M. Perkins in his works printed 1605. fol. 585. o. post med affirmeth that Parents believe for themselves and their Children and that the Child by the Parents faith hath title to the Covenant and fol. 585. b. initio it is said that Infants are Gods children not by vertue of their birth but by means of their Parents faith are for that cause to be baptized and that therefore the Children of Jews Turks and such like professed Infidels [u] In the Propositions and Principles c. ubi supra sect 8. pag. 179. and M. Whitaker contra Duraeum l. 8. pag. 679. fine saith Infidelium liberos ut Turcarum Judaeorum Ethnicorum Calvinus meritò verè negat esse baptizandos and the like is taught by Kimedoncius in his redemption of mankind l. 2. cap. 15. pag. 167. fine and see M. D. Some in his defence against Penry and resutation c. pag. 150. are not to be baptized as not being comprehended within the Covenant by reason that their Parents do not believe All this yet notwithstanding they profess [x] Taught by M. Whitgift in his defence c. pag. 623. ante med by M. Hooker in his Ecclesiastical Policy l. 3. sect 1. pag. 131. by D. Some ubi supra pag. 149 150. and in the foresaid Propositions and Principles c. pag. 179. sect 9. it is said by the Divines of Geneva We are of mind that the Children of Papists may be received into Baptism to teach and practice their baptizing of Infants born of Catholick or as they tearm Popish Parents not saith M. Hooker in regard of [y] M. Hooker ubi supra Gods promise which reacheth unto a thousand generations for by this reason the Children of Turks and as M. Hooker saith [z] M. Hooker ibidem all the world may be baptized insomuch as no man is a thousand descents from Adam but their said baptizing of them is according to the other premisses of their Doctrine by themselves practised and holden good though as M. D. Some affirmeth to [a] M. Some in his foresaid defence c. cap. 22. pag. 165 167. Penry they were the Children of Popish West Indians whose other former Ancestors never knew the Christian faith And though saith he those West-Indians [b] M. Some ibid. pag. 167 were baptized by Popish Shavelings yet they received true Baptism and were ingrafted into Christ and for this reason because there is a Church in Popery For saith he [c] M. Some ibid. pag. 149. post med And Amandus Polanus in partit Theolog. pag. 305. post med saith Hodierna Ecclesia Romana est adhuc Ecclesia Christi sed omnium impurissima c. alicquin ii qui in Papatu sunt Baptizati extra Ecclesiam Christi ac proinde nec baptismo Christi fuissent baptizati c. if there were no Church at all in Popery then the Infants of Papists were not to be baptized in any reformed Church By which premisses of their confessed practice it appeareth First that the Children of Catholick or Popish Parents are to be baptized Secondly as being comprehended within the Covenant of eternal life Lastly and that by reason of their Parents faith So evidently in their Doctrine and practice is the faith of the Catholick or Popish Parent holden for available to his Child And shall it then be thought damnable to himself or holden worthy to be yet further persecuted by our so implacable and unrelenting Adversaries 4. This foresaid Truth is further proved by Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 14. saying That the more sober and learned Protestants whom headstrong and inconsiderate zeal hath not altogether blinded for the preservation of Christs Church in Being which according to [r] M. Whitaker against M. Reynolds in his answer to the Preface pag. 33. saith We believe to the comfort of our souls that Christs Church hath continued and never shall fail so long as the world endureth And we account it a prophane heresie to teach otherwise And the same is yet further affirmed by Fulk in the Tower disput with Edm. Camp the 2. daies conference And also by the Confessions of Belgia in the Harmony of Confessions pag. 321. and by the Confession of Helvetia ibid. pag. 306. by the Confession of Saxony ibid. pag. 324 325. 473. Insomuch as the Divines of Wittemberg in Colloquio Badensi apud Osiandrum in epitom c. cent 16. pag. 1064. ante med say Ecclesiam inde ab ascensione usque ad haec tempora nunquam interruptam sed perpetua successione in terris permansisse firmiter credimus And ibid. pag. 1065. post med it is said Contra omnes furores Satanae Ecclesia vera in terris usque adventum Christi ad extremum judicium est mansura all opinions must evermore continue without failing or ceasing to be not so much as for any one moment of time do acknowledge as well that their own Succession Calling and Ministry is and hath been for former times †Apud Brereley tract 2. c. 2. sect 6. post med in the margent at * next before d. M. Bridges in his defence of the government c. pag. 1276. post med resteth so wholly upon the calling conferred to their Protestant Ministers from and under our Catholick Church that saith he of our Catholick Bishops and their calling If our Brethren will make them but meer Laymen then are neither they nor we any Ministers at all but meer Laymen also For who ordained us Ministers but such Ministers as were either themselves of their Ministry or at least were made Ministers of those Ministers except they will say the people can make Ministers c. See hereof further in Brereley ibid. at g. h. preserved in and by the onely succession and calling continued in our Catholick Church as also that the true Church immediatly before Luthers time had its * Luc. Osiander in epitom hist Eccl. cent 16. part altera pag. 1073. in fine saith Ecclesia quae sub Papatu fuit eo tempore quo Lutherus natus est suit Ecclesia Christi c. Ideoque qui sub Papatu ad ministerium Ecclesiasticum fuerunt ordinati ut Lutherus multi alii Evangelici Doctores revera habuerunt legitimam ordinationem being in our Catholick Church To this end M. D. Field saith †M. D. Field in his Treatise of the Church l. 3. c. 6. pag. 72. ante med Where some demand of us where our Church was before Luther began We say it was where now it is if they ask us which Church we answer it was the known and apparent Church in the world wherein all our Ancestors lived and dyed wherein Luther and the rest were baptized received their Ordinance and power of Ministry And our other learned Adversaries do accordingly teach that like as Luther himself before his preaching against the Pope was an (t) Sleydan l. 1. initio Augustine Friar and as himself saith (u) Luther
Antiparaeus pag. 97. initio saith Tot celebres Antitrinitarii ex Calvinianorum Scholis Ecclesiis prodierunt Writers do therefore affirm them to have been the true and next occasion of these so late new uprising and many daily increasing Arians in [e] Beza in Epist Theolog Ep. 81. pag. 303. paulo post med saith hereof Hinc illud incendium quod tota jam vastata Polonia in Transilvaniam quoque pervasit And Ep. 16. pag. 122. post med be saith hereof Poloniam totam Transilvaniam in hunc miserrimum statum redactam vides Polonia Hungary and Transilvania A thing as yet more probable in that the principal Heads or beginners of these late Arians were as Neuserus confesseth all of them at first Calvinists and so to this present in most other points do these Arian Churches yet continue thinking themselves hereby more reformed than others of whom Mr. Hooker therefore saith in his Ecclesiastical Policy l. 4. pag. 183. fine The Arians in the Reformed Churches of Poland think the very belief of the Trinity to be a part of Antichristian corruption and that the Popes triple Crown is a sensible mark whereby the world might know him to be that mystical Beast spoken of in the Revelation in no respect so much as in his Doctrine of the Trinity 43. And the Protestant Writer Luc. Osiander in Epitom c. centur 16. pag. 269. fine saith of these Reformed Arians Asserunt Deum unum in Essentia trinum in Personis esse commentum Anti-Christi esse triplicem Cerberum esse Deum Baal Moloch c. Symbolum Athanasii vocant fidem doctrinam Satanasii vanissimè insuper jactitant Lutherum vix tectum Babylonicae turris detexisse se verò ex imis fundamentis eam exscindere thinking the vulgar Protestant to be over Popish and as far short of Reformation in respect of the Trinity as do the Puritans think him to be in regard of Bishops and Ceremonies In defence of which their horrible Heresie they do daily Print and publish their many [f] Gratianus Prosper a principal Arian publâ—shed in defence of Arianism a Book of this title Instrumentum doctrinarum Aristo elicum in usum Christianarum Scholarum exemplis Theologicis illustratum per Gratianum Prosperum Losci Anno 86. Wherein are reduced into form of argument all or most of the Scriptures usually alleged in proof of Christs Divinity and by him undertaken there to be answered As also he propoundeth very many other Scriptures and reasons reduced into like form of argument against the Divinity of Christ As also Socinus another Arian published lately his Book thereof against Volanus And the other published writings of Gentilis Servetus Blandrata and many other late Arians are known and many Books taking advantage to follow Calvins example in their like perverting of the Scriptures c. proudly [g] See this in Brereley tract 1. sect 10. subd 2. at i. k. And whereas the Calvinists in Polonia did dispute against the Antitrinitaries there and charged them with arguments taken out of the Fathers the Antitrinitaries answered the Calvinists from themselves saying Hi sunt vetusti panni quosâ—vos ipsi primi lacerastis in aliis fidei articulis c. lacerata jamdudum calceamenta See this in Nullus nemo H. 9. rejecting the produced testimonies of the Fathers and in [h] Symlerus de aeterno Dei Filio l. 1. c. 2. saith of the Arians Hienim nos ad Scripturas provocant quia omnem antiquitatem sibi adversari non ignorant omnes sine exceptione rejiciunt And see Brereley tract 1. sect 10. subdivis 2. at i. k. the like appeal of other Arians to only Scripture expresly pretending the same by like examples of the Calvinists appealing from them with shew of great confidence to only Scripture In their allegations whereof they are as were the old Arians [i] St. Austine apud Brereley tract 1. sect 10. atâ—g contra Maximinum Arâ—aâ—um Episc l. 1. initio induceth the Hereticks saying then to Catholicks as Protestants do now Si quid de Divinis Scripturis protuleris quod commune est cum omnibus necesse est ut audiamus Hae vero voces quae extra Scripturam sunt nullo casu à nobis susc piuntur Cum ipse Dominus moneat nos dicat Sine causa colunt me docentes mandata praecepta hominum And again ibid. versus finem libri the Heretick further saith Oro opto Discipulus esse Divinarum Scripturarum c. Si affirmaveris de Divinis Scripturis si alicubi Scripti lectionem protuleris nos Divinarum Scripturarum optamus inveniri Discipuli See the very many Scriptures alleged only by the Arian Gratianus Prosper in his Book intituled Instrumentum doctrinarum c. very frequent and plentiful as also no less prompt in making answer as Calvin doth and by imitation of his example unto sundry those very texts of greatest importance which were heretofore by the Fathers and are now by us urg'd in proof of Christs Divinity In so much as many and some of them very learned Protestants and of great reputation in their Churches quite contrary to M. D. [k] M. D. Field of the Churcâ— l. 3. c. 29. initio pag. 138. ante med saith The tenth imputation is of Arianism which Heresy we accurse to the pit of Hell with all the vile calumniations of damned slanderers that charge us with it Neither did any of our men incline to it Fields untrue and bold denyal are fully perswaded that Arianism or further infidelity is as it were the Materia prima or very last end or center whereto the poyse or Bias in this behalf of Calvinism is by the proper direction of its genius daily more and more moving and inclining In most other points the Antitrinitarians and Arians continue yet Protestants as appeareth by Gratianus Prosper the Arian in his Book intituled Instrumentum Doctrinarum c. Printed Losci Anno 86. wherein he setteth down their several opinions to be The inequality of Christ with God the Father That Children are not to be Baptized till they be of discretion to answer for themselves which Zuinglius and Oecolampadius think to be but a matter of indifferency as is declared in Brereley tract 2. cap. 3. sect 9. subd 3. at e. f. And that the Roman Church may not in any sense be called the Church of Christ 44. Pu. Mark here who be they who are most opposite to the Roman Church namely they who deny the Blessed Trinity and our Saviours Divinity in respect whereof they tearm themselves the Reformed Church condemning the other Protestants for Popish and superstitious And as to Puritans common Protestants were esteemed Popish so Puritans who believe the Trinity and the Consubstantiality of our Saviour with his Father are also tearmed Popish and now even they who deny the Trinity c. will be judged Popish by other Sects who will pretend to be more Reform'd for example
eternal memory And whereas according to histories he was born in Britain and of British Progeny and governed that Kingdom with great piety and vertue he now returneth to your Highness representing to you that State of the Church which in his time illustrated the whole world with the splendour thereof That man must needs have an iron heart which is not moved with the godly succesful and laudable proceedings of his Ancestors Seeing therefore your Majesty is adorned with all good learning we doubt not but that Constantines Ecclesiastical history shall be to your Highness most pleasant and grateful c. 24. Pu. Now good Reader out of the foresaid Premises that the antient holy Fathers are even by Protestants themselves confessed to stand for us thou canst not but conclude First That either our Doctrines do not exclude Salvation or else that all those whom even Prostestants stile Holy and Antient and acknowledge them to be Saints in Heaven were incapable of Salvation which to affirm is no less than most temerarious and cruel blasphemy implying that our Blessed Saviour had no true Church on earth when Luther appeared and that Gentiles were converted to Christian Religion from Paganism and worship of false Gods with no better effect than to be damned 25. Secondly That no man who hath care of his soul will not judge that for interpreting Scripture and in matters of Faith more credit is to be given to the Fathers who were so neer yea who were of the Primitive Church and holy mortifyed and induced with all dispositions making them capable of Gods holy impressions and inspirations than to Luther and other Novellists appearing so lately for time and for doctrine and manners teaching and living so carnally and wickedly as Protestants cannot dissemble it as hath been proved in the first Consideration and consequently more open to receive the suggestions of Satan than the motions of the Ho-Ghost 26. Thirdly that if Luther and his followers could not have been excused from Heresie and Schism if they had lived in those antient days and had opposed the Doctrine and forsaken the Communion of those Fathers so neither can they avoid the just imputation of Heresie and Schism in opposing the Doctrine and abandoning the Communion of us Catholicks who are confessed to agree with the Fathers and antient Christians of those times 27. Fourthly that in a word we cannot but be safe since our very Adversaries confess that we agree with those holy Fathers whom they confess to be saved 28. Fiftly that this our agreement with Antiquity and of Antiquity with Truth is so manifest and forcible that among all the chief points wherin Protestants do disagree from us there is not any one of moment wherein divers chief learned Protestants do not agree with us against their pretended Brethren so that by the confession of all sides if either Antient Fathers or modern Sectaries cannot be saved we are secure And that this agreement of Protestants with us is truly affirmed by me the Reader will find evidently proved in the next Consideration THE THIRD CONSIDERATION Chief Protestants stand for us in the most important points of Religion against their Protestant Brethren BRereley tract 3. sect 7. saith The sundry Articles of our Catholick Faith defended and that most earnestly against the other opinions of our learned Adversaries by sundry of their own no less learned Brethren and all this by either party upon pretended certainty from the Scriptures are many known and evident as may appear by the seventy and above examples thereof here particularly alleged 1 First as concerning the Real Presence of Christs Body in the Sacrament to the bodily mouth it is affirmed by Luther and Lutherans and contradicted for Popish by Calvin and his followers Secondly the Reall presence not only of the efficacy of Christs body but also of the body it self after a wonderfull and incomprehensible manner to the mouth of Faith is affirmed by Calvin Institut l. 4. c. 17. sect 7. 10. 32. by Mr. Rider in his friendly Caveat c. the third leaf a. circa med And by Mr D. Whittaker contra Duraeum pag. 169. by the confession of Belgia in the English Harmony pag. 431. By Bucer in Script Anglican pag. 548. post med 549. And by Mr. Hooker in his Ecclesiasticall Polity l. 5. sect 67. pag. 174. circa medium pag. 177 post med vide Apolog. modest ad acta conventus quindecim Theolog. Torgae nuper habit c. pag. 19. pag. 13. initio 23 47. And contradicted as inclining to Popery to omit the known Doctrine of Oecolampadius and Zuinglius whereof see Mr. Hooker l. 5. sect 67. pag. 174. ante med Lavat in Hist Sacramentar pag. 4. Calvin in libello de Coen Dom. versus finem extant in Calvin's tract Theolog. pag. 12. a. Schlusselburg in Theol. Calvinist l. 1. fol. 78. b. 82. b. by Peter Martyr in his Epistles annexed to his common-places in English pag. 107. b. Ep. 25. ibidem pag. 98. a. pag. 108. a. for which Bucer in his Scripta Anglicana pag. 548. post med 549 ante post medium reproveth Peter Martyr Also by Aretius Serm. 3. de Coena by Szegedine in loc commun pag. 182. at 12. 15. and by our English Puritans in their Christian letter to M. R. Hooker pag. 35. paulo post medium and by certain French Protestants mentioned by Hospinian in hist Sacramt par altera fol. 344. a. post med b. initio And by others mentioned by Mr. Rogers in his Catholick Doctrine c. pag. 176. circa med And by Ludevicus Alemannus in positionibus apud Lugdunenses editis Anno 1566. who said hereof neque etiam per fidem seu incomprehensibili modo ut vocant quia hoc totum imaginarium repugnat appertissimè Dei Verbo of whose opinion see further Beza Epist 5. Thirdly that Sacraments do not only signifie but also confer Grace is affirmed by Osiander in Enchirid. Controversiarum quas Augustanae Confess Theol. habent cum Calvinianis pag. 272 post medium in Epitom Histor Eccles c. centur 16 pag. 527.529.531 538. by Jacob. Andraeas in Epit. Colloquii Montisbelgar pag. 58. prope initium pag. 42 initio and by M. D. Bilson in his true difference c. part 4. pag. 539. ante med and 592. post medium 368 post medium by Mr. Hooker in his Ecclesiasticall Polity l. 5. sect 57. pag. 127 128. and by M. D. Whittaker contra Duraeum l. 8. pag. 662. paulo ante medium 664. post medium Melancthon in c. 4. Ep. ad Rom. after the first Edition saith Repudienda est Zuinglii opinio qui tantum civili modo judicat de signis scilicet Sacramenta tantum notas esse professionis c. apud Ulembergium causa 20. pag 697. And contradicted for Popish by the Survey of the book of Common prayer pag. 103 104. by Mr. Willet in his Synopsis
is so patently insufficient that directly it may be retorted by saying that although it were supposed but in no wise granted that they who were first acquainted with the arguments of Luther against us might be excused by ignorance yet none can be excused at this time seeing not only we Catholicks but also the best learned Protestants upon further advice better Consideration long accurate strict and even partial and passionate examination of the doctrines and grounds of Luther and other pretended Reformers have finally forsaken them and are come to us and therefore they who at this day oppose themselves to all Christian Churches extant when Luther appeared and to us of this time and even to their own learned Protestant brethren cannot pretend ignorance or any other lawfull or probable excuse 109. Fifthly The demand which even now we made concerning Heresie may be with proportion applyed to Schism by asking whether the Communion of those Protestants who hold with us against their pretended brethren ought to be forsaken or no by those who intirely and constantly dissent from us in all points controverted at this day if there can be imagined any one such as it is not easy to believe there is or morally speaking can be any considering the great liberty which Protestants for want of an infallible visible guide have to believe what they apprehend as true to day with freedome to forsake it to morrow If their Communion must be forsaken Protestants will be divided into nothing by perpetually forsaking one another yea the same man by forsaking himself at different times If they need not be forsaken for such doctrines we inferr that the first pretended Reformers could not forsake our Communion for the very same doctrines which now chiefest Protestants hold and yet are not forsaken by the rest and therefore Luther could not be excused from the grievous sin of Schism in forsaking our Communion 110. Sixthly It is very carefully to be observed that all the different Sects of Protestants and every single person of these Sects whether they agree with us against other Protestants or disagree one from an other and also from us or the same man at different times disagree from himself It is I say to be observed that in all these differences and contrarieties against us against their brethren and against themselves they still pretend evident Texts of Scripture in favour of their opinions for the then present time wherein seeing it is clear they must be deceived it being impossible that the word of God can deliver contradictions we must evidently conclude that Scripture alone cannot be to them a sufficient Rule of Faith but that we must finally acknowledge a living judge of Controversies namely the Church of God which therefore must be believed to be absolutely infallible in all her Definitions concerning matters of faith Otherwise we can have no certainty in Articles of Religion 111. Seaventhly Considering what hath been said in the next precedent second Consideration That many learned Protestants acknowledge the Ancient Fathers to stand with us against Protestants we may by the confession of our Adversaries with all truth and sincerity use that exclamation and Protestation which in M. Jewell was false hypocritical reprehended even by his greatest earned'st Protestant friend as we have seen heretofore O Gregory O Austine O Hierome O Chrysostom O Leo O Dionyse O Anacletus O Calixtus c. If we be deceived you have deceived us this our Adversaries confess you taught us c. and further considering what hath been proved in this third Consideration That many of the most learned Protestants in many of the most important points of faith agree with us against other Protestants we may use an other more strange and unexpected exclamation and truely say O Luther O Calvin O you other most famous Protestants if we were deceived you are deceived this you teach with us and you teach with us those very points which your brethren are wont to call Popish and for which a thing to be well considered the first Reformers took a pretence to divide themselves from all Churches of Christ extant before Luthers time 112. Eightly every one who hath care of his eternall salvation is deeply to consider That this agreement of protestants with us against their brethren demonstrates that they are not the Church of which unity in matters of Faith is a most inseparable necessary and essentiall note Whereof Brereley tract 2. cap. 3. sect 5. subd 1. saith As concerning unity in doctrine it is said [y] 1. Cor. 1.10 I beseech you that you all speak one thing be yee knit together in one mind and one judgement [z] Ephes 4.3 endeavouring to keep the unity of Spirit in the bond of peace [a] Philip. 1.27 1. Pet. 3.8 continue in one spirit and one mind [b] Philip. 2.2 of one accord and of one judgement Thus in the first times [c] Act. 4.32 1.14 were the multitude of them that believed of one heart and one soul Thus our Saviour in his special prayer [d] Hebr. 5.7 heard no doubt for his reverence instantly prayeth for the members of his Church [e] Joan. 17.11 that they may be one And thus the holy Ghost describeth the Church of Christ saying [f] Cantic 6.8 My Dove is one As also on the contrary it is said of dissention [g] 2 Cor. 1.10 I beseech you brethren that there be no dissentions among you [h] Hebr. 10.25 not for saking the fellowship that we have among our selves [i] Proverb 6.16 19. God hateth him that raiseth up contentions among Brethren This want of Unity is so improper to God that he is therefore tearmed [k] 1 Cor. 14 33. the God not of dissention but of Peace and it is so certainly the means to dissolve continuance that the holy Scriptures which cannot lye say thereof [*] Galat. 5.15 If you bite one another take heed you be not consumed one of another [l] Luc. 11.17 Every Kingdome divided in it self shall perish [m] Psalm 55.9 see Gen. 11.6 7 9. Destroy O Lord and divide their Tongues [n] Osee 10. â— Their heart is divided they shall now perish c. By this Brand or mark of want of Unity did the antient Fathers [o] Irenaus l. 1. c. 5. initio saith Videmus nunc corum inconstantem sententiam cum sint dâ—o veltres quen admodum de â—â—dem cadem non dicant And cap. 18. fine he saith Cum autem discrepant ab invicâ—â—â— doctrina traditione qui recentiores 〈◊〉 adnoscuntur affâ—ctant per singulos dieâ— norum aliquid invenire c. Darum est enim omnium describere sententias Irenaeus [p] Tertullian de Praescrip advers haerer c. 42. saith Mâ—ntior si non etiam à regulis suâ—â— variant inter se dum unusquisque proinde modulatur quae accepâ—t quâ—â—nadmodum de suo arbitrio
6. fine in his Treatise tending to Pacification sect 14. circa med pag. 89. acknowledgeth a particular blessing of God in the Church of Rome and an evident work of the Holy Ghost saying That the Church of Rome hath ever continued after a sort in profession of the faith since the time that by the Apostles it was delivered to them c. and hath also in some manner preserved and hitherto maintained both the Word and Sacraments that Christ himself did leave unto us which surely saith he is a very special blessing of God and an evident work of the Holy Ghost c. To make good saith Brereley ibidem in the margent at †M. Bunny's words of the evident work of the Holy Ghost in preservation of the Roman Sea the same hath appeared many waies extraordinary and admirable As first in that the other four Patriarchal Seas are noted and known to have been pestered every one of them with confessed Arch-hereticks or Inventers of new doctrines against some principal Article of our Christian faith As at Antioch Paulus Samosetanus at Hierusalem Joannes and Arsenius at Alexandria Dioscorus at Constantinople Macedonius and Nestorius onely the Sea of Rome hath been preserved free from all such known note or touch For howsoever our Adversaries do pretend some one or other Pope to have had his private errour yet to charge any Pope with being an Arch heretick as before-said they have not any colour Secondly in that the Cities of all the other Patriarchal Seas and the Bishops belonging to them now are and of long have been oppressed with Infidels and their succession is either none or but inglorious whereas God hath yet hitherto disposed otherwise of the City and Sea of Rome Thirdly in the example of so many great Christian Kingdomes and Countryes in Asia Africk and Europe which forsaking the Communion of this Sea became not long afterwards barbarous and subject to Infidels accordingly as it is foretold of the true Churches prerogative The Nation and Kingdome that will not serve thee shall perish and those Nations shall be utterly destroyed Esay 60.12 Fourthly in that this is the onely Sea or Church which is confessed by our Adversaries to have continued known and visible for these last thousand or 1300 years whereof see Brereley tract 1. sect 2. at k. l. sect 8. in the margent at c. tract 2. c. 2. sect 7. fine at 3 4 5 6 c. converting also to the Christian faith during all that time by its Legats and Preachers so many confessed Nations and Kingdomes of the Gentiles agreeable to the predictions of the Prophets in that behalf whereof see Brereley tract 2. c. 1. sect 4. initio in the margent at* Fifthly in that this Sea hath been persecuted by the contrary factions of so many Christian Princes by the very Citizens and Cardinals of Rome by the Schisms Factions and wicked lives of the Popes themselves by the implacable hatred and contradiction of so many confessed heresies and hereticks of every age conspiring all of them howsoever divided otherwise among themselves to malign and impugn this Sea as the principal object of their daily continued malice So Hell gates may be said to have assaulted her and yet not prevailed Matth. 16.18 Upon which consideration but duely had of all Hereticks though divided among themselves yet joyning so together in malice against the Roman Sea how can that out-faced opinion of our Adversaries be possibly true which M. D. Downham in his treatise concerning Antichrist l. 2. pag. 22. ante med delivereth saying We hold Antichrist to be the whole body of Hereticks in the last age of the world c. The head of which body is the Papacie The Pope to be their Head and yet he ever against them all and they all ever against him is it possible 6. Pu. Besides what hath been said out of Brereley of this point that Protestants confess that the Roman Church wants nothing necessary to salvation I will shew the same yet more at large D. Potter in his Answer to Charity mistaken pag. 63. saith The most necessary and fundamentall Truths which constitute a Church are on both sides unquestioned And for that reason learned Protestants yield them Romanists as he calls us the name and substance of a Christian Church Where we see that he saith in generall learned Protestants yield them c. In proof whereof he cites in his margent Iunius D. Reinolds and sayes See the judgement of many other writers in the advertisement annexed to the old Religion by the Reverend Bishop of Exeter and adds The very Anabaptists grant it Fr. Johnson in his Christian Plea pag. 123. So that with this one Testimonie of Potter we have many other even of our greatest Adversaries And pag. 62. he saith To those twelve Articles which the Apostles in their Creed esteemed a sufficient Summary of wholsome Doctrine they Catholicks have added many more Such are for instance their Apocryphall Scriptures and unwritten dogmaticall Traditions their Transubstantiation and dry Communion their Purgatory Invocation of Saints Worship of the Images Latine service trafficke of Indulgences and shortly the other new doctrines and decrees canonized in their late Synod of Trent Upon these and the like new Articles is all the contestation between the Romanists and Protestants And then he adds the words which we have cited The most necessary and Fundamentall truths which constitute a Church are on both sides unquestioned and for that c. Where we see he grants we believe the twelve Articles of the Apostles Creed which he teaches at large to contain all Fundamentall Points of Faith and that we hold all the most necessary and Fundamentall truths which constitute a Church Therefore those Points of our Doctrine which he gives for instance are no Fundamentall errors nor the contrary Articles necessary and Fundamentall truths and yet he names all the chiefest Points controverted between us and Protestants even Transubstantiation Communion in one kind and Latine Service which are the things they are wont most to oppose Yea he comprises all the Doctrines and Decrees of the Councill of Trent Therefore we are free from Fundamentall errors by the confession of our Adversaries pag. 59. he further saith The Protestants never intended to erect a new Church but to purge the old The reformation did not change the substance of Religion but only cleansed it from corrupt and impure qualities If the Protestants erected not a new Church then ours is still the old Church and if it were only cleansed from corrupt qualities without change of the substance the substance must be still the same it was and that which was must be still the same with that which is pag. 61. The things which the Protestants believe on their part and wherein they judge the life and substance of Religion to be comprized are most if not all of them so evidently and indisputably true that their Adversaries themselves do avow and receive them
PROTESTANCY CONDEMNED BY THE EXPRESSE VERDICT AND SENTENCE OF PROTESTANTS LUKE 19.22 By thine own mouth I judge thee DOWAY Printed in the Year 1654. THE PREFACE TO THE READER I Cannot doubt but that every Protestant if he have not a mind to divest himself of common reason and proclame himself to be inexcusable will confess Protestancy to be cast and condemned by Protestants if by their own free and open Confession these ensuing points be acknowledged for true First That the first Protestants who forsooth undertook a Reformation of the Universal Catholick Church existent before Luther after their pretended Reformation led so lewd lives and held doctrines confessedly so absurd that no man of sense or wisdom can judge them fit instruments for that supposed strange sublime supernatural and divine work Secondly That in opposition of the late and vitious Fathers of Protestants those men who even by Protestants are stiled Antient and Holy Fathers believed taught and practised the very same things which we now believe teach and practise against Protestants Thirdly That not only the Antient Fathers but even the chiefest and most learned Protestants convinced by evidence of truth stand with us against their Protestant Brethren in most of the chiefest points of Religion controverted between us Fourthly That our doctrine hath been approved by the Omnipotent hand of God using for Instruments of working Miracles those who were confessedly of our Religon yea and in express confirmation of points believed by us and rejected by Protestants Fifthly That by the confession of Protestants we Catholicks may be saved though we live and dye in the belief of all those Articles wherein Protestants disagree from us Which last consideration though it were alone ought effectually to move every one who believes an Eternity of Joy or Torment speedily to joyn himself with that Church wherein by the confession of all both friends and foes Catholicks and Protestants salvation may certainly be attained if our life agree with our belief Now for proof these Truths most important to be known I present not to the Reader any new VVork or Invention of mine own but in effect only transcribe and publish what I find in that excellent Book intituled The Protestants Apology for the Roman Church the true Author whereof thought fit to conceale himself under the name of John Brereley Priest though indeed he was neither Brereley nor Priest nor Clergy-man not John but rather James He dedicated his Book to King James and writes with so great exactness fidelity temper and moderation that Protestants though they must needs feel themselves deeply wounded by the substance of his discourse yet cannot with any shadow of reason pretend to be justly offended with his manner of discoursing In so much as Thomas Morton confesseth that whatsoever strong argument in any place in Roman Authors is to be found in favour of that Religion whatsoever hath by chance fallen from the pen of any learned Protestant but in outward appearance consonant to their doctrines which may seem any way to promote the Roman cause all that we see in this volume collected to be brought and presly urged against us with so singular a choice of the things themselves with such force of arguments with such an elegant and exquisite stile Lastly with so moderate a kind of expression as their subtilty judgement wit art and moderation could do I wish the Book were in the hands of many but it being of some bulk and not easy to be had and the points which here I offer being but few and comprised in no very great compass and of themselves very intelligible and clear to every mans understanding they will come to the knowledge of more by being published thus apart than if they were to be sought in the Book it self mixed with many other matters by the Author handled in different and distant places and upon several occasions and in a method not obvious to men who have no great mind to take much pains If upon occasion I put in a word of mine own the Reader will understand it to be mine by the word Publisher abbreviated by Pu. I make use of the Edition of An. 1608. It is clear that he is most exact in his Citations citing not only the Book but the year Edition place of Print and sometimes even the page and line as appears by the Table set down in the beginning of his Book with this title A Table of certain Protestant writers and their particular writings whose folio or page for more ready and certain direction are specially alleged in the subsequent Discourse and of their several Editions or year of Print according to which they be so alleged unless it be otherwise noted in the margent But yet notwithstanding all the care exactness used by the Author it was not in his power to exempt the Print from many Errors and Omissions as also I cannot doubt but he who Prints this publication of mine will have his errors The five Heads or Truths mentioned above I will call so many Considerations Neither have I any more to say in this place than with my whole heart to beg of the Protestant Reader even for the love he ows to the Redeemer of Mankind and for the care he should have to save his own soul that he will peruse these Considerations with a hearty desire to find and an absolute resolution to embrace the truth laying aside prejudice passion sloath and all humane and wordly respects seriously meditating the words of our Blessed Saviour Matth. 16. v. 26 27. What doth it profit a man if he gain the whole world and sustain the damage of his own Soul Or what exchange shall a man give for his Soul For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of his Father with his Angels and then will he render to every man according to his works If the Reader come not with such a disposition and resolution every word he reads will rise against him in that dreadful day of Judgement upon which all Eternity must depend O ETERNITIE ETERNITIE THE FIRST CONSIDERATION Concerning the lives of the first Protestant pretended Reformers OUR Saviour forewarning us saith Brereley tract 2. cap. 3. sect 9. subdivis 1 That a good Tree yieldeth good fruit Math. 7.17 and beware of false Prophets which come to you in sheeps clothing but inwardly are ravening Woolvs by their fruits you shall know them Math. 7.15 16. omitting petty examples saith Brereley tract 2. chap. 3. sect 9. subdivis 2. we will intreat of Principals namely of Luther of Jacobus Andreas the greatest enlarger of his Doctrine and of Zuinglius Calvin and Beza and of these also for other respects but with a gentle sparing and forbearing touch as not undertaking to allege any thing of them but that which is in it self evident and for such confessed Of Luther 1 COncerning Luther's Life and Manners saith Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 10. subdivis 11. for so much as he
to be good with whatsoever words it be ministred so the same be not in the name of Man but God So Luther tom 2. Wittemberg in lib de captivit Babylon cap. de Baptismo fol. 75. a. initio saith Quocunque modo tradatur Baptismus modo non in nomine Hominis sed in nomine Domini tradatur verè salvum facit imô non dubitem siquis in nomine Domini suscipiat etiamsi impius Minister non det in nomine Domini verè Baptizatum esse in Nomine Domini 5 Concerning the [r] Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 10. subdivis 8. sufficiency of our Redemption by our Saviours Passion in his humane nature upon the Cross Luther taught thus far to the contrary as that not only the Humane Nature of Christ sufferd for us for saith he in affirming but so much Christ is a Saviour of vile and small accompt and needeth himself also a Saviour [Å¿] Luther in confessione majori de Coena Domini Cum credo quod sola humana natura pro me passa est Christus ille vilis nec magni pretii Salvator est Imo ipse quoque Salvatore opus habet but also that the [t] Luther de Consiliis Part. 2. saith of the Zuingliand Pertinacissimè contra me pugnabant quod Divinitas Christi pati non posset Divinity of Christ did suffer which is so intollerable and grosse that it is specially contradicted by divers learned Protestants as Zuinglius Hospinianus D. Barnes Beza Czecanorius in Brereley pag. 403 404. and affirmed to be an old condemned opinion in Apollinarius and Eutiches and contrary to the Prophets Apostles and all true Believers To this we may adde Luther's wicked Doctrine concerning our Saviour's descending into Hell there also for to suffer Torments in Soul after his death Thus Luther tom 3. Wittemberg in Psalm 16. fol. 279. a. post med saith Christus sicut cum summo dolore mortuus est ita videtur dolores post mortem in inferno sustinuisse ut nobis omnia superaret c. And see this opinion confessed in Luther by Fulke in his defence of the English translation of the Bible cap. 7. pag. 204. See Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 10. sub 8. at 16. pag. 205. it should be 405 6 Conterning Luther's [u] Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 10. subdi 9. contempt of the antient Fathers and his own great undertaking knowledge he saith [x] Luther in libro ad Ducem Georgium And see his like saying in Colloquiis Litinis cap. de consolatione And ad cap. 1. dd Galatas tom 5. Wittemberg fol. 290 b. He saith Esto Ecclesia Augustinus alii Doctores item Petrus Apollo imo Angelus è Caelo diversum doceant tamen mea Doctrina est ejusmodi quae solius Dei gloriam illustrat c. Petrus Apostolorum summus vivebat docet extra Verbum Dei And after the English Translation fol. 33. b. paulo post med and 34. a. initio and in libro de servo arbitrio contra Erasmum in the first Edition thereof He saith if not most arrogantly judge Deponite quicquid armaturae suppeditabunt Orthodoxi veteres Theologorum Scholae authoritas Conciliorum Pontificum consensus tot saeculorum ac totius populi Christiani nihil recipimus nisi Scripturas sed fic ut penes nos solos sit certa Authoritas interpretandi Quod nos interpretamur hoc sensit Spiritus Sanctus quod afferunt alii quamvis magni quamvis multi à Spiritu Satanae â—lienata mente profectum est See this Saying alleged in Nullus Nemo G. 6. pag. 153. And in Cnoglerus his Symbola tria pag. 152. And Luther tom 2 Wittemberg fol. 486. b. fine saith Ego verò hoc libro non contuli sed asserui assero ac penes nullum volo esse judicium sed omnibus suadeo ut praestent obsequium Since the Apostles times no Doctor or Writer hath so excellently and cleerly confirmed instructed and comforted the Consciences of the Secular States as I have done by the singular grace of God This certainly I know that neither Austine nor Ambrose who yet are in this matter the best are equall to me herein And again tom 7. in serm de eversione Hierusalem fol. 271. a. The Gospel is so copiously preacht by us that truly in the Apostles time it was not so clear And apud Brereley trect 1. sect 3. subd vis 14. initio in the Margent at the figure 4. he affirms tom 2. Wittemberg Anno 1551. lib. de servo Arbitrio pag. 434. the Fathers of so many Ages to have been plainly blind and most ignorant in the Scriptures to have erred all their life time and that unless they were amended before their deaths they were neither Saints nor partaining to the Church See further Luther's Book de servio arbitrio printed in octavo 1603. pag. 72 73 276 and 337. Also in Colloquiis Mensalibus cap de Patribus Ecclesiae Luther saith of sundry Fathers in particular In the writings of Hierom there is not a word of true Faith Christ and sound Religion Tertullian is very superstitious I have holden Origen long since accursed Of Chrysostom I make no account Bazil is of no worth he is wholly a Monk I weigh him not of a hair Cyprian is a weak Divine c. affirming there yet further that the Church did degenerate in the Apostles age and that the Apologie of Phillip Melancthon doth far excell all the Doctors of the Church and exceeds even Augustin himself [y] See Brereley Tract 2. c. 2. sect 10. subdivis 9. How highly he esteemeth of such Doctrine as himself collecteth from the Scriptures and how much he preferreth himself therein before the Fathers himself signifieth saying tom 2. l. contra Regem Angliae fol. 344. b. Gods Word is above all the Divine Majestie maketh for me so as I pass not if a thousand Austins a thousand Cyprians a thousand King Harry Churches stood against me Nay he doubteth not in plain tearms to exempt his Doctrine from all judgment of Men and Angels making himself therby judge of both saying Adversus falso nominatum Ecclesiasticum statum Scire vos volo quod in posterum non amplius hoc honore dignabor ut sinam vel vos vel ipsos Angelos de Caelo de mea doctrina judicare c. nec volo meam doctrinam à quoquam judicari atque adeone ab Angelis quidem cum enim certus de ea sim per eam vester Angelorum judex esse volo And see these words though somwhat altered in the late edition of Wittemberg tom 2. fol. 306. a. fine And apud Brereley tract 3. sect 7. pag. 681. marg at e. tom 2. Wittemberg lib. contra Regem Angliae fol. 333. a. fine he saith Certus enim sum dogmata mea habere me de Caelo c. dogmata mea stabunt c. And will our English Divines allow this in
the Doctrine of Real presence Images c. wherewith they charge and reprove Luther Luther also apud Brerely tract 2. cap. 2. sect 10. subdivis 2. saies in Epist ad Galat. cap. 1. after the English Translation fol. 33. b. paulo post med and 34. a. initio tom 5. Wittemberg of anno 1554. fol. 290. b. Be it that the Church Austin and other Doctors also Peter Apollo yea an Angel from Heaven teach otherwise yet is my Doctrine such as sets forth Gods only Glory c. Peter the chief of the Apostles did live and teach extra verbum Dei besides the Word of God And in the same place fol. 290. a. fine he further saith Sive S. Cyprianus Ambrosius Augustinus sive S. Petrus Paulus immo Angelus è Caelo aliter doceat tamen hoc certè scio quod humana non suadeo sed Divina For this cause sundry Calvinists have not forborn to taxe Luther with excessive Pride Conradus Regius in lib. Germanico contra Hessium de Caena Domini b. 2. saith God hath for the sin of Pride wherewith Luther extolled himself as many of his writings shew taken from him his true Spirit c. and in place thereof hath given an angrie proud and lying Spirit And the Tigurine Divines in Confessione Germanica Printed Tiguri 1544. in octavo say Luther boasteth himself to be the Apostle and Prophet of the Germans who hath learned of none of whom all others have learned no man hath known any thing but what he learned of Luther no man hath done any thing Luther hath done all c. And apud Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 11. subdivis 2. at* Zuinglius in responsione ad confessionem Lutheri chargeth Luther with magna Arrogantia cum arroganti verborum fastu minis quoque plusquam turgidis And Oecolampadius in responsione ad confessionem Lutheri saith that Luther was arrogantiae superbiae affectâ—â— inflatus Also the Tigurine Divines in their answer to Luther's Book against Zuinglius say Prophetae Apostoli Dei Gloriae non privato honori non suae pertinaciae superbiae studebant Lutherus autem sua quaerit pertinax est insolentia nimia effertur c. And Symon Lythus responsione altera ad alteram Jacobi Gretzeri Apologiam pag. 333. paulo ante med saith Lutherus plusquam debeat tribuit gloriolae partae cujus particulam communicari cum aliis indignissime ferebat And Thomas Naogeorgus a learned Calvinist alledged by Schlusselburg in Theolog. Calvinistarum l. 2. fol. 131. a. post med saith of Luther Plurima scripsit per iram carnalem per aemulationem ne succumbere cerneretur ulli Doctorum veterum orbitam reliquit indulgens stomacho suo ac honori And Calvin alleged ibidem fol. 126 a. post med Hanc intemperiem quâ ubique ebullit utinam magis fraenare studuisset c. Utinam recognoscendis vitiis plus operae dedisset c. And Conradus Gesnerus in Universali Bibliotheca saith Illud non est dissimulandum Lutherum virum esse vehementis ingenii impatientem qui nisi per omnia sibi consentientes ferre nesciat c. Dominus faxit nequid contentione impudentia oris obsit Ecclesiae cujus olim crepundiatam feliciter promovit Pride even the confessed intolerable pride was the only true cause of his persisting in his revolt and Apostacy a point to be carefully considered by all Protestants who have any care to save their Souls For saith Fox Acts and Monum pag. 404. a. fine It is apparent that Luther promised Cardinal Cajetan to keep silence with this annexed condition of pride provided also his Adversaries would do the like And Osiander in epitom c. centur 16. pag. 61. fine 62 initio saith accordingly Quod Lutherus in Pontificem quaedam durius scripserit id condonari sibi petit promittens posthac majorem modestiam indulgentiarumque posthac nullam se facturum mentionem modo adversariis etiam suis silentium imponatur And Mr. Cowper late Bishop of Winchester reporteth further in his Chronicle fol. 278 a. paulo post initium that Luther by his letter submitted himself to the Pope with this other like condition so that he might not be compelled to recant 7 As concerning Luther's [z] Brerely tract 2. cap. 2. sect 10. subdivis 12 impugning of the Masse upon his confessed instruction from the Devill by sensible conference had with him we referre the same to his own Testimony hereof hereafter alleged [a] Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 11. subdivis 2. In the Text and Margent at 17. He did continue his accustomed saying of Masse until that among the [b] Manlius Luther 's Scholar testifieth this in loc com pag. 42. fine And so also the Alphabetical Table of that Book where it is set down Luthero saepe spectra apparuerunt And Luther Tuton ad Senator Civit German speaking of other Sectaries to wit the Swenkfeldians and Anabaptists who bragged of Apparitions confesseth of himself saying Ego quoque fui in Spiritu atque etiam vidi spiritus si omnino de propriis gloriandum est forte plulquam ipsi intra annum videbunt severall Apparitions hapened unto him not of [c] Luther in loc com class 4. pag 36. prope finem saith Nullas apparitiones Angelorum habeo And ibidem page 40. ante med He further saith Pactum feci cum Domino Deo meo nevel visiones vel somnia vel etiam Angelos mihi mittat c. vide ibidem post med Angels for therein he disclaimeth but of wicked Spirits wherwith he was infested or haunted whereof one was so terrible that [d] Manlius in loc com pag. 42. fine 43. initio saith Cum Coburgi subsisteret Doctor Martinus Lutherus c. accidit ut semper post apparitiones nocturnarum facium ipse gravi capitis morbo agitaretur Accidit autem ut cum praecedente nocte tres ejusmodi volantes faces vidisset fere incidiffet in Syncopen Praesentiens autem morbum ministrum vocabat is Amygdalinum oleum instillabat in aurem c. Luther tom 7 Wittemberg An 1588. in lib. de Missa privata unctione Sacerdotum fol. 443. tom 6. Germ. Jenensi fol. 28. in lib. de Missa angulari Also Luthers words hereof are acknowledged and set down in the treatise against the defence of the censure pag. 234 235 236. and in Luther tom 7 Wittemberg fol. 228. a. fine he was almost cast into a sound in prevention whereof Oil was distilled into his Ear and his Feet rubbed with hot Clothes It chanced that upon a certain time as himself reporteth the matter he suddainly awaked about midnight then saith he Satan began this Disputation with me saying Harken right learned Doctor Luther thou hast celebrated Masse by the space of fiveteen years c. And so the Devill with Arguments which himself there at large setteth down disswaded him from further saying of Masse whereat the Protestants are greatly
Francofurti tit de libris veteris Novi Test fol. 379. saith further that the said Book was not written by Salomon but by Syrach in the time of the Macchabees and that it is like to the Talmud the Jews Bible out of many Books heaped into one Work perhaps out of the Library of King Prolomaeus And further he saith ibidem tit de Patriarchis Prophet fol 28â— that he doth not believe all to have been done as there is set down And teacheth tit de lib. vet Novi Test The Book of Job to be as it were an argument for a fable or Comedy to set before us an example of Patience And he fol. 380. delivers this general censure of the Prophets Books The Sermons of no Prophet were written whole and perfect but their Disciples and Auditors snatched now one sentence and then another and so put them all into one Book and by this means the Bible was conserved If this were so the Books of the Prophets being not written by themselves but promiscuously and casually by their Disciples will soon be called in question Concerning now the other Books of Scripture although Luther acknowledged many of them for Canonical how far yet hee was chargeable otherwise in mistranslating them we will refer to the credit of Zuinglius his testimony who tom 2. ad Luther l. de Sacrament pag. 412. b. 413. a. saith hereof to Luther Thou dost corrupt Luther the word of God thou art seen to be a manifest and common corrupter and perverter of the holy Scriptures how much are we ashamed of thee who have hitherto esteemed thee beyond all measure and now prove thee to be such a man And see the like testimony of Keckermannus in Brereley tract 1. sect 10. subdivis 4. initio at b. saying in System S. Theolog. l. 1. p. 188. circa medium Lutheri versio Germanic in vet Test praesertim in Job Prophetis naevos suos habet non exiguos Omitting many other particulars we will here observe that whereas it is said 1 Joan. 5.7 There are three which give testimony in Heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three are one This being a most evident place in proof of the Trinity is omitted by Luther in his Dutch Bibles In like manner where it is said Rom. 3.28 We accompt a man to be justifyed by faith without the works of the Law Luther to colour his doctrine of only faith translateth here justifyed by faith alone and being admonished of his thus adding here to the text the word alone he persisteth wilful saying tom 5. Germ. fol. 141. 144. Sic volo sic jubeo sit pro ratione voluntas c. Lutherus ita vult ait se esse Doctorem super omnes Doctores in toto Papatu And concludeth lastly Propterea debet vox sola in meo novo Testamento manere etiamsi omnes Papismi ad insaniam reducantur tamen non eam inde tollent paenitet me quod non addiderim illas duas voces omnibus omnium viz. Sine omnibus operibus omnium legum Pu. Mark his boldness to addo even to the text of holy Scripture In like manner Luther doubteth not to argue the Aposties themselves of error in doctrine which is to the great prejudice and danger of their writings for if they did or might erre in Doctrine how then can we be sure that they were the Scribes of the holy Ghost and that their writings be Canonical and voyd of errour To this end Luther saith in Epist ad Galat. Cap. 1. after the English translation fol. 33. b. paulo post med and 34. a. initio tom 5. Wittemberg of An. 1554. fol. 290. b. Be it that the Church Austine and other Doctors also Peter Apollo yea an Angel from Heaven teach otherwise yet is my Doctrine such as setteth forth Gods only Glory c. Peter the chief of the Apostles did live and teach extra verbum Dei besides the word of God And in the same place fol. 290. a. fine he further saith Sive S. Cyprianus Ambrosius Augustinus five S. Petrus Paulus imò Angelus è Coelo aliter doceat tamen hoc certè scio quòd humana non suadeo sed Divina Yet further against St. James his mentioning of extreme Unction he saith de captivit Babylon de extrema Unctione in tom 2. Wittemberg fol. 86. h. ante med Ego autemdico si uspi am deliratum est c. tamen si etiam esses Epistola Jacobi dicerem non licere Apostolum sua authoritate Sacramentum instituere c. Hoc enim ad Christum solum pertinebat I further say that if in any place it be erred Puâ—or be done like a man doting or raving in this place especially it is erred c. or done like one doting or raving but though this were the Epistle of James I would answer that it is not lawful for an Apostle by his authority to institute a Sacrament For this appertained to Christ alone As though that blessed Apostle would publish a Sacrament without warrant from Christ In like manner concerning Moses he saith tom 3. Wittemberg in Psalmum 45 fol. 423. a. vide ibidem fol. 422. and tom 3. Germ. fol. 40.41 in Colloq Mens Germ. fol. 152.153 Habuit Moses labia sed profunda infacunda impedita irata in quibus non est verbum gratiae sed irae mortis peccati colligite omnes sapientias Moysis Gentium Philosophorum invenietis eas coram Deo esse vel dolatriam vel sapientiam hypocriticam vel si est politica sapientiam irae c. Haâ—et enim Moyses labia diffusa fellè ira c. Moses hath his lips unpleasant stopâ—ed and angry c. Do you collect together all the wisdoms of Moyses and of the Heathen Philosophers and you shall find them to be before God either idolatry or hypocritical wisdom or if it be politick yet but the wisdom of wrath c. Moyses hath his lips full of Gall and anger c. away therefore with Moyses c. 18. As concerning [a] Brerely tract 2 cap. 2. sâ—ct 10. subdivis 3. faith Luther reproveth as well such Protestants as say [b] Luther upon the Galathians Englished in cap. 2. fol. 67. u. post med Neither can faith be true faith without charity as also those others who teach [c] Luther ibidem fol. 67. circa med though my faith be never so perfect yet if this faith be without charity I am not justified calling it [d] Luther ibid. fol. 68. b. prope finem fol. 126. b. And see Luther in his Sermons Englished c. pag. 204. circa med impiety to affirm that faith except it be adorned with charity justifyeth not Nay he proceeded so far as he doubted not to say [e] Luther tom 1. prop. 3. Fides nisi sit sine c. Faith unless it be without even the least good works doth not justify nay
all his works did not deserve Heaven Which sentence their Martyr John Teuxbury defendeth for [c] Act mon. ibidem plain enough and [d] Act Mon. pag. 487. b. pauâ—o post med true as it lyeth to omit that Calvin himself condemneth this Doctrine of Christs meriting to himself though expressed in Scripture [e] Calvin Institut l. 2. c. 17. sect 6. saith Quaerere an sibi meruerit Christus non minus stulta est curiositas quam temeâ—aâ— a definitio And a little after Quibus enim meritis affequi poâ—uit homo ut jâ—dex esset â—â—undi caput Angelorum And see further Calvin in Epistolas Pauli in Philip. 2 ver 9. pag. 466. b 467. a. in so much that in his Books of Institutions l. 2. c. 17. sect 1. He saith against Christs meriting for us Equidem fateor si quis simpliciter per se Christum apponere vellet judicio Dei non fore merito locum quia non reperietur in homâ—ne dignitas quae possit Deum promereri for a foolish curiosity and rash opinion the said Tindall was so much bent against all opinion of Good Works that he affirmed and taught that as concerning [f] Acts Monu pag. 488. a. initio the preaching of the Work and washing of dishes there is no difference as touching to please God Which saying as their foresaid Martyr Teuxbury affirmeth is a [g] Acts Mon. pag. 488. a. initio plain Text as needing no further explication and that as for pleasing God saith he all is one for saith Tindall [h] Acts Mon. pag. 1336. a. ante med there is no work better than other as touching to please God to make water to wash dishes to be a Sowter or an Apostle all is one to please God 20 Having at length written out what Brereley delivers concerning Luther's Doctrine and Manners [i] Finally we may conclude the life of Luther with the words of Erasmus a man highly esteemed by Protestants writing to Luther Anno 1526 11. Aprilis in these words Optarem tibi meliorem mentem nisi tua tibi tam valde placeret Mihi optabis quod voles modo ne tuam mentem nisi tibi Dominus istam mutaverit taking his proofs from witnesses above all exception that is from his own words and the writings of Protestants themselves as I could not without a deep sense of grief reflect how many have been and are yet deceived in that unhappy man whom they conceive to have been sent by God to the World for Reformation thereof so now in order to the help of persons so seduced I must beg of them to ponder well these ensuing Reflections First as for his Doctrine whether they can acknowledge him for their Father or Brother or a Protestant in any degree who taught Doctrines so wicked Carnal Absurd Temporizing Inconstant Seditious and Blasphemous as both Protestants and Catholicks and all Christians yea and all men of common Reason and human Civility must abhorr and detest whether I say this man can be said to have been of the Protestant Religion and consequently that their Church remained without any being no less after than before Luther appeared Secondly For his Life and Manners by his own Confession and the Testimonie of Protestants after he undertook to reform the whole Church of God they grew to be so abhominable and shameless as we may well judge that God Almighty out of his Wildome Goodnes and Justice permitted him to fall so openly and shamefully that whosover did follow his Doctrine should become inexcusable it being a thing very evident that men chosen by the Holy Ghost to enlighten and reform others are first to be freed from intollerable Errours in their Understanding and Viciousnes in their Will and not to fail notoriously in both even upon their very begining that pretended great worke having before led a commendable life as Luther did which cannot but manifest to the World that his pretended Reformation could not proceed from God but from that Enemy who perpetually seeks whom he may devour And although all the followers of Luther were inexcusable in adhering to such a man against the whole Church of God united in Peace and Union for as much as concerned Faith and Religion yet they who persevere still to embrace and pursue such a Reformation are less excusable than they who followed him in the begining when men came to the knowledg of his Vices and abhominable Errours in Faith not all at once but by degrees as he day by day profited to the worse whereas now every one may at one view see his Vices and Heresies put together published and acknowledged by his own confession and the confession of Protestants themselves When the Holy Ghost moves us to some worke he doth it suaviter fortiter with Sweetness and Efficacie inspiring Constancy Perseverance Meekness Humility and Satisfaction to the Soul according to that of the Apostle The Gifts of God are without Repentance Whereas we have seen that Luther confessed himself to have opposed Indulgences when he knew not what the name meant and would have renounced his reforming the World if for sooth he might have done it with his credit and wished that he never had begun that business in Coll. mensal affirming futher that he fell Into those troubles casually and against his will Casu non voluntate in has turbas incidi Deum ipsum testor not so much as dreaming or suspecting any change which might happen Act. Mon. pag. 404. whereby it appears that Luther was moved by Ambition Pride Lust and Envy and not led by any true desire of Reformation which if he judged to be aecessary what a huge wickednes was it in him to promise silence if his Adversaries would do the like or to submit himself to the Pope so that he might not be compelled to Recant or if the Reformation were not necessary as certainly the Church can never need Reformation for matters of Faith how can he and they who follow him be excused from damnable Schism and Heresie And accordingly it is no wonder if he fell into that deep sense of remorse and perplexity of Soul so farr as to wish his Books were all abolished as we have seen above It is also reported Oecolampadium à Landgravio privatim admonitum de perspicuitate ac certitudine verborum Christi cum gemitu respondisse optare se dextram sibi fuisse praecisam antequam de hac Controversia scribere quicquam ordiretur But let us now with Brereley go on to other chief Protestants Of Jacobus Andreas 21 AS concerning [k] Brereley tract 2. cap. 3. sect 9. sudivis 2. Jacobus Andreas the prime Lutheran of this age and the greatest enlarger of Luther's Doctrine and Chancelor of the Universitie of Iubinge no less honored and famous in Germany than ever was Calvin or Beza at Geneva The Protestant writer Hospinianus discoursing briefly of his life from testimony of the learned
other beginning or beginners of Protestancy than those whom hitherto they have taken for their glorious Fathers and persons qualified with such gifts and endowments as make them fit to reform the whole Christian world and these being once removed from the rank of their Forefathers how will they answer this question Who in particular were the first beginners of their Protestant Church at what time and in what place did they live To which demand I am sure they cannot answer with satisfaction but perforce they must be content to be like the Donatists of whom St. Optatus sayd that they were Filii sine Patre Sonns without Father and every one must be to himself a begining of his Faith and Religion A dreadfull point in the business of an Eternity and necessary subject to that weighty saying of St. Bernard Qui se sibi magistrum constituit stulto se discipulum subdit He who will be his own Master shall be Scholler to a Fool. Secondly For Manners who can imagin that God being Truth Purity and Peace it self would choose for Reformation of the World such men as confessedly have shamefully erred against Truth for Doctrin and against not only Purity but common honesty and morality and against Peace by being both for their Doctrines and Practises Authors of Tumults Seditions and Rebellions Thirdly it ought to be considered with deepest grief and Tears what a lamentable thing it was that people should have been seduced from that antient Religion which the World professed with the specious names of Dr. Luther c. and with a fair but false and lying title of Reformation by men who indeed were such as hath been declared and proved from their own Writings and the expresse and direct Assertions of their own brethren Fourthly since we have found them to be most inconstant in their Doctrine in matters of highest concernment expresly professing to have temporized accommodated themselves to the times and not to that which even themselves judged true who can rely on them unless he first resolve not to be settled in any truth but to be ranked among those who circumferuntur omni vento doctrinae which in effect is no better than to have no true Faith at all Fiftly seeing they cannot nor ever could agree with those whom they stile Brethren and which is the main point have no possble means of agreement no men in wisdome can join themselves to the common generall name of Protestants not knowing which of them in particular hold the Truth nor who are or are not Protestants nor why they should believe one sect of them more than another neither is it possible to join with them all they believing and professing to believe contradictory Tenents some of which must needs be false Sixtly Seing those first Reformers are confessed to hold Doctrines in themselves damnable and detested even by Protestants how can they be excused from Heresy And seing they left the whole Catholick Church extant before Luther upon pretence of Errous in Doctrine of lesse moment than those wherin they thus differ among themselves and yet forsake not one another but will needs be Brethren and of one Communion how can they be excused from Schism by their division from the Communion of all Churches But now having declared what kind of men the Progenitots of Protestants were let us in the next place examine of what Fathers we Catholicks may deservedly glory even by the Confession of our Adversaries who by evidence of Truth are forced to confesse that the Antient Holy Fathers taught the same Doctrines and practised the same things which Protestants disprove in us and for the Reformation whereof they pretend to have forsaken our Church This then according to the order prescribed in the Preface must be the subject of the next Consideration THE SECOND CONSIDERATION By the Confession of Protestants the Antient Holy Fathers believed and practised the same things which we believe and practise against Protestants 1. FIrst saith Brereley tract 1. sect 3. subdivis 1. concerning Vows it is confessed that the Fathers did allow Vows of perpetual Chastity affirming them to be obligatory Non ignoramus saith Chemnitius exam part 3. pag. 14. ante med quod Patres vota perpetui caelibatûs probent quodque illa obligatoria etiam agnoscant In so much as he Chemnitius doth thereupon specially recite and reject in this behalf the several sayings of Basil [q] Chemnitius ibid. pag. 40. a. ante med Ambrose and Chrysostom Also of [r] Ibid. pag. 42. a. Epiphanins Austine and [s] Ibid. pag. 42. b. ante med Innocentius And it is likewise yet further affirmed that the [t] Peter Martyr de Votis pag. 490. saith Erant ergo Clementis aetate professiones vota fateor I am tune incaeperant homines deflectere à Verbo Dei c. With whom agreeth Mr. Parkins in Problem c. pag. 191. initio saying In antedictis saeculis stipulationes de continentia publice in Ecclesia fieri solebant nam Anno Christi 170. Clemens Alex. l. 3 stromat ait c. profession and Vows of Chastity were extant among Christians in the time of Clement Bishop of Alexandria who by [u] Euseb hist l. 6. c. 11. paulâ—ante med saith Clemens de se ipso loquitur quod prope ad Apostolorum tempoâ—a successerit his own testimony lived neer to the Apostles times that [x] Peter Martyr ibid. pag. 524 fine saith Scio Epiphanium cum multis aliis ex Patribus in eo errare quod peccatum esse dicunt votum hujusmodi violare cum onufuerit malè illum id referre in traditiones Apostolicas Epiphanius and many other Fathers erred therein that [y] Cent. 3. c. 6. col 140. linea 27. cent 3. c. 7. col 176. lâ—ea 39. Tertullian and Cyprian taught Vows of Chastity that the famous antient [z] Iustus Molitor de Ecclesia militante c. pag. 80. fine saith Chalcedonense Concilium contra Spiritus Sancti oracula Monachis Virginibus monialibus usum conjugii interdixit Council of Chalcedon did hereupon forbid Marriage to Monks and Nuns that St. Augustine and all the Fathers assembled with him in the Carthage Council [a] So saith Danaeus contra Bellarm. primae partis altera parte pag. 1011. initio And see Concil 4. Carthag can 104. and 1 Tim. 5.9 10 11 12. abused manifestly the word of God saying upon the Apostles words If any Widow how young soever c. hath vowed her self to God left her secular habit and under the testimony of the Bishop and Church appeared in a religious weed if afterward she go to secular Marriage she shall according to the Apostle have damnation because she dared to make void the vow of Chastity which she made to God that [b] Mr. Fulk against the Rhemish Testament in 1 Tim. 5. fol. 381. b. sect 10. initio And see Danaeus contra Belar 1. partis altera parte pag.
c. 9. col 656. lin 44 and by Mr. Fulk against the Rhemish Testament in Matth. 8. sect 3. fol. 14. a. post med that Paphnutius though he thought that Priesthood did not dissolve marriage contracted before Orders given yet he affirmed to the Nycene Council that those who were made Priests before they were married should not afterwards marry alleging for this veterem Ecclesiae traditionem the antient tradition of the Church So plainly doth Paphnutius hereby acknowledge that this Doctrin was then holden for the Churches antient Doctrin our learned Adversaries doubt not therefore to [s] So Chemnitius in his examen Concil Trid. part 3. reprehendeth Hierom Ambrose and Origen pag. 50. a. ante med And Epiphanius pag. 62. a. initio and Trigivillaeus Gauvius in his Palma Christiana pag. 103. reprehendeth Socrates and Zozomene for their report of Paphnutius saying thereof Socrates hoc à â—o temerè adjecit c. Socrates added this report rashly of his own devising c. with like falshood did he wrest the saying of Paphnutius in the Nycene Council c. And Zâ—zomen following after Socrates followeth his explication in maintenance of the Doctrin of Dâ—â—â—â—s condemned by Paul 1 Tim. 4. reprehend the said Fathers And as Epiphanius and Paphnutius in their cited testimonies hereof do in plain tearms rest upon the Churches Doctrin before their times so likewise the Fathers of the [t] Concil 2. Carthag can 2. saith Omâ—â—bus placet ut Episcopi Praeâ—byteri Diaconi c. ab uxoribus se abstinâ—â— â—nd for this reason there set down ut quod Apostoli docuerant ipsa servav tantiquitas nos custodiamus Carthage Council whereat St. Austin was present doubt not in like manner to ground this point upon antiquity and the Apostles Doctrin So evident thereby it is that Siricius in his foresaid Doctrin hereof brought in no innovation or change 3. Thirdly [u] Brereley tract 1. sect 3. subd 3. as concerning Anti-christ and also Altars and Sacrifices which he is foretold to [x] Daniel 12.11 take away Mr. Whitaker confesseth touching Anti-christ saying [y] Whitaker l. de Antichristo pag. 21. And M. Cartwright in his 2. Reply part 1. pag. 508. post med saith Divers of the antient and the chiefest of them imagined fondly of Antichrist as of one singular person The Fathers for the most part thought that Anti-christ should be but one man but in that as in many other things they erred Concerning the short time of his persecution or reign gathered from the Scriptures Mr. Fox confesseth that [z] Fox in Apocal. c. 12. pag. 345. fine post med almost all the holy and learned Interpreters do by a time times and half a time understand only three years and a half affirming further this to be [a] Fox in Apocal. c. 13. pag. 392. fine the consent and opinion of almost all the holy Fathers As concerning Altras and Sacrifice which as Dr. Reynolds granteth are [b] Dr. Reynolds in his conference with Mr. Hart. pag. 552. fine linked by nature in relation and mutual dependance one of other so as the one being proved the other is thereby established and first concerning Altars in respect whereof the other was termed [c] See hereafter in this consideration num 23. in the margent at * next before 13. See also the Sacrament tearmed the Sacrifice of the Altar by St. Austin in Enchirid. cap. 110. de cura pro mortuâ—s cap. 18. and by Greg. in Lucam hom 37. and by Hierom Ep. 59. ad Paulinum in solut 5. quaestionis And by Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus in his words alleged hereafter in this Consideration num 17. in the margent under t. at Anno 320. the Sacrifice of the Altar Peter Martyr reproveth the antient Fathers saying [d] Peter Martyr in his Common places in English part 4. pag. 225. b. post med Petrus Alexandrinus attributeth more to the outward Altar than to the lively Temples of Christ And yet further against [e] Peter martyr ibid. pag. 226. a initio Optatus Optatus l. 6. against Permenianus saith What is the Altar even the seat of the Body and Bloud of Christ [f] Ibid. such sayings as these saith Peter Martyr edified not the people c. And in no less plain manner is Optatus foresaid saying mentioned and reproved [g] Centur. 4. cap. 6. col 409. l. 25. by the Century Writers As also Peter Martyr reproveth the Fathers in general saying [h] Peter Martyr in his Common places part 4. pag. 225. b. ante med And Mr. Cartwright in his second Reply the last part pag. 264. circa med saith The antient Writers abuse herein may easily appear in that in this too great liberty of speech they used to call the holy Supper of the Lord a Sacrifice and the Communion table an Altar And see Praetorius de Sacramentis pag. 287. post med where he saith Anno 262. Sixtus secundus abrogavit mensas hactenus usitatas constituit Altaria quae magis repraesentant Judaismum quam Christianismum The Fathers should not with so much liberty have seemed here and there to have abused the name Altar A word nevertheless so frequent with the antient Fathers that Ignatius the Apostles undoubted Scholar is by Master Cartwright and Mr. Jacob [i] Mr. Cartwright in his 2. Reply part 1. pag. 517. prope finem saith Ignatius calleth the Communion Table unproperly an Altar Mr. Cartwright placing in his margent there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And see the like mention of this word in Ignatius confessed by Mr. Jacob in his reasons taken out of Gods word c. pag. 58. post med And see the same word accordingly used by Ignatius in Epist ad Philadelph confessed to have used the same accordingly Now as concerning Sacrifice in respect whereof the Ecclesiastical Minister was by the Fathers [k] See hereafter in this Consideration num 17. initio at 5. called properly a Priest it is affirmed by our learned Adversaries that the more antient Fathers namely [l] See this affirmed by Calvin hereafter in this Consideration num 17. in the margent under the letter t. And M. D. Field l. 3. of the Church c. 19. pag. 107. post med saith in excuse of Calvin The reason doubtless that moved the Fathers so much to urge that mystical Sacrifice of Christ in the blessed Sacrament was for that they lived in the midst of Jews and Gentiles both whose Religion consisted principally in Sacrifice the Fathers therefore to shew that Christian Keligion is not without Sacrifice and that of a more excellent nature than theirs were did much urge that Christ once offered for the sins of the world upon the Altar of the Cross is daily in mystery offered stain and his bloud powred out on the holy Table and that this Sacrifice of Christ stain for the sins of the world thus continually represented and living in our memories is the Sacrifice of Christians Thus confesseth he the
in his said Epistle to the Romans And Hierom in Câ—tal and Eusebâ—us l. 3. c. 30. do mention Ignatius his Epistle to the Romans alleging likewise a great part thereof answerably found in the said Epistle now extant And like mention and recital do they make of sundry his other Epistles the undoubted [k] Mr. Whitgift in his defence c. pag. 408. circa med acknowledgeth and urgeth these Epistles of Ignatius alleging in proof of them Hierom and Eusebius And Mr. Cartwright in his answer thereto doth not so much as deny the said Epistles and confessed writings of Ignatius the Apostles known Scholar answering [l] Mr. Whitgift ubi supra saith Ignatius was St. Johns Scholar and lived in Christs time and see pag. 343 prope finem to his objected testimony [m] Mr. Wotton in his defence of Mr. Perkins pag. 340. And whereas Mr. Wottoâ— in the same place to prove these Epistles counterfeit allegeth this saying of Ignatius whosoever doth not fast every Lords Day or Sabbath except Easter day only is a murderer of Christ which saith M. Wotton is absurd to forbear Mr. Wottons misalleging of Ignatius his words woich are directly to the contrary of that be allegeth condemning indeed fasting upon the Lords Day whereof see M. Cartwright in Mr. Whitgifts defence pag. 99. fine who allegeth this intended sentence as the undoubted saying of Ignatius As concerning the matter the Lords Day being the Day of our Saviours Resurrection and so to us a day of joy it was ever in regard thereof prohibited to fast thereupon As concerning the phrase of killing Christ it is to be taken as spoken of murdering or killing only by way of signification or in a like sober sense as when the Apostle affirmeth us to be buryed with Christ in Baptism Rom. 6.4 Coloss 2.12 Or as when he affirmeth of sinners that they crucify again to themselves the Son of God Hebr. 6.6 In so much as Mr. Whitgift in his defence pag. 102. ante med and Mr. Hooker l. 5. sect 72. pag. 209. circa med do both of them specially mention and answer this very objection urged by Mr. Wotton And Brereley in his Omissions c. of pag. 94. saith And so likewise doth Mr. Buddle in his discourse of Evangelical Fasts pag. 13. post med I say plainly this mans testimony is nothing worth because he was of little judgement in Divinity 7. Seaventhly concerning Free-will merit of works invocation of Saints and such other like the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury discoursing of [n] Mr. Whitgift in his defence c. against the reply of Cartwright pag. 472. fine 473. initio Doctrin taught in any age since the Apostles time affirmeth without any other exception of age or Father that to use his own words [o] Mr. Whitgift ubi supra pag. 473. paulo post initium and see Mr. D. Covel in his examination c. pag. 120. post med affirming in like manner and saying Divers both of the Greek and Latin Church were spotted with errors about freewil Merits invocation of Saints c. almost all the Bishops and writers of the Greek Church and Latin also for the most part were spotted with Doctrines of Freewil of Merit of invocation of Saints and such like And so accordingly concerning invocacation of Saints Mr. Fulk saith [p] Fulk in his rejoynder to Bristow pag. 5. fine I confess that Ambrose Austin and Hierom held invocation of Saints to be lawful And it is in like manner yet further confessed and affirmed of the Fathers in particular that [q] Mr. Fulk against the Rhemish Testament in 2 Pet. c. 1. sect 3. fol. 443. paulo post med in Nazianzen Basil and Chrysostom is mention of invocation of Saints that [r] Ibid paulo post med Theodoret also speaketh of prayers unto Martyrs that [s] Ibid paulo ante med Leo ascribeth much to the prayers of St. Peter for him that [t] Ibid. paulo ante med many of the antient Fathers held that the Saints departed pray for us And to omit like further confession concerning [u] Mr. Fulk against Purgatory pag. 310. Ambrose [x] Chemnitius examen part 3. pag. 200. a. fine saith Invocatio Sanctorum tandem circa Annum Domini 370. per Basilium Nyssenum Naz anzenum in publicos Ecclesiae conventus invehi caepit Basil Nazianzen Gregory Nyssen [y] Chemnitius ibid. pag. 211. a. ante med And see further concerning Hierom Bullinger in Apoc. Serm. 87. fol. 270. b. ante med Theodoret Hierom and concerning also even [z] Chemnitius ibid. pag. 211. a. initio allegeth St. Austin invocating St. Cyprian and concludeth saying thereof Haec Augustious sine Scriptura temporibus consuetudim cedens St. Augustin himself St. Cyprian who was much their antient is charged [a] The Centurists cent 3. col 84. lin 23. say Certè in fine prioris Epistolae libri primi non obscurè sentit Cyprianus Martyres Sanctos desunctoâ— pro viventibus orare to affirm that Martyrs and dead Saints did pray for the living And the Centurists charge Origen who was antient to Cyprian with [b] Centur. 3. col 83. lin 49. they allege Origen saying O beate Job ora pro nobis miseris prayer for himself to holy Job and [c] Cent. 3. col 75. lin 29. it is said Angelos etiam Origine invocandos putavit hom 1. in Ezek. invocation of Angels affirming further that [d] Centur. 3. c. 4. col 83. lin 47. it is said Videas in Doctorum hujus seculi scriptis non obscura vestigia invocationis Sanctorum there are manifest steps of Invocation of Saints in the Doctors of that antient age 8. Eightly concerning Baptism and grace conferred by it and other Sacraments it is confessed that the most antient Fathers who succeeded next to the Apostles Scholars namely Justin Clement c. [e] Centur. 2. c. 4. col 47. lin 43. and in cent 3. c. 4. col 82. lin 55. it is said Affirmare audet Cyprianus quod persona Baptizans Spiritum Sanctum conferat Baptizatum intus sanctificet c. thought regeneration not to be signified but wrought by Baptism and the word unto which two joyned together they attribute efficacy that is to say remission of sins that [f] Zuinglius tom 2. de Baptismo fol. 70. it was a great error of the old Doctors in that they supposed the external water of Baptism to be of any value towards the purging of sin that [g] Musculus loc com pag. 299. post med saith thereof Inconsideratè dictum est ab Augustino c. Austin did inconsiderately affirm the Sacraments of the New Testament to give salvation that also [h] Centur. 3. c. 6. col 125. lin 16. Origen Tertullian and Cyprian mention how that the Baptized persons were accustomed to be signed with the sign of the Cross That there were likewise then used in Baptism sundry other Ceremonies
and next before 18. Martin Luther agreeth for otherwise saith M. D. Covel [a] Mr. Covel ubi supra pag. 107. paulo post med By what course of authority inforcing obedience can the Churches divided members dispersed in other several Kingdoms and Nations be governed unless according to these principles laid down by Mr. Covel some one have authority over them all If it rest in the several other Princes of those other several Kingdoms who then shall have authority to command those Princes severally absolute in Government disagreeing also perhaps in Religion and some of them as in the times of the Primitive Church not yet Christian And if no assured means be in this case left how then is that avâ—yded which Mr. Covel here saith of the Church being in far worse case than the meanest Commonwealth For howsever the said several Kingdoms of such said several Princes make each of them on absolute and several Common-wealth yet the several Congregations dispersed throughout those several Kingdoms do all of them make but one spiritual Common-wealth and Church so Christ obliged in duty to the belief and profession of one and the same faith See further hereof in the next Consideration num 68. and in Brereley tract 3. sect 7. after o. at the figure 7. the Church which though dispersed in several Kingdoms under several Christian Magistrates maketh yet but one Church should be in a far worse case than the meanest Common-wealth nay almost than a den of Thieves if it were left destitute of means either to convince Heresies or suppress them yea saith he further which is much to be noted though there were neither help nor assistance of the Christian Magistrate c. Hitherto of Peters Primacy Now as concerning that only preheminence or Primacy which Jacobus Andraeas thought necessary [b] Hospinianus in his Historia Sacramentaria parte altera fol. 389. a. circa med reporteth of Iacobus Andraeas a prime Lutheran Demonstrare conatur Ecclesiarum tranquillum statum tueri difficile esse nisi ad aliquem tanquam ad summum Administratorem Pontificem rerum summa deferatur to establish the Church quiet which also our learned and so greatly [c] See Melancthon greatly commended for a man raised up of God by Luther in praefat primi tomi oper Melancth And also in Act. Colloquii Altembergensis pag. 94. paulo ante med and pag. 230. paulo post med commended Adversary Melancthon [d] Melancthon in the Book entituled Centuria Epistolatum Theologicarum c. Epist 74. quae est Melancthonis pag. 244. paulo post med saith from the opinion of himself and other his Brethren Quemadmodum sunt aliqui Episcopi qui praesunt pluribus Ecciesiis c. As certain Bishops are president over many Churches so the Bishop of Rome is President over all Bishops and this Canonical Policy no wise man as I think doth or ought to disallow c. For the Monarchy of the Bishop of Rome is in my opinion profitable to this end that consent of Doctrin may be retained wherefore an agreement may easily be established in this article of the Popes Primacy if other articles could be agreed upon And see Melancthons other like saying set down by Conradus Schlusselburg in Catalog Haereticorum l. 13. ult pag. 633. acknowledged as due and appertaining to the Roman Sea and which as the learned Puritans freely confess doth by way of proportion necessarily arise and follow upon the Protestants acknowledgement either of a Catholick visible [e] Mr. Iacob in his reasons taken out of Gods word c. pag. 24. saith By acknowledging a Catholick visible Church it followeth necessarily that there is and ought to be on earth an universal Government Ecclesiastical c. for if there be properly one visible Church and Government Ecclesiastical throughout the world then this must be in some one place eminently for some whither must we go when Christ biddeth us tell the Church now there is no place in all the world so likely as Rome is to be the visible and spring-head of universal Government of the Catholick Church And see more evidently in subdivis 13. at 2.3 Brereley tract 1. sect 4. Also Martin Luther in loc com class 1. cap. 37. pag. 107. post med saith Cum Deus voluerit habere unam Ecclesiam Catholicam per totum Orbem necesse fuâ—t unum aliquem populum imo unum aliquem Patrem istius unius populi eligi and quem suâ—s posteros spectaret totus Orbis fieret unum ovile fic ex omnibus gentibus in infinitum variatis moribus tamen unica fieret Ecclesia Church or else but of Bishops [f] M. Cartwright in M. Whitgifts defence c. pag. 380. ante med saith if it be necessary for keeping of unâ—ty in the Church that one Arch-Bishop should be Primate over all why not as meet that for the keeping of the whole universal Church there should be one Archbishop over all And in his 2. reply part 1. pag. 582. paulo post med he further saith This point of keeping peace in the Church is one of those which requireth as well a Pope over all Arch-Bishops as one Arch-Bishop over all Bishops in a Realm And the very same is more fully as yet affirmed by Beza see his words at large in Sarav a de diversis Ministrorum gradibus c. pag. 491. fine 492. initio Government confessedly [g] Of the confessed Government of Bishops and Arch-Bishops in all ages since the Apostles see Mr. Whitgifts defence pag. 470 471. testified and practised in all succeeding ages since the Apostles and without which foresaid Papal Primacy as is inferred by Mr. Cartwright and others [h] Mr. Cartwright in his 2. reply part 1. pag. 582. med saith If an Arch-Bishop be necessary for calling a Provincial council when the Bishops are divided it is necessary there be also a Pope which may call the general Council when division is between the Arch-Bishops for when the Churches of one Province be divided from other as you ask me so I ask you who shall assemble them together Who shall admonish them of their duties when they are assembled If you can find a way how this may be done without a Pope the way is also found whereby the Church is disburdened of the Arch-Bishop See also this point more plainly confessed by Conradus Schlusselburg Sir Edwin Sands and others alleged hereafter in the third Consideration cannot be assembled any general Council which is yet nevertheless the confessed only hope remaining ever to asswage Protestants contentions In respect whereof Melancthon did as before assent to acknowledge the Popes foresaid Primacy As touching this only Primacy we allege that Mr. Fulk affirmeth in general that not some few but [i] Mr. Fulk in confirmation of Papists quarrels c. Printed Anno 1583. pag. 4. initio many of the antient Fathers were deceived to think something more of Peters Prerogative
for the Scripture hath not all things and therefore the Apostles delivered certain things by writing and certain by Tradition with whom agreeth St. Basil saying [u] Basil de Spir. Sanct. c. 27. Some things we have from Scripture other things from the Apostles Tradition c. both which have like force unto godliness Mr. Doctor Reynolds answering to these foresaid sayings of Basil and Epiphanius saith [x] D. Reynolds in his conclusions annexed to his conference the 1. Conclusion pag. 689. I take not upon me to controle them but let the Church judge if they considered with advice enough c. Whereunto might be added the like further confessed [y] Where Eusebius l. 1. Demonstr Evang. cap. 8. is objected to say That the Apostles published their Doctrin partly by writing partly without writing as it were by a certain unwritten Law Mr. Whitaker de Sacra Scriptura pag. 668. fine saith thereto I answer that this testimony is plain enough but in no force to be received because it is against the Scriptures And whereas Dâ—onysius de Eccles Hierarch c. 1. versus finem saith That the Apostles dâ—d deliver their Doctrin partly by writing partly without writing c. Mr. Whitaker hereafter alleged in this Consideration num 13. aâ— t. de Sacra Scriptura pag. 655. ante med saith I do acknowledge that Dâ—onysius is in many places a great Patron of Traditions testimony from Eusebius and from Dyonysius Areopagita the Apostles Scholar And thus much briefly concerning the Fathers of the Greek Church Now as concerning the like confessed Doctrin in the Fathers of the Latin Church to avoid tediousness St. Austin only as being most [z] Gomarus in speculo verae Ecclesiae c. pag. 96. ante med saith Augustâ—us Patrum omnium communi sententâ—a purissimus habetur Also M. D. Field of the Church l. 3. pag. 170. fine tearmeth Austin the greatest of all the Fathers worthiest Divine the Church of God ever had since the Apostles times approved by our Adversaries shall serve for all who labouring to prove that those who are Baptized by Hereticks should not be re-baptized saith [a] Aug. de Bap. contra Don. l. 5. c. 23. The Apostles commanded nothing hereof but that custom which was opposed herein against Cyprian is to be believed to proceed from their tradition as many things be which the whole Church holdeth and are therefore well believed to be commanded of the Apostles although they be not written Wherein and [b] See the like saying in St. Austin Epist 118. ad Januarium other his like sayings his meaning is so evident and confessed that M. Cartwright speaking thereof saith [c] See Mr. Cartwright in Mr. Whitgifts defence c. pag. 103. ante med To allow St. Austins saying is to bring in Popery again And that [d] See Mr. Cartwrights words alleged ubi supra And see his further assertion hereof in his 2. Reply against Master Whitgift part 1. pag. 84. fine 85. 86. If St. Austins judgement be a good judgement then there be some things commanded of God which are not in the Scriptures and thereupon no sufficient Doctrin conteined in the Scriptures Adde but now hereunto that [e] See Chemnitius examen part 1. pag. 87. 89 90. Chemnitius reproveth for their like testimony of unwritten traditions Clemens Alexandrinus Origen Epiphanius Ambrose Hierom Maximus Theophilus Basil Damascene c. That Mr. Fulk [f] See Mr. Fulk against Purgatory pag. 362. ante med 303. 397. and against Martial pag. 170 178. and against Bristows Motives pag. 35. 36. also confesseth as much of Chrysostom Tertullian Cyprian Augustin Hierom c. That lastly M. Whit. [g] See Mr. Whâ—taker de Sacra Scriptura pag. 678. 681. 683. 685. 690. 695. 696. 670. 668. acknowledgeth the like of Chrysostom Epiphanius Tertullian Cyprian Augustine Innocentius Leo Basil Eusebius Damascen c. Now as concerning Ceremonies Mr. Calfehil to omit others affirmeth that [h] See this saying of Master Calfchil in Mr. Fulks rejoynder to Martials Râ—ply Printed 1580. pag. 131. fine 132. initio the Fathers declined all from the simplicity of the Gospel in Ceremonies In like manner concerning the Machabees Ecclesiasticus Toby and other the Books of the old Testament [i] Unworthily so sâ—cluded by Mr. Whitaker in his answer to Mr. Reynolds refutation pag. 22. 23. for it is a rash assertion so to measure the Scriptures by the â—ongue wherein they are written as to restrain the Spirit of God to one only Language The known vanity of which said asserâ—ion is sufficiently further disproved by example of Daniel a great part whereof viz. from cap. 2. ver 4 u que ad finem cap. 7. though not written in Hebrew is yet by our adversaries themselves acknowledged for Canonical Neither is it approved that God would direct by his holy Spirit no Authors in their writings but such as were known and also further declared by certain testimony to be Prophets For our adversaries cannot yet tell who were Authors of the several Books of Judges the third and fourth of Kings the two of Chron cles and the Books of Ruth and Job even Mr. Whâ—taker himself in disput de Sacra Scriptura pag. 603. post med saith hereof Multoâ—um lâ—brorum authores ignorantur ut â—osuae Ruth Paralâ—ppomenon Hester c. And Mr. Willâ—t in his Synopsis pag. 4. post med saith We receive many Books â—n the old Testament the Aâ—thors whereof are not perfectly known Also Calvâ—n Bâ—za and the publishers of the English Bâ—bles of Anno 1584. 1579. in the Preface or Argument upon the Epâ—stle to the Hâ—brews do all of them profess to rest doubtful of the Author thereof Calvin and Beza there affirming that it is not written by Paul whereof see also Calvin further in cap. 2. Hebr. ver 3. fine unworthily secluded by Mr. Whitaker from the Canon for thaâ— saith he they were written in Greek or some other forein language and not in Hebrew nor had for their known Authors those whom God had declared to be his Prophets that these Books were nevertheless holden for Sacred and Canonical by St. Austin the third Council of Carthage and other Fathers is made evident by their manifest [k] St. Austin de doctrina Christiana l. 2. c. 8. saith Totus Canon Scripturarum his libris continâ—tur Qâ—nque Moylcos c. Job Tobias Hester Judith Machabaeoâ—um lâ—bâ—i duo Esdrae duo c. Illi duo libri unus qui Sapientia alius qui Ecclesiasticus inscribitur de quadam fimilitudine Salomonis esse dicuntur Nam Jesus filius Syracheos conscripsisse constantissimè perhibetur qui tamen quoniam in authoritatem recipi meruerunt inter Propheticos numerandi sunt reliqui sunt c. Also the third Council of Carthage can 47. saith Placuit ut praeter Scripturas Canonicas nihil in Ecclesia legatur sub nomine divinarum
we upon this ground deny also with the Lutherans the [i] Osiander a prime Lutheran speaking of the last Canon of the Laodicen Council commonly objected by our Adversaries wherein are omitted the Books now in question and the Apocalyps saith in his Epitom c. cent 4. pag. 299. fine Non recitantur libri Machabaeorum rectè quidem In eo autem erratum est quod Epistolam Jacobi Judae posteriores duas Joannis inter Canonica Scripta numerant quae Scripta non longè post Apostolorum tempora non pro Scriptis Canonicis habita sunt c. Rectè autem omissa est Apocalypsis ea enim non est Joannis Apostoli c. And see this point more fully in Brereley tract 1. sect 10. subdivis 3. fine at a. and tract 2. c. 2. sect 10. subdivis 2. initio in the text and margent there at o. p. q. r. s t. u. And see at large in the Protestant Authors themselves the places there cited wherein they reject these Scriptures under colour and pretence that they were denyed or doubted of in the Primitive Church Epistles of James Jude the second of Peter the 2. and 3. of John the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalyps no less than the other Books now in question but by that which many of the Fathers do constantly affirm And seeing the Churches assertion as being in the judgement of our very [k] Mr. Fulk in his answer to a counterfeit Catholick pag. 5. initio saith the Church of Christ hath judgement to discern true writings from counterfeit and the word of God from the writings of men and this judgement she hath of the Holy Ghost And Mr. Jewel in his defence of the Apology pag. 201. and after the other Edition of 1571. pag. 242. circa med saith The Church of God hath the spirit of Wisedom whereby to discern true Scripture from false The Protestant Author of the Scripture and the Church which Bullinger so greatly commendeth in his Preface thereof to the Reader doth cap. 15. fol. 71.72 cap. 16. fol. 74.75 affirm that The Church is indued with the Spirit of God and that the diligence and authority of the Church is to be acknowledged herein which hath partly given forth her testimony of the assured writings and hath partly by her Spiritual judgement refused the writings which are unworthy And afterwards he further saith We could not believe the Gospel were it not that the Church taught us and witnessed that this doctrin was delivered by the Apostles To this end Mr. Hooker in his first Book of Ecclesiastical Policy sect 14. pag. 86. ante med saith apud Brereley tract 1. sect 10. subd 3. Of things necessary the very chiefest is to know what Books we are bound to esteem holy which point is confessed impossible for the Scripture it self to teach whereof he giveth a very sensible demonstration ibid. l. 2. sect 4. pag. 102. fine saying It is not the word of God which doth or possibly can assure us that we do well to think it his word for if any one Book of Scripture did give testimony of all yet still that Scripture which giveth credit to the rest would require an other Scripture to give credit unto it Neither could we come to any pause wherein to rest unless besides Scripture there were some thing which might assure us c. Which he acknowledgeth to be the authority of Gods Church l. 3. sect 8. pag. 146. fine l. 2. sect 7. pag. 116. ante med And Brereley tract 2. cap. 3. sect 11. subd 1. at s allegeth further the like judgement of Mr. D. Covel in his defence of Mr. Hookers five Books art 4. c. pag. 31. ante med saying Doubtless it is a tolerable opinion of the Church of Rome if they go no further as some of them do not to affirm that the Scriptures are holy and divine in themselves but so esteemed by us for the authority of the Church And after in the same page It is not the word of God which doth or possibly can assure us that we do well to think it is the word of God the first outward motion leading men so to esteem of the Scripture is the authority of Gods Church which teacheth us to receive Marks Gospel who was not an Apostle and to refuse the Gospel of Thomas who was an Apostle and to retain Lukes Gospel who saw not Christ and to reject the Gospel of Nicodemus that saw him Adversaries an infallible and sure direction to us in this question of the Canonical Scriptures is as heretofore positively delivered and made plain to us by no less testimony than of St. Isidoâ—e Innocentius Gelasius the Fathers of the Carthage Council and to omit others of St. Austin himself who in our Adversaries confessed judgement was [l] M. D. Covel in his answer to John Burges pag. 3. fine saith Saint Austin a man far beyond all that ever were before him or shall in likelihood follow after him both for humane and divine learning those being excepted that were inspired Also M. D. Field of the Church l. 3. fol. 170. fine saith Austin the greatest of all the Fathers and worthiest Divine the Church of God ever had since the Apostles times And Gomarus in speculo verae Ecclesiae c. pag. 96. ante med saith Augustinus Patrum omnium communi sententia purissimus habetur chief and best of all the Fathers what can be more clear and convincing herein for us and against our Adversaries than that which is as heretofore though but briefly yet plainly thus delivered from the not doubtful but confessed judgement of St. Austin and those other many antient Fathers Mr. D. [m] M. D. Covel in his answer to Mr. John Burges pag. 85. fine saith of the untruths or repugnances supposed to be in these Books now in question We could without violence have afforded them the reconcilement of other Scriptures and undoubtedly have proved them to be most true And pag. 87. fine 88 89 90. â—e maketh special answer to certain such objected repugnances Covel a prime man among our Adversaries not forbearing in this case to undertake special defence and answer against such weak seeming repugnances or contradictions occuring [n] Concerning the like seeming repugnancy of other Scriptures Mr. Jewel in his defence c. pag. 361. fine affirmeth that St. Mark alleged Abiathar for Abimelech and that St. Matthew nameth Hieremias for Zacharias and in St. Matthew 27.9 are words alleged under the name of Hieremy which are not found in Hieremy but in Zachary 11.13 Also in Mark 15.25 our Saviour is said to be crucified in the third hour whereas in John 19.14 Pilate sate in judgement upon him about the sixt hour In like manner Luke 3.35 36. affirmeth Sale to be the son of Caynan and Caynan the son of Arphaxad and so Arphaxad was Grandfather to Sale whereas in Genesis 11.12 it is said that Arphaxad lived 35.
D. Humfrey did grievously reprehend Mr. Jewel for his so bold appealing to the Fathers affirming therefore of Mr. Jewel that herein [2.] Humfredus in libel de vita Jewell Printed Londini pag. 212. And see the same also in Mr. Fulks retentive against Bristow pag. 55. circa med he gave the Papists too large a scope was injurious to himself and after a manner spoyled himself and the Church which like disclaim in the antient Fathers is no less plainly professed by Jacobus Acontius in his treatise [3.] Jacobus Acontius in Stratagematum Satanae l. 6. pag. 296. saith of the Protestants allegation of the Fathers Quidam eo redierunt ut Patrum authoritatibus omnia denuò replerent quod utinam tam secundo fecissent successu quam bona spe aggressi sunt c. Equidem perniciosissimam omninoque fugiendam hanc offe abitror consuetudinem And see the like in Peter Martyr de Votis pag. 462. circa med dedicated to her late Majesty and by sundry [4.] Lutherus tom 2. Wittemberg Anno 1551. lib. de servo arbitrio pag. 434. affirmeth the Fathers of so many ages to have been plainly blind and most ignorant in the Scriptures to have erred all their life time and that unless they were amended before their deaths they were neither Saints nor pertaining to the Church And see further Luthers Book de servo arbitrio Printed in Octavo 1603. pag. 72.73 337. Also in Colloquiis Mensalibus cap. de Patribus Ecclesiae Luther saith of sundry Fathers in particular In the writings of Hierom there is not a word of true faith in Christ and sound Religion Tertullian is very superstitious I have holden Origen long since accursed Of Chrysostom I make no accompt Basil is of no worth he is wholly a Monk I weigh him not of a hair Cyprian is a weak Divine c. affirming there yet further that the Church did degenerate in the Apostles age and that the Apology of Philip Melancthon doth far excel all the Doctors of the Church and exceed even Austin himself And Pomerane in Joannam saith Nostri Patres sive sancti sive non sancti nihil moror excaecati sunt Montanico Spiritu per traditiones humanas doctrinas Daemoniorum c. non purè docent de Justicatione c. Nec solliciti quidem sunt ut Jesum Christum per Evangelium suum verè doceant And Beza in his Preface upon the new Testament dedicated to the Prince of Condy Anno 1587. affirmeth that Even in the best times the ambition ignorance and lewdness of Bishops was such that the very blind may easely perceive how that Sathan was President in their assemblies or Councils other Protestant Writers many of them not doubting specially to reprove even those Fathers that lived next to the Apostles times Mr. Whitaker and others to such purpose [5.] Abusing for where as Euseb l. 3. c. 26. fine allegeth Egesippus saying Till those times the Church remained a pure Virgin and incorrupt for if any then were willing to deprave or corrupt the sincere rule of healthful doctrin they lay hid in the obscure corners of darkness But after the Apostles death c. then certainly the false and subtil conspiracy of wicked errors took beginning through the fraud and craft of those who laboured to disperse false doctrine c. Mr. Whitaker in resp ad rationes Campian rat 7. pag. 102. and contra Duraeum l. 7. pag. 490. 491. urgeth this to prove that presently after the Apostles times the true Church was no longer a chast Virgin but became adulterous and corrupt An inference many ways most absurd For first Egesippus only meaneth that during the Apostles times the Church remained a Virgin that is not so much as assaulted openly by Hereticks who then lay secret and lurking where as after the Apostles times they stepped forth and gave open and violent assaults invading sometimes and usurping even upon Bishops Seas and corrupting or altering with their damnable heresies many of the Churches revolted Children which yet no more made the visible true Church to be as then heretical or unchast than Luthers like late dispersion of his doctrine and infecting therewith of many who were formerly Catholicks maketh our now Church to be Lutheran Secondly if otherwise the Church so presently after the Apostles times ceased to be a Virgin and so became adulterous and corrupt who seeth not then the blasphemy thence ensuing For in what one age since the Apostles times to this present may the Church then be thought to be preserved chast Thirdly it is against manifest Scripture as where it is said of the Church I will marry thee to me for ever c. I will marry thee to me in saithfulness and thou shalt know the Lord. Osee 2.19 20. and I will make this my Covenant saith the Lord my Spirit that is upon thee and my words which I have put in thy mouth shall not depart out of thy mouth nor out of the mouth of thy seed nor out of the mouth of thy seeds seed from henceforth for evermore Isa 59.21 Very pertinenently therefore saith St. Cyprian to the contrary Adulterari non potest sponsa Christi incorrupta est pudica c. l. de unitate Ecclesiae post initium abusing the mistaken testimony of Egesippus To this end also doth M. Napper in his discourse hereof to his late Majesty not only condemn all the Fathers that lived for [6.] Brereley tract 2. c. 1. sect 4. at q. r. s t. saith Mr. John Napper in his treatise upon the Revelations pag. 43. versus finem affirmeth that the Popes Kingdom hath bad power over all Christians from the time of Pope Silvester and the Emperour Constantine for these thousand two hundred and sixty years and that ibid. pag. 145. col 3. fine from the time of Constantine until these our days even 1260. years the Pope and his Clergy hath possessed the outward visible Church of Christians That also ibid. pag. 68. versus finem between the year of Christ 300. and 316. the Antichristian and Papistical reign began reigning universally and without any debatable contradiction 1260. years Gods true Church most certainly abiding so long latent and invisible Ibid. pag. 191. initio pag. 161. col 3. circa med pag. 156. ante med 237. paulo post med 23. fine pag. 188. ante med 1260. years last before Luther but doth also proceed yet further affirming that [7.] Mr. Napper upon the Revelations pag. 191. initio and see the Century Writers cent 2. cap. ◠col 125. lin 49. During even the second and third ages next after Christ the trne temple of God and light of the Gospel was obscured by the Roman Antichrist himself In like manner doth M. Fulk averre [8.] Mr. Fulk in his answer to a counterfeit Catholick pag. 35. prope finem the true Church decayed immediatly after the Apostles times and that
[*] Mr. Fulk ubi supra prope initium immediatly after the Apostles times errors and abuses crept into the true Church With whom agreeth Mr. Downham affirming that [9.] Mr. Downham in his treatise of Antichrist l. 2. c. 2. pag. 25. prope finem This mystery of iniquity which St. Paul 2 Thess 2. ver 7. affirmeth to be working in his times is more than boldly perverted by Mr. Downham and our other Adversaries to be as then working in the Church of Christ directly against St. Paul himself who tearmeth the Church the pillar and stay of Truth 1 Tim. 3.15 The working therefore of this mystery of iniquity in the Apostles times was not in the Church but in the Churches then persecutors and sundry heresies of those first times As also it is yet working in the heresies of this time the same being as some Divines hold the very next and ultima or at least penultima myst cal working before the Revelation of Antichrist himself the general defection of the visible Church foretold 2. Thess 2. began to work in the Apostles times And Melancthon saith accordingly that [10.] Melancthon in 2 Cor. cap. 3. Hamelmannus de traditionibus col 460. saith Post mortem Joannis Apostoli caeperunt defectiones a fide doctrinae daemoniorum sub specie verbi Dei prohibitiones nuptiarum ciboruth vota caelibatus c. presently from the beginning of the Church the antient Fathers obscured the doctrine concerning the justice of faith increased Ceremonies and devised peculiar worships As also Peter Martyr affirmeth in like manner that in the Church [11.] Martyr de Votis pag. 477. errors did begin immediatly after the Apostles times And that [12.] Martyr de Votis pag. 490. fine presently after their Age men began to decline from the word of God and that therefore [13.] Martyr de Votis pag. 476. paulo post med saith Quamdâ—â— consist mus in Conciliis Patribus versabimur semper in iisdem orroribus so long as we do insist upon Councils and Fathers we shall be alwaies conversant in the same errors In so much as Beza and others doubted not if not most arrogantly read and judge to prefer in [14.] Beza in Epist Theol. Ep. 1. pag. 5. initio saith Itaque dicere nee immerito quidem ut opinor consuevi dum illa tempoâ—a Apostolicis etianâ— proâ—ima cum nostris comparo plus illos conscientiae scientiae minâ—s hâ—buiffe nos contra scientiae plus conscientiae minus habere haec mea sententia est c. And Mr. Whitgift in his defence of the answer to the admonition pag. 472. fine pag. 473. ante med saith to Mr. Cartwright The doctrine taught and professed by our Bishops at this day is more perfect and sounder than it commonly was in any age after the Apostles c. how greatly were almost all the Bishops and learned writers of the Greek Church and Latines also for the most part spotted with Doctrines of Freewil of Merits of invocation of Saints and such like other points of Popery surely you are not able to reekon in any age since the Apostles times any company of Bishops that taught and held so sound and perfect Doctrine in all points as the Bishops of England do at this day knowledge of the truth their now Protestant Writers even before those other that flourished immediatly and next after the Apostles times Caelius Secundus Curio a principal Protestant writer expressing further to that end [15.] Caelius Secundus Curio in his Book de amplitudine regni Dei lib. 1. pag. 43. circa med which said Book is greatly commended by Beza in Epist Theolog. pag. 232. saith An ignoramus quantis in tenebris quantaque caecitate ignorantia versatus sit mundus ab Apostolorum fere aetate usque ad haec tempora in quibus Dominus praeter omnem expectationem se ipse caepit apetire in how great darkness blindess and ignorance the world hath continued almost from the Apostles age to these very times in which above all expectation our Lord began to manifest himself And an other learned Protestant writer affirmeth accordingly that [16.] The Author of the Book intituled Antichristus sive Prognostica finis mundi apud Brereley tract 2. c. 1. sect 6. subd 1. at g. pag. 12. fine saith Spiritus qui annunciat futura non operatur nisi eunte Evangelio quod sub finem ex confesso Lutherus primus invexit And pag. 13. post med he further saith Non manifestatur autem Psuedo propherarum surrectio nisi Evangelio quod inde primitivo Apostolorum Evangelâ—o ante Lutherum ut diximus nunquam ivit Ne quis autem Hussiticuâ— Evangelium pertinere huâ— putâ—t id prohibet â—uod Christus illud Evangelium edicit quod sub finem per universum forbem esseâ— ituâ—um Porro Hâ—â—â—ticum Evangelium â—ohemis tantum venit signo orgo esse non potest Naâ— commune Orbis Evangelium signo esse voluit non illud unius gentis Lutheri Evangelium per Orbem volat tam voce quam prelo from the Apostles times till Luther the Gospel had never open passage not so much as in Huss his time In respect of which their so common received opinion Sebastianus Francus concluded for certain that [17.] Sâ—bastianus Francus in Epistola de abrogandis in universum omnibus statutis Ecclesiasticis If our Adversaries do hereunto answer that this Sebastianus Francus denyed the Baptism of Infants and being so an Anabaptist his testimony is not to be regarded it is replyed thereto First that being otherwise a learned writer and no less enemy to us than our Adversaries his testimony as against himself and them is therewith of no less force than theirs Secondly that the denyal of Childrens Baptism till they be of years of belief is osspecially by our adversaries who deny the necessity of Baptism to infants excepted against unworthily in comparison of their own far greater differences concerning Real presence Christs descent into Hell his suffering in soul the pains of Hell Reprobation and many more of like consequence notwithstanding which they yet profess to be Brethren of one Church Thirdly that accordingly Zuinglius and Oecolampadius do affirm the Baptism of Infants to be but a matter of indifferency and such at the Church may worthily omit and rightly take away For Zuinglius apud Brereley tract 2. cap. 3. sect 9. subd 3. at e. f. tom 2. l. de Baptismo fol. 96. a circa med saith Num enim tanti momenti res haec est ut tantas turbas diffidia propter hane excitâ—re conveniat etiamsi parvulorum Baptismus nullis omnino Scripturarum testimoniis inniteretur Externum quiddam est ceremonale quo ut aliis rebus externis Ecclesia dignè honestè uti potest vel idem hoc omittere rite tollere c. And in Zuinglii Oecolampadii Epistolarum libro secundo pag. 363. post med Oecolampadius
saith of Baptism of Infants Cogitare illos decebat rem externam effe quae charitatis lege dispensabilis est ad aedificationem proximi fatemur non esse legem Baptizandi pueros sed etiam non est lex quae arceat pueros And see him further pag. 301. prope finem And so accordingly Peter Martyr in his Epistles annexed to his Common places in English Ep. 34. to Robert Cooch pag. 133. b. circa med tearmeth him his dear friend in the Lord his dear friend in Christ Ibid. pag. 115. a. initio and yet did the said Robert as appeareth there pag. 114. b. circa med deny Baptism to Infants as likewise Oecolampadius in libro Epistolarum Oecolampadii Zuinglii pag. 300. prope finem writeth of this very point to Baltazar Pacimontanus tearming him there Charissime Frater and yet was he a chief Anabaptist Fourthly this Sebastianus Franeus was so far enemy to the other barbarous Anabaptists that be specially reprehendeth them apud Brereley tract 2. cap. 3. sect 5. subd 1. at x. Chron. part 111. fol. 236. b. seq where also he numbreth up seventy of the Anabaptists different opinions and concludeth their further differences to be so great as no man can either know or number them affirming further that scarce two of them are found to agree in all things Statim post Apostolos omnia inversa sunt c. Presently after the Apostles times all things were turned upside down c. And that for certain through the work of Antichrist the external Church together with the Faith and Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure and that for these 1400. years the Church hath been no where external and visible 15. Fifteenthly to seal up as it were the premisses whereas Master Whitgift doth against Mr. Cartwright learnedly and truly urge this general rule or proof of Apostolick Doctrine saying [m] Mr. Whitgift in his defence pag. 351. post med And see also further hereof D. Field of the Church l. 4. cap. 21. pag. 242. the title of that Chapter being Of the Rulâ—s whereby true traditions may be known from counterfeâ— For so much as the Original and beginning of these names Metropolitan Arch-Bishop c. such is their antiquity cannot be found so far as I have read is to be supposed they have their Original from the Apostles themselves for as I remember St. Austin hath this rule in his 118. Epistle In so much as he yet further saith in proof of this rule [n] Mr. Whitgift ubi supra pag. 352. ante med and sce Zuinglius his words hereof tom 2. fol. 94. b. circa med it is of credit with the writers of our time namely with Master Zuinglius Master Calvin and Master Gualter and surely I think no learned man doth dissent from them It is now by the premisses and by manifest [*.] Mr. Whitaker in resp ad Camp rat 7. pag. 101. initio confesseth that the time of the Roman churches change cannot easily be told And Master Gabriel Powel in his consideration of the Papists supplication pag. 43. circa post med being provoked that if our Catholick Doctrin be error then to tell us when it came in who was the Author of it c. answereth thereto acknowledging and saying We cannot tell by whom or at what time the enemy did sow it c. Neither indeed do we know who was the first Author of every one of your blasphemous opinions c. confession of sundry learned Protestants made more than evident that the several Doctrines of our Faith are according to this rule no less free from all noted and known beginning fince the Apostles times then are the other foresaid Doctrines of Metropolitans and Bishops a thing so manifest that Master Cartwright though our adversary doubteth not yet further to acknowledge the same saying therefore of this very rule in plain words [o] Mr. Cartwright his words in Mr. Whitgifts foresaid Defence c. pag. 352. initio that thereby a window is open to bring in all Popery And [o] Mr. Cartwriâ—ht alleged ibid. pag. 103. paulo ante med I appeal saith he to the judgement of all men if this be not to bring in Popery again to allow of St. Austins saying c. So evidently do our learned adversaries and the [2.] Apparent probability For seeing Pastors and Doctors must be in the Church till the end of the world Ephes 4.11 12 13. and Mr. Fulk against the Rhemish Testament in Ephes 4. fol. 335. a. initio and that they shall not be silent Esay 62.6 and the marginal notes of the English Bible in Esay 62.6 but shall alwaies resist all false opinions with open reprehension Mr. Fulk in his answer to a counterfeit Catholick pag. 11. initio and 92. ante med And that the Religion being of God no fear of man shall keep them back Mr. Dearing in his Reading upon the Epistle to the Hebrews in c. 2. ver 12. lect 10. cirea med and seeing also that all new and strange Doctrine is at its first beginning against and contrary to the other then before general received opinion as being for the time but private and singular in the first teacher thereof Yet it doth therefore upon these premises most evidently follow as well that all such new doctrine was ever at its first beginning resisted and openly withstood as also that by reason of such open and known resistance such said beginning is discovered and left known to posterity Which point as it is abundantly verified in the many examples of all such confessed heresies as are out of question between our adversaries and us whose resistance and secondary beginning since the Apostles times is yet to us discovered and left known So again to think that it should hold in all other and fail only in these matters now in controversy between our adversaries and us may be thought no less than very partial strange and inforced Vpon all which is necessarily deduced that according to Master Whitgifts foresaid rule and assertion whatsoever opinion is not known to have begun since the Apostles times the same is not new or secondary but received its Original from the Apostles themselves apparent probability of this foresaid rule in it self confirm and prove our foresaid Catholick Religion whereto we were so many ages since converted to be not new or secondary to the Apostles times but only Primitive and undoubtedly Apostolick 16. As [*.] Brereley tract 1. sect 7. subd 4. concerning Transubstantiation Master Whitaker giveth example in Innocentius the third saying [o] Whitaker l. 7. contra Duraeum pag. 480. circa ined saith Qui transubstantiationem primus excogitavit is fuit Innocentius tertius in Lateranesi Concilio And Brereley in his Omissions of pag. 183. saith And Mr. Sutcliff de Mâ—ssa Papistica l. 2. c. 5. fol. 196. b. circa med saith Transubstantiationis nomen Incentius 3. primùm publicè recipendum decrevit nec rem nec
for these thousand years last past but also for so many other precedent ages as being in our opinion not any new redemption but rather a continual commemoration and application of the force and benefit of that one Sacrifice which was offered once for all Hebr. 28. 18. To what hath been said already concerning Purgatory and Prayer for the dead we may in this occasion about innovations adde that which Brereley hath tract 1. sect 7. subd 6. of the same matter where he saith Mr. Whitaker giveth example to wit of innovation in Religion made by the Roman Church in Gregory the Great saying [e] Whitaker contra Duraeum l. 7. pag. 480. He that first delivered Purgatory for a certain doctrine was Gregory the Great Whereto in Gregories full discharge from all innovation in this point we answer that long before Gregory St. Austin whom our adversaries do unworthily [*] Vnworthily for whereas Mr. Fulk against the Rhemish Testament 1 Cor. 3. sect 6. fol. 267. b. circa med to prove that St. Austin doubted of Purgatory allegeth these words of St. Austin It is not incredible that some such thing is done after this life and it may be inquired of whether it be so and either be found or hid Aug. Enchâ—rid cap. 69. 68. And ad Dulcitium quaest 1. And in like pretence that St. Austin denyed Purgâ—tory Master Fulk doth there further allege these other words of St. Austin The third place we are utterly ignorant of c. Aug. Hypognost contra Pelag. l. 5. This we say is extreamly abusively to urge the Fathers doubtful obscure words against their other plainer sayings and known meanings Therefore in answer or explanation of these saying of St. Austin we say as to the first that St. Austin doubteth not there of Purgatory but only which point is at this day yet doubted of whether that to use St. Austins words in the very same place some of the faithful after this life be saved so much later or sooner by a certain Purgatory fire as they more or less loved their transitory goods So that his doubt there is not whether there be any Purgatory which by these his very words he presupposeth and in the very same Book saith thereof as is here alleged in the text at g. it may not be denyed c. but only as he yet further explaneth himself whether that to use his own further words rerum saecularium quamvis licitè concessarum tales cupiditates c. such affection to worldly things lawfully injoyed as to Wife Children c. that without grief of mind he cannot part from them be punished in Purgatory or not And of this point he saith as is before objected and as we our elves yet say it may he inquired of whether it be so and either be found or hidden Thus much of his unworthily supposed doubt Now concerning the second place of his like supposed denyal of Purgatory we say that St. Austin useth that alleged saying not in denyal of the temporal pains of Purgatory but only upon occasion and by way of disputation against the Pelagians who imagined that besides Heaven and Hell there was a third place of everlasting life prepared for infants that dyed unbaptized In respective confutation of which said imaginary third everlasting place he saith as is alleged the third place we are utterly ignorant of c. acknowledging no more places of ever histing continuance but Heaven and Hell and affirming withall further to the Pelagians that such infants shall for ever remain not in this pretended third place which they imagined and he denyed but saith he damnatione omnium levissima in a state of condemnation of all other most easy Aug. contra Julian Pelag. l. 5. c. 8. Their punishment as the Schoolmen hold being not paena sensus any sensible torment because they never committed actual sin but paena damni the punishment of loss or privation of Heaven Into which in regard of their original sin and want of actual faith they could not enter without Baptism Joan. 3.3 Furthermore the other sayings of Austin most plain for Purgatory are over-many and known to be here recited in so much as he himself foreseeth as it were and explaneth our adversaries other common and unworthy objections out of him concerning his sometimes mentioning Sacrifice offered for Martyrs and those that be in Heaven declaring and explaning that for them it is offered as a thanksgiving and for others that are not as yet in such persect estate as a propitiation Aug. Enchirid. cap. 110. vide Aug. de verbis Apost Serm. 17. in Joan. tract 84. Our adversaries therefore may do well more advisedly to consider of these and such other like obscure seeming sayings of the Fathers before they object them to us and to remember Bâ—za ' s direction in his answer to a like objected doubtful saying from Calvn where after exphcation made thereof he saith Comparanda sunt enim inter sâ— saepenumcro unius ejusdemque Scriptoris loca ut quae fuerit ejus sententia liquidò perspiciatur quum omnia omnibus locis etiam de re una quapiam dici nec possint nec debeant Hoc qui non faciunt dici non potest quam injuriam saepe bonis doctisque Scriptoribus faciant Bâ—za in Epâ—st Theolog. Ep. 82. pag. 382. ante med This admonition of Bâ—za but duly observed by our adversaries would save them much labour of often alleging so many unworthy frivolous and mistaken objections as are by them in many controversies no less tediously than commonly urged from the obscure serming sayings of the Fathers pretend to have been doubtful of Purgatory and to have denyed it to that end abusing his more obscure sayings accordingly as the antient Father [*] Vincent Lyr. advers haer ante med saith of the Hereticks of his time Captant plerun que veter is cujuspiam Viri scripta paulò involutius edita quae pro ipsa fui obscuritate dogmati suo quafi congruant ut illud nescio quid quodcunque proferunt â—â—que primi neque soli sentire videanâ—ur Vincentius Lyrinensis noteth of the like practise of the Novellists of his time delivereth the same for most certain saying amongst his many [*] Aug. de Civit. Dei l. 20. c. 25. paulo ante med saith Ex his quae dicta sunt videtur evidentiùs apparere in â—llo judicio quasdam quorundam purgatorias poenas futuras c. And l. 21. c. 13. fine he further saith Temporarias paemas alâ—i in hac vâ—ra tantum alii post mortem alii nunc tunc c. patiuntur In so much as Mr. Fulk though faâ—sly pretending St. Austins incercertainty herein is yet insorced to confess and say of this place Austin de civit Dei l. 21. c. 13. concludeth very clearly that some suffer temporal pains after this life this may not be denyed Mr. Fulk in 〈◊〉 confutation of Purgatory pag. 110. paulo ante med
suis paulatim fructus possessionum suarum pauperibus dividunt quam illos qui possessionibus venundatis semel omnia largiuntur non a me eis sed a Domino respondebitur Si vis esse perfectus vade vende omnia quae habes da pauperibus veni â—equere me Ad â—um loquiâ—uâ— qui vult esse perfectus c. iste quem tu laudas secundus tert uâ— gradus est quem nos recipimus dummodo sâ—amus prima secundâ—â— terths praeferenda nec à suo studâ—o Monachi deterrendi sunt à te lingua Viperca morsu saevissimo de quibus argumentaris dicis si omnes se clauserint fuerint in solitudine quis celebrabit Ecclesias c. And see this plainly confessed by Crispinus in his Book of the Estate of the Church pag. 131 132. Vigilantius and others The denyal of the power (f) In like manner is Januarius for this like doctrine repreved by St. Austin serm 49. ex diversis cap. 1. And Justus is for the same reproved by Gregory l. 4. dial c. 55. And see further hereof Leo Ep. 92. ad Rusticum And Concil Chalcedon cap. 7. And Austin Ep. 89. ad Hilarium and Chrysostom l. adversus Vituperatores vitae monasticae And Austin contra literas Petil. l. 3. c. 40. chargeth and reproveth Petilianus saying of him Deinceps perrexit ore maledâ—co in vituperationem Monachorum Monasteriorum c. And Austin in Psalm 132. charges also the Circumcellians for that saith he dicere consueverunt quid sibi vult nomen Monachorum And again Quid ergo dicunt illi quâ—â—nobis de nomine Monachorum insultant c. qui nobis dicunt ostendite ubi scriptum sit nomen Monachorum of Priests to remit sinns in the (g) See hereafter in this Consideration num 23. multo ante med at d. And in Brereley tract 3. sect 1. at x. in the margent is cited St. Ambrose lib. 1. de paenitentia cap. 2. saying of Novatians Sed aiunt se Domino deferre reverentiam cui soli remittendorum criminum potestatem reservant Immo nulli majoâ—em injuriam facâ—unt quam qui ejus volunt mandata rescindeâ—e Nam cum ipse in Evangelio suo dixerit Dominus Accipite Spiâ—itum Sanctum quorum remisâ—ritis peccata remittentur eis c. quis est ergo qui magis honorat utrum qui mandatis obtemperat an qui resistit And cap. 7. he further saith to them Cur Baptizatis si peccata per hominem dimitti non licet In Baptismo utique remissio peccatorum omnium est quid interest uâ—rum per paenitentiam an per lavacrum hoc jus sibi datum sacerdotes vendicent unum in utroque ministerium est Also Pacianus in Epist 1. ad Sympronianum Novatianum saith Nunquam Deus non paenitenti comminaretur nisi ignosceret paenitenti Solus hoc inquies Deus poterit Verum est Sed quod per Sacerdotes suos facit ipsius potestas est Nam quid est illud quod Apostolis dicit Quae ligaveritis in terris c. In like manner in Socrates in hist Tripart l. 2. cap. 13. fine is reproved Acesius the Novatian for that he taught concerning such as fell in persecution in vitandos quidem ad paenitentiam spem verò remissionis non à Sacerdotibus sed à Deo solummodò sustâ—ere qui potestatem habet peccata remittere Haec cum dixâ—ssâ—â— Acesius Imperatoâ— ait O Accsi pone scalam si potes ascende solus in caelum So strange and singular in those times was this opinion deemed vide hist Tripartit l. 8. c. 9. prope initium Novatians The denyal of Free-will and of Remission of Sinns and Grace conferr'd in Bâ—ptism in the [h] Hieron in prooemio librorum adversus Pelagianos fine saith Manichaeorum est hominum damnare naturam liberum auferre arbitrium Dei adjutorium and see Hieron in explanatione Symbol ad Damasum And St. Austin de fide contra Manich. c. 9. saith Adversus haec solita caecitate Manichaei latrant cum convincuntur naturam non esse malum sed in potestate esse hominis facere benè aut malè dicunt non esse animae liberam voluntatem non vident caecitatem suam c. vide ibid. c. 10. in actis cum Felice Manichaeo l. 2. c. 4. And Chrysostom in Joan. hom 45. prope initium saith Christ said to them no man can come to me except the Father who sent me draw him Hereat the Manichees do rise up contending by testimony of this Scripture that we can do nothing of our selves c. but this taketh not away our freewill but sheweth that we need Gods help And concerning the other point touching Baptism Mr. Whitaker l. 10. contra Duraeum p. 883. confesseth the same saying Nos in Baptismo peccata remitti gratiam conferri credimus ac docemus quod negari soliti sunt Manichaei ergo nos à Manichaeis alieni sumus vide Sarcerium loc commun tom 1. de Baptismo fol. 232. b. post med Manichees The (2) See this affirming in the first Consideration in Luther num 11. in Zuinglius n. 35. in Calvin num 40. and in other Protestants apud Brereley tract 2. c. 2. sect 10. subd 14. throughout affirming of God to be the Author of our sin in Symon (3) Vincentius Lyr. lib. adversus haeret post med saith Who before Symon Magus c. was bold to affirm God the Creator to be Author of our wicked deeds c. and who before Novatianus taught that God would rather the death of him that dyeth than that he should return and live And St. Austin ad Art sibi falso imposit Art 10. saith Detestanda c. it is a hateful and abominable opinion to believe that God is the Author of any ill will or action And of this condemned opinion see further Eusebius hist l. 5. c. 19. concerning Florinus his error And see Mr. Hanmer in his Chronograph pag. 30. Magus and others The denyal of the necessity of Childrens Baptism in the (i) Innocentius in rescripto ad Melivitanum Concilium post med saith of the Pelagians Illud vero quod vestra fraternitas eos asserit praedicare parvulos eternae vitae praemâ—is absque Baptismatis gratia posse donári perfatuum est In like plain manner is this point condemned in the Pelagians by St. Austin haer 88. contra Jul. Pâ—lag l. 6. c. 7. de pec mer. rem l. 2. c. 9. 27. and by St. Leo Ep. 86. ad Episcopam Aquileinsem Pelagians The denyal of the Blessed Sacraments reservation in the [k] Cyril ad Calosyrium saith I hear they say that the mystical blessing if any remnants thereof do remain till the next day following is unprofitable to Sanctification but they are mad in so saying for Christ is not made an other neither shall his body be
ut Constantiâ—â—s daret potestatem Bessiae quam statim Julius exercuit nam etiam Conrtantinus magnus ferebat arma draconis in insigniis suis c. ita ut ipse sit Draco qui dedit potestatem bestâ—ae typus Draconis serpentis antiqui qui Bestiae potestatem dedit Apoc. 13.2 fatally to have given power to the beast (d) The Centurists cent 4. col 653. line 26. report this opinion of Acesius signisied to the Emperour to be ad paenitentiam quidem admoneri homines spem verò remissionis non à sacerdotibus sed ab ipso Deo expectare qui possit potestatem habeat remittere peccata Cum haec Acesius dixisset subjunxit Imperator pone scalam ô Acesi solus ascende in caelum Socrates l. 1. c. 7. And see this error of the Novatians further confuted by Ambrose And Pacianus alleged heretofore in this Consideration num 21. in the margent at g. He reproved Acesius the Novatian for denying the power given Priests to remit sin under pretence (*) Vbi supra that God only remitteth sin Of [7] Eusebius de vita Constantini l. 4. c. 45. his Priests or Clergy by him assembled to the Dedication of the Temple not only some of them did preach and interpret the holy Scriptures but also others of them who could not so do appeased the Deity with unbloody [*] Alii qui c. horum nihil poterant officere incruentis consecrationibus divinum Numen placabant supplices Deo preces offerebant pro communi pace pro Ecclesia Dei ipsoque Imperatore c. By these Vnbloody Sacrifices and mystical consecrations thus particularly distinguished as several from the foresaid Preaching and prayer cannot be understood other than the said Priests celebration of the blessed Sacrament as is plainly acknowledged by D. Abbots in his answere to D. Bishops Epistle to the King pag. 183. ante med 184. paulo post med Which in regard of the then external oblation thereof by those sundry Priests Eusebius tearmeth Unbloody Sacrifices so thereby distinguishing the same in manner of Oblation from Christs other bloody oblation upon the Crosse according to which sense it is often by the other Fathers tearmed the Unbloody Sacrifice as by Chrysostome in Psalm 95. Athanasius alleged heretofore in this Consideration Num. 3. at * next after h. in the margent Cyril Alexand in interpretatione Anathemat 11. Nazianzen orat funeb in Basilium and orat 1. in Iulianum In so much as they are therefore reproved by Calvin in Epist ad Haebr c. 9. vers 26. pag. 946. b. fine 947. a initio So that if unto these Unbloody Sacrifices thus mentioned by Euschius we do adde the foresaid appeasing of God thereby by him also mentioned we do then hereby find not onely Sacrifice but also propitiatory Sacrifice Sacrifices and mystical Consecrations and prayed for the health of the Emperour At [8] Eusebius de vita Constantini l. 4. c. 61. the time of his last sickness he intended to expiate his sins by efficacy of the holy mysteries and the imtiation of the healthfull lavar of regeneration at those times purposely [†] Osiander in epitom c. cent 4. pag. 248. ante med saith Veteres Baptismum distulisse videntur c. ut deinde Baptisma suscipiendo universa delicta simul abluerent deferred and so [9] Eusebius de vita Constantini l. 4. c. 61. it is said Humi procumbens genibus in ipsa Martyrum aede errata sua confessus c. And of Confession made to the Priest long before these times see heretofore in this Consideration num 9. at 10. prostrating himself upon his knees confessed his sins in the house of of the Martyrs and thereupon received [10] Eusebius vbi supra imposition of hands [e] Centur. 4. col 454. line 26. it is said Turba frequens preces cum fletu pro anima imperatoris fuditâ— And see Eusebius de vita Constant l. 4. c. 71. After his death prayer was made for his soule and the mystical [f] Eusebius vbi supra saith Adhuc quidem licet contemplari ter beatae animae tumulum c. divinis ceremoniis mystico sacrificio sanctarumque precationum societate perfrui Sacrifice offered And [*] In the brief discourse of the Churches Estate c. annexed to Crispinus his book of the Estate of the Church it is affirmed how that about the end of this period which continued untill Constantine the love of solitude and monkery the abstinence from mariage and from certain meats on particular dayes many seasts and other seeds of superstition after succeeding took a marvailous root so the commencement of Prayer for the dead and Sacrifice of the Masse did discover themselves c. as concerning the Churches doctrine of that age it was in like manner so evidently our now professed Catholick faith that to forbear much other particular proof and what is by certain our other adversaries confessed in this behalf the Century-writers of Magdeburge whose writings are by our English Protestants affirmed to be [11] So saith M. Willet in his Tetrastylon Papismi pag. 21. fine An excellent work and [g] So saith M. D. Hill in his defence of the article that Christ descended into Hell fol. 23. b. post med worthy of immortal memory in their fourth Century by them dedicated to Queen Elizabeth in which they specially undertake to deliver to her Highness [12] The Centurists cent 4. in Epist dedicatoria Serenissimae Reginae ac Dominae Elizabethae c. prope finem say to the Queen concerning that fourth Century Redit hic Constantinus jam ad te adferens statum ejus Ecclesiae quae suo tempore totum Orbem suo splendore illustravit c. And there again Non dubitavimus Constantini Britannici Ecclesiasticas res tuae Majestati jucundissimas atque acceptissimas fore that state of the Church which in Constantines time illustrated the whole world do professe to [h] Centur 4. col 287. line 16. the title there of that special Tract is Inclinatio Doctrinae complectens peculiares incommodas opiniones â—â—ipulas errores Doctorum set down the peculiar supposed errors of the Doctors of those times and do joyn with others in charging sundry of them severally and respectively with some or other particular opinions by collection from their own writings which in general are as followeth namely with [i] Centur. 4. col 291. line 7. it is said Patres omnes ferè hujus aetatis de libero arbitrio consusè loquuntur And immediatly after they do there recite and reject the particular sayings of Lactantius Athanasius Basil Nazianzen Epiphanius Hierom c. Freewil [k] Cent. 4. col 292. 293. there under the titles de Justificatione and de bonis operibus Iustification by works (l) Ibid. col 293. throughout and there line 59. where they conclude saying Jam cogiter pius
Scripture may have divers understandings and all of them true against our Adversaries practise who to make the same plain by one example for many if they can shew that St. Augustin or some other Father doth by Fire 1 Cor. 13.15 upon occasion of other application understand the tribulation of this life do therefore urge this Exposiâ—ion thus given against the other common received sense of Purgatory though also given elswhere by the very same and other Fathers which the said Fathers by their other foresaid firster sense never meant to gainsay This slight being usuall by our Adversaries is hereby once for all prevented affirmed by the Translator of the English Bible published 1576. in his Epistle to the Brethren of England Scotland and Ireland circa med by the Divines of Geneva in their Propositions and Principles disputed in Geneva c. cap. 52. pag. 149. post med by Hierome Zanchius de facra Scriptura pag. 422. fine 424 425. and by Aretius in loc com loc 59. pag. 187. circa med pag. 177. circa med with whom herein agreeth St. Augustine de Civit. Dei l. 11. c. 19. initio l. 12. confess c. 31. de Doct. Christ l 3. c. 27. lib. 1. c. 36. de util cred c. 3. de Gen. ad lit l. 1. c. 21 Yet contradaicted by Mr. Fulk in his confutation of Purgatory pag. 151. and M. Willet in his Synopsis pag. 26 fine 65 The distinction of Order and Jurisdiction whereby the greatest Archbishop and the meanest Bishop or Priest are said to be equal or unequal the equality being in respect of Order and the inequality in respect of Jurisdiction which distinction serveth to explain the seeming repugnant sayings whether of Scripture or Fathers which otherwise might be thought to affirm somtimes a superiority at other times an equality between Peter and the other Apostles and so likewise between the Pope and other Bishops Affirmed by Mr. Whitgift and [y] Brereley tract 2. c. 3 sect 10. subd 2. sine in the margent at m. Mr. Bridges in his defence c. pag. 313. 445.446 1156. fine and Mr. Whitgift acknowledgeth this distinction affirming in his defence of the Answer to the Admonition pag. 303. post med that Archbishops quoad ministerium doe not differ from other Pastors but touching Government affirming also pag. 386. ante med and answering to a common objection out of Hierome who equalleth the meanest Bishop with the Pope that they are equal quoad Mnisterium but not quoad politiam And see him there further pag. 320. fine 461. initio pag. 390. prope initium and contradicted for Popish by Mr. Cartwright alleged in Mr. Whitgift's defence pag. 389. prope finem and by many others 66 That the true visible Church cannot wholly erre affirmed by Mr. Fox in his Martyrs as by Philpot Act. Mon. pag. 1401. a. prope finem by Bilney Act. Mon. 464. b. art 4. by Ridley Act. Mon. pag. 1361. b. post med pag. 1286. b. prope finem by James Baynham Act. Mon. pag. 493. b. prope finem also by Mr. Fox himself Act. Mon. pag. 999. a. fine at art 36. by Mr. Bancroft in his Sermon and page mentioned next hereafter in number 67. by the Divines of Geneva in their Propositions and Principles disputed c. pag. 141. sect 12. 13. and most expresly by Bertrand de Loque Minister of Delphinine who in his discourse of the Church c. 12. pag. 198. saith of this very question The Controversie in my judgement is not of the Catholike or universal Church for we all agree herein that she cannot erre touching Faith c. wherefore this question is touching only a particular Church Impugned by Mr. Fulk who in his answer to a counterfait Cathotholike pag. 8â— fine saith The whole Church militant consisting of men which are all liars may erre altogether as every part thereof And by the Puritans who in their Brief Discovery of untruths in a Sermon preached 1588. by D. Bancroft pag. 34. do expresly reprove Mr. Bancroft for his teaching our Catholike Doctrine herein 67 An external Judgment or difinitive sentence and not only Scripture appointed for the ending of Controversies affirmed by Mr. D. Field in his words alleged heretofore in this Consideration num 51. by M. Bilson in his perpetual government c. pag. 372. initio by Mr. Bancroft in his Sermon preached February 8. 1588. pag. 42 43. see his saying alleged and reprehended in the Puritans foresaid Discovery c. pag. 34. by Mr. D. Covell in his Modest Examination c. pag. 108. paulo ante med 109. prope finem by Mr. Hooker in his Ecclesiastical Polity in the Preface sect 6. initio pag. 26. circa med pag. 28. ante med by Melancthon in Consil Theolog. part 2. pag. 1. 2. And in the end after much winding in and out by Mr. D. Reynolds in his Conference with Mr. Hart pag. 99. post medium and by the Puritans whereof see M. Bancroft's Survey c. pag. 304. fine Yet contradicted vulgarly by over many to be named Sectaries of all sorts who thereby to exempt themselves from all triall do pretend that the Church may erre and therefore that only Scripture is to be our Judge See this at large pretended by the Protestants throughout the late Conference at Ratisbon printed Lavingae Anno 1602. 68 Those that be learned know that the Government of the Church is neither Popular nor Aristocratical but a Monarchy affirmed in these words by Mr. Whitgift in his defence c. pag. 641. post medium by M. D. Covell in his Examination c. against the Plea of the Innocent pag. 109. 107. alleged heretofore in the second Consideration num 10. after 15. at a. b. c. e. by Luther alleged there afterwards in the margent under * next before 18. and vulgarly by many other Protestants who affirm the temporal Magistrate to be the head of the Church But yet many others who discern the known difference between the several Common-wealths of forein Nations governed by several Princes and the particular Churches of those Nations as namely that those sundry Common-wealths be each of them of it self a several absolute politike body governed severally by distinct lawes whereas yet all those several National Churches professing all of them one Faith and Religion make but one Catholike Church one Body Ephesians 2.16 3.16 One visible Church of Christ Hooker l. 3. sect 1. pag. 126. prope finem do therefore impugn Mr. Whitgift's foresaid Assertion foreseeing that by sequell thereof the several Churches of Forein Nations making as aforesaid all of them but one visible Church one Body should be accordingly governed by one visible Ecclesiastical Head or Monarch And hence it is that Mr. Jacob in his Reasons taken out of Gods word retorteth how probably we refer to judgement Mr. Hookers Assertions saying there pag. 24. paulo ante med It followeth from this necessarily that there ought to be a Catholike
any such objection as this at that time when Protestants did much affect the use of lights Altars Pictures in their Churches In the meane time who would not I know not whether to say laugh or conceive just indignation to see so great a Champion as M. Chillingworth was esteemed to object such matters as these and as causes sufficient to forsake Gods Church 96. Ninthly he specifyes our saying of Pater-nosters and Creeds to the hono◠of Saints and of Ave-Maries to the honor of other Saints besides the Blessed Virgin This is not unlike to the former neither can I imagine what difficulty he can find that any good work as saying of Pater-nosters and Creeds is even in the account of Protestants and the saying of Ave-Maries must be sapposed to be in the opinion of these Protestants who allow prayers made to Saints may be offered in honor of Saints What will he say to the known doctrine of S. Augustine that although Sacrifice be offered to God only yet it may be offered in honor of Saints And much more why may not Pater-nosters and Creeds be offered in honour of Saints and Ave-Maries in honor of other Saints though the words be directed only to the Blessed Virgin In the mean time I return to say can such matters as these be alleged in the day of judgement as sufficient to excuse Luther and his followers from the grievous sin of Schism in forsaking the Communion of all Churches then extant 97. Tenthly He names the infallibilitie of the Bishop or Church of Rome Answer It cannot be expected that Protestants or any other divided from the Church of Rome will in expresse termes acknowledge her to be infallible under that word of Infallible but it hath been shewed that if they will speak with consequence to themselves they cannot deny her to be infallible while they give her such titles and grant her such Prerogatives as we have seen heretofore and deny not but that the ancient Fathers yielded her a preheminence before all other Churches and took her Doctrine and Practise for a Rule and proof of the Truth or falshood of what was believed or practised through all Christian Churches Yea and we have heard Protestants confessing that the Popes Authority for conserving unity and deciding Controversies in matters of faith is altogether necessary and that there cannot be expected any peace and union among Christians except by submitting to the Pope Besides Protestants commonly grant that the true Church is infallible in fundamental points and we must either say that the Roman Church was the true Church when Luther appeared or that Christ had no true Church on earth at that time nor hath any at this present seeing even the chiefest Protestants agree with us in many of those very points for which the first Protestants pretended to forsake all Churches extant when they appeared 98. Eleaventhly He objects our prohibiting the Scripture to be read publickely in the Church in such languages as all may understand Of this we have spoken heretofore Neither is it true that there is any general prohibition to read any Scripture in the Church in such a language as all may understand for some Preachers are wont to read in a vulgar language the Gospell of which they are to preach but our doctrine is that there is no Divine precept to use vulgar languages in the Liturgy or publick Offices recited in the name of the Church But what would he say to the custome which I have understood to have been used in Ireland of forcing people of that Nation to be present even at Sermons made in English of which they understand not one word which is a case far different from the use of an unknown tongue in the Liturgie or publick Offices ordained to the publick worship of God by the Church and not referred immediately for a Catechism or Instruction of the people as Sermons are 99. Twelfthly He strangely mentions our doctrine of the Blessed Virgines immunity from actual sin and our doctrine and worship of her immaculate Conception Answer It is a sign you want better matter while you object these points Your conscience cannot but tell you that you know we are so farr from making the immaculate Conception a point of Faith that there is a severe prohibition that neither part censure the other of Heresie Error or the like so that this Instance is manifestly impertinent The reader may be pleased to read Bellarmine tom 4. de amissione Gratiae statu peccati lib. 4. cap. 15. where he saith Quod ad primum scilicet non haberi apud Catholicos pro re certa explorata ac fide Catholica tenenda beatam Virginem sine peccato fuisse conceptam Joannes Pomeranus unus ex primis Lutheri discipulis in comment cap. 1. 44. Hierem. scribere ausus est pro articulo fidei apud Catholicos haberi B. Virginem sine ullo peccato immo etiam de Spiritu Sancto fuisse conceptam Sed hoc impudentissimum mendacium satis apertè refellunt duae Pontificum constitutiones Concilii aecumenici decretum quibus constitutionibus ac decretis Catholici omnes libenter obediunt Sixtus IV. Pontifex Max. in ea Constitutione quae incipit Gravè nimis de reliquiis veneratione Sanctorum desirtis verbis pronuntiat nondum esse quaestionem istam de Conceptione B. Virginis ab Ecclesia Romana Apostolica sede definitam ideò paenam excommunicationis statuit in eos qui alterutram sententiam ut haereticam damnare audent Judicium Sixti Pontificis sequutum est Concilium TRIDENTINUM ses 5. ac demum nostro tempore PIUS V. in constitutione quam edidit de conceptione Beatissimae Virginis Mariae Besides Protestants themselves acknowledge this point to be a thing indifferent excusable and not defined as may be seen in the fift Consideration num 4. at †next after f. in the margent at Fifthly and as Brereley tract 2. c. 2. sect 14. in the margent at †next after f. at Fifthly tract 2. c. 3. sect 5. subd 2. at f. in the margent proves saying Touching our B. Ladies being preserved from Original sin and the worshipping of Images Mr. Bunny in his Treatise tending to pacification sect 17. pag. 104. paulo ante med pag. 105. saith If any think it more honor able for the Blessed Virgin yea for Christ himself that took flesh of her to have been without sin and thereuppon for his part do rather think that by special praerogative she also was preserved from original corruption c. in these or such like whosoever will condemn all those that are not perswaded as we are committeth an uncharitable part towards those his brethren And D. Field ibid. apud Brereley pag. 499. in the margent at * expresly affirmes lib. 3. of the Church c. 42. pag. 174. post med the point concerning the Conception of our Blessed Lady to be a controversie not [ſ] Not defined saith M.
D. Field cited in the text And in his said Treatise of the Church l. 2. c. 9. pag. 58. ante med he affirmeth of the contradictory opinions for which saith he some were named Thomists other Scotists that they consisted to use his own words in the controversies of religion not yet determined by consent of the vniversal Church defined Now if these Protestants speak thus of our Bâ—essed Ladies immunity from Original sin much more will they hold that it is no damnable error if it were an error as it is indeed a most certain Catholick truth and so still we are safe for matter of Doctrine But here Chillingworth doth much forget himself not to consider that He his brethren the Socinians and some other Protestants deny all Original Sin and consequently that our B. Lady neither was or could be conceived therein So farr is this doctrine from being an errour or heresie in the grounds of these men 100. Thirteenthly He exemplifies the necessity of Auricular Confession But we have shewed that some learned Protestants hold the necessity of Confession and confess that the Fathers taught the necessity of confessing even thoughts Yea Chemnitius than whom no Protestant was ever more famous 2. part Exam. pag. 960. teacheth perfect sorrow or contrition not to be sufficient without Absolution as also I am informed by persons of worth and credit that Dr. Jeremie Tailor is so much for the necessity of Confession and Absolution that he teaches Contrition without Absolution not to be sufficient for remission of sins which he indeavours to prove in a Book written purposly to that end though for ought I understand it is not printed as yet And M. Spar a Cambridge Man printed a Sermon to prove the necessity of Confession as also in this third Consideration n. 82. fine we have heard Dr. Andrews prove the same out of St. Austine 101. Fourteenthly He allegeth the necessity of the Priests intention to obtain benefit by any of the Sacraments But this as we have seen out of Brereley in this third Consideration n. 49. is taught also by learned Protestants and the thing of it self is so reasonable that no man can deny it who understands the termes 102. Fifteenthly He ends his enumeration with these words And lastly for this very doctrine of licentiousness That though a man live and dye without the practise of Christian vertues and with the habit of many damnable sins immortifyed yet if he in the last moment of life have any sorrow for his sins and joyn Confession with it certainly he shall be saved In this accusation are involved three points or propositions First that Attrition with Absolution is not sufficient for the abolition of sin Secondly that true Repentance requires the extirpation and mortification of all vicious habits Thirdly that we teach any sorrow with Absolution to be sufficient for pardon of sins For the first we appose M. Chillingworth to himself who pag. 32. n. 4. saith God hath no where declared himself but that wheresoever he will accept of that Repentance which you are pleased to call Contrition he will accept of that which you call Attrition For though he like best the bright Flaming holocaust of Love yet he rejects not he quenches not the sâ—oaking flax of that repentance if it be true and effectual which proceeds from hope and fear which is more than we grant who teach only that not Attrition alone but with Absolution is sufficient The second is for ought I know against the common Tenet of Protestants and all Christians who believe that a sinner may be saved at the hour of his death if he have true contrition for his sins past with a firm purpose to amend for time to come though at that instant he cannot extirpate all vicious habits which as M. Chillingworth pag. 391. n. 8. confesses being a work of difficulty and time cannot be performed in an instant So that a poor sinner though he be never so contrite for his sins must despair of remission and salvation The third point that we believe any sorrow with Absolution to be sufficient for pardon of sins is a meer calumny as will appear to any that reads the sacred Councill of Trent declaring what sorrow is required to obtain pardon of our sins or Catholick divines writing on this subject For if the sorrow be conceived upon any Reason meerly of temporall Hope or Fear we teach that it is no wise sufficient to make men capable of Absolution or forgiveness of sins but it must proceed from some motive known by supernatural Faith for example the fear of Hell or desire of Heaven Secondly it cannot be produced by the natural forces of men or Angells as being the gift of God and requiring the special motion inspiration and grace of the holy Ghost and contrarily all the wit pains and industrie of all men that have been are or shall be yea or are possible to be created cannot arrive to it by all the natural forces of them all though they were assisted by the help of all Angels created or creable or of all other natural Creatures contained in the Omnipotency of Almightly God Thirdly Such sorrow must extend it self to all deadly sins in order to which it is to be so effectual that it must exclude all affection to them and the Penitent must be resolved rather to undergoe a thousand deaths than once consent to the least mortal sin And therefore Fourthly He must resolve to avoid for time to come all proximas occasiones or imminent danger of falling into any one mortal sin As also if he have injured any man by taking away his good name or goods or limb or life he must effectually and speedily procure to give satisfaction or make restitution according as the case shall require Yea and sometime if it be justly feared that dealy will cause a failing in his purpose Absolution may prudently or must be deferred till he hath actually satisfied all obligation the neglect whereof would prove a deadly sin And in a word that sorrow which we call Attrition differs from Contrition in the motive only because Contrition is conceived for sin as it is against the infinite goodness of God Attrition as it is repugnant to our eâ—ernal salvation and therefore Contrition is an act of the Theological Vertue of Charity Attrition of the Theological Vertue of Hope which as it moves us to desire and hope everlasting happiness so doth it incite us to fear the loss thereof and out of that holy fear not to fear any other temporal loss with the prejudice of our Souls according to those words of our blessed Saviour doe you not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul but rather fear him who can punish with Hell fire both the body and soul Which words declare that as I said a natural fear meerly of temporal losse though it be even of our life is not a sufficient disposition for pardon of sins as is
composuâ—t c. denique inspectae haereses omnes in multis cum authoribus suâ—s dissentientes deprehenduntur And see cap. 37. Tertullian [q] Chrysost opur imperfect in Matth. hom 20. saith Omnes infideles qui sub Diabolo sunt non sunt uniti nâ—câ—unum sapiunt sed sunt per diversas opiniones dispersi alius quidem sic dicit alius sic c. comodo perfidia haereticorum qui nunquam sapiunt unum sed quot sunt tot sententias habent Chrysostom [r] Hâ—lar l. 7. de Trinitate saith Haeretici igitur omnes contra Ecclesiam veniunt sâ—â—d dum haeretici omnes se invicem vincut nihil tamem sibi vincunt victoria enim eorum Ecclesiae triumphus ex omnibus est dum in eo haeresis contra alteram pugnat c. Hilarie and [Å¿] Athanasius orat 1. contra Arianos saith Illud qâ—oque prorâ—us admirabile omnes quot sunt hae reses in fingendo diversa pugnantiaque inter se adferre nee alib nisi in falsitate sibi invicem consentire c. And see in Decret's synod Nâ—caenae contra haeresim Arianam See surther a notable example hereof in Socrates hist l. 5. cap. 10. c. 22. And see the sayings of Ambrose l. deâ—fi de ad Gratianum c. 4. Hicrom in Matth. 24. Austine contra Epist Parmen l. 3. c. 4. de Baptismo contra Don. l. 11. c. 6. others discover the Hereticks of their times By the same mark also doth Luther himself make his like discovery saying [t] Luther tom 3. Wittemberg in Psalm 5. fol. 166. b. fine A Kingdome divided in it self shall not stand neither have any Hereticks at any time been overcome by Force or subtilty but by mutual dissention neither doth Christ fight with them otherwise than with a spirit of giddiness and disagreement And again [u] Luther tom 5. Wittemb in Galat. cap. 5. fol. 416. a post medium The Authors of Schisms are disagreeing among themselves c. they bite and devour one another c. till at last they perish This to omit Scriptures the examples of all times do testifie After that Africk was overthrown by the Manichees presently followed them the Donatists who disagreeing among themselves were divided into three Sects c. In our time the Sacramentaries first and then after the Anabaptists divided themselves from us neither of them are in Unity among themselves so alwaies Sects bring forth Sects and one condemneth another And the very same argument is yet further afforded against the Anabaptists by [x] Sebast Francus Chronicorum part 111. fol. 263. b. seq numbreth up Seaventy of the Anabaptists different opinions and concludeth their further differences to be so great as no mâ—n can either know or number them affirming further that scarce two of them are found to agree in all things Sebastianus Francus and the Divines of [y] Theologi Heidelbergenses in protocoll Frankentalensi in praefat ad Anabaptistas say Si vobis Ecclesiae titulum concedere vellemus quaenam inter vos Secta pro Ecclesia Dei habenda offet cum tam in multas sectas divisi sitis Heidelberge and also against the Sacramentaries by the Divines of [z] Theologi Mansfeldenses in confessione Mansfeldica latina fol. 120. say Suspectam meritó habemus Sacramentariorum doctrinam c. quod non definitè in eadem sententia concordes sed inter seipsos divisi sunt ut alii sunt Caralostadiani alii Zuingliani Oecolampadiam Calvinistae c. Mansfield 113. But now although the Testimonie of our Adversaries against themselves be great and convincing whether they confesse that the Fathers stand for us and whether Protestants joyn with us and thereby witness our Doctrines to be true yet there remains a greater testimonie that is true Miracles of which our Blessed Saviour saith Joan. 5.36 I have a greater testimonie than John the very works which I doe give testimonie of me that the Father hath sent me And that our Doctrines have been confirmed by Miracles shall be demonstrated out of the very confession of Protestants in the next fourth Consideration THE FOURTH CONSIDERATION That the Doctrine of us Catholickes hath been approved by the omnipotent hand of God using for Instruments of working Miracles those who were confessedly of our Relgion yea and in express confirmation of points believed by us and rejected by Protestants 1 LIKE as in those [a] Brereley tract 1. sect 5. firster times of the Churches infancy our Saviour did make manifest the truth of his Apostles doctrine with undoubted miracles to serve as [b] 2 Cor. 11.12 signs of their Apostleship to that end [c] Marc. 16.20 confirming the word with signs following so likewise this vertue or power of Miracles not ceasing but as our Adversaries confess [d] Whereas our Saviour loan 14.12 saith He that believeth in me the works that I do he shall do and greater In the marginal Notes of the English Bâ—ble printed 1576. it is thereupon said This is referred to the whole Body of the Church in whom this Vertue doth shine for ever shining in the Church for ever the necessity thereof being one and the same in all succeeding Ages to the [e] In Euseb Hist l. 5 c. 7. Irenaeus is alleged saying Quidam Daemones pro certò verè ejiciunt c. alii co qui gravibus morbis afflictantur per manuum impositionem curant c. lam verò ut diximus mortui suscitati sunt multos annos post apud nos commorati quid plura dona fanè ne dicendo quidem numerari poterunt quae Deus Ecclesiae per universum mundum diffusae donaverit quibusque illa in nomine Jesu Christi sub Pontio Pilato Crucifixi in dies singulos multa miracula ad Gentium utilitatem efficâ—t c. And see Irenaeus l. 2. c. 58. versus finem And S. Austine de civit Dei l. 22. c. 8. initio saith Cur inquiunt nunc illa miracula quae praedicatis facta esse non fiunt Possem quidem dicere necessaria quidem fuâ—sse priusquam crederet mundus ad hoc ut crederet mundus And a little afterwards Nam etiam nunc fiunt in ejus nomine c. And Luther tom 7. Wittemberg l. de Judaeis fol. 209. b. saith Nunc autem per hos 1500. annos audierunt Judaei esse verbum Deâ— viderunt maxâ—â—a signa mitabilia contra fremuerunt And ibid. fol. 210. b. ante med he further saith A Deo did câ—mus accepimus ut aeternum verbum veritatem Dei hactenus mille quingentis annâ—s miraculis signis confessam ac confirmatam Conversion of the heathens who contemn the Scriptures are nothing moved with the Miracles therein mentioned our Saviour did in like manner confirm our now faith so then taught by Austine with like manifestation of Miracles not such only as Antichrist or the Devill can by the power of nature or secondarie
25. Also Sigwartus in his 23. disputationes Theolog. c. pag. 207. sect 8. saith Haec vocatio semper extraordinaria quaedam divina dona comitantia habet quae sunt tanquam sigilla doctrinae c. cuâ—usmodi suerunt miracula c. And D. Saravia in defens tract c. contra respons Bezae c. 2. pag. 38. ante med saith Ea verò quae proximè à Deo est vocatio nunquam sine aliquo externo visibili signo aut visione facta legitur And see further hereof Saravia in his English book of the divers degrees of Ministers c. 2. pag. 7. and M. Fenner in his Sacra Theologia pag. 119. b. Also Bullinger adversus Anabaptist l. 3. c. 7. saith to the Anabaptists Quod si dicitis vos instar Apostolorum peculiarem vocationem habere probate eam signis miraculâ—s c. hoc autem nunquam facietis ideoque vocatio vestra nihili imò pernitiosa est Ecciesiae Christi See this saying alleged to this end by M. Thomas Bell in his Regiment of the Church pag. 137. initio miracles as necessary to prove that it is from God yet is the gift of miracles which is to them according to their own doctrine so needfull in proof of their said pretended extraordinary calling so confessedly wanting and defective in their Church that M. Fulk thereof saith [h] M. Fulk against the Rhâ—msh Testament in Apocalyp cap. 13. sect 3. fol. 478. a. post med It is known that Calvin and the rest whom the Papists call Arch-hereticks do work no miracles And M. Sutcliff saith accordingly [i] M. Sutcliff in his examination of Kellison 's Survey printed 1606. pag. 8. post med Neither do we practice miracles nor do we teach that the doctrine of truth is to be confirmed with miracles Insomuch as certain others discerning the necessity of miracles and themselves unable to afford any true example thereof in their Church do lastly urge and name for miraculous [k] Fox act mon. printed 1596. pag. 789. a. lin 59. And Sigwartus in Disp Theol. pag. 170. and Sutcliff de vera Catholica Christi Ecclesia pag. 313. and Philip Mornay in his Treatise of the Church englished Anno 1581. cap. 11. pag. 351. and Justus Molitor de Ecclesia militante pag. 159. Luther 's so large dispersion of his Doctrine maugre the malice of the Pope and all his Adherents which as it is against the evident confession of their own brethren who disclaim as before in all miracles shewed by Luther Calvin c. and as the learned †Theologi Casmâ—riani in admonit sua de libro Concordiae Bergensis cap. 6. and after the edition of Neustadii 1581. pag. 203. post med say Scimus istos Theologos c. magnis clamoâ—ibus regerere Lutherum esse Prophetam quia ipse immediatè extra ordinem à Deo excitatus c. quia miracula fuerint res ipâ—â—us gestae successus multa futura praedixerit c. Whereto they answer among other things saying Miraculum quod ediderit nullum audivimus Nam fortunatio defensio curriculi ipsius fuit beneficium Dei ordinarium secundum promissiones datas ipsum timentibus c. quod autem praedicit de paenis ingrati udinis pro luce Evangelii donata vel similia non sunt nova oracula sed veterum oraculorum Scripturae ad nostra tempora accommodatio Calvinists confess is withall [*] The learned Protestants dâ—sinâ— a miracle to be signum supra naturae ordinem effectum So doth Amandus Polanus in partition Theolog. pag. 228. And see others hereafter in this Consideration num 7. at * next after k. no miracle in it self as not being against or above the power of nature and secondary causes so also by like instance might the proceeding of Arius and Mahomet be much more probably said to be miraculous for that their errours were from no less small beginning [l] More generally dispersed For whereas Lutheranism holdeth only in the Northern parts of the world and also but in a corner of those said Northern parts which are but a parcel of Europe Aâ—ianism was far more universal as extending it self into sundry parts of Asia Africk and Europe Hereof Daniel Camierus in epist Jesuâ—tic part altera pag. 49. paulò post initium saith Arianorum venenum non portiunculam quandam sed paenè totum orbem contamâ—na verat And see Joannes Pappus in epitom histor Eccles pag. 412 413. And the like inlargement in short time of Mahometanism is evident and confessed by Melancthon chronic l. 3. a pag. 311. ad pag. 317. by Illyricus in Apoc. c. 9. a versu 13. ad finem more generally for the time dispersed than ever was the doctrine of Luther And thus much concerning the confessed want of miracles in our Adversaries Church 4. As concerning now our Catholick Church the * M.D. Downham in his Treatise of Antichrist l. 1. c. 7. pag. 111. propè initium saith Neither Turks nor Jews nor any other Churches of Christians but only the Pope and Church of Rome do vaunt of miracles which onely confessedly challengeth the gift of miracles the known examples of her true and undoubted Miracles are plentifully testified As first for the thousand years last past it is confessed that we Englishmen were so long since [m] See Brereley tract 1. sect 1. converted to our now professed Catholick Faith Insomuch as they charge Austin with his then converting us to [n] See Brereley tract 1. sect 1. at 9. Popery and to [o] See ibid. at e. the Papistical faith for which say they [o] See ibid. at 6. he went undoubtedly to Hell after his death And yet are the undoubted miracles which God wrought by the same Austin in proof of his doctrine sufficiently confirmed with the credible [q] See heretofore in this Consideration num 1. at r. s t. testimony of those very times with like [r] See heretofore ibid. at n. q. * testimony also of S. Bede who lived in the age next after and are thereupon reported and [Å¿] See ibid. at u. and see M. Fox act mon. printed Anno 1576. pag. 117. a. prope finem where he saith of Austin and those that came with him to the Conversion of England The King was moved with the miracles wrought through Gods hand by them acknowledged as true undoubted by our very Adversaries themselves In the same age also lived Holy Oswald King of Northumberland whose undoubted miracles are by like credible [t] Concerning Oswald Beda hist l. 3. c. 2. affirmeth that the place where he with religious prayer obtained victory was after called Heavens field in regard of the innumerable miracles there done That also usque hodie c. even till Bede's time diseased persons were thereby restored to health Among whom was saith Beda one Bothelmus yet living restored miraculously to health ante paucos annos but some
miracula sunt fiunt à Deo quidem solo ad ejusdem solius laudem c. solus enim Deus id potest propriè quod est supra naturam creatam c. 6. pag. 43. Miraculum Christianum est opus Dei ipsius totius naturae creatae vires facultates superans quod invocato Dei nomine ad verae fidei confirmationem fit And see the like affirmed by Amandus Polanus in Partition Theolog. l. 1. pag. 228 229. And by Hierom Zanchius in D. Pauli Epistolas ad Philip. Colloss Thessal pag. 241 242. And by Zegedinus in loc commun pag. 188. Antichrists miracles are but such as the order of nature observed may be brought to pass by the deceit of Men or Devils c. whereas the miracles wherewith God garnished his Church are works besides or against the order of nature and secondary causes and therefore done onely by the Divine power of which kind are to cure diseases without means of physick and many other such like whereof we have heretofore given plentifull examples All this being to them evident and not to be denyed to what refuge now do they lastly betake themselves To name one prime man instead of many M. Whitaker the matter being reduced or straitned to this issue rather than he will acknowledge our Catholick Church in which such true miracles are as before most plentifully evident doubteth not to betake himself to this extreamest despair rather than hopefull refuge as seriously to affirm that although it be indeed certain that [l] Whitaker de Ecclesia pag. 348. circa med saith Respondeo me minimè ignorare vera miracula nulla vi nisi divina fieri posse true miracles cannot be done but by the Divine power which to Antichrist or Satan were to acknowledge them for God yet as it were to supply in this want the Devils confessed defect or unableness to work such miracles he is not abashed against the * Sigwartus in disput Theologic pag. 172. initio saith Pseudo-doctores vel etiam ipsum Satanam ad stabiliendas haereses prodigia verè divina designare posâ—e pernegamuâ— And that false Prophets can do no true miracles see further heretofore in this Consideration num 1. initio in the margent at e. And next heretofore in the margent at * next before l. To which Brereley in his Omissions c. of pag. 551. lin 25. addeth Also M. Anthony Wotton in his trial of the Romish Clergies title c. pag. 115. ante med accordingly saith For my own part under correction I speak it I am not perswaded that ever any true miracle was or shall be wrought for confirmation of false doctrine c. I see no sufficient cause to imagine that God will employ his infinite power to the countenancing of any untruth doctrine of other Protestants to conclude and say observe we beseech your Majestie for it is a Monster that [m] Whitaker ubi supra pag. 349. further saith that true miracles are not of force to demonstrate true doctrine whereof be giveth this reason saying Nam possunt vera miraracula etiam à falsis Doctoribus Pseudoprophetis fieri sed tamen Dei non illorum virtute c. Constat enim Deum non modo veris sed falsis Doctoribus vim tribuere hujusmodi faciendi miracula non tamen quò confirmet illorum falsa dogmata sed quò tentet eos ad quos mittantur And see the like in Danaeus in his respons ad Bellaâ—mini disput c. part 1. pag. 784. God himself doth give power of working such true miracles unto false teachers not to confirm their false opinions but to tempt those unto whom they be sent In colour of which paradox he forbeareth not to [n] Misapply For Deut. 13.1 2. by him there alleged doth not speak of Gods enabling false Prophets but of permitting them in trial of his people neither doth it concern their foretelling of things simply future by immediate revelation from God but only of such other future effects as are depending upon their precedent known causes and are also in them foreseen or else of such other future things as depend but upon probability of conjecture collâ—cted from circumstances of persons time and place which do though not ever certainly yet often times casually happen and so accordingly it is but said with condition If there arise a Prophet and give thee a sign and the sign which he hath told thee come to pass it is not said shall come to pass but if it do come to pass and withall he saith Let us go after other Gods thou shalt not hearken to his words Secondly though some of those who have true Revelations from God or of those who cast out Devils or work true miracles be reprobates whereof see heretofore in this Consideration num 1. initio at f. g. h. yet have they those gifts not as false teachers nor to the confirmation of any false doctrine but of Gods truth themselves being otherwise reprobates in regard of their wicked life Which premises observed sufficeth to explain and prevent many impertinent objections commonly urged in this behalf mis-apply the Scriptures inferring thereupon that [o] Whitaker ubi supra pag. 349. ante med having divided miracles into true and false saith Dico ex neutro genere miraculorum posse sufficiens testimonium sumi aut certum argumentum collâ—gi pro vera doctrina c. no sufficient testimony can be taken or certain argument collected for true doctrine from neither kind of miracles true or false directly against the Scriptures themselves which affirm of true miracles that they [p] Our Lord confirming the Word with signs following Marc. 16.20 do confirm and [q] God withall testifying by signs and miracles Hebr. 2.4 witness the truth tearming them also therefore [r] The signs of my Apostleship have been done among you in signs and wonders 2 Cor. 12.12 signs and [Å¿] I have a greater testimony than John the very works which I do give testimony of me that the Father hath sent me Joan. 5.36 testimonies thereof And thus much but briefly respecting the length of the matter concerning miracles and to whether Church Catholick or the foresaid Protestant Church the same have been confessedly appertaining or wanting and consequently that our Church whose doctrines have been confirmed by perpetual great and manifest miracles before any Protestant appeared in the world and therefore could not be feigned or recorded upon any particular design against them and their Heresies cannot be false but the onely true Church of Christ THE FIFTH CONSIDERATION By the Confession of Protestants We Catholicks may be saved though we live and dye in the belief and profession of those Articles wherein Protestants disagree from us ALL †Brereley tract 1. sect 6. paulò post initium the learned Protestants of sober judgement have afforded us Catholicks the promises of hopefull salvation as
in re nihil tanquam neceslarium praecepit praestaret tamen pacem c. sectari quà m de speciebus contendere And Luther de utraque specie Sacramenti saith Si veneris ad locum ubi tantùm una species ministratur cum aliis una tantùm specie utere c. And the like indifferency hereof is yet further affirmed by Melancthon and others cited heretofore in the third Consideration num 32. fine Fifthly touching our B. Ladies being preserved from Original Sin and the worshiping of Images M. Bunny in his Treatise tending to Pacification sect 17. pag. 104. paulò ante med and pag. 105. saith in like manner of them In these therefore or such like whosoever will condemn all those to be none of the Church that are not fully perswaded herein as we are c. committeth an uncharitable part towards those his Brethren Sixthly concerning Primacy M. Anthony Wotton in his answer to a Popish Pamphlet c. pag. 68. fine denyeth that Protestants hold the Kings Supremacy to be an essential point of faith And Luther in assertionibus art 36. versus finem speaking of the Popes Primacy doth expressy number it among saith he those unnecessary trifles wherein the Popes levity and foolishness is to be born withall And Melancthon in his Epistle extant in the Book entituled Centuria Epistolarum Theologicarum ep 74. pag. 245. fine saith The Monarchy of the Bishop of Rome is profitable to this end that consent may be retained wherefore an agreement may easily be established in this Article of the Popes Primacy if other Articles could be agreed upon Seventhly as concerning Satisfaction and Merit of Works affirmed by the antient Fathers no less than now by us whereof see heretofore in the second Consideration num 6. at q. num 7. at r. s num 9. at 13 14. num 23. at k. l. M. Whitaker contra rat Campiani pag. 78. and in his answer to M. William Reynolds c. 6. pag. 135. initio 136. fine saith The Fathers thought by their external discipline of life to pay the pains due for sin wherein they derogated not a little from Christs death c. which though it be an errour yet were they notwithstanding good men and holy Fathers Eighthly as concerning Mass Luther in Colloquiis Germanicis c. de Missa saith Private Mass hath deceived many Saints and carried them away into errour from the time of Gregory for 800 years And Tindall Act. Mon. pag. 1338. a propè initium saith accordingly I doubt not but S. Bernard Francis and many other holy men erred as concerning Mass So little did the Mass impugn Holiness Lastly as touching Mass and sundry other points of faith M. Francis Johnson in M. Jacobs defence of the Churches and Ministry of England c. pag. 13. ante med saith Did not John Huss that worthy Champion of Christ and other also of the Martyrs of fore-times say and hear Mass even to their dying day c. did not also divers of them acknowledge some the Popes calling and Supremacy some seven Sacraments some auricular Confession c. And Benedict Morgenstern in tract de Ecclesia c. pag. 41. circa med saith that in former times Condonanda erant piis c. These things were pardonable in the godly who held the Pope to be the Vicar of Christ and Head of the Church the Papacy for the Church Saints for Mediators and the Mass for the Supper of our Lord. Aad see heretofore in this Consideration num 2. throughout sundry examples of acknowledged salvation in many confessed Catholicks such as are against the foundation or hope of salvation but rather in respect thereof as onely matters of indifferency And hence it also cometh that in general M. Hooker and M. Covel do acknowledge [g] M. Hooker in his Ecclesiastical Policy l. 3. sect 1. pag. 130. ante med l. 5. pag. 188. initio aud M. D. Covel in his defence of M. Hooker pag. 68. the Church of Rome to be of the Family of Jesus Christ a part of the House of God a limb of the visible Church of Christ that M. Barrow saith [h] In his four Sermons and two Questions c. ser 3. pag. 448. fine The learneder Writers acknowledge the Church of Rome to be the Church of God that M. D. Some saith [i] M. D. Some in his defence against M. Penry c. c. 23. fine pag. 182. initio In the judgement of all learned men and all reformed Churches there is in Popery a Church that another late English Protestant writer saith * See the discourse upon the means of well governing c. against Nicholas Machiavel printed at London 1602. pag. 80. post med The Catholick and Reformed make not two but one same Religion ⋠Ibidem pag. 83. paulò post med 85. propè finem agreeing in all principal points of Religion necessary for salvation That also George Cassander though disliking [k] Cassander in libro de officio pii viri c. pag. 14. ante med 15. initio pag. 27. post med the Pope and acknowledged for ¶ David Pareus in his book de Symbolis Sacramentalibus c. in praefat ante med saith Cassander eruditus Scriptor c. And M. Morton in his full satisfaction concerning a double Romish Enquiry c. pag. 55. circa med tearmeth him that most grave and learned Cassander of singular learning and piety a most grave and learned writer saith [l] Cassander ibidem pag. 14. post med and in defence of his opinion he allegeth Luther ibidem pag. 14. fine pag. 21 22. The Church of Rome is to be reverenced as being the true Church and Temple of God and that a late disguised French Protestant writer affirmeth [m] Examen pacifique de la doctrine des Hugonotes c. imprimè à Caen 1590. en argum du liure pag. 2. Catholicks and Hugonots to be of one faith and religion with whom agreeth another like writer tearming them in like manner [n] Apologie Catholique c. part 2. pag. 26. 203 204. Domesticks of one faith and Branches of one and the same Vine And hence also it cometh that the learned Protestants as we before [o] Heretofore in this Consideration num 1 2. have shewed do afford to our Catholick Professors the hopefull promises of salvation affirming this to be [p] M. Doctor Some in his defence against Penry pag. 176. propè finem the judgement of all learned Protestants and made [q] M. Bunny in his Treatise tending to Pacification sect 15. pag. 93. circa med clear by the whole course of their writings Insomuch as they doubt not to charge such of their other headstrong Brethren as affirm the contrary even with [r] M. D. Covel in his defence of M. Hooker pag. 68. paulò post med ignorant zeal 5. Hence lastly it is that M. Bunny apud Brereley tract 1. sect 9. subd
as well as they Therefore we Catholicks have the life and substance of Religion pag. 60. In the prime grounds or Principles of Christian Religion we have not forsaken the Church of Rome Therefore he grants that we have the prime grounds or Fundamentall Articles of Religion pag. 11. For those Catholick verities which she the Roman Church retains we yield her a member of the Catholick though one of the most unsound and corrupt members In this sense the Romanists may be called Catholicks Behold we are members of the Catholick Church which could not be if we erred in any one Fundamentall Point By the way If the Romanists may be called Catholicks why may not the Roman Church be termed Catholick And yet this is that Argument which Protestants are wont to urge against us and Potter in particular in this very place not considering that he impugns himself whiles he speaks against us not distinguishing between universall as Logicians speak of it which signifies one common thing abstracting or abstracted from all particulars and Catholick as it is taken in true Divinity for the Church spread over the whole world that is all Churches which agree with the Roman and upon that vain conceit telling his unlearned Reader that universall and particular are tearms repugnant and consequently one cannot be affirmed of the other that is say I Catholick cannot be affirmed of D. Potter nor D. Potter said to be a Catholick because a particular cannot be said to be universall or an universall pag. 75. To depart from the Church of Rome in some doctrines and Practises there might be just and necessary cause though the Church of Rome wanted nothing necessary to salvation pag. 70. They the Roman Doctors confesse that setting aside all matters controverted the main positive truths wherein all agree are abundantly sufficient to every good Christian both for his knowledge and for his practise teaching him what to believe and how to live so as he may be saved His saying that the Roman Doctors confess that setting aside all matters controverted c. is very untrue it being manifest that Catholicks believe Protestants to erre damnably both in matters of faith and practise yet his words convince ad hominem that we have all that is necessary yea and abundantly sufficient both for knowledge and practise for us to be saved And then he discoursing of the Doctrines wherein we differ from Protestants saith pag. 74. If the Mistaker will suppose his Roman Church and Religion purged from these and the like confessed excesses and novelties he shall find in that which remains little difference of importance between us Therefore de facto we believe all things of importance which Protestants believe After these words without any interruption he goes forward and sayes pag. 75. But by this discourse the Mistaker happily may believe his cause to be advantaged and may reply If Rome want nothing essentiall to Religion or to a Church how then can the Reformers justify their separation from that Church or free themselves from damnable Schisme Doth not this discourse prove and the Objection which he raises from it suppose that we want nothing essentiall to Religion Otherwise this Objection which he makes to himself were clearly impertinent and foolish if he could have dispatched all by saying we erre in essentiall points which had been an evident and more then a just cause to justify their separation which yet appears further by his Answer to the said Objection That to depart from a particular Church and namely from the Church of Rome in some Doctrines and practises there might be just and necessary cause though the Church of Rome wanted nothing necessary to salvation And afterward in the next pag. 76. speaking of the Church of Rome he saith expresly Her Communion we forsake not no more than the Body of Christ whereof we acknowledge the Church of Rome to be a member though corrupted And this clears us from the imputation of Schism whose propertie it is to cut off from the Body of Christ the hope of salvation the Church from which it separates But if she did erre in any one Fundamentall point by that very errour she would cease to be a member of the Body of Christ and should be cut off from the hope of salvation therefore she doth not erre in any Fundamental point p. 83. We were never disjoyned from her the Church of Rome in those main essentiall truths which give her the name and essence of a Church You must then say that she errs not in any Fundamental Point For the essence of a Church cannot subsist with any such error And that it may appear how desirous he is that it should be believed Catholicks Protestants not to differ in the essence of Religion he adds these words immediately after those which we have last cited Whereof if the mistaker doubt he may be better informed by some late Roman Catholick writers One of France who hath purposely in a large Treatise proved as he believes the Hugonots and Catholicks of that Kingdom to be all of the same Church and Religion because of truths agreed upon by both And another of our Country as it is said who hath lately published a large Catalogue of learned Authors both Papists and Protestants who are all of the same mind Thus you see he ransacks all kind of proofs to shew that Catholicks and Protestants differ not in the substance and essence of Faith and to that end cites for Catholick writers those two who can be no Catholicks as Charity Maintained part 1. chap. 3. pag. 104. Shews the former in particular to be a plain Heretick or rather Atheist Lucian-like jesting at all Religion Pag. 78. he saith We hope and think very well of all those holy and devout souls which in former Ages lived and dyed in the Church of Rome Nay our Charity reaches further to all those at this day who in simplicity of heart believe the Roman Religion and professe it To these words of the Doctor if we subsume But it were impossible that any can be saved even by Ignorance or any simplicitie of heart if he erre in a Fundamentall point because as by every such error a Church ceases to be a Church so every particular person ceases to be a member of the true Church the Conclusion will be that we doe not erre in any Fundamentall point Nay pag. 79. he saith further We believe it the Roman Religion safe that is by Gods great Mercy not damnable to some such as believe what they professe But we believe it not safe but very dangerous if not certainly damnable to such as professe it when they believe or if their hearts were upright and not perversly obstinate might believe the contrary Behold we are not only in a possibility to be saved we are even safe upon condition we believe that Faith to be true which we professe and for which we have suffered so long so great and so many
that many learned Protestants do not believe all such Doctrines and consequently are not capable of Salvation Pag. 269. n. 45. A man may possibly leave some opinion or practise of a Church formerly common to himself and others and continue still a member of that Church Provided that what he forsakes be not one of those things wherein the Essence of a Church consists For this cause he saith That although Protestants leave the external Communion of the Church yet they left not the Church because they left her not in any thing essential to a Church as Fundamental points are Therfore he supposeth the Church before Luther did not erre in any Fundamental Article Otherwise Protestants had left her that is they had disagreed from her in a Fundamental point P. 272. n. 52 and pag. 283. n. 73. He denies that Protestants divided themselves from the Church absolutely and simply in all things that is ceased to be a member of it which still supposes that the Church before Luther believed all essential and fundamental Points which Protestants also pretend to hold and for that cause say they left not the Church Pag. 272. n. 52. He saith In the reason of our separation from the external Communion of your Church you are mistaken For it was not so much because she your Church as because your Churches external Communion was corrupted and needed Reformation But if we erred in Fundamental points Protestants must have forsaken us chiefly for that reason that our Church was corrupted with Fundamental errours of Faith Therefore he grants that we erred not in any such necessary Points Pag. 401. n. 26. He confesseth that D. Potter saith indeed that our not cutting off your Church from the Body of Christ and hope of salvation frees us from the imputation of Schism Pag. 133. n. 12. He saith expresly By confession of both sides we agree in much more than is simply and indispensably necessary to salvation It is well he makes so open a confession that we believe much more than is simply necessary to salvation But as I said before we will not because we cannot yield so much to Protestants And here I must ask again how he could say Pag. 401. n. 27. As for our freeing you from damnable Heresie and yielding you salvation neither D. Potter nor any other Protestant is guilty of it Seeing he saith that by the confession of both sides we agree in much more than is simply and indispensably necessary to salvation If we believe much more than is necessary to salvation by what Logick will he deduce that we believe not as much as is necessary 8. These so many and so clear words of D. Potter and M. Chillingworth may justly make any man wonder with what pretence of truth or modesty he could say Pag. 280. n. 95. As for your pretence that your errours are confessed not to be Fundamental it is an affected mistake as I have often told you And Pag. 308. 108. As for your obtruding upon us that we believe the Points of difference not Fundamental or necessary you have been often told it is a calumny The oftner the worse it being a Saying void of all truth and a shamefull calumny in him 9. To these testimonies of Potter and Chillingworth many other might be alleged out of other Protestants as we have seen divers other alleged by Potter D. Laud in his book against Fisher Pag. 299. saith I doe acknowledge a possibility of salvation in the Roman Church But so as that which I grant to Romanists is not as they are Romanists but as they are Christians that is as they believe the Creed and hold the foundation Christ himself Behold not only a possibility of salvation but also the reason thereof because we believe the Creed c. which is the very reason for which Protestants hold that they themselves may be saved though they differ in many points from one another This I say is the reason of D. Laud which other Protestants must approve though in true Divinity it be of no force at all for though one believe the Creed and hold the foundation Christ himself that is that he is God and Saviour of the world yet if he deny any point evidently delivered in Scripture or otherwise sufficiently propounded as revealed by God he cannot be saved even according to Protestants who therefore doe in this as in many other things speak inconsequently and contradict themselves Pag. 376. he saith The Religion of the Protestants and the Romanists Religion is the same nor doe the Church of Rome and the Protestants set up a different Religion for the Christian Religion is the same to both but they differ in the same Religion Therefore say I we hold no Fundamental errors wherein whosoever differ cannot be of the same but must be of a different Religion And Pag. 129. The Protestants have not left the Church of Rome in her Essence not in the things which constitute a Church And Pag. 282. he saith The possibility of salvation in the Roman Church I think cannot be denyed and in proof hereof Pag. 281. he alleges Luther Field Joseph Hall Geor Abbot Hooker Mornaeus Prideaux Calvin And D. Jeremie Taylor in his liberty of Prophecying Pag. 251. sect 20. teaches that we keep the foundation and believe many more truths than can be proved to be of simple and original necessity to Salvation And therefore all the wisest Personages of the adverse party allowed to them possibility of Salvation whilst their errors are not faults of their will but weaknesses and deceptions of the understanding which as I said may easily be believed of us Catholicks who suffer so much for our Religion so that there is nothing in the foundation of Faith that can reasonably hinder them to be permitted The foundation of Faith stands secure enough for all their vain and unhandsome superstructures And in particular he shews that Prayer for the dead and the doctrine of Transubstantiation are not Fundamental errours and also saith these two be in stead of the rest Yea he affirmes Pag. 258 that there is implyed as great difficulty in the mystery of the B. Trinity as in the Doctrine of Transubstantiation and shewes that we are not in any danger of sinning by Idolatrie in adoring the Sacrament 10. Thus good Reader having proved out of the Confession of Protestants That the first Protestants who pretended to reform all Churches extant when they appeared led such lives and taught such Doctrines as no man of judgement can think them to have been fit Instruments for that Work That Protestants confesse the Ancient Holy Fathers to stand for us That the chiefest Protestant Writers joyn with Catholicks against other Protestants in the most principal Articles of Religion Yea even in those very points for which Luther and his followers opposed our Doctrine and forsook our Communion which deserves well to be considered That our Doctrines have been confirmed by Miracles and finally That all
intercession to his Father both according to his Humanity and Divinity n. 41. p. 117 18 19 20 1. That Christ suffered all the torments due to the damned and despaired for fear they should be eternal yea refused to be obey his Father in Redeeming Man n. 46. p. 131 2 3. He calls it a foolish curiosity to question whether Christ merited for himself and a timer arious definition to merit n. 19. p. 67. t. m. He furiously railed saith Grotius at the opposer of his Doctrine n. 47. p. 133 4. He contemptibly condemns the antient Fathers for averring the sacrifice of the Masse n. 39. p. 111 12 13. He died calling desperately upon the Devill eaten up with Lice and other Vermin n. 37. p. 107.110 Calvinists held it lawfull to lie for the Glory of God n. 53. p. 155. t. m. Of Canonicall Scriptures the sense of the holy Fathers and the Protestants reprehending them for it c. 2. n. 12. p. 234 to 242. inclusivè t. m. Canonicall Scripture onely determined by the Church p. 240. t. m. c. Carolostadius pretended Visions and Conference with God for his Doctrine c 1. n. 23. p. 79. t. m. Of Catholike Religion as Protestants confesse no beginning can be assigned after the Apostles times c. 2. n. 15. p. 255. t. m. It is by them judged safe c. 5. per totam shewed by their clear Testimonies n. 1. p. 437.8 9. Ceremonies practised by the Fathers c. 2 n. 8. p. 205 6. t. m. and n. 12. p. 234. Most of the now used acknowledged by Protestants to have been then used n. 13. p. 247. t. m. The Chancel prohibited to the Laity c. 3. n. 89. p. 366. Chillingworth confutes himself n. 87. p. 363. With reason he excepts against painting the Irinity for he denies the Trinity n. 92. p. 377. His ridiculous objection of an Oblation by way of Consumption n. 95. p. 375. Divers other of his impertinent objections in the Numbers and pages precedent and following particulars about the immaculate conception of our blessed Lady n. 99. p. 378.9 His many testimonies that the Catholike Church is saving and his contradicting himself c. 5. n. 7 8. p. 459 60 1 2 3 4 5. Chrisme or Confirmation gives grace c. 2. n. 8. p. 205.6 Clement vide John Clement Confession as now used avowed by the antient Fathers n. 9. p. 206 7. and n. 19. p. 269. c. Confirmed by Miracles c. 4. n. 2. p. 407. Consecrating of Creatures c. 2. n. 12. p. 244 5 6. t. m. c. Constantine the great allwaies had with him a portable consecrated Tabernacle or Church with Priests and Deacons not to be forced against the then practice of the Church to celebrate Divine Mysteries in prophane places n. 23. p. 292. t. m. The Lord Cromwell professed at his death to believe in all with the Church of Rome c. 5. n. 2. p. 439 40. Use of the Cross c. 2. n. 8. p. 205 6. m. In practise with the holy Fathers reprehended by Protestants n. 12. p. 243. t. m. The vertue of it confirmed by Miracles c. 4. n. 2. p. 406. St. Cutbert's Miracles and miraculous integrity after his death n. 4. p. 412 13. D Almes Prayer Sacrifice for the Dead c. 2. n. 3 4. p. 196.7.8 t. m. Delrius cleared from Morton's falsification c. n. 7. p. 26. 7. t. m. E Equivocation beyond all limits held and taught by Protestants c. 3. n. 72. p. 348 9 50 1 2. English inconstant in Doctrine c. 1. n. 28. p. 85 6 7. Errors affirmed by Protestants to have crept into the Catholike Church but no beginning of them can be assigned since the Apostles time c. 2. n. 15. p. 255. c. t. m. wherefore they impute them to the Apostles time n. 14. p. 251. c. t. m. Eucharist consecrated by vertue of the words n. 2. p. 179. t. m. In round Wafers of which use no beginning can be shewed p. 178. t. m. Transubstantiation held by the antient Fathers p. 179 80 1 2. t. m. 't was carefully conserved in the Church p. 181 2. in one kind onely so also carried in long journies c. 3. n. 83. p. 356. Water mingled with the Wine in consecration c. 2. n. 2. p. 182 3. It must be received fasting p. 183 4. And Chastly wherefore Priests are not to marry p. 184. c. t. m. F In the antient Fathers the now Catholike Doctrines acknowledged and reprehended by Protestants Vide Protestants The Faith of Catholikes judged saving by Protestants c. 5. per totam Their clear testimonies of it n. 1. p. 447 8 9. Fasts obligatory c. 2. n. 12. p. 229 30 31. t. m. Held an Heresie by many Fathers to fast on Sunday ibid. Fathers so evident for all Catholike Tenets that Protestants rebuke one another for citing of them and cry out that if their Authority be acknowledged the Protestant Church is undone n. 14. p. 249. c. t. m. Fox's Revelation concerning the 42 Moneths in the Apocalyps rejected c. 1. n. 23. p. 80. His fraud to cover Dr. Barnes his acknowledgment of Transubstantiation c. 3. n. 37. p. 320. St. Francis his Miracles Wounds and austere life c. 4. n. 5. p. 418 19. t. m. Freewill and merit of Good Works frequent in the holy Fathers c. 2 n. 5 6. p. 200. c. Fulke held Christ according to his Deity to be his fathers Priest c. 1. n. 41. p. 120. and the Arrians to be a true Church of God n. 42. p. 122. t. m. G GRegory the great introduced by St. Austine Rites and Ceremonies in England c. 2. n. 12. p. 244 5 6. Grotius his censure of Calvin's furious railing against the Opposers of his Doctrine c. 1. n. 47. p. 133 4. He stands in most points for Catholikes c. 3. n. 85. p. 359 60 1 2. H KIng Henry the Eigth kept to his death the Doctrine of Rome c. 5. n. 2. p. 439. Heretikes fraud in citing Authors c. 2. n. 18. p. 267. They moulter away by Divisions amongst themselves c. 3. n. 112. p. 391 2. t. m. Holy-Water confirmed by miracle c. 4. n. 2. p. 417. Hus no Protestant c. 3. n. 80. p. 355. I JAcobus Andreas vide Andreas King James his censure of John Knox c. 1. n. 60. p. 166. And of the English translations of the Bible n 33. p. 95. Jewell affirms Christ according to his Deity to be his Fathers Priest n. 41. p. 120. His impudent imposture upon Fathers Apostles and Christ himself c 2. n 22. p. 281 2 3. Thirty eight Jewes burnt in the Marchy of Brandenburgh and all the rest banished for stabbing the B. Sacrament c. 4. n 5. p. 421 t m 422 m. John Clement's miraculous cure at our B. Ladies of Sichem p 423 4 5. Images used by the antient holy Fathers c 2. n 12. p 243. Confirmed by miracle c 4. n 2. p. 404 5. t. m. Innocentius the third falsly taxed to have first brought up Transubstantiation c 2. n 16. p 257. t.
m. The Invisibility of the Protestant Church before Luther c 4. n 3. p 408. t. m. â—ish forced to hear English Sermons which they understood not c 3. n 98. p 377. K OF John Knox c 1. n 60 1. from p 165. to 170. inclusivè Why many particulars of his turbulent seditious spirit are omitted p 165. King James his censure of him p 166. His dreadfull death ibidem L Dr. Laud acknowledges Catholike Faith to be saving c 5. n 9. p 465 6. Lent held of obligation by the Fathers c 2. n 12. p 211 12 13. Limbus Patrum held by antient Fathers n 3. p 198 9. t. m. Lyturgy in an unknown tongue c 3. n 87. p 364. c. Of Luther c 1. from n 1. to 20. from p 1. to 71. inclusivè His own testimonie of his pious and penitent life before his Apostacy n 1. p 2. His raging Lust described by himself p 2 3 4 t. m. His blasphemy that no Sin Lust or other can separate from Christ p 4. Whence he gave scope to all villany ibid. He secretly to the disgust of his friends married Katherine Bore a Nun and iâ— such heat that he could not expect untill next morning when the forbidden time for marriage expired p 4 5. t. m. This shamelesly excused by Melancthon Luther himselâ— acknowledging that he did not professe good life but Doctrine p 5. t. m. Hence Protestants when they will be licentious say This day we will live Luther like p 6. t. m. His inclination to Poligamy n 2. p 7 8. t. m. His contempt of superiority His hideous railing against K. Henry the Eigth and other Princes forced the Protestant Lansgrave to disallow his Writings by a publike Manifest p 9 10 11. t. m. He hired Corolostadius to rail against him n 3. p 12. t m He gives as much power to Lay-men yea to Women concerning the Sacraments as to Priests n 4. p 12 13 t m and n 7 p 27 He saies that the Divell can truly consecrate the Sacrament of the Altar n 4. p 13. m. and n 7. p 34. For his opinion of Baptism vide Baptism He held that had not Christs Divinity suffered we had had but a base Redeemer n 5. p 15. That Christ's Soul suffered in Hell after death p 16. He boasted of more truth in his Doctrin than in the Fathers or Apostles n 6 p 16 17. t. m. His contempt of the Fathers p 18. His Doctrine as certainly divine must judge Angells not be judged by them ibid. and p 19. Chief Protestants do sharply reprove this his pride p. 19 20 1 2 3. His inconstancy in Doctrine n 4. p 14 15. He was taught by the Devill to impugn the Mass n 7. p 23. t. m. and that by bodily conference not by spiritual fight as Fulke would have it nor by dream as Sutcliff saies both against Luther's expresse words p. 22. to 36. inclusivè he was grievously haunted frighted by an evill spirit p. 23 22. He affirms the Emp. Oecolampadius and others were slain by evill spirits appearing to them p. 24 25. He denies obedience to spirituall Pastors and G. Councills and right to judge of Doctrine and grants it Lay-people n. 8. p. 37.8 He teaches that whatsoever a Generall Councill commands the contrary is to be done n. 12. p. 44 5. He affirms that when one dies the Soul sleeps as Insensibly as the Body and denies Purgatory and prayer to Saints n 9. p 39. t. m. He puts three Divinities as three persons and praises the Arrians for rejecting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 n 10. p 39 40. t.m. His wicked Doctrine concerning the Author of sin n 11. p 40 1 2. His Blasphemy that God crowns and damns without desert p 42. By these Doctrines he opened the way to all lewdness p 43. To have his will he stuck not to contradict himself and Scripture n 12. p 43. He acknowledgeth that he believed not what he preached p 46. He acknowledgeth his fall to have been Pride and wilfullness and speaks of it with great perplexity and terror of Conscience p 47 8. Yet false Flatterers will call him Saint ibid. He is deeply taxed by Zuinglius Oecolampadius and all Calvinists for his unchristian bitterness against them n 14. p 49 50 1. He most arrogantly conceived himself the onely man opposed by Satan as the first teacher of Christianity and sole right understander of the Gospell n 15. p 51 2. His wicked Doctrine in favour of the Turke and disesteem of Christianity n 16. p 53 55 54 56. His Schollars ashamed of divers things in his Works corrupted them in the edition at Wittenburg n 17. p 57 58. t. m. alibi ipse His wilfull corruptions and impudent censures of Scriptures and holy Writers makes them of no credit p 57 to 64. t. m. inclusivè He acknowledges that the manifold translations of Scripture will force to receive Councills n 34. p 97. He teacheth that onely Infidelity condemns and onely Faith which cannot be without Good works justifies n 18 19. p 64 5. That who is good can do nothing but good that good works neither justifie nor are any way necessary to salvation p. 65. but hurtfull to it p. 66 7. t. m. Erasmus his saying of him n. 20. p 68. m. He cannot be held a Protestant p 68 9. His vild Doctrine and Manners are now so notorious as none can be excusable in following him p 69. He preferrs Melancthon to all the Doctors of the Church n 54. p 155. His Blasphemies against the Holy Ghost c 1. n 2. p 187 8. By his Life and Doctrine many Protestants held Lewdnes to be an Evangelicall Institution and serious Christian Discipline a new Popery c 1. n 1. p 6. M St. Malacias his Miracles c 4. n 1. p 400. i. t. m. and n 4. p 414 15. Calumniated as wrought by the Divel n 1. p 400. m. Dying he gave his Blessing to St. Bernard n 4. p 414. m. Marriage forbidden to Priests from the Apostles time c 2. n 7. p 166 7. t. m. Like for Monks p 167. t. m. Masse and the sacrifice of it most antient n 17 p 267. t. m. Of Melancthon c 1. n 55 6. p 156 7 8 9. He held three Divinities He perswaded Polygamy to King Henry the eight n 56. p 156. He taught that in case of Divorce the offending partie might marry another p 157. He changed from Lutheranisme to Calvinisme n 57. p 157. Yet he perswaded others to remain Catholikes and wished he had rather lost a Finger than wrote of Divinity p 159. Melchisedeck and his sacrifice presigured Christ and his sacrifice c 2. n 17. p 260. c. Merit of Good Workes n 5 6. p 200. c. Of Miracles c 4. per totam wrought in confirmation of points believed by Catholicks Protestants and are testimonies of true Faith although wrought by wicked men they being of that kind which cannot naturally be done n 1 p. 396 7. t. m. The gift
the New Grace conferred by imposition of hands in the Sacrament of Confirmation Also in the sacrament of Order Deaconship a distinct order from Priesthood and a step unto it n. 41 2 3 4 5 p. 325. Extraordinary calling is ceased n. 46. p. 327. An indelibel Character imprinted by some sacraments n. 47. p. 328. Baptism by Lay persons and women in case of necessity n. 48. p. 328. The known intention of the Church needfull to administer Sacraments n. 49. p. 328 9. Seven Sacraments n. 50. p. 329. Implicit Faith n. 51. p. 329 30. Usury unlawfull n. 52. p. 330. Antichrist not yet come n. 53. p. 331 Distinct degrees of Angells Angells Protectors of several Countries By Michael the Arch-Angell is not meant Christ n. 54 5 6. p. 331 2 3. Sunday for our Sabboth is unalterable and an Apostollicall Tradition n. 57 8. p. 333 4. Get Fasts and Abstinence from certain meats for spirituall motives n. 59. p. 334 5. Vows not obrogated n. 60. p. 335 6. Fasting Chastity giving ones Goods for pious uses and Vlountary poverty are more pleasing to God than their contraries n 61. p. 336 7. Who hath the gift of Continency may lawflly marry or refrain n. 62. p. 337 8. The sin against the Holy Ghost is onely final impenitence n. 63. p 338. One Text of Scripture may have divers under standings n. 64. p. 339. Ecclesiasticall persons equal in Order unequal in Jurisdiction n. 65. p. 339 40. The whole truc Church cannot erre n. 66. p. 340 1. Scripture without external judgement cannot end Controversies n. 67. p. 341 2. The Church Government is monarchical n. 68. p. 342 3. Children have not vertual Faith n. 69. p. 343 4. Sacred Books onely determined by the Churches Tradition n. 70. p. 344. The Church of Rome is part of the Church of God n. 71. p. 344 5 6. One Primate over the Church in all Nations n. 72. p. 346. Unwritten Tradition must be observed n. 73. p. 146 7 8. Equivocation n. 74. p. 348 9 50 1 2. Use of the sign of the Cross n. 75. p. 352 3. Many other added n. 76. p. 353. Most points in which we disagree from them held by some or other of their chiefe men indifferent matters n. 77. p. 3â—3 4. Protestants to continue a Succession alledge such as hold against them n. 78. p. 354. c. They cannot with consequence deny the Roman Church to be infallible n. 97. p. 376 7. They judge the Faith of Catholikes saving c. 5 p. 437. per totam Protestants clear testimonies that the Catholike Faith is saving c. 5. n. 1. Many confessed by them to be true Saints yet rigid Roman Catholikes n. 2. t. m. They allow that Infants baptised are saved by the Faith of their Catholike parents which then must needs be saving in the Parents themselves n. 3. t. m. That our Church is a true Church one with theirs not differing in Fundamentalls both good and saving and onely controverted which is the better n. 4. Divers Protestants drew from Luther's Life and Doctrine that Lewdnes was an Evangelicall Institution and serious Christian Discipline a new Popery c. 1. n. 1. Pultrot strangely taken after he had by Beza's counsell and encouragement murdered the Duke of Guise n. 49. R THE Reall Presence in the blessed Sacrament confirmed by Miracle c. 4. n. 1. Reliques acknowledged by the holy Fathers c. 2. n. 12. Confirmed by Miracles c. 4. n. 2. Rome acknowledged by Protestants to be the Seat of and fittest for the Primate of the Church c. 2. n. 10. t. m. And the Bishop of it to have exercised what now he doth for the first 500 years p. 213 14 c. And the Church to be uniform and constant in its Doctrine n. 20. They cannot fancy it to be infallible c. 3. n. 97 It is evidently shewed to be sigularly protected by the Holy Ghost c. 5. p. 450 1 2 3. S WHat is confessed by Protestants concerning Sacraments vide Protestants and c. 2. n. 13. Of the sacrifice of the Altar c. 2. n. 3. t. m. The Antiquity of it p. 196. t. m. see more n. 17. and c. 3. n. 89. t. m. It is offered for the dead p. 368 t. m. Prayer to Saints impugned by the Divell c. 1. n. 7. Held by the holy Fathers and they reproached for it by the Protestants c. 2. n. 7. Scriptures manifold and corrupted translations c. 1. n. 28. to 33. inclusivè which forced Luther to confesse that the Conncills must be received again n. 34. The vulgar Translation preferred by Protestants before all other n. 34. What Scriptures are Canonicall must be learnt from the Church c. 2. n. 12. t. m. Liberty of reading Scriptures confessed by Protestants to be the cause of so many Heresies c. 1. n. 29. Siricius Pope was not the first that made the Decrees of Priests Chastity c. 2. n. 2. Socrates his false relation of Paphnutius His hereticall writing of the celebration of Easter and of other things p. 189 90. Sorrow necessary for remission of sins c. 3. n. 102. Mr. Sparkes excuse of Beza's liconciousness refuted c. 1. n. 48. Sutcliffs impertinent and false interpretation of Luther's Conferrence with the Divell c. 1. n. 7. He falsly sayd that Innocentius the third was the first that brought in Transubstantiation c. 2. n. 16. T ONes testimonie against himself is most strong c. 3. n. 106. Tindall and Teuxbury Fox's Martyrs held Good Works hurtfull to salvation That all Christs works did not deserve Heaven That God is no more pleased with one work than with another c. 1. n. 19. t. m. Traditions c. 2. from n. 12. to 16. inclufivè whence it is concluded that those of which no certain beginning is known were introduced by the Apostles Transubstantiation not first brought in by Innocentius the third n. 16. But held as Protestants confesse by most antient Fathers n. 2. t. m. The Antiquity of it n. 16. t. m. V VOws acknowledged by Protestants to be held by antient holy Fathers lawfull and obligatory c. 2. n. 1. By the first Faith 1 Tim 4. is understood by holy Fathers the Vow of continency p. 172 3. W WAldo and Waldenses no Protestants They pretended an Order of begging Friars but could get no confirmation Some of their Tenets c. 3. n. 79. Water to be mingled with Wine in the Consecration of the Eucharist c. 2. n. 2. t. m. Wicliff no Protestant his and his Disciples habit c. 3. n. 80. Whitaker's impudent justification of Calvin's branding c. 1. n. 37. His false imputation upon Pope Siricius c. 1. n. 2. t. m. He condemns the antient Fathers for holding that Antichrist is one single person n. 3. t. m. He falsly saies that Innocencius the third began Transubstantiation n. 16. His impudent provocation to the first 600. years n. 22. Continent Widdows the Sanctuary of God n. 1. Mr. Wotton falsifies St. Ignatius n. 6. m. X ST Xaverius his miracles in the Indies and the incorruption of his body acknowledged by Protestants c. 4. n. 3. Xenaias the first opposer of Images c. 2. n. 12. t. m. Z ZOzomenus followed Socrates in his false report of Paphnutius and is affirmed by St. Gregory to have lyed much in his Writings c. 2. n. 2. Of Zuinglius c. 1. from n. 22. to n. 39. To cloak his acknowledged incontinency he affirms that St. Paul found no other cause of Marriage but to sattisfie Lust n. 22. He was taught in a dream which Hospinian calls a Revelation to impugne the Masse n. 23. t. m. He taxes Luther for contradicting himself to temporise n. 24. m. Himself did shamfully the same but saies he Invenite Domino p. 80 1. He calls Gods promise of reward Hyperbolicall p. 81. Original sinn no sinn but a Disease which deserves not Damnation n. 25. t. m. and is reproved for it by his Brethren p. 82. t. m. He teacheth that Heathens never beleiving in Christ are saved if they have a pious mind For this also his Brethren reprove him n. 26. t. m. That neither St. Paul or any of the Apostles thought their own Writings Canonicall or could think so but with extream Arrogancy n. 27 Wheresoever be finds in Scripture This is my Body This is my Blood for is he puts signifies for which Schlusselburg reprehends him p. 84 5. He saies that to God who is bound by no Law 't is an honor to move to sinn but in man who is bound by Law it is a sinn n. 35. That Civill Magistrates opposing his Doctrine must be resisted by the Sword and deposed n. 36. Armed in this quarrell he was killed and died as Protestants affirm a Child of Hell n. 36. t. m. FINIS ERRATA PAg. 22. Line 18. in the text read Charke p. 25. l. ult t. r. Charke p. 30. l. 28. t. r. est p. 72. l. 26. t. r. lecto p. 94. l. 18. t. r. Parker p. 158. l. 31. t. r. graves p. 159. l. 13. t. r. vocasse p. 162. l. 9. t. r. mulierem p. 102. l. 11. t. r. cohabitante p. 200. l. 26. t. r. Apostolos p. 221. l. 31. m. r. Archiepiscope p. 222. l. 36. m. r. latere p 231. l. 2. m. r. Eusebius p. 257. l. 16. m. r. constat p. 273. l. 29. t. r. to p. 276. l. 29. m. r. negare p. 346. l. 21. t. r. a divers p. 349. l. 26. t. r. nomine p. 350. l. 24. t. dele not p. 352. l. 24. t. r. cubitum p. 360. l. 6. t. r. no. p. 375. l. 24. t. r. is p. 367. l. ult m. r. for p. 368. l. 35. m. Annuas p. 389. l. 31. t. adde next to the word error to free her from actuall sinn if c.