ministrie of the Word and Sacraments are in absolute degree of Necessitie to Saluation D. Whitaker (41) Cont. Duraeum l 3 p. 260. assureth vs that they are Essential Notes of the Church (42) Ibid. p. 249. which being present they do constitute a Church and being absent do subuert it And D. Willet (43) Synopsis p. 71. auoucheth that These Markes can not be absent from the Church and it is no longer a true Church then it hath these Markes for 44 Ib. p. 69 as he further saith The only absence of them do make a nullitie of the Church Lobechius (45) Disput Theo p. 213. speaking of these Markes and of the Church affirmeth that They are coupled togeather with so streight and indissâ—luble a knot that in the assemblies of those who are called the one can not be without the other and the one denyed the other of necessitie is to be denyed Hiperius (46) Meth. Th p. â—48 557. teacheth that These Notes are needful to distinguish the true Church from the false that men careful of their Saluation may know where the true Church is and to which Companie chiefly they ought to adioyne themselues By the premisses now it is euident aswel by the sacred Scriptures as by the manifest Confessions of Protestant Writers that the Church of Christ must euer haue in her Ecclesiastical Pastours and Preachers which must be lawfully sent and ordinarily called by the Church and which must preach the true Word and Faith and administer the holie Sacraments The only poynt therefore resting to be examined is whether the Roman or Protestant Church hath euer had in al Ages the forsayd Pastours lawfully called and succeeding one another truly preaching the holie Word and administring the Sacraments And first concerning the Protestant Church Al personal Succession of Pastours hath been so interrupted or rather altogeather wantâ—ng that in steed of anie Successiâ—n of Pastours to be named it is at large confessed before (47) Before l. 3. c. 1. that their Church hath been wholy Inuisible and vnknowne for manie hundred of yeares togeather Yea Caluin [48) In Lascicius de Russor c. Râ—lig p. â—3 And see Caluin Inst l 4. c 3. sec 4. Danaeus Isagog part 4. p. 36. plainly confesseth that Through the Tyrannie of the Pâ—pe the true Succession of ordination was broken off in the Protestant Church And agayne (49) Tract Th. p. 374. The Church of God for some Ages was so torne and pulled a-sunder that she was destitute of true Protestant Pastours (50) Ep. Theol. ep 5. Beza acknowledgeth that among them ordinarie vocation was no where extant And (51) Disputationes Theol. p. 719 Sadel relateth that sundrie Protestants who acknowledge the doctrine which their Church doth embrace to be true and grounded vpon the expresse word of God do yet affirme the Ministers with them to be destitute of lawful calling as not hauing a continued visible Succession from the Apostles times which they do attribute only to the Papists In like sort saith Bullinger (52) Vpon the Apocalyps ser 145 fol. 137. Sâ—e Libauius in his Gretzerus triumph p. 102. and knewstubs in Confut. of the principal pointes of Popery p. 38 Albeit we can not at this day referre our calling to the Pope and Bishops which brag of lawful Succession yet for so much as we can proue that our Doctrine is Christs Doctrine and therefore that our Ministerie is lawful we care not a whit c. So confessedly is the Protestant Church destitute of lawful Calling And to touch breefly the Calling and Succession of our English Ministerie wheras D. Barlow in his Sermon before the King at Hampton Court publickly taught that The Apostles reserued Ordination to themselues and conueyed it to Bishops c. Neither would the Church of Christ succeeding admit anie other but Bishops to that busines as not iustifyable for the Presbiters either by reason example or Scripture c. Not one Example sayth he is to be showed through the whole Storie Ecclesiastical that anie besides a Bishop did it if some one of the inferior rank presumed to do it his act was reuersed for vnlawful It is so certaine that our Catholick Bishops after the death of Queen Marie were so far from Consecrating those other which were for such named by Q. Elizabeâ—h at her entrie to the Crowne and from whom sithence al the Protestant Clergie of England deriueth itself that the (53) p 177. Protestant Writer of The Assertion for true Christian Church-Policie auoucheth that It cannot be proued that anie Lord Spiritual was so much as present in Parlament or gaue anie assent to the Enacting of Statutes made Anno primo Elizabethae Yea in supply therof there was a Statute made An. 8. Eliz. c. 1 the Title therof being An Act declaring the manner of making and Consecrating Archbishops of this Realme to be good And towards the end of that Statute it is enacted that Al Acts done by anie Person about anie Consecration c. by vertue of the Queens Maiesties Letters Patents shal be good c. And that al Persons that haue been or shal be Consecrated Archbishops c. shal be Archbishops c. But the then Parlament or her late Highnes Letters Patents could not enable the first Protestant Bishops to be true Bishops because that function is not Ciuil but Spiritual and ex
no period or difference of time wherin the Church of Christ hath more gloriously shined either for puritie of Faith or Sanctitie of life then during the time of her primitiue being which according to the accompt (1) Ievvel in his Sermon at Paules Crosse And in his Reply p. 1. Humfrey in vita Iuelli p. 123. 124. VvitaKer Resp ad Ranones Campiani p. 90. of the learnedst ProtestaÌ„ts extended itself to the ful tearme of the first six hundred years after Christ our Sauiour his glorious Ascension In greatest confidence wherof D. Iewel whom M. Mason (2) Consecration of English Bish. p. 267 styleth and esteemeth a Iewel made his so aduenturous a Challenge when he publickly exclaimed at Pauls Crosse O Gregorie O Austin O Hierom O Chrysostom O Leo O Denis O Anaclet O Calixt O Paul O Christ If we be deceaued you haue deceaued vs this you taught vs c. And As I sayd before so I say now againe I am content to yeald and subscribe if anie of our learned Aduersaries or if al the learned men that be aliue be able to bring anie one sufficient Sentence out of anie old Catholick Doctour or Father or out of anie old General Councel c. for the space of 600. yeares after Christ which maketh agaynst anie one of 27. Articles by him there repeated and defended And this he protested to preach not as carryed away with the heate of Zeale but as moued with the simple truth This proffer of D. Iewel was so pleasing to D. Whitaker that he most valiantly renewed it in behalf of al Protestants (3) Resp ad Rat. CaÌ„p p. 90. And see p. 9. saying to our glorious Martyr Campian Attend Campian the speach of Iewel was most true and constant when prouoking you to the Antiquitie of the first six hundred years he offered that if you could shew but anie one cleare and playne Saying out of anie one Father or Councel he would grant you the victorie It is the offer of vs al The same do we al promise and we wil performe it With like courage steppeth forth (4) Of the Church l. 5. in his Appendix therto Part. 1. p. 33. D. Field We say sayth he with Bishop Iewel in his worthie Challenge that al the learned Papists in the world can not proue that either Gregorie or Austin held anie of these twentie seauen Articles of Popish Religion mentioned by him Neither wil D. Morton yeald a foot herein stoutly auouching that (5) Prot. Appeal p. 354. It hath been the common and constant profession of al Protestants to stand vnto the Iudgement of Antiquitie for the continuance of the first foure hundred years and more in al things Yea he further publickly professeth that (6) Protest Appeale p. 573. 574. Protestants in oppugning Doctrines which they cal new and not Catholick c. are so far from suffring the limitation of the first 440. years that they giue the Romanists the scope of the first fiue hundred or six hundred years as our Aduersaries themselues do acknowledge For D. Stapleton writing of the opinion of Luther Caluin and Melancthon sayth that they did yeald vnto the tryal of truth by the testimonie of Antiquitie for the space of the first Fiue or Six hundred yeares M. Campian a Iesuit reporting the Challenge of Bishop Iewel for the mayntenance of these Articles which he then propounded for Catholik sayth that he appealed vnto the Iudgement of Antiquitie for the first six hundred years And againe (7) Ibid. p. 512 Protestants in the disquisition of truth do not absolutely bound the name of Antiquitie within the compasse of the first Centurie of years but are content to allow it a longer extent and therfore in al Doctrines which are truly Catholick c. they refuse not to be tryed by the testimonies of the ancient Fathers in the first fiue hundred years after Christ Yea (8) Ib. p. 680. we repose our securitie in those two impregnable fortresses of the Catholick Faith one is the ancient Tradition of the Primitiue Church as the Protestants are confessed to professe c. So willingly do the learned Protestants prouoke and appeale to the Primitiue Church of Christ for the certayne tryal of truth in matters of Faith and Religion Al which they pretend to do because as Luther sayth (9) Tom. 2. Germ. f. 243. Epist ad Marchionem Branâ—eburg It is dangerous and horrible to heare or beleeue anie thing which is contrarie to the vnanimous testimonie of Faith and to the doctrine of the holie and Catholick Church which she from the beginning agreably kept for aboue One thousand fiue hundred years And as Chemnitius truly obserueth (10) Exam. par 1. f. 74. No man doubteth but the Primitiue Church receaued from the Apostles and Apostolical men not only the Text of Scripture but also the right and natiue sense therof wherupon sayth he (11) Ibid. p. 64. we are greatly confirmed in the true and sound sense of Scripture by testimonie of the ancient Church Which according also to other Protestants (12) Harmonie of Confess p. 400. Is the true and best Mistresse of Posteritie and going before lâ—adeth vs the way Yea sayth D. Beard (13) Retractiue from Romish ReligioÌ„ p. 372 without al question al truth was taught by the Apostles to the Primitiue Church and no part therof was left vnreuealed c. Besides it is as certayn that that Church which next succeeded the Apostles was the most pure and absolute Church whether for doctrine or manners matter or forme that euer was in the world and therefore to degenerate from that must needs be to degenerate from the puritie and sanctitie of Religion And againe it can not be denyed that c. though the Primitiue Age of the Church after the Apostles was most pestered with Hereticks yet euermore the truth preuayled both in regard of birthright and predominance D. Morton Declareth that (14) Protestant Appeale p. 513. In the maine question of discerning the true bookes of holie Writ the Protestants do appeale c. vnto the IudgemeÌ„t of the Primitiue Church attributing vnto it the right and Authoritie of assigning and determining what is the perfect Canon of Scriptures With whom agreeth Chemnitius saying (15) Exam. part 1. p. 69. Andradius affirmeth that the testimonie of the Church is either alwayes to be reiected or alwayes to be receaued I answer c. where the Fathers set downe this Tradition of the books of Scripture they proue it by testimonies of the Primitiue Church if with the same course of certayntie they shal do the like of other Traditions wherof sometimes they make mention it is to be respected and they are to be receaued by the same law D. Sarauia confirmeth the authoritie of the Primitiue Church from her special assistance by the Holie-Ghost saying The (16) De diuersis Ministrorum Gradibus p. 8. Holie-Ghost who gouerneth the Church is the best interpreter
that Pelagius Celestius Iulianus al of them Hereticks do see and Hilarie Gregorie Ambrose c. are blind This so worthie a Saying of S. Austin being alleaged against the Puritans by D. Bancroft he therupon inferreth (32) Suruey p. 352. 353. 351. Surely I do not perceiue why I may not without offence apply the same wordes to those men in those dayes c. Were there neuer learned men before you were taught the Principles of the Geneua Discipline c. Do you know what was in the Apostles times better then they who succeded the Apostles c. Is the light that shewed it self so manie wayes in the Ancient Fathers become such darknes that Carthwright Trauerse Fenner to whom I might as truly adde Luther Zuinglius Caluin Beza c. and such like should be thought so clearlie-sighted And shal Ireneus Tertulian Cyprian Ambrose Hierom Chrysostom Austin Gregorie Hilarie and al the rest of those whorthie men be reckned blind So cleerly doth D. Bancroft the Protestant late Primate of England acknowledge the shining light and glorie of the ancient Fathers and defend their authoritie from the imputations of Nouelists D. Morton ioyfully acknowledgeth (33) Prot. Appeal p. 33. That the ancient Fathers c. did obtayne in the Church of Christ honourable Titles as Augustin the great Mall or hammer against Hereticks Basil the light of the world Chrysostome The Doctour of the whole world Athanasius the Pillar as it were of the Church Nazianzene by a phrase of excellencie the Diuine Origen the Maister of the churches Cyprian the President of the whole world And lastly Ambrose A man called by God vnto an Apostolical Presidencie Now as for the Confidence which Catholicks place in the ancient Fathers D. Morton testifyeth for vs that (34) Ib. p 348 Neuer did the ancient Iewes more boast of their original and descent from father Abraham then do the Romanists glory in their pretended consent of ancient Fathers And though it be true that the ancient Fathers were men yet (35) Eccl. Pol. p. 115. The strength of mans Authoritie in M. Hookers iudgement is affirmatiuely such that the weightiest affaires in the world depend therupon Yea (36) Ib. p. 116. whatsoeuer we beleeue concerning saluation by Christ although the Scripture be therin the ground of our beleef yet is mans Authoritie sayth he the key that openeth the doore c. The Scripture could not teach vs these things vnles we beleeued men And wheras the sacred Scriptures do foretel sundrie things to be performed by the Church of Christ in succeeding Ages the answerable accomplishment therof in particular being matter of fact can be to vs at this day no otherwise made knowne then vpon the Credit of humane Testimonie commended to vs by Ecclesiastical Histories In which respect D. Whitaker truly teacheth that (37) Cont. Duraeum l. 7. p. 472. Historie plainly testifyeth al that to be accomplished which the ancient Prophets haue foretold concerning the Propagation amplitude and glorie of the Church So that there is no doubt sayth he but that Ecclesiastical Historie doth strengthen the Predictions of the Prophets Now from the Premisses we may briefly remember that not only al Catholicks but euen the Primest ProtestaÌ„ts that euer were do thus willingly appeale for the decision of Controuersies in Faith and Religion to the Censure and Determination of the Church of Christ which for the first six hundred yeares was confessedly sincere holie and religious Acknowledging withal the integritie and puritie of the Roman Church during the sayd time and professing to beleeue and teach no other Faith and religion then that which was taught and beleeued by the ancient Fathers of the same Church This then supposed I wil now descend in particular to the chiefest articles of Faith disputed at this day between Catholicks and Protestants And wil only examine whether the Roman or Protestant Church is now more agreable with the confessed Faith and Religion of the Fathers of the Primitiue Church in the foresayd poynts And for the cleerest preuenting of the manifold shiftes and euasions vsed by ProtestaÌ„ts when they are vrged in this kind I wil only produce such proofe from the Primitiue Church and Fathers as is recorded and confessed by Protestants and by them disliked and reiected as agreeing with our Roman Faith and condemning Protestancie THAT THE FATHERS AND DOCTOVRS OF the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught that S. Peter was ordayned by Christ the Head of the Apostles and of the whole Church and that the Church was founded vpon S. Peter it is Confessed by Protestants themselues CHAPTER III. BEcause the deciding of this present Controuersie of the Churches Primacie is indeed the speediest and most certaine meanes for the final dissoluing of al doubts in Religion either already begun or hereafter to arise I wil therfore more particularly and at large set downe the manifest and confessed Doctrine and practice of the Primitiue Church concerning the same And first as al gouernment whether Politick or Ecclesiastical the more it reseÌ„bleth the gouernment of this world by the Creatour therof ONE GOD or the gouernment of the Church during our Sauiours aboad vpon earth by ONE CHRIST the more it is to be approued coÌ„mended and followed so nothing is holden more Soueraigne or more needful for the procuring or preseruing of vnitie and concord in anie Bodie or Communitie then the vnitie of one Head or gouernment Monarchical Herevpon the (1) Bel. de Rom. Pont l. 1. c. 10. l. 2. c 12. Catholick Church doth beleeue and teach That S. Peter was ordayned by Christ the Supreme Ecclesiastical Head not only ouer the rest of the Apostles but euen ouer the whole Church And that the Bishop of Rome succeedeth him in the same Power and Authoritie The direct (2) Luther l de Potestate Papae in assertione Art 25. Calu. l. 4 Instit c 6. Morton in his Appeale l. 2. c. 5. Sect. 11. Negatiue wherof is not only taught by the Protestant-Church but withal it further beleeueth maintayneth that the Bâ—shop of Rome in steed of being the true Successour of S. Peter and the Vicar of Christ is the true Antichrist or Man of Sinne wherof so much is foretold in the sacred Scriptures To discouer now the Faith and practise of the Primitiue Church and to begin with the confessed Primacie of S. Peter And first that for the preseruing of vnitie and preuenting of Schismes he was appoynted by Christ the Supreme Head of that slender Bodie or litle Church of the twelue Apostles Wheras S. Hierom l. 1. cont Iouinianum teacheth that Amongst the Twelue one is chosen that a Head appoynted the occasion of Schisme should be taken away From hence (3) In his Examination c. against the Plea of the Innocent p. 106. 107. D. Couel hauing spoken of the necessitie of One aboue the rest to suppresse the seed of dissention thus argueth most strongly If this were the Principal
for our present Controuersie and manie others that M Carthwright (6) In Whit. Def. p. 103. And in his 2. Reply against Whit. part 1 p 84-85 86. sayth therof To allow of Austin's Saying is to bring in Poperie againe And if S. Austins Iudgement be a good Iudgement then there be some things commanded of God which are not in the Scriptures and therupon no sufficient doctrine contayned in the Scriptures Caluin also acknowledgeth the same words of S. Austin yet confesseth (7) Inst l 4. c. 10. § 20. not to respect them affirming also that Austin hath nothing besides coniectures In like sort S. Chrysostom in expresse words teaching (8) In 2. Thes hom 4. that The Apostles did not deliuer al things by writing but manie things without these be as worthie of credit as the other D. Whitaker (9) De sacra Scriptura p. 678. in answer hereto sayth I answer that this is an inconsiderat speach and vnworthie of so great a Father And wheras Epiphanius haer 6â— teacheth that we must vse Traditions for the Scripture hath not al things and therfore the Apostles deliuered certain things by writing and certain by Tradition with whom agreeth S. Basil de Spiritu Sancto c. 27. saying Some things we haue from Scripture other things from the Apostles Tadition c. both which haue like force vnto Godlines D. Raynolds (10) In his Conclusions to his Conf. Conc. 1. p. 689. his answer to these foresayd Sayings of S. Basil Epiphanius is I take not vpon me to controle them but let the Church iudge if they considered with aduise enough c. In like sort Eusebius affirming l. 1. Demonstr Euang. c. 8 that the Apostles published their Doctrine partly by writing partly without writing as it were by a certaine vnwritten Law D. Whitaker (11) De sacra Scriptura p 668. sayth hereof I answer that this Testimonie is plaine enough but in no force ta be receiued because it is against the Scriptures Chemnitius (12) Exam. part 1. p. 87. 89. 90. reproueth for their like testimonie of vnwritten Traditions Clemens Alexandrinus Origen Epiphanius Ambrose Hierom Maximus Theophilus Basil c. And M. Fulk (13) Against Purg. p. 302 303. 397 And agâ—inst Martial p. 170. 178. Anâ— against Bristowes Moâ—â—â—s p. 35. 36. confesseth as much of Chrysostome Tertulian Cyprian Augustin Hierom c. Schrederus (14) Opusc Theol. p. 72. acknowledgeth that Origen and Basil in his book of the holie-Ghost and Hierom against the Luciferians do relate manie Customes which they cal Doctrines receaued by Tradition without writing as Threefold immersion in Baptisme Prayer towards the East the words of Inuocation when the Bread of the Eucharist is shewed c. prohibition to Fast on Sunday c. Sacrifices for the dead c. And D. Whitaker (15) De sacra Script p. 678 681. 683 685. 690. 695. 696. 670. 668. acknowledgeth and reproueth for their like doctrine of Traditions Chrysostom Epiphanius Tertulian Cyprian Augustin Innocentius Leo Basil Eusebius c. The Centurists (16) Cent 4. p 299. condemne al the Fathers of the Fourth Age one by one reciting their Sentences and reiecting them Chemnitius reciting and reiecting the Sayings of Origen (17) Exâ—m part 1. p. 87. concludeth thus So Origen iudgeth that there are Apostolical Traditions And D. Fulk 18) Agaâ—â—st Purg. p. 393 confesseth that Tertulian taught Sacrifice and prayer for the dead vpon Traditions from the Apostles D. Whitaker (19) De sacra Script p. 685. being to answer S. Cyprians playne Sayings for Traditions writeth thus I answer first Cyprian was no Apostle and therefore his words are to be examined and not al things forthwith to be receaued c. therfore let vs not regard what he sayth c. Lastly wheras S. Dyonisius de Eccles Hierarchia c. 1. S. Paul's Schollar affirmeth that the Apostles did deliuer their Doctrine partly by writing partly without writing c. D. Whitaker (20) De sacra Script p. 655. deuoyd of al answear or euasion sayth I do acknowledge that Dionisius is in manie places a great Patrone of Traditions And D. Fulk (21) In his Answear to a Count. Cath p. 35. confessing that Papias was Scholler to S. Iohn yet M. Midleton 22) Papisto-mastix p. 200. affirmeth that Papias was the first Father and Founder of Traditions But Before al these liued the ancient Iewes of whom Paulus Fagius writeth that (23) Comment in Cap. Patrum The Iewes are of opinion that Moses receiued from God in Mount Sinai a double Law the one which they cal the Law deliuered in writing the other which they cal the Law which is in the mouth or deliuered by word of mouth And this last they affirme to be deriued by Moyses to posteritie by a certain order of Succession And the self same is confessed by D. Beard (24) Rotract from Rom. Relig. â— 73 74. M. Rollock likewise auoucheth that (25) Treatise of Gods effectual calling p. 241. The Church after Moyses had both the Tradition or sound of a liuely voice and of the Scripture and written Word of God And the same Doctrine of Traditions in the Iewes is confessed by Buxdorfius (26) Synagoga Iudaica p. 13 21. 48 67. a Protestant Hebrew Reader in Basile D. Morton admitteth that (27) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p 377. The Protestants wil as readily confesse that the Iewes pretended vnwritten Traditions as could either Egesippus or Anatolius but whether they did make that boast vniustly or iustly that sayth he is worthie our m st diligent Scanne Wel then the Fathers here confessed and disliked by Protestants for our Catholick Doctrine of Traditions are S. Gregorie Austin Ambrose Hierome Chrysostom Epiphanius Basil Eusebius Maximus Theophilus Innocentius Leo Cyprian Origen Tertulian Clemens Alexandrinus Dionisius Areopagita Papias and the faithful Iewes before Christ The Protestants citing and reprouing the sayd Fathers herein are Chemnitius Caluin Schrederus Buxdorfius Whitaker Carthwright Morton Beard Rollock Fulk and Rainolds So Apparent it is that our present Roman Church in the Doctrine of Traditions doth stil insist in the steps of the Primitiue Church It is Confessed by Protestants that according to the Fathers of the Primitiue Church the Sacraments do truly conferre Grace Remission of sinnes And that they are in number seauen CHAPTER VII PRotestants (1) Luth. in Assert 1. Articuli teaching Faith alone to iustify do consequently affirme the Sacraments to be but bare Signes not causes of our Iustification seruing either euen as preaching for an obiect to stir vp and nourish our Faith or for certaine markes whereby the Faithful are discerned from Infidels But contrarie hereto the Catholick Church (2) Conc. Florent ln Institut ArmenoruÌ„ Trid sess 7. can 1. hath defined the Sacraments to giue or conferre Grace to the worthie receiuer and that they joyntly with Faith and other vertues concurre to our
is acknowledged of Dionysius by Melancthon (49) In aliquot libel c. fol. 23. D. Fulk 50) Against Purgatory p. 353. which D. Fulk in plainest words teacheth that Tertulian (51) Against Purgat p. 3â—2 see p 303. 393. Cyprian Austin Hierom and a great manie more do witnesse that Sacrifice for the dead is the Tradition of the Apostles Wherunto Bucer accordeth (52) In Enarrat in Sacra quatuor Euangel in Math. c. 12. p 311. affirming that prayer and almes were made for the dead almost from the verie beginning of the Church Lastly Zuinglius being impugned for denying Prayer for the dead and pressed with the Authoritie of Fathers especially of S. Chrysostom S. Augustin who deriue this Custome from the Apostles answereth thus (53) Tom. 1. Epicheroe de Can. Miss f. 186. And see Tom. 2. in Elench contra Anabap f. 10. If it be so as Augustin and Chrysostom report I think that the Apostles suffred certayne to pray for the dead for no other cause then to condescend to their infirmitie So insimulating the Apostles wilfully to haue permitted others to erre according to the errours of Protestants in praying for the Dead which they could not do without errour in themselues Yea the Doctrine of Purgatorie and Prayer for theÌ„ dead was beleeued and practised by the ancient true beleeuing Iewes For whereas M. Morton speaking of the Church before the coming of Christ affirmeth the doctrine then taught by the Iewes to be now knowne among other Reasons (54) Treat of Israel the Church p. 93. 94. By the open Confession of the Iewes in al Ages since the coming of Christ For sayth he it is plaine that they hold euen to this day those opinions which they receaued from their Ancestours and were commonly held of that Nation Yea say the Centurists (55) Cent. 8. col 885. The Iewes are constant in their opinions And Pet. Martyr writeth that (56) Com. plac in Engl. part 2. p. 599. The Iewes as yet continue and kept in so great aduersities in so diuers and griâ—uous Captiuities and Dispersions they hold stil their Religion Doubtles no ancient Troians Lumbards Hunnes or Vandals haue so held their owne c. and could shew their original Historie set forth in most true writing and being euerie where dispersed as they were could neuertheles keep their owne Ordinances c. Now concerning these Iewes so constant in their Faith and admitting the bookes of Machabees but only for a true Historie it is euident thereby that Iudas Machabeus a holie and iust man procured (57) 2. Machab 2.43.45 Sacrifice for the dead and that the Priests of Hierusalem then true beleeuers offred the same wherein also our later Iewes are so conformable that D. Whitaker confesseth the same in these words (58) Cont. Dur. l. 1. p. 85. I know that the Iewes haue libros memoriales books of Commemorations which they read in their Synagogues and I am not ignorant that now they are accustomed to vse certaine prayers for the Dead Insomuch that Buxdorsius also reporteth their knowne and confessed doctrine of Purgatorie (59) Synagoga Iudaica p. 24. 505. 506. 508. 275. D. Beard auoucheth that (60) Retractiue from the Romish Religion p. 77. The Romanists are like vnto the Iewes in their doctrine and practise of Prayer for the dead for they hold and teach that prayer Sacrifice is to be offered for the dead grounding their opinion partly vpon the example of Iudas Machabeus who as they affirme procured Sacrifice to be offered by the Priests for the dead c. and partly vpon the Thalmudical Traditions of diuers of their ancient Rabbins From the Premisses then we may remember that the ancient Fathers did confessedly beleeue a place of Purgatorie after this life Secondly wherin Sinnes were punished and remitted Thirdly for which Remission they vsed to Pray giue Almes and offer the most precious Sacrifice of Christs Bodie and Bloud Now the Fathers acknowledged and reprehended by Protestants for the forsayd Poynts are S. Gregorie Austin Ambrose Hierome Chrysostom Prudentius Epiphaenius Pelagius the Fourth Carthage Councel Cyprian Tertullian Origin Clemens Alexandrinus Dionysius the Areopagite the Apostles and the ancient beleeuing Iewes The Protestant Writers obseruing and disliking in the sayd Fathers the forsayd Poynts are Caluin Beza Bullinger Zuinglius the Centurie-writers Carion Chemnitius Osiander Melancthon Hospinian Winkelmannus Buxdorsius Bucer Symondes Bale Sutcliffe Humfrey Fulk Whitaker Gifford Willet Morton It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught our Catholick Doctrine of Christs Descending into Hel. CHAPTER XII ACcording to the Article of our Creed He descended into hel Catholicks generally teach that the Soule of Christ presently after his death descended into Hel or Lymbus Patrum or Abrahams Bosome there to deliuer and redeeme the Captiue Soules of the holie Patriarks Prophets and other Iust who liued before his time But Protestants being diuided amongst themselues (1) Buâ—er in c. 27. Mat. Beza in c. 2. Act. some of them teach that by the foresayd Article is only vnderstood that Christ descended to his Graue (2) Calu. Instit l. 2. c. 16. § 8 9. 10. 11. 12 others that he suffred the paynes of the Damned Soules Now do decide this Controuersie by the beleef and Doctrine of the Fathers of the Primitiue Church and that by the confessed acknowledgement of our Aduersaries who in a case so euident liberally confesse the general streame of ancient Doctours to be most aduerse vnto them in this verie Article of our Faith wheras that most holie and euer renowmed Cardinal Bellarmine in proofe of this Article alledged (3) Tom. 1. l 4. de Chri. Anima c. 14 the plaine testimonies of the Greek Fathers as namely of Iustin Ireneus Clemens Origen Eusebius Basil Nazianzen Nyssen Epiphanius Chrysostome c. And of the Latin Fathers Tertulian Hypolitus Cyprian Hilarie Gaudentius Prudentius Ambrose Hierome Ruffinus Austin Leo Fulgentius c The Protestant (4) Ad Bellarm Disput part 1. p. 176. Danaeus in answer to so manie most famous Fathers testimonies most barely affirmeth that As concerning them they were not instructed out of Gods word neither do they confirme their opinion from it but only from their owne coniectures c. Thus supposing their Catholick opinion herein and therefore reiecting al their iudgements as confirming their Faith only by their owne coniectures in Danaeus his opinion which as no lesse absurd in itself then improbable to al Iudicious I omit as an answer purely Protestantical In like plaine manner (5) Conc. Dur. l 8. p. 567 And see p. 773. D. Whitaker in answer to the like testimonies of the Fathers vrged by our Catholick Writer Duraeus writeth thus That which thou couldest not do by Scriptures no doubt thou wilt performe by the testimonies of the Fathers of whom that I may freely and briefly answer thee what I
sayth D. Morton (7) Prot. Appeal l. 1. sec 24 p. 27. be greatly moued with the contrarie Doctrine of S. Gregorie allowing praying to Saincts c. And agayne Neuertheles as we find in him very rarely anie prayer vnto Saints c So desiring to mince but not daring to deny a truth so manifest and for such confessed by so manie of his other Brethren of S. Gregorie his defending Inuocation of Saints But to ascend from S. Gregorie to other more ancient Doctours (8) Exam. part 3. p. 211. Chemnitius alleageth S. Austin inuocating S. Cyprian and coÌ„cludeth saying therof These things did Augustin without scripture yeelding to the times and custome Prudentius I grant sayth D. Whitaker (9) Answer to Campian Reas 5. p. 140. 141. as a Poet somtims called vpon the Martyrs whose Acts he describeth in verse And the superstitious Custome of praying to Saints had now taken deep root in the Church which as a Tyrant haled somtimes the holie Fathers into the same errour [10) In his Reioynder to Bristow p 5. D. Fulk spareth not to speak thus plainly I confesse sayth he that Ambrose Austin and Hierom held Inuocation of Saints to be lawful And that (11) Against the Rhem. Test in 2. Pet. c. 1. sec 3. fol. 443. In Nazianzene Basil and Chryostome is mention of Inuocation of Saints And that Theodoret also speaketh of prayers vnto Martyrs As also that Leo ascribeth much to the prayers of S. Peter for him And in brief that manie of the ancient Fathers held that the Saints departed pray for vs. (12) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 675. The Centurists charge S. Chrysostom's Lyturgie with Inuocation of our B. Ladye by name Chemnitius (13) Exam. part 3. 200. auoucheth that About the yeare of our Lord three hundred and seauentie Inuoâ—aâ—ion of Saints began to be brought into the publick assemblies of the Church by Basile Nyssen and Nazianzene (14) Ibid. p. 211. And he reprehendeth for the same Doctrine Theodoret and Hierome A French Protestant answering to the testimonie of S. Gregorie Nazianzene writeth (15) Clypeus fidei Dial. 8. p. 258. In that thou citest S. Gregorie praying to S. Basil dead that he would pray for him I wil let thee know that Gregorie knew not what he sayd when he sayd so Belike this Protestant thought that greatest Diuine S. Gregorie Nazianzen to haue been ouertaken with drinke when he prayed so as we may iustly suspect this giddie French Protestant was when he writ thus But the Centurie-writers (16) Cent. 4. col 295. 296. 297. alledge sundrie examples of prayer to Saincts Athanasius Basil Nazianzene Ambrose Prudentius Epiphanius and Ephrem (17) Apocal. in c. 14 p. 382. M. Brightman hauing named Athanasius Basil Chrysostom Nazianzen Ambrose Hierom Austin c. reproueth them as in words condemning Idolatrie but indeed establishing it by Inuocation of Saints worshipping of Relicks and such like wicked Superstitions c. sayth he And wheras D. Bishop alleageth S. Chrisostom affirming the Emperour Constantin to haue prayed to Saincts (18) p. 17. M. Wotton in his book against D. Bishop only answereth by barely reiecting the Saying for suspected and forged yet (19) In his Ansvver to D. Bishop p. 174. D. Abbot acknowledgeth the contrarie saying We deny not Chrysostom to be authour of the words And then inuenteth an answer no lesse false then impertinent to wit (20) Ibid. that Chrisostom thereby meaneth the Emperour Arcadius who was Emperour aboue sixtie yeares after Constantin but of Constantin it is sayth he that we enquire for what others did after the time of Constantin Superstition more and more increasing is nothing concerning him But yet to omit al other answere this may so much concerne anie indifferent man that it may sufficiently assure him that Inuocation of Saincts was confessedly vsed in the Church at least about Anno Domini 398. when Arcadius raigned Yea this Doctrine was so general and so certainly beleeued in the Primitiue Church that the holie Fathers are reproued by our young Protestant writers for condemning the contrarie Protestant Doctrine as Heretical in Vigilantius and Aerius D. Fulk sayth (21) In his ansvver to a counterf Cath. p. 46 Last of al Vigilantius shal be brought in who wrot against the Inuocation of Saincts c. Him Hierom reprooueth And (22) In defen tract de Diuers p. 349. D. Sarauia and Beza (23) Ibid. p. 346. do both of them affirme that Aërius was likewise charged and condemned by the Fathers for his then affirming that the Saincts departed are not to be prayed vnto But to arise yet somwhat higher and a litle to view the times neer Christ and his Apostles Beza speaking of the times of Cyprian Austin and Chrysostom acknowledgeth that (24) Prefat nou Test ad Princip Condens then preuayled Inuocation of the Dead The Centurie writers speaking of (25) Cent. 3 col 84. S. Cyprian say thus Verily Cyprian in the end of his first Epistle of his first book doth not obscurely think that Martyrs and Saincts departed do pray for the liuing (26) Cent. 3 col 83. Yea they further charge Origen for praying O holie Iob pray for vs wretches And for teaching hom 1. in Ezech. that Angels are to be prayed vnto But to auoyd tediousnes in reciting the other particuler Fathers of that Age they in grosse confesse (27) Cent. 3. c. 4. col 83. that There are manifest steps of Inuocation of Saincts in the Doctours of that ancient Age which was the third Age or hundred yeares after Christ And wheras (28) l. 5. c. 19. S. Ireneus termeth the B. Virgin Marie Eues Aduocat some Caluinists auouch that these were the words (29) Clypeâ—â— fidei Dial. 8. p. 277 Ediâ— Gall. rather of some Idolater or if they were the words of Ireneus Ireneus had not the true vnderstanding of the confession of the holie Faith of Christian Religion But if so ancient and holie Ireneus wanted true vnderstanding of Faith and Christian Religion we may assure our selues that new borne Protestants are wholy blind therin But without al restraint of Age or time (30) In his Examination c c. 9. p 120. D. Couel affirmeth that Diuers both of the Greek and Latin Church were spotted with errours about Free-wil Merits Inuocation of Saincts c. Yea D. Whitguift discoursing of (31) In h is Def. c. against the Reply of Carthwright p. 472. 473. Doctrine taught in anie Age since the Apostles time affirmeth without any exception either of Age or Father that to vse his owne words (32) Ibid. p. 473. almost al the Bishops and learned writers of the Greek Church and Latin also for the most part were spotted with Doctrines of Free wil of Merit of Inuocation of Saincts and such like Now the Doctrine and practise herof in the ancient Iewes is so cleerly recorded in the books of (33) c. 5.
Ireneus and are repugnant to the Scriptures In like sort Osiander 22) Cent. 2. p. 5. 6. And see the Centurists Cent. 2. col 207. reproueth Iustin saying Iustine extolled too much the libertie of mans Wil in obseruing the Commandments of God And it is granted 23) Cent. 2. c. 4. col 59. And see Caluin Inst l. 2 c. 2 §. 4. that Clemens euerie where defendeth Freewil so that it may appeare say they that not only al the Doctours of that Age were in such darknes but also that the same after increased in the later Doctours D. Abbots 24) In defence of the Reformed Catholick part 1. p. 114. speaking of the booke of Hermes entituled Pastor and some others forged according to his opinion in the Apostles times sayth The poyson which Satan had conueyed into such counterfaite books was receiued as wholesome food and sundrie errours and superstitious fancies of vowed Virginitie and Prayer for the dead of Freewil of Inuocation of Saincts of Antichrist and the Assumption of Marie and such like by litle and litle got footing in the Church And here was indeed sayth Abbot the true beginning of manie doctrines of Poperie c. The Centurists 25) Cent. 2. c. 4. 4 coâ— 58. speaking of the times next after the Apostles doe acknowledge That almost no poynt of Doctrine began so soon to be obscured as this of Freewil Yea it is confessed 26) So say the Puritanes cyted in D. Bancrostes Sermon p. 23. that the Protestants know that euer since the Apostles time in a manner it flourished euerie where vntil Martin Luther took the sword in hand against it A true so euident that D. Humfrey 27) Iesuit part 2. p. 530. thinketh It may not be denyed but that Ireneus Clemens and others quos vocant Apostolicos whom they cal Apostolical in respect of the time in which they liued haue in their writings the opinions of Freewil c. Yea sayth M. Caluin 28) Instit l. 2. c. 2. § 9. Al Ecclesiastical Writers excepting Augustin haue written so ambiguously and differently in this matter of Freewil that nothing certain can be gathered from their wrytings And they were ouer ful in extolling Freewil Lastly D. Whiteguift 29) In his Defence against the Reply of Carthwright p. 472. 473. discoursing of Doctrine taught in anie Age since the Apostles time affirmeth without anie other exception of Age or Father that to vse his words almost 30) Ibid. p. 473. And see the lyke in Whitak de Eccl. Con. Bellar. Controu 2. p. 299. al the Bishops and learned Writers of the Greek Church and Latin also for the most part were spotted with doctrines of Freewil of Merit of Inuocation of Saincts and such like And the same also almost in the same words is confessed by D. Couel saying 30) In his Exam. c. 9. p. 120. Diuers both of the Greek and Latin Church were spotted with errours about Freewil Merits Inuocation of Saincts c. Yea the ancient Iewes did so firmely beleeue our Doctrine of Freewil that to omit the 31) c. 15. 12. 15. 16. 17. cleerest words of Ecclesiasticus which D. Whitakers had no other wayes 32) Resp ad Camp Rat. 1. p. 15. to euade but by denying the sayd booke to be Canonical Scripture D. Fulk tearmeth 33) Defence of the Eng. Transl p. 320. The Iewish Rabbins Patrons of Freewil which D. Morton 34) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 371. iustifyeth and further sayth 35) Ibid. p. 370. What if it be confessed that some Rabbins maintayned the libertie of mans Wil as Rabbi Moses did Yea M. Hal chargeth the Pharisees 36) Pharisaisme p. 50. with Freewil and Merit which is more then either Christ or his Apostles did who yet in other respects spared not to discouer their true Errours Wel then our Catholick Doctrine of Freewil is the Primitiue Doctrine taught by S. Gregorie Hierome Epiphanius Nazianzene Basil the Councel of Nice Chrysostome Athanasius Lactantius Cyprian Origen Tertulian Theophilus Iustine Athenagoras Tatianus Clemens Alexand. Ireneus Hermes and by al the Fathers since the Apostles vntil Luthers time Our strongest witnesses herof are the Protestant Writers The Centurists Beza Osiander Hamelmannus Schultetus Calum Humfrey Abbot Hal Morton Whiteguift Fulk and Whitaker Jt is graunted by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church taught not only Faith but likewise Good works truly to iustify And that the sayd works are meritorious of Grace and Glorie CHAP. XXI COncerning Good-works It is the general (1) Se Bellarmin De Iustificatione l. 1. 4. 5. and receiued doctrine of the Roman Church First that the works of the iust are truly good and not of their owne nature sinne Secondly that not only Faith but likewise good works doe truly iustifie a man obtaine remission of sinnes Thirdly that the same good works do truly merit or deserue Grace in this world and glorie in the next Directly 2) Luther in Assert art 31. 32. 36. Caluin Instit l. 3. c. â—◠§ 4. and c. 41. §. 9. c. 19. §. 2. 4. 7. c. 15. § 2. contrarie to al the forsayd poynts concerning Good-works is the ordinarie doctrine of our new Protestants First affirming that the best works of the iust are of their owne natures deadlie sinne Sâ—condly that only Faith doth iustify Thirdly and lastly that works do neither merit Grace nor glorie To come now to the doctrine and Faith of the Primitiue Church The 3) Cenâ— 6. c. 10. col 748. Centurists making a Catalogue of S. Gregories pretended errours amongst the rest number his Errour of good workes and Iustification And 4) Cent. 6. p. 288. Osiander much reproueth him for that he attributeth ouer much to good works S. Augustin is reiected by 5) In Confess Wittemb Brentius for that the taught Affiance in mans merits towards remission of Sinnes The 6) Harmony of Confess in English sec 16. p. 509. Diuines of Wittemberg affirme that These reasons which Augustin bringeth for his opinion of Purgatorie doe seem to leane to this foundation That we obtaine remission of our sinnes and life not only for Christ his sake through Faith but also for the merits of our works And for the same doctrine of Merit of works he is further reprehended by 7) Cent. 4. p. 520. Osiander the 8) Cent. 5. col 507. 1133. Centurists 9) Instit l. 3. c. 11. § 15. Caluin 10) l. 1. Ep. p. 290 in Consil Theol. p. 240. And see Colloq Altemberg fol. 307. Field of the Church l. 3. c. 42 p. 170. Melancthon and D. Field So likewise the 11) Cent. 5. col 1178. Centurie-writers speaking of S. Chrysostom affirme that Chrysostom handleth impurely the doctrine of Iustification and attributeth merit to works They likewise say of Prosper 12) Cent. 5. c. 10. col 1363. that he retayned not a few freckles of his Age Such an
Fathers in particular pronounceth of them in general thus 40) In Col. Conuiual c. De Patribus Ecclesiae See ye what darknes there is in the Fathers writings concerning Faith for when that Article of the Iustification of men is couered with darknes it can by no meanes be that greater errours he auoyded Bullinger doth 41) In Apoc. Serm. 87. fol. 270. acknowledge that The doctrine of Merits satisfaction and Iustification of works did incontinently after the Apostles time lay their first foundations Caluin affirmeth in general that 42) Inst l. 3. c. 25. §. 2. The ancient Writers of the Church vsing euerie where the word Merit gaue occasion of errour to posteritie therby Adde lastly that D. Whiteguift 43) In his Def. against the Reply of Carthw p. 472. 473. treating of Doctrine taught in anie Age since the Apostles time affirmeth without al other exception either of Age or Father that Almost al the Bishops and learned Writers of the Greek Church and Latin also for the most part were spotted with doctrines of Freewil of Merits c. And the same is likewise taught by 44) De Eccl. cont Bellar. p. 299. D. Whitakers Now concerning the ancient Iewes The Books of 45) c. 12 9. 4.10 Tobie and Ecclesiasticus 46) c. 3. 33. are so pregnant for the Merit of works that sundrie Protestants say therof 47) Minist of Lincolne Dioces in their Abridgment p. 76. The two places of Tobie and Ecclesiasticus tend dangerously to the Iustifying of the Merit of Almes-deeds And others writing against the booke of Homilies say 48) â—ilenced Ministers in the 2. Part of Def. p. 164. The book of Homilies whereto we are required to subscribe c. expoundes Tobie saying that Almes is profitable to purge the soule from the spots of sinne alleaging these words of Tobie 4.10 and 12.19 c. and out of Ecclesiasticus c. Yea they further say This 49) Ib. p. 166. place of Tobie were it Canonical c. is verie pregnant for the Merit of works and as strong for it as the Scriptures are for the merit of Christ Buxdorfius also writeth of the Rabbins that 50) Synagog Iudaica p. 23. They perswade themselues that they may satisfy for their sinnes by doing pennance vpon their skinnes and that they may easily merit eternal life by keeping of the Commandments and Good works And the same also is acknowledged in them by 51) Pharisaisme p. 13. 50. M. Hal. I may then conclude that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church are our firmest Patrons for our Catholick Doctrine concerning Good-works confessedly teaching First that Good-works do truly iustify Secondly Meriting Grace and Remission of sinnes in this life and eternal glorie in the next For which verie doctrine the Fathers acknowledged by Protestants are S. Gregorie Chrysostom Augustin Prosper Ambrose Hierom Nyssene Nazianzene Hilarie Ephrem Cyprian Origen Tertulian Theophilus Lactantius Iustin Clemens Alex. Ireneus Hermes Ignatius and the ancient beleeuing Iewes The Protestant Writers producing and charging the forsayd Fathers are Luther the Centurists Brentius the Diuines of Wittemberg Osiander Caluin Melancthon Chemnitius Winkilmamus Schultetus Bullinger Buxdorfeus Wotton Whitaker Humfrey Couel and Whiteguift It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Ceremonies now vsed by the Roman Church in the ministring of seruice or Sacrifice as also of the Sacraments were formerlie vsed by the Bishops Priests and Fathers of the Primitiue Church CHAP. XXII HAuing thus passed through so manie particular Controuersies of greatest weight and finding in al of them a perfect agreement and sweetest harmonie between the ancient most holie and Primitiue Church and the present Roman Catholick Church and this by no weaker proofes or euidences then the free grants Confessions and acknowledgments of our sworne and professed Aduersaries I wil now for my Conclusion in this kind only examen one poynt further which being not purely Doctrinal but most sensible and external wil therby not only prooue most accommodate to the sense and capacitie of the meanest Reader but withal wil most euidently declare and make manifest the outward gracious and beautiful face of Christian Religion practised by the ancient learned and holie Bishops Doctours and people of the Primitiue Church Nothing is better knowne either to those of greater yeares who as yet may wel remember the Ecclesiastical rites and Customes of our owne kingdome or to others more moderne who haue trauailed forraine Nations then the external Ceremonies vsed in Material Churches in Celebration of Seruice and Administration of the most holie Sacraments For who knoweth not that when Catholick Churches are erected they are specially consecrated and dedicated either to Christ or some of his Saincts That in them are seueral Chancels and Vestries as also Altars Candles Reliques and Images that there are truly Priests who offer daily external Sacrifice at the Altar Whose Vestments and vessels are specially hallowed who likewise obserue Canonical houres saying some prayers in Secret others with a loud voice sometimes giuing the people their benediction and burning Incense at the Altar In the Church likewise there is a Font specially hallowed for the administration of Baptisme which is holden necessarie to Saluation and the same is ministred with the Signe of the Crosse with holie Oyles and sundrie other Ceremonies hereafter specifyed And to omit sundrie other In the Church is blessed by the Priest Holiewater Holie-bread Candles Ashes c. I need not describe the naked walles of Protestants Churches or the bare black coates of their wedded Ministers both of them deuoyd of al grace ornament puritie and state duly befitting places and persons Ecclesiastical And therfore I hasten to the confessed practise of the Primitiue Church Wherein I first find that when Material Churches were first built they were specially hallowed by the Bishop so much as S. Gregorie and S. Austin are reproued by D. Humfrey 1) In Iesuit part 2. rat 5. p. 5. 627. for bringing into England the new Consecration of Churches And the 2) Cent. 6. col 364. 365. Centurie-writers do charge S. Gregorie out of his owne writings with Consecration of Churches D. Morton affirmeth that he vsed 3) Prot. Appeal l. 1. p. 53. Superstitious manner of Consecration of Churches Yea the 4) Cent. 4. col 408. further confesse that Athanasius in his Apologie to Constantin plainly sheweth that Christians did not assemble togeather in Churches not consecrated And that in the Fourth Age the Fathers vsed 5) Cent. 4. col 497. Sumptuous Churches consecrated and Superstitious Insolencie in celebrating of Masse appointed to be sayd in no places but such as were hallowed by a Bishop 6) Cent. 4. col 497. Yea they reprooue Constantin himselfe for that say they concerning Consecration of Churches new built proud adorning of them and other Superstitious things the greatest part Constantine inuented and spread abrode in many Churches And wheras Sozomene hist l. 1. c. 8.
one litle part or other but Apostasie hath auerted the whole bodie from Christ By which it appeareth that euen at these first beginnings of Luther not only one member or parcel but euen the whole bodie of Christianitie was auerted from Protestancie the Church of Protestants as then not being being knowne to haue the least Being in the smalest parcel or member of the same bodie The like obscuritie or nullitie of the Protestant Church at Wicclifs first reuolt from the Catholick Faith is confessed by (22) Act. mon p. 85. M. Fox in these wordes Out of al doubt al the world was in a desperate and vile estate and lamentable ignorance and darkenes of Gods truth had ouershaddowed the whole earth when Iohn Wiccliffe stepped forth as the morning starre in the midst of a cloud And againe (23.‖ Act. mon p 391. In times of horrible darkenes when there seemed in a manner to be no one so litle sparke of pure Protestant doctrine left or remaining Wiccliffe by Gods prouidence rose vp through whom the Lord would first awaken and raise vp againe the world c. ‖24‖ Estate of the Church p. 418. Crispinus also auoucheth that Ihon Wiccliffe beganne as from a deepe night to draw out the truth of the doctrine of the Sonne of God And D. ‖25‖ Vita Iuelli p 263 Humfrey affirmeth that Ihon Wiccliffe in these last times was almost the first Trumpeter of this Ghospel In so much that ‖26.‖ Cent. 9. 10. 11. p. 439. Osiander confesseth that he as then had not so much as anie Companions of that time brotherly to admonish him So assured we may rest that at Wiccliffs time the Protestant Church was ouershaddowed with horrible darkenes not so much as one litle spark of pure Protestancie appearing in the world But yet neither was Wiccliffe himself Protestant for besides his sundrie Catholick opinions before proued it is testifyed of Wiccliffe to the contrarie by Melancthon ‖k‖ Ep. 〈◊〉 Frider. micō inter ep Suinglii p. 612. saying I haue looked into Wiccliffe who maketh a great ado about this Controuersie of the Eucharist but I haue found manie other errours in him by which we may iudge of his Spirit surely he neither vnderstood nor held the Iustice of Faith which onlie point is so necessarie to the Saluation of Protestants that Luther sayth therof ‖l‖ Praefat. Ep. ad Gal. If article of Iustification by onlie Faith be once lost then is al true Christian doctrine lost And as manie as hold not that doctrine are Iewes Turkes Papists or Hereticks Againe by this only doctrine the Church is built and in this it consisteth ‖m‖ In c. 1. ad Gal. If we neglect the article of Iustification we loose al togeather For ‖n‖ In c. 2. ad Gal. it is the principal article of al Christian doctrine al other articles are comprehended in it It is the foundation sayth M. ‖o‖ Act. mon p. 840 Fox of al Christianitie and the ‖p‖ Ibid. p. 770. only origin of our Saluation It is the ‖q‖ Tovver Desp soule of the Church sayth D. Chark Now this soule foundation principal Article of Protestancie Wiccliffe did not beleeue Yea such were the demerits of Wiccliffe that D. ‖r‖ Antiqu. l 2. p. 268. Caius obiecteth him to the Oxonians as a disgrace to their Vniuersitie And Melancthon censureth him to haue been ‖s‖ Loc. com Tit de Pot. Eccl. A mad man and sundrie his grosse errours and Paradoxes condemned both by Catholicks and Protestants wil discouer hereafter so litle cause haue the Protestants to appeale to Wiccliffe for the continuance of their Church in his time Now as concerning Waldo 27‖ Estate of the Church p. 338. Crispinus confesseth Waldo his beginning to haue been in time of thick darkenes and as a first little begining of the instauration of Christian Religion But whereas Father Campian Rat. 3. affirmeth that the Protestants cannot for manie Ages togeather giue exāple so much as of anie one Cittie village or house professing their doctrine ‖28‖ Resp. ad rat Cāpiani rat 3 p. 48. D. Whittaker coming to answer thy very point telleth in general that in the worst times manie Faithful were found and that all Histories do witnesse this But being prouoked to giue particular instance out of anie one Historie either of time or person he becometh mute affirming in the same place directly to the contrarie that In the times of the Apostles al Churches al Citties al Townes al Families embraced the same Religion which we Protestants professe Afterwards by litle and litle the purritie of doctrine began to be corrupted and much superstition more and more to be spred abroad to which yet the most holie Fathers resisted what they could vntil that mysterie of iniquitie which tooke roote euen in the Apostles Age went through al the partes of the Church and so at last possessed the whole Church So true it is that for manie Ages togeather insteed of anie Instance of the Protestant Churches being Popish pretended superstition possessed euen the whole Church But some may say the Protest Churches inuisibilitie for these last 1000. yeares is a point vndoubted and for such by themselues formerly and fully confessed But it is the Primatiue Church of the first 600. yeares wherein they glory their Church was most splendent knowne and conspicuous Now of al the Ages of the Primitiue Church none is more famous or better knowne or wherein Christian Religion more clearly shined ouer the whole face of the earth then the Age of Constantin whereof say the ‖29‖ Cent. 4 Ep. dedic Reginae Elizabeth Centurists The state of the Church at Constantins time illustrated the whole world with her splendour And D. Morton styleth Constantin himself The ‖a‖ Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 328 great and first Christian Emperour so greatly honoured in the first and most famous Synode of Nice And yet in so great a Sun-shine of Christs true Church it was impossible as then to see a Protestant Chappel for M. ‖30‖ In Apocalyp in his synopsis before the Booke A 1. § 11 Brightman teacheth that the Protestant Church from the times of Constantin for 1260. yeares was hid c. And ‖31‖ Ib A. 2 §. 14. And see p. 383. againe for 1000. yeares from Constantin the was conuersant with Christ in most hidden dens Yea as 32) Ibid. p. 326. then there were no Protestant publick assemblies wherein the Diuine Institutions did wholy flourish So Constantin a sonne of the Church saith he did more hurt then an Enemie As 33) Ibid. p. 577. see p. 341. also the want of publick Religion hath been manie Ages to wit from Constantin the Great to this day al which time Antichrist raigned whilst the Woman the Protestant Church liued in the desert To the same effect sayth M. Napper 34) Vpon the Reuelat. p. 161. From the yeare of Christ 316. God hath withdrawne his
assigned the third place to Hereticks who haue Gone out of the elect people of God but were not of them So that Scriptures Fathers and Protestants do al of them agree That the Going out or departing from the Church is the Badge of Heresie and Persons so Going out are thereby marked Hereticks Examples heerof we haue in al former Hereticks in Arius Macedonius Nestorius Pelagius Eutyches Donatus waldo Wicclif Husse c. who al of them being at first Roman Catholicks through Innouation of opinions afterwards seuered themselues from their mother Church going out from her to new Congregations But now to apply this to Catholicks and Protestants and breefly to examine whether companie hath gone or departed out of a former knowne Church the true Church of Christ and first to giue M. D. Morton a short scantling concerning himself his Brethren his owne neighbour M. Mason answering certaine demands of Catholicks in this kinde saith a) Consecrat of English Bishopes p. 41. When it pleased him which causeth the light to spring out of darknes we did spring from yourselues being stil content to be yours so you would be Christs In like sort sayth a) Apol. p. 288. D. Iewel We haue indeed gone from the Pope we haue shaken of the yoake of the Bishop of Rome It is true sayth b) Act. mon. p. 3. M. Fox we are remoued from the Church of Rome And D. Rainolds c) In his Conclusions annexed to his Conference maketh this one of his Conclusions That the reformed Churches in England Scotland France Germanie and other kingdomes and Common-wealthes haue seuered themselues lawfully sayth he from the Church of Rome And as for Luther himself he was at first so Roman Catholick as that sayth he (d) In Ep ad Gal. fol. 38. and see 37. 188. I did so highly esteeme the Popes authoritie that to dissent from him euen in the least point I thought it a sinne worthy of euerlasting death and would my selfe in the defence of the Popes Authoritie haue ministred fire and sword Caluin speaking of Protestants in general expresly sayth 20) In Ep. 141. p. 273. we were inforced to make a departure from the whole world yea we 21) Instit l. 4. c. 6. § 1. haue departed sayth he from her to wit the Roman Church And so accordingly it is so euident that Waldo Wicliffe Husse Luther Caluin Zuinglius c. were first borne baptised and brought vp in the Catholick Church from whence afterwards through Noueltie Libertie they went out became Apostates as that to endeauour anie special proof therof might iustly be censured of no lesse idle vanitie then to seeme to deny it of greatest ignorance or impudencie And so leauing our Protestants thus confessedly Going out of our former Catholick Roman Church and thereby branding themselues with the infamous Mark of Hereticks I wil examine what Protestants think of the Roman Church in this behalf And indeed this crime of Going out is in it self so foule a blemish as that some Protestants much desire to stayne our Roman puritie therewith So D. Fulk would haue the world to thinke That 22) Retentiue p. 85. the Popish Church is but an Heretical Assemblie departed from the vniuersal Church long since Augustins departure out of this life With whom agreeth his Brother blindbyard D. Sutclif affirming That 23) Suruey of Poper p. 315. the Papists are a sect going out of Christs Church and rising long after Christs time But these great Doctours speake much but proue nothing for it behoued them to assigne a former Church from whence the Papists thus reuolted as also the persons who the time when with other Circumstances of al which they rest silent Wherefore to cleere our Roman Church of this so foule Imputation that to the perfect sight of the blearedst eye And first to omit al former testimonies plentifully exhibited in proof of her confessed knowne and vn-interrupted Conrinuance from the Apostles times to these of ours as also to forbeare that ancient Doctours and Writers in al Ages do specially mention and register vp al notorious departures made by any Hereticks from the true Church not insinuating the least concerning our Roman Our Innocencie herein is so notoriously apparent as that sundrie Protestants being prouoked in this kind to giue the least Instance of anie such departure in our Roman Church are euer inforced in their answer therunto only to fly to our pretended departure from the sacred Scriptures so passing ouer al precedent Ages without anie colour of Examples to be vrged against vs. So M. Knewstubs 24) Answer to certaine assertions c. p. 35. answereth you require to know if our doctrine were the same which they in the Primitiue Church professed who they were that did at that time note our Going out c. This question is altogeather vnnecessarie for when an offender is taken with the manner it is needlesse to stand vpon Examination of them who were at the deed doing We haue taken you with the manner that is to say with Doctrine diuerse from the Apostles and therefore neither Law nor conscience can force vs to examine who were witnesses of your first departing With whom agreeth M. Powel only answering that the Roman Church is 25) Consideration of the Papistes supplication p. 36. fallen from the doctrine comprehended in the writings of the Apostles But to omit that this answer is a base and shameles begging of the thing it self in question to wit that we are departed from the Scriptures which as most vntrue we euer do deny It is further most impertinent to the point now vrged which is whether the Roman Church hath gone out from anie other knowne Church yea it most strongly argueth the contrarie seing they much desiring to exemplify against vs herein for want of al Instance during these 1600. yeares constrained to iumpe them ouer and only to insist in the writings of the Apostles then which what more strongly can be vrged in our behalf And yet in like sort for want of better answer D. Sutclif 26) Answer to the mass Priestes supplicat c. 7. sayth Neither is it material that the Roman Church neuer went out of anie knowne Christian Societie So insinuating her neuer Going out with is the only thing I here desire to proue But if this be not material with D. Sutclif yet is it most material and conuincing with al men of iudgement for if the Roman Church or anie other Church hauing once been confessed members of the true ancient visible Church of Christ did neuer depart or Go out of the sayd true Church then are they stil yet within it and members of it Now that the Romam Church was not only a true Church in the Apostles times but also vnto the time of S. Austin and further it is abundantly already confessed and therefore seing she hath confessedly neuer departed out the sequele is euident that stil she continueth tâ—e
but they droue it out So cleer it is that the true Churches Pastours are neuer so sleepie as to suffer anie errours to be published or practised without their resistance But D. White M. Woton and other Protestants obseruing that this pretence of sleeping would nothing auayle them do therefore acknowledge that such was the nicenes of our imagined Inuentions that they could not be seene or discerned so faith M. Wooton 66) Trial of the RomaÌ„ clergy p. 383. You presse vs that if there had been anie alteration of Religion it would haue been recorded but how should it haue been recorded when it was not seen The alteration grew so nicely that few or none could discerne it D. White exemplifyeth this saying 67) Way to the true Churhc p. 370. The Romish Faith came into the true Church as sickenes doth in to the bodie and ruin to a house which appeareth not by and by at the first but then when it is ripened D. Whitaker instanceth in the haires of a 68) Cont. Camp Rat. 7. p. 101. 102. mans head which waxe not white suddainly and in slifters entring into a building at first not to be perceiued But to omit that as Peter Martyr confesseth 69) Epist anex to his com plac in Engl. p. 131. vnles a man do diligently examine similitudes he shal easily be deceaued by them This argument being taken froÌ„ excrements diseases and ruines is no lesse vnworthie infirme and ruinous itself for first in none of these is the change made instantly and at the first but by degrees and in successe of time whereas in Doctrine euerie opinion is at the first either true or false Secondly the first whitnes of haires or the first decay in health or building cannot at the first he discerned though they were most precisely regarded which is euidently otherwise in change of Doctrine and practise thereof Thirdly none are specially appointed neither is there anye such vrging necessitie to marke the first change of the haires and the like whereas it is the special charge and command not of few but of al the Churches Pastours not only to obserue but also publickly to withstand the other with the vttermost of their power and learning But admitting for the time that the foresaid similitudes were pertinent and that we were not to vrge Protestants to shew the first begining of our so great a change as is by them imagined Yet we are in al reason to expect that as though the first white haire or slifter or degree of disease be not discerned yet the further degrees and encrease of them being most markable to be seen that therefore they are to discouer describe to vs some sensible proceedings encrease of this our supposed change And if they wil say it was not made al at once but by litle litle sometimes in on point of Faith sometimes in an other then stil must we vrge them to shew those seueral litle changes as what points of doctrine were so by degrees changed Who were the Authours of the change What Popes begun or first allowed them by what Doctours and Pastours were they first contradicted Or els they in al these being most silent we may most strongly conclude that our Roman Church being thus free from al knowne change or Innouation since the Apostles times that therefore she is not anie Heretical sect Going out or departing from a former Church nor her doctrine Heretical no one Article thereof being lyable to that foulest stayne of Innouation Whereas to the contrarie the verie first beginings changes and Apostasies made by Waldo Wicclif Husse Luther Suinglius Caluin or anie other pretended Protestant in anie Age whatsoeuer were euer so obserued contradicted and condemned by the watchful Pastours of the Roman Church as that euerie particular both of Person time place and opinion are euerie where to be seene in sundrie Writers both Catholick and Protestant But to reach M. D. Morton yet an other scantling of an Heretick we must obserue that this name Christian giuen at first to al beleeuers was especially taken to distinguish them from the Iewes and Gentils which beleeued not at al in Christ But when Hereticks began to arise from among the Christians who professed stil Christs name and sundrie Articles of Faith the name Christian was too general to seuer Hereticks from true beleeuers And therefore the Apostles imposed the name Catholick vpon al such as in al points were obedient to the Churches Doctrine Hereof saith expresly M. Wotton 70) Trial of the Romish clergy p. 285. 286. The reason of the name Catholick was at first that there might be a title to distinguish sound Christians and true churches from Hereticks And of the contrarie in al Ages it was euer vsual that euerie Sect or Companie embracing new Doctrine though but in some one or other point contrarie to the Catholicke fayth receiued thervpon the like answerable alteration of name sometimes from the Doctrines so newly embraced sometimes and that more vsually from the first Authour and Inuentour himself And it was thought meet saith M. Woton 71) Ib. p. 286. That Hereticks should be called by some special name either of their Authour or of some points of errour which they held In like sort D. Field doubteth not to say 72) Of the Church l. 2. c. 9. p. 57. Surely it is not to be denyed but the naming after the names of men was in the time of the Primitiue Church peculiar and proper to Hereticks and Schismaticks only Neither 73) Apologie c. p. 30. 31. do I see saith M. Parker anie sufficient reason why those among vs whom singularitie in affection and noueltie in faction haue denomitated Puritans should not be distinguished by that name c. for in truth such new names haue in al former Ages for distinction sake been attributed vnto al such who defended new opinions either deuised by themselues or others contrarie to the receiued doctrine of the whole Church Thus from the erroneous Doctrines which they broached defended were named the Heretical Monothelites Aquarians Agnoites Theopaschites Catabaptists c. And according to Hospinian 74) Concord dâ—scord f. 131. the Enthusiastes Anabaptistes Antimonians and Sacramentaries And from that Authours themselues were named the Nicolaites the Manichees the Arians the Pelagians the Donatists the Nestorians the Eutichians the Waldenses the Wiccliuists the Hussites the Lutherans the Caluinists the Suinglians To examine now both Catholicks and Protestants about this point The name Catholick we haue seen was imposed to distinguish sound Christians and true Churches from Hereticks and was for the same cause inserted into the Creed by the Apostles themselues and so accordingly it hath been vsed and vnderstood by al Fathers 75) Cyril Catech. 18. Aug. Cont. Ep. fundam c. 4. de vera Rel. c. 7. Patianur Ep. ad Sympron and Writers in former Ages And as for the name Papist as it was neuer heard of
Champion by one only blow to giue a greater aduantage to vs or more dangerous wound to himselfe then at the verie first footing or encounter to yeeld so much homage and honour to the Roman Church as that for the first 600. yeares entire she remained constant and immoueable in her Faith receiued from Christ and his Apostles And that more especially and altogeather vnanswerably seing the very particulars of our Roman Faith wherein D. White cheifly insisteth for his pretended Innouation and change as our Doctrines of Images of Primacie of the vnmarried life of Priests of Real presence of merits c. are al of them (3) See before l. 2. acknowledged by the most of the learnedst Protestants to haue been the verie Doctrines beleefe and practise of the Primitiue Church not some few only but al or most of the ancient Fathers being therefore reproued in general as agreeing with vs Catholiks in the points forenamed The second thing I intend to obserue is the strange indiscretion or palpable ignorance discouered in M. White by his thus appealing to these last 1000. yeares for proofe of change and noueltie in our Roman Faith for what period of time is more generally confessed by al other Protestants to haue been wholy Papistical then these last 1000. yeares (4) See before l. c. 2. Do not D. Fulk M. Parkins M. Powel and manie others al of them confesse that for these 1000. yeares to speake in their Dialect the Popish Heresie hath spread itself ouer the whole earth the Protestant Church during that time being not visible to the world but lying hid vnder the chaffe of Poperie Yea do not our Protestants further confesse to the contrarie saying (5) See before l. 1. c. 5. Between the yeare of Christ 300. and 316. the Antichristian and Papistical Raigne began raigning vniuersally without anie debatable contradiction 1260. c. neuer suffring for the space of 1000. yeares after Syluester the First anie to be seen vouchable or visible of the true Church And it is so cleare that during the foresayd time our Roman Church was not resisted or charged with anie Innouation by anie imagined Protestant that directly likewise to the verie contrary it is acknowledged that the faigned Protestants of those times did in al external shew and profession conforme (6) See hereafter l. 4. c. 6. themselues to the Roman Church whereof to omit others D. White sayth himselfe (7) Way to the true Church p. 371. Protestants did not alwayes abandon the Communion of the Roman Church c. the Tyrannie of Rome suppressed them so that they could not manifest abroad to the world their dislike c. but by force and violence were constrained to deuoure their owne sorrow in the societie of their aduersaries So sociable and good fellowes were those Platonical Protestants who insteed of resisting the Roman Church for anie conceited Innouation according likewise to Osiander (8) Cent. 8. Ep. Ded. p. 3 with a common Custome as with a violent streame were carried away to do the same things with the Papists Which things he numbreth to be their (9) Cent. 16 p. 1073. cent 8. Ep. ded p. 2. Communion in the Ministerie of the Ghospel or preaching in the Bible in Baptisme in the Lords supper in taking of Orders c. such saith he as those times did affoard Then which what can be sayd more forcible to free our Roman Church from al change or contradiction during the foresayd times Thirdly it is to be obserued that whereas D. White vndertaketh to shew that the present Religion of the Roman Church was obserued and resisted in al Ages as it came in and increased naming c. to that end the time when it so came in and increased he faileth so fouly in his performance thereof that among so manie examples by him produced he doth not nor could giue Instance of the first noted begining of anie one or of the first contradictioÌ„ made therevnto In clerest conuiction whereof I wil euidently shew here after that euerie particular point of Doctrine by him instanced for our pretended first change and Protestant resisting was formerly in much more ancient Ages taught and beleeued in the Roman Church and so consequently that D. White doth not performe his promise made of naming The time when our present Religion of the Roman Church was obserued and resisted in al Ages as it came in and increased Now to passe from the Time to the Persons which D. White nameth to haue made the Resistance himself diuideth them into three parts or ranks saying (10) Way to the true Church p. 393. one part of them is the Greek Church an other part is some ancient Diuines of their owne Church a third part is such as the Roman Church persecuted The first sayth he are sound and lawful witnesses being the true Church of God to this day though polluted with some errours The second though Papists in manie points yet shew against al exception those points wherein they were no Papists to haue been no part of the Catholick Faith so called in their time for then they would not haue resisted them but embrace them as they do al the rest The third part I graunt the Church of Rome then persecuted and now calleth Hereticks to wit vs Protestants but that is the question c. But now to examine the force of the argument thus taken from this triple testimonie produced by our Doctour First I do constantly auerre that no one part of the three no nor anie one man of that one part can be assigned which was not originally at his first birth and breeding a Roman Catholick and not Protestant And therefore though Going out of the Roman Church he afterwardes contradicted the same in some one respect or other yet this nothing proueth that the Roman Church did change her Faith but only that the sayd maÌ„ so Going out from her did change his Faith which she had formerly taught him he beleeued Secondly I do as resolutely auouch that not anie one man of al those which D. White produceth as obseruers impugners of the pretended change of Roman Church was not only at the first but neuer after through his whole life truly Pâ—otestant dissenting much more in Doctrine and profession of life from moderne Protestants then from Roman Catholicks And therefore if their testimonie be good against vs in regard of some one or other opinion wherein they haue Apostated from vs agreing yet in the rest how much more forcible wil it be against Protestants from whom they wholy disclaime in most and most important Articles of Faith For example the first part of D. Whites Spyes which obserued and resisted our conceited change is the Greek Church which sayth he are sound and lawful witnesses being the true Church of God to this day c. Now concerning these so sound witnesses first it is certaine that as there haue been seueral
al faith Into such miserable streights manifest coÌ„tradictions are the learnedst Protestants driuen through want of their Churches continuance and vniuersalitie Yea vpon the self same ground of the Protestant Churches not fulfilling the predictions of the Churches continuance (35) In his Preface of the great Latine Bible dedicated to K. Edward the Sixt. Castalio bursteth out into these words Verily we must confesse either that those things shal be performed hereafter or haue been already or that God is to be accused of lying If any man answer that they haue been performed I wil demand of him when If he say in the Apostles time I wil demand how it chanceth that neither then the knowledge of God was altogeather perfect and often in so â—bort space vanished away which was promised to be eternal and more abundant then the flouds of the Sea And agayne The more I do peruse the Scriptures the lesse do I find the same performed howsoeuer you vnderstand the sayd Prophecies But (36) Apcalypsis insignium aliquot Haerâ—siarcharum fol. 4. nu 8. Dauid George a Protestant at Basile proceeded much further vpon the self same cause as is recorded by one of his brethren who introduceth him disputing thus If the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles had been most true and most powerful to Saluation the Church by their Doctrine they had framed and confirmed should not haue been torne asunder for against the Church the Gates of Hel Christ himself witnessing can not preuayle But now it is euident that the building of Christ and his Apostles is vtterly ouerthrowne by Antichrist as is abundantly seen in the Papacye From whence he necessarily concludeth the Doctrine of the Apostles to haue been torne and discontinued c. To the same effect it is reported in his Historie (37) Historia Georgij Dauidis published by the Diuines of Basile that he thus disputed If the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles had been true and perfect the Church which they planted c. should haue continued c. But now it is manifest that Antichrist hath subuerted the Doctrine of the Apostles and the Church by them begun as is euident in the Papacie therefore the Doctrine of the Apostles was false and imperfect Not much lesse dangerously writeth (38) In praef suorum Dialogorum Bernardine Ockin When I did consider how Christ by his power wisdome and goodnes had founded and established his Church washed it with his bloud and enriched it with his Spirit And againe discerned how the same was vtterly ouer-throwne I could not but wonder and being desirous to know the cause I found there had been Popes So playne it is that the Church of Protestants which themselues suppose to be the Church of Christ directly contrarie to the forsayd Scriptures hath not continued but hath been vtterly ouerthrowne A truth so certaine and plaine that therfore Christ his Apostles and Doctrine are al of them accused of lying through want of accomplishment of the forsayd Prophecies in the Protestant Churches continuance and vniuersalitie And heer I can not but admire the follie and impudencie of D. White (39) The way to the Church p. 85. who directly contrarie to his other brethrens coÌ„fessions to al Histories writeth thus audaciously We confesse the Church neuer ceaseth to be but continueth alwayes without Interruption to the worlds end and against al Papists we make it good that this verie Faith we now professe hath successiuely continued in al Ages since Christ and was neuer interrupted so much as one yeare moneth or day and to confesse the contrarie were sufficient to proue vs no part of the Church of God c. And yet the Contrarie is plainly confessed by D. Whitaker before affirming the mysterie of Iniquitie to haue possessed the whole Church by Cannerus confessing Apostacie to haue auerted the whole bodie of the Church from Christ by M. Paâ—kins confessing for manie hundred yeares an vniuersal Apostacie by D. Willet defending that the Church in which the Word is truly preached and Sacraments administred hath not alwayes been by Castalio confessing that the Prophecies of the Churches Continuance he cannot find performed in the Protestant Church by Dauid George confessing that the Protestant Church hath been vtterly ouerthrowne not continued and by Bernardine Ockin teaching the very same So cleer it is that the Church of Protestants is not the Church of Christ which according to the Shriptures is euer to continue euen from Christs time vnto the end of the world But now to examine whether in our Roman Catholick Church the forsayd Scriptures are truly verifyed by her perpetual Continuance euen from Christs time to these our dayes I hold it superfluous seing I haue proued the same at large heretofore through euery Centurie or Age and that by no weaker proofes then the plainest acknowledgements of manie and the learnedst Protestants as namely (40) See before l. 1. c. 2. for these last 1000. yeares by M. Parkins Powel Wotton Tindal Iohnson Doue Beacon Fulk Downham Whitakers Luther Caluin the Centurists Osiander Hospinian Danaeus and sundrie others And for the like Continuance of our Roman Church for the first 600. yeares (41) See before l. 1. c. 5. by Zanchius Zuinglius Caluin Beza Danaeus Francus Rhegius Broccard Brightman Napper Fulk Powel Leigh Morton Midleton Parkins Bunnie Iewel and manie others Now whereas the Apostles in their Creed do giue to the Church the Surname of Catholick and that for this verie reason according to (42) The Harmonie of Confess p. 307. Clapham in his Soueraigne Remedy p. 23. Protestants themselues because it is vniuersal spread abroad through al parts and quarters of the world and reacheth vnto al times c. This name Catholick is so peculiar and appropriat to the Roman Church and her Professours as that it is applyed only vnto them by their greatest Enemies (43) Act. Mon. p. 613. M. Fâ—x tearmeth our aduersaries Protestants and vs Catholicks (44] l. 7. fol. 96. l. 10. fol 127. Sleydan recordeth that Luther and others differed only in opinion touching the Lords Supper which the Catholicks reioyced at and the rest much lamented And the same name is applyed to vs by M. (45) Reâ—soÌ„s taken out of Gods word p. 5. 23. 24. 73. 74. Willet in his Obedience c. p. 29. Humfrey vita Iuelli p. 202. Iacob D. Willet D. Humfrey and others Yea the sayd name is so dissorting from the Prot. Church so agreable to the Roman that therefore it is hateful and disliked by Protestans Insomuch as Luther translating the Apostles Creed into Dutch thrust out the word Catholick and in steed therof put-in Christian And of the like course obserued by Lutherans (46) Against Rhem. Test in Act. 11. fâ—l 377. D. Fulk himself acknowledgeth and saith It is not to be allowed Yea in the Synod holden at Altemberg betweene the Diuines of the Palsgraue of Rhene and the Duke of
chief of the worshippers so general and receaued was the practise heerof in the time of Paulinus who as Osiander relateth was 45) Cent. 5. p. 387. familiar with Hierom Austin and Ambrose 16. Concerning the Vow of Chastitie Chemnitius confesseth that 46) Exam. part 3. p. 41. we are not ignorant that the Fathers allowed the Vowes of perpetual Chastitie and that they thought them to be obligatorie I know sayth Peter Martyr that 47) De Votis p. 524. Epiphanius with manie other Fathers erred in that they affirme it to be sinne to breake this Vow when need shal require and that he referreth the same naughtily to Apostolical Traditions Yea sayth M. Wotton it is one of the blemishes 48) Defence of Parkins p. 491. of the ancient Writers 17. The Chastitie or single life of Priests was so generally prescribed and practised by the ancient Fathers who were Priests also themselues that M. Iewel speaking of this point 49) Def. of the Apol. p. 195. saith Heer I grant that M. Harding is like to find some good aduantage as hauing vndoubtedly a great number of holie Fathers on his side Bucer likewise acknowledgeth that 50) Gratul ad Eccles Angliae p. 35. in the time of S. Hierome the Churches of Aegypt of the East and of the Sea Apostolick were not accustomed to receaue for Priests but such as either were not married or abstained from their wiues 18. Monastical life was so general with the Fathers that M. Cartwright confesseth that 51) In Whiteg Def. p. 344. Ruffin Theodoret Sozomen Socrates do mention Monks almost in euerie page And the Centurists do begin a whole special Tract the title wherof is 52) Cent. 4. c. 10. col 294. Of the Monks through Syria Palestina Bythinia and the other places of Asia vnder Constantin the Great as also the title of another Tract is 53) Cent. 4. c 10. col 1306. The African Monks through Aegypt vnder Constantin the Great And the title of another Tract is 54) Ib. col 1331. The Monks through Europe So that in those purest and ancientest times Religious or Monastical life was generally practised ouer the whole face of the Christian world euen through Asia Africk and Europe 19. Prescribed times for fasting are so ancient and general that Chemnitius confesseth that 55) Exam. par 1. p. 89. Ambrose Maximus Taurinensis Theophilus Hierome and others do affirme the Fast of lent to be an Apostolical Tradition And Caluin professeth that 56) Instit l. 4. c. 1 2. §. 19. heerin he dareth not excuse the old Fathers but that they sowed some seeds of superstition And that 57) Ib. §. 20. euerie where the obseruation of superstitious Lent was in force 20. Concerning Free-wil some Protestants say 58) A Discouer of vntruthes contained in D. Bancrofts serm p. 23. 59 We know that euer since the Apostles times in a manner it flourished euerie where til Martin Luther took the sword in hand against it The Centurists speaking of the times next after the Apostles say 59 In like sort Clemens affirmeth euerie where Free-wil that it may appeare not only al the Doctours of that Age to haue been in such darknes but that it likewise encreased in their successours 21. Merit of works was so generally belieued by the ancient Fathers that D. Whitaker chargeth with errour therin 60) Resp ad Camp p. 78. not only Cyprian but almost to vse his owne words al the most holie Fathers of that time And 61) Iesuit par 2 p. 531. It may not be denyed saith D. Humfrey but that Ireneus Clemens and others called Apostolical haue nothing Apostolically inserted into their writings the opinions of Free-wil and Merit of works 22. And as for the vse of Ceremonies in the Church M. Calfhil affirmeth that 62) In Fulks Reioynder to Martials Reply p. 131. 132. the Fathers declined al from the simplicitie of the Ghospel in Ceremonies Melancthon also affirmeth that 63) In 1. Cor. c. 3. Presently from the beginning of the Church the ancient Fathers obscured the doctrine concerning the iustice of Faith encreased Ceremonies and deuised peculiar Worships 23. But to include manie in one D. Whiteguift a prime Metrapolitan amongst Protestants discoursing 64) Defence c. p. 472. 473. of Doctrine taught in anie Age since the Apostles time affirmeth without anie exception either of Age or Father that almost al the Bishops and learned Writers of the Greek Church and Latin also for the most part were spotted with doctrines of Free-wil of Merit of Inuocation of Saints and such like c. Meaning thereby such other like points of our Catholick Religion which his Assertion hath since been renewed by D. Couel who speaking of the ancient Fathers vseth these like words as 65) Exam. against the Plea of the Innoc. p. 120. Diuers both of the Greek and Latin Church were spotted with the errours about Free-wil Merit Inuocotion of Saints Manie things expressing their Papistrie might be alledged in this kind if it were anie vertue to rip vp their faults whom we ought to honour And wheras Bellarmin alledgeth 66) De Not. Ecclesiae l. 4. c. 9. the particular sayings of Caluin and the Centurie-writers as charging the ancient Fathers with our doctrine of Free-wil Lymbus Patrum Denyal of our Concupiscence without consent to be sinne Satisfaction Prayer for the Dead Merit Pennance the Fast of Lent the vnmarried life of Priests Baptisme of Lay-persons in case of necessitie the manner of Sacrificing c. D. Whitaker answering thereto iustifyeth the same saying 67) De Eccles cont Bellarm. Contr. 2 q. 5. p. 299. Bellarmin alledgeth certain testimonies from Caluin and the Centurie-writers as noting certain errours of the ancient Fathers which were common to them with the Papists as namely Free-wil Merit Lymbus Inuocation of Saints the vnmarried life of Priests Satisfaction and certain other such like c. before mentioned by Bellarmine I answer thereto that it is true which Caluin and the Centurie-writers haue written that in manie things the ancient Church erred as in Lymbus Free-wil Merit of works and in al the residue of those other before recited 24. In like sort M. Brightman hauing named S. Athanasius S. Basil S. Chrysostom S. Ambrose S. Hierom S. Augustin c. affirmeth of them al that 68) In Apoc. in c. 14. p. 382. in words they condemned Idolatrie but in deed they established it by Inuocation of Saints Worshipping of Relicks and such other wicked Popish superstitions 25. Beza speaking of the times of S. Cyprian S. Austin and S. Chrysostom auoucheth that 69) Praef. in Nou. Test ad Princip Cond Then Sathan layd the first foundations in Greece of Inuocation of the Dead whereto some of the chiefest Bishops were so far from resisting c. others c. did not only not represse open superstitions arising but did also nourish them c. Hence those opinions of Free-wil of Faith
p. 23. Primacie Ecclesiastical denyed to Emperours by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 4. p. 23. l. 3. c. 3. p. 9. 10. Priests ordained by Bishops l. 2. c. 22. Priests are to liue chast l. 2. c. 17. p. 69. Hereticks impugning the same condemned l. 2. c. 17. l. 3. c. 8. p. 42. 48. Priests anoynted at their Consecration l. 2. c. 22. Priests haue power from God to remit sinne l. 2. c. 10. p. 46. Priests crownes shauen in the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 22. The Primitiue Church her authoritie l. 2. c. 2. p. 3. seq To the Primitiue Church some Protestants pretend to appeale l. 2. c. 2. p. 3. 4. Other Protestants dislike the foresaid Appeale l. 5. c. 1. p. 2. Protestant Church inuisible at S. Gregorie's time l. 3. c. 1. p. 1. Inuisible al these last 1000. yeares Ib. p. 1. at Luther's time Ib. p. 2. at Wicklifes time Ib. p. 3. at at Waldo's time Ib. p. 4. at Constantine's time and since Ib. p. 4. 5. In the Apostles time and after to Constantine Ib. p. 5. Protestants went out of the Catholick Church l. 3. c. 7. p. 24. Protestants neuer wrought miracles l. 4. c. 4. p. 22. 23. Protestants confessed external dissimulation in matters of ReligioÌ„ l. 4. c. 6. p. 38. Protestant Writers preferred by Protesstants before S. Peter and S. Paul l. 5. c. 3. p. 22. 23. The name Protestant from whence first l. 3. c. 7. p. 32. The name Puritan from whence first Ib. 32. Protestants are enforced to vse diuers names for distinction of their Religion and opinions Ibid. p. 33. The name Papist whence Ibid. p. 31. Purgatorie Prayer and Sacrifice for the dead confessedly taught by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 11. p. 50. seq l 5. c. 2. p. 14. Purgatorie belieued by the ancient belieuing Iewes l. 2. c. 11. p. 53. Purgatorie denyed by Aerius and he condemned for the same by the Fathers l. 2. c. 11. p. 52. l. 3. c. 3. p. 11. R. RElicks confessedly reuerenced by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 15. l. 5. c. 2. p. 15. By Relicks miracles wrought l. 2. c. 15. To Relicks Pilgrimages made in the Primitiue Church Ibidem Relicks translated Ibidem Relicks impugned by Vigilantius and he condemned for the same by the Fathers l. 3. c. 3. p. 10. Roman Church continued confessedly a pure Church for the first 600. yeares l. 1. c. 5. p. 21. 22. l. 2. c. 2. Roman Church continued vniuersally these last 1000. yeares l. 1. c. 2. p. 4. Roman Church continued vniuersally since Constantine l. 1. c. 5. p. 26. Roman Church continued the first 300. yeares after Christ l. 1. c. 5. p. 22. roman-Roman-Church hath no knowne beginning since the Apostles l. 1. c. 5. p. 26. Roman Church her beginning is ascribed to the Apostles times Ib. p. 20. S. SAcraments to conferre grace is the confessed doctrine of the Primitiue Church l 2. c. 7. p. 32. Seauen Sacraments taught by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 7. p. 32. Saints to be prayed vnto is the confessed doctrine of the ancient Fathers l. 2. c. 13. p. 57. Saints to be prayed vnto was taught by the ancient Iewes l. 2. c. 13. p. 59. Vigilantius and Aerius denying the same were condemned by the Fathers l 2 c. 13 p. 58. l. 3. c. 3. p. 10. Scotus obiected against the Real presence and answered l. 3. c. 8. p. 46 47. Scriptures appealed vnto by al Hereticks l. 3. c. 3. p. 9. l. 4. c. 1. p. 2. Scripture hath seeming repugnances l. 2. c. 5. p. Scriptures discerned for Canonical by the Church l. 1. c. 1. p. 2. Simeon the Monk commended l. 2. c. 18. p. Sinne attributed to God as the Authour condemned l. 3. c. 5. p. 15. Sigebert l. 3 c. 8. p. 52. T. TRaditions confessedly taught by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 6. p. 30. Traditions taught by the ancient belieuing Iewes Ibid. p. 31. Transubstantiation confessedly taught by the Fathers of the Priuitiue Church l. 2. c. 8. p. 34. V. VEstments Vessels consecrated to Church vses l. 2. c. 22. Vow of Chastitie approued and practised by the Primitiue Chuch l. 2 c. 17. p. 69. Iouinian condemned for denyal therof l. 3. c. 4. p. 13. W. WAldo no Protestant l. 1. c. 3. p. 12. Wales conuerted to Christianitie in the Apostles times l. 1. c. 6. p. 18. The VVelch-men or ancient Brittans were Roman Catholicks l. 1. c. 6. p. 28. They changed not their Faith before S. Austin's coming l. 1. c. 6. p. 30. VViccliff no Protestant l. 1. c. 3. p. 11. 12. VVorkes to iustifye and merit confessedly taught by the Primitiue Church l. 2. c. 21. p. 86. Heretiks denying the same condemned l. 3. c. 5. p. 14. FINIS FAVLTS ESCAPED Epist Ded. Parag. Now supposing for plainly read painfully Lib. 1. c. 1. pag. 2. lin 26. for Ccclestical read Ecclesiastical p. 3. for ea read and. cap. 2. p. 4. lin antepen for Confirmation read Confutation Lib 2. c. 1. p 2. lin vlt. for Church read Churches c. 4 p. 17. lin anteantep for which read with p. 18. lin 18. for Athasius read Athanasius p 19. lin 40. for 20 read second hundred cap. 5. p. 26. lin 42. for Churches read Councels p. 29. lin 33. for only not read not only cap. 8. p. 37. lin 10. for purposely to read purposely profâ—sseâ—h to p. 38. lin 13. for or read of cap. 10 p. 48. for command read commend Lib. 3. c. 1. p. 4. lin 21. for thy read this cap. 4 p. 13. lin 34. for Arians read Aerians cap. 6. p. 2. lin 14. for roriter read writer cap. 7. p. 23. lin ante p adde 9 p. 26. lin 6. for with read which p. 31. lin 24. for that read the. p. 32. lin 14. for the read that cap. 8. p. 37. lin 36. for Turctisme read Turcisme p. 48. lin 1. for contracted read contradicted lin 17. for 66 read 26 p. 43. lin 29. for noâ— worthie read not vnworthie Lib. 4. c. 2. p. 5. lin 25. v. Dauid adde 7 lin 27. v. Church adde 8 p. 6. lin 2. v. Vvittemberg adde 17 p. 7. lin 36. v. VvhitaKer adde 34 p 8. lin 1. for often read after lin pen for Scriptures read Scriptures cap 4. p. 13. lin pen. p. 14. lin 27. for Vzias read Ozias lin 9. p. 20. lin 9. for had read and p. 24. lin 3 for ad read al lin 35. for Chapter 4. read Chapters Lib. 5. c. 1. pag. 3. lin 1. sor read sort c. 1. pag. 4. lin 3. ad read and. pag. 10. lin penult beshabken read beshaken lib. 5.
licence Valentine dost thou ouerthrow my fountains c. It is my possession long since I possessed it I possessed it first Yea he prescribeth in general (18) lib. cont Prax. that to be true which is first that false which is later Answerably vnto which writeth S. Hierome of the Luciferians (19) Cont. Lucifer fin In this that they are afterwards begun they shew themselues to be those which the Apostle foretold were to come to wit Hereticks of whome he demandeth further (20) Ep. ad Pamach et Ocean Why doe you go about after 400. yeares to teach that which we knew not before vntil this day the world was Christian without that doctrine With whome agreeth S. Gregorie Nazianzen saying (21) Ep 2. ad Chelid They tel vs as Protestants stil doe of a wisdome hidden since Christ a thing deseruing teares For if Faith began within these 30. yeares seing almost 400. yeares and as I may now say 1600. yeares are past since Christ was openly knowne so long then was the Ghospel in vaine in vaine also our fayth in vaine Martyrs suffred death in vaine also such and so great Bishops did gouerne the people From this verie Argument of Innouation S. Athanasius confuteth the Arians in these words (22) de Decret Nycen Synod Behold we haue proued this doctrine to haue been deliuered to vs from fathers to fathers But you new Iewes and the sonnes of Caiphas what progenitours of your name are you able to shew Of whome also sayth S. Hilarie (23) Lib. 6. de Trin. ant med This our fourth Age hath brought forth ouer late for me these pretended most godlie Doctours S. Austin writing against Donatus vp braydeth his new or late birth in this manner (24) Lib. 3. de Bap cont Donat. c. 2. From whence hath Donatus appeared Out of what earth hath he budded From what sea hath he swum From what heauen hath he fallen And he obiecteth thus vnto the Manichees (25) de Vtilitate Cred. c. 14. But you being so few so turbulent and so new euerie man knoweth you can produce nothing worthie of credit In like sort writing against the Pelagians he vrgeth (26) Cont. Iulian. Pelag l. 2 c. l. that Christian people ought to preferre the sayings of Saints before your profane Nouelties and rather choose to adhere to them then to you Yea Cassiodorus relateth that the (27) Diuin Instit lib. 1. p. 11. most holie Fathers not suffering the true Faith to be wronged ordayned Ecclesiastical Rules in the Councel of Chalcedon striking with the Diuine sword of Excommunication the obstinate Inuentours of new Heresies And Decreing that none ought to bring-in new questions but content with the authoritie of the old approued Doctours should obey the holesome Decrees without deceipt and falshood for there are some who thinke it commendable if they can conceaue anie thing against the ancient writers and inuent something new wherof they may be deemed skilful But I wil cōclude this with this sweetest saying of S. Bernard (28) Ep. 174. Against the custome of the Church nothing at al wil please me presumed Noueltie the mother of Temeritie the sister of Superstition and the daughter of Leuitie What I haue receaued from the Church I securely deliuer So secure it is in al arising difficulties to recurre to Antiquitie and to eschew Noueltie And as thus we haue seen from Scriptures and Fathers the special account euer made of reuerend Antiquitie or Ancestrie and the sharp reprehensions of prophane Noueltie so are there none who seeme more ioyfully to applaude and approue the force of the foresayd Argument then the learnedst Protestants of these our dayes amongst whome for breuitie in a Case so manifest to produce only one of our owne domesticks who for his supposed worth in iudgement and learning may suffise for manie D. Morton affirmeth (29) Appeale for Protestants p. s 11. See also White in the Way to the Chur. Pref. to the Reader n. 17. that our Sauiour Christ by his Parable of the diuers seedes first wheate in the day and then tares in the night doth teach vs that Truth may challenge prioritie of Errour yealding principalitie vnto Truth sayth Tertulian and posteritie vnto lying And so it must needs be because as there must be first iron before there can be rust which canckereth the iron so must there be a virgin-truth before errour which is nothing else but an adulteration therof So that Primum and Verum that is primarie Antiquitie and Truth are both inseparable twins begot and bred in the same instant And againe (30) Ibid p. 512. But tel vs what is Noueltie When the Apostle exhorted his Timothie to keepe that which was committed vnto him and to take heed of profane Nouelties he did in effect instruct him to preserue the doctrine receaued not to suggest anie doctrines newly conceaued as sayth Lyrinensis who accounteth it according vnto Salomon's description a whorish trick to cal anie out of the ancient and beaten way and to say Come vnto me In like sort [31] Ibid p. 679. As it becometh the children of God who commanded that the first-borne euen of the woman that was hated should be respected before the yonger sonne of the beloued wife we albeit hated by our Romish Aduersaries yet only desire that they would hold as S. Chrysostome teacheth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is euerie Noueltie a vanitie and in al Controuersies suffer the first-borne to finde a preheminence by preferring each doctrine according vnto the prime antiquitie Now in this desire of preferring Antiquitie al Catholicks most ioyfully wil ioyne hands with M. Doctour Morton desiring nothing more then that al Questions at this day controuerted between the Roman Church and the Protestant Congregation might strictly be examined and finally decided by the square of Antiquitie And for this cause haue I compiled this Treatise following intending thereby to set downe the true Progenie both of Catholicks and Protestants from what Ancesters they are lineally descended and of what continuance their names and families haue formerly been And although the guard and strength of Truth in this point of Antiquitie is euer such that she resteth stil accompanyed attended and fortified with surest friends strongest towers and best munition yet neuer may she repose in greater quiet or more gloriously appeare with greater honour then when her soueraigne right titles and prerogatiues are plainly admitted granted and acknowledged by the sworne and professed enemies of Truth And yet according to that of S. Austin (32) Cont. Donatist post collat c. 24. Truth is more forcible to wring out confession then anie rack or torment No wit of man can finde out Arguments more conuincing in themselues the truth of Religion then the plaine Texts and literal sense of holie Writ the infallible decrees of the Church and General Councels the vnanimous consent of ancient Fathers and Histories and often the common light of Nature
continuance of our now Roman Church and Religion for these last thousand yeares is taken from the Confessed belief and profession of such Persons as liuing within the foresayd time were most Famous and Notorious in one respect or other CHAPTER III. IN further euidence then of our Catholick Churches Raigne and general Dominion for these last thousand yeares I wil descend to particular statioÌ„s or periods of time and such especially as for some importaÌ„t respect are most knowne and notorious And first I wil begin with the time of Luther himself at his first appearing Protestant when I find the whole face of the world to be so RomaÌ„ Catholick as that himself was an (1) Tom. 7. Vvitt f. 228 anoynted Priest and an (2) SimoÌ„ de Voyon in his discourse vpoÌ„ the Catalog c. p. 180. and Luther ad Gal. c. 1. fol. 35 after the English translation Augustin-Friar c. And liued in his Monasterie punishing his bodie with watching fasting and prayer (3) Luther ibidem Honoured the Pope of meer conscience Kept Chastitie Pouertie and ObedieÌ„ce And whatsoeuer sayth he I did I did it with a single hart of good Zeale and for the glorie of God But when he fel into his Apostacie so directly contrarie to the then present or precedent profession of Religion ouer the world his troubled conscience burst out into these words (4) Luth. to 2. Germ. fo 9. and tom 2. Vvittemb de AbrogaÌ„da Missa priuata fol. 244. How often did my trembling hart beate within me and reprehending me obiect against me that strong argument Art thou only wise Do so manie worlds erre Were so manie Ages ignorant What if thou errest and drawest so manie into errour to be damned with thee eternally And (5) Tom. 5. Annot. breuiss againe Dost thou ô sole man and of no accoÌ„pt take vpoÌ„ thee so great matters What if thou being but one offendest If God permit such and so manie and al to erre why may he not permit thee to erre Hitherto appertayne these arguments the Church the Church the Fathers the Fathers the Councels the Customes the Multitudes and Greatnes of wise men whom do not these Hils of arguments these Clouds yea these Seas of Examples ouerwhelme sayth Luther And againe (6) Tom. 1. Vvitemb Pref. At the first I was alone (7) Tom. 2. fol. 63. and alone rolled the stone yea (8) Loc. com class 4. cap. 30. pag. 51. vndertook so great a busines vpon me alone And confessed it is that Luther at his first reuolt from being a Catholick Fryar was the first sole and only man that began Protestancie thereby departing as himself confesseth from the Church from Fathers Councels and so many Worlds so many Ages precedent This poynt is so certain that M. Iewel (9) In his Apologie of the Church of Eng. part 4. c. 4. And in his Def. of the Apol. pa. 426. confesseth That the Protestant truth was vnknowne at that time and vnheard-of when Martin Luther and Hulderick Suinglius first came vnto the knowledge and preaching of the Ghospel And Bucer (10) In Epist An. 36. ad Episc Heref. praefix Enarrat Buceri in 4. Euang. calleth Luther The first Apostle to vs of the purer Ghospel yea the Lutherans (11) Schlusselburge Theol. Caluin li. 2. fol 130. do affirme it impudencie to say that manie learned men in Germanie before Luther did hold the doctrine of the Ghospel (12) In Augustan confes explic Arti 7. de Eccl. p. 137. 138. Georgius Miluis argueth that If there had been right beleeuers that went before Luther in his office c. there had then been no need of a Lutheran Reformation therefore we say that Luther was raysed-vp by Gods special appointement and extraordinarily So likewise (13) Trac de Eccl. pag. 145. Morgensterne iudgeth it ridiculous to think that in the time before Luther anie had the puritie of doctrine and that Luther should receaue it from them and not they from Luther Considering sayth he it is manifest to the whole Christian world that before Luthers time al churches were ouerwhelmed with more then Cimmerian darknes and that Luther was diuinely raysed vp to discouer the same and to restore the light of true doctrine In so much as (14) Epist ad Argentinenses in Praef. in corp doctrinae Luther sayth of himself we dare glorie that Christ was first made knowne by vs. And he tearmeth (15) In Deutronom in pref fol. 2. his doctrine resurgens vel potius oriens Euangelium the Ghospel rising agayne or rather first beginning A truth so clear that (16) De fraetruÌ„ Orthodox Eccl. pa. 264. Camerarius auouching Wicliffe to haue been holpen or instructed by the waldenses and Husse by Wiccliffe speaking yet of Luther affirmeth to the contrarie that Luther receiued his doctrine neither from Husse or Wiccliffe but was instructed of himself as he declareth of himself in his writings In whâ—ch respect also sayth M. Wotton Luther might truly say that he was the first which had in these times published Christ especially in the chief poynt of the Ghospel which is (17) In his Trial of the Romish Clerg Title pa. 392. Iustification by faith in Christ and in this respect it is an honour to Luther to haue been a Sonne without a Father a Disciple without a Maister Agreably wherunto also sayth M. (18) Act Mon. pa. 770. Fox Luther pluckt downe the fondation of Papistrie by opening one veine long hid before the touchstone of al truth and the only principal origen of our saluation which is our free Iustification by Faith only yea Luther is so confessedly the first Authour or Beginner of Protestancie that one of his owne Brood writeth that (19) Prognostica finis mundi The Spirit which telleth things to come worketh not but in time of the Ghospel which Luther as it is confessed towards the end of the world did first bring-in And againe (20) Ibid. pa. 13. The seduction of false Prophets is not manifest but vnder the Ghospel which before Luther as we sayd neuer went since the Primitiue time of the Apostles Some Protestants (21) In his Articles Art 19. p. 130. Doue in his Recusancie pa. 32. sayth D. Couel make Luther and Caluin Authours of the Religion among vs. By al which it appeareth that Luther was borne and bred a Catholick and that at the same time the Religion knowne and practised ouer the Christian world was the present Roman from which Luther then reuolting confesseth himself to be the sole and only man who first preached the Protestant Ghospel and so is confessed by other Protestants to be the first Authour of their Religion to be their first Apostle and to be a Sonne without a Father a Disciple without a Maister At the same time of Luther raigned here in England King Henrie the Eight in whose time our Roman Religion was so vniuersal that D. Willet confesseth
who liued vnder the Tyrannie of Antichrist I wil not stand vpon M. Sanders may haue great store of such For (103) Against Rhem. Test in Heb. 10.11 Bede liued in a superstitious time long after Antichrist did openly shew himself c. He affirmed that Men vnderstood that the healthful Sacrifice auayled to Redemption both of bodie and soul euerlasting and (104) Ib. in 1. Pet. 3.19 In some things was carryed away with the errours and corruptions of his time By which it clearly appeareth that in the Age of S. Bede the Popes of Rome were so Roman Catholick and the external gouernment of the Church thereto so answerable that our moderne Protestants do therfore traduce those ancient Popes for Antichrists and their Gouernment for Tyrannie In the Age before S. Bede liued the two most famous Brethren named Eualdi whom M. Bale tearmeth (105) In Catal. Scrip. c. Cēt. 14. p. 145. Osiand Cent. 7. p. 559. Papistical Martyrs suffring for Papistrie And though D. Morton (106) Prot. Appeal p. 67. 68. endeauoureth to obscure this by affirming that Protestant Writers were doubtful whether the sayd Brethren dyed by the hands of Christians or Infidels which later himself thinketh more probable yet this hindreth not but according to his Brother Bale and Osiāder cited by himself that they dyed for our Roman Faith Yea so litle was this doubt that D. Morton himself sayth If notwithstanding Catholicks shal insist in their clayme of these Two suffring death in maintenāce of Papal Iurisdiction ouer forraine Churches miserable wil be their issue especially considering that we haue manie Twoes to oppose against these euen a thousand and two hundred religious Britans who in a resolute resistāce of that Iurisdictiō and Authoritie of Austin the Legate of S. Gregorie dyed vnder the hands of Pagans and as Galfrid speaketh suffred Martyrdome But to omit that Protestants (107) Carthvvright in his 2. Reply part 1. p. 475. themselues charge this Galfrid with vntruth and too too childish errours wherof his owne (108) See l. 8. c. 19. l. 9. c. 4. l. 10. c. 3. l. 12. c. 4. c. writings wil be best witnesses as also that D. Morton doth vntruly and vndeseruedly referre the death of these religious Britans occasionally to S. Augustin I can not yet but obserue the greatest penurie of ancient Protestant Martyrs when D. Morton is glad to clayme for such those who liued and dyed Catholick Monks euen the Monks of Bangor So great a Bangor doth our Doctour make in making Protestants Ministers and Martyrs of Religious Monks THAT THE FAITH OF S. GREGORIE AND S. Augustin and whereto England was by them conuerted was our Roman Catholick and not Protestant CHAPTER IV. TO arise euen to the height or beginning of these last thousand yeares and first to examine the Faith of S. Gregorie and his time Concerning him D. Morton writeth (1) Prot. Appeal p 5. wee willingly cōfesse that S. Gregorie was an happie Father of the Faith of manie and deliuered to thē the sauing knowledge of Christ crucifyed And as cōcerning our Countries Conuersion by him he further sayth (2) Prot. Appeal p. 60. This happines of our English Conuersion to the Faith of Christ and worthines of our Conuerter S. Gregorie we could easily acknowledge without anie further adoe c And againe our Protestants Authours looking on their right hand beholding how Pagans and Heathnish people c. by the light of the Ghospel through the Ministerie of Austin the Legat of S. Gregorie were brought vnto the Fold of Christ did togeather with the Angels of heauen reioyce in remembrance of this their happines and therefore called it a gratious Conuersion And that most iustly seing our sayd Conuersion was confessedly from Paganisme to the true Faith of Christ for so Hollinshead testifyeth that (3) Description of Britannie l. 11. c. 7. S. Austin was sent by Gregorie to preach to English-men the Word of God who were yet blind in Pagan superstition And Anno 596. Gregorie sent Austin into this Ile to preach the Christian Faith vnto the English Saxons which Nation as yet had not receaued the Ghospel Agreably also hereunto sayth M. Cambden (4) Descript Britan. p. 104. Austin hauing rooted-out the Monsters of Heathnish superstition ingrafting Christ in English-mens minds with most happie successe conuerted them to the Faith And the like is acknowledged by M. Fox (5) Act. Mon. 110. 115. 172. Bale Cent. 1. c. 73. Cent. c. 1. VvitaKer cont Dur. p. 394. Cooper chron anno 599. Stovv 596. M. Bale D. Whitaker D. Cowper Now this Faith was so certainly the Faith planted by Christ and his Apostles that M. Fox calleth it (6) Act. Mon. p. 111. 120. 122 The Christian Faith (7) Ib. p. 115. 116. the Faith and Doctrine of Christ (8) Ib p. 121. Christs Religion and that Church The Church of Christ and The (9) Ib. p. 112. perfect Faith of Christ Cowper styleth it (10) Chron. anno 636. The right Beleef Stow (11) Chron. p. 9. The Christian Faith and (12) Ibid. p. 72. pure and incorrupted Christianitie Cambden (13) Descript Brit. p. 519. The true Religion of Christ (14) In vit Paulin. Godwine The Ghospel and sundrie such like Now this our Conuersion to this Faith of Christ by the meanes of Saint Gregorie was in truth a Blessing so great that (15) Cont. Duraeum l. 5. p. 394. 502. 397. D. Whitaker most humbly thus writeth therof we wil euer most gratefully remember that great benefit which Gregorie bestowed vpon vs And I confesse S. Gregorie to haue been a good and holie man c. He was a learned and holie Bishop (16) Iesuit p. 2. p. 624. D. Humfrey tearmeth him therefore Gregorie in name Great and indeed Great and M. Bel (17) Suruey of Poperie p. 187. calleth him S. Gregorie surnamed the Great the holie and learned Bishop of Rome According to (18) Cent. 1. c. 68. M. Bale He was the most excellent of al the Bishops of Rome for learning and life That against his wil and striuing to the contrarie and at last compelled he succeeded Pope Pelagius That he was a learned and good man founded Hospitals inuited Pilgrims to his Table sent things necessarie to the Monkes of Hierusalem and maintayned three thousand Virgins (19) Ibid. c. 7. He reduced the Gothes from Arianisme to the Church professed himself by writing the Seruant of Gods seruants that thereby he might appeare most far from al Ambition and desire of command In like sort is S. Augustin honoured by M. Godwine (20) Catalog of Bish. p. 7. and See Cābd Descript Brit. p 515. 178. Bale Cent. 13. c. 7. Cent. 14. c. 13. with the Title of our Apostle Wherof also sayth M. Mason (21) Consecration of English Bishops p. 57. 58. for as much as Lethardus gathered but a few clusters and the mayne Vintage was reserued
did formerly auouch that the sayd Rule was of Credit euen with the Protestant Writers of our time namely with M. Suinglius M. Caluin and M. Gualter and that he thinketh no learned man doth dissent from them Yet M. Morton who would take it vnkindly and that deseruedly to be censured for Vnlearned doth thus far aduenture directly to discredit and disauthorize the foresayd Rule as shamefully to curtle it both in bredth and depth The (44) Ibid. p. 345. bredth sayth he though most vntruly reacheth no further then vnto matters of Ceremonies and other Customes of the Church c. Secondly the depth of the same position if it be rightly sounded wil be found to be a truth of strong Probabilitie only and not of an absolute infallibilitie which is to say in good English that the sayd Rule only concerneth trifles and matters of smal moment as also that it is not a certain true Rule but peraduenture true and peraduenture false which strongly implyeth that our Doctour in matters of faith and moment now disputed between Catholicks and Protestants would be loath to be squared and tryed thereby And so in substance acknowledgeth that which he reproueth in M. Carthwright that thereby a window is open to bring in al Poperie So euidently in deed doth the forsayd Rule prescribed by S. Austin and approued by so manie of the learned Protestants strongly confirme and conuince the vninterrupted Current and continuance of our Roman Religion from the Apostles themselues to these our dayes Agreably to the premisses (45) Consideration of the Papists supplication p. 43. M. Powel expresly and ingenuously confesseth We can not tel by whom or at what time sayth he the enemie did sow the Papists Doctrine c. Neither indeed do we know who was the first Authour of euerie one of your blasphemous opinions (46) Reioynder to Bristow p. 265. D. Fulk answering to the demand of the Roman Churches change sayth thereto I answer my Text sayth it was a mysterie not reuealed and therefore could not be at first openly preached against c. And though D. Whitaker taught before that No man denyed but that it much auayled for the confuting of Heresies to haue knowne their beginning Yet the same (47) Resp ad Rat. Comp. p. 101. D. Whitaker is inforced to confesse that The time of the Roman Churches change can not easily be told Yea to such absurdities are Protestants brought in this poynt that Vrbanus Rhegius being vrged to shew wherin the Roman Church had changed her Faith at last betaketh himself to this desperat boldnes saying (48) In lib. Apologet. p. 192. But to conclude though it were true that the Roman Church had changed nothing in Religion would it therefore presently follow that she were a true Church I think not sayth he And yet I think hardly any one Protestant can be picked out so ignorant or impudent as wil openly auouch that the Roman Church was not a true Church when S. Paul writ vnto the Romans in these words (49) Ep. Ad Rom c. 11. vers 5.6.7.8.9.11.12 By Christ we receaued Grace and Apostleship for obedience to the Faith in al Nations c. among whom are you also the called of Iesus Christ. To al that are at Rome the beloued of God called to be Saints Grace to you and Peace from God our Father and our Lord Iesus Christ. First I giue thanks to my God c. for al you because your Faith is renowned in the whole world c. without intermission I make a memorie of you alwayes in my prayers c. And I desire to see you that I may impart vnto you some spiritual grace to confirme you that is to say to be comforted togeather in you by that which is common to vs both your Faith and mine Now if the Roman Churches Faith was once thus the same with S. Paules Faith then if she neuer changed her sayd Faith as this Protestant supposeth she must needs continue a true Church Al this Sun shine notwithstanding D. Morton wil needs defend his brother Rhegius herein because (50) Prot. App. p. 675. diuers Hereticks who liued in the Apostles times such as were the Simonians Basilidians Nicolaitans albeit they liued in the dayes of the Apostles yet did they not professe the Doctrine of the Apostles which sufficiently demonstrateth the infirmitie of the Consequence But I must confesse I did not expect such weake Demonstrations from D. Morton for the Consequence was not that Hereticks liued in the Apostles dayes therefore their Doctrine is the doctrine of the Apostles as our Doctour would abuse an vncautelous or vnlearned Reader but as himself before thus confessed The Church of Rome hath not altered anie article of Faith since the Apostles times ergo the now Faith of the Church of Rome is the same with that which was taught by the Apostles This Consequence is so cleer supposing that the Church of Rome in Saint Pauls time professed the true Faith which I haue formerly proued and no Protestant dare deny as that al further proof would discouer no lesse tediousnes in the Writer then the denying therof hath bewrayed ignorance and temeritie in M. Doctour So cleer it is that no Protestant whosoeuer is able to assigne anie knowne beginning of our Roman Religion since the Apostles times Wherefore in playne tearmes they ascribe the beginning therof to S. Pauls time To this effect sayth D. Willet (51) Synopsis Controu 2. q. 3. p. 56. Therefore S. Paul calleth Papistrie a mysterie of iniquitie which began euen to work in his dayes M. Midleton (52) Papisto-mastix p. 193. auoucheth that we are sure that the Mysterie of inquitie did work in Pauls time and fel not a sleep so soone as Paul was dead waking againe 600. yeares after when this Mysterie was disclosed c. And therfore no maruaile though perusing Councels Fathers and Stories from the Apostles forward we find the print of the Popes feet c. M. Parkins desiring 53 Reformed Cath. p. 329. To stop the mouths of Papists who demand of vs sayth he where our Church was foure-score yeares before Luther They are answered sayth he that our Church hath been since the dayes of the Apostles and that in the verie midst of the Papacie So supposing the Papacie or Roman Church to haue continued since the dayes of the Apostles Lastly the truth hereof is so certayne that the same is acknowledged by our seuerest (54) Suruey of the BooK of common prayer in the Preface to the King p. 18. Puritans who speaking to the Kings Maiestie giue this wholsome persuasion Let not your Maiestie be now deceiued by the Popish Argument of supposed Antiquitie as Ioseph was with the old and mouldie bread of the Gibeonites c. And the rather ô christian King take heed because Antichrist began to work euen in the Apostles dayes So vndoubted and to be supposed it is that the Argument drawne from
meanes to preuent Schismes dissentions in the Primitiue Church when the Graces of God were far more abundant and eminent then now they are Nay if the Twelue were not like to agree except there had been one Chief among them for sayth Hierom among the Twelue one was therefore chosen that a Chief being appoynted occasion of dissention might be preuented How can they think that equalitie would keep al the Pastours in the world in peace and vnitie c. For in al Societies Authoritie which can not be where al are equal must procure vnitie and obedience In like sort the (4) Cen. 4. Col. 556. Centurists confesse that Optatus l. 2. cont Donat. writeth It can not be denyed but that thou knowest in the Cittie of Rome the Episcopal Chaire to haue been first bestowed vpon Peter in which Peter the Head of al the Apostles sate wherupon he is called Cephas In which one Chaire vnitie should be kept by al least the other Apostles should euerie one defend his owne So that he should be esteemed a Schismatick and sinner who should erect another against that singular Sea therfore there is one Chaire c. (5) Cent. 4. Col. 1100. They also reprehend him for that he extolleth ouermuch the Chaire of Peter and the Succession of the Roman Bishops And (6) In his Retentiue c. p. 248. D. Fulk chargeth Optatus with absurditie for saying of Peter He deserued to be preferred before al the Apostles and he alone receaued the Keyes of the kingdome of heauen to be communicated to the rest (7) Retentiue against Bristows Motiues p. 248. D. Fulk (7) Retentiue against Bristows Motiues p. 248. speaking of S. Leo and S. Gregorie Bishops of Rome confesseth that The mysterie of iniquitie hauing wrought in that Seate neer fiue or six hundred yeares before them so anciently before them did the Roman Sea in his opinion begin to be Papal and then greatly encreased they were so deceaued with long continuance of errour that they thought the dignitie of Peter was much more ouer the rest of his fellow Apostles then the holie Scriptures of God do allow Yea the (8) Cent. 3. col 85. Centurists recite and reproue Origen hom 17. in Lucam for calling Peter the Prince of the Apostles And D. Raynolds (9) In his Cōference p. 485. citeth S. Dionysius de diuinis nominibus c. 3. tearming Peter the chief and most ancient Top or Head of the Apostles (10) Apocalypsis in cap. 13. p. 343. This poynt is so euident in the Fathers that M. Brightman thinketh It hath its original from a corrupt Doctrine to wit the false boasted Authoritie of the Chaire of Peter wherof almost at euerie word the Roman Bishop braggeth and which the Ancient Saints Tertullian Cyprian and others extolled with immoderate prayses not knowing with what impietie they prepared the way c. But the Fathers further proceed teaching that the whole Church was built or founded vpon S. Peter To which purpose the Rhemists citing S. Gregorie D. Fulk answereth The (11) Ag. Rhem. Test in Math. 16.19 Authoritie of Gregorie c. being a Bishop of Rome himself and so neer the time of the open reuelation of Antichrist in the Romish Sea is partial in this case and therefore not to be heard And againe Leo (12) Ibid. vers 18. Bishop of Rome striuing for the dignitie of his Sea as his Predecessours Zosimus Boniface and Celestin had done before c. is no equal Iudge in this case The (13. Cent. 8. col 555. Centurists charge S. Hilarie that he speaketh incommodiously of Peter the Apostle that he lyeth vnder the building of the Church and is made the Foundation therof They (14) Cent. 4. col 557. see col 1250. likewise affirme that S. Hierom sayth incommodiously of Peter that our Lord built his Church vpon him And for the like Saying they (15) Cent. 4. col 558. and see col 1250. reproue Nazianzene Yea they (16) Cent. 3. col 84. charge Tertullian that not without errour he seemeth to think that the Keyes were committed only to Peter and that the Church was built vpon him And they (17) Cent. 3. col 84. confesse that Cyprian in manie places affirmeth the Church to be founded vpon Peter as l. 1. ep 3. l. 4. ep 9. c. And they (18) Cent. 3. col 85. charge Origen Tract 5. in Math. to say Peter by promise deserued to be made the foundation of the Church (19) Resp Ad Bellar. disp part 1. p. 277. Danaeus reproueth the Fathers in general for that they sayth he naughtily expounded of the Person of Peter that Saying of Christ Math. 16. Thou art Peter and vpon this Rock I wil build my Church (20) Instit l. 4. c. 6. sec 6. Caluin sayth The Church to be built vpon Peter because it is sayd vpon this Rock c. some of the Fathers haue so expounded but the whole Scripture gaynsayeth Yea the Fathers kept a yearely Festiual day in honour of S. Peters Sea or Chaire which poynt Bellarmine confirming by the testimonies of sundrie Fathers Danaeus (21) In Resp ad Bellar. Disp part 1. p. 275. 276. only answereth that the Fathers assertion therof was the Iudgements and Testimonies of the Church then corrupted and bewitched or made blind with this errour And wheras Anacletus ep 3. Leo ep 53. and Gregorie l. 6. ep 37. do al of them teach a special preheminence to be giuen euen to the Seas of Alexandria and Antioch before other Apostolical or Patriarchal Seas in respect of S. Peter who first founded them Danaeus (22) In Resp ad Bell. part 1. p 275. in his answer to Bellarmin obiecting them in steed of a better euasion barely writeth What he bringeth out of Anacletus Leo and Gregorie is in vaine seing they plead for themselues in their owne cause But D. Field (23) of the Church l. 5. c. 31. p. 162. ingenuously confesseth that There were in the beginning only Three Patriarcks to wit the Bishop of Rome Alexandria and Antioch The reason as some think why the Bishops of these Seas were preferred before others and made Patriarcks was in respect had to blessed S. Peter who was in sort before expressed in order and honour the First and Chiefest of the Apostles c. Al Churches are rightly called Apostolick but these more specially in which the Apostle Peter sate And in proof of this he alleageth Anacletus Leo and Gregorie before mentioned D. Fulk (24) In his Confut. of Papists quarrels c. p. 4. affirmeth in general that manie of the ancient Fathers were deceaued to think something more of Peters Prerogatiue and the Bishop of Romes dignitie then by the word of God was giuen to either of them Hence then we see that Catholicks defending S. Peter to haue been appoynted by Christ the Head of the Apostles and of the whole Church As also the Church
say Certaine doubtful incommodious speeches occurre in some Fathers As in the Epistle of Ignatius ad Smyrnenses Ignatius sayth It is not lawful without a Bishop to offer or Sacrifice Which words they censure (38) Ibid. col 167. to be dangerous as the seeds of errour But M. Beacon (39) Reliq of Rome fol. 344. confesseth that The Masse was begotten conceaued borne anone after the Apostles times if al be true that Historiographers write In like sort (40) Epist de AbrogaÌ„dis Statutis Eccl siae Sebastiaenus Francus confesseth that Presently after the Apostles al things were turned vpside downe c. the Supper of the Lord was turned into a Sacrifice And another Protestant 41 Writer speaking of the first Roman Bishops after S. Peter sayth Let no man think it strange that the Successours of the Apostles haue from time to time corrupted the true vse of this holie Sacrament of the Eucharist And agayne (42) A French wryten in his six godly Treat Engl. p. 48. How was it possible that the first Bishops of Rome should draw the Princes Senatours and Romans vnto the Ghospel during the first 300. or 400. yeares after Christ seing they did not labour but to corrupt the vse of the holie Sacraments and to restore the Iudaical Ceremonies the Idolatries of the Heathen meaning therby External Sacrifice and the Ceremonies therof In which sense also Hospinian (43) Hist Sacram. l. 1. c. 6. p. 20. affirmeth that Euen in the first Age the Apostles yet liuing the Diuel dared to lay snares more to this Sacrament then to Baptisme by litle litle did withdraw men from the first forme therof And M. Ascham (44) Apol. pro caena Domini p. 31 a Prime Protestant plainly acknowledgeth (42) Ibid. p. 66. that no beginning of Sacrifice after the Apostles time can be shewed saying At what time or by what men the Supper of the Lord was cast out of possession by the Masse can not truly be knowne Thus haue we seen the Fathers in particular euen vp to the Apostles times acknowledged and reproued by Protestant Writers for their doctrine and practise of the Sacrifice of the Masse But the truth herein is so euident and the Fathers doctrine so general as that for greater breuitie they are in grosse reiected by Caluin (45) De vera Eccl. Reform extant in Tractat. Theolog. Theol. Calu. p. 389. The ancient Fathers sayth he are not to be excused so far forth as it appeareth that they are altered from the pure proper institution of Christ for seing the Supper was to be celebrated to this end that we might communicate with Christs Sacrifice they not content therwith added also oblation this Addition I affirme to be faultie c. And againe (46) In omnes Pauli Epist in Heb. c. 7. p 924. speaking in general of the ancient Doctours of the Church possessed with this opinion he further addeth verily as Errour is accustomed to draw errour with it when they had forged a Sacrifice in the Supper of Christ without his commandment so adulterated the Supper with adding of Sacrifice afterwards they endeauoured of euerie side to procure colours or pretences wherwith to cloak their errour As also (47) Inst l. 4 c. 18. sec 11. I see those old Fathers to haue detorted this Memorie otherwise then was agreable to the Institution of our Lord in that their Supper carryed the face of I know not what reâ—teâ—ated or at least renewed Sacrifice c for they more neerly imitated the Iewish manner of Sacrificing then either Christ had ordayned or the rule of the Ghospel permitted In like sort sayth D. Fulk 48) Reioynder to Bristowes Reply p. 28. See Zâ—pperus de Sacr. p. 47. Hospinian H st Sacr. p 592. The name of Sacrifice which the Fathers vsed commonly for celebration of the Lords Supper they took of the Gentils and Iewes but how proue you they had it from the Scriptures And D. Field (49) Of the Church l. 3. c. 19 p. 107 for his best euasion affirmeth that The reason doubtles that moued the Fathers so much to vrge that mystical Sacrifice of Christ in the blessed Sâ—crament was for that they liued in the midst of Iewes Gentils both whose Religions consisted principally in Sacrifice The Fathers therfore to shew that Christian Religion is not without Sacrifice that of a more excellent nature then theyrs were did much vrge that Christ once offred for the Sinnes of the world vpon the Altar of his Crosse is daily in mysterie offred slayne his bloud powred out on the holie Table And that this Sacrifice of Christ slayne for the sinnes of the world thus continually represented liuing in our memories is the Sacrifice of Christians But the Fathers are so ful herein as that they further teach that the Sacrifice of the Masse is propitiatorie or able to appease Gods wrath and cause remission of sinnes (52) Cent. 4 col 295. (50) De Opificio Missae p. 167. Chrastouius reciting the Fathers opinion hereof confesseth that The sayings of the Fathers do not only import Impetration but a certain intrinsecal force of appeasing Origen hom 13. in Leuitie sayth This is the only Commemoration which maketh God propitious to men Athanasius in serm de Defunctis apud Damascenum sayth The oblation of the vnbloudie Hoste is a Pâ—opitiation To which end he alledgeth likewise further the particular Sayings of Ambrose Chrisostom Augustin Gregorie Bâ—de and of the Third Councel of Bâ—ach S. Cyril of Hierusalem Catech. 5. calling it in this sense The Hoste of Propitiation And the greatest help of Soules departed for which it is offered is therfore reproued by Hospinian (51) Hist Sacr. p 167. See Osiand cent 4. p. 227. Hutt câ— Sacrif Miss p 525. who withal confesseth that it was the receaued Custome of S. Cyrils time And for the same doctrine is reiected S. Ambrose (52) Cent. 4. col 295. S. Cyprian (53.a.) Cent. 3. col 138. 139 And see Osiand cent 3. p. 10. Tertulian by the Centurists In like sort the Fathers describe in particular this Sacrifice to be a Sacrifice according to the order of Melchisedech which was of bread and wine wherein S. Austin is so cleare that D. Morton in his very (54.b) Prot. Appeale p. 166. obiecting of him yet acknowledgeth that S. Austin held That Melchisedechs offering was a Sacrifice (54) Lib. de vera Eccl. Reform p. 389. Caluin auoucheth that It is vsual to those knaues meaning Catholick Writers to scrape togeather whatsoeuer is corrupt in the Fathers c. when therefore they obiect to vs the place of Malachie to be expounded by Ireneus of the Sacrifice of the Masse the Sacrifice of Melchisedech to be so handled by Athanasius Ambrose Augustin Arnobius let it be briefly answered the self same Writers els-where also to expound bread to be the Bodie of Christ but so
193. Now because Priests without knowledge and Confession of sinnes can not discerne or iudge when or what Sinnes are to be remitted or retayned It is further likewise confessed that in the Primitiue Church Confession auricular and particular of sinnes to the Priest was taught and practised And though (10) Contra Duraeum l. 7. p. 490. D. Whitaker doth affirme that Innocentius the Third was the first that instituted Auricular Confession for necessarie yet S. Leo who liued almost eight hundred yeares before this Innocentius is charged with like Innouation by M. Symonides (11) Vpon the Reuel p. 57. saying Leo the First first brought-in Auricular Confession And then presently after he citeth S. Leo his owne words for Auricular Confession And wheras long before Innocentius the Iacobites were condemned for affirming that we are to confesse our sinnes to God only And that Confession of Sinnes to a Priest is not needful this is acknowledged by the Protestant (12) p. 126. Authour of Catholick Traditions But to clear also S. Leo of al Nouellisme in this hehalf It is confessed by the Centurists (13) Cent. 4. col 425. And see col 426. that euen in the time of Constantin who liued aboue One hundred yeares before S. Leo that the Christians as then To this end had a Priest c. appoynted to whom those coming who had sinned should confesse the sinnes they had committed c. And the Priest vpon that condition absolued those who Confessed that they should desire from him Pennance for their Sinnes Yea they arise higher and plainly confesse (14) Cent. 3. c. 6. col â—27 that in the times of Cyprian Tertulian priuat Confession of thoughts and lesser sinnes was vsed and thought necessarie and their words are these Absolution from sinnes was so giuen that those who did Pennance first confessed their sinnes For so doth Tertulian greatly vrge Confession in his book of Pennance and that priuat Confession was vsual wherein they confessed their crimes as also their wicked thoughts it appeareth by some places of Cyprian as in the Fift Sermon de Lapsis third book of Epistles ep 14. 16. where he plainly sayth Euen for lesser sinnes which are not committed directly against God it is needful to go to Confession and this he commandeth to be done often l. 1. ep 3. c. Thus far the Centurists Confession being made by the Penitent to the Priest the Centurists (15) Cent. 3. col 127 81. 38. 49. 82. And see Caluin Instit l. 4. c. 12. §. 8. And Conc. Laodicenum Can. 2. apud Osiand ceÌ„t 4 p 386. further confesse that Pennance or Satisfaction was enioyned according to the offence And that the Priest (16) Cent. 4. col 425. 426. And see col 491. 834. 868. did absolue those who confessed their sinnes vpon that condition that they would demand punishment for the same And D. Whitaker (17) Cont. Camp rat 5. p. 78. acknowledgeth that Cyprian Tertulian thought by such their external discipline of life to pay the paynes due for sinnes and to satisfy Gods Iustice And that Not Cyprian only but almost al the most Holie Fathers of that time were in that errour So likewise Melancthon (18) In his Libelli aliquot fol. 10. 11. 16. disliketh that Cyprian vrgeth Canonical Pennance c. and confirmeth the opinion as though they were necessarie that for them sinnes are forgiuen c. In like sort the whole Nycene Councel ouercome with the consent of the multitude and time approued the Canons of Pennance And for the same doctrine he reproueth the (19) Ibid. fol. 19. 28. Carthage Councel S. Chrysostome Chemnitius (20) Exam. part 4. p. 68. chargeth the Fathers in general saying I am not ignorant that the Old Fathers do sometimes ouer largely and with words ouer loftie command that Canonical discipline As that Tertulian sayth by these Satisfactions sinnes are purged Cyprian sayth by them sinnes are redeemed washed cured Ambrose by them the paynes of Hel are recompensed Augustin God by them is pacifyed for sinnes past And such like Sayings there are which with true Faith neither can nor ought to be taken as they sound And Hamelmanus auoucheth that Cyprian seemeth fouly to haue erred concerning Satisfaction Yea sayth Caluin (22) Pref. Inst ad Reg. Galliae And see Inst l. 3. c. 4. §. 38. Those things which euerie foot occurre in the works of the Old Writers or Fathers touching Satisfaction moue me but litle (21) De Tradit l. 2. c. 7. col 97. for I see that diuers of them I wil say simply as it is almost al whose works are extant either haue erred in this matter or haue spoken ouer crabbedly hardly And agayne (23) Inst l. 3 4 c. 12. §. 8. The immoderate Austeritie of the ancient Fathers can no wayes be excused it differed wholy from the Commandment of our Lord was verie dangerous here their wisdome was to be required As also (24) Inst l. 3 c 3. §. 16. The ancient Writers exceeded measure with â—mmoderat prayses they commended that corporal Discipline They were more seuere in exacting chastisements then Ecclesiastical lenitie doth permit And the Centurists speaking of the Third Age affirme that (25) Cent. 3. p. 81. Most of the Doctours of this Age do wonderfully depraue the doctrine of Pennance yea they spare not to say of the Age next to the Apostles that (26) Cent. 2. p. 62. Euen then this part of Doctrine concerning Pennance began to be weakned Now as concerning Indulgences or Pardons of temporal punishment It is confessed by M. Symonides (27) Vpon the Reuel p. 84. that S. Gregorie remitted Canonical Penance promised clean remission of sinnes to such as frequented Churches on set dayes M. Bale (28) In Act. Rom. Pontif. p. 46 47. affirmeth that Gregorie confirmed by Indulgences Pilgrimages to Images for the deuotion of the people And that He was a defender of Pardons yet not a seller As also that He first granted Pardons for set dayes and to such as visited Churches In like manner Pantaleon (29) In Chr. p. 48. auoucheth of him that He first granted pardon of sinnes to the people visiting Churches vpon set dayes In Decret in 3. psal Paenit (30) In his Euseb Capt. published by Pâ—zelius vnder the Title of Act. 1. diei de Indulgentijs fol. 48. Hieronymus Marius thinketh that Gregorie the First and Boniface the Eigth were the chief authours of Pardons Cyprian (31) In his Treatise of the liues of Popes Engl. p. 32. also Valera confesseth of S. Grogorie that he granted Pardons but sold them not And D. Humfrey (32) In Iesuit part 2. rat 5. p 5. 627. repeating sundrie Catholick poynts of Faith taught and brought into England by S. Gregorie S. Austin inferreth from them in these words From al which what els is intended but that Pardons Monachisme Papistrie
think one litle word of Scripture hath more weight with me then a thousand Sayings of Fathers without Scriptures Therfore thou art not to expect that I seuerally wash away those errours of the Fathers So according to the custome of al Hereticks for their last refuge appealing to only Scripture and disclayming from the Doctrine of the ancient Fathers M. Iacob (6) In Bilsons ful RedeÌ„pt p. 188 And see Iacob in Def. of the Treat of Christs fuffringes p 199. 200. honestly acknowledgeth that Al the Fathers with one consent affirme that Christ deliuered the Soules of the Patriarcks and Prophets out of hel at his coming thither and so spoyled Satan of those that were in his present possession with whom agreeth herein D. Bilson (7) Vbi sup p. 189. And in his Suruey p. 656. And D. Barlow (8) Def. of the Articles of Prot. Relig p. 173. testifyeth that This passeth most rife among the Fathers who taking Inferi for Abrahams bosome expound it that Christ went thither ad liberandum liberandos to conuey the Fathers deceased before his Resurrection into the place where now they are A French Protestant (9) Catholick Tradit p. 112. 113. Writer not only affirmeth this to be the doctrine of Chrysostom a very true sayth he Catholick teacher but also of the now present Apostolick Churches of the East whereto sayth he In likelyhood the Christians of Affrick do consent And wheras S. Ignatius (10) Ep. ad Trallianos post med doth cleerly teach the same Doctrine the same is acknowledged in him (11) Def. of his Article c. fol. 22 Bislons Suruey p 657. 658. by D. Hil D. Bilson yea the Poloman (12) De Russorum c. Religione p. 122. 123. Protestant Lascicius doubteth not to affirme and deriue the Doctrine therof not only from S. Ignatius S. Iohns Scholler but also from S. Thadaeus one of the twelue Apostles (13) Math. 10 3. And withal answerably testifyeth herein the opinion and doctrine of the Hebrewes (14) Vbi sup p. 123. of the remote Christians both in Syria Aethiopia And the like acknowledgement of S. Thadaeus his opinion herein is made by (15) Palma Christiana p. 74. And see Eus Hist l 1. c vlt. Frigiuillaeus Gruuâ—us who speaking therof affirmeth that we haue the testimonie of Eusebius Pamphylus who in the Historie of Agbar King of the Edessens testifyeth Thadaeus the Apostle to haue preached before Agbar and others amongst other things the Descension of Christ to Hel c. And then further defending this Historie for Authentical he concludeth No man of mature iudgement wil impugne those things which Eusebius deliuereth of the preaching of Thadaeus at Edessa and the conuersion of Agbar to Christ Finally this testimonie of the holie Apostle Thadaeus is further defended by D. Bilson and sundrie times alledged and vrged by D Hil. The ancient Iewes did so certainly beleeue the Doctrine of Lymbus Patrum and the same is so cleerly taught (17) c. 24. 37. in the booke of Ecclesiasticus that D. Whitaker for his best answer finally betaketh himself to the reiecting (18) Conc. Dur. l. 8. p. 567. of the sayd booke for not Canonical But the falshood herof being formerly (19) See bef l. 2 c. 5. proued (16) Suruey of Christs suffrings p. 653. 654. 657. 660. 661. c. Hil Def. of this Art Christ DesceÌ„d c. and that from the Confession of other Protestants it sufficeth for this present that the sayd booke being but a true Historie doth yet fully manifest the Doctrine herin of the Ancient Iewes who liued before Christ In which regard also D. Beard (20) Retractâ—ue from Rom. Relig p. 78. affirmeth Catholicks to Iudaize in their doctrine of Lymbus Patrum and Purgatorie This Article then of our Creed that Christ after his death truly descended into Hel we see was the confessed Doctrine of S. Austin Leo Fulgentius Chrysostom Prudentius Hierom Ruffine Ambrose Hilarie Gaudentius Epiphanius Iustin Clemens Hippolytus Irenaeus Ignatius Thadaeus the Apostle and of al the Fathers and the ancient Iewes Now the Protestants producing and acknowledging the Fathers Doctrine herin to be Roman Catholick are Danaeus Lascicius Frigiuillaeus Gruuius Whitaker Bilson Hil Iacob Barlow Beard and others IT IS CONFESSED BY PROTESTANTS THAT THE Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and practised our Catholick Doctrine of praying to Angels and Saints CHAP. XIII ALthough the glorious Angels and blessed Saincts do not require or need in regard of themselues anie human Apologie for their deserued honour they being seated in the highest and strongest turrets of the kingdome of Heauen wherin new Triumphs they dayly winne against their Enemies and being as (a) l. de Mortalitate S. Cyprian sayth now secure of their owne immortalitie are yet careful of our securetie Yet if we respect either the general Calumnies and contempts of our modern Hereticks against them or our bounden duties by reason of so manie celestial Graces through their charitable suffrages bestowed vpon vs it may iustly be thought expedient or rather necessarie in their due defence and for sa isfaction of the Aduersarie briefly to set downe the confessed Doctrine and beleef of the Primitiue Church honouring and inuocating the sayd Angels and Saincts as Intercessours agreably as the Roman Church stil doth directly contrarie to our Modern Protestants refusing and impugning the same First then touching S. Gregorie the Great the Protestant Chronicler Carion affirmeth that (1) Chron. l. 4. p. 567. 568. Gregorie ordaâ—ned the publick Rite of Inuocation of Saincts M. Symonds only auoucheth that (2) Vpon the Reuelations p. 83.84.85.86 Gregorie increased two pernicious things in the Church Inuocation of the Dead aâ—d Prayer for the dead And that he wrote to Leontia to make S. Peter Protectour of the Empire in earth and Intercessour in Heauen c. He Sent Austin into England to conuert the English they which were sent spread forth a Banner with a painted Crucifix and so came in Procession to the king singing Litanies in a strange tongue Now one chief part of the Litanie contayneth Inuocation of Saincts Luke Osiander (3) Cent. 6. p. 288. reciting manie Catholick poynts of Faith taught and beleeued by S. Gregorie numbreth amongst the rest that He approued cloaked and defended the Inuocation of Saincts and their worship (4) In the Index of the sixt Century at the word Gregory The Centurie writers numbring vp in like sort the pretended Popish Errours of S. Gregorie charge him with Inuocation of Saints Wâ—th whom agreeth (5) In Iesuitis part 2. r at 5. p. 5. 627. D. Humfrey reprehending S. Gregorie for publick Inuocation of Saints and their worship (6) Cent. 6. c. 131. col 17. And the Centurists further confesse that Gregorie the Great reciteth manie miracles c. which plainly confirme Superstition as confidence in Saints Inuocation of the dead c. Wee need not therefore
5. 12. 13. 15. 18. Tobie and Macchabees (34) 2 Ma. 15 12.13.14 3.33 4.34 that no better answer thereto can (35) Ad Rat. Camp p. 15. 16. D. Whitaker find then barely to reiect them as not Canonical D. Beard affirmeth that Catholicks (36) Retractiue from Romish Religion p. 80. ioyne hands with the Iewes in their Doctrines of Freewil Inuocation of Angels and Saincts and Merit of good works Al which the Moderne Rabbins hold as Articles of their Creed deriuing them from their Predecessours the Pharisees that went before them And yet we neuer read that the Pharisees were reproued by Christ or anie of his Apostles for the foresayd poynts who yet noted their smallest errours This then our Catholick Doctrine of praying to Angels and Saincts is thus by the Confession of Protestants the ancient Catholick Doctrine and Practise of S. Gregorie Austin Leo Ambrose Hierome Chrysostome Nyssen Nazianzene Basil Theodoret Athanasius Prudentius Cyprian Origen and of almost al say they the Greek and Latin Fathers Now the Protestants acknowledging and disliking this in the sayd Fathers are the Centurists Osiander Carion Chemnitius Beza Sarauia Symonds Brightman Humfrey Fulk Abbot Couel Whitguift Beard and Morton IT IS CONFESSED BY PROTESTANTS THAT THE Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed the vse of Christs Image and his Saincts placing them euen in churches and Reuerencing them CHAP. XIV THough (a) Conc. Trident sess 25. Images may not be worshipped with Inuocation or by placing anie confidence in them as though they were endowed with any Diuinitie yet that otherwise they may be worshiped as by kissing them kneeling downe and praying before them placing them in Churches translating and the like the Catholick Church doth teach and practise But Protestants denying al worship to Saincts do much more deny al reuerence or respect to their Images Wherfore to decide this Controuersie by the Doctours of the Primitiue Church I find the holie Fathers euen often reproued by Protestants for their special deuotion and Reuerence towards holie Images So S. Gregorie is reprehended by M. Bale (1) In Act. Rom. Pont p. 44. 41 46 47. for that he suffred the Image of the Blessed Virgin to be carryed about c. And that he confirmed by Indulgences Pilgrimages to Images for the Deuotion of the People (2) Cent. 6. p. 289 290 Osiander affirmeth that Austin sent by Gregorie thrust vpon the English Churches the Roman Rites and customes to wit Altars Vestmentes Images c. (3) Vpon the Reuelations p. 83.84.85 86. M. Symondes confesseth that S. Gregorie was angrie for breaking of Images and called theÌ„ Lay mens books c. He did worse sayth he then the Hereticks called Collyridiani that worshiped the Virgin Marie (7) Instit l. 1. c. 11. § 5. carryed the Image of the Virgin Marie in Procession c. He sent Austin into England to conuert the English they which were sent spread forth a Banner with a painted Crucifix and so came in Procession to the king c. D. Fulk confesseth that (4) Against Rhem. Test in Mat. 4. Gregory allowed of Images (5) Ibid. In Hebr 11. Allowed Images to be in Churches (6) Ibid. in Act. 17. Allowed Images to be Lay-mens books for which verie point Caluin affirmeth that S. Gregorie was not taught in the Schoole of the Holie Ghost And Osiander (8) Cent. 6 p. 288. affirming that S. Gregorie was fowly and Popishly deceaued in manie Articles besides sundrie other particulars there by him mentioned auoucheth that he approued cloaked and defended the Idolatrical worshipping of Images For which worshipping of Images and defending the same he is cited and reproued by (9) In his â—oÌ„mon plac part 2. p. 343. Peter Martyr (10) Exam. part 4. p. 32. Chemnitius (11) Cent. 6. p. 288. Osiander and Iohn Bale (12) In his Pageant of Popes fol 33. And though D. Morton wil not so ingenuously confesse with his former Brethren that S. Gregorie approued the worshipping of Images yet himselfe (13) Prot Appeal l 1 sect 25. p. 28. reporteth and citeth S. Gregorie reprehending Serenus Bishop of Marseils for breaking downe Pictures in Churches c. And further thinketh that his not suffring Images to be broken when there was so publick and general Idolatrie committed with them seemed vnto our Osiander although not a direct yet an occasional approuing of Idolatries or rather a cloaking therof c. But to goe to the more ancient Doctours (14) In his Pageant of Popes p. 24. 27 And see Osiander cent 5. p. â—3 M. Bale confesseth that S. Leo allowed the worshiping of Images Yea sayth M. Symonds (15) Vpon the Reuel p. 57. Leo decreed that reuerence should be giuen to Images c. And S. Chrysostom (16) Problem pag. 27. Fulk against Heskins p. 673. is charged by M. Parkins and D. Fulk with worshiping of Christs Image D. Fulk (17) Against Heskins c. pag. 672. 47. 675. acknowledgeth that Paulinus caused Images to be paynted on Church wales And of the vse of Images confessedly in Churches in those ancient times sundrie examples are giuen by (18) Against Symbolizing ‖ part 1. pag. 32. M. Parker the Centurie-writers (19) Cent. 4. col 409. and Chemnitius (20) Exam. part 4 pa. 26. 29. 30. from the seueral testimonies of Sozomen Athanasius Prudentius and others D. Morton confesseth that (21) Prot. Appeal pag. 586. About the Foure hundreth yeare Images crept out of priuat man houses and went into the publick Churches standing there c. Now wheras according to Protestants al Religious worship is to be exhibited only to God and none to anie Creature yet as Catholicks now so S. Austin before deuided Religious worship into two kinds the first which is proper only to God he called Latria the second which is communicable to creatures Dulia Hereof the Protestant Hospinian sayth (22) De Templis pag. â—07 Blessed Augustin first forged the Dinstinction of Dulia and Latria c. Amongst Religious worships in this sort he distinguished that which was due only to God he called Latria and that which was lawful to giue to creatures he named Dulia And presently afterwards he citeth the special places hereof out of S. Austin condemning withal this distinction as being sayth he a Defence of Superstition and Idolatrie Chemnitius (23) Exam. part 4. pa. 29. confesseth that in the Tripartite Historie and in Nicephorus there are certain places which seem to tend as though in the time of Constantin certain Statues or Images began to be placed in Temples but of this sayth he I wil not much contend But Lactantius who was yet ancient is reproued by the Centurie-writers for that say they he affirmeth manie Superstitious things concerning the efficacie of Christs Image Which (24) Cent. 4. col 408. 409. Cent. 4. c. 2. col 33. Centurists also do make report of that strange Miracle at large
Emperour Constantin and Pope Syluester they repeat and dislike the Second Canon therof which was That no marryed man ought to be admitted to Priesthood nisi fuerit promissa Conuersio vnlesse his Conuersion or leauing of his wife was first promised Yea they further 23) Cent. 4. col 616. And see col 486. 303. 704. 2293. confesse that the ancient Councel of Neocesarea decreed That if a Priest should marry he should be deposed from his Orders But this prohibition of Priests Mariage was so general in the ancient Fathers as that Hospinian (24) Hist Sacr part 1 p. 132. acknowledgeth the same in Siricius Innocentius Calixtus the second Councel of Arles the Councel of Neocesarea And M. Parkins (25) Volum 2. p. 658. reproueth for the same the Councel of Ancyra which was before the Nicene Councel as also S. Hierom (26) Ibid. p. 661. Siricius Leo Ambrose Isidore Arator c. D. Field (27) Of the Church l 3. p. 475. reiecteth likewise herein the Councel of Eliberis which was holden Twentie yeares before the Nicene Councel But Osiander (28) Cent. 4. p. 46. in Can. 1. And see p. 195. 167. 45. 122. 156 298. 365. 406. reproueth the same in the Councel of Neocesaria in the second Councel of Arles in the Councel of Eliberis in the first Toletane Councel in the Councel of Agatha in the Fifth Councel of Carthage in the First Arausican Councel in the Councels called Turonense and Venetica Beza (29) In nou Test in Praef. ad Principem Condensem speaking of the times of Cyprian Austin and Chrysostom confesseth that There was in vse the Inuocation of the dead and the foolish opinion of single life which shameful errours sayth he Hierom plainly defendeth Yea S. Hierom preferring Single life before Mariage is therfore cēsured by Caluin (30) Hermonia in Math. 19.11 to haue giuen a clear proof of a malignant peruerse disposition Againe (31) In 1. Cor. 7.7.9 whilest the chiefest Doctours are wholy busied in extolling Virginitie forgetting man's frailtie they neglect this Admonition of Paul yea of Christ himself But Hierom blinded I know not with what zeale doth not only slide into such false opinions but runneth headlong But because D. Whitaker (32) Cont. Duraeum l. 7. p. 480. Mort Prot. App p 477 D. Morton affirme that Siricius who liued about Anno 384 was the first that annexed perpetual Chastitie to the Ministers of the Word I wil therfore search further into the times more ancient And I find the Centurists (33) Cent. 4 col 467. to acknowledge that it is euident by the Fourth book of Eusebius of the life of Constantin that there were before Cōstantins time who liued aboue sixtie yeares before Siricius virgins women continent that professed perpetual chastitie Where also say they Eusebius affirmeth that the Emperour Constantin did greatly approue that kind of discipline Insomuch as he often went vnto them And Socrates testifyeth l. 1. c. 17. that Helen mother of Constantin found at Hierusalem Virgins consecrated to God whose profession she liked so much that she made her selfe seruant vnto them Yea the Centurists (34) Cent. 3. c. 6. col 140. c. 7. col 176. further confesse that Cyprian in his first book and 9. and 11. Epistles declareth that among Christians there were Virgins consecrated vnto God which would could keep chastitie c. And that Tertulian in his booke of the cloathing of Virgins expresly mentioneth the vow of Chastitie And that It was decreed by Cyprian his fellow Bishops l. 1. ep 11. that Virgins vowing chastitie ought not to dwel with men And wheras Origen in Numer hom 23. sayth It is certaine that the continual Sacrifice is hindred to them who serue the necessities of wedlock wherupon it seemeth to me that he alone is to offer the continual Sacrifice who hath vowed himself to continual perpetual Chastitie This Saying is confessed reiected as being euidētly against Priest Mariage by Chemnitius (35) Exam. part 3. p. 50. And see p. 58. And so likewise in the same case is S. Cyprian (36) Med. Theol. p. 357 by Schultetus But before them liued S. Clement of whose time Peter Martyr (37) De votis p. 490 writeth I confesse there were in the time of Clement Professions and vowes of Chastitie c. And M. Parkins (38) In Probl. p. 191. acknowledgeth that In the foresayd Ages promises of Continencie were accustomed to be made publickly in the Church For in the yeare of Christ One hundred seauentie Clemens Alex. l. 3. Strom sayth c. In like sort Hospinian (39) De origine Monachetus f. 104 I wil grant that in the time of this Clement that is about the yeare of Christ One hundred seauentie fiue there were Professions vowes of Virginitie or continencie single life But before Clement liued S. Ignatius Scholler to S. Iohn the Euangelist about the yeare One hundred and nine of whose time the Centurists (40) Cent. 2 c. 4. col 64. say It appeareth by the Epistles of Ignatius that euen then men began somewhat more earnestly to loue and reuerence the desire of Virginitie for in the Epistle ad Antiochenses he sayth Virgines videant cuise consecrauerint Let Virgins see or remember to whom they haue consecrated themselues And wheras in his Epistle ad Tarsenses he aduiseth thus Honour yet those who are Virgins Sicut Sacras Christi as the Sacred or consecrated to Christ and reuerence the chast widowes Sicut Sacrarium Dei as the vestrie or Temple of God This his Saying is reproued (41) Cent. 1. l. 3. c. 23. p. 131. by Osianders And the Centurists (42) Cent 2 c. 10. col 167. charge him that he speaketh incommodiously of Virginitie and that his foresayd Sayings (43) Cent. 2. p. 65. were an occasion and opened the way to those things which afterwards were therupon founded concerning Cloysters Vowes c. Shulterus (44) Med. Theol. p. 450. alledgeth Ignatius writing ad Philippenses I salute the Colledge of Virgins wherupon he immediatly inferreth Were there then in that floure of the Church Virgins which professed perpetual Chastitie and Continencie There were truly c. sayth he D. Morton also acknowledgeth that (45) Prot. Appeal l. 1. p. 88. we find that the Age next abutting vpon the Apostles time did practise a perpetual vow of virginitie which being guarded with a iust moderation may be iudged both commendable and conuenient But to passe from the Schollers to the Maisters themselues to wit the blessed Apostles Luther (46) Tom 5. Wittemb fol. 108. inferreth this Doctrine from the example of S. Paul himself saying Dicendum est c. It is to be sayd that either Pauls wife dyed or that she was dismissed from him by her owne assent that he might not carry her about with him so in matrimonie to haue liued a single life as he
seemeth to shew in the 9. Chapter howsoeuer whether his wife dyed or he left her for the Ghospel of his owne accord it is certaine that then he liued as a widower who before was marryed Peter Martyr (47) De Coelâ—bata votis p 54. acknowledgeth that S. Ambrose and Epiphanius deriue professed chastitie from the Institution of S. Paul And D. Fulk (48) Against Rhem Test in 1. Tim. 5. fol 381. Danaeus coÌ„t Bellarm. 1. partis aleâ—ra parte p. 1811 Maior in ep 1. ad Tim. in c. 5 fol. 249. Danaeus and Georgius Maior doe al of them grant that by the first faith mentioned 1. Tim. 5 11.12 most of the ancient Fathers do expound the vow or promise of Continencie Hamelmannus (49) De Traditionious Ap st o. 460 and see col 254. Aud Bugchagius in Ionam c. 3. auoucheth that after the death of Iohn the Apostle who by the Fathers is much commended and esteemed for his Virginitie presently began reuolting from the Faith c. forbidding of Mariages and meates vowes single life c. D. Fulk speaking of our B. Ladies vowing Chastitie opposeth himself to S. Austin S. Gregorie Nyssen therein saying (50) Ag. Rhem. Test in Luc. 1. sec 13 Though S. Austin gather she vowed Virginitie yet it followeth not c. And although Gregorie Nyssen be of Austins opinion c. But D. Fulks Non sequitur wil neuer counterpoyse the contrarie Collection of so worthie Fathers But to speake of the ancientest Ages and Fathers in general Peter Martyr (53) De Caelib votis p. 477. thinketh that forthwith after the Apostles times too much was attributed to single life And Caluin (54) Instit l. 4. c. 13. sec 17. speaking hereof sayth This say they was obserued from furthest memorie that those who would dedicate themselues wholy to the Lord should bind themselues to the vow of contineÌ„cie I confesse this custome was anciently receaued but I do not grant that Age to be free from al vice In like sort answereth M. Wotton (55) In his Def. of M. Perkins p 491. saying But the Fathers are not for vs what then Is nothing true that cannot be confirmed by their testimonies c. Indeed it is one of the blemishes of the ancieÌ„t Writers that they were too highly conceited of single life c. Therefore it is not to be looked for that Antiquitie should afford vs Protestants anie testimonie herein against the practise and iudgement of those dayes And wheras Bellarmin to this purpose produceth manie Sayings of the ancient Fathers Danaeus (56) In 1. partis a t. parte p. 1034 his best answer thereto is that those Fathers thought so being blinded with the cloud and enchantment of that errour of the lawful Vow of perpetual continencie So likewise M. Iewel (57) In his Def of the Apol p 164. speaking concerning the Fathers opinion against Mariage of Priests sayth Here I grant Mr Harding is like to find some good aduantage as hauing vndoubtedly a great number of holie Fathers on his side Adde lastly that the Fathers herein were so firme and constant as that D. Fulk (58) In his Answer to a Counterf Cath p. 45. acknowledgeth that Iouinian was condemned by them for that among other things He taught that such as could not contayne though they had vowed virginitie should neuerthelesse be maryed So euident confessed it is that the vowes of Chastitie and the single life of the Clergie was allowed and practised in the purest times of the Primitiue Church Now wheras it is Law decreed and obserued by the Roman Church that Bigamus or he that hath been twice maryed is not to be admitted to holie Orders without special dispensation therin M. Bale (59) In Act. Rom p. 44. 45 46. 47. acknowledgeth that S Gregorie the Great prohibited that he that was Bigamus should be made Priest And D Fulk (60) In his Retentiue against Bristow c. p. 164. granteth that He who had had two wiues could not be a Priest in Hieroms time And the Centurists (61) Cent. 4. col 847 And see col 303. 877. 1293. And see Cent 3. col 85 86. Carthwright in his 2. Reply part 1. p. 509. speaking of that Fourth Age affirme that it was decreed that ordination to Priesthood should not be bestowed of those who were Bigami But Beza (62) De Polig p. 211. reprehendeth herein ancient Origen saying Origen were ancient then al Councels excepting that of the Apostles writeth in Luc. hom â—7 that not only fornication but also Mariage doth hinder from Ecclesiastical dignities to wit second Mariage c. But here I affirme that Origen is to be altogether reiected as contradicting the doctrine of the Apostles Yea he further (63) In nou Test in 1. Tim 5.9 p. 333. sayth of Bigamie In the case of widowes If any shal oppose to me the authoritie of certain Fathers I appeal to the Word of God For which his appeale he is reproued by (64) In his Suruey p. 220. D. Bancroft And the Centurists (65) Cent 3. col 85. 86. doe alledge both Tertullian and Origen against Bigamie in the Clergie The Particulars then concerning Vowes thus confessedly taught by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church are First that Vowes of things not coÌ„manded but indifferent as of perpetual Chastitie are lawful commendable Secondly that though for some time as then it was permitted that such as were maryed before their taking of holie Orders should continue and liue with their wiues in the state of wedlocke yet was the same afterwards euen during the precinct of those purest times prohibited and disallowed But neuer in anie time or by anie Father was it allowed to the Clergie to contract Mariage after Orders taken a thing now so ordinarie with our Protestant Ministers Thirdly it was neuer suffred that those who were Bigami or twice maryed should afterwards be admitted to holie Orders without particular dispensation therin Now the Fathers produced reproued by Protestants for these forsayd Catholick Articles are S. Gregorie Austin Ambrose Hierom Leo Innocentius Chrysostom Epiphanius Siricius Socrates Sozomene Eusebius Basil Cyprian Nyssen Origen Tertulian Clement Ignatius S. Paule the Apostle with the B. Virgin Marie S. Pauls widowes As likewise the Councels of Neece of Arles of Neocesaraea of Eliberis of Toledo of Carthage and seueral others The Protestants accusing the forsayd Fathers are Luther the Centurists Carion Chemnitius Molitor Danaus Osiander Gaunius Crispinus Hospinian Beza Schulterus Peter Martyr Maior Hamelmannus Caluin Symondes Bale Humfrey Carthwright Fulk Bancroft Wotton Parkins Morton Field Whitaker and Iewel It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed and practised the Religious State of Monastical life And that manie Christians of those purest times both men and women did strictly obserue professe the same CHAPTER XVIII BVT now to come to that which to our Protestants
iustly condemned c. Osiander (21) Cent. 4. p. 434. reciting the condemned errours of Aerius amongst the rest numbred appoynted Fastes not to be kept c And that fasting is to be when a man wil according to his libertie And wheras S. Epiphanius her 75. affirmeth of Aerius that he sayth Neither shal fasting be appoynted for these things be Iudaical and vnder the Law of Bondage If at al I wil fast I wil choose anie of myself and I wil fast for libertie Al this is acknowledged by Pantaleon (22) In his Chronogr p. 28. and is so agreable with the now Doctrine of Protestants that D. Whitaker (23) Contra Duraeum l. 9. p. 830. auoucheth that Aerius taught nothing concerning fasting different from the Catholick Faith by which he meaneth the Protestant Faith Insomuch that Aerius herein is defended by Danaeus (24) De haresibus c. 53. f. 175. 177. D. Fulk (25) Answ to a countor Cath. p. 45. Though M Hooker (26) Eccles Pol. l. 5. p. 210. And the Author of Quaerim Eccles p. 31. 94 103. and other Protestant Writers doe no lesse condemne him herein of errour then Catholicks doe In like sort wheras D. Fulk 27) Against Rhem. Test in Math. c. 15 fol. 28. And Aretius loc com p. â—72 and other Protestant Writers doe commonly obiect against Catholicks that Montanus the Heretick was the first that appoynted lawes of fasting M. Hooker (28) Eccles Pol l. 5. p. 209. 210. himself answereth with vs that the Montanists were reprehended only for that they brought in sundrie vnaccustomed dayes of fasting continued their fastes a great deale longer made them more rigorous c. wherupon Tertulian maintayning Montanisme wrote a book in defence of the new fast And the like answer is giuen by another Protestant [29) Quaerimonia Eccl p. 110. saying Protestants say that Eusebius manifestly teacheth that Montanus made the first lawes of fasting but they are greatly deceaued in this as in other things c. Montanus bringeth in a new Custome of fasting hauing abrogated the Fastes of the Church c. And of this new Custome in particular Chemnitius (30) Exam. part 4. p. 143. recordeth that The Montanists make three Lents in the yeare as though three Sauiours suffred in the yeare which is altogeather impertinent to Catholicks Agayne wheras it is ordinarily vrged against Catholicks that they absolutely condemne certaine meates contrarie to S. Paul 1. Tim. 4.3 M. Iacob (31) Def. of the Church Ministry of England p. 59. a Puritan acknowledgeth that The place of Paul is vnderstood of Marcion Tatianus who did absolutely condemne Mariage certaine meates And so sayth he are in no comparison with the Papists if they erred in nothing els But to proceed yet to Fathers more ancient The Centurists (32) Cent. 3 col 136. write that Origen hom 10. in Leuiticum mentioneth the 40. Dayes or Lent consecrated to fasting as also Wenesday Friday in which sayth he were solemne Fasts D. Whitaker (33) Cont. Duraeum l. 7. p. 480. Mort. Prot. App. p. 506 D Morton charge Pope Calixtus who liued about Anno Domini 218. that He was the first that ordayned Ieiunium quatuor Temporum or Ember dayes And Hamelmannus (34) De Trad. Apost col 254. speaking of Hermes of whom S. Paul maketh mention Rom. 16 14 affirmeth that in his book intituled Pastor is recorded the then Fasting from certaine meates Abraham Schultetus (35) In Medulla Theol. Patrum p. 440. doth not only affirme to vse his words the superstition of Lent Fasting to haue been allowed commanded by Ignatius (37] Vbi supra and Whitguift in his Def. p. 102. Hooker Eccl. Pol. l. 5. p. 209. but doth also as doth likewise D. Whitguift M. Hooker defend that verie Epistle of Ignatius being ad Philippenses in which this Doctrine is extant to be his true Epistle not counterfaite Chemnitius (38) Exam. part 1. p. 89. confesseth that Ambrose Maximus Tauroninsis Theophilus Hierom others do affirme the fast of Lent to be an Apostolical Tradition And the like almost in the same words is acknowledged by Schrederus 39) Opuscul Theol p. 71. saying Ambrose Theophilus Hierom others do decree that Lent hath descended from Apostolical Tradition Adde lastly that Caluin (40) Insti l. 4. c. 12. sec 19. speaking of fasting confesseth in general that he dareth not wholy excuse the Old Fathers but that they sowed some seedes of Superstition And that (41) Ibid. sec 20. euerie where the obseruation of superstitious Lent was in force Hamelmannus affirmeth that 42) De Traedit col 460. After the death of Iohn the Apostle there began fallings away from the Faith Doctrines of Diuels vnder pretence of the Word of God forbidding of Mariages meates vowes single life c. And the Centurists do confesse report from (43) Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 10. col 581. the testimonie of Clemens Alexandrinus Egesippus Iosephus concerning the abstinence of the blessed Apostle S. Iames that (44) Ibid. col 582. wine sicer he did not drink that he did not feed of anie liuing creature c. that he wore not wollen garments but was attired in Syndon that he prayed so continually vpon his knees that Camel-like they had lost their feeling So strict were the Fasts and other austerities of the ancientest Fathers and Apostles But to touch briefly our Puritan or Sabaoth Fastes wheras M. Welch (45) In his Rep. against Browne p. 196. speaking of himself and his Brethren sayth We think it not Heresie to fast on the Lords more then other dayes The Fourth Carthage Councel Can. 64. is reprehended by Osiander (46) Cent. 5. p. 13. for decreeing that He that aduisedly or of purpose fasted vpon the Sunday should not be esteemed a Catholick And wheras Epiphanius haer 75. reciting and condemning the errour of the Aerians herein affiâ—meth that They affect rather to fast vpon the Sunday and to eate vpon the Wenesday Friday in which respect our moderne Protestants are their docible Schollers M. Midleton alledgeth to the same purpose not only the seueral testimonies of Epiphanius but also of Tertulian Ignatius freely confessing that Sundayes fast was coÌ„demned in Eustathius the Aerians In like sort S. Austin ep 86. ad Casulanum affirming that To fast on Sunday is a great offence (47) In h s Papistomastix p. 35. especially since the detestable Heresie of the Manichees c. who appoynt vnto their hearers this day as lawful to be fasted vpon This saying is alledged by D. Whiteguift [48) In his Def. p. 102. the Centurie-writers (49) Cent. 4. col 445. as also is S. Ambrose for the same purpose by M. Parker 50) Against Symbol part 2. c. 5. sec 16 p. 38. And where Clement l. 5. Constit Apost c. vlt. Ignatius
one is that Faith only doth not iustify Luther 13) In Gal. c. 4. And after the English Translation fol. 220. tearmeth S. Hierom Ambrose Austin and others Iustice-workeâ—s or as the English Translation therof hath Merit-mongers of the old Papacie And because he and his children confirme their doctrine of sole Faith by certaine sentences especially taken out of S. Pauls Epistles to the Romans and Galathians which they wrest to another sense then euer was giuen by the ancient Fathers hence he maketh this complaint saying 14) In Colloq Conuiual c. de Patribus Ecclesiae Neither are there anie works extant of the Fathers vpon the Epistle either to the Romans or to the Galathians in which anie thing pure and sincere may be found But of S. Hierome in particular because he contrarieth his Exposition of the sayd Epistles he auoucheth that 15) Tom. 5. in Ep. ad Gal. c. 3. f. 348. Tom 2. de seruo Arbitrio f. 473. Et in Ep. ad Brentium quae praefixa est Brentii Com. in Oseam And see him in c. 5. ad Gal. he was deceaued by Origen and that he vnderstood nothing at al in S. Paul but depraued the Iustice of only Faith And that this one errour of his was so great that it alone was sufficient to destroy the Ghospel by which if it had not been saith Luther through the singular Grace of God Hierome had merited rather Hel then Heauen The Centurists hauing proued at large that neither Lactantius Chromatius Ephrem Theophilus S. Hierome S. Gregorie Nyssene S. Gregorie Nazianzene S. Hilarie nor S. Ambrose euer acknowledged their manner of Iustification by Faith only inferre therupon 16) Cent. 4. col 292. 293. Now let the Godlie Reader imagine with himself how far this Age touching this Article went astray from the doctrine of the Apostles And see the Fathers of the Fourth Age further disliked therein by 17) Cent. 4. p. 102 506 520. 430. 70 Osiander and 18) Exam. part 4. p. 110. Chemnitius But to arise to the Third Age 19) In Rom. p. 391. Melancthon affirmeth that Origen and manie others following him imagined that men were iust by reason of their workes The 20) Cent. 3. col 265. 266 Centurists plainly confesse that Origen made good workes the cause of Iustification 21) Ibid. col 79. And speaking of the Fathers of that Age they acknowledge that They attributed to good works Iustice before God as Origen l. 1. in Iob. c. And that as then for the most part this cheefest article of Iustification seemeth to haue been obscured 22) In Apoc. p. 206. Winkelmannus doth cleerly grant that Origen ascribeth to works the cause of Iustification Yea the Centurists 23) Câ—nt 3. col 80 affirme that Origen in manie places ascribeth to works the preparation and cause of Saluation as trac in Math. hom â—4 in Iosuam 26. he ascribeth to our merits Gods dwelling in vs by his Grace In which respect also Beza accuseth Origen 24) In Act. c. 10 46. of horrible blasphemie The Centurists speaking of this Third Age auouch that 25) â—ent 3. c. 4. col 53 79 80 8. Cent. 4. c. 4. col 292. Cent. 5. c. 4. col 504. c. 10. This Article of Iustification by only Faith was almost altogeather obscured and that the Doctours of that time declined more from the true doctrine of Christ and of the Apostles then of the Age before Hence among others of this and the succeeding Age that they pretend to haue erred herin they name S. Clement Tertulian Origen S. Cyprian S. Augustin S. Ambrose S. Hierome S. Chrysostom S. Cyril Theophilus Lactantius Eusebius Chromatius Ephrem S. Gregorie Nyssene S. Gregorie Nazianzene S. Hilarie S. Leo Saluianus Esichius Prosper Maximus and Paulinus In like sort they report of S. Cyprian that He attributeth ouermuch to good wooks And 27) Medulla Theol. p. 370. Schultetus reprehendeth him for that In his Sermon de Lapsis he ascribeth forgiuenes of sinnes to Satisfactions And the 28) Cent. 3. col 240. Centurists confesse the same in the selfe same words of Tertulian But D. Whitaker 29) In Resp ad rat Cam. rat 5. p. 78 with Chemnitius 30) Exam. part 4 p. 110. and Melancthon 31) In suis libelli aliquot fol. 25. do al of them auouch that Not Cyprian only but almost al the most holie Fathers of that time were in that errour as thinking so to pay the paine due to sinne and to satisfy Gods Iustice Melancthon acknowledgeth that 32) In 1. Cor. c. 3. Presently from the beginning of the Church the ancient Fathers obscured the doctrine concerning the Iustice of Faith c. So likewise in general it is confessed by the 33) Cent. 3. col 80. Centurists that The Doctours of this Age declined from the true doctrine of Christ and his Apostles concerning works But to ascend yet higher The Centurists speaking of the second Age after Christ affirme that 34) Cent. 2. c. 4. col 60. 61. The Doctrine of Iustification was deliuered more negligently and obscurely by the Doctours of this Age. As also This Article the highest and chiefest of al by litle litle through the craft of the Diuel began to be obscured And againe say they It appeareth out of the writings of Clemens Alexandrinus that in his Age the Doctrine concerning the end of good workes began to be obscured Finally The times ensuing declare sufficiently that the doctrine of Faith iustifying without works began forthwith to be more and more varied and obscured Schultetus 35) Medulla Theol. p. 48. 122. 151. And see Cent. 2. c. 4. and Cent. 3. c. 4. confesseth the Doctrine of Merit of works in Clemens Alexandrinus Theophilus Cyprian Iustin Martyr c. And D. Humfrey 36) Iesuit part 2. p. 530. his opinion is that 26) Cent. 3. col 247. It may not be denyed but that Ireneus Clemens and others called Apostolical haue in their writings the opinions of Freewil and Merit of works Schultetus 37) Medul Theol. p. 467. also chargeth the booke of Hermes entituled Pastor with Merit and iustification of works And 38) In his Defend of Parkins p. 339. 340. M. Wotton not forbeareth to taxe for this verie poynt of Merit Ignatius cyting for the same his Epistle to the Romans and only answering in this vnworthie namer I say plainly this mans testimonie is nothing worth because he was of litle iudgement in Diuinitie But what may then be thought of M. Woottons no diuinitie or of Woottons greatest impudencie thus censuring that ancientest Martyr of Christ and schollar of S. Iohn Yea this Doctrine of Merit was so vniuersal as that D. Couel 39) In his Exam. c. 9. p. 120. writeth that Diuers both of the Greek and Latin Church were spotted with errours about Freewil Merits c. Luther after his Censure giuen agaynst diuers of the
Def. Tract cont Bezam p. 38 And see his Diuers Degrees of Ministers p. 7. And Fenner in his sacra Theol p. 119 also teacheth that That vocation which is immediatly from God is neuer read to be made without some external and visible signe and vision (105) Disp th 23 p. 207 Sigwartus auoucheth that This vocation hath alwâ—yes certaine and extraordinarie guifts attending it which are as it were the Seales of Doctrine c. of which sort were Miracles c. (106) Part. Theol. l. 1. p. 308 Polanus auerreth that of Ministers extraordinarily called there were also extraordinarie guifts to wit of Prophecie of working Miracles c. (107) Loc. com p. 394. Musculus assureth vs that The calling which is immediatly from God is not now in vse as it was in times past it had its signes whereby it might be knowne wherof Mark the Euangelist maketh mention in his last Chapter saying They preached c. with Signes following And M. Clapham (108) Soueraign Remedy c. p 25. vpon the same ground reprehendeth Browne for that he did take vpon him extraordinarie calling and wonted Miracles M. Parkins (109) Vol 3 part 2. p. 395. 441. And Luther in Dâ—uteron in t. 13 fol 102 Aretius loc com loc 63. p. 198. Melancthon in Christ doct p. 884. Clapham in Chro. c. 7. f. L. 2. Maior in ep 1. ad Tim. in c. 3. fol. 177. confesseth that We may iustly require more and more wonderful Signes of an extraordinarie calling afore we beleeue it c. The Church in these dayes hath much more cause to doubt and to require manie and extraordinarie signes afore it acknowledge anie such extraordinarie calling c. So that our Protestant Clergie challenging vnto themselues extraordinarie Calling thereby do oblige themselues to proue the same by extraordinarie Signes and Miracles But to the contrarie it is most certaine that not anie Minister no nor other Protestant in the world euer wrought anie Miracle And so also is it coÌ„fessed by Sir Edward Hobbie saying (110) Letter to Higgons p. 102 And Tinleyes 2. Serm. p 66. Wotton in his Tryal of the Romish Clerg p. 355 We are not ashamed to confesse that we haue no other Miracles then those which were wrought by Christ the Prophets and Apostles But Sir Edward may then be much ashamed of his painted Ministers who only pretend for themselues extraordinarie Calling which as before must euer haue Miracles annexed Agreably hereunto writeth M. Mason saying (111) Consecrat of Engl Bish. p 11. We teach the same doctrine for substance which Moses and the Prophets Christ and his Apostles both taught and confirmed by Miracles And in this sense al the Miracles of Moses and the Prophets Christ and his Apostles are ours c. But if the question be concerning our Persons then we confesse that we can work no Miracles we take no such matter vpon vs neither is it necessarie because both our Calling and Doctrine are ordinarie So flatly doth he disclayme from al Protestants Miracles or extraordinarie Calling In like sort acknowledged D. Sutcliffe (112) Examination of Kellisons Suruey p. 8. Neither do we Ministers practise Miracles nor do we teach that the doctrine of truth is to be confirmed with Miracles D. Fulk (113) Ag Rhem. Te. in Apoc. c. 13. fol. 478. confesseth that It is knowne that Caluin and the rest whom the Papists cal Arch-hereticks do work no Miracles And as concerning Luther himself whom al pretend to be most extraordinarily called (114) Admonitio de libro Concordiae p. 202. 203. the Protestants of the Count Palatine do expresly say of him We haue not heard anie miracle which he hath done Yea himself (115) Tom. 4. in Esay c 35. fol. 157. endeauouring to answer this strongest argument made against him is enforced to confesse and say They laugh at vs and obiect that not so much as a lame horse hath been cured by Lutherans and that we are altogeather destitute of the guift of Miracles But it is written The impious seeth not the glorie of God and now reporteth he his Miracles for as now the blind do see when they are reduced to the knowledge of Christ c. the deafe heare the Ghospel the lame who sate in Superstition and the Idolatrous go wel and walk with pleasant Faith c. whom do not these Miracles moue c. for they are no lesse then to raise the dead or to giue sight So that the greatest Miracle that Luther wrought was to make for exaÌ„ple Catharine Bore to see the libertie and pleasure of his new Ghospel she being before blinded with the austeritie and Mortification of a Religious Nunne and to make her heare his lasciuious scurril discourses being before deafe to al speeches but such as tended to Charitie and deuotion lastly to make her walke with pleasant faith from her Monasterie to the Tauerne being before mured within the walles of her Nunnerie which are Miracles ordinarily wrought by anie Heretick whosoeuer Besides these blind deafe lame whom Luther did so miraculously cure by reducing them to the knowledg of Christ were those who were indeed already Christians whom he seduced by his greatest libertie offred from their ancient Faith for as for his Conuersion of one Heathen Pagan or Idolater from Infidelitie to the Christian Faith no Instance can be giuen as shal be shewed at large in the Chapter subsequent Besides it is the certaine and true Doctrine euen of sundrie Protestants that as [116) Vol. 1. Thesien Theol. loc 23 p. 364. Bale Examen Recitationum p. 386. Lubbertus de Principijs Christ Dogm p. 562. Pol. Part. Theol. l. 1. p. 308. Beamlerus Hypost Theol l. 3. fol. 109. Piscator saith whom God calleth by himself immediatly those he is accustomed to furnish with singular guifts that it may appeare they are sent from God And these only haue testimonie that they can not erre in Doctrine Now it is euideÌ„t and for such at large acknowledged by Protestants that Luther beleeued and taught sundrie (117) See this at large in the Prot. Apology Tract 2. c. 2 Sec. 10. Subd 2. 3. 4. 5. 7. 8. grosse and most dangerous errours and Heresies as that the Apocalypse the Epistles to the Hebrewes and of S. Iames are not Canonical That Faith vnles it be without euen the least good words doth not iustify nay is no Faith and that nothing sinneth but vnbelief and that Good works are hurtful to Saluation That The Husband if the wife wil not may take the mayde and may haue ten or more wiues at once That the Lay-people may preach Baptise Consecrate and minister the B. Sacrament that the Diuinitie of Christ did suffer c. with sundrie such like ouer tedious to recite But here by the way I cannot omit the strange Encomium giuen of Luther by D. Morton in these words (118) Protest Appeale p. 615. This is our Aduersaries guise whensoeuer they
ancient Papists In like for argueth Mr. Carth wright saying That (9) Reply part 1. p. 18. the argument of the authoritie of men which haue interpreted the Scriptures is the best reason in Controuersies of Diuinitie was neuer heard of but by Papists whose strongest towers are in the testimonies of the Doctours c. There is nothing more Papistical then this Assertion So that if Protestants commit themselues to the trial by Fathers they yeeld themselues prisoners to the strongest Towers and Castles of the Papists their Enemies wherin what can they expect but ruine and confusion D. Whitaker affirmeth (10) Cont. Dur. li. 6. p. 423. The Popish Religion to be a patched couerlet of the Fathers errours sowed togeather Wel then if our Religion was beleeued by the Fathers from them deliuered to vs I am perswaded that D. Whitaker admitting this would place litle hope in appealing to Fathers for Confutation of Popish Religion And though he falsely tearmeth our Religion the Fathers errours yet therby he plainly granteth the Fathers to haue beleeued and taught the same Religion which we now professe and Protestants impugne Now the ancient Fathers being thus acknowledged for Papists I do not wonder that Protestants contemne their authoritie and seeke their disgrace with al contumelies possible Why may not D. Luther affirme (11) To. 2. Wittemb l. de Seruo Arb. p. 434. And the same booke printed in 8. p. 72. 73. 276. 337. The Fathers of so many Ages to haue beene plainly blind and most ignorant in the Scriptures to haue erred al their life time and that vnles they were amended before their deaths wherof neuer Protestant had yet the least intelligence they were neyther Saints nor pertayning to the Church but no doubt according to Luther damned Papists Why might not he further auouch That (12) In Colloq mensalibus c. de Patrib Ecclesiae in the writings of Hierome there is not a word of true faith in Christ and sound Religion Tertullian is very superfluous I haue houlden Origen long since accursed Of Chrysostome I make no account Basil is of no worth he is wholy a Monk I weigh him not a haire Cyprian is a weake Diuine c. See how our old Papists are betrampled by a yong Protestant And yet no lesse resolute against them is (13) In Ionam Pomerane Our Fathers whether Saints or no I care not ô zeale and reuerence Protestantical they were blinded with the Spirit of Montanus by humane traditions and the doctrines of Diuels c. they teach not purely of Iustification c. neither are they careful to teach IESVS CHRIST according to his Ghospel Stil are the Fathers reiected as men blinded with Papistical opinions The Centurists endeauouring to discredit the whole multitude of Doctours and Fathers in euerie Age begin euen with the first Age next after the Apostles saying 14) Cent. 2 c. 4. p. 55. Albeit this Age was neerest to the Apostles yet the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles began to be not a litle darkned therin and many monstrous and incommodious opinions to Protestants are euerie where found to be spread by the Doctours therof Perhaps some cause therof may be for that the guift of the Holie Ghost in these Doctours did begin to decay for the ingratitude of the world towards the Protestant Truth Now as for the Doctours of al Ages succeeding they make a Principle that The 15) Cent 3. c. 4. p. 17. further we go of from the Apostles Age the more stubble shal we find to haue been added to the puritie of Christian doctrine So that al Doctours and Fathers since the very first Age of the Apostles are discarded by the Centurists for stubble and Papistical But Luther wil not rest vntil he hath brought these stubble-Doctours to Hel for teaching Papistrie (16) In Deut. c. 13. p. 102. Sathan sayth he hath hitherto deluded vs by signes and lying wonders c. whilst contrarie to the Ghospel we haue admired Pilgrimages Apparitions of Spirits and cures at certaine Sepuchers in so much that Saints also erred herin as Augustin Bernard Hierome and many others c. certainly damned as Wicclif sayd vnles they repented So that if Papists be damned for beleeuing the Catholick faith they haue for their Companions Hierome Augustin Bernard and many others most renowned Doctours of Christs Church and Saints From this true conceipt of the ancient Fathers being Roman Catholicks Protestants further disclayme from their Interpretations and expositions of Scripture refusing to stand to their iudgments for the true vnderstanding therof Thus then they write The Sacred Scripture saith Polanus (17) Symphonia c. 1. Thes 6. p. 56. is not to be interpreted by Fathers neither is the Interpretation of Scripture to be iudged by Fathers the Fathers are not the rule of expounding the sacred Scripture c. what is here sayd of euerie Father alone is to be vnderstood of al the Fathers ioyned togeather as also of Councels That is though al Fathers and Councels conspire togeather in their Expositions of Scripture agreably to the Doctrine and beleef of the Catholick Roman Church yet Protestants wil not subscribe or admit the same but wil valiantly maintayne al such expositions though most contrarie therto as are last coyned at Geneua or Wittemberg or newliest extracted by some Brother more illuminated In like and most prouident manner argue our English Puritans against Doctour Downham obiecting against them That none of the Fathers did euer vnderstand the Text then in question as Puritans do (18) The Puritans in their answ to D. Downham Doth not Mr. Doctour know say they that to argue negatiuely concerning the sense of Scriptures from the authoritie of Fathers is the practise of Papists only and taxed by learned writers against them c. If that manner of disputing be good we shal often loose more truth in taking their Interpretations c. Carthwright tearmeth the seeking into the holy Fathers writings a 19) In Bancrofts suruey of Pretend Discipl p. 331. 337 and see chap. 4. p. 64. Raking of ditches and the bringing in of their authorities the mouing and summoning of Hel. Parker assureth vs that (20) Pref. to his Answer Limbomastix and see Iacob's Treatise p. 1. 3 54. 81. 68. Bilson's sermons Ps 323. Answ to Broughâ—on's Letter p. 17. If you alleadge the ancient Fathers against them they wil tel you roundly that their opinions are nothing els but the corrupt fancies of vaine Imaginations of men toyish fables fond absurd without sense and reason And some stick not to cal the Fathers of the Latin Church the plague of Diuinitie Hence it is that the French Protestants haue enacted it for a (21) Disciplina Magistrorum Galliae art 4. law that no place be giuen to the writings of the old Doctours for the iudgement ad determination of Doctrine So cleerly is Protestancie at an end if the Fathers Interpretation of Scriptures may stand for
good But yet further they doubt not to affirme the argument or consequence vrged from the (22) Puricans Answ to D. Downham's ser p. 92. receiued opinion in the Church of God euen from the Apostles time vnto our Age to be lyable to iust exception So that though the Fathers of al Ages vp to the Apostles themselues do al of them ioyntly agree with our Roman faith in their Expositions and deliuerie of the sense of Scripture yet may one illuminated Protestant except contemne and reiect them al as not hauing the Spirit nor interpreting according to the Analogie of the Protestant faith But O most miserable and lamentable times O insolencie most impious and incredible What the receiued opinion in the Church of God euen from the Apostles time vnto our Age to be lyable to iust exception The Fathers of al Ages during 1600. yeares of al Countries though most distant in place and different in language and other conditions of nature and gouerment al of them to conspire in one opinion of truth doctrine and yet al of them so fowly and so grosly to erre as that a new-found Protestant is able to discouer it This this may a Protestant often declaime but no man of iudgement can possibly beleeue him Yea our Protestants are so far out of loue and liking with the Fathers as they painfully labour to make the world to think that their Cōmentaries books and beleef were directly contrarie to the Sacred Scriptures and therefore to these they wil euer appeale from the writings of men Captaine Luther 23) L. contra Henricum 8. Regem Angliae saith Against the sayings of Fathers Men Angels and Diuels I place not ancient consent nor the multitude of men but the Ghospel being the Word of One Eternal Maiestie which themselues are enforced to allow Here I stand here I sit here I abide here I glorie here I triumph here I insult ouer Papists Thomists Henricians and al the Gates of Hel much more ouer the sayings of men though neuer so holy and deceauable custome The word of God is aboue al Diuine Maiestie maketh with me so that I care not if a thousand Augustins a thousand Tertullians a thousand Henries or Papistical Churches should stand against me God can not erre and deceiue Austin and Cyprian as also al the Elect may and haue erred My Doctrines shal stand the Pope shal fal Here we haue a man of liuelie Faith but yet heare him further 24) In Comment in ep ad Gal. No other doctrine is to be deliuered or heard in the Church then the pure word of God that is the Sacred Scripture Let other Doctours and Auditours be accursed with their learning but here wanteth Charitie Neither is Luther in this alone for Zuinglius likewise declaymeth 25( In Explanat Artic. 64. Presently thou beginnest to cry Fathers Fathers the Fathers haue so deliuered But I do not ask of thee Fathers or Mothers but I require the word of God In like sort Peter Martyr 26) De Votis p. 462. As concerning the Fathers iudgement because our Aduersaries the Papists are accustomed in this and other Controuersies alwayes to prouoke to them I therfore declare that to me it seemeth not the part of a Christian to prouoke to the iudgements of men from the Scriptures of God Yea saith he 27) Ibid. p. 476. As long as we rest in Councels or Fathers we shal alwayes be conuersant in the same errours And the like is taught by Summerus saying 28) Contr. Carolum l. 1. c. 1. Antiquitie by which they affirme we are condemned is of no force for if they speak of a right beleeuing Antiquitie by which we vnderstand Christ and his Apostles the matter itself cryeth that it is for vs but if they wil vnderstand the same of the authoritie of the Fathers we do not take it il that the word of God is condemned by them Agreably heerunto writeth D. Whitaker 29) Contra Sander p. 92. If you argue from the testimonies of men be they neuer so learned and ancient we yeeld no more to their words in cause of Religion then we perceiue to be agreable to Scripture Neither think your self to haue proued any thing though you bring against vs the whole swarme of Fathers except that which they say be iustifyed not by the voice of men but by God himself And againe 30) Answ to Camp Reas 2. p. 70. And see the like in Abbots in his Answ to His. Reas 10 p. 371. We are not the Seruants of the Fathers but the Sonnes when they prescribe vs anie thing out of the Law and Diuine authoritie we obey them as our parents if they enioyne anie thing against the voice of the heauenlie truth we haue learned not to hearken to them but to God You Papists as vassals and base seruants receiue whatsoeuer the Fathers say without iudgement or reason being affrayd as I think either of the whip or the halter if euerie thing they speake be not Ghospel with you Againe 31) Against Sanders de Antichristo p. 21. We repose no such confidence in the Fathers writings that we take any certain proof of our Protestant Religion from them because we place al our Faith and Religion not in humane but in Diuine authoritie If therefore thou bring vs what some one Father hath thought or what the Fathers vniuersally altogeather haue deliuered the same except it be approued by testimonies of Scriptures it auaileth nothing it gaineth nothing it conuinceth nothing for the Fathers are such witnesses as they also haue need of the Scriptures to be their witnesses If deceiued by errour they giue forth their testimonie disagreeging from Scriptures albeit they may be pardoned erring for want of wisdome we can not be pardoned being green-witted Protestants if because they erred we also wil erre with them Thus doth this Protestant Doctour defend his reiecting the ancient Fathers as writing contrarie to the Scriptures and vpbrayd vs Catholicks for our due estimation of the same and so do Protestants stil labour in derogation of the Fathers to oppose the Sacred Scriptures and holie Fathers as contrarie one to another But al in vaine for who euer more duly reuerenced or more carefully preserued those heauenlie writings then the ancient Bishops and Doctours of the Primitiue Church Who more truly translated them to their greatest paines for the good of al succeeding Ages then those learnedst Fathers Who in searching the deepest difficulties so frequent in them did more submit and captiuate their iudgements then these holy Fathers Who euer more pressed Hereticks with the weight of God's word then those zealous Fathers Who euer writ more large or more learned Commentaries and explanations therof then the aged Fathers And is it then possible that the sayd Fathers should so directly contradict the Sacred Scriptures as our Protestants pretend But this so desperate so vnworthie dealing against the Fathers doth cleerly conuince that
is so copiously preached by vs that truly in the Apostles time it was not so cleare And seing 48) Tom 2. lib. Cont. Reg. Angliae f. 344. God's word is aboue al the Diuine Maiestie maketh for me So that I passe not if 100. Austins 1000. Cyprians 1000. King Harrie 's Churches stood against me Wherefore 49) Lib. de Seruo Arb. And see Cnoglerus his Symbolatria p. 152. Cast you off what armour the ancient Orthodoxal Fathers shal afford or the schooles of Diuines the authoritie of Councels Bishops the consent of so manie Ages of al Christian People we receiue nothing but Scriptures but yet so that the infallible authoritie of interpreting is only in vs what we expound that the Holy-Ghost thinketh what others though great though manie bring it commeth from the spirit of Sathan and a mind distracted Yea the Pope 50) L. aduersus Papatum Romae à Satana fundatum f. 1. knoweth saith Luther that by the singular guift and bountie of God I am more learned in the Scriptures then himself and al his Asses But if Luther himself doth so fully mouthe his owne prayses and deserts we may presume his disciples and followers are not sparing in the like And so indeed writeth Alberus 51) Contra Carolostadianos l. 7. I doubt not but that if Austin were now liuing he would not be ashamed to professe himself Martin Luther's Scholler But Musculus lasheth far further for 52) Praef. in Libellum Ger. de Diaboli Tyramide since the Apostles times saith he there liued not in the world a greater then Luther And it may be sayd that God powred al his guifts vpon this only man and that there is as great difference betwixt the ancient Doctours and Luther as betwixt the light of the Sunne and of the Moone Neither is it to be doubted but that the ancient Fathers euen those that are chief and best among them as Hilarie and Austin if they had liued and taught in the same time with Luther would without blushing haue carried the lanterne before him as his Schollers or Ministers And another professeth that 53) In Hos in Hist Sacra part alt f. 346. He preferreth one leaf in Luther before the writings of al Fathers So that if we beleeue either Luther or his Schollers not only Austin and Hilarie and Ambrose but euen al the Fathers since the Apostles times must giue place to Luther in regard of his profoundest knowledge and learning But not only Luther himself thus far excelleth the ancient Fathers but in his opinion the onlie 54) In Col. mensa c. de Patribus Eccl. Apologie of Philip Melancthon doth far excel al the Doctours of the Church and exceed euen Austin himself Beza in like sort affirmeth 55) Praef. in nouum Testament dicat Principi Condiensi Caluin to haue far exceeded al the ancient and later writers in interpreting of the Scriptures wth varietie of words and allegation of reasons Yea saith he 56) Epist Theol. ep 1 p. 5. I haue been accustomed to say and not without cause as I take it that whilst I compare those verie times next the Apostles with our times they had then more conscience lesse knowledge And on the other side we haue now more knowledge and lesse conscience This is my opinion c. Agreably herevnto saith D. Whiteguift in his 57) Defence c. p. 472. Brief Comparison between the Protestants Bishops of our time and the Bishops of Primitiue Church The doctrine taught and professed by our Bishops at this day is much more perfect and sound then it commonly was in anie Age after the Apostles times 58) Ibid. p. 473. Surely you are not able to reckon in anie Age since the Apostles time anie company of Bishops that taught and held so perfect and sound doctrine in al poynts as â—he Bishops of England do at this time Yea in the truth of doctrine our Bishops be not only comparable with the old Bishops but in many degrees to be preferred before them In like sort saith Zanchius 59) De Sacra Scriptura p. 411. Christ hath now giuen to vs more excellent Interpreters then euer heretofore stnce the Apostles Yea saith M. Iacob 60) Defence of Treatise of Christ's sufferings p. 146. And see the Answ to Downham's sermon p. 20. this is the profit that comes by ordinarie flanting with the Fathers c. if in this case we were to looke after anie man surely we haue more cause to regard our late faithful teachers rather then those of old who being equal with the best of them in anie of the excellent graces of God's Spirit c. By which we may see the smal account made by Protestants of ancient Doctours not blushing thus to equal yea much to preferre their owne latest Writers before al the Fathers since the Apostles times But what should I vrge thus much their dislike disclaiming and disgracing of ancient Fathers when they spare not to reiect and contemne the authoritie of al Councels though neuer so general neuer so ancient And first doth not Luther affirme in general 61) In Asser Articulorum per Leonem X. damnat Art 29. That the way is made to vs Protestants of weakning the authoritie of Councels and of freely contradicting their decrees and of iudging their Acts and of confessing confidently whatsoeuer seemeth true to Protestants whether it be approued or reproued by anie Councel Doth not Beza affirme that 62) Praef. in nouum Testam ad Princ. C ndiens euen in the best times the ambition ignorance and lewdnes of Bishops was such that the verie blind may easily perceaue how that Sathan was president in their assemblies or Councels Doth not D. Humfrey disclaime from the Councels celebrated in the first 600. years saying 63) De vita Iuelli p. 212. What concerneth it vs what the false Synods of Bishops as then shal ordayne And doth not M. Carthwright reiect as erroneous euen the first Nycene Councel saying 64) 2. Reply part 1. p. 509. We haue good cause to hould for suspect whatsoeuer either in gouernment or doctrine those times left vnto vs not confirmed by substantial proofs out of the Word c. This appeareth in the first Councel of Nyce where the most errours decreed vpon c. besides the vngodlie custome which may appeare to haue occupyed almost al the Churches touching the forbidding of the second Marriage of Ministers before that Councel And againe 65) Ibid. p. 484. In the same Councel appeareth that to those chosen to the Ministerie vnmarried it was not lawful to take anie wife afterwards c. Paphnutius sheweth that not only this was before that Councel but was an ancient Tradition in the Church in which both himself and the whole Councel rested c. If the ancient Tradition of the Church saith Cartwright cannot authorize this neither can ancient custome authorize the other to wit of Metropolitans Luther
auoucheth 51) In D. Bancrofts Suruey p. 373. that if Paul should come to Geneua and preach the same hower that Caluin did I would leaue saith he Paul and heare Caluin And 52) Ibid. p. 372. another in Basile did attribute no lesse to Farellus then to Paul Yea some of Luthers schollers 35 not the meanest among their Doctours sayd 53) Lauaterus Hist sacram p. 18. see Schlusselb Theol. Cal. l. 2. f. 146. they had rather doubt of S. Paul's doctrine theÌ„ of Luther or the Confession of Augusta And yet the doctrine of Luther is often so absurd so impure and scandalous as that some Protestants themselues as much ashamed therof haue reiected the same And the Confession of Augusta hath been often impugned by sundrie Caluinists But preaduenture S. Peter is in better credit then S. Paul And yet I find him rebuked by Protestants for his claime of Primacie 54) Catalog Testium veritatis to 1. p. 27. It cannot be denyed say they but that sometimes Peter laboured with Ambition and desire of greatnes c. Wherefore this so peruerse Ambition of Peter and ignorance and negligence of Diuine matters c. But Luther saith further 55) In Epist ad Gal. c. 1. Be it that the Church Austin and other Doctours also Peter Apollo yea and an Angel from Heauen teach otherwise yet is my doctrine such as setteth forth God's only glorie c. Peter the chief of the Apostles did liue and teach besides the Word of God And againe 56) Tom. 5. Vvittemb f. 290. Whether S. Cyprian Ambrose Austin or S. Peter S. Paul yea an Angel from Heauen teach otherwise yet I know this certainly that I do not perswade humane but Diuine things Caluin likewise affirmeth that Peter's pretended erring was 57) In omnes Pauli Epist in Gal. c. 2. p. 510. 511. 37 To the Schisme of the Church the endangering of Christian libertie and the ouerthrow of the Grace of God 38 D. Fulk chargeth S. Peter with errour of ignorance and against the truth of the Gospel And that this pretended erring of S. Peter 58) Against Rhem. Test in Gal. 2. f. 322. was euen after the descending of the Holie-Ghost vpon him D. Goad auoucheth saying 59) Tower Disp 2. Confer Arg. 6. Pâ—ter did erre in faith and that after the sending downe of the Holie-Ghost vpon him Brentius likewise affirmeth that 60) In Apol. Conf. c. de CoÌ„cilijs p. 900. S. Peter chief of the Apostles and also Barnabas after the Holie-Ghost receaued togeather with the Church of Hierusalem erred In like sort saith D. Whitaker 61) De Eccl. cont Bellar. Controu 2. q. 4. p. 223. But peraduenture they wil say Christ had not yet ascended and the Holie-Ghost was not yet giuen to the Apostles whereto he immediately thus replyeth what did they not erre afterwards Yea it is euident that after Christ's Ascension and the descension of the Holie-Ghost vpon the Apostles the whole Church not only the common sort of Christians but also euen the Apostles themselues erred concerning the calling of the Gentils c. Yea Peter also erred concerning the abrogation of the Ceremonial Law c. And this was a matter of faith and in this Peter erred He furthermore also erred in manners c. And these were great errours and yet we see these to haue been in the Apostles euen after the Holie-Ghost descending vpon them So that S. Peter is of as smal authoritie with Protestants as S. Paul before was To come now to S. Iames Andreas Friuius a Caluinist whom 62) Com. Plac. in Engl. part 4. p. 77. Peter Martyr tearmeth an excellent learned man affirmeth that 63) Ib. 2. de Eccl. c. 2. p. 411. Christ at his last supper ioyned wine with bread if therefore the Church separate these she is not to be heard The Church of Hierusalem did separate these S. Iames as some dare affirme gaue only one kind to the people of Hierusalem what then The Word of God is plaine and manifest Eate and drink This is to be heard of vs and preferred before al Iames words of the Church And 64) De Captiuit Bab. c. de Extr. vnct tom 2. wittemb f 86. further say saith Luther that if in anie place it be erred in this place especially concerning Extreame-Vnction it is erred c. But though this were the Epistle of Iames I would answer that it is not lawful for an Apostle by his authoritie to institute a Sacrament this appertaineth to Christ alone As though S. Iames would institute or publish a Sacrament without warrant from Christ And the Centurists before affirmed that S. Paul was drawne into errour by S. Iames and the rest of the Apostles Now as concerning S. Iames his Epistle Luther auoucheth that 65) Praef. in Epist Iacobi in Edit Ien. The Epistle of Iames is contentious swelling dry strawie and vnworthie an Apostolical spirit As also 66) Adc. 22. Gen. Abraham was iust by Faith before he was knowne to be so by God Therefore Iames concludeth il c. It doth not follow as Iames doateth c. Let our Aduersaries therfore be packing with their Iames whom they obiect so often vnto vs. Againe 67) In Coll. Mensal lat tom 2. de lib. nou Test Manie haue much laboured in the Epistle of Iames that they might accord it with Paul as Philip tryed in his Apologie but without successe for they are contrarie Faith iustifieth Faith iustifieth not Agreably heervnto also saith Musculus 68) Loc. com c de Iustific The Papists obiect the Epistle of Iames But he whosoeuer he was the Brother of Christ and a Pillar amongst the Apostles and a great Apostle aboue measure yet he alone cannot preiudice the truth of Faith And after the disagreement between S. Paul and S. Iames according to his imagination shewed at large he thus schooleth and correcteth S. Iames He alleadgeth the example of Abraham nothing to the purpose where he saith wilt thou know ô vaine man that Faith without works is dead c. He confoundeth the word Faith How much better had it been for him diligently and plainly to haue distinguished the true and properly Christian Faith which the Apostle euer preached from that which is common both to Iewes and Christians Turks and Diuels then to confound them both and set downe his sentence so different from the Apostolical doctrine whereby as concluding he saith you see that a man is iustified by works and not by Faith alone wheras the Apostle out of the same place disputeth thus c. where hauing made S. Paul to speak as he thinketh best he inferreth Thus saith the Apostle of whose Doctrine we doubt not Compare me now with this argument of the Apostle the Conclusion of this Iames A man therefore is iustifyed by works and not by Faith only and see how much it differeth wheras he should more rightly haue concluded thus c.