thought not that he was otherwise vnderstood None was yet troubled with such a question you not yet iangling he spake more securely But the ProtestaÌ„ts which we produce liued al after that protestancy was both bred and hatched after the Catholike fayth had for many ages shined through out the world and therfore could not be ignorant what wordes of theirs might make for the Catholike fayth Cassander Erasmus-Cornelius Agrippa Marsil of Padua and preiudice their owne cause Another difference is that none of the Catholikes whose testimonyes Protestants alleage against vs is accounted of vs for a man sent extraordinarily of God and much lesse for a Prophet Euangelist or Apostle Nay Beatus Rhenanus Faber Stapulensis Orthuinus Gratius many of them are obscure writers and of small or no reckoning among vs some of them are not held for Catholikes of vs and some of them euen by the iudgments of Protestants themselues are our open enemyes But the confessions of fayth which we cite against ProtestaÌ„ts containe their faith so that they cannot be reiected of them vnles they will renounce their fayth And of the men whose testimonyes we produce one is accounted of them a (e) Humf. ad Rat. 4. Camp God another a Prophet an (f) Colloq Aldebur Schusseâ—b Catal. 13. Hunius praefat de liber arbit Euangelist an Apostle a third Elias an Angell His writings are held for inspired from heauen for a rule of fayth and equall to the writinges of the Apostles Another is called a (g) â—â—anae lib. 4 de Eccles c. 9. Beza ep 6. great and admirable Prophet others are esteemed for lights lampes bright starres props founders parents renewers of the Protestants church and religion Others are men extraordinarily sent and diuinely raised to lighten the world most of them for very learned famous well deseruing of the Protestant religion finally all for sincere Protestants The holy Fathers were wont to refute both the (h) Iustin dial cum Tryphon August l. de ciuit Chrysost hom 26. in 2. Cor. Cyril l. 6. in Iulian. Pagans superstition and the (i) Hier. cont Vigilant Ambros serm 5. de Sanctis Hilar. l. 1. 6. de Trinit heretikes errours out of the Diuels confessions Of which kind of proof (k) Apol. cap. 22. Tertullian vsing it maketh this account What more manifest then this fact what more sure then this proofe Belieue them they speake true of themselues who vse to credit them when they lye No man lyeth to his owne disgrace And S. (l) Lib. ad Demetr Cyprian VVho so sayest that thou worshipest the Gods belieue euen them whom thou worshippest And likewise Minutius in Octauio Neither do they lye to their owne shame especially if some of you be by Belieue themselues witnessing that they are Diuels and confessing the truth of themselues But our proofe taken out of the Protestants confessions of faith out of Luther such like famous Protestants testimony against Protestancy is much more euident and stronger both because it is more likely that men will confesse the truth though against themselues then the Diuell the father of lyes and sworne enemy of truth as also because the confessions of the Diuel were extorted from him by force as the Fathers themselues doe acknowledge but these of Luther and his mates come most freely from them Belieue therefore O Protestants your chiefe leaders Note your founders Instructors Prophets EuaÌ„gelists Apostles in that which they freely of their own accord coÌ„fesse of themselues of their doctrine Euen by the testimony of your own Prophets teachers belieue that ProtestaÌ„cy is newly risen first founded by Luther before knowne to none No man willingly lyeth to his owne shame no man freely confesseth that which ouerthroweth his owne cause but which he cannot deny No man knew protestancy better then they no man fauoured it more then they VVho sayth Caluin is to be credited touching Popery more then the Pope himselfe De ver â— Eccles reform And whom shal we belieue touching the author and hatching of protestancy amongst the Lutherans rather then Luther himselfe Melancthon the Century-writers Kemnice Schusselburg and the like Or amongst the Sacramentaryes rather then Zuinglius Bullinger Bucer Peter Martyr Caluin Beza Plessie and such others or amongst English Protestants rather then Iewell Fox Whitaker Fulke Humfrey Perkins and the like whose frequent and plaine confessions we heerin produce A third difference between our and the Protestants manner of proceeding in this kind of proofe is that Protestantes oftentymes alleadge Catholikes testimonyes corrupted mangled and falsifyed and sometymes also the obiections which they make against theÌ„selues insteed of their answeres as Cardinall Peron not long since shewed Plessie to haue don before the French King conferenrence at fountaine Bel-caue euen by the iudgment of Protestant themselues And it were easy to demonstrate that D. (m) Apol. part 1. l. 1. c. 23. l. 2. c. 41. part 2. l. c. 35. l. 2. c. 41. Morton hath done the like in his Apology But I produce the testimonyes of Protestants certaine and entiere at least for that sense for which I alleadge them For I haue cited none in this worke which either I haue not seene with myne owne eyes and for the most part haue quoted not only the bookes and chapters but also the leaues and pages or if I haue wanted the booke I haue cited them out of some good Author The fourth difference that of great moment is that the Catholiques whose testimonyes Protestants alleadge against is if so be they were true Catholikes were alwayes ready to reuoke and recall whatsoeuer they had written contrary to the catholik fayth to submit all their wordes or writings to the censure of the catholike Church which to be the mind disposition of all Catholiks Protestants themselues confesse For thus writeth D. (n) Contr. 2. q. 5. c. 8. Whitaker This is the condition this the consent of the Popish Church that all hang their saluation vpon one man and submit themselues to one mans iudgment And D. (o) Apol. part 1. l. 2. cap. 31. Morton Is there any Papist that thinkes any decree of the Pope can be contemned or broken without cryme or heresy Which sith it is so in vaine do they obiect any Catholikes words against the Catholike fayth For either they are not contrary thereto or if they be they are already reuoked recalled and disanulled by himselfe But the mind and proceeding of ProtestaÌ„ts is far otherwise who subiect not their opinions to the iudgment of the Church but as they thinke that she may erre so will they hold their opinions notwithstanding her sentence to the contrary and therfore iustly may we produce their testimonies against their owne Church 9. The fift difference which is much to be noted is that Protestants alleadge Catholik witnesses in matters of doctrin in which some tymes by reason of
1 We say that the Church cannot erre in things simply necessary Which he often repeateth in the 2. cap. And quest 5. cap. 17 If any fundamentall doctrine be taken away the Church straight way falleth And cap. 18 The fundamentall articles are those on which our fayth relyeth as the house vpon the foundation Againe If any fundamentall and essentiall principle of fayth be ouerturned or shaken it cannot be truly called a Church And quest 6. cap. 3 That is no true Church which taketh away one only foundation The same he teacheth in his 1. booke of the scripture cap. 7. sect 8. and cap. 12. sect 3. M. Perkins in his explication of the Creed If any man or Church retaine or defend obstinatly or of willfull ignorance a fundamentall errour we must not account them anymore Christians or Churches D. Sutliue in his first booke of the Church cap. 1 Those blemishes take away the name of the true Church which are against the grounds of fayth D. Feild in his 2. booke of the Church cap. 3 Purity free from fundamentall and essentiall errour is necessarily required in the Church D. Morton in the 1. part o◠his Apology booke 2. cap 38 Purity of doctrine in fundamentall principles of fayth is required to the being and constitution of the Church And in his answere to the Protestants Apology l. 4. c. 3. Sect. 5 The deniall of fundamentall doctrines doth exclude men from saluation and disannulleth the name of the Church in the gainsayers D. White in his way to the Church pag. 110 VVe do not thinke euery company to be the true Church that holdeth only some points of the true fayth but it is requisite that the foundation be holden And in his defence of the way cap. 17 A fundamentall point is that which belongs to the substance of fayth and is so necessary that there can be no saluation without the knowledge and explicite fayth thereof And surely they all and at all tymes ought to affirme this seeing they deliuer truth of doctrine as an essentiall marke of the Church which they must needs vnderstand and so Vorstius in his Anti-bellarmin pag. 148. expresseth it of true doctrine in fundamentall points And this their doctrine touching this matter I earnestly commend to the memory of the Reader because it is necessary to find out what a Protestant is and also is one of the grounds whereby it may appeare that there was no Protestant Church before Luther because before him there was no company which held all the same fundamentall points of doctrine which Protestants do hold 6. Finally They exclude all that deny any article of fayth they sometyms shut out of their Church all those who deny any one point of fayth be it fundamentall or other For thus writeth the Apology of the Confession of Auspurge The Church of Christ is not among them who defend naughty opinions contrary to the Ghospell And Luther in his epistle to Count Albert It is not inough if in other things he confesse Christ and his Ghospell For who denieth Christ in one article or word denieth him who is denied in all because there is but one Christ Lutherās the same in all his words And vpon the 17. cap. of Deuteronomy Faith suffereth nothing and the word tolerateth nothing but the word must be perfectly pure and the doctrine alwayes sound throughout And vpon the 17. cap. of S. Matthew Fayth must be round that is belieuing all articles though small ones For who belieueth not one article rightly belieueth nothing righly as Iames sayth VVho offendeth in one is guilty of all and so who in one article doubteth or belieueth not at least obstinatly dissolueth the roundnes of the graine and so can do no good And vpon the 5. cap. to the Galathians In diuinity a small errour ouerthroweth all the doctrine Doctrine is like to a Mathematicall point it cannot be deuided that is it cannot suffer either addition or detraction And when Zuinglius and his followers desired of the Lutherans to be esteemed as their brethren Melancthon as Hospinian reporteth in his Sacramentarian history fol. 81. roughly sayd vnto them VVe meruaile with what conscience they can account vs for brethren whome they iudge to erre in doctrine And againe fol. 82. Luther grauely spake vnto them saying he greatly merueiled how they could hold him for a brother if they thought his doctrine to be vntrue And the same Melancthon togeather with Brentius writeth thus to the Lantgraue Perhaps Christians who are entangled in some errour which they do not obstinatly defend may be tolerated as brethren but they which not only bring false doctrine into the Church but also maintaine it are not to be acknowledged for brethren And againe Melancthon in his examen of those who are to take orders tom 3. There are in that company of the Church many who are not Saints but yet agreeing in doctrine The Deuines of Wittemberg in their refutation of the orthodoxall consent pag. 73 Like as he who keepeth the whole law and offendeth in one as Iames the Apostle witnesseth is guilty of all so who belieueth not one word of Christ albeit he seeme to beliue the other articles of the Creed yet belieueth nothing and is to be damned as incredulous For euery heretike did not impugne euery article of fayth but commonly each of them of purpose impugned some one or other whome neuertheles the Church iustly condemned as heretikes if they pertinaciously stood in their errours Schusselburg also in his 3. tom of the Catalogue of Heretiks pag. 85. Christian fayth is one copulatiue and who denieth one article of fayth calleth in doubt the whole body of the heauenly doctrine Which he repeateth againe in the next pag. And tome 8. pag. 361 The Lutherans do fly him who depraueth the doctrine of truth in any article whatsoeuer And in his 2. booke of Caluinisticall diuinity article 1 VVe are certaine by the testimony of Gods word that an errour in one false doctrine obstinatly defended maketh an heretike For S. Chrysostome vpon the epistle to the Galathians sayd most truly that he corrupteth the whole doctrine who ouerthroweth it in the least article And Ambrose wrote rightly to the Virgin Demetrias That he is out of the number of the faythfull and hath no part in the inheritance of Saints who disagreeth in any thing from the Catholike truth Sacramētaries Thus the Lutherans Peter Martyr in his epistle to the straungers in England tom 2. loc col 136 VVe answere all the words of God as farre forth as they proceeded from him are of equall waight and authority and therefore none may receiue this and reiect that as false Iames sayth boldly who sinneth in one becommeth guilty of all That if it haue place in keeping of the commandements is also true in points of fayth Sadeel in his index of Turriās Repetitions pag. 806 I sayd that it was no true Church which teacheth doctrine repugnant to the
man Sonis Respons ad Spondeum c. 10. pag. 365. Heretiks are within the Church Lubbert lib. 2. de Eccles cap. 3 It is manifest that heretikes are some as yet in the visible Church some also in the church of the elect Iunius lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 4 Heretiks absolutely are of the Church vnlesse they be such as ouerthrow fundamentall articles of religion Cap. 3 n. â—â— Bullinger teacheth the same Decad. 2. serm 8. and it is the common doctrine of the Protestants who as is before proued exclude none from being members of their Church that deny only such articles as are not fundameÌ„tall Howbeit some of them vpon hereticall priuiledge as Tertullian speaketh will not haue such called heretiks Lib. de carne Coâ—isti cap. â—5 being indeed more ashamed of the name then of the thing it selfe Zanchius likewise lib. 1. epist ad Dudit pag. 150. sayth that hereticall and Schismaticall sects are within the Church Tilenus in Syntag. disput 14 Heretiks euen those that subuert the foundation and Schismatiks in regard of outward Communion are in the Church till either of themselues they go to the enemies side or are cast out by the lawfull iudgement of the Church And D. Feild in his first booke of the Church cap 14 Seing God gaue the power of the keyes and the dispensation of his word and Sacraments only to his Church if Heretiks be not of the Church they do not then baptize And cap. 7 They that are partakers of the heauenly calling and sanctified by the profession of diuine truth and the vse of the meanes of saluation are of very diuers sortes as heretikes Schismatiks hypocrites and those that professe the whole sauing truth in vnity and sincerity of a good and sanctified heart All these are partakers of the heauenly calling and sanctified by the profession of truth and consequently are all in some degree and sort of that society of men whome God calleth out vnto himselfe separateth from Infidels which is rightly named the Church D. Whitaker contr 4. quest 5. c. 3. pag 679 All heretiks are within the Church Hooker in his 3. booke of Ecclesiasticall policy pag. 128 VVe must acknowledge euen heretikes themselues to be though a maymed part yet a part of a visible Church Againe If an Infidell should pursue to death an heretike professing Christianity only for Christian Prosession sake could we deny vnto him the honour of Martyrdome By which words it is plaine that they admit heretiks not only into the visible Church but into the inuisible also or company of the elect and predestinate to saluation And D. Andrews in his answere to Bellarmines Apology cap. 5. pag. 121. denyeth that the words Catholik and Heretike are opposite wherefore vnlesse he will debarre and shut out some Catholiks from the Church he must needs giue admittance to heretiks seing by his owne verdict they may be Catholiks D. White in defence of his way cap. 38. pag. 367 The second sort of the militant Church are hypocrites and vnsound members that are not called effectually but disobey the truth whereof they make profession such are heretiks schismatiks c. Touching their acceptations of Schismatiks besides what hath byn already alleaged D. Feild in his first booke of the Church cap. 13. Writeth thus They challenge Schismatiks The departure of Schismatiks is not such but that notwithstanding their schisme they are and remaine parts of the Church of God Iunius in the place before quoted layeth clayme to those Schismatikes VVho sayth he seuer not themselues from the whole Church but only from a part thereof But D. Mortoâ— in the 1. part of his Apology lib. 1. cap. 2. sayth absolutely without any acception or restraint at all Schismatiks are of the Church And lib. 2. cap. 10. pag. 288 Variances sayth he and schismes do not betoken the false Church And D. Willet in his Synopsis cont 2. quest 3. pag. 104 VVe say that Schismatiks though they hold some false points of doctrine yet if their errours be not fundamentall and if they retaine the purity of doctrine in all points necessary to saluation and the administration of the Sacraments may make a particular Church by themselues These are their acknowledgements touching Heretikes and Schismatikes in generall They acknowledge the Grecians Let vs now descend to particularities and see the courteous admission they giue to some of them by name 8. The Grecians and other Easterne Schismatiks yea heretiks to for the most part find that fauour at their hands as they vouchsafe to account them members of their Church His Maiesty epist ad Card. Peron pa. 13 hath thus The Churches of Rome Greece Antioch Aegipt Aethiopia Muscouy and others more are members of the Catholike church D. Whiâ—e in defence of his way c. 37. pag. 355 The visible churches of Greece Aethiope Armenia and Rome with the nations contayned therin haue in them the true church of God wherin men may be saued D. Morton in his answere to the Protestants Apology lib. 4. cap. 2. sect 7. sayth that the Assyrian Churches keep the true foundation of Christian fayth The same especially of the Grecians teacheth Luther tom 2. lib. de captiu Babylon fol. 65. in Assert art 37. fol. 114. Innius cont 4 lib. 4. cap. 6. Sedeel Respons ad Thes Posnan cap. 12. D. Whitaker lâ—b 7. cont Duraeum sect 3. Bucanus loco 41. quest 5 D. Feild lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 5. 28. D. Fulke de Success pag. 120. Burhill pro Tortura Torti c. 15. and others 9. And sometymes they are not lesse free-harted towards westerne heretike Melancthon in locis à Maulio editiâ—tit de Eccles pag. 491. writeth that two girles who were burnt as he sayth for Anabaptisme They challenge the Anabaptists held the foundation of sayth and died in a good Confâ—ssion And Zuinglius tom 2. lib. de Author sedit fol. 134. seq exhorting his fellowers not to reuolt from his doctrine for the debates and quarels between the Protestants and the Anabaptists calleth both parts most learned and sonnes of the same Father Neither must thou sayth he giue any man way to shake and weakeâ— thy sayth although thou see that men of the greatest learning moue disputes and fall by the cares with much â—agernesse of contention touching externall matters he meanes baptisme but let this be rather thy stedfast persuasion that by the Sonne of God we are all made sonnes of the same Father Againe Neither am I wont to speake these things for that I am so greatly moued with the baptisme of children And ibidem lib. de Baptismo fol. 96. he sayth that baptisme is a matter of ceremony which the church may omit or take quite away Oecolampadius in his 2. booke of epistles p. 363. sayth baptisme is an externall thing which by the law of charity may be dispensed withall And Musculus in locis tit de haeresi pag. 605. reckons the Anabaptists amongst those who
about to shew any other kind of Pastors Finally all those who affirme that the vocation or Mission of Luther and their first Ministers was extraordinary must needs say that there were no former Protestant Pastours of whome they could haue byn sent or approued ProtestaÌ„ts say the Church may be without Pastors 4. The same also they insinuate when they teach that the Church may be without Pastors which they affirme that thereby they may defend the being of their own Church before Luther when it had no Pastors Luther in cap. 4. Oseae tom 4. fol 295 As if the Church were tyed to any certaine order of Ministery The Confession of Saxony cap. 12 God estsoones restoreth the Ministery Caluin of true Reform pag. 332 I graunt indeed that it can neuer fall out that the Church perish but when they referre that to Pastors which is promised of the perpetuall continuance of the church in that they are much deceiued For the Church doth not perish streight if Pastors he wanting Beza of the notes of the Church pag. 55 Ordinary succession and vocation of Pastors was not always needfull or perpetuall Sadeel in Answere to the abiured articles pag. 533 It is false that the outward Ministery must be perpetuall The same he hath in Repetit Sophism Turriani pag. 763. Iunius and Danaeus lib. 4. de Eccles cap. 8. Bucan in his 41. place de Eccles quest 19 Sometyme the outward and vsuall ministry of the church being interrupted the Church is extraordinarily nourished of God as it were in the desert Keckerman in his Theologicall Systeme lib. 3. pag. 397 The Church is often pressed so that the order of succession of Pastors must be somewhat interrupted And Vorstius in his Antibellarm pag. 158 The ordinary succession vseth oftentymes to be interrupted for some tyme. Luâ—bert in his 5. booke of the church cap. 5 VVe say that the church may for a short space be depriued of Pastors D. Whitaker c. 6. before cited pag. 510 I gather that true and lawfull succession may be broken of and that it is not a true but only an accidentall note of the Church because it pertaineth not to the essence of the Church but only to her externall state And pag. 512 VVe say that ordinary succession hath oftentymes byn interrupted and cut of in the true Church D. Morton lib. cit cap. 17. writeth thus The matter of the proposition to wit where there is no succession there is no Church ye know to be weake And cap. 18. he affirmeth this saying to be false Succession of doctrine cannot be deuided from succession of persons And cap. 23. sayth Succession of fayth may be without succession of doctrine and succession of doctrine without succession of persons D. Fulke lib. de Succes pag. 319 Yea euen the very publike preaching of the word may be silent for a tyme and the Church being depriued for a tyme of this ordinary meanes of her saluation may be preserued so long of God And D. VVhite in his way to the Church pag. 87 All the externall gouernment of the Church may come to decay in that the locall and personall Succession of the Pastors may be interrupted And pag. 403 For the externall Succession we care not it is sufficient that in doctrine they succeded the Apostles and primitiue Churches and those faythfull witnesses which in all ages since imbraced the same 5. By the foresayd Confessions of Protestants it is most cleare that when Luther began to play the Pastor there was no Protestant preacher at all For they acknowledge that they are no Church for any ordinary succession that the true order of the church perished that the true Ministery was taken out of the Church true knowledge of diuine ordination was extinguished and ordination abolished and decayed That the Church had no true Ministery and that she was destitute of true Pastors And that they meane these words both of a substantiall vniuersall destruction of true Ministry is manifest both by the selfe same words and others also For they adde withall that the state of the church was quite ouerthrowne ordinary vocation wholy corrupted that ordinary vocation was no where no place left for ordinary vocation and there were none of whome those who freed their Church from Popery might receiue imposition of hands that the state of the Church was so interrupted that God must raise vp Pastors extraordinarily that the true ranck of ordination was so cut of as that their needed a new succour and a new foundation lastly that the Ecclesiastical order the vaine names therof only remayning was ouerthrowne from the foundation and lawfull order quit abolished that there was not left so much as the slenderest shadow of the cheifest parts of ecclesiasticall vocation In which words either they say that there was neuer a Protestant Pastor at all or that can be sayd by no words whatsoeuer And such was the state and condition of the Protestant church not for a small tyme but as themselues say for some ages And for this cause vsually they call Luther his first partners their (a) Plessie l. 1. de Eccl. c. 11. Napp in 14. Apocal. first ministers first (b) Sadeel de Vocat pag. 556. teachers first (c) Gâ—alt Praefat. in ep ad Rom restorers of the ghospell first (d) Perk. in â— Galat. cap. 11. preachers of the ghospell first restorers of the house of God Apostles and Euangelists 6. Finally I proue that there was no true Protestant preacher before Luther out of the reall coÌ„fession of all Protestants For none of them all can by any sufficient testimony or argument proue that there was any such Pastor Wherefore this is rashly affirmed and fondly belieued 〈◊〉 Marc. â— Either proue sayth Tertullian that which thou belieuest or if thou prouest it not how doest thou belieue it And that common argument of theirs wherewith they vse to proue that they had a Church and Pastors at all tymes because they bring the Scripture to proue their doctrine to be true we shall hereafter shew to be a most vaine Sophisme And besides themselues do ouerthrow it in teaching as we haue seene that the Church may be without Pastors wherby it would not follow that they had Pastors albeit they could by the Scripture proue that before Luther they had a Church Moreouer then those who endeauour to name some Protestant preachers or Pastors before Luthers tyme do plainly shew that there was no true and absolute Protestant Pastor to wit such as taught iustification by only faith and the rest of the fundamentall opinions of Protestancy For the Apology of the Church of England pag. 103. sayth That they gaue not so cleare a light but lightned as it were some sparck The Confession of Saxony cap. 12 That they ioyned stable vnto the foundation Cruciger and Rorarius in Luther tom 1. fol. 202 That they had some litle light D. Fulke of Success pag. 131 That perhaps in all points
ready to proue out of the scripture that we professe the same doctrine of fayth and manners which Christ would haue to be perpetuall by euident reason our succession is manifest althogh all Historyes were silent of the names of the Persons and continuation of succession And the like he hath pag. 154. and 331. D. White in his way pag. 403. sayth he knoweth his Church was alwayes because it holdeth the fayth of the Scripture which cannot be extinguished The like he sayth pag. 320. 326. Likewise Luther de notis Eccles tom 7. fol. 149. Caluin in Matth. cap. 24. vers 28. and generally al of them whiles they make the truth of doctrin the infallible marke of the Church Lib. 2. contra Arian O proofe that I may cry out in S. Augustins words O errour o dotage And with S. Athanase A worthy heresy which wanteth probable reasons to vnder proppe it For this argument on which all their belief that their Church was before Luther doth rely is a most fond sophisme and most counterfait syllogisme as manifestly appeareth whether it be framed in that forme wherein D. Whitaker hath proposed it or whether it be reduced to this forme That Church which holdeth the true doctrine of Christ hath alwayes beene and consequently before Luther The Protestant Church holdeth the true doctrin holdeth the true doctrin of Christ as say they we will proue by scripture Therefore it hath bin alway 3. I answere that this argument is a manifest sophime for many causes For if the Maior be particuler so that the sense thereof be Some Church which holdeth the true doctrine of Christ hath alwayes beene it is true because the catholik church which holdeth Christs true doctrine hath alwayes been but then the Syllogisme is sophism for want of due forme inferring a conclusion out of particuler propositioÌ„s But if the Maior be vniuersall according as it is made of D. Whitaker then so farre is it from being out of controuersy as he affirmeth that it is manifestly false and no way true but only apparant and therefore vnfit to make a true syllogisme but only a counterfait and a sophisme ProtestaÌ„ts assume a manifest falsity That it is manifestly false is euident because that Church or company of ChristiaÌ„s which is strictly and properly termed schismatical holdeth the true doctrine of Christ as both the Fathers teach and the Protestants themselues doe also most plainely affirme yet it is not the true church of Christ Wherefore sith as the Philosopher teacheth those thinges are probable which seem true to all or to most or to wise men and those either al or most or most approued and such as are not probable serue only to make sophismes The foresayd Maior not seeming true to all or most or the wisest Christians yea not euen to the Protestants themselues it is manifest that it is no probable propositioÌ„ but only apparent and therefore not fit to make a true syllogisme but only an apparent and counterfait 4. That the Fathers teach that a Schismatical Church holdeth the true doctrine of Christ is manifest by S. Augustine who lib. quest Euang. pag. 28. tom 4. sayth It vseth to be enquired wherein Schismatickes differ from heretâ—kes That Schismatikes hold true doctrine and this found that no difference in faytht but breach of society in communion maketh Schismatikes And lib. de fide Symbolo cap. 10 Heretikes by belieuing wrong of God violate the fayth but Schismatickes by wicked diuisions leape from fraternall charity albeit they belieue aright those thinges which we belieue And lib. cont Gaud. cap. 9. refuteth him because he had sayd that Schismatikes and Heretikes are the same against which he sayth Thou art a Schismatike by sacrilegious diuision and an heretike by sacrilegious opinion And lib. 1. cont Cresc cap. 29. and de gest is cum Emerito affirmeth that the same fayth is had out of the Church S. Hierome in Tit. 3. VVe iudge this difference to be between heresy and schism that heresy holdeth a naughty opinion schisme separateth from the Church by dissention of Bishops S. Gregory lib. 18. Moral cap. 14. Some doe belieue false thinges of God others by Gods help belieue rightly of God but keep not vnity with their brethren these are diuided by schisme S. Isidor lib. 8. Origin cap 3. Schisme tooke its name of breach for it beleeueth the same religion and rites that others do only is pleased to keep company a part The same teach S. Ireneus lib. 4. cap. 62. S. Chrysost hom 3. in 1. Cor. S. Optat. lib. 1. 4. 5. cont Parmen and others And it is manifest by reason For if Schismatikes did erre also in Fayth they should not differ from heretikes And it is grauÌ„ted both of old and new Heretikes For thus sayth Faustus in S. Augustine lib. 20. cont Faustum cap. 3. Schisme if I be not deceaued is to belieue the same to worship God in the same manner that others do only to be delighted with diuision of assemblyes Caluin 4. Institut cap. 2. § 5. Austin putteth this difference betwixt heretikes and schismatiks that they corrupt the sincerity of the fayth with false doctrines these sometymes euen hauing the like saith breake asunder the band of society And in 1. Cor. cap. 11. vers 19. It is known in what sense the ancient vsed both these nams schisme heresy they put heresy in difference of doctrine but schisme rather in alienation of minds to wit when any either vpon enuy or hatred of the Pastours or of frowardnesse departed from the Church Beza libro de puniendis Haereticis pag. 89 Shism properly is the diuision of those who belieue the same things And pag. 150. Let them remember that we terme them not heretikes who are properly called Schismatiques The same he hath in 1. Cor. 1. v. 10. and other where Plessie lib. de Eccles cap. 1. pag. 16 VVe call erroneous Churches either heretikes or schismatikes according as they erre either in fayth or in charity And pag. 32. VVhat pertaineth to schismaticall Churches either they are simply schismaticall or when heresy also is adioyned as it vseth after schisme as an ague after a wound And cap. 10. pag. 340. True and pure Schismatiks are those who holding the same doctrine yet make meetinges a part Peter Martyr in locis tit de Schism pag. 618. I thinke it more plaine to define Schisme to be a cutting a sunder of the Ecclesiasticall peace vnity And pag. 619 There may be schisme in the Church without heresy Aretius also in locis part 2. fol. 10 Schisme sometymes in the same doctrin breaketh society Bucan in loc quest 33. de Eccl. affirmeth that shismatiks differ from heretiks because heresy properly is dissention in doctrine Polâ—n part 2. Thes de notis Eccl. Albeit schismatical Churches agree in the doctrine of truth c. Zanchius tract de Eccles cap. There may be breach in the symboles of Charity that is in
a true Church and vnderstand their foresayd Maior vniuersally it is false for not euery true Church in that sense is Apostolicall or hath euer beene For a schismaticall Church is true in doctrine and yet is neither Apostolicall nor hath euer beene And if they vnderstand their Maior particulerly the conclusion followeth not because it is deduced out of pure particuler propositions And thus much of the Maior 7. Secondly the foresayd argument is a sophism because of the Minor by which one vnknown thing is proued by another one false thing by another not only false Protestāts proofe out of a thing more vnknowne but also impossible For it is more vncercertaine that the Protestant Church holdeth the doctrin of Christ then that she was before Luther For albeit she were not before notwithstanding it was not impossible that she should haue beene but that she holdeth the doctrine of Christ is both false and impossible also And as Luther sayth in defens verb. Coenae tom 7. fol. 385. It is a mad mans part to proue vncertaine things by others as vncertaine And D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 3. cap. 3. All proofe is by thinges that are more knowne Which also he hath cont 2. quest 5. cap. 18. Sadcel praefat lib. cont Traditiones Daneus l. 4. de Eccles cap. 2. D. Morton part 2. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 37. Pareus lib. 3. de Iustificat cap. 1. Wherupon Luther tom 2. Praefat. assert Antic fol. 95. writeth Aristotle and all sense of nature sheweth that vnknowne thinges must be proued by thinges more knowne and obscure thinges by manifest If therefore as Pareus sayth lib. 1. de Iustificat c. 20. when the Aduersarie is brought to that that eitheir he gainesayth himselfe or beggs that which he is to proue assuming that in his proofe which is in debate or trifleth by repeating now and then the same thing he is vanquished surely then Protestants are vanquished whom in this smal work we haue shewed oftentymes to gaine say themselues now including these within the Church now excluding them now affirming the Church to be inuisible now denying it now to haue alwayes Pastours now denying it and the like And in this argumment with which alone they proue the existēce of their Church before Luther they assume in the Minor that which most of all is in debate Caluin 4. Insticut c. 1. § 12. Narrat de Eccles Belg. p. 196. And the Maior they can proue no otherwise then by trifling by repeating it and saying that it is out of all doubt I add also that the sacramentaryes say that the Lutheran Church erreth euen in the fundamentall points and the like say the Lutherans of the Sacramentaries and scarce there is any Protestant who doth not thinke that the Church whereof he is doth erre in some points What reason then haue they out of the truenesse of the doctrin of their Churches to inferre their perpetuall existence 8. Thirdly I adde that the manner wherwith Protestants doe proue the Minor of their foresayd syllogisme is sophisticall and not such as they exact of vs for proofe of our doctrine For commonly they exact of vs to shew that our doctrine is contained in expresse words in Scripture or as Luther sayth lib. de seru arbit tom 2. fol. 440 inso manifest testimonies as are able so to stop all mēs mouths as they are not able to say any thing against it But manifest it is that such be not the proofes wher with Protestants proue their doctrine For to omit other points where is in expresse words in scripture that fundamentall point of their doctrin that we are iustified by only faith Say the contrary is so expresly in S. Iames epistle Tom. 6. in c. 12. Gen. as therfore Luther blasphemously sayth S. Iames doted And the Lutherans for that very cause deny his epistle to be canonicall Besides VVhitak cont 1. q. 4. cap. 3. Protestants doe now confesse that the scripture is not of it selfe sufficient to end all questions of faith and that Schismatikes cannot be conuinced by scripture How then can they sufficiently proue al the points of their doctrine by scripture VVhitak loc cit p. 490. Plessy l. de Eccles c. 9. Againe themselues acknowledge that they need certaine meanes to attaine to the right sense of the Scripture and that their meanes are humane and not infallible as knowledge of tongues conference of places and such like and with all that such as the meanes be such is the exposition of Scripture If therfore their meanes be not infallible how can their vnderstanding of the scripture be infallible Moreouer they scarce euer proue any thing by both principles out of scripture but almost euermore adioyne one human principles as easily will appeare if their proofs be brought to a syllogisticall forme as well obserue the most learned Bishop of Luçon in his defence of the Principall articles of faith cap. 3. 5. And how can they be infallibly certaine of the conclusion which they cannot know but by one human principle whereof they can haue no such certainty Furthermore because many of their proofes doe not only consist of one humane principle Protestats conclude against sense which is not at al in the scripture but also they inferre a conclusiō directly contradictory to that which the scripture in most expresse words teacheth of that matter As for example when they proue that the Eucharist is of not the very body and bloud of Christ alwayes one of their principles is humane and besides their conclusiō is flat contrary to expresse words of scripture which affirmeth that it is Christs very body and bloud And who is he in his wittes that will perswade himselfe either that the scripture meaneth that the Eucharist is not the body bloud of Christ which directly it neuer sayth rather then that it is his body and bloud which it as expresly sayth as euer it sayth any thing or that that proofe is not sophisticall which out of one humane principle at least inferreth the contrary of that which the scripture most expresly teacheth Lastly they neuer proued any one point of their doctrine any otherwise then euer Heretiks do that is in their own iudgmēt neuer before any iudge or general Councell which Luther himselfe confesseth in c. 27. Gen. tom 6. fol. 368. in the words In the affaire of the Gospell we haue decided the matter against al the impiety of the Pope without form of law VVe accused not the Pope neither could we for there was no iudge Yea their doctrin hath bin cōdemned according to all forme of law in the Generall Councel of Trent of the Patriarch of Constantinople to whō they appealed and of al other kinds of Christians 9. Fourthly I say that the foresayd argument is a sophisme in that in a sēsible matter as the Church is it concludeth against the sense of all men For nether did any see the Protestant Church before Luther
OF THE AVTHOR AND SVBSTANCE OF THE PROTESTANT CHVRCH AND RELIGION TWO BOOKES Written first in Latin by R. S. Doctour of Diuinity AND Now reuiewed by the Author and translated into English by VV. Bas Euery thing must be reduced to its beginning Tertull. Praescript cap. 20. Permissu Superiorum M.DC.XXI The Scope of this Worke. IF both Luther himselfe and the famousest Protestantâ— of all sorts haue many wayes most plainly and most freely confessed that Luther was the Author and Beginner of the Protestant Church and Religion as in this worke doth manifestly appeare then vndoubtedly he was so And if Luther were the Author and Beginner therof assuredly it is not the Church and Religion of Christ. Read therefore and iudge indifferently and thereby an end may be made of all Controuersies in Religion betwixt the Catholiks and Protestants THE PREFACE OF THE AVTHOR TO the Reader Wherein the manner and profit of this Worke is declared THERE are two kinds of questions gentle Reader which are in controuersy betwixt the Catholikes and Protestantes the one kind is of fact to wit Whether Luther was the Author and beginner of the Protestants Church and ReligioÌ„ whether before him it were visible and had Pastours whether he and the first Protestant Preachers were sent to preach Protestancy and the liâ—e The other kind of question is of Christs doctrine or law For example whether Christ taught good workes do iustify be necessary to saluation meritorious and such others Why a a question of Fact is handled rather theÌ„ of doctrin At this present I treate not of this second kind of question but only of the former and that for three causes First the questions of Doctrine are innumerable but the questions of Fact few And many haue handled them and that most exactly but these few haue touched and for ought that I know none of purpose hath hitherto written of the Authour of Protestancy and in that manner as I intend to write Secondly there are few questions of doctrine of that nature that all other controuersies of faith depend vpon them but the most questions of Fact are such as if they be well decided al other Controuersies of religion are at an end Such kind of question this especially is which now I handle VVhether Luther were Author and beginner of the Protestant church and Religion For if it be made manifest that he was the Author and Beginner of it euery one will straihgt see that it is not Christs Church Religion but Luthers deuise and inuention Thirdly in questions of doctrine or law Protestants want not some pretext of Scripture as neither any Heretikes wanted and therfore diuers tymes they are ready to debate these kind of Questions in which as Tertullian sayth they pretend Scriptures Prescrip c. 15. and with this their boldnes shake some and in the dispute weary the constant catch the weake send away the midalâ— sort with scruple and douâ—ts But in questions of Fact they are destitute not only of al pretence of Scripture vnles it be some most vaine but also of all testimony of men and help of reason and stand only vpon their owne sayinges are conuinced by the testimonies of the whol world and sometyme also by their owne confessions and therefore are brought to debate these kind of questions no more willingly then is a theefe to his tryall Neither do they in these disputs either weary the constant or catch the weake but shew their owne weaknes and wilfullnes vnto all kind of men And this is the cause why Ministers are so loath to dispute of the Church because the Church being a company of men includeth many questions of fact as of antiquity succession continuance visibility mission ordination of Pastours and such like in which points there is little colour or shew on their part 2. Fourthly Protestants exact more difficult poofes in questions of doctrine then they can demand in matters of Fact For in matters of Fact wherof the scripture speaketh nothing they must be content with testimonies of men against whome no iust exception can be made or they must refuse all triall of these kind of questions But in controuersies of doctrine they account those only to be lawfull proofes which are taken out of the scripture Neither doe these satisfie them vnlesse they be plaine (a) Melan. Brent in Hospin fol. 107. Colloq Ratisb sess 11. expresse and as they say word (b) Vorst respons ad Slad for word containe that which is in question or at least be so pregnant and strong that they (c) Luth. de seru arbitr fol. 440. Lib. 6. confess c. 4. stopp all mâ—ns mouths that they can gainsay nothing For it is the common fault of Protestants which S. Augustin saith himselfe was guilty of whiles he was an heretike that they will be as certaine of all things as that seauen and three make ten Nay they yield not alwayes to these kind of proofs For what can be sayd more expressy more plainly more literally then the scripture saith that man is iustified by workes and not only by faith that that which our Sauiour gaue with his hands to his Apostles after his last supper was his very body and bloud and such like yet the Protestants yield not to these kind of testimonies but deuise figures and shiftes to delude them Catholiques proofes in controuersies of doctrine are certainly Theological demonstrations because they are clearly drawne from the proper principles of Diuinity to wit from cleare words of God confirmed by the tradition of the Church and vnanimous exposition of the Fathers which kind of proofe is as great and strong as either Diuinity or law or any Science whatsoeuer which is founded in words either doth affoard or the nature of any law or science which is grounded in words as Diuinity is can beare or affoard And as the Philosopher saith well it were starck madnes to exact any other kind of proofes of any Profession then the nature therof can affoard 1. Eth. 1. But because heretiques expound what words soeuer as they list and litle set by the authority of the Church or Fathers and the vnlearned hardly perceaue what kind of proofe is a Theologicall demonstration such as Diuinity can affoard no greater or which is the true sense of Gods word or how great the authority of the Churh and Fathers ought to be therefore with them Catholiks proofs in points of doctrin albeit in truth they be Theological demonstrations take litle effect Wheras on the other side Catholique proofes in matter of Fact are not only Theologicall but also that I may so speake Mathematicall demonstrations because they consist of one principle which is grounded not only vpon the foundations of Diuinity to wit the word of God together with the expositioÌ„ of the Church and Fathers but also is manifest by the light of reason which kind of principles these are That Gods Church hath alwayes him
that it is one that it is the auncientest of all Churches that it is alwayes visible hath alwayes Pastors and the like And of another principle which may be tryed by our sense and experience as that the foresayd properties agree neither to the Protestants nor to the Anabaptists nor to any hereticall company And therfore these kind of demonstrations moue euen the most obstinate heretiques and are euident euen to the most ignorant and vnlearned persons 3. And hence ariseth a fift cause of handling rather questions of Fact then of doctrin because the fruit of debating those questions is reaped with more facility and of far more For wheras few but diuines do themselues perceaue the true meaning of the testimonyes of Scripture wherwith the questions of doctrin are debated as the true meaning of the law few but lawyers theÌ„selues do see all perceaue the meaning of those testimonyes wherwith the questions of fact are disputed Epist dedicat exercit cont Baron who will affoard an atteÌ„tiue eye to see or eare to heare And heer upoÌ„ Casaubon wrote that for to insinuate into the mind of the Reader any opinion now in controuersie Baronius historyes are of greater force D. Flauignie then Bellarmines disputes And sayd also sometyme as one most worthy of credit who heard him told me that whiles he read Bellarmines disputations he began to doubt of all Religion but whiles he perused Baronius Annales he felt himselfe by little little drawn towards Papistry which thing might wel haue befallen him and such others not because Cardinall Bellarmine proueth lesse soundly for the nature of the matter the truth of Catholik Religion in questions of doctrine then Cardinall Baronius doth the same in questions of Fact but because such is the nature of the testimonyes wherewith the truth of Catholike fayth in questions of doctrine is proued that they are lesse euident then the testimonyes wherewith the Catholike truth in matters of Fact is proued and also haue many thinges which seeme to be contrary and repugnant to them Whereupon it falleth out that some hearing or reading controuersies of doctrine disputed between Catholikes and Heretikes and not being able of theÌ„selues to discern betwixt truth shew of truth either follow neither party but become vncertaine or Atheistes or content with any shew of truth take that part to which any affection of their will doth draw them Whereas none by hearing or reading controuersies of Fact becommeth not more confirmed in the Catholik faith or more auerted from heresy And therefore Tertullian counsaileth vs Praescrip cap. 1â— not to dispute with Heretikes out of Scripture by which questions of doctrine are disputed but aduiseth vs to appeale to antiquity succession and such like which concerne questions of fact 4. Lastly though the fruit of disputing both those kind of questions were equall yet sith the Author by order of nature goeth before the thing whereof he is Authour according to the order of Nature we ought to intreate of the Author of Protestancy before we dispute of Protestancy it selfe For as well sayth Tertullian nothing but God alone is without beginning which how much it goeth before in the state of all thinges so much ought it to go before in the handling of them Lib 5. cont Mar. Lib 3 cont Mar. that the state may be knowne And other where Nothing is knowne before the beginning is knowne Wherfore I will begin my first dispute concerning the Protestant Religion of the Authour therâ—of Yet before I do that I must set downe and determine what a Protestant or the Protestant Church and Religion is and what is necessary for one to be a Protestant and discouer the vncertainty of Protestants And this much touching the matter which I haue made choice of to handle in this little worke and the causes thereof VVhy proued only out of Protestants 5. As for the manner wherwith I vndertake to discusse this question of Fact whether Luther was the first Author beginner of the Protestant Church and Religion I purpose to proue it only out of the confessions of Luther himselfe and of the three sorts of Protestants to wit Lutherans who professe to follow Luther in all points of doctrine Sacramentaries who notoriously dissent from him touching the reall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament and our English Protestants who differ from both the former at least in discipline gouerment of their Church because this kind of proofe out of their owne wordes I find to be both necessary and most effectuall with Protestants Necessary because of this question of Fact neither the Scripture Necessary or the Fathers say any thing as also because seeing Protestants deny part of the scripture and interprete the rest as they please and will not stand to the sentence of the Church Councels or Fathers account reason Sophistrie contem me the testimonies of Catholique writers they haue left nothing but their own coÌ„fessioÌ„s by which we may dispure with them And I pray God they do giue place to their own most frequent and most plaine confessions and not delude them by voluntary and friuolous interpretations for then hope may be that there wil be some end of these controuersies At least we shall reape this profit by this labour that by it shall be manifest to all that either Protestants will heare no testimony admit no iudgement no not their owne which is a most euident argument of a most desperat cause or that they shall be condemned by their owne verdict sentence or lastly that there can be no forme of speech so plaine no words so cleare no sentence so manifest which they with their faigned figures deuises will not wrest frustrate and delude which is in effect to disanull al kind of proofe which is taken out of words or testimonies whatsoeuer For I will bring so plaine testimonies of theirs as plaine can scarce or not at all be deuised I will bring so many as themselues will require no more I will bring so weighty as themselues will demaund none more weighty I wil bring them also most freely and often iterated and repeated lastly I will bring not only those which indirectly and by consequence proue that which I would but those also that especially oftenest which directly testify that which they are brought to confirme Wherfore either they will not delude these words of theirs or they wil delude all wordes whatsoeuer And either they will not refuse these their owne testimonies and confessions or they will reiect all testimonies and iudgements whatsoeuer which is in effect to confesse that their cause is most desperate and most worthy to be reiected and condemned of all Most effectuall 1. This maÌ„ner also of proofe is most effectuall for what can be of greater force to conuince a man then his owne iudgement and acknowledgement of the truth Surely vnlesse a man will professe himselfe to be en enemy
that Protestants as (u) Lib. 2. c. 9. Lactantius wrote of Cicero cannot be more sorely confuted then they are by Protestants themselues Faults escaped in the printing Page Line Fault Correction 8â— 11. himelf himselfe 82. 27. vnles he vnles he be 96. 6. numb 66. numb 96. 107. 19. The There 109. 23. light of dele of 120. 4. credible incredible 127. 7. the these 23â— 6. dele haue bin 237. 2. be be by 140. 6. fourth third 147. 33. waye waxe 154. 7. in is 168. 23. sonde sponge 169. 3. one our 170. 33. 1525. 1535. 181. 14. should only should only say 184. 27. predigious prodigious 205. 31. boasteth boasteth that â—19 vlt. Taye Faye 211. 33. of fayth faith of 222. 21. first fifth If any other faults haue escaped it is desired of the Gentle Reader to correct them of his courtesy the Author being far absent from the Print THE FIRST BOOKE Of the substance of the Protestants Church and Religion and of their vncertainty therein CHAP. I. BECAVSE as after Plato and Aristotle Tully sayth very truly VVhosoeuer will according to the order of reason treat of any thing Lib. 4. must first define or explicate the nature thereof that it may be knowne what it is whereof he speaketh and Protestants agree that the definition is the very ground of all disputation before I do shew Caluin 3. Institut cap. 4. §. 1. Sadeel in Refut Thes â—osnan cap. 2. who was the first author of the Protestant Church and Religion which I will do in the second booke I will in this first define and determine what is a Protestant and what is the Protestant Church and Religion And because Protestants in this matter as in all others are variable and inconstant sometymes requiring many things to the making and constitution of a Protestant sometymes being content with very few things sometyms stretching the bounds of their Church most largly otherwhiles drawing theÌ„ very strait according as it serueth to their present purpose I will first discouer this their vncertainty about so weighty a matter afterward out of their owne principles and confessions of fayth set downe what is indeed necessary to the very substance and being of a Protestant and of their Church and Religion And in this Chapter I will shew how few they sometymes do admit to be of the Church and how many things they require to the making of a Protestant and in some chapters following how many they at other tymes do graunt to be of their Church and how few things they account necessary for to be a member thereof That done I will make manifest what is indeed necessary thereto They exclude Papists 2. First of all therefore they sometymes exclude Catholiques whome they terme Papists out of the Church as is manifest by all their writings in so much that the French Protestants in the 28. article of their confession say VVe openly affirme that where the word of God is not receiued nor there is any profession of obedience due thereto nor any vse of Sacraments there properly speaking we cannot iudge to be any Church VVherfore we condemne the Popish Conuenticles And D. Whitaker in his second booke against Dureus 2. section is so earnest that he sayth I will not allow the very name of a lawfull Church vnto the Roman Church because it hath nothing which a true Church ought to haue And both he in his 2. Controuersy 6. question 3. Chapter D. Sutliue in his first booke of the Church 3. cap. and lib. 2. cap. 9. M. Perkins in his reformed Catholique towards the end Caluin in his book against the Chaunter of Lions Beza in his of the notes of the Church the Confession of Saxony in the Chapter of the Church and many others do reckon diuers articles or euery one whereof they pronounce Papists to be â—ut of the Church And because their opinion hereâ—n is well inough knowne and hereafter also we â—hall haue occasioÌ„ to shew how haynously they conâ—emne the Popedome or Papistry I will heere reâ—earse no more of their sayings touching this point The like sentence they sometymes pronounce of the â—nabaptists Anabaptists and Atians For thus speaketh the conâ—ession of Auspurg Cap. 9. They condemne the Anabapâ—â—sts who disallow the baptisme of infants and think them to â—â—e faned without baptisme And the Confession of Switâ—erland cap. 20. VVe condemne the Anabaptists who deny â—at infants ought to be baptized The same is manifest by â—he English Confession c. 38. by the Confession of â—asse c. 24. others Of Arians Arrians they giue this verâ—ct in the forsayd Confession of Auspurg in the first â—rticle They condemne all heresies risen against this article of the Trinity as the Manichees Arians Eunomians c. â—nd in like sort the French Confession art 6. the â—nglish art 1. the consent of Poland and others in 〈◊〉 much as in England the Protestants haue burnt me Arians 3. Sometymes also they thrust out all hereâ—ckes Heretiks For thus writeth Luther in his explication of â—e Creed Neither Gentile Iew Heretike LutheraÌ„s or any sinner is â—ued vnlesse he make attonement with the Church and in all â—ings thinke do and teach the same And the Magdeâ—â—rgians in the preface of their 6. Century Neither â—eretikes nor deuisers or patrons of sanaticall opinions are of â—â—rist but they are of Antichrist and of the diuell and apperâ—â—ne to Antichrist and the diuell they are the impostume and â—â—e plague of the people of God The ministers of the Prince Elector of Saxony in the Conference held at Aldburg in the 3. writ cast out of the Church all VVho say they wittingly and willingly defend such corruptions of doctrine as haue byn condemned by the lawfull iudgment and consent of the Catholike Church And the Ministers of the Duke of Saxony in the 4. writ of the sayd Conference pronounce this sentence VVhosoeuer they are that do cloak and defend corruptions of the word of God that is of the articles of fayth after they haue byn admonished we iudge not to be true members of Christ vnlesse they repent And Vrbanus Regius one of the first and cheifest scholers of Luther in his Catechisme sayth All Heretikes are out of the Church The same teacheth Schusselburg a principall superintendent amongst the Lutherans in his Catalogue of heresies and many others As for the Sacramentaries SacrameÌ„taries thus professeth the French Confession in the 6. article VVe detest all Sects and heresies which haue byn reiected by the holy Fathers as S. Hilary S. Athanasc S. Ambrose S. Cyrill Whereupon Sadeel in his preface of his answere to the abiured articles sayth Our Confession of fayth condemneth all Heretikes Likewise the Confession of Basle in 24. article writeth in thiâ— sort VVe driue away all whosoeuer dissenting from the society of the holy Church do either bring in or follow strange wicked doctrines And Peter Martyr in his Commoâ— places in the title
of heretiks This in summe I will say heretikes are not otherwise to be dealt with all then Infidells 〈◊〉 Iewes Caluin also in his 2. booke of Institution cap. 15. number 1. Rightly Augustin denyeth Heretikes haue the same foundation with the godly albeit they preach tâ—â— name of Christ And in his instruction against the Libertines That we may speake properly Heretikes are not oâ—ly like to wolues or theeues but much worse Beza in his booâ— of punishing Heretiks If one terme Heretikes saithleâ— apostatas he shall giue them their due title And againe Heretikes affirme Christ in word and deny him indeed Danaeus in his 5. Controuersy and 691. pag. An heretike condemned by lawfull iudgement and actually cast out of the Church is not of the visible Church nor of the inuisible neither actually or apparently so long as he remaineth in that state Polanus in his 7. booke which he termeth Syntagma cap. 5. Heretikes whiles they remayne such are not members of the Catholique Church And Vorstius in his Anti-bellarmin pag. 79. The Ghospellers do esteem Antichrist in common to be euery heretike who opposeth himselfe eyther openly and plainly or closely and indirectly to Christ and his doctrine And in the 121. pag. There is no controuersy betweene vs and our aduersaries touching heretikes Schismatikes and Apostatas properly and truly so called that they are altogeather out of the Church of Christ Thus forraine Protestants In England English Protestants his Maiesty in his epistle to Cardinal Peron written by Casaubon The King damneth and detesteth those who either haue departed from the sayth of the Catholike Church and are become heretikes or from the Communion and are become Schismatikes The Apology of the Church of England part 3. diuis 3. VVe condemne all sortes of the old heretiks as the Arians the Eutichians c. and shortly all them that haue a wicked opinion either of God the Father or of Christ or of the holy Ghost or of any other point of Christian Religion for so much as they be confuted by the Ghospell of Christ we plainly pronounce them for damnable and detestable persons and defy them euen to the diuell D. Whitaker in the preface of his Controuersies If we be heretikes it is reason they should warne all theirs to fly from vs. And Controuer 2. question 1. cap. 4. That he proueth heretikes and Apostatas and Schismatikes not to be members of the true Church maketh nothing against vs. None of our men euer taught that The like he hath question 5. cap. 1. and 18. D. Sutliue in his first booke of the Church cap. 1. Heretikes are not of the Church D. Morton in his Apology 1. part 1. booke cap. 3 affirmeth that Heretikes are not to be accounted of the â—hurch in truth but in name not indeed but equiuocally Finally D. White in his way to the Church pag 110. All hereticks teach the truth in some things and yet we deny them to be the Church of God And in the defence of the same way cap. 8. sect 1. There is little or no difference betweene the Diuell and an Apostata or Heretike 4. The same censure they sometymes giue of Schismatikes They exclude Schismatiks as appeareth by the words of his Maiesty D. Whitaker and Vorstius already rehearsed Besides Luther in his great Catechisme tom 5. pag. 628. affirmeth the sense of that article The Communion of Saints to be this I belieue that there is on earth a litle Congregation of Saints agreeing in all things without sectes or Schismes And Melancthon in his book against Swenfeild tom 2. LutheraÌ„s pag. 201. Neither is there more then one Church the Spouse of Christ neither doth this company consist of diuers Sectes Salomon Gesnerus in his Common places the 24. place of the Church Catholiks are opposite to Schismatikes heretiks The same teacheth Schusselburg in his 8. tome of the Catalogue of heretikes pag. 726. 727. Amongst the Sacramentaries the Switzers in their Confession SacrameÌ„taries article 17. do thus professe VVe so much esteeme the Communion with the true Church of Christ as that we teach that those cannot liue before God who communicate not with his true Church And the French Protestants in theirs article 26. VVe belieue that none can lawfully withdraw themselues from the assemblies Bullinger in his Epitome or Compendium of fayth 6. booke 11. cap They be out of this Church whâ— vpon enuy or contention separate themselues from her withouâ— cause will haue some thing peculiar to themselues Musculus also in his common places in the title of the church The vnity of Heretiks and Schismatikes is bastard and diuided True entier and Catholike vnity is not among Schismatikes And in the title of Schismatikes A Schismatike putteth himselfe in daunger of losse of his saluation in departing from the Communion of the flock of the Lord. For by that departure he is not only separated and diuided from that Ecclesiasticall and externall society of the faythfull but also from participation of the bloud and spirit of Christ Caluin likewise in his treatise of the necessity of reforming the Church VVe do professe the vnity of the Church such as is described by S. Paul to be most deare vnto vs and we accurse all them that shall any way violate it And in his fourth booke of Institutions chap. 1. numb 2 Vnlesse vnder Christ our head we be vnited to all the rest of his members there is no hope for vs of the euerlasting inheritance For we cannot haue two or three Churches vnlesse Christ be torne in pieces And num 4. Out of the lap the Church there is no saluation departure from thence is alwayes pernicious Againe num 10 God maketh so great account of the Communion with his Church as he holdeth him for a renagate and fugitiue whosoeuer obstinatly separateth himselfe from any Christian society which retaineth the true vse of the word and Sacraments And he addeth that the forsaking of the Church Is the deniall of God and Christ The like doctrine he deliuereth in his Catechisme vpon the 1. Cor. cap. 1. and other where Polanus in his Theses part 2. sayth Schismaticall Churches are to be forsaken And Bucanus in his places loc 41. of the Church quest 33. auoucheth Schismatiks to be out of the Church and quest 5. that they are not vniuocally a Church that is they haue not the true nature of a Church The same sayth Danaeus in his treatise of Antichrist cap. 17. And in his 3. booke of the Church cap. 5. writeth thus Schismaâ—ikes actually excommunicated and cast out of the Church by lawfull sentence are no more of the visible Church For sayth he the marke that you be of the visible Church is this that you outwardly professe the fayth and communicate in Sacraments with the rest of the Church And he addeth that such are neither actually of the inuisible Church but only in possibility and that the holy Fathers liken sucâ— to
Heathens Pagans and infidells And in his Apology for the Switzers Churches he defineth Schisme to be a separation from the rest of the body of the Catholike Church Zanchius also in his treatise of the Church cap. 7. reacheth that Schismatikes are not in the Church And suâ—us in his 3. booke of the Church c. 5. approueth the fame of such Schismatikes as separate themselues from the whole Church The strangers in England writing to Beza in the 24 epistle haue these words in their 13. article VVhosoeuer is lawfully excommunicated of a particuler Church or cutteth himselfe of vpon vnlawfull causes and with scandall in that doth loose all priuiledge of the Catholike Church And Beza answereth them in the name of the Church of Geneua in this manner Your thirteenth article we wholy receiue at most orthodoxall Casaubon in his 15. exercitation against Baronius num 6. It is an vndoubted truth that how often soeuer a pious flock is ioyned to a true Bishop there is a Church of God in so much that if any forsake that Church it cannot be doubted but that he is out of the Church Finally Chamier in his epistle to Armand excludeth Schismatikes out of the Church because sayth he they want the sincerity of the Sacraments English ProtestaÌ„ts Amongst our English Protestants his Maiesty in his foresayd epistle to Cardinall Peron All those testimonies of Augustin proue only this that there is no hope of saluation for those who leaue the Communion of the Catholike Church which the King willingly graunteth D. Whitaker in his 2. controuer 5. quest 6. cap. sayth It is false that hereticall and Schismaticall Churches be true Churches Againe The Catholike Church consisteth not of diuided but of vnited members And cap. 2 The true and Catholike Church is that which consisteth of Catholiks D. Fulke in his booke of the succession of the Church VVhat auailed it them to eternall saluation to haue byn sound in Religion and doctrine seing they were cut of from the Communion of the true Church in which alone saluation is and from her true head VVhat skilleth it whether one being drawne by heresy or Schisme from the body of Christ be subiect to euerlasting damnation D. Humfrey in his answere to the 3. reason of F. Campian VVe confesse that he is vndone who is separated from the followship of the Church And D. Feild in his first booke of the Church cap. 7 The name of the Catholike Church is applyed to distinguish men holding the sayth in vnity from Schismatiks And in his 2. booke c. 2. he sayth that Schismatikes are not Catholike Christians Thus we see how Protestants sometymes do teach that the true Church consisteth of Catholiks of members vnited not deuided that it hath no Schismes or Sects That Schismatiks are not Catholiks that their vnity is not true nor Catholike that their Churches ought to be forsaken that they are not vniuocally Churches nor true Churches that they are not members of the true Church but out of the Church altogeather out of the Church and actually neither of the visible nor inuisible Church and that this is an vndoubted truth which coÌ„fession of theirs must be well noted and kept in mind for thereby is ouerthrowne as we shall see in the 2. booke their only argument wherwith they endeauour to proue that their Church was before Luther and also is defaced their only essentiall mark of finding the true Church by the truth of doctrine For Schismatikes as we shall heare them confesse in the 2. booke hold true doctrine and neuertheles as here they acknowledge are not of the true Church They exclude those that deny any fundameÌ„tal article 5. In like manner they do commonly debarre from their Church all such as deny any principall or fundamentall point of fayth Melancthon in his booke of common places in the title of the Church They are not members of the Church who pertinaciously maintaine errours opposite to the foundation And in his answere to the Bauarian articles Saints may haue errours but not such as ouerthrow the foundation In his examen of those that are to take orders Agreement in the foundation LutheraÌ„s is a thing necessary to the vnity of the Church And vpon the 3. cap. of the 1. epistle to Timothy The foundation is held in the Church otherwise there should be no Church at all And in his 79. proposition tom 4 It is most certaine that those companies are not the Church of God who either are altogeather ignorant of the Ghospell or impugne some article of the foundation that is some article of fayth or doctrine of the decalogue or maintaine open idols Chemnitius in his common places pa. 3. title of the Church Neither can these be acknowledged for the true Church who imbrace fundamentall errours And the Lutherans in the conference at Ratisbon Ses 14. Hutter in his Analysis of the Confession of Auspurg Gesner in his 24. place Adam Francis in his 11. place and other Lutherans commonly agree that the Church cannot erre Fundamentally or in the Foundation And the Confession of Saxony giueth this note to know who are in the Church SacrameÌ„taries Those who hold the Foundation As for Sacramentaries Caluin in his 4. booke of Institutions cap. 2. num 1 So soone as a lye hath broken into the castle of Religion the summe of necessary doctrine is inuerted the vse of Sacraments is fallen certainly the destruction of the Church ensueth euen as a mans life is lost when his throat is cut or his vitall parts deadly wounded And soone after It is certaine that there is no Church where lyes and errour haue gotten to the toppe And cap. 19. num 17 VVithout doubt the Church of the faythfull must agree in all the heads of our Religion Sadeel in his answere to the Theses held at Posna cap. 12 I thinke the matter is thus to be defined by the word of God that if any in what Church soeuer dissent in the foundation of sayth and be obstinate in their errours such appertaine not to the vnity of the Church The like he hath in his answere to Arthure cap. 12. Vesinuâ— in his Catechisme quest 54. cap. 4 The whole Church erreth not nor wholly nor in the foundation Polanus in his Thesis of the Church sayth The Church erreth not in the foundation The same teacheth Zanchius in his treatise of the Church c. 7. Lubbertus in his 2. booke of the Church c 3. Vorstius in his Anti-bellarmin pag. 139. Bucanus in his 41. place and other Sacramentaries commonly And with them herein agree our English Protestants English ProtestaÌ„ts For thus sayth his Maiesty in his epistle to Cardinall Peron The Churches are vnited in vnity of sayth and doctrine in those heads which are necessary to saluation And D. Whitaker in the preface of his Controuersies The foundations of sayth are of that nature that one being shaken nothing in all religion remaineth sound And Contr. 2. quest 4. cap.
written word of God And his Maiesty in his Monitory epistle pag. 97. English ProtestaÌ„tâ— in Latin I call God to witnes that I hold him not for a Christian who in this learned age belieueth that to wit that Enoch and Elias are to come And D. Morton in his answere to the Protestants Apology lib. 4. c. 2. sect 3. after he had sayd that in a Church albeit corrupted with errour and superstition yet if it do not ruinate the foundation the erroneous superstitious professors may be saued adddeth VVhich notwithstanding we must so vnderstand as that the errour and superstition do not proceed from knowledge but from ignorance which ignorance is not affected but simple Thus we see that Protestants somtymes confesse that true fayth is like a graine or Mathematicall point which cannot be parted that the articles of fayth are one copulatiue and cannot be deuided that who so obstinatly denieth one article belieueth truly none that the obstinate deniall of any one poynt of fayth is sufficient to damne or to make an heretik and no brother of the faythfull or member of the Church And finally that she is no true Church who willfully maintaineth any one thing repugnant to the Ghospell or word of God Which indeed is most true and is the doctrine of the holy Fathers and Catholiks and I would to God Protestants would constantly stand vnto it 7. By all which hath byn rehearsed in this chapter out of Protestants it appeareth how many sortes of Christians Protestants do sometymes exclude out of the Church namely Papists Anabaptists Arians al Heretiks all Schismatiks all those who deny any fundamentall point of fayth and finally al who obstinatly deny any point whatsoeuer of fayth or of the word of God And how many things they sometymes require to the making and being of a Protestant to wit that he belieue all and euery point of their fayth and obstinatly dissent in none To which their doctrine if they would as I haue sayd alwayes constantly stand it would easily appeare first how small a company the Protestants Church is and how little it is spread through the world and much lesse Catholike or vniuersal seeing there is no Prouince nor scarse any citty in which all Protestants agree amongst themselues in al points of their doctrine Secondly it would easily appeare that the Protestant Church was neuer before Luther seeing there is no apparence that before him there was any company of Christians who in all points of doctrine agreed with Protestants But ProtestaÌ„ts as I sayd in the Preface accommodate their doctrine and opinions to tymes and occasions And the tymes when they deny Papists to be of the Church are when they exhort them to leaue the Roman Church or excuse their owne reuolting from her or when they dehort others from returning to her For at all these tymes it serueth to their purpose to deny that Papists are of the Church or in the way of saluation which at other tymes as we shall see in the next chapter they are content to graunt And the tymes when they exclude Anabaptists Arians Heretiks Schismatiks and all that deny either fundamentall or other articles of fayth out of the Church are when either the euidence of truth enforceth them thereto or when they are ashamed to acknowledge such vgly monsters for brethren and members of their Church or would exhort such as haue left their company to returne vnto them and keep others from forsaking them or finally would brag of the agreement and purity in doctrine of their company For at those tymes it serueth their turne to renouÌ„ce all the foresayd kind of men whom at other tymes especially when we demaund of them who were of their Church before Luther they are most willing to receiue as their kind brethren diligently scraping gathering such shreeds and clouts when they perceiue their owne nakednes and beggary which themselues when they thought they were rich and had no need thereof most disdainfully cast on the dunghills as shall appeare in the chapters following CHAP. II. That Protestants sometymes account Papists for members of their Church IN the former chapter we haue seene how sparing Protestants sometyms be in admitting others into their Church now we shall see how liberall they be at other tymes in so much that they graunt not only all those whome in the former chapter they reiected but also their professed enemies idolaters Infidells Atheists Antichrist himselfe and all whosoeuer vnder the name of Christians impugne the deeds or doctrine of the Pope to be their brethren their fellowes and members of their Church This we will shew concerning the Papists in this chapter and of the others afterward 1. That Protestants sometymes do acknowledge Papists to be in the Church is manifest First by their open confession thereof LutheraÌ„s For in the preface of their Confession of Auspurg speaking of themselues and Papists Papists serue vnder christ they say VVe are all soldiers vnder one Christ And Luther in his epistle against the Anabaptists as Caluin in his booke against the Chaunter of Lions and D. Whitaker in the place hereafter cited do confesse writeth The kernel of Christianity in Popery That in Popery is true Christianity yea the kernell of Christianity and many pious and great Saints Againe If Christianity be vnder the Pope then it must be the body and member of Christ And vpon the 28. chapter of Genesis VVe confesse that there is a Church among the Papists because they haue Baptisme absolution the text of the Ghospell and many godly men are among them Caluin in his 140. epistle to Soziâ— I think I haue sufficiently proued that in Popery there remayneth some Church albeit halfe destroyed and if you will broken and deformed And vpon the 2. câ—ap of the 2 epistle to the Thessalonians The Body of Christ I confesse it is the temple of God in which the Pope ruleth and he calleth it the very sanctuary of God And de vera reform pag. 332. SacrameÌ„taries â—ayth that S Paul affirmeth that Antichrist whom he will haue to be the Pope shall sit in the temple of God And lib. de scandalis pag. 103 In the midest of Gods temple And lib. cont Precentorem pag. 372 In the very sanctuary of God And Respons ad Sadolet In the midest of Gods sanctuary Surely this is to graunt that the Romane Church in which the Pope sitteth is the very temple and very sanctuary of God And in his answeare to Sadolet VVe deny not those to be Churches of Christ which you gouerne In his 4. booke of Institutions chap. 2. num 11. he sayth that among Papists Gods couenant remayned inuiolable Not yet killed And num 12 VVe deny not that there are Churches among them Neither deny we but there remaine Churches vnder his the Pope he meaneth tyranny but which he hath almost killed Iunius in his book of the Church cap. 17. writeth that the Popish
that before Luthers tyme they seeke their Church in Popery and amongst the Papists 2. Secondly I prooue this same out of that which diuers tymes they graunt that the Roman Church holdeth all the fundamentall articles of fayth That Papists hold the foundation of fayth which themselues commonly teach as hereafter shall be shewed to suffice to make a Church Their Confession of Auspurg in the 21. chapter hath these wodrs This is almost the summe of doctrine among vs in which as it may seeme there is nothing which differeth from scripture or from the Catholike Church or from the Roman Church LutheraÌ„s so farre as it appeareth by writers All the dissention is about some few abuses which haue crept into Churches without certaine authority Whereby we see that the first and auncientest Protestants The suÌ„me of faith in Popeâ—y publikly professed that they differed not from the Roman Church in the summe of doctrine but that all their disagreement was about some few abuses And albeit the wordes be somewhat altered in the printed copies yet that they were in the originall copie which was presented to Charles 5. Emperour is manifest by Fabritius who repeateth them so out of that copie by Pappus in his 3 defence against Sturmius who so also reporteth them by Zanchius in his dispute between two Deuines where he repeateth these wordes out of the said Confession There is nothing in our doctrine which differeth from the church of Rome as far as it is knowne by writers and finally by Hieremias Patriarch of Constantinople in his censure vpon the said Confession it being sent vnto him by the Protestants where he thus writeth to them Yee say yee agree in all things with the Latins Cocleus anno 1â—28 VseÌ„berg causa 17. and that the difference betwixt you and them is only touching some abuses likwise Luther in his foresaid epist cont Anabap VVe confesse that in Popery is much good belonging to Christians yea all Christian good All ChristiaÌ„ good to wit that in Popery is the true Scripture true baptisme the true Sacrament of the altar the true keyes for remission of sinnes the true office of preaching the true Catechisme as the Lords prayer the ten commaundements and the articles of faith Whereupon Schusselburg in his 8. tome of the Catalogue of heretikes pag. 439. saith VVe deny not but that Luther sayd that all Christian goods are in Popery What was needfull to saluation and came from thence vnto vs Iohn Regius in his consideration of the censure c Albeit the Ministery of Papists be corrupted with many traditions and inuentions of men yet it had that which was necessary to saluation to wit the Canonicall scripture the Creed c. Leonard Crenâ—zen The bishop of Rome holdeth the same foundation of the Catholike faith 1. Cor. 3. The fouÌ„dation of Fayth which I and the Catholik Apostolik Church do acknowledge although there be some difference of opinions in certaine circumstances Thus the Lutherans Of the Sacramentaries SacrameÌ„taries Iunius in his 5. controuersy lib. 3. cap. 19. writeth thus of Papists Lutherans and Caluinists VVe agree in the essentiall foundation Essentiall foundation Zanchius in his foresayd preface In despite of the Diuell that Church of Rome hath kept the principall grounds of fayth Principall grounds of fayth Boysseul also in his forenamed confutation pag. 79 VVe acknowledge that it is pure in the cheife articles of Christian Religion And Vorstius in his Anti-bellarmin pag. 188. It is manifest that there are many in that company of Papists who rightly hold the fundamentall points The fundamentall points of our Religion And of the English Protestants his Maiesty in his monitory epistle pag. 148. plainly intimateth that Papists do stick vnto the auncient foundations of the old true Catholike and Apostolike fayth M. Hooker in his 3. booke of Ecclesiasticall policy pag. 128. sayth Touching those maine points of Christian truth wherein they constantly still persist English ProtestaÌ„ts we gladly acknowledge them to be of the family of Iesus Christ D. Whitaker in his 2. cont quest 5. cap. 14 Papists haue the Scripture Baptisme Catechisme the articles of fayth the ten commandments the Lords prayer The main points and those things came to vs from them D. Whitgift in his answere to the admonition pag. 40 Papistry confesseth the same articles of fayth that we do although not sincerely And pag. 62 Papists belieue the same articles of fayth that we do M. Perkins in the preface of his reformed Catholike By a reformed Catholike I vnderstand any one that holds the same necessary heads of Religion with the Roman Church The necessary heads yet so as he pares of and reiects all errours in doctrine whereby the sayd religion is corrupted D. Morton in his answere to the Protestants Apology lib. 3. cap. 18. sect 1 VVe may graunt that God may cooperate with them to the conuersion of Infidels The ghospell of saluation so far as the Ghospell of Christ which is the power of God to saluation is preached by them D. White in defence of his way cap. 38 In the substantiall articles of fayth we agree with them Lastly D. Hall in his foresayd booke sayth The substantiall articles that the Romane Church is one touching the common principles of fayth Those things which she holdeth together with vs make a Church As farre as she holdeth the foundation she is a church 3. Thirdly the same point is proued The articles which make a Church by that they graunt some to be saints whom they acknowledge also to haue liued and died Papists For of S. Bernards holines thus writeth Luther vpon the 4. cap. to the Galathians Bernard a man so holy pious chast c. The Apology of the Confession of Auspurg in the chapter of answere to the ArgumeÌ„ts Antony Bernard That they say some Papists be saints Francis Dominicke and other holy Fathers Brentius in his Apology for the Confession of Wirtenberg pag. 297 I iudge Bernard to haue byn a man indued with great piety and to liue now happily with Christ Caluin in his 4. booke of institutions c. 7. num 22 Gregory and Bernard holy men Vorstius in Anti-bellarmin pag. 181 VVe graunt Bernard indeed to haue byn pious Lubbert in his 6. booke of the church c. 7 VVe think Bernard to haue byn truly holy D. Whitaker cont 3. quest 5. c. 14 I take Bernard to haue byn holy indeed And D. Morton in his Apology part 2. lib. 2. c. 23 I confesse Bernard was a Saint And as plainly do they confesse that he was a Papist For thus Luther in the place now cited Let vs imagine that Religion and discipline of the ancient Popery to flourish now and to be obserued with that rigour with which the Eremits Hierome Augustin Bernard Francis and many others obserued it And in his booke of abrogating Masse Bernard Bonauenture Francis Dominicke with their
5. affirmeth that he had reiected only the accidents of his Popish orders but retayned the substance still M. Mason in his 5. booke of the ordination of ministers cap. 12. sayth that Popish ordination consistes of two parts to wit of power to offer sacrifice of power to administer the word and Sacraments and albeit he reiecteth the former yet the later he approues as that wherein true ministery consisteth Sadeel respon ad artic abiurat 61. And Vorstius in Anti-bellarmin pag. 177. teach the same and so must all others do who hold the mission of Luther and their first ministers to haue byn ordinary and receiued from the Papists which opinion most Protestants do now follow retracting vpon better aduise their former assertion confessing that the mission of their new Reformers was not in substance extraordinary And their deeds and actions do no lesse declare their approbation and esteeme of the mission and Pastorall charge which is in the church of Rome For as Turrian reporteth lib. 2. de Eccles cap. 3. and Luther intimateth tom 2. epist ad Bohemos when the Catholike Bishops giue orders the Hussites of Bohemia steale in priuily among the rest The Lutherans also made sute to the estats of the Empire that their ministers might receiue orders from the bishops of Misnia and Numburg And in artic 10. Smalcald they professe thus If the bishops of the church of Rome would truly execute their office and looke carefully to the church and word of God it might be permitted them to giue orders vnto vs and our preachers You may adde hereunto that neither Luther nor any Reformer else euer sought other ordination then what they had receiued of Papists and that in the beginning of Queene Elizabeths raigne the supposed Prelates earnestly be sought a Catholike Bishop to consecrate them And euen to this day if any renegate Priest ioyne himselfe to the Protestants they order him not anew but deeme him fit for their ministeriall function by vertue of the orders he receiued of Papists Now if Papists haue true Mission true pastorall charge and true Pastors True mission and Pastors inseparable froÌ„ the Church surely they haue also the true church it being impossible that the church should be seuered froÌ„ the true Pastours or that the keyes of heauen which are in the true Pastours hands should be out of the church or that the power to remit sinnes the prerogatiue of true Pastours shold be where the church is not Nay the Protestants themselues confesse as much Luther tom 4. in cap. 4. Oseae fol. 295 True it is that the Ministery is only in the Church Melancthon tom 1. Lutheri disput de Eccles Polit. fol. 483 The ordination of Ministers is one of the peculiar giftes of the Church Caluin lib. de neces reform Eccles pag. 57 This one reason is as good as thousands that who so hath shewed himselfe an enemy to true doctrine hath lost all authority in the Church D. Whitaker ad demonstrat 18. Sanderi Out of the Church there is no other seate but the seat of errour of pestilence and euerlasting destruction The same teacheth Sadeel ad Sophism Turrian loc 10. D. Feild in his 1. booke of the church cap. 14. and others 5. Fiftly it is euident by the doctrine of the Sacramentaries who hold that the children of Papists are in the couenant of God and estate of saluation through the fayth of their parents Papistâ— children saued by the fayth of their parents and may therefore be baptised much more then must they teach that the parents themselues are for their owne fayth in the couenant of God and estate of saluation which could not be were they not in the Church The antecedent is manifest by the saying of many Protestants For thus writeth Luther lib. de capt Babylon tom 2. fol. 77 Here I say that which all say that infants are holpen by the fayth of them which offer them Caluin in his Catechâ—sme cap. de lege God extendeth his bounty so farre vnto the faythfull that for their sake he is good to their children not only blessing their affaires in this world but also sanctifying their soules that they may be accounted of his flock Contr. Seruetum pag. 601 VVe think that there will be no vse of Baptisme vntill this promise I will be thy God and of thy seed be apprehended by fayth but euery one apprehendeth it not only to himselfe but also to his issue Beza part 2. Respon ad acta Montisbel pag. 118 Parents through Gods grace do apâ—rehend grace by true fayth according to the forme of the Couenant as well to their posterity as to themselues Which he oftentymes repeateth And likewise in Confes cap. 4. sect 48. and cap. 5. sect 9. and pag. 126 M. Perkins de Sacramento Baptismi tom 1. col 846 Others say that the fayth of the Parents is also the fayth of their children all the tyme of their infancy or childhood and that because parents do by their fayth apprehend the promise both for themselues and for their children VVhich opinion seemeeh to me the fittest of all The like he sayth in cap. 3. Galat. The sequele likewise is vndoubted For if the fayth of Popish parents be of force to establish their very children in the Couenant of God and estate of saluation though it reside not in them nor be their act much more doth it establish the parents themselues who haue that fayth in them and whose act it is Nor do the instances D. Morton brings against it in his answere to the Protestants Apology lib. 4. cap. 6. make any thing to the purpose as that in case of necessity an hereticall Priest or Schismatike may absolue from sinnes and an Infidell administer Baptisme Againe That if such as were free of a citty and are araigned of treason should haue issue after their condemnation their children neuertheles shall enioy the title and right of cittizens whereof their parents were destitute These examples I say are not to the purpose because he who is eyther baptized by an Infidell or absolued by an hereticall Priest enters not into the couenant of God and estate of saluation for ought that is in the person which baptizeth or absolueth him but for the Sacrament of Baptisme or Pennance which he receiueth indeed by the others administration but hath it in himselfe And the sonne of a traytor is not made a Cittizen in regard of any thing that is in the father alone but for his owne birth which appertaines to himselfe though his Father be author thereof But the Sacramentaries teach that the child of a Papist is in the couenant of God and estate of saluation not for his owne fayth for they say he hath none but for the beliefe of his father which is no way possible if the same fayth be not of force to worke the like effect in the father himselfe seeing it belongs farre more to him then to his child and therefore must
sooner giue him interest in the couenant then the child that is descended of him For how can the fathers beliefe lay hold on the promises and couenant of God for his children and cannot do it for himselfe 6. These allegations demonstrate The suÌ„mâ— of Protestants ConfessioÌ„ touching Papists that by the Confession of the Protestants the starkest Papists such as are of beliefe that the masse the Popes primacy and all things else of his are good vpright and of God are soldiers vnder Christ may attaine to saluation may be Saints yea that there are among them both many and great Saints That there is in the Church of Rome what so is necessary to saluation the summe of fayth the ground-works the essentiall ground-works the principall grounds of fayth the cheife articles the fundamentall heads the necessary heads the cheife parts the Ghospell of saluation the kernell of Christianity and all Christian good Lastly that the Church of Rome Is a limme and member of the vniuersall Church of the Catholike Church a member of the true Church and is of the family of Iesus Christ that it is mother to the children of God that it is the Church of God the temple of God the body of Christ the Spouse of Christ that it abides yet in the couenant is not yet cast of or put away is not yet killed but is yet aliue Which words plainly import that the Roman or Popish Church is a true Church in the sight of God 7. But is it credible Note that such as make profession of Christian religion should mount to that height of impiety as dare to reiect diuorce themselues from that Church which they confesse remaynes yet in the couenant of God which Christ hath not yet reiected Is it credible that they feare not to impugne to make bitter inuectiues to disgorge curses and execrations against her whom they acknowledge to be their Mother which bore them to Christ to be the Church of God to be the body and Espouse of Christ What can be more lewd and impious then to rage and raile against their owne mother against the Church of God against the very body and Espouse of Christ What strang and monstrous blindnes is it not to perceiue that whiles they confesse the church of Rome to be the church of God Espouse of Christ they acknowledge their owne to be the Synagogue of Antichrist and strumpet of the Diuell For Christ cannot haue two Espouses repugnant each to other Now the Protestant church and church of Rome are parts so opposite as can neuer make one For they iarre and disagree mainely in diuers weighty points as namely touching the canon and exposition of the Scripture touching sacrifice and the Sacraments touching the worship of God his Saints touching the meanes to obtaine remission of sinnes and many the like Whereupon Beza in Confes cap. 7. pag. 56 VVe dissent sayth he from the Papist about they very summe of saluatioÌ„ And others say no lesse as shall be shewed hereafter in the 2. booke and 6. cap If ours be true Religion sayth S. Augustin to the Donatists which yet came nearer to Catholiks then Protestants do yours is superstition Lib. 2. coÌ„t Gaud. c. 11. Againe If our communion be the Church of Christ yours is not Christs Church Lib. 1. de Bapt. c. 11. for that is but one which so euer it be And in another place VVhen they approue that Church which as is manifest we communicate with all and they do not by that their testimony they acknowledge themsâ—lues conuinced Lib. ad Donat post codat and giue you plaine notice if you be wise what you ought to forgoe and what it behoues you to cleaue to and retaine And S. Cyprian epistle 76 If the Church were on Nouatus side it was not with Cornelius Num. 4. 8. The Protestants now and then perceiue as much when they acertaine vs as hath byn shewed in the first chapter that who so seuereth himselfe from any particuler congregation which is a true Church excludes himselfe wholy from the church Caluin saw it when 4. Insti c. 2. § 10. he wrote thus VVe cannot graunt them Papists that they are the church but the necessity of subiectioÌ„ obedieÌ„ce will befall vs. If they be churches the power of the keyes is in their possession If they be churches that promise of Christ VVhatsoeuer ye bind on earth shall be bouÌ„d in heauen takes effect in them M. Perkins perceiued it to when in his explicatioÌ„ of the Creed col 794. he sayd Zanchiuâ— lib. 1. de Eâ—cl c. 7. As long as any church forsakes not Christ we may not withdraw our selues from it The reason is apparant because in so doing we should depart from Christ or Christ shold be parted euen as we are rent and disioynted from the church wherein he is And in his Reformed Catholike tract 22. col 470. Whâ—re he sayth VVe ought not to deuide our selues from any nation or people which hath not before cut it selfe of from Christ D. Feild likewise saw it in his 3. booke of the Church c. 47. Where he makes this acknowledgement Surely if he can proue that we confesse it the Church of Rome to be the true Church he needeth not vse any other argument But we haue clearely prooued it by sundry plaine confessions of many famous Protestants And hitherto we haue discouered how they sometyme harbour and receiue Papists into their church now we will shew that they vse the like curtesy towards the rest CHAP. III. That Protestants acknowledge for members of their Church sometyme those that deny as well fundamentall as other articles of their fayth sometymes Heretiks Schismatiks yea their profest and sworne enemies THAT they esteeme all such to be members of their Church as swarue from the Christian fayth only in points not fundamentall themselues in the preface of the Switzers Confession declare in these words Mutuall consent and agreement in the principall points of doctrine in orthodoxe sense and brotherly charity was of religious antiquity thought abundantly sufficient And D. Whitaker cont 4. quest 1. c. 2. pag. 527 God forbid that they should be no longer of the number of the faythfull who are in some points of a contrary opinion so they assent in the cheife and principall and necessary matters And for as much as the Protestants opinion herein is well knowne for whâ—Ì„ it is obiected vnto them that their churches disagree in points of fayth this serues them for excuse I think it needlesse to alleage any more of their sayings He that will may looke the Confession of Saxony cap. de Eccles Luther tom 7. lib. de not Eccles fol. 149. Melancthon tom 4. in ca. 3. 1. Cor. Kemnitius 1. part Examinis tit de bonis operibus pag. 332. Zuinglius tom 1. in Prefat lib de Prouident Caluin 4. Institut cap. 1. § 12. and cap. 2. § 1. Beza epist 2. Zanchius in prefat lib.
that the Church may for a tyme swarue from the truth euen in some fundamentall points and be notwithstanding safe And Zanchius lib. 1. epist pag. 221. will not haue vs forsake any coÌ„pany on occasion of false opinions which swarue from the groundwork of fayth D. Hall likewise in sua Roma irreconc sect 1. sayth that the true Church may foster such errours As by deduction and consequence destroy the foundations of beliefe D. Fulke in his serm vpoÌ„ the Apocalips hauing made this obiection to himselfe that seing the Church is the Espouse of Christ it cannot be that he suffered it to be possessed so many ages with damnable errors answeares it in this manner VVhat Christ himselfe hath sayd that the errors of false Prophets should be exceeding great in as much as the very elect if it might be should be led into errour And lib. de Succes Eccles pag. 122. he sayth It seemes not fitting to take from the Grecians the name of a Church whome notwithstanding he confesseth to be ensnared with grieuous errors Now a grieuous errour according to D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 4 cap. 1. dissolues the foundation and may therfore be termed fundamentall M. Perkins in his exposition of the Creed col 790 VVhen an errour is repugnant to the foundation either directly or by necessary consequence if it proceed of weaknes he in whome it is ought to be reputed a member of the vniuersall Church And vpon 1. Galat. v. 2 If a Church through frailty fall into errour although it concerne the foundation notwithstanding it remaynes yet a Church as is certaine by the example of the Galathians And vpon the epistle of Iude v. 19 The Church of Gaelatia through weaknesse remoued it selfe vnto another Ghospell and erred in the foundation yet Paul writeth to it as to the Church of God D. Willet affirmeth the same in his Synopsis cont 2. q. 3. pag. 104. And Melancthon tom 2. lib. de Eccl. pag. 123. toucheth the same string when he sayth The true Church it selfe may haue errours which obscure and darken the articles of fayth And tom 4. in cap. 9. Rom God gathereth alwayes some company in which the foundation is kept sometymes lesse pure sometymes more D. White in his way pag. 111 Some articles lying in the very foundation may be belieued not so clearly Nay sometymes they dare auouch that those very Corinthians that denyed the resurrection and those Galatians also that changed the Ghospell of Christ into another Ghospell were of the Church Luther in 1. cap. Galat fol 215. Perkins loc cit For thus the Switzers Confession c. 17 VVe are not ignorant what manner of Churches those of the Corinthians and Galathians were in the Apostles tyme which the Apostle accuseth of many and grieuous crimes and yet termeth them the holy Churches of Christ And Caluin 4. Institut cap. 1. § 27 Most greiuous sinnes possesse sometymes whole Churches The Apostasy of the Galathians was no small offence the Corinthians were lesse excusable then they howbeit neither of them are excluded from the Lords mercy Sadeel in his answere ad Thes Posnan cap. 12. pag. 866 The Galathians and Corinthians though corrupted with errour and disagreeing each from other about the cheife groundwork of beliefe and that not concerning the manner but touching the matter it selfe retained notwithstanding the name of a true â—hurch And hence he gathereth that the debate and disagrement betweene the Lutherans and Caluinists concerning the Eucharist doth not let either of them from being of the true Church 5. The deeds of the Lutherans and Sacramentaries yeld vs a second kind of proofe For the Electorall or milde Lutherans in colloq Aldeburg scripto 8. call themselues LutheraÌ„s professe that theÌ„selues differ fundamentally Fellowes and companions of the same Ministery fellow-cittizens and fellow-soldiers of those of Saxony or rigorous Lutherans of whome notwithstanding scripto 6. pag. 111. they giue this censure They haue shewed themselues to dissent from our Churches in the foundation Againe VVe will make it euident that they impugne the fundamentall doctrine And scripto 4. pag. 4 Our opinion is that we disagree not about impertiment matters only or things of no consequence but about the maine and cheifest matters And scripto 7 This one thing they ayme at and bend all their endeauours to vndermine and ouerturne the groundwork of sauing doctrine And pag. 374. they complaine that those of Saxony do often cry out of them that they are worse then any idolaters And the Sacramentaries in Praefat. Apologet. Orthodoxi consensus write thus of the Lutherans They haue hitherto suffered among them such as call in question the doctrine of iustification of originall sinne of free will of the Ghospell of the law and vse thereof of Christs descent into hell of his person of the election of Gods children and many other articles of no small moment which things they easily put vp because all these go vnder the name of Lutherans Now that the Sacramentaries likewise acknowledg the Lutherans for their brethren is apparent by the Apology of the Church of England by the consent of Poland by the preface of the Syntagme of Confessions SacrameÌ„â—taries challenge LutheraÌ„s by the Conferences of Marspurg and Montbelgard and other publike writings and registred acts and yet they see and openly exclaime against their errours in fundamental points of fayth Of Luther thus writeth Zuinglius tom 2. Resp ad Luther fol. 401 And yet say they differ fundameÌ„tally from theÌ„ VVe iudge thee a worse seductour impostour and denyer of Christ then was Marcion himselfe And fol. 430. Luther as yet is entangled and sticks fast in two errours exceeding grieuous and in most foule ignorance Of Melancthon thus sayth Caluin epist 183 Either he openly impugneth true doctrine in the cheifest heads or else hideth his meaning craftily or not very honestly And epist 179. he complaineth that Melancthon endeauoureth to ouerthrow his doctrine of predestination VVithout which sayth he the knowledge of Gods free and vndeserued mercy is vtterly lost The like he sayth epist 141. Sturmius lib. de Ratione incundae Concordiae sayth plainly that the Lutherans do pluck vp the foundation of Christian Religion And Bullinger in fundamento firmo writeth that the very infidelity of the Iewes and Gentils is by the Lutherans brought into the Churches Cureus in Exegesi Sacramentaria pag. 91 Surely the controuesy between the Lutherans and Sacramentaries is concerning the foundation The Sacramentaries in the Preface of the Conference at Mulbrun say that the Lutherans Teare in preces and adulterate the articles of the incarnation of the true humane nature c. VVhich articles say they no Christian man can doubt but are the groundwork of saluation And in the foresayd preface They are at variance not about the Lords supper only but touching the person of â—hrist touching the vnion of his diuine and humane nature touching the vbiquity of his body and corporall manducation thereof
common both to good and bad touching his ascending vp to heauen and his sitting at the right hand of his Father of all these points they contend and that with such exceeding heat of disputation as that old heresies not a few long since abolished and condemned begin againe to lift vp their head as if they were recalled from hell The like they haue ibidem in Prolegomenis Of the controuersy which is betweene the Lutherans Sacramentaries about the â—eall presence of Christs body in the Eucharist Martyr in locis tom 2. p. 156. giues this iudgement The contention and difference therein concernes the cheife heads of Religion Caluin epist 292. sayth that the opinion of the Lutherans doth By mischeiuous iuglings and legierdemains ouerturne the principles of fayth Beza in his 5. epist that it destroyeth the verity of Christs body And epist 81. that it recalleth from hell the folly and doting errours of Marcion and Eutiches Bucer cited by Hospin part 2. Hist fol. 84 It followeth thereupon that Christ is not true man Paraeus in cap. 3. Galat. lection 37 There is nothing more directly opposite to Christian Religion then to think that the body of Christ doth indeed lye hid really vnder the bread and that the same is truly eaten with the mouth Sadeel in tract de Coniunctione c. pag. 369. that it ouerthroweth the true nature of the true body and bloud of Christ VVhich thing sayth he we still lay to their charge And tract de Sacramentali manducatione pag. 26. that it is a word of euils pag. 267 That it traines after it idolatry And pag. 268 that it â—annot stand with the verity of Christs body Hospin part 2. citat fol. 2. that it is the foundation of Papistry And fol. 181 The base and pillar which sustaineth all the whole blended and disordered heape of abuses and all the bread-worship whicâ— hath vnder the Popedome byn deuised and brought in Lauaterus lib. de dissid Euchar. fol. 7. that it is the Foundation of the Popedome Cureus in Spongia that it is the foundation the strength the throne of the God Maozim and of the Popish state Caluin de Coena p. 8. in CoÌ„s pag. 754. Beza in fo 6. v. 23.62 ad 4. Demonstr Illyrici Zanâ—hius in Confess c. 16. sect 12. And Vrsinus in Catechism quest 78. cap. 3. sayth As long as the opinion of the corporall presence is maintained Popish adoration and oblation and the whole Popish masse is kept on foot And there is not one Sacramentary but thinks the verity of Christs body and his ascention sitting at the right hand of the Father cleane taken away if he should say he were substantially in the Eucharist Whereupon Zanchius tom 1. Miscell in iudicio de dissidio Coenae pag. 553. sayth There are two maine reasons why the one party to wit the Sacramentaries renounce the presence of the body The one that the article of Christs ascension into heauen may be kept entire the other that the nature and verity of his humane body be not destroyed Nay some of the Sacramentaries in their Confessions of faith condemne the opinion of the Lutherans as mad and blasphemous For Confess Crengerina cap. de coena Domini sayth VVe condemne their madnes who auouch and maintaine flesh-eating that is who hold that Christs naturall and very body raw and bloudy without any change or transubstantiation at all is receiued with the very mouth And the Scots in their Confess pag. 159. say they Detest that blasphemous opinion which auoucheth Christs reall presence in the bread wine and that he is receiued by the wicked or taken into the belly This and much more of the like is sometymes the Sacramentaries plea against the reall presence of Christs body in the Eucharist and yet at other tymes they professe that this controuersy is not of so great weight and moment as that it should dissolue Ecclesiasticall Communion and fellowship For so teacheth Martir apud Simlerum in vita eius the author of the orthodoxe Consent Prefat Apologet. Hospinian part 2. Histor fol. 78. Caluin de scandalis pag. 95. In Consens p. 764. Beza lib. de coena cont Westphalum pag. 258. M. Perkins in his exposition of the Creed col 792. and others Nay as we sayd before these men besought the Lutherans who stedfastly maintaine the reall presence to hold them for brethren and members of their Church They can then find in their conscience to haue fellowship and Communion with those men whose doctrine they condemne As Frantike blasphemous whose doctrine they say destroyeth Christs ascension What kind of men Sacramentaries challenge for brethren and the verity of his humane nature subuerteth the principles of fayth and cheifest points of religion recalleth the doting follies of Marcion and Eutyches establisheth the Kingdome of Antichrist traines after it idolatry and a world of euills Fy on these meÌ„ beliefe who think the maintenance of an opinion which as themselues professe ouerthroweth the principall articles of Christian fayth drawes after it idolatry and most foule heresies layeth the foundâ—tion whereon Antichristianity is raised of so sleight consequence as it ought not to dissolue fraternity and Communion What regard of fayth or saluation may we think these men haue There is yet another point oâ— Luteranisme touching the vbiquity or presence of Christs body euery where reproued of the Sacramentaries and held in extreme dislike of which they likewise exclaime that it is (a) Beza respons ad acta montisb l. pag. 252. forged and composed of Eutychianisme and Nestorianisme that the heresies of (b) Caluin 4 Instit c. 17. p. 17. Marcion and Eutyches yea well nigh (c) Hosp pref par 2. all old heresies are by it raised againe from hell that it subuerteth the whole (d) Perkins expos Symb. coll 792. Creed that it takes away the (e) Sadeel de verit hum nat cheife heads of Christian Religion that there is scant any one article of Christian beliefe which it doth not vtterly abolish And yet these selfe same Sacramentaries stile them who defend this opinion (f) Sadeel sup Most flourishing Churches and made earnest sure to be held for (g) Beza in colloq moÌ„tisbel pag. 462. brethren of those very men who vpheld this doctrine against them and maintayned it to their face Nay the particuler Churches of Sacramentaries themselues consist of parts mainly disioyned in matters of beliefe SacrameÌ„taries say there is fundameÌ„tall differeÌ„ce amoÌ„g them Examples hereof we need not seeke a broad Our owne Protestants tell vs how the Puritans their brethren allow not of the booke of common prayer but hold it to be full of (a) Whitgift resp ad Admonit p. 145. 157. corruptions and all abominations and teach that Protestants (b) Ib. resp ad schedas wickedly mangle and wrest the Scriptures that they haue no (c) Resp cit pag. 6. Pastours that they haue not a true Church
by externall profession they are all whose marke of recogniscance hath in it those things which we haue mentioned yea although they be impious idolaters wicked heretikes persons excommunicable Againe Those whose knees were bowed vnto Baal euen they were also of the visible Church of God Boysseul in Confut. p. 822 answering to the place where Spondeus obiected that if the Church of Rome be an Idolatresse as Boysseul had auouched it is not the Church of Christ makes this reply And why not as well as Israel And D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 475. saith Although this errour Idolatry in adoring the calfe were most grieuous yet it destroyed not the whole nature of the Church 2. And Infidells That they sometymes comprize also Infidels in the Church is manifest first because they affirme that such may be saued For M. Fox in his Martyrologe pag. 495. reporteth that a certaine Protestant Martyr whole learning piety zeale he greatly commendeth taught that a Turke Saracen or any Mahamet an whatsoeuer may be saued if he trust in one God and keep his law M. Bale in his 6. Century pag. 464. bids vs beware that we condemne not rashly any Turke And Zuinglius tom 1. lib. de prouid fol. 370. sayth It is not vniuersally true that who so hath no fayth is damned Againe As for the damnation of vnbelieuers it is meant only of those who heard and did not belieue And tom 2. declarat de peccat orig fol. 118 This saying who so doth not belieue shall be condemned must in no wise be absolutely vnderstood but it is to be vnderstood of those See Homiâ—â— in Specim Contr. art 27. who hauing heard the ghospell would not belieue And ibidem in exposit fidei fol. 559. he sayth that in heauen Christians shall meet many heathens whose names he there sets downe and amongst the rest that cruel Theseus and Magician Numa the founder of heathenish superstitions amongst the Romans Which opinion of his those of Zurich in Apolog. Gualter in prefat tom 1. Zuinglij Simler in vita Bullengeri and others seeke to patronize and make good Now it were folly and madnes to auouch that these men were of the number of the faythfull They belieue then that infidels may be saued But S. Augustin was of a farre different beliefe lib. 4. cont Iul. cap. 3. where he writes thus VVhat one of those who would be accounted Christians will say an Infidell is iust be it euen Fabritius 3. Secondly their doctrine touching the predestinate carrieth with it a necessary acknowledgement of their Communion with Infidels For they teach that who so is predestinate is alwayes a member of the Church Hus his first article condemned by the Councel of Constance was this The predestinate remayneth euer a member of the Church And Luther tom 2. in Assert art 30 I say the opinions of Iohn Hus are all Euangelicall and Christian Againe I admit all the condemned articles of Iohn Hus. And tom 1. in disput Lypsic fol. 254. he maintaineth openly this article of Hus The Church is the whole multitude of the predestinate Vorstius in Anti-bellarmine page 125 VVe affirme that the Councell of Constance which condemned the doctrine of Hus that who so is predestinate is alwayes a meÌ„ber of the Church was surely in this respect Antichristian Danaeus in Resp ad Bellarm. Contr. 4. lib. 3. cap. 2. sayth The first opinion which was the opinion of Hus is true and is ours Againe our opinion is that the Church is the whole company of men whome God hath predestinated to saluation And cap. 7 It must be answered that Paul was alwayes but not alwayes apparently in regard of men of Gods true Church Againe Such Turkes and Iewes as God hath predestinated to saluation are of the Church euen now at this tyme in regard they are predestinate and in respect of God but they are not yet of Gods Church apparently and in respect of vs for as much as they lack yet those marks whereby God doth heere shew vs men who are of the church And Cont. 4. lib. 3. cap. 12 The true definition of the true church is this The company and multitude of those whome God hath chosen to saluation And Iunius lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 7 Paul was alwayes of the church according to predestination from which sayth he the church taketh her being or formal definition but not according to the outward forme of the church What can be more apparent then that these men teach that the predestinate are members of the church according to the true being therof and in the sight of God euen during the tyme of their infidelity 4. Thirdly this followeth necessarily vpon that which they teach concerning infants especially such as are descended from faythfull parents departing this life vnbaptized For they affirme that the children of the faythfull are actually in the Church as the French Confession article 35 Togeather with the parents God accounteth also their ofspring in the church And the Zuitzers cap. 20 VVhy should not they the children of the faythfull be ingrafted by sacred baptisme who are Gods proper possession and within his church Caluin in Instruct cont Anabap. art 1 Vnspotted infants are in the Communion of the church before they come forth of their Mothers wombe And Pareus lib. 3. de Iustificat cap. 4. pag. 884 Caluin on good reason determineth that the children of the church are borne cittizens of the church Their doctrine also hath the same issue who teach that infants at leastwise the children of the faythfull are saued without baptisme as the Protestants in the colloq Ratisbon And Zuinglius tom 2. Declarat de peccat orig fol. 119 Concerning Christians children we are assured that they are not damned for originall sinn of others we haue not the like assurance howbeit to confesse ingenuously the opinion we taught heretofore to wit that we ought not to iudge rashly of heathens children seemes to vs the more probable Voritius in Anti-bellarmine pag. 542 Zuinglius and some other ghospellers auouch that all children whatsoeuer are by the grace of Christ saued others for the most part hold that at leastwise all the elect whether extract from faythfull or other parents do euen vnbaptized attaine to saluation Whereof he sayth The opinion of these later is surely the safest and yet the first opinion is probable inough and ought not to be rashly condemned Now as D. Whitaker sayth Cont. 2. quest 1. cap. 5. 6 All that are saued are really and actually in the church And D. Morton part 1. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 4 To be of the church in possibility sufficeth not to saluation Lubbertus lib. 2. de Eccles cap. 2 Neither can any one be saued except he be actually and really in the church Whence Martyr in 1. Cor. 7. fol. 177. sayth Infants must of necessity appertaine vnto the church seing there is no saluation without it They teach moreouer that Infants haue
Messias to be that notable Antichrist foretold in Scripture For thus writeth M. Powell lib. de Antichristo cap. 33. pag. 338 I will in no wise say that all the Popes from the tyme wherein Papistry was first reuealed to be Antichristianity are damned Howbeit in the beginning of his booke he makes this protestation I solemnely take God to record that I as certainly know the Bishop of Rome to be that great Antichrist and the Popish church to be the Synagogue of Antichrist as I know God to be in the heauens or Iesus Christ to be the true Messias promised to the Fathers D. Whitaker likewise com 4. q. 5. cap. 3. pag. 694. sayth Let vs cry aloud and swore by him who liues for euer that the Bishop of Rome is Antichrist And to D. Sanders last demonstration that the Pope is not Antichrist pag. 799 VVe may take that most sacred and most true oath and sweare by him who liues for euer that the Bishoppe of Rome is the very Antichrist And neuerthelesse in his answere to the first demonstration he sayth with M. Powell I will not say that from the tyme that Papistry began to be Antichristianity the Popes themselues haue byn all damned And both he cap. cit pâ—g 679. 682. other Protestants ordinarily affirme that Antichrists Sea shal be in the true Church among the company of the saythfull and that he shall be a cittizen and inhabitant and Pastour of the Church To whom I pray will these men deny saluation or a place in their Church who graunt it vnto Antichrist the sworne enemy of Christ whome the scripture it self styleth Christs aduersary the man of sin the sonne of perdition I see not why they should henceforward vpbrayd vs with Antichrist since they themselues clayme him for a member of their Church 6. It is also certaine that they challenge Atheists For Illyricus in Catel lib. 9. col 1916. Dâ— Humfrey respons ad Rat. 3. That they challenge Atheists Camp M. Fox in his Acts printed anno 1596. pag. 646. allot that Atheist Machiauel an honorable roome among the witnesses and maintayners of the truth And Luther apud Manlium in loc tit de Eccl. pag. 483. layth of Valla that he gaue place to none but Epicure himselfe and professed openly that he held opinions repugnant to the foundation of sayth Neuerthelesse the same Luther respons ad Louan Colen tom 2. fol. 38. writeth thus of him Valla in my iudgement was either a remanent sparke or some feâ—â—eli of the primitiue Church whose like in constancy and vnfayned zeale of Christian fayth Italy or the whole Church had not for many ages One Epicure then in Luthers iudgement was the remanent sparke and Iewell of the Church That sometymes Protestants account all those their brethren who vnder the name of Christians oppose themselues any way against the Pope CHAP. V. 1. THAT Protestants sometymes acknowledge all those for members of their Church who vnder the name of Christians do any way oppose themselues against the Pope I proue First because some of them do openly so professe For as Keâ—nice reporteth in locis tit de Eccles pag. 122. Some faine the Church to be a rable of all Sects of Anabaptists Sacramentaries Swineseldians and others so they be not Papists And Capito in Caluin epist 6. Some haue brought in a liberty as if all were of the Ghospells side whosoeuer haue cast of the Popes yoke Musculus also in locis tit de caena pag. 522. sayth I imbrace all for brethren in the Lord howsoeuer they disagree from me or among themselues as long as they mayntaine not the Popish impiety Secondly because they professe that the end of their preaching was to lessen the authority of the Pope For what end Luther and â—is fellowes preached and Bishops and to be contrary to them For thus Luther writeth of himselfe epist ad Frederic Elect. tom 2. fol. 330 The Ecclesiasticall tyranny is now weakned and broaken which only I purposed in writing Or as Slcidan lib. 3. reporteth He writeth that the Ecclesiasticall tyranny is now weakned that that alone was his designe at the first And epist ad Waldenses in Hoâ—pin part 2. fol. 8. he sayth that he impugned transubstantiation only for enny of the Papists And in parâ—â— Confell apud eâ—â—â—dem fol. 13. that he impugned the Eleuation only to spite the Papists Caluin 4. Institut cap. 10. § 1. sayâ—h The end of our contention is to bridle that infinite and barbarous Dominion which those who would be accounted Pastors haue vsurped ouer soules Zuinglius lib. de Auctor Sedit â—om 2. â—ol 125. affirmeth that there is a sort of ProtestaÌ„ts which for no other cause do heare the doctrine of the Ghospell then because they extremely hate the Popedome and enuy Papists their felicity and glory Bucer lib. de regno Christi cap. 4 The greatest part of men seeme to haue sought only these things of the ghospell First that they might shake of the tyranny of the Romane Antichrist and of the false Bishops c. Luther also tom 2. German fol. 22. telleth what was the end of the Sacramentaries Anabaptists I heare sayth he that some imbrace Anabaptisme for this only end that so they may spite the Bishop of Rome euen as the Sacramentaries do only in hatred of the Romish Bishop deny that there is any thing in the sacrament beside bread and wine Of the new Arians end thus writeth Zâ—nchius lib. 1. epist pag. 154 Ouâ— Arians haue determined to ouerturne from the foundation whatsoeuer is in the Church of Rome And what end Illyricus had thus telleth D. Whitaker ad Rat. 8. Campiani Illyricus went further then he should as I think to be the further of from you whome he hated 2. Thirdly because they call the departure from the Pope and Popish doctrine the foundation a good part and the summe of the Protestant building Sâ— dâ—el Respons ad Arthu cap. 12 Protestants agree in this foundation that the Church ought to be reformed out of the word of God and that Popish errours must be remoued out of the Church Seranta epist dedicat ad Episc Angliae It is to be wondered how much almost all the Reformers please themselues in this point that they will haue nothing common with the church of Rome Grotius apud Homium in Specimine c Neither can I forebeare to shew the fountaine and ofspring of this and other calamities VVe think that we are so much the purer the further we go from points of Romish doctrine without any difference Vergerius dial 1. pag. 20 VVe hope that shortly all matters will be composed VVe could do by Gods helpe that which seemed the cheifest of all and the hardest and well nigh impossible that is pull our selues and ridde vs of the Papists tyranny VVherefore nothing is to be doubted but we shall compasse other matters of lesse moment For a good foundation is layd yea a good part
of the building is set vp And Zuinglius Respons ad Billi tom 2. fol. 261. When one obiected vnto him the dissention amongst the Sacramentaries in expouÌ„ding Christs words of the supper answereth No man ought to be offended with this diuersity more then with the difference among many captaines Tertull. praes c. 41. Athanas orat 1. coÌ„t Arian Hieron ad Cresiphont August in Psal 80. Beda l. 1. in Iob. c. 7. who go about to conquer a castle whiles one would haue it battered another vndermined and a third would haue it scaled For all agree to destroy the castle the difference is only about the way not about the summe of the matter And so concludeth that if any SacrameÌ„taries haue erred They erred sayth he in the letter not in spirit in the summe they agree all The summe therefore wherein all Protestants agree is to ouerthrow the Popish castle and Catholike fayth in which also the ancient heretikes agreed amongst themselues as the holy Fathers do testify and who attempteth that by what meanes soeuer erreth not in spirit but in letter only not in the summe but in some circumstance only of ProtestaÌ„cy But with what spirit they are led herein let them heare of their owne Prophet Luther defens verb. coenae tom 7. l. 411 VVhat a kind of spirit is that sayth he which hath no other end but to weaken the aduerse party without all doubt it is no other spirit then the Diuell 3. Fourthly because they describe paint name a Protestant by departure from the Pope and Popish doctrine The Confession of Wittenberg in Prefat describeth Protestants to be such as haue changed in their Churches a kind of Popish doctrine which had byn vsed for many yeares and some other ancient ceremonies M. Perkins in the Preface of his Reformed Catholik sayth By a Reformed Catholike so he termeth a Protestant I vnderstand any one that holds the same necessary heads of Religion with the Roman Church yet so as he pares of and reiects all errors in doctrine whereby the sayd religion is corrupted D. Willet in the Preface of his Synopsis A Protestant is he that professeth the ghospell of Iesus Christ and hath renounced the iurisdiction of the Sea of Rome and the forced and vnnaturall obedience to the Pope Schusselburg tom 13. Catal. Haeret. pag. 23 A Lutheran or true Christian is he who hath seuered himselfe from Papists c. And tom 8. pag. 363 True Lutherans are they who imbrace the doctrine of the ghospell amending Popish abuses You see how in all these descriptions of a Protestant the denyall of the Pope and Popish doctrine is put as a certaine difference which concurreth to the making and distinguishing of a Protestant from all others Hereupon D. Audrews Apol. Cont. Bellarm. cap. 1. sayth Sauing this Protestation that they will not suffer certaine Popish errors and abuses our fayth is no other then yours is or ought to be And he addeth that they call their religion reformed only because it is purged from certaine deuises and corruptions which had crept into it And sayth that Bucer and Peter Martyr did only pluck vp certaine cockle which Papists had sowed In like sort Boysseul in his Confutation of Sponde pag. 724. sayth Take away your Popery that which dependeth thereof and you and we shall be but one church because we shall haue but one Confession of fayth Moreouer Plessy in the forefront of his mystery of iniquity painteth a Protestant with a torch in his hand setting fire to the tower of Babylon by which he vnderstandeth the Popedome And finally Luther in exempl Theol. Papist tom 2. fol. 401. calleth himselfe an Anti-papist as of his principall end or office and sayth that he was called by diuine reuelation to destroy the Popes Kingdom D. Humfrey also termeth Ochinus a stout Anti-papist as if to be a Protestant and an Anti-papist were all one 4. Fiftly because the same opinions which in Papists they detest in other who are opposite to the Pope they dissemble or extenuate Lubbert lib. 1. Replicat cap. 4. sayth The Lutherans dispute not with vs about the Canon of Scriptures nor we with them And lib. 4. de Concil cap. vlt VVe contend not with the Churches of Saxony which keep images in the Churches And yet they dispute most eagerly against Catholiks about the Canon of scriptures and images The Scots in their general Confession professe to detest Popery for maintayning the reall presence of Christs body in the Eucharist for making the signe of the Crosse for denying infants without baptisme to be saued And in their other Confession c. 22. they say they shunne the Communion of the Popish Church Conf. Augustus â—visit â—axon Liturgia Augliaâ— Conference at Hampt Court because her ministers are not Ministers of Christ because the permitteth women to christen in case of necessity and yet dissemble that the Lutheran Protestants allow all these points and that the English Protestants admit Popish Priests for sufficient ministers command the making of the crosse in baptisme allow womens baptisme in case of necessity but because they are against the Pope as well as the Scots their opposition to the Pope like sole fayth couereth all and maketh that the Scots impute not these matters to them And if at any tyme the Catholiks do set before their eyes the errors or dissentions amongst them either they impudently (a) Laâ—ko Erastus in Schussel l. 4. Theol. Caluin p. 310. Feild l. 3. of the Church cap. 24. deny them or greatly extenuate them saying that they are not about the (b) Apol. Anglis foundation not of (c) Whit. CoÌ„t 2 q. 5. cap. 8. weighty matters of light matters not of the (d) Bucer in Schussel lib cit Caluin de rat concord p. 862. matter but of the manner of (e) Epist Monitor things indifferent of I know not what titles and finally only of (f) Mart. in loc tit de Euchar. §. 65. Hosp part 2 fol. 134. 163. 109. BruÌ„sfeld resp ad Erasm words Surely I imagine as they say that all sinnes in the elect faythfull are veniall but in others all are mortall so they deeme that all errors in those that are opposite to the Pope are veniall and light but in Papists all are haynous and mortall So much the alteration of the person changeth the case with them Hereupon Q. Elizabeth enacted not that it should be treason for any one to dissuade froÌ„ that religion which she had established vnlesse it were done with intention to induce him who was dissuaded to the obedience of the Bishop of Rome And hereupon also some of them openly professe that they more esteeme Turks then Papists forsooth because the Turke agreeth with them in hatred of the Pope and Popery in respect whereof they little regard the consent in the mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation and Passion and other articles of Christian fayth Sixtly they make the forsaking of Popery an
contrary opinions Thirdly we see how infamous a society Protestancy is into which all heretikes and Schismatikes likewise Idolaters Infidels Antichrist Atheists are admitted What sinke euer did receiue such filth Surely such a rable deserueth better the name of hell then of the holy Church Fourthly we see how monstruous a company it is which consisteth of so different and opposite members What they meane by a Protestant in tymâ—past Fiftly we may gather what Protestants meane when they say Protestants haue byn alwayes or before Luther For they meane not that there haue byn alwayes some who belieued at least all their fundamentall articles but that there were alwayes some who as they speake opposed themselues against the Pope or his errors whether they were otherwise Schismatiks Heretiks infidels or Atheists Of which kind of men I deny not but there haue byn alwayes some rable but none but a mad man will say that it was the holy Church spouse of Christ Sixtly we see how litle ProtestaÌ„ts account of their Church fayth and religion and belieue nothing lesse then that it is the church of God or fayth of Christ For who doubteth but Schisme heresy infidelity Atheisme are most pestilent plagues and infernall darknesse directly opposite to ecclesiasticall Communion and fayth which are the forme life soule of the Church And who can imagin Note that he can associate and vnite together formes so contrary as are light and darknesse life and death truth and lies or that the society in darknesse lies and death as are the societies in Schisme Heresy and infidelity can become one with the society in light life truth as the Church is If therfore seriously they belieued their Church to be the church of Christ they would neuer thinke that she could become one with the society in Schisme heresy and infidelity And this sometymes Protestants themselues perceiue For Brentius in Appendice Recognit thus speaketh to the Sacramentaries when they desired to be held for brethren of the Lutherans whome yet they condemned of heresy If they iudâ—e our opinion to be impious with what face do they desire to ioyne themselues with that Church which maintayneth impious doctrine and to be held of her for brethren VVhat fellowship sayth Paul is there of iustice with iniustice or what CoÌ„munion of light with darknesse or what agreement of Christ with Belial or what for the saythfull with the infidell VVherefore if they desire this sincerely and in earnest they manifestly shew that they make mockery of religion as if it skilled not which one follow so he may passe his life peaceably and quietly In like manner those of Wittenberge in their Refutation of the orthodoxall consent pag. 636. say VVe cannot wounder inough that seing they not only accuse the doctours of our Church of horrible and damned heresies but also haue long since condemned them to wit of Arianisme Nestorianisme Eutichianisme Marcionisme Manicheisme and the Monothelites heresies neuerthelesse they dare account vs for brethren and desire our brotherhood VVho that is carefull of piety and truth can persuade himselfe that these Sectmasters do in earnest handle religion For if we be such as we are iudged of them our friendship and fraternity is to be detested not desired Thus speake the Lutherans to the Sacramentaries which no whit lesse falleth vpon theÌ„selues because they also challenge the Hussites and other old heretiks whome they cannot excuse from holding vile heresies Finally we see how vncertaine Protestants be in determing what a Protestant is and what is necessary to the essence making of a Protestant consequently how vncertaine they must be whome to hold for one of their houshould whome for a stranger whome for a brother whom for an enemy which church or company they must imbrace which they must fly which they must account the spouse of Christ which the Synagogue of Satan Then the which vncertainty nothing can be more miserable in matter of religion Wherefore sith they are so vncertaine in this matter we must therin setle some certainty and that according to their own principles That it is necessary for a Protestant to belieue with only speciall fayth that himselfe is iustified CHAP. VI. 1. ABOVE all things it is most necessary to an inuisible or true Protestant in the sight of God as they terme him that with only speciall or peculiar fayth he belieue some thing belonging to himselfe to wit that he is iustified in Christ or as they vse to speake that with fayth he apprehend Christs iustice and apply it vnto him elf in particuler And to a visible Protestant in sight of men it is in like sort necessary that he professe himself to belieue with such a fayth that he is iustified in Christ For example For Luther to haue byn a true Protestant before God it is needfull that he haue truly belieued himselfe to be iustified by only the foresayd speciall fayth which he had of his own iustice which faith they call speciall or particuler because it was particuler to Luther no man being bound to belieue Luther to be iustified besides himselfe And for Luther to haue byn a visible Protestant in the sight of men it was needful in like manner to haue professed himself to haue belieued that he was iustified by only the sayd fayth The same I say of Caluin and of euery Protestant in particuler That according to their doctrine it is most necessary to a Protestant that he belieue himselfe to be iustified by only speciall fayth is manifest First because they teach that a man is iustified by only speciall fayth wherwith he belieueth something belonging to himselfe alone not by an vniuersall or Catholike fayth whereby he belieueth the mysteryes of Christian religion common to all and which euery one must belieue for this fayth they call historicall and say it may be in such as are not iust yea in hipocrites and Deuills Seing therefore in their opinion no man is a true Protestant in the sight of God but only he that is iust nor any iust but who hath a speciall or peculiar fayth wherewith he apprehendeth Christs iustice to himselfe it is manifest that according to their principles none can be a true Protestant before God vnlesse he haue the foresayd speciall fayth and in like manner that none can be a visible Protestant before men vnlesse he professe to belieue iustification by only speciall fayth because none can be accounted to be of any religion vnlesse he professe to belieue those meanes of obtayning iustification and remission of sins which that religion teacheth Caluin 3. Instit cap. 2. § 16 None is a true faythfull man None faythfull without speciall fayth but he who with a solid persuasion that God loueth him assureth himselfe of all things from his goodnes c. And § 39. he sayth VVithout this Christianity standeth not And in Rom. 1. v. 7 Hence we gather that none do rightly account themselues faythfull vnlesse
they certainly assure themselues that God loueth them M. Perkins in his exposition of the Creed col 780 No man can belieue himselfe to be a member of the Church What fayth is according to Protestants vnlesse he firmely and certainly persuaded that he is predestinated to eternall life Besides Caluin in his litle Catechisme cap. de fide defineth iustifying fayth to be a certaine and stedfast knowledge of our heauenly Fathers goodwill towards vs. The like definition he hath 3. Pareus l. 1. de Iustit cap. 11 Instit cap 2. § 2 Luther in cap. 4. Ioelis tom 4. and generally all Lutherans and Sacramentaries except that where some define it to be a knowledge others say it is an assurance or confidence of Gods fauour Hence it is manifest that they account none a iust or faythfull man vnlesse he haue a speciall fayth of his iustification and Gods fauour towards him 2. Secondly I proue the same out of diuers commendations of Protestants touching the necessity and excellency of this article For Luther tom 1. in disp fol. 410. sayth In vaine he belieueth other articles who denieth that we are iustified by only fayth And tom 2. lib. cont Missam fol. 390. he sayth The Summe that this article is the summe of his doctrine and Ghospell And lib. de votis fol. 278. that this is the definition of a Christian who belieueth to be iustified by the only works of Christ alone The Definition without his owne Tom 3. in Psalm Grad fol. 573 That the only knowledge of this article conserueth the Church And fol. 576. that it is the summe of Christian doctrine The Sun the sunne which lightneth the Church which falling the Church falleth Tom. 4. in cap. 53. Isaiae fol. 200. he writeth that it is as it were the foundation on which the Gospell relyeth and which alone distinguisheth his religion from all others Fol. 201. that it is like the liuely fountaine whence all treasures of diuine wisedome do flow The fouÌ„dation and the foundation of all the Church and Christianity And Prefat in Ionam that it is the cheife of Christian doctrine and the summe of all the scripture Tom. 5. Prefat in Galat. fol. 269. he affirmeth that it is the only rock of the Church And 273 The rock VVho holdeth not this article are sayth he either Iewes or Turks or Papists or Heretiques And fol. 274. that in this doctrine alone the Church is made and consisteth And fol. 333. he plainly confesseth that it is his only defence Their defence without which as he speaketh both we and heretiks togeather with vs had long since perished Tom. 6. in cap. 21. Genes fol. 265. he termeth it the cheifest article of fayth And tom 7. epist ad Liuones fol. 499. auoucheth that it is the only way to heauen and the summe of Christian life The only way And finally in the first article concluded at Smalcald In this article are and consist all which in our life we teach witnesse and do against the Pope the Diuell and all the world This and much more writeth Luther in commendation of the necessity and excellency of the article touching iustification by only fayth And of the contrary beliefe concerning iustification by works tom 5. in cap. 3. Galat. fol. 257. he sayth It is the sinck of all euills And in cap. 4. fol. 402 That it taketh away the truth of the Ghospell faith Christ himselfe 3. With Luther herein agree the Lutherans For the Confession of Auspurg cap. de discrimine ciborum sayth that this article is the proper doctrine of the ghospell And the Apology therof cap. de iustificat that it is the principall place of Christian doctrine And cap. de poenit the cheifest place and principallest article about which they fight with their aduersaries and the knowledge wherof they account most necessary to all The Confâ—ssion of Saxony that this article being extinguished there is no difference betwixt the Church and other men The Confession of Bohemia The suÌ„me of all Christianity and piety that this article is held of them for the cheifest of all as which is the summe of all Christianity and piety The vniuersity of Wittemberg tom 2. Lutheri fol. 248 It is the cheifest article of the ghospell The Ministers of the Prince Electour in Colloq Aldeburg pag. 1. say that this article is as it were the summe and last end to which all the other articles do look vnto And those of the D. of Saxony pag. 132. affirme that as long as this doctrine standeth Luther standeth yea Paul yea God This doctrine falling Luther falleth This falling God falleth Paul falleth God falleth and all men are necessarily damned Those of Magdeburg in Sleidan lib. 21. call this article the stay of saluation Melancthon tom 2. Lutheri fol. 506. termeth it the cheifest article Kemnice part 1. Examen tit de Iustificat pag. 231 The cheifest place And in locis part 1. tit de Iustificat pag. 216. writeth that it is like the castle and principall bulwarck of all Christian doctrine and religion Lobechius disput 22. The Bulwarck pag. 515. addeth that it is one of the cheifest points of our sayth because the prore and poupe of Christianity is contayned therein and on it hangeth the hinges of our saluation Scnusselburg tom 8. Catal. haeret affirmeth it to be the cheifest article wherein consisteth our saluation and which is the head of our religion Finally to omit other Lutherans Brentius in Apolog. Wittemberg part 3. pag. 703. sayth The essentiall differeÌ„ce that the essentiall difference betwixt a Protestant and a Papist is that of the Protestant religion these are the first principles The scriptur Christ the Sonne of God sayth or assurance of Gods fauour towards vs for Christs sake 4. Neither do Sacramentaries dissent herein from the Lutherans For the Confession of Basse auoucheth it to be the first and cheifest point in Euangelicall doctrine The French Confess art 18. calleth it the foundation Zuinglius in Isagoge fol. 268. sayth it is the summe of the Ghospell Bucer Respons ad Abrincens pag. 613. And Gualter Prefat in Ioan. write that about this article is almost all the whole substance of dispute with them and Papists Bullinger in Compend lib. 5. cap. 1. termeth it the cheifest point of holy Euangelicall and Apostolicall doctrine And lib. 8. cap. 8 The highest and cheifest head of Christian doctrine and of fayth Peter Martyr in locis tit de Iustif col 939. sayth it is the head fountaine and stay of all piety Tom. 2. epist ad Peregrin col 136 The summe of Summeâ— It is the summe of summes and cheifest head Caluin 4. Institut cap. 11. § 1. that it is the cheifest proppe of religion lib. 11. § 17 The summe of all piety And Respons and Sadolet pag. 125. that the knowledge thereof being gone Christi glory is extinct religion abolished and hope of
saluation wholy ouerturned And lib. de Necess Reform fol. 47. that the safety of the Church dependeth vpon this doctrine no lesse then mans life dependeth of his soule Pareus in Prooem lib. de Iustificat On this alone the hinges of our comfort and saluation do hang. And lib. 2. cap. 2. affirmeth that it was the cheifest cause of the separation of the Protestant Church from Popery And lib. 4. cap. 2. sayth The only doctrine of obtayning iustice and saluation by only sayth and of loosing them by incredulity is the sincere and proper ghospell all other doctrine in the scripture belongeth to the law And those of Geneua Prefat Syntag. Confess auouch that this article is the groundworke forme and soule of Christian religion The soule the summe of Euangelicall doctrine of which men are called faythfull and true Christians without which the knowledge of other articles hath no holesome fruit For it is the substantiall inward and formall cause of saluation of which all Sacraments instituted by God are and were pledges and seales vnto which article all the other do tend as to their center and in which mans felicity consisteth 5. Neither do our English Protestants make lesse account of this their article of iustification by only fayth For D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 6. cap. 3. pag. 562. sayth It seemes to be the cheifest of all and most fundamentall The Prore Puppe as in which the Prore and puppe of our saluation consisteth and who faine any other meanes of Iustification do ouerthrow the foundation and most necessary heads of Christian religion and are fallen from saluation and euerlasting life And Respons ad Rat. r. Camp he writeth thus of their doctrine of Iustification by only fayth If Iames or a heauenly Angell disallow it he is impure wicked and to be detested to hell D. Humfrey in his oration de vitando fermen to calleth this article The cheifest point and hinges of fayth D. Fulke de Success pag. 4. The principall head of the ghospell M. Fox in his acts pag. 440 The foundation of all Christianity And pag. 770 The fouÌ„dation The only principall origen of our saluation And finally M. Powell lib. 2. de Antichristo cap. 5 The summe of the doctrine of sayth Neither is it to be merueiled that Protestants so highly esteeme this their article both because it is the cheifest bait wherwith they draw men vnto them as also because as Luther confessed it is their cheife defence without which they had long since perished and finally because Iustification being one principall end of religion if speciall fayth be the only meanes to attaine to iustification vndoubtedly it ought highly to be esteemed of that religion which belieueth it to be such a meanes ProtestaÌ„ts esteeme of only faith Thus we see that according to the common opinion of Protestants to belieue himselfe to be iustified by only fayth is the cheifest article the foundation the stay the head the fountaine the summe the last end the prore and puppe the hinges the proppe the castle the bulwarck the essentiall difference the definition the soule the forme the formall cause the only rocke the only safegard of Protestancy the only way to heauen which falling the church yea God himselfe falleth But none can be a Protestant without the foundation head soule forme summe definition c. of a Protestant Therefore none can he held for a Protestant vnlesse he professe to belieue to be iustified by only speciall fayth Whomesoeuer therefore Protestants cannot proue to haue held this article they cannot with any reason and coulour challenge for Protestants And because as it shall hereafter appeare they cannot proue that any one before Luther held this article nay on the contrary we will proue that Luther first deuised it they cannot with any appearance of truth auouch that there was any Protestant before him And in like sort whome we can proue not to haue belieued this article we may euidently conclude that they were no Protestants That it is necessary for a Protestant to belieue all the fundamentall articles of Protestancy CHAP. VII â— BESIDE the foresayd article of Iustification by only fayth it is also necessary to the making of a Protestant of a member of the Protestant Church Vâ—â—â—d l. 3. de Eccles c. 2. that he belieue at least all the fundamentall points of Protestancy either explicitly or implicitly so that he obstinatly deny no one of them This is manifest First because as I shewed before cap. 1. it is the common opinion of Protestants that all those are out of the Church whosoeuer deny one fundamentall article Num. 3. Againe because themselues say that the name of a fundamentall article doth insinuate that it sustaineth the Church as the foundation sustaineth the house Besides all Protestants assigne truth or purity in doctrine for the mark of the Church As the Confession of Ausparg cap. 7. The English Confession cap. 19. The Suiâ—zers cap. de Eccles and other Protestants commonly and their meaning is Truth essentiall to the Church that it is the essentiall marck Wherupon D Whitaker Controuers 2. quest 5. cap. 17. pag. 541. sayth that it is absolutely necessary and the essentiall marck And at Rat. 3. Campiani that it is the substantiall note His Maiesty in his epistle to Cardinall Peron that in is the substantiall forme of the Church Caluin epist 190. The purity of doctrine is the soule of the Church And the same say Sadeel ad Sophism Turriani loc 1. Author de Eccles in Danaeo pag. 1029. Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 145. D. Willet cont 2. quest 3. pag. 102. Yea D. Morton part 1. Apos lib. 1. cap. 6. affirmeth that Protestants account the truth of Euangelicall doctrin the cheifest and almost only essentiall inseparable and perpetuall marck of the Church And hence it proceedeth that they put the truth of purity of doctrine in their definition of the Church as an essentiall part thereof as the French Confession cap. 27. The Magdeburgians Cent. 1. lib. 1. cap. 4 col 140. Melancthon tom 1 in cap. 16. Matthaeâ— D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 20. pag. 552. Sadeel ad Sophism surriani loc 21. and others commonly But this purity of doctrine if it must be in any articles especially it must be in those which are fundamentall as is manifest and the Protestants do graunt For thus writeth D. Morton part 1. Purity in fundameÌ„tal points essential to the Church Apol. lib. 2. cap. 38. Purity in the fundamentall principles of fayth is necessary to the being and making of the Church And D. Feild lib. 2. de Eccles cap. 3 Purity from fundamentall errour is necessarily required to a Church And the like hath Vorstius lib. cit pag. 148. Nay the English Confession art 19. defineth the visible Church of Christ to be a congregation of faythfull men in which the pure word of God is preached and the Sacraments duely ministred according to Christs
ordinance in al those things that of necessity are requisite to the same And his maiesty ep cit Whitâ—k Cont. 2. q. â— c. 18. Sutla l. 1. de Eccl. c. 1. Mort. Apol. l. 2. cap. 3â— It is needfull that the churches be vnited amoÌ„g themselues in vnity of saith and doctrine in those points which are necessary to saluation And hereupon diuers Protestants deny those Corinthians who denyed the Resurrection and those Galathians who ouerturned the Ghospell of Christ to haue byn members of the Church because they denyed a fundamentall point point of Christian fayth Wherefore vnlesse Protestants will deny their common doctrine in this matter reiect their owne definition of the Church cast away their only marke of the Church and leaue no marke of her at all they cannot auouch any one to haue byn a Protestant who dissented from them in any fundamentall point of doctrine 2. If any one say that although he who denyeth any fundamentall point of Protestancy cannot be of the visible Protestant Church yet may he be of their inuisible Church I answeare that as shall be shewed hereafter there can be no Church which is inuisible in profession of fayth howsoeuer it be inuisible in iustice and predestination and therefore none can be of the inuisible Church who is not also of the visible Againe Protestants will haue none to be of the inuisible Church but such as are iust But how is he iust who denieth Gods faith and maketh him a lyer and that in a principall point of religion Besides Protestants say that none can be a member of the inuisible Church vnlesse he be also a member of the visible Church if so conueniently he may 3. Moreouer the holy Fathers most frequently Leo. Ierm 4. de Nat. Hier. lib. 3 â—oÌ„t Ruffi Aug. l. de haer q. 11. in Mat. 18. de ciuit c. 51. Basilius in Theodor. lib. 4. c. 19. and sometymes also Protestants themselues do teach that it is necessary to a faythful and belieuing man that he deny no one article of fayth and much lesse a fundamentall or principall article Finally Protestants are wont to laugh at Catholiks if they proue any Father to haue byn a Papist because he held some fundamentall point of Papistry For thus writeth Pareus lib. 1. de amiss gratiae cap. 1 It is ridiculous for him to conclude S. Augustin to haue byn a Papist because in this errour he agreed with them no lesse them if you inferre that we are Papists because we agree with Papists in some truth And D. White in defence of his Way cap. 45. pag. 432 His holding of some things superstitiously which the Church of Rome hath entertayned proues not that he professed the same fayth the Church of Rome now doth because the fayth of the sayd Church comprehends much more then he held and what he held is now otherwise expounded and applyed then by him it was And in his Way pag. 298 If he would deale faythfully and to the point he should not say Bernard professed the Roman fayth and was a monke but he should haue shewed that be professed the present Roman fayth as the Councell of Trent and the Iesuits haue set it downe at least in the fundamentall points thereof Let them then abide the law which themselues haue made and let not them conclude any one to haue byn a Protestant because he agreed with them in one or more points vnlesse he agreed with them at least in all fundameÌ„tall points of their doctrine I adde also that against Protestants we do rightly conclude that the holy Fathers were Papists if we do shew that they dissented from Protestants in one or more fundamentall points For they will not deny but that the Fathers were either Papists or Protestants But Protestants they were not if they denyed their doctrine in any fundamentall point thereof therfore they must needs be Papists And the like is not of others whome Protestants cannot coÌ„clude to haue byn theirs if they can proue that they were none of ours Because neither we wil graunt nor they can auouch that such were either ours or theirs as they graunt of the holy Fathers What is necessarily required to a ProtestaÌ„ts Be it therefore certaine and assured that to a Protestant is necessarily required that either explicitly or at least implicitly and vertually he belieue all the fundamentall points of Protestancy and willfully deny no one of them And that therefore Protestants can no way challenge any who reiected any one of their fundamentall and principall articles It remayneth that we set downe the fundamentall articles of Protestancy lib. de vnie baptism c. â—â— because Protestants themselues agree not herein but as S. Augustin sayd that the Donatists did concerning sinnes which they would haue to exclude men out of the Church so Protestants in a strange fashion distinguish the fundamentall points of their fayth deuising rules of distinction amongst them not out of the scriptures but out of their owne heads Which be the fundamentall heads of Protestancy CHAP. VIII 1. THAT we may determine which be the fundamentall articles of Protestant religion we must first shew How much ProtestaÌ„ts esteeme the Conf. of Ausp that all Protestants professe to receiue the Confession of Auspurge at least in the principall and fundamentall articles thereof Of the Lutheran Protestants this is manifest For in their conference at Aldeburg both parties of them agreed to admit it for a rule of their disputation And ibidem pag. 404. those of the Electors side do say VVe referre our selues and do looke vnto the Confession of Auspurg as to the foundation of religion next after the word of God And other Lutherans in Zanchius in Supplicat ad Senat. Argentinens pag. 70. The fouÌ„dation of Religion do appoint that it be taught according to the Confession of Auspurge presented to Charles the 5. anno 1530 and the Apology thereof subscribed at Numberg and that it be the square and rule of all religion in all articles The square of religion Heshusius lib. de present corp Christi in caelo affirmeth that amongst the Lutherans all that are promoted to degrees and cure of soules do sweare to the Confession of Auspurg and the Apology thereof They sweare to it The same testifyeth Lobechius disp 1. pag. 12. and as Lauatherus addeth anno 1530 The lawes of the vniuersity of VVittemberg do streightly forbid to defend any opinions which are contrary to this Confession Heâ—â—â—sius also lib. cit writeth The authority thereof most holy that the authority thereof ought to be most holy amongst all godly men Westphalus cont Laskum affimeth that it containeth the summe of doctrine founded in the word of God Ernestus Regius in vita Vrbani that it is the square and rule of controuersies in the Church Lobechius lib. cit that it is the rule of sayth and doctrine distinguishing the orthodoxall Church from the heterodoxall Reineccius in armatura tom
1. cap. 28. CoÌ„taineth the suÌ„me of doctrine affirmeth that it was inspired from heauen and written by instinct of the holy ghost Nay some Lutherans as testifieth Laskus epist ad Regem Poloniae sayd that they would rather doubt of the doctrine of Paul The Rule of fayth then of the Confession of Auspurg And with the Lutherans herein conspire the Sacramentaries For as Bucer confessed in the Conference of Ratisbon The Protestants condemne all writings Inspired froÌ„ heaueÌ„ which are repugnant to the Confession of Auspurge and the Apology thereof Caluin admonit vlt. ad Westphalum pag. 797. sayth Surius anno 154â— Touching the Confession of Auspurg I answere thus that as it was published at Ratisbon there is not one word in it contrary to our doctrine And epist 236. sayth that be wittingly and willingly subscribed to it Beza epist 1. writeth in this sort I define those to be our Churches which hold the Confession of Auspurg the French Confession c. And Apol. 1. cont Saintem pag. 297 Neither is the Confession of Auspurg such as any pious man may reiect it Zanchius loc cit receiued the Confession of Auspurge as the square and rule of all doctrine And as Vorstius writeth Respons ad epist Parci pag. 91 In the vniuersity of Heddelberg they vsed to sweare to no Confession but to that of Auspurg Or as D. Whitaker affirmeth Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 5. pag. 505 The Confession of Auspurg is receiued of all Protestants vnlesse perhapps it be in one word or two rather then in any opinion And in truth seing all Sacramentaries professe to hold the Lutherans who follow the Confession of Auspurg for their brethren in Christ and besides when we obiect vnto them their dissention in matters of fayth they appeale vnto their harmony or syntagme of Confessions amongst which the Confession of Auspurg is placed as do those of Geneua Prefat Syntagmatis the Switzers Prefat suae Confess Beza epist 1. Sadeel Indice Repetit Turrian pag. 808. and respons ad Theses Posnan c. 11. Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 168. D. Feild lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 12. 42. D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 8. pag. 521. D. Andrews Respons ad Apol. Bellarm. c. 1. D. Fulke de Success pag. 287. 304. D. White in his way to the Church pag. 138. and others commonly When as I say the SacrameÌ„taries do thus they must needs approue the Confession of Auspurg at least in all the principall and fundamentall points thereof For I hope they will not hold theÌ„ for brethren in Christ whome they see to dissent from them in fundamentall points of Christian fayth nor say that those Confessions agree which are repugnant in the very foundation of beliefe VVhich the coÌ„fess of Ausp accouÌ„teth fundameÌ„tal articles 2. But this Confession of Auspurg so generally receiued and of so high account with Protestants as we haue rehearsed hath set downe and declared which be the fundamentall points of Protestancy For in the beginning thereof is set this title The principall articles and after that many Protestanticall opinions are rehearsed thus it sayth of them cap. 21. The suÌ„me of Protest doctrine This is the summe of the doctrine which is deliuered in our Churches And â—fterward naming certaine controuersies of Indulgences Pilgrimages the like it sayth of them These kind of matters we haue let passe that those things which are the cheifest in this cause might be easierly knowne Againe Cheifest points those things only are rehearsed which were necessary to be told And finally VVe would present these articles before written in which our Confession might be extant Only necessary and the summe of their doctrine who teach vs might be seene And in another edition of this Confession in Melancthon tom 3. thus is written in the end thereof VVe haue comprised the summe of Euangelicall doctrine necessary to Churches SuÌ„me of doctrine necessary Wherefore vnlesse Protestants will reiect their first and most maiesticall Confession of Auspurg they must needs confesse that the articles thereof are the summe of Protestant doctrine the principal articles of their fayth are they only which are necessary to be told and the summe of Euangelicall doctrine necessary to Churches But surely such are fundamentall articles 3. Neither doth the sayd Confession alone but also many other great Protestants acknowledge the articles of it to be fundamentall For thus hath the Apology of that Confession in Melancthon tom 3. fol. 91 Truth necessary to the Church VVe haue comprised in the Confession of Auspurg almost the summe of all Christian doctrine And Melancthon himselfe in the preface of that Apology writeth that that Confession is truth necessary to the Church And likewise in the preface of his 3. to me I gathered together the heads of confession comprising almost the summe of the doctrine of our Churches The whole forme of the Confession was after sent to Luther who wrote back that he had read and allowed this Confession And tom 4. Respons ad Staphylum pag. 817. sayth that the Confession of Auspurg contayneth the whole body of doctrine And in Prefat 2. tom Luther 11 The summe of doctrine which our Church preached is publikely comprehended in the Confession of Auspurg The whole body of doctrine Likewise the D. of Wittemberg in the preface of his Confession speaking of the Confession of Auspurg sayth thus VVe commanded our preachers to write the summe of their doctrine And the Ministers of the Elector in colloq Aldeburg scrip 3. pag. 21. say VVe doubt not but the summe of doctrine reuealed from heauen is dextrously plainly and most sweetly contayned in the Confession of Auspurg And pag. seq VVâ—â—â— the Confession of Auspurg we comprehended the summe of doctrine Kemnice Praefat. lib. de coena The summe of holesome doctrine is comprehended in the Confession of Auspurg out of the word of God Westphalus defens altera cont Laskum sayth It containeth in briefe the summe of Christian doctrine Iames Andrews lib. cont Hosium pag. 22 The summe of pious doctrine is contained in the Confession of Auspurg Finally the Lutherans as the Sacramentaries of Newstad write in Admonit de lib. Concord cap. 4. Note pag. 116 do place in the role of heretiks as erring in the foundation of sayth and saluation all those who find any sault with the Confession of Auspurg or dissent from it in any article And as touching the Sacramentaries themselues the Palatin Confession pag. 198. sayth thus That Confession of fayth which was presented at Auspurg and the Apology annexed thereto was taken out of the doctrine of the Apostles Prophets and the foresayd Creed as a certaine litle summe Caluin lib. 1. de Lib. arbit pag. 142 VVhen at Auspurg there was to be exhibited a forme of Confession Melancthon the Author thereof would not make any stay but only in that doctrine Doctrine necessary to saluation which alone is proper to the
Church and necessary to saluation to be knowne 4. According therefore to the verdict both of Lutherans and Sacramentary Protestants theâ—e Confession of Auspurg contayneth the summe whole body of Protestant doctrine and only those things which are necessary to be told and that only doctrine which is proper to the church and is necessary to be knowne for saluation Whosoeuer therfore dissenteth from the Confession of Auspurg dissenteth from Protestants in the summe and body of Protestancy in things that are necessary 〈◊〉 doctrine necessary to the Church and necessary â—o â—â—â—nation But vndoubtedly who oâ—ssenteth in sâ—ch things dissenteth in fundamentall points And thâ—s manner of examining who is a Protestant cannot be disliked of Protestants because themselues vsed it against the Anabaptists in their Conference at Frankentall wherein they proue that the Anabaptistia were not before the yeare of Christ 1522 For say they if you read ouer all histories you shall not find any people from the beginning of the world who had a Confession of sayth like to yours They are therefore of opinion that it is necessary for an Anabaptist that he hold their CoÌ„fession Why then may not we say the like is necessary to a Protestant Besides Sadeel in Refutat Thes Posnan pag. 866. sayth that we ought to iudge of the fayth of the reformed Churches by the Confessions of their fayth which rule we now follow 5. And if any Protestant do not thinke that the articles of the Confession of Auspurg be fundamentall let him take the Confession of Saxony Fundam articles according to the CoÌ„fess of Saxony to which many principall Protestants subscribed and which they composed with mind to present it to the Councell of Trent For this Confession affirmeth her articles to be fundamentall saying cap. 23 This is the summe of doctrine which with one mouth we preach in our Churches And soone after It is true doctrine and necessary to the Church And Hospin part 2. Hist fol. 215. sayth that the composers of this Confession auouch this in summe that that writing contayneth clearly and fundamentally the princâ—pall articles of Christian fayth and doctrine of Sacraments instituted of Christ Or if he please let him take the Confession of Strasburg According to the CoÌ„fession of Strasburg which in the end thus writeth of the articles thereof These are the cheife points in which our men haue somewhat gone from the common doctrine of the Clergy Or else the Scottish general CoÌ„â—essioÌ„ wherin thus speake the Scots VVe belieue confesse and subscribe According to the CoÌ„fession of Scotland and affirme before God and the whole world that this only is the true Christian sayth which pleaseth God and bringeth saluation to men which is now layd open to the world and receiued of diuers Churches and Kingdoms especially of the Scottish Church For these Confessions do affirme that their articles are principall necessary to the Church and their doctrine the only true Christian doctrine which bringeth saluation But surely such articles be fundamentall Therefore the articles of these Confessions be fundamentall articles in Protestancy And consequently that a man be accounted a Protestant according to the iudgement of these Confessions it is necessary that he professe their articles Or finally let him make choice of the Bohemian Confession According to the CoÌ„fession of Bohemia in the Preface whereof it is written thus VVe imbrace and hold all things which belong to the true Church and without which she can be no where on earth For without doubt such things are fundamentall 6. But if any will not admit either the articles of the Conâ—ession of Auspurg or of Saxony which are Confessions of Lutherans nor the articles of the Confessions of Strasburg or Scotland which are Confessions of Sacramentaries not finally the articles of the Bohemian Confession which is sayd to be the Confession of the Waldenses to be the fundamentall articles of Protestancy First he shall shew that touching which are fundamentall articles he agreeth neither which LutheraÌ„s nor Sacramentaries nor Waldenses Againe besides that which we haue repeated out of Protestants concerning their account of the Confession of Auspurg he shall herein reiect those Confessions to which Protestants as themselues say yeld almost as much as Papists do to the Councell of Trent Vorstiue in Praefat. Antibell Praefat. Syntagm Conf ssionum which they hold for authenticall writings and which they say haue byn sealed with the bloud of many martyrs and approued of Kings Princes and common wealthes most excellent Deuines great seruants of God Assuredly if there be any certainty or worth in Protestant doctrine it is in their Confession of fayth Moreouer he can name no other articles which Protestants by publike and common iudgement haue agreed to be fundamentall and therefore either they haue not by publike consent determined which articles they hold for fundamentall or certainly no iudgement or decree of theirs is to be more esteemed of them then that which we find in their Confessions of fayth If Protestants be not certaine which are fundam articles they are not certaine of their Church Wherefore either they are to be held for fundamental articles or else Protestants are not certaine which are fundamentall articles of their fayth And if they be not certaine herof they cannot be certaine what is the essence or substance of a Protestant or who is a Protestant who not seing as I shewed before the only essentiall forme and substance of a Protestant they put in the beliefe of their fundamentall articles Either therefore they haue not yet determined which are their fundamentall articles and consequently they haue not determined what is the substance of a Protestant or who is a Protestants who not who is a member of their Church who an alien or that which they haue determined in their forsayd Confessions is to be taken for their decree and determination in this matter Finally I regard not what articles this or that Protestant iudgeth to be fundamentall for I might set downe which Luther tom 1. in Praefat. Disput fol. 419. or which Zuinglius Prefat Conf. fidei or which Beza in fine breuis Confess or which Bullinger Praefat. Compend haue reckoned for fundamentall articles but I would determine this matter out of their publike Confessions of fayth Sadeel ad Thes Posnan c 12. Beza epist 1. Rainold praelect 4. because they cannot deny them but in denying their fayth as also because they are of more authority amongst Protestants and finally because themselues require vs so to do 7. Let it be therefore assured and stedfast that according to the iudgement generally of all Protestants it is necessarily and before all matters required to a Protestant that he belieue Iustification by only speciall or particuler fayth What necessary to a Protestant because this is the soule life definition and all in a Protestant and moreouer according to the iudgements of the foresayd Confessions that he belieue
at least virtually and implicitly all their articles and wittingly deny none of them because as we see they are fundamentall articles of Protestancy without which one cannot haue the whole essence or substance of a Protestant nor be an entire and absolute Protestant We speak of any who are ProtestaÌ„ts only in part but only in part and in some sort And we as hath byn often sayd treat here only of an entire and absolute Protestant such as at least hath all the substantiall parts of a Protestant and endeauour to proue that Luther was the author of such a company and of such a faith and religion and regard not whither that before his tyme there were any who were Protestants only in part and in some sort and held only some part of Protestant religion but not the whole substance thereof And hereupon we frame an inuincible argument to proue that there was no true Protestant or Protestant church before Luther The definition of a true ProtestaÌ„t Euery true Protestant belieueth Iustification by only speciall faith and at least virtually and implicitly belieueth the articles of the Confession of Auspurg or of Saxony Scotland Strasburg or Bohemia But there was no man no Church before Luther who thus belieued Therefore no true Protestant or Protestant church The Maior is the very definition of a true Protestant gathered partly out of the common doctrine of all Protestants partly out of the foresayd Confessions of their fayth The Minor being negatiue is sufficiently manifest by that neither Luther nor any in his tyme or to this day could produce any one man or company who before Luthers preaching had belieued in that sort This foundation therefore touching the essence and substance of a Protestant and Protestant Church being layd to wit that he only is a true absolute Protestant who belieueth Iustification by only speciall fayth and the foresayd other fundamentall points of Protestancy and that the Protestant Church is a company of such belieuers and the Protestant religion such a beliefe and worship of God I will endeauour in this next book out of Protestants testimonies and Confessions to proue that Luther was the first beginner of their Church and Religion The end of the first Booke THE SECOND BOOKE Of the Author or Beginner of the Protestant Church and Religion CHAP. I. That Protestants confesse that the substance of their Church and Religion was perished when Luther began THE first demonstration wherewith we will proue that Luther was the author and first beginner of the Protestant Church and religion we will take out of Protestants Confessions of the substantiall destruction of their Church ProtestaÌ„ts confesse their religion was perished religion principall article of Iustification by only fayth before Luther arose For of the destruction of their fayth and religion thus writeth Luther himself tom 1. Proposit 62. fol. 375 Certaine it is that our Apostaticall Bishops raigning Gods fayth perished Perished And lib. de Captiu Babylon tom 2. fol. 77 The Popes tyranny hath many ages agone extinguished the fayth Extinguished And lib. de abâ—og Mist fol. 249. he sayth to the Catholikes Ye haue extinguished the Ghospell And lib. de pijs ceremon is fol. 387 alià s 393 Destroyed The doctrine of the ghospell lay destroyed by humane traditions Tom. 3. in psalm 1. fol. 126 VVhat thinkest thou was in the Church but a whirle wind of Gods wrath by which we were thrust into so many so different so inconstant so vncertaine and those infinite glosses of Lawyers Christ altogeather vnknown and opinions of Deuines in the meane tyme Christ being altogeather vnknowne stumbling into many quicke sands gulfes and snares of conscience were knockt together And in psalm 22. fol. 345 Christ together with fayth is now extinguished Christ and fayth extinguished And fol. 348 Fayth lyeth extinct And in psalm 51. fol. 460 The former age could neither vnderstand nor soundly teach the greatest and weightiest points Praefat. in psalm Grad fol. 509 God punisheth contempt so as he plainly taketh away his word whereof Popery is a notable example Al knowlâ—dge of Christ wholy extinct in which we see it hath so fallen out And fol. 568 Fayth it selfe was plainly extinct Tom. 4. Praefat. Eccl. fol. 1 The schooles of Deuines haue wholy extinguished most assured fayth in Christ togeather with all the knowledge of Christ Tom. 5. in cap. 2. Galat. fol. 306 The Papists with their impious and blasphemous doctrine haue not only obscured but simply haue taken away Not only obserued but simply taken away the Ghospell and ouerwhelmed Christ And fol 322 Christs ghospell being obscured yea truly ouerwhelmed the Pope c. In c. 4. fol. 376 This most common and most receiued opinion of the vncertainty of the remission of sinnes was surely an article of fayth in all Popery Christ shut out of the Church wherewith truly they ouerwhelmed the doctrine of fayth destroyed fayth and shut Christ out of the Church Fol. 400 The Pope hath vtterly extinguished Christian liberty In cap. 1. Petri The sincere knowledge of fayth was extinct In cap. 15.1 Cor. fol. 134. VVithout our helpe they had neuer learnt one word of the Ghospell Without Luther not one word or iot of the Ghospell And fol. 141 They had not knowne one iote of the Gospell vnlesse by our labour and study it had byn brought forth into the world â—om 6. in cap. 3. Genes fol. 43 Holesome doctrine was by little and litle extinct In cap. 4. fol. 57 The light of the word was extinguished by wicked Popes In cap. 17. fol. 199 That I may say all in one word the Pope hath truly buryed Christ In cap. 48. fol. 643 The Pope hath obscured nay destroyed the doctrine of sayth In cap. 49. fol. 660 The Pope hath truly obscured the doctrine and taken away the Promises Christ truly buried that we knew not what Christ was Fol. 666 He hath extinguished the Gospell Tom. 7. lib. de Missa fol. 230 The knowledge of Christ was truly abolished and destroyed This ye Papists ye cannot deny the matter it selfe proclaimeth it And fol. 231 All true VVorship of God being extinct from the bottom c. Epist ad Fredericum Electorem fol. 506 Knowledge of Christ truly destroyed The Pope of Rome hath most plainly rooted out the Ghospell truly oppressed and ouerthrowne lib. cont Papatum fol. 469 Fayth was weakened choaked and extinguished and Christian liberty lost Thus plainly speaketh Luther almost in all his Latin comes of the substantiall destruction of his fayth and Ghospell before that as he sayth he brought it againe into the world Ghospell most plainly rooted out To which he addeth in his 7. Dutch tome in his admonition to the Germans This abomination was increased so that they blotted out and supprest the words of this Sacrament and fayth so that neither a letter nor point of them remayned in all Popery in all
masses and bookes Thus Luther 2. In like manner the Protestants in Sleidan lib. 1. fol. 258 The Pope made lawes by which true knowledg was vtterly oppressed Melancthon tom 2. Lutheri fol. 192 Scholasticall diuinity being receiued fayth was destroyed the doctrine of works being admitted The Magdeburgians Praefat. Centur. 5 Extreme abolitioÌ„ of religion There was an extreme abolition of true Religion and the word of God vnder Popery Caluin Praefat. Institut In former ages men had extinguished the light of God And 1. Institut cap. 11. § 9 Many ages since true religion was drowned and ouerthrowne 4. Institut cap. 2. § 2 The substance of Christianity buried Vnder Popery that doctrine without which Christianity cannot consist was all buryed and shut out Respons ad Sadolet pag. 128. he sayth that the necessity to leaue the Roman Church was That the light of diuine truth was extinct the word of God buryed c. And p. 130. Cheifest points of doctrine ouerthrowne from the root maketh this speach vnto God in defence of his forsaking the Roman Church There were not a few profane opinions which euen by the ground ouerthrow the cheifest points of that doctrine which thou diddest deliuer vnto vs by word Lib. de necess Refor pa. 49 VVhen the word of God was choaked with these so many so thick darknesses Luther stept forth c. pag. 62 None prayed to God with assured sayth that is in earnest neither could they for Christ being buryed in that manner as he was c. Word of God ended Respons ad Versipell pag. 358 They haue extinguished the doctrine of saluation In Psycopan pag. 388 The word of God being ended by peruerse vse and sloth now returneth to light In Rom. 11. vers 22 The truth was taken away The light put out S. deel de vocat Minist pag. 552 God suffered that light to be put out which should perpetually haue lightned vs in gouerning our life Pure worships banished Crispin Praeâ—at operum Occolampadij Both the doctrine of saluation and piety were taken away they banished out of the Church all pure worship of God Celius secundus Cario de amplitudine regni Dei lib. 1. pag. 33 True Christ taken out of the world And so by litle and litle true Christ was taken out of the world and Antichrist put in his steed And Hospin part 1. Histor lib. 4. pag. 291. writeth that after 800. yeares after Christ the light of the holesome and true doctrine began to be darkned till it was vtterly put out The light cleane put out Thus forraine Protestants both Lutherans and Sacramentaries 3. Amongst English Protestants thus writeth M. Bale Cent. 4. c. 6 Holesome truth perished from the earth Cent. 1. pag. 69 From this tyme anno 607 purity of heauenly doctrine vanished out of the Church The truth perished froÌ„ earth In his Apology against Priesthood and vowes fol. 3 Two things haue cheifly byn the cause of the vtter decay and full destruction of Christian religion c. Vanished out of the Church M. Powell in â—tinerarium Cambrâ—ae lib. 2 cap. 7. sayth that about the yeare 1189 There was the cheife raigne of darknesse in so much that not only preaching of the true word but also the true religion was banished and scarce the name of Christianity remayned Vtter decay full destructioÌ„ of religioÌ„ M. Fox in the Protestation before his Acts affirmeth that about the yeare 1215. and 1080 Christian sayth was extinguished And pag. 840. that Christian Religion was wholy changed into Idolatry D. Fulke ad Cauillat Sâ—apletoni Scarse name of Christianity remayned Scarce could he fiue hundred yeares after banish the true doctrine of saluation out of the Churches of Europe And finally the Apology of the English Church part 5. cap. 13. diuis 1. sayth that Papists haue broken in peeces all the pipes and conduicts haue stopped vp all the springs and choaked the fountaine of liuing waters and by damning vp all the fountains of Gods word haue brought the people into a pittifull thirst Item Not a sparck of diuine light found VVith great distresse went they scattering about seeking some sparck of heauenly light to refresh their consciences withall but that light was already throughly quenched out so that they could find none This was a rusull state this was a lamentable forme of Gods Church It was a misery to liue therein without the Ghospell ProtestaÌ„ts light thoroughly quenched out without light without all comfort Thus write these learned Protestants both English and strangers of the destruction of their doctrine their fayth their religion and Ghospell before Luther arose which do so plainly testify the substantiall destruction therof as I may well vse S. Augustins words in the like occasion If I should speake thus they would resist and cry Lib. 1. de pec mer. c. 9. that I speake not truly thought not truly For in these words if they were spoken by others they would imagin no other meaning then that which in the foresayd Protestants they will not vnderstand 4. ProtestaÌ„ts confesse their lundam art perished Neither write they otherwise of the destruction of their principall and most fundamentall article of Iustification by only fayth For thus the Confession of Anspurg cap. 20 VVhen the doctrine of fayth which ought to be principall in the Church lay so long vnknowne Sole faith vnknown as all must needs confesse that there was a most profound silence of the iustice of fayth that in sermons only the iustice of works was spoken of in Churches c. And tit de bonis operibus pag. 25 Horribly ouerwhelmed In tymes past certaine absurd opinions horribly ouerwhelmed this doctrine in which the vnlearned faigned that men did satisfy the law of God In the meane tyme there was great silence how Christ is to be apprehended by fayth And pag. 27 The was no word of fayth which is necessary for remission of sinnes And pag. 19 In tymes past there was great silence in Churches of the exercises of sayth And Praefat. Apol. Confess August in Melancthon tom 3. fol. 27 All Churches Monasteries schooles briefly all bookes of late diuines No man taught c All Prot. coÌ„fort vnknown were before mute of the iustice of fayth No man taught sinnes to be forgiuen by fayth in Christ Sacraments were impiously profaned after that opinion that they iustify by the work wrought was receiued And this opinion did wholy oppresse the doctrine of saith Praefat. Conf. Saxoniae All this comfort which is necessary to euery one how a man conuerted to God is iustified was vnknown The Protestant Princes and Cities in Sleidan lib. 21. fol. 240 The contention is about the doctrine of sayth and of the true knowledge of God which is the cheifest head of Christian life and of pure religion Vtterly extinct And it cannot say they be denyed that this doctrine was vtterly extinct and
worship God And M. Iewel in Defe Apol. part 4. c. 4. diuis 2. Elias thought all the godly in Israel had byn slaine and not one left aliue D. Fulke ad Cauillat Stapletoni It sell to Elias that he seemed to be left alone of all the number of the Godly which sincerely worshipped God M. Hooker in his 3. booke of Eccles policy pag. 126 He tooke it as though there had not byn remayning in the world any besides himselfe that caryed a true and an vpright hart towards God with care to serue him according vnto his holy will D. Sutclife lib. 1. de Eccl. cap. 6. pag. 95 The church in Elias his dayes did seeme to him so destroyed that he thought he had byn left alone D. Whitaker Cont. 2 quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 476 Elias thought the whole Church of the saythfull was perished in his tyme. Elias belieued that none remayned besides himselfe Elias thought that he alone was left a true worshipper of God And pag. 475 Elias sayd that he was alone left the true seruant of God I dispute not now how falsly they impose vpon Elias this blasphemous opinion of the church perishing or destruction only I note how vnder the name and authority of that great Prophet they teach that the church may perish which sometymes they are ashamed to auouch in their owne names 9. Moreouer they teach that the Church may consist of one or two which is in effect and in other words to say that it may perish Luther lib. de notis Eccles tom 7. fol. 148 ProtestaÌ„ts Chuâ—câ— may 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 child This is called the Christian society it is necessary that there be alwayes such men in the world albeit of them there be only two or three or children alone Aretius in locis part 3. fol. 50 Any number though neuer so small sufficeth to the Church for externâ—ll matters Iuniuâ— cont 4. lib. 3. cap. 16 Of any number Two men ordered towards God are a Church D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 474 It is false which he sayth that two men cannot make a Church And pag. seq he graunteth that Protestants teach that ech man is a seuerall Church And pag. 478 Of two only If in the most forlorne tymes of the Church there be one or another faythfull seruant of God it is inough If one or two Which also Bucanus saith loc 41. de Eccles sect 14. Nay Luther in cap. 7. Gen. tom 7. fol. 107. sayth If I were the only man in the whole world who did hold the word I alone should be the church Of one alone And Riuet in Epitom Cont. tract 1. sect 27. The Church subsisteth in euery one of her members Finally they think ProtestaÌ„ts belieue not the coÌ„tinuaÌ„ce of their Church that their Church and religion shall not alwayes endure For thus Luther writeth in cap. 2. Mathaeâ— tom 4. fol. 438 VVe cannot comfort our selues so as the Papists do with that consolation that the Church shall not perish For whersoeuer we cast our eyes we are diuersly terrified the fury of Satan and the world is extreme wherewith he endeauoureth to extinguish this doctrine But the Popes boast and that with full mouth that the Church shall not perish In cap. 55. Isaiae fol. 226 There is danger least it shortly fall out that the word be againe taken from vs. Tom. 3. in psalm grad fol. 489. alias 508 The Pope obstinatly keepeth those promises with which Christ did comfort his followers that he would be with them to the end of the world That S. Peters boat althought it be in danger shall neuer be drowned But the true ProtestaÌ„t Church to which alone that was sayd doth not so belieue that nor so cheare vp her selfe with the trust of those promises Kemnice in locis part 1. tit de Iustificat pag. 216 I often tremble that Luther oftentymes I know not with what abode repeateth those words This doctrine after my death shall be darkened againe The Confession of Mansfeld It is euident what shall follow at length to wit a horrible destruction of pure doctrine which suddenly we shall leese beyond all expectation The Magdeburgians Praefat. Cent. 5 The reuealed truth is already periâ—hed and that vpon the suddaine what remayneth but vtter abolition of true religion Caluin in his Catechism I am so doubtfull touching posterity that I scarce dare thinke thereof Author Praefat. in Syntag. Confess VVe haue cause to feare that matters will returne to the darkenesse of former tymes And Paraeus in Miscellanca Vrsini pag. 39. sayth that all good and wise men do easily perceiue that there hangeth ouer their heads some dreadfull night and darcknesse M. Iewell in his sermon in cap. 1. Aggaei This Ghospell which ye now loath shall be taken from you D. Whitaker cont 2 quest 5. cap. 4. pag. 503 That which he sayth that neither Lutherans nor Zuinglians nor Caluinists shall last euer is vncertaine And lastly D. Morton part 1. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 31. sayth Protestants say not that their Church cannot faile Thus ye see that Protestants cannot comfort themselues that their Church shall not perish that they do not belieue that they shall not be drowned that a horrible destruction and vtter abolition of their doctrine is to follow that they dare scarce thinke of posterity that it is vncertaine whether they are to last for euer and that they belieue not that their Church cannot faile Consider now diligently good reader First how not few but very many Protestant writers haue confessed that their Church and religion was then perished when Luther began Secondly Note that not obscure writers but the most famous amongst them Thirdly that they haue not seldome confessed it but oftentymes Fourthly that not in obscure or generall termes only but in plaine and most particuler words Lastly that not only in their contentious writings against their aduersaries or in their sermons to the people in which speaches some vse to speake hyperbolicaly but also in their most sober and temperate writings as in those wherin they deliuer their doctrine or relate histories in their commentaries vpon the scripture in their Confessions of fayth and in their speaches vnto God himself Be it so that one or two or some few in heat of contention should haue hyperbolically sayd that their church and religion was perished without meaning so But that so many and so great masters so often and in so many kinds of writings so plainly and so particulerly should say that their Church and religion was perished and yet not meane so cannot be sayd vnlesse we will graunt that so many so great Maisters of Protestants in so great a matter haue deceiued their Readers and haue written one thinge and meant another and that their meaning is not to be gathered out of their owne most frequent and most plaine words vttered in all kinds of writings but out of our fancie and pleasure Scorp c.
12. VVhat as Tertullian sayth meane they otherwise then they write masters of deceit not of truth 10. If any demaund how it came to passe that Protestants should so often and so plainly say that their Church and religion was perished before Luther appeared Wherfor Protestāts say their Church was perished I answeare that there were many causes thereof First because it was so euident that their Church and religion was not at all when Luther began that as themselues haue confessed they cannot deny it It cannot be denyed If any deny it he may be conuinced All men must confesse it The matter it selfe proclaimeth and proueth it Num. 1.4.5.7 And finally that it is manifest both to learned and vnlearned Secondly they sayd so for to moue men to hate the Pope and Papists whome they affirmed to haue destroyed the fayth and Church Thirdly for to purchase the loue of the people as who had restored to them againe the Church and Religion Fourthly they sayd so for to excuse their preaching and playing the Pastours without ordinary calling as if forsooth when they began there had byn no church which could giue them cōmission Finally as phrantike men so Protestants sometymes are in good fittes in which they see and confesse the truth But at other tymes when Catholiks out of this perishing and destruction of their Church and religion do inferre that it is not the Church or religion of Christ Matth. 16. against which as he hath promised the gats of hell shall not preuaile but some other Church religion either first began by Luther or else restored and renowed by him after that it was substantially perished and destroyed then they mollify and glose their former sayings deuise strange violent senses of their words and euery way seeke out shiftes and sleights whereby they may auoyd the force of their owne testimonies which we shall rehearse and refute in the next chapter The Protestants shiftes for to delude their foresayd Confessions touching the substantiall decay of their Church and Religion refuted CHAP. II. 1. ALBEIT the foresayd confessions of the Protestants touching the substantiall decay of their Church and religion before Luther arose be so plaine and euident as we may well say with Tertullian VVho will not acknowledge these rather then expound thē De Resur c. 21. Yet because the obstinacy of heretiks is so great as it may be sooner ouercome then persuaded is wont to seek out all shifts to auoyd the force euen of their owne words I will heare set downe their shifts and confute them 2. Their first shift is Their first shift that the forenamed Protestants by the words of fayth religion and the like when they say that they perished did not meane the inward fayth of the heart as if no man in his heart had held the Protestant fayth or religion but only the outward profession thereof and so meane only that the outward profession of Protestancy was perished or that none professed it I graunt indeed that somtyme they speake of outward profession of faith but this commeth all to one purpose That they say inward faith perished Because the profession of faith can no more perish in the church then the fayth it selfe as hereafter we shall proue by the confessions of Protestants themselues But that they speake not also of the inward fayth or of fayth it selfe is most false First because they say so without all proofe neither can they proue it otherwise then because perhaps the same Protestants haue other where sayd the contrary which kind of proofe we hereafter shew to be nothing worth Lib. 2. c. vl Againe it is credible vnlesse one will belieue what he list that by so many words of light clarity religion worship of God truth of God Ca. 1. n. 2. 3. sayth true knowledge knowledge of fayth Christian fayth knowledge of Christ as they haue vsed and we repeated they meant not fayth it selfe but only the outward profession of faith Besides they sayd plainly That none belieued to be iustified without workes That the doctrine of Iustification by sayth was blotted out of the memory of men Cap. 1. nu 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6 that holesome truth perished from earth and that it was taken from men that Christ was buryed and taken out of the world and the Church that all Protestant consolation was vnknowne that without Luther one iot had not byn knowne that the knowledge of Christ the knowledge of sayth fayled and lastly that Christ was not vnderstood but vtterly vnknowne Which words are manifestly spoken meant of true or inward fayth I adde also that it is a rule of ciuil law approued by Luther and Protestants Luther de abrog mis epist ad Amsd. Schusselb tom 4. Catal haeret that who cold speak clearely and yet spake obscurely should haue his words expounded against him Seeing therefore Protestants could haue spoken farre more clearly if they had meant only that outward professiō of faith had perished we may lawfully expound their words against themselues 3. To this shift is another like wherewith they say that the foresayd testimonies of Protestants touching the destruction or decay of their Church are not to be vnderstood of their inuisible Church The secōd shift which they say is the company of only true faythfull and predestinate men but of the decay of their visible Church which they say is the company of al those that professe true doctrine and is the Church not in the sight of God but only in the eyes of men I do not deny that sometymes they speake of the visible Church notwithstanding as before I sayd it comes all to one purpose because as shall be proued hereafter there can be no inuisible Church without a visible nor a company of faythfull and predestinate men but they must professe their fayth The Protestāts say the true Church hath perished But most false it is that they speake not also of the true Church which they will haue to be inuisible to any but to God alone For first as before I argued this cannot be proued otherwise then that perhaps the same men haue at other tymes sayd the contrary which will proue that they like lyers haue contradicted themselues not that they haue not sayd this which they haue as clearly sayd as euer they sayd any thing else Besides in saying according to their meaning that the Church hath not perished or cannot perish they do not indeed cōtradict themselues when they say that it hath or can perish For when they say that the Church cannot perish by the name of the Church they vnderstand not the Catholike Church that is the Church spread throughout the world Cap. 1. n. ◠for as we saw they teach that the Church may consist or be reduced to one or two and that Elias thought there was none of the Church but himselfe Whereupon D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. pag.
Catholike or vniuersall church Finally this shall yet more appeare out of the chapter following where we shall see that they teach that the whole world did fall from the fayth 5. Their fourth shift is That they meane of a substantiall perishing that by the words Destruction decaying failing ouerthrowing and such others they meane not a substantiall perishing of the fayth or Church but only an accidentall corruption of becomming worse But this shift also is soone refuted First because Luther sayth of his fayth doctrine or ghospell that it dyed was neglected ouerwhelmed extinct blotted out taken away ouerthrowne lost Cap. 2. n. â—â— abolished forgotten and rooted out And that he might put it out of all doubt that by these words he meant a true and substantiall destruction or perishing he added vnto them most significant aduerbes saying that it was truly ouerwhelmed wholy extinct vtterly extinct Ib. extinct from the bottome plainly extinct plainly taken away simply taken away quite taken away vtterly buryed vtterly lost wholy abolished and blotted out and most plainly rooted out And least any one might also cauill that these words are not meant of a true and substantiall destruction he sayd further that the Pope hath obscured nay extinguished the doctrine of fayth They haue darckned nay wholy ouerwhelmed Christs Ghospell They haue not only obscured but absolutely taken away the ghospell Lib. 1. de peccat mer. c. 4. Surely as S. Augustin sayth such kind of words needs no Expositor but only a reader In like sort other Protestants say of their fayth or ghospell that it was banished cast out extinct ended choaked buryed obscured till it was vtterly extinguished Num. 2.3 that it perished from the earth and vanished out of the Church They add also that it was wholy ouerturned vtterly extinct quite changed into idolatries ouerturned from the root and that there was an vtter abolition an extreme salling away and full destruction of it so that not so much as one litle sparke could be sound but it was quite extinct scarce the name of Christianity was left 6. Besides of their principall and most fundamentall article of Iustification by only fayth they say C. 1. n. 4. 5. 6. that lay long vnknowne that there was profound silence of it that no man taught it that it was neglected lost blotted out extinct and horribly opprest that it was corrupted nay extinct and abolished that no man belieued it that it was vtterly extinct plainly lost quite lost wholy suppressed wholy oppressed wholy trampled wholy dasht out vtterly blotted out quite extinct quite taken away quite neglected and blotted out of the memory of men and not only obscured but quite extinguished But if this doctrine were so extinct as no man belieued it and blotted out of mens memory surely not only the Profession of their fayth but also their fayth it selfe was vtterly perished and consequently also their Church whereof this article is the life soule summe definition and all Num. 7. 7. Of the Church also they say that it was banished fayled was oppressed extinct ouerturned fallen wholy fallen that it fell to Antichrist that the old foundation thereof was remoued and a new layd that the order of the Church perished that there was a slaughter of the whole Church that Christs Kingdome was throwne downe razed to the ground that in the temple of God there was nought but pittifull ruines that the Church was from the foundation rooted out and ouerthrowne by the ground and that where it once was there remayned only the name the substance being quite lost Surely either by these manner of speaches is signified a substantiall destruction or that cannot be plainly signifyed by any manner of words Besides the formes of speach do more clearly signify a substantial destruction theÌ„ those which Protestants condemne in some heretiks For Caluin lib. cont Seruetum pag. 657. condemneth Seruet for saying that there had byn a long banishment of the Church from the earth and that she had byn driuen out of the world And yet as we see Danaeus sayth that the Church was banished Powell that all true religion was banished D. Fulke that the true doctrine of saluation was driuen out Anâ— Crispin that all true worship of God was driuen out D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 471. and otherwhere condemneth the Donatists and other Heretikes for saying that the Church perished and yet Bale sayth that holesome truth perished from the earth And Lobechius vnder Elias his name that the Church quite perished Moreouer they say that the Church may be reduced to one or two which is indeed to say that the Church may substantially perish Num. 8. for the Church is defined to be a company or multitude in the English Confession article 19. That the Church cannot consist of one in the French art 27. in the Suitzers art 17. and in the Flemish art 27. But one or two are not a company Whereupon Danaeus lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 16. sayth It is written of Vlpiaâ— the Lawyer in the ciuill law that at least three persons are required to make a Colledge and if to a Colledge much more to the Church And Lubbert lib. 2. Replicat cap. 3. sayth plainly that one man makes not a Church And Polanus in Syntag. lib. 7. cap. 1 One man though neuer so holy cannot be a church Beurlin also in Refut Soti Neither do we call the solitude of one man which worshippeth God the Church And D. Whitaker lib. 1 de Scriptura cap. 11. Sect. 4. How can the Church be in one seeing the very name of the Church doth signify a company or multitude If therefore there be but one there is no Church For the Church cannot be imagined to be but in many Iuel DefeÌ„s Ap. part x. c. 1. Fulk de Succes p. 89. Beza in Catech. c 5. Brent in Prolog q. 4. And much lesse can one or two be the Catholike Church that is as the Protestants themselues expound it the Church spred throughout the whole world because one or two cannot be spred throughout the world Whereupon the Scots in their Confession cap. 18. say that two or three make not the vniuersall Church And Zuinglius lib. de vera falsa relig tom 2. fol. 192 VVho sayes that the Church signifieth some few erreth like to him who sayth that people signifieth the King Surely it should be a notable flock which consisted of one or two sheep a worthy Kingdome which had but one or two subiects and a strange Catholike or vniuersall Church which contayned but one or two faythfull persons What can the gates of hell preuaile so farre against the Church as they can reduce her to one or two Christians What other thing is this then to say that the Church can perish For seing the Church cannot be imagined but in company or multitude who sayth â—hat the Church can be brought to one or two doth indeed
say the Church can be destroyed 8. If any reply that S. Augustin vpon the 128. psalme sayth that the Church was once in Abel alone and Tertullian lib. de poenit cap. 10. the Church is in one or two I answere that S. Augustin there by the Church vnderstandeth those only whome the scripture by name hath canonized as it hath Abel for otherwise it is manifest that in Abels tyme there were others that were of the Church besides himselfe to wit Adam and Eue. And Tertullian by the Church vnderstandeth not the Catholike or vniuersall Church as we do but any number of Christians such as were those domesticall Churches which S. Paul sometymes saluted 9. The last refuge may be that what Protestants haue sayd of the destruction of the Church and fayth they meant not of their owne Church and fayth but of some others But this is a fond shift For first as I haue shewed they meane the destruction of the true Church and fayth Eyther therefore their Church and fayth is not the true but false or else they meane of their owne For the true Church and fayth is but one as the Apostle sayth Ephes 4 One God one fayth And the Nycen Creed I belieue one church S. Cyprian lib. de vnit One God one Christ one Church and one sayth S. Hilary ad Constant VVhatsoeuer is besides one fayth is not fayth but treachery And S. Leo serm 4. de Natiuit Vnlesse it be one it is no fayth Nay Luther lib. cont Papaâ—um tom 7. fol. 461 Christ knoweth not two kinds of vnlike Churches but one only Church Caluin 4. Inst cap. 1. § 2 VVe cannot find two or three churches vnlesse Christ be pluckt in peeces And in his Catechisme As there is one head of the faythfull so they must all be vnited in one body that there be not many Churches but one only And hereupon inferreth Sadeel in Refutat Thes Posnan art 61. that what is sayd of the true Church is sayd of theirs Seeing sayth he the true Church is one and not many as often as the truth of doctrine shineth openly so often we say the true Church and therfore our Church was visible Secondly because as we haue seene they speake of the destruction of their most principall article of iustificatioÌ„ by only faith which they affirme to be the life soule and summe of their Church Thirdly because they estsoones speake of the destruction of the Ghospell but by the name of the Ghospell they meane their owne doctrine as by the name of Gospellers they vnderstand themselues as hereafter shall appeare Finally because they professe that by the name of a Protestant Lutheran or Caluinist they vnderstand a true Christian Sadeel lib. de peccat remiss cap. 1 Ours that is the true Christian Catholikes opinion D. Fulke lib. de Succest pag. 186 I will neuer deny that Iewell was a noble Protestant that is a Christian And ad Cauillat Staplet The community of Christians whome ye call Protestants Hutten in Expostul cum Erasmo Against Lutherans that is maintayners of the truth Schusselburg tom 7. Catal. haeret Pap. 73 A Lutheran or true Christian is c. And lib. 2. Theol. Caluin fol. 131 Lutherans that is true seruants of Christ Beza cont Illyricum pag. 168 VVe perceiue no difference betweene Sacramentaries and Christians Hospinian part 2. Histor fol. 384 The Sacramentaries that is the orthodoxall And Danaeus cont Bellarm. pag. 311 The Caluinists that is Christians pag. 169 A Caluinist that is a godly man 10. Wherefore out of all whâ—ch hath byn sayd in this and the former Chapter I thus make my first demonstration to proue that Luther was the Author and first beginner of the Protestant Church and religion If the Protestant Church were not at all when Luther began he was the author thereof But it was not at all Therefore he was the author of it The Maior or first proposition is euident For if it were not at all when Luther began he was the beginner of it The minor is manifest by the foresayd CoÌ„fessions of Protestants wherein they plainly say that it was substantially perished That euery man followed a Church and religion different from the Protestant before Luther arose CHAP. III. 1. THE second demonstration wherewith we will proue Luther to haue byn haue byn the Author of the Protestant Church and religion we will take from the Protestants confessions that wheÌ„ Luther first began all the world and euery man imbraced a different religion Luther in the Preface of his first come Here see euen by my case The whole world how hard it is to yet out of errours which are confirmed by the example of the whole world and by long custome as it were changed into nature And to 2. this is written in his Epitaph O Christ Long custome he shewed thâ—e when all the world was ouerwhelmed with darkenesse And lib. 1. de captiuit Babylon fol. 72. being to write against Masse he sayth Neither let it moue thee that the whole world hath the contrary opinion and custome And fol. 68 There is almost this day nothing more receiued or more seâ—led in the Church then that Masse is a sacrifice Againâ— So many ages I set vpon a thing which being approued by the custome of so many ages and consent of all is so ingrafted as it is needfull to change almost the whole face of the Church Consent of all And lib. de â—â—râ—g Miss fol. 244 How often did my trembling hart quake and reprehending me obiected that their strongest and only argument Art thou only wise what did all erre Only Luther wise were so many ages ignorant Behold how Luthers heart or conscience did tell him that he alone knew Protestancy and that for many ages all were ignorant of it And in hiâ— table talkes fol. 10 These cogitations were very troublesome to me Thou only hast the pure word of God all others want it And lib. cit de Missa â—ol 247 The common people without doubt are most fully persuaded that all men are holpen by Masses for it seemeth incredible that all the world should be so forsaken of God And fol. 256 It seemes incredible to them that Luther alone should be wise Contra Cochlaeum fol. 408 The Sophisters and Monks haue seduced the whole world to trust in works The whole world vnder the Pope Tom. 3. in psal 82. fol. 481 In tymes past the whole world was vnder the Popes Dominion Tom. 5. â—n 4. Galat. fol. 388 In former ages Paul was vnknown to the whole world Tom. 6. in cap. 11. Genes fol. 130 The wicked impostour so he termeth the Pope hath deceiued all the word in c. 37. fol. 506 The whole world was horribly brought into madnes and solly by Papists In cap. 19 fol. 238 In the former age all things lay in darknesse Tom. 7. epist ad D. Sabaudiae fol. 483 VVe confesse that the world was by the Pope most miserably seduced
ensnared in those traditions of men but rather snares of the deuill whiles all were persuaded that in keeping them they obtayned saluation in omitting them sell into damnation And serm de Simulacris fol. 277 All the world was filled with the other abuse of images For who would haue put images in Churches if thereby he had not thought that he did seruice to God Thus much Luther 2. And in like manner speake the Lutherans The Confession of Auspurg cap. 20 No man admonished of the difference betwixt humane traditions and Gods law no man taught how good works did please The Magdeburgians Praefat. Centur. 5 All alike were drowned in the impieties and Aegiptian darknesse of Antichrist All alike And Praefat. Centur. 8 Antichrist had brought vnder his yok all Europe that we may say they speake nothing of other parts of the earth All Europe Melancthon tom 4. Prefat in Act. Ratisbon pag. 730 Only Luther durst touch the errours of the Popes schooles Our Churches follow him rather then the consent of so many ages Popes and schooles Lobechius disput 29 The Roman tyranny hath ouerwhelmed the Church and held the Christian world in thraldome Huber in Antibellarm lib. 4. The Christian world cap. 3. Our Church hath a new forme not vsed at that tyme when the Pope possessed all Morgestern tract de Eccles pag. 145 The whole Christian world knoweth that before Luther all churches were ouerwhelmed with more then Cymmerian darknesse All churches Hitherto the Lutherans 3. Amongst the Sacramentaries Caluin 2. Institur cap. 2. § 4 All All eueÌ„ to the common people euen to the common people are embâ—ed with this principle that man hath free will Lib. 4. cap. 18. § 18 The Abomination of Masse profered in a golden cuppe hath made so drunke all Kings and people of the earth from the highest to the lowest that they put the whole hope of their saluation in it alone Al people on earth from the highest to the lowest Which very words are repeated by Lobechius disput 26. and by Hospin epist dedicat 1 part Histor and part 2. fol. 25. And the sayd Caluin lib. 4. cit cap. 10. § 5 The whole world was couered with a most thick mist of ignorance And lib. de Coen pag. 10 VVith how thick a mist of darknes was the world beseiged Againe VVhen Luther began to teach he so handled the matter of the supper as that what belongeth to the corporall presence he seemed to leaue such as all then receiued And lib. de Necess Reform pag. 46 It is manifest that the whole world was bewitched with these wicked opinions before Luther appeared The whole world And Respons ad Sadolet pag. 130 All things were stuft with pernicious errours There was none which truly esteemed that only sacrifice of Christ none which so much as dreamed of his eternall Priesthood and the intercession which dependeth thereupon none rested in his only iustice No maÌ„ so much as dreamed of c. But now whereas all did put their trust in good works when they went about by good words to purchase thy God he speaketh to grace to obtaine iustice to purge their sinnes to satisfy thee All which sayth he do dash out and annihilate the vertue of the crosse of Christ Respons ad Veâ—â—pel pag. 354 Seeing the whole VVâ—sterne hurch as he calles it defendeth obstinatly all the inipiety which we iustly detest c. All the weâ—terne Church And epist 141 VVe are compâ—â—en to make a separation from the whole world Bucer lib. â—0 vâ—â—â—â—â—â—su Ministerij pag. 602 It is plaine that for many ages past God reuealed to no nation the doctrine of our saluation and all things belonging to his Kingdome so farre as he hâ—â—â— dâ—â— in our age Lâ—b de Concord pag. 660 This error of the reall presence preuailed with all Nations of the whole world D. 〈◊〉 â—it de Antichristo cap. 26 At length antichrist and his doctrine ouercame all men holding their peace shamefully and basely submitting themselues vnto him vntill Iohn Vâ—iâ—lâ—s arose who stoutly opposed himselfe against him Sâ—eidan epâ—â—t â—ed 〈◊〉 Hâ—â—tor The beginning of Protestancy was slender and almost contemptible One only man and one only bare the haâ—â—â— and brunt of the whole world Bibliander Orat. ad Pâ—â—â— oâ—eâ— Germ VVe put it as a thing knowne by it selfe most cleare and out of all doubt Al people from the first to the last that after Gregory the great his death the Pope of Rome was Antichrist who with his abom nations blâ—sphemies and idolatries did so besot all Kings and people from the first to the last that they became more blockish then â—rute beasts Zâ—â—inglius lib. de vera falsa relig cap. de Eâ—char The whole body of Christendome I think no man will deny this that we all ran to masse as to a sacred refuge Daniel Camier epist 49 Errour possessed noâ— one or two small parcels but Apostasy turned the very whole body away from Christ Hospin Praefat. part 2. Histoâ— None stroue against From Gregories tyme no man stroue against superstition but all added and put to what strength each one could And ep dedicat part â— This most grosse and more then Cymmerian darknesse endured in the whole Christian world these 6. hundred years last past Viretus in Hospin part 2. fol. 224 The whole Christian Nation The whole Christian Nation vtterly bewitched as it were with sorceries and alienated from God and true religion c. Praefat. Syntag. Confess VVhen all was couered with most grosse darknesse of ignorance and idolatry Gualter Praefat. Comment Epist ad Rom In the point of the reall presence the whole Christian world was greatly deceiued And Praefat. in â—om 2. Zuinglij The whole world was before bewitched with trust in outward signes Iezler de bello Euchar. fol. 24 The former age was euery where drowned in most thick darknesse which no man in his witts can deny Brocard in c. 2. Apocal. fol. 41 Al euery meÌ„ber of Christ VVhen the preaching of the ghospell was allowed in Luther and his first onset against the Papacy the knowledge of Christ was sound missing in all and euery of his members 4. Amongst our English Protestants thus speaketh the Author of the Apology of the English Church pag. 38 VVe are indeed departed from him who we saw had blinded the world for many ages His Maiesty in his Mâ—nitory epistle pag. 37 In those ages a thicker and more blind ignorance of truth possessed the world Pag. 100 How many ages was the Christian people held in so great blindnes and ignorance of holesome doctrine And pag. 160 A darck night of Popish doctrine possessed the world D. Whâ—taker Conâ— 2. eâ— 3. pag. 467 The plague of Popery at last went through the whole world Pag. 468 That Antichristians plague raged through all parts of the world and through all visible Churches And Cont. 4. quaest
they should be vnderstood rather according to Saint Hieromes meaning then according to their owne most proper most plaine and most frequent words especially when as Luther sayth tom 1. fol. 414 Many thinges are borne withall in the Fathers who were knowne to be orthodoxe which we may not imitate 8. Wherefore out of all which hath byn rehearsed in this chapter I thus frame my second demonstration If so be that before Luther arose there were not one only Protestant in the whole world but that all euery man followed a different Religion Luther was the Author and beginner of the Protestant Church and Religion But that is true as manifestly appeareth by the manyfold and open confessions of Luther and many and most famous Protestants Therefore c. That Protestants confesse their Church and religion to haue byn altogeather inuisible before Luther appeared CHAP. IV. 1. THE fourth demonstration wherewith we will proue Luther to haue byn the Author of the Protestant church and religion we will draw out of that which they confesse of the inuisibility thereof before Luther brake out And by the way I must aduertise the Reader of two things The one is that by the name of the Church is not to be vnderstood only the men who are of the Church but their society in religioÌ„ wherby they make a church wherefore those Protestants speake not to the purpose who to excuse the absurdity of their doctrine touching the inuisibility of the Church say they meane not that the men whereof it consisted were inuisible men for it sufficeth that they confesse that they were inuisible worshippers of God according to the Protestant manner or that their society in this kind of worship of God was inuisible Note The other point is that in these kind of questions VVhether before Luther the Protestant Church were VVhether it were visible Colloq Batisban Ses 1.6 10.17 Iuel Def. Apol. par 5. c. 15. d. 1. VVhither it had Pastors and the like the Catholiks hold the negatiue part and Protestants the affirmatiue and that it belongeth to the affirmer to proue what he affirmeth wherein if he faile he is ouercome and it is not needfull for the denyer to proue his denyall but is sufficient reasonably to answere the proofes of the affirmer which if he performe he hath wonne the cause As if one like Anaxagoras would say that there were many worlds besides this or that such and such things haue byn done in tymes past he were bound to proue what he sayth he that should deny such matters were not bound to proue his denyall but only reasonably to answere his aduersaries arguments And the reason is manifest because for to affirme or belieue any thinge we must haue reason or proofe thereof bur for the not belieuing of it we need no other reason then to shew that there is no sufficient reason why it should be belieued Hereupon Luther in his booke against Henry 8. King of England tom 2. fol. 340 sayd He must be taught the principles of disputation who hauing to proue his affirmation vrgeth his aduersary to proue his denyall And Vorstins in his Antibellarm pag. 464 It is inough for the denyer probably to deny Wherefore in these kind of questions Protestants ought to be vrged to performe their part that is to proue what they affirme to wit that before Luthers tyme their Church was had Pastors and the like which if they cannot do they must needs confesse that in this debate they haue lost their cause And they ought not to presse vs to proue that before Luther their Church was not had not Pastors c. Because as I sayd herein we are only the defenders and denyers Tom. 1. fo 389. 473. and therefore it sufficeth for vs to shew that no reasons which the Protestants alledge conuince a reasonable man to belieue that there was any such Church before Luther appeared which if we do we haue wonne the cause That the ProtestaÌ„ts Church was inuisible to strangers Neuerthelesse that I may vse Luthers words in the booke before cited Albeit it belong not to vs to proue the negatiue let vs do it 2. First therefore touching the inuisibility of the Protestant Church before Luthers tyme Protestants confesse that it was inuisible to Papists to enemies to the world and to all that were not of it For thus sayth Sadcel in his Refutation of the 61. article pag. 538 VVe deny not that the Godly men lurcked vnder Popish darknesse and we giue God thanks that such persons families Inuisible to Papists and companies were for a tyme inuisible and vnknowne to the Pope and all his Catchpoles seing they were for a long tyme like sparckles couered with much ashes The same he sayth in his answere to Arthur cap. 8. and to the Sophismes of Turrian loco 10. and to the Repetition of them pag. 706. Danaeus in his booke of Antichrist cap. 38. writeth That there were very few Protestants and those dwelling in wildernesses and also vnknowne to others vnknown to others Iunius in his 4. booke of the Church cap. 5. speaketh thus of Protestants before Luther They professed their sayth amongst themselues but not before dogges wild beasts who would runne vpon them D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quaest 2. cap. 2. pag. 458. VVas it the Protestant Church manifest to all No but to those only who had eyes And pag. 468 There was no true Church on earth Knowne only to ProtestaÌ„ts which appeared to all And quest 6. cap. 2. pag 359 VVe care not for their obiecting solitude vnto vs. For we are not ashamed to haue recalled our Church out of this kind of solitude D. Fulke to the Cauillations of Stapleton The whole forme of the Church was for some ages vnknowne to the vngratefull world And in his booke of succession pag. 118 They confessed Christ but not alwayes before heretiks but before themâ—elues and the Church And in his notes vpon the 11. cap. of the Acts If by visible you vnderstand that which is seene and knowne to the whole world it is not true that the Church was alwayes visible D. Morton in the 1. part of his Apology booke 1. cap. 16. sayth They professed secretly not publikely D. White in his way to the Church pag. 95 That they professed among themselues Osiander in his Manuel pag. 59 In the visible Church of Rome there was the inuisible company of belieuers hidden to the eye of the world Caelius secundus Curio in his booke of the lardgnes of the Kingdome of God pag. 212 It came to passe that for many yeares the Church lay hid and that the Cittizen of this Kingdome could scarce or not at all be discerned from others And the Scots in their generall confession VVe say that this is the only true Christian sayth which is now reuealed to the world Thus they acknowledg that before Luthers tym Protestants were vnknown to the Pope and his officers to their
enemies to the world to all others besides themselues could not be discerned from others lurcked in desertes in darknesses like sparkles vnder much ashes professed not their fayth before the world or their aduersaries but at most before themselues and were known only to those that had eyes that is to themselues 3. The same also they meane They teach that the church may be inuisible to the world when they teach that the church of God may be inuisible to the world and all that are out of it Iunius in his 2. book of the church cap. 13 VVe conclude that the outward forme and visible shape of the Church may so in common vanish that it cannot be pointed at or perceiued of the world And againe The Church is oftentymes couered and inuisible to the world Often inuisible to the world And cap. 16 The visible fashion of the Church may be hid and faile from the vngratefull world And in his Theologicall Theses cap. 43 Sometymes the church appeareth to the faithfull alone sometymes it is knowne to some godly persons not to euery one Besnage in his booke of the state of the visible and inuisible Church cap. 4 The Church is not alwayes knowne to the world Sonis in his answere to Spondé cap. 2. pag. 32 God sometymes taketh away the face of the Church from men Lubbertus in his 3. booke of the Church cap. 4 VVe affirme that the Church may be driuen to those straights that it may lye hid from the world and persecutors And cap. 6 VVe deny that she is alwayes visible to the world which he repeateth againe cap. 7. Riuet in his Epirome of Controuersies treatise 1. sect 37 It happeneth sometymes that the Church hath byn inuisible or rather hidden sometymes from the eyes of persecutors sometymes from the eyes of the faythfull themselues to wit of some and the most of them D. Whitaker Controuers 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 474 VVe say that the Church may be conserued in so few that it appeare not to the world And quaest 5. cap. 6. pag. 508 It is most false that the Church shall alwayes be knowne and manifest to the world D. Fulke to Stapletons Cauillat Bullinger Alphonse Chytreus Marlorate and all the rest do acknowledge that the Church by the defence of Christ shal be protected in the desert that is in places remote from the sight and accesse of the wicked Againe The Church is not alwayes apparent to the multitude of the wicked And in his booke of Succession pag. 19 It is not doubted whether the Ecclesiasticall succession of persons and places ought sometymes to be visible to the world but whether at all tymes And pag. 21 Sometyms the Church is vnknowne to the world Pag. 42 God would sometymes prouide for the Church in this sort in striking her enemies with blindnes that they could not find her And pag. 129. The externall policy of the Church is vnknowne to the world that is to the enemies of the Church And pag. 366 I affirme that the Church is sometymes vnknowne to the world D. White in his way to the Church pag 86 The question is only of the outward state of the Church whether it be alway visible to the world or not that in euery age those congregations may be discerned and pointed to which are the true Church For we say not Pag. 87 This number may be very small and their profession so secret amongst themselues that the world and such as loue not the truth shall not see them they remayning so hidden as if they were not at all And pag. 97. The Church may be hid or become inuisible sometyme so that the world cannot see it D. Morton in the 1. part of his Apology lib. 1. cap. 16 ProtestaÌ„ts proper defence Protestants say the Church is not alwayes knowne to all the faythfull nor to her enemies And this he termeth the proper defence of Protestants And cap. 13 VVhen Protestant say the Church is sometymes ecclipsed like the moone they meane that she is brought sometymes to so sew that it is not seene but of those which are in her but not openly knowne by her visibility rites or visible Succession or to all the faythfull D. Willet in his Synopsis Cont. 2 quest 1. pag. 67 A number of faythfull people hath byn alwayes in the world but not alwayes visible to the world Againe If by visible they vnderstand that which is actually visible we say it is not so alwayes visible to the world Thus we see that for to maintaine the inuisibility of their Church they teach that the visible forme of the Church of God may vanish mayly hid may faile from the world is often taken away from men by God is vnknowne to the world That the Church sometymes is vnknowne or appeares not visible to the world sometyme knowne only to the faythfull yet not to all them neither but to some and the fewer of them and that neither by any visible rites nor by visible succession and that this kind of doctrine they terme the proper defence of Protestants to wit for to defend the inuisibility of their Church before Luther Which kind of defence hath neither truth nor probability and though it had yet would it not suffice to defend the inuisibility of their Church before Luthers tyme when it was inuisible not only to the world to enemies to straungers to some or most of the faythfull but to all and euery one as shall manifestly appeare hereafter 4. If any say that it is no meruayle if Protestants teach that their Church was inuisible to the world because the true Church cannot be seene but by fayth I answeare first that this supposeth their Church to be the true Church which ought not to be supposed but proued Secondly that they teach that the Church may be vnknowne not only to the world but also to some or most of the faythfull Lastly that the true Church may be knowne two wayes one way to be the true Church of God an other to be knowne distinctly from all other Churches The true Church discerned from all other Churches euen by Infidels as Christ was knowne to be the Messias only by his disciples but yet he was knowne distinctly from all other men by the Iewes And the scripture is knowne to be the word of God only by Christiâ—ns but is knowne distinctly from other writings by Infidels And in Christs tyme his company was known to be the true Church of God only by the faythfull but knowne distinctly from all other companies or Churches euen by Infidels And the same we say of his Church from his tyme vnto our dayes that it is and euer was knowne to be the true Church of God only of the faythfull but known and seene distinctly from all other Churches euen by the world Infidels And of his kind of knowledge and visibility wherewith the true Church is knowne and visible not only to the faythfull
but euen to Infidels and of the opposite ignorance or inuisibility we speake in this matter and Protestants also as appeareth by their testimonies already rehearsed shall yet more by those which we shall repeat hereafter That they say their Church was simply inuisible 5. Further more therefore Protestants do not only teach that their Church may and hath byn inuisible respectiuely that is to this or that kind of men as we haue already heard but also they graunt that it may be simply and absolutely inuisible Luther vpon the 90. psalm tom 3. fol. 493 The Church was and abode in Popery but truly so hidden as to one that would iudge by the appearance the seemed to be no where at all Seemed to be no where And vpon the psalm 22. fol. 344 The Church is brought into the dust of death so that no where there appeareth any shew or trace of her And vpon the first chap. of Micheas tom 4. fol. 434 No trace of church appeared In the former ages there was no true forme of religion extant The Magdeburgians in the preface of their 10. Century It is very hard to find where which the Church was in this age No forme extant Likewise in the Preface of the 11. Century Euery where was darknes neither durst the Church mutter any thing Gerlachius in his 22. disput of the Church pag. 927. writeth that before Luther The true Church withdrew it selfe from the eyes sight of men into lurking holes and hid her selfe in darknesse Zuinglius in his supplication to the Bishop of Constance tom 1. fol. 120 The heauenly doctrine lay a long tyme hid Hospinian in the epistle dedicatory of the first part of his History From the yeare 1200. vntill the yeare 1515. the Church lay miserably ouerwhelmed as it were with a most deep and most strong deluge Caluin in the Preface of his Institutions God permitted that in former ages there should be no face of the true Church extant No face of the church extant And addeth of his owne doctrine It lay a long tyme vnknowne and buryed Againe For some ages all things were drowned in deep darknes And vpon the 23. chapter of the Acts vers 6. he sayth The Church was hidden from the eyes of men And in his Preface vpon Isaias Touching the oueward shew of the church nothing for many ages appeared but desolate and confused wast on all sides Beza in his book of the notes of the church pag. 99 The Church lurked in the wildernes Pareus in his 4. booke of grace and freewill cap. 6 In Constantines tyme the church began to waâ— sick to death notwithstanding the Catholike Church remayned But where In the desert as in the world withdrawne from the eyes of men Sadeel in his treatise of the vocarion of Ministers pag. 533 After the Church had a long tyme lurked the Lord called her at this tyme into light Could not be discerned Voyen in his Preface of Catalog Doct The true visible Church could not be discerned no tract of Gods grace appeared in his Church The Apology of the English Church part 4. cap. 4. diuis 2. sayth that 40. yeares agoe truth first began to spring vnknowne at that tyme and vnheard of Vnheard of D. Humfrey vnto the 3. reason of F. Campian pag. 286 VVhy the picture of the Church in these later tymes cannot be seene of our aduersaries or drawne of vs c. And pag. 288 If the only names of our Fathers were extant who eyther by teaching Not so much as their names extant or monishing or writing did help the Church of Christ we should see another ranck and progresse of the Church another succession of Bispops another picture of Protestants And pag. 291 And yet they will obiect that our Church was hidden which they no where suffered aliue D. Whitaker Controu 2. quest 3. pag. 479 VVhen they aske of vs where was our Church in tymes past for so many ages we answere that it was in a close wildernesse that is that it was hidden lay secret fled the sight of men And quest 5. c. 3. pag. 499 Luther brought the fayth out of darknesse wherein before it lay drowned And cap. 4. pag. 502 Our Church was then but you will say it was not visible Not visible VVhat then therefore was it not No. For it lay hid in the wildernesse M. Perkins in his exposition of the Creed colum 788 VVe say that many ages past before this our age that vniuersall defection ouerwhelmed almost all the world Not visible and that our Church was not visible at that tyme. M. Base in his 1. Century of the writers of Britanny cap. 4 From Phocas vntill the renewing of the Ghospell the doctrine of Christ lay so long in lurking holes M. Downham in his 2. booke of Antichrist cap. 2 The generall defection of the visible Church began to worke in the Apostles tyme. M. Powell in his 1. book of Antichrist c. 23 Our religion lay long tyme vnknowne and buryed vnknown buried And M. Cox Chancellour of Oxford in King Edward 6. tyme exhorting the vniuersity men to Protestantisme biddeth them pluck out truth lying long tyme lurking in Trophonius denne Thus clearely and thus many wayes they simply and absolutely graunt that their Church was inuisible vnknowne and buryed before Luther arose 6. The same also they intend They teach the Church may be simply inuisible when they say that the Church either was or can be inuisible For they would neuer say so vnlesse they knew that such was the condition of their Church before Luther began Luther vpon the 90. psalm tom 3. fol. 495 Sometymes the Church was most weake and so dispersed as it appeared no where Hutter in his Analysis of the Confession of Auspurg pag. 448 No where appeare It is certaine that it may fall out that the true Church may ly hidden and her visible forme not at all tymes appeare to the eyes Herbrand in his Compend of diuinity place of the Church pag. 502. writeth That the faythfull sometymes appeare not to the eyes euen of the Godly Not to the Godly Kemnitius in his common places tit the epistles of the Apostles pag. 78 Sometymes the true Church another bastard and company preuailing and ouertopping doth so as it werely hid that Elias may say I am leâ—t alone Gerlachius in his 22. dispute of the Church pag. 946 No surely if at some tyme the Church be not seene with corporall eyes therefore she is not Caluin in the Preface of his Institutions Sometyme God taketh away the outward knowledge of his Church from the sight of men Sometyme the Church hath no apparent forme And in his treatise of the true Reformation of the Church pag. 332 The Church sometyme lyeth hid and flieth the sight of men And in his Antidote of the 18. article of the Vniuersity of Paris VVe gather that the Church
is not at all tymes subiect to the eyes of men as the experience of many ages witnesseth Againe Elias thought himselfe only left of the Church falsly indeed but that is a proofe that she may lye so hidden And in his 4. booke of Institutions cap. 1 § 3. he affirmeth that it is not needfull to see or to feele the Church and that she may passe our knowledge Beza in his Confession cap. 5. § 9 Diuers tymes the Church seemeth to haue perished vtterly Iunius in his 3 book of the church cap. 16 The Church shall neuer end but shall lye hidden according to her visible forme Chassanio in his common pâ—aces loc 2. of the Church pag. 148 The Church is not alwayes visible Danaeus in his 3. booke of the Church cap. 2. Bellarmine will haue that only to be the Church which is visible which is most false Cap. 12 God oftentymes will haue some visible Church on earth and often tymes none VVhen there is no visible Church OfteÌ„tyms no visible Church on earth then this precept of adioyning himself to the Church ceaseth And cap. 13 Bellarmine laboureth to proue the true Church of God on earth to be alwayes visible That being most false c. And cap 16 VVe say we affirme we auouch that the Church may so faile on earth not that there is none at all but that there is none in respect of vs that is of men that there be none visible to vs on earth Againe S. Paul inferreth generally that the whole Church may leaue to be visible And lib. 4. cap. 8 The true Church may sometymes faile to be visible Son is in his answere to Sponde cap. 2 pag. 33 The whole Church may haue to be visible God maketh that the Church is not alwayes visible Plessy Mornay in his booke of the Church cap. 1 Oftentymes the good corne is hidden vnder the chaffe without any appearance of the Church Polanus in his Antibellarm Colledge disput 14 The visible Church may faile Bucanus in his common places loc 41. sect 9 It oftentymes happeneth that there is no company of men extant which publikely and visibly worshippeth God purely The visible church may faile And sect 12 There is alwayes on earth some number which worshippeth Christ piously but this number is not alwayes visible Trelcatius in his 2. booke of Theologicall Institutions maketh rhis title of one Chapter That the visible church may fayle against Bellarmine Hyperius in his Methode of diuinity lib. 3. pag. 548 VVhiles Elias wandred here and there there appeared no face of the Church Sadeel in his refutation of the 61 â—rticle pag. 531 They are deceiued who think there is no Catholike Church vnlesse they measure it with their eyes And pag. 535 The true church maybe conserned without any visible state And in his repetition of Sophismes pag. 610 It is plaine Wanteth outward forme that the Church is not so to be tyed to any outward forme whatsoeuer that it ought to be denyed to be a Church as often as that forme shall not be extant And of vocation of Ministers pag. 543 The Church sometyme wanteth the externall forme Againe It is cleare that the Church hath sometymes byn without visible and personall succession Pag. 550 Mens wickednes doth sometymes take from vs the visible face of the Church And againe It is sometymes so darkned that it appeareth not to our eyes The whole visible Church may perish Scharpe of Iustification Cont. 5 The visible Church as such may perish The members of the visible Church may perish yea the whole visible Church as such Bastingius vpon the Catechisme title of the Church pag. 227 VVithout doubt in euery age things haue byn so troubled as like a graine couered with straw there appeared no face of the Church Vorstius in his Antibellarm pag 133 A litle before the calling of Abraham no where appeared any visible Church And pag. 136 Hereupon it followeth that the visible church of Christ not only in a great part The whole visible Church may faile but also taken whole in her vttermost extent may for some tyme faile from the true sayth and be wholy darkned The outward church of Christ may perish And pag. 424 Neither did Christ promise that he would absolutely and perpetually hinder the perishing and corruption of the outward Church The Flemmings Confession article 27 The Church in the eyes of men for sometyme seemeth as extinguished And Napper vpon the 11. chap. of the Apoc. pag. 186 They erre who think that the true Church is alwayes visible And vpon 12. cap. pag. 195 The visible Church wholy imbraced the errors of merits of indulgences c. And Proposit 20. pag. 41 The true Church was inuisible and the true knowledge of God so couered with darknesse that none could visibly enter Thus foraine Protestants Of our couÌ„trymen D. Whitaker Contr. 2. quest 3. cap. 2. pag. 470 Sometymes obscurity most of all helpeth the church For at some tyme she could not be safe vnlesse she lay hid And cap. 3. pag. 474 VVe say that sometyme the Church may auoyd the sight of men hide it selfe in corners Cap. 1. pag. 466 VVe confesse that euer more there is on earth some number of them who piously worship Christ hold the true fayth and religion but we say that this number is not alwayes visible Their Papists opinion is that there is euer more on earth a visible church Not alwayes visible It may fall out that there cannot be fouÌ„d out and knowne any true and certaine visible church And cap. 2. cit pag. 468 Our aduersary would proue that there was alwayes in the world some visible church And pag. 469 Hence inferreth Denis the Carthusian not as our aduersaries do that the visible church can neuer perish The visible church may perish or that there is euer more in the world some visible church but that sayth shall neuer perish wholy but that Christian religion shall still perseuer in some to the end of the world This sayth Whitaker is plainly that which we say and defend Marke how plainly he professeth that they do not teach that the visible Church cannot perish Note or that there is alwayes some visible Church on earth but only that some shall alwayes belieue the Christian religion The same doctrine he teacheth pag. 470. 473. 475. 476. and 479. And q. 6. cap. 2. pag. 559. And in his third booke against Duraeus sect 5. 6. 7. 11. M. Perkins in his problem title of the church The ancients do acknowledge that the church on earth is not alwayes visible D. Willet in his Synopsis Cont. 2. q 1. pag. 67 VVe say the church is not always actually visible to the world nay it may sometyms be so hid and secret that the members know not one another Againe In Elias tyme not visible In the dayes of Elias the church was not visible And quest 2. pag. 74 A visible
church we define to be a congregation of men amongst whome the word is truly preached and the Sacraments administred Such a church hath not alwayes byn neither can we be assured that it shall alwayes be sound vpon the earth There was a tyme when as the visible church failed vpon earth The visible church failed This inuisibility of the Protestant Church which I haue hitherto proued by their manifold Confessions I will also proue by sequels out of other their sayings First therefore D. Morton in his Apology part 1. book 1. cap. 31. disliketh not these words of Bellarmine Protestants when they say the church cannot faile or perish meane the inuisibible church And many of them in expresse words deny that the Promises of perpetuity Protestāts say the promises belong not to the visible Church which in the scripture are made vnto the church Math. 16. and other where be made to the visible church D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 468 It is most false that it is the visible church against which the gates of hell shall not preuaile And Daneus Cont. 4. lib. 3. cap. 13. pag. 717 There Math. 16. is not meant the visible church To whome assenteth D. Willet in his Synopsis cont 2. quest 2. M. Powell of Antichrist lib. 1. cap. 10. Beurlin in his Refutation of Sotus cap. 53. Moulins of the vocation of Ministers lib. 1. c. 4. in his Bucklet part 1. pag. 49. And D. Morton lib. cit cap. 13. addeth that those three places Math. 16. vlt. and psal 47. which promise the perpetuity of the Church Protestāts belieue not the visible church Are euery one of them vnderstood almost by euery Father of the only company of the elect which the Protestants call the inuisible Church Besides they all generally teach that by the Catholike Church which they professe to belieue in the Creed they meane not the visible Church but only the inuisible Luther in his booke of abrogating Masse tom 2. fol. 247 VVho shall shew vs the holy church seeing it is hidden in spirit and is only belieued according as I belieue the holy church Zuinglius in his explication of the 31. article The church which consisteth of those which are knowne to God alone in that which we professe in the articles of our creed Danaeus lib. cit pag. 713 The question is of the true church of God whereof it is sayd in the creed I belieue the holy church Bellarmine vvill haue it to be the visible vve deny it The like he sayth pag. 789. 717. 718. and 725. Vorstius in his Antibellarm pag. 144 VVe professe not in the creed to belieue the visible church but the inuisible D. Whitaker lib. 3. against Duraeus sect vlt You see vvhat Catholike church vve belieue not the visible multitude of Christians but the holy company of the elect The same he sayth Cont. 2. quest 2. cap. 2. Brentius in Prolegominis pag. 2. and others commonly Furthermore they say that the visible Church is not the true Church in the sight of God For Caluin in his 4. book of Institutions cap. 1. § 7. They say the visible Church is not the true Church before God and the rest graunt that both wicked and reprobate Christians may be of the visible Church but deny that they can be of the true Church in the sight of God Now surely if the visible Church be neither the true Church in the sight of God nor she to whome he hath promised perpetuity nor she which Protestants do belieue what reason can they haue to belieue that the visible Church shall alwayes remayne or which is all one that the Church shall be alwayes visible Againe their common doctrine is that preaching of true doctrine is the note of the visible Church for so teacheth the Confession of Auspurg cap. 7. the English Confession artic 19. and all the rest To which his Maiesty in his epist to Cardinall Peron D. Whitaker Contr. 2. q 5. c. 17. D. Morton part 1. Apol. l. 1. c. 6. M. Willet in his Synopsis Cont. 2. quest 3. pag. 102. Sadeel to Turtians Sophismes loc 5. Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 145. and others do adde that it is an essentiall note of the visible Church And it is manifest that they must say so because they vse to define the visible Church to be a company vvherein the pure vvord of God is preached the Sacraments rightly administred For so it is defined of the English Confession and of Sadeel lib. cit of Whitaker quest 5. cit cap. 20. of Melācthon tom 1. in cap. 15. Matth. and of others generally But before Luther there was no preaching of Protestantisme as we shall heare them confesse cap. 7. therefore there was then no visible Protestant Church Finally sometymes they say that not only preaching of the word but that also a lawfull ministery or that not only what true preaching soeuer but also such as is made by a lawfull Minister of the word is of the essence and substance of the visible Church For thus writeth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 5. cap. 19. pag. 550 Stapleton sayth that the preaching of the Ghospell by lavvfull Ministers is the proper note of the church and vve say no othervvise And pag. 551. That he confesseth true preaching by a lavvfull Ministery to be a note of the church is no other thing then that vve say and defend The like hath Sadeel in the place now cited and the Switzers Confession cap. 17. putteth lawfull preaching for the chiefest note of the church Caluin 4. Institut cap. 2. § 1. for a perpetuall note the conclusions defended at Geneua pag. 845. for an essentiall note thereof But before Luther there were no Protestant Ministers at all as we shall hereafter heare the Protestants confesse Therefore no visible Protestant Church 8. By that which hath byn rehearsed it is manifest Summe of the foresayd confessions that very many and very famous Protestants haue often and plainly confessed that when Luther came first as they speake to the Ghospell the Protestant Church and religion was not visible say hid lurked lay in the wildernes in lurking holes indarknesse in Trophonius his denne was buryed was vnknowne vnheard of appeared to none cold not be discerned Her image could not be seene no shew of besides a huge spoile did appeare no face no fashion no trace of her was extant and she was so hid that he who would iudge according to the outward shew would think her to be no where And that this is so manifest as that the experience of many ages beareth witnes thereof With what words I pray you could they say that their Church was altogeather inuisible if they haue not sayd it in these 9. Moreouer it is manifest that for to maintaine their inuisible Church they do teach that the Church may be vnknowne to the godly to those who are of it that it may be not visible not appeare not
no where but in the sight of God Hyperius in his Methode of diuinity lib. 3. pag. 349 VVas not the true Church at that tyme of Elias altogeather inuisible to men and knowne to God alone The Switzers Confession cap. 17 The Church hidden from our eyes and knowne to God only Knowne to God alone doth often fly the iudgement of men Besnage in his booke of the state of the visible and inuisible church cap. 4 The Church is eftsones knowne to God alone Son is in his answere to Sponde cap. 2. pag. 32 VVe say the state of the Church is such as is sometymes known to God alone And D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 478 VVe say that the externall state of the Church doth cease and that the faythfull and godly may be so scattered that they worship God only in heart and mind Worship God in heart only But who seeth not that it implieth manifest contradiction that a Church which is no where but in the sight God which is knowne to God alone which flyeth mans iudgement and which worshippeth God only in heart and mind should be visible or seene of man How long the Protestāts Church was inuisible 13. If any aske them how many ages their Church was thus inuisible Luther vpon the 1. cap. to the Galat. tom 5. fol. 214. sayth that she lay hid aboue 300. years To whome commeth neere Danaeus in his 3. book de Roman Pontif. cap. 8. saying the Church was in banishment 350. years But Luther better thinking on the matter in his booke of the Popery tom 7. maketh her to haue lurked 600. years And with him agreeth Hospinian in his epistle dedicatory of the 1. part of his History Melancthon in his oration for Luther tom 2. will haue this lurking to haue byn 400. yeares But Caluin his booke of Scandals Perkins and Bale in the places before cited will haue it to haue continued 900. years Parcus aboue cited will haue it to haue begon in Constantines tyme and Napper from the yeare of our Lord 316 With whome consenteth Brocard vpon the 11. Chap. Apocal. pag. 110. Fuccius in his Cronology fetcheth the beginning of this lurking a litle higher from the yeare 261. and finally Curio of the largenesse of Gods Kingdome pag. 33 Almost from the Apostles ages euen to our tym Which they also intimate who say that Popery began in the Apostles tyme. O Christ most patient Lord that I may cry out with Tertullian who so many years yea so many ages diddest suffer thy doctrine to be turned vpside downe till Luther came to helpe thee 14. Luther Author of the visible Protestāt Church Of all things which haue byn related in this Chapter it is most cleare that Luther was at least author of the Protestants visible Church and if not the first which founded it yet the first which after it was fallen in substance perished did rayse and restore it againe For when Luther began first to preach there was no visible Protestant Church at all and by his preaching there became such a visible Church Therefore vndoubtedly he was the author thereof And if any Protestant against so many and so open Confessions of his Fathers and brethren will say that there was a visible Protestant Church before Luther he shall first gainesay so many witnesses without all exception in this matter who hauing searched all corners and enquired of all men haue neuerthelesse confessed that at that tyme no such visible Church appeared Besides he shall say that without all either diuine or humane testimony which to do of tymes before his age is to play the Prophet or rather the mad man For it is not the part of a man in his wittes to affirme without all kind of testimony especially such a thing and so manifestly false as that so many and such kind of men as had most need to affirme it were neuerthelesse forced to deny it That it wanteth all sufficient humane testimony is euident because neither the foresayd Protestants nor any yet to this day could bring forth any sufficient witnesse who would depose that he had seene such a Church before Luthers reuolt That also it is destitute of diuine testimony is manifest by what hath byn before rehearsed For Protestants at we haue heard teach that the promises of perpetuity which in the scripture are made to the church Sup. num 7. are made only to the inuisible church that is to a society of men in election and Iustification out of which Church they exclude the reprobate and wicked and not to the visible Church that is to the society in Profession of true doctrine and lawfull vse of Sacraments And in truth they most needs say so sith they commonly teach that the inuisible Church whereof the elect and iust alone are members is the true Church before God and that the visible Church whereof the wicked reprobate may be members is but a Church in sight of men that is a shadow and outward shew of the Church And it is cleare that God promised perpetuity to that Church only which in his sight is the true Church and not to her which is no Church but only in sight of men When as I say they teach that God promised perpetuity and continuance only to the inuisible Church out of his promises they cannot inferre Lib. 2. cōt Maxim c. 3. l 3 c 176 that the visible Church hath or shall euer continue Of whome therefore that I may vse S. Augustins words hast thou heard this whence diddest thou learne it where hast thou read it for to belieue it whereupon hast thou presumed for to affirme it where there is neither any authority nor reason If Protestants cry out Whitak cont 2. q. 3 c. ◠that it is most absurd to say in Elias his tyme there was any Church visible amongst the Gentiles beside the Synagogue which now after so many thousands of years we cannot name how much more absurd ought they think it to say that before Luther arose there was a visible Protestant Church which yet none neither of that Church nor out of it neither at this tyme nor at that could euer name 15. It being thus manifest that Luther was the Author of the visible Protestant Church it followeth likewise that he was the author of all and Euery Protestant Church For as shall be shewed hereafter there can be no such inuisible Church as Protestants meane that is such as belieueth and worshippeth God only in hart and mind and no way professeth outwardly her fayth and religion Yet before we come to that we will first refute those who when they consider how absurd a thing it is to affirme such an inuisible Church especially for so many ages they begin to shufle and either send vs to others or themselues name vs such as only in part or in some sort held Protestantisme but imbraced not all the substantiall points thereof and
that is to be iustifyed by good works For thus sayth Luther of them in his table-talkes chap. of Suermers The VValdenses are holy workmen and belieue not that sayth without works doth iustify and know nothing at all of imputatiue iustice Cocciuâ— 10.1 lib. 8. And Bennet Morgenstern in his treatise of the church p. 1â—4 speaketh thus vnto them Yee confirme the doctrine of Antichrist touching good works iustification c. And theÌ„selues in their Apology printed at Hanow togeather with the history of Bohemia pag. 256. plainly shew that they belieue a man to be iustified by fayth charity hope penance and works of mercy and do say That deuout prayer doth purge and pennance cleanse a man 4. Thirdly the Waldenses are condemned of Protestants both Lutherans and Sacramentaries Melancthon in his Counsailes part 2. pag. 152. writeth See Refut Orthod Consensus pag. 418. I reioyce that you agree with vs in the summe of doctrine I know the VValdenses are vnlike And in Carions Chronicle printed at Paris 1357. he sayth that they sowed errors denyed all oathes and all forme of prayer besides the Lords prayer Morgenstern in his fornamed booke pag. 79. giueth this verdict of them They haue proudly neglected the light of doctrine which is kindled from heauen in this age haue with tooth and naâ—le by writing among their own men secretly defended those most grosse erros which in the year 1523. were discouered by Luther Besides Selnecer as he reporteth affirmed that they had grosse errors and such as were not to be borne withall Leonicus Antisturmius also in Danaeus in his answere to his Sonde pag. 1516. pronounceth them to be impious and Schusselburg in his 3. tâ—me of the Catalogue of heretiks pag 188. reiecteth them as heretiks Camerarius in his booke of the Church in Bohemia Poland c. pag. 273. writeth thus VVe can say that the VValdenses were neuer one with our Churches nor our men would euer ioyne themselues to them Whereof he giueth these two reasons because the Waldenses would not haue extant any publike declaration of their fayth and for peace sake did vse the Popish masse For these two causes sayth he our men did not ioyne themselues to them neither did they think that they could so do with good conscience Caluin also epist 278. thus writeth to the Waldenses themselues VVe abide in one opinion that the forme of your Confession cannot be absoluâ—ely admitted without danger And M. Iewell also in defence of the Apology part pag. 48. sayth plainly of the Albigenses They are none of ours D. Humfrey to the third Reason of F. Campian pag. 371 They are not wholy ours And Osiander in his 13. Century lib. 1. cap. 4. Pantaleon in his Chronicle pag. 98. Melancthon in the foresayd Chronicle of Carion reckon them amongst heretiks But the Albigenses were all one for religion with the Waldenses as D. Fulke sayth in these words lib. de Success pag. 332 That epistle of the Arch-bishops doth proue that the Albigenses VValdenses were all one The same also confesseth Illyricus in his Catalogue in 4. to pag 536. Where also pag. 561. he speaketh in this sort The VValdenses or Albigenses Yea the Waldenses themselues in the Bohemian Confession if it be theirs do insinuate that they are condemned of the Sacramentaries wheras they say in the 13. article that they who deny the supper of the Lord to be the true flesh and bloud of Christ do call them Idolaters Antichrist and men branded with the marke of the beast Besides Illyricus in his forecited catalogue writeth that the Thaborites who indeed sayth he followed the opinions of the Waldenses were grieuously vexed and persecuted of Rokesana and other Hussites Wherefore sith Protestants commonly challenge the Hussites for their brethren they ought not to claime also the Waldenles whose doctrine the Hussites did persecute Certainly the Confession of Bohemia which is sayd to be theirs doth plainly distinguish them from Protestants especially from Sacramentaries For art 2. they say VVe must keep the commandements in hart deed Art 5. that those which repent must confesse their sinnes to a Priest and aske absolution of him Art 9. that Priests ought to be single Art 11. that Sacraments are necessary to saluation And art 13. that the Eucharist is the true body of Christ as say they Christ plainly sayth This is my body of which word we ought to belieue the plaine sense not decliming to the right or left Whereupon it is no meruayle that Caluin in his 249. epistle denieth it to be lawfull for a Christian man to imbrace the Waldenses Confession in these words Consider you whether it be lawfull for a Christian man to imbrace the forme of the Confession of the Waldenses who without any distinction bind vp all in one bundell of damnation who precisely confesse not the bread to be presently the body of Christ Surely we think not 5. Fourthly I proue the same because the Waldenses hold many errors which the Protestants condemne Illyricus in his foresayd Catalogue pag. 545. relateth out of an ancient writer aboue 300. years agoe that they taught that a Priest being in mortall sinne cold not consecrate the Eucharist that euery oath is a mortall sinne that they disallowed matrimony And likwise out of Aeneas Syluius that they sayd it was lawfull for euery one to preach that he who was guilty of mortall sinne was not not capable of any secular or ecclesiasticall dignity Neither auayleth it any thing that now in the CoÌ„fession of Bohemia which is sayd to be the Waldenses Confession there is found the article of iustification by only fayth because that Confession was presented in the yeare 1525. as the very title thereof declareth in the Preface mention is made of Charles 5. Emperour which was after Luther had preached some years As also because Hospinian part 2. Histor fol. 11. sayth SacrameÌ„taries haue corrupted the Waldenses CoÌ„fessioÌ„ that the Waldenses Confession was renewed or rather corrupted by the Sacramentaries as the Waldenses themselues say in the Preface of their Confession printed anno 1538. as witnesseth Schusselburg lib. 2. Theol. Caluin art 6. fol. 55. Moreouer Illyricus in his Catalogue in fol. col 1502. writeth that after Luther was knowne the VValdenses did greedily purchase greater knowledge Morgenstern in his foresayd booke pag. 79. sayth that they borrow the best part of their doctrine from the Lutherans And D. Fulke in his booke of Succession pag. 360. that they learnt of those of Basle to amend certaine errors which they had receiued from their ancestors Why then shall we not think they receiued the doctrine of iustification by only fayth from Luther especially sith as I befor sayd there is no mention of it amongst them in former tymes Againe Iurgenicius in the 2. chap. of his warre of the 5. ghospell affirmeth that the Authors of the Bohemian Confession do professe in the beginning thereof that they would neuer conioyne themselues to
Chapter of Isaias tom 4. fol. 220. thus writeth There is no religion in the world which receiueth this opinion of iustification by only fayth and we our selues in priuate do scant belieue it though we publikely defend it By which words he sheweth that neither Hussytes nor Waldenses nor any Christians besides Protestants and scarce they also do belieue the principall and most fundamentall article of Protestancy howsoeuer openly they professe it That the Church cannot be so inuisible as Protestant confesse theirs to haue byn before Luthers tyme. CHAP. VI. 1. BY the name of the Church we vnderstand not as I sayd before only the men but men sociated or the society of men in the fayth worship of God Wherfore that a church be sayd visible not only the men but their worship of God must be visible Neither by this word visible do I vnderstand here that only which can be seene but whatsoeuer is sensible according both to the vulgar phrase of speach wherewith we say See how it soundeth as S. Augustine noteth and also after the phrase of scripture Lib. 10. Confess c. 35. wherein as the same holy Doctour obserueth All sensible things are called visible And Protestants as is before shewed do confesse that before Luthers rising their Church was simply inuisible Lib. 1. de mor. Manich c. 20. and vnseene of any either of those within or without her And necessarily they must say so because they can name none at all who before Luther arose did see a company of men who professed to belieue iustification by only fayth and the rest of the fundamentall principles of Protestancy yea they affirmed that it was so inuisible Ca. 4. n. 11. as it implyed contradiction to haue byn seene of any That the Church cannot be inuisible 2. Now that the Church Militant or liuing on earth cannot be so inuisible I proue first because it is against an article of fayth of diuers Protestants And if perhaps any hereupon imagine that either Protestants neuer graunted the contrary or that if they did graunt it their testimonies against themselues are not to be accepted let him read what hereafter I write touching that matter in the last chapter of this booke Wherefore in the Confession of Saxony cap. 15. they professe in this sort God will haue the Ministery of the ghospell to be publike he will not haue the voice of the ghospell to be shut vp only in corners but will haue it beard of all mankind Therefore he will haue publike and seemely meetings and in them he will haue the voice of the ghospell to sound He will also haue these same meetings to be witnesses of the Confession and separation of the Church from the sects and opinions of other Nations God will haue his Church to be seene and heard in the world and will haue her deuided by many publik marks from other people And the same they repeat in the Consent of Polony cap. de Coena And the same Confession of Saxony cap. of the Church VVe speake not of the Church as of a Platonicall idaea but we shew a Church which may be seene and heard The eternall Father will haue his Sonne to be heard in all mankind VVherefore we say that the Church is in this life a visible company c. SecoÌ„dly it is against their owne definitions of a militant Church ProtestaÌ„ts definitioÌ„s of the Church For the foresayd Confession of Saxony defineth the Church in this life to be a visible company The Magdeburgians in their 1. Century lib. 1. c. 4. col 170. do thus write The Church may be thus defined The Church in this life is a company of those The câ—urch in this life who imbrace the sincere doctrine of the Ghospell and rightly vse the Sacraments And the very same definition giueth Melancthon tom 4. in cap. 3.1 ad Tim. pag. 398. Hutterus in his Analysis of the confession of Auspurg pag. 444. saith This Church which is sayd to be and to be belieued The Church which we belieue is not a Platonicall idea but the visible company of those that are called Zanchius also in his treatise of the Church cap. 2 The militant Church is the company of the elect and truly saythfull Church militant professing the same sayth partaking the same Sacraments c. Hereof properly speake the scriptures when they call the Church the spouse of Christ the body of Christ redeemed with the bloud of Christ sounded vpon a rock Gerlachius tom 2. Disput 22 Defining the Church as it is on earth we say that it is a congregation of men Church on earth who called by the voice of the Ghospell heare the word of God and vse the Sacraments instituted of Christ. 3. Thirdly it is against the properties and markes of the true Church assigned by the Protestants themselues to be altogeather inuisible For thus their Confession of Auspurg cap. 7 The Church of Christ properly so called The proper Church hath her marks to wit pure doctrine c. The Confession of Saxony cap. 12 The true church is discerned from other nations by the voice of true doctrine and lawfull vse of Sacraments The true Church The French Confession art 27 VVe belieue that the true church ought to be discerned with great care VVherefore we affirme out of the word of God that the Church is the company of the faythfull who agree in following the word of God and imbracing true religion wherein also they daily profit growing and confirming themselues mutually in the feare of God The Confession of the Low Countries art 29 By these markes the true Church shall be discerned from the false if in her the pure preaching of the Ghospell be of force by these markes it is certaine that the true Church may be distinguished The Confession of Scotland art 18 It is necessary that the true Church be discerned from the false by euident marckes least being deceiued we imbrace the false for the true to our eternall damnation Againe VVe belieue the markes of the true Church to be true preaching of the word c. Melancthon in his answere to the Bauarian articles tom 3. fol. 362 It is euident that the true Church is a visible company And vpon the 16. to the Romans tom 1. pag. 486 She is the true Church who teacheth the Ghospell aright and rightly administreth the Sacraments Danaeus in his booke of Antichrist cap. 17 The proper definition of the Church This is the proper definition of the Church that the true Church is the company of the faythfull who serue God purely and keep the notes of adoption instituted by him such as are the heauenly word the Sacraments and discipline By these 3. marks the false Church is distinguished from the true Lubbert in his 4. booke of the Church cap. 2 VVe say that the Church doth shew her selfe to be the true Church by the sincere preaching of the word of
God And Beza wrote a booke of this title Of the true and visible marks of the Catholike Church D. Whitaker in answere of the 3. reason of F. Campian That we iudge to be proper to the true Church that it increase and conserue Christs word that it vse the Sacraments entiâ—rly and purely These we defend to be the most true and essentiall properties of the Church Take these away and you will leaue nothing but the carcasse of the church Againe They containe the true nature of the church which if they be present they make the church and take it away if they be taken away And D. Feild in his 1. book of the church cap. 11 VVe say that that society wherein that outward profession of the truth of God is preserued is that true church of God c. Finally to omit the words of others the same teach Wigand in his method of doctrine cap. 19. Gesner in his 24. place of the Church The Magdeburgians in the Preface of their 6. CeÌ„tury Heshusius in cap. 1.1 ad Cor. Soterius in his method title of the church Pelargus in his Compend of diuinity loc 7. Sohnius in his Thesis of the Church Bullinger in his Catechisme fol. 44. Aretius in his places part 3. fol. 50. Theses of Geneua disput 74. SummeoiÌ„ Protest former CoÌ„sessioÌ„s Thus thou seest good reader that according to the manifold iudgement of Protestants a part of the definition of the essence the marke of the Church in this life of the Church militant of the Church which is belieued of the proper Church of the Church whereof the Scripture properly speaketh when it calleth her the spouse of Christ the body of Christ of the true Church of the Church properly so termed and finally of the Catholike Church that I say it is of the definition and essence a marke of this church to be a visible company professing the faith partaking the Sacraments mutually confirming themselues and that otherwise it is as they say but a carcasse of the Church Wherefore it implieth manifest contradiction that there should at any tyme haue byn a true Church and not a visible company because nothing can be without all its essentiall parts The Protestant Church therefore which as we head was before Luthers tyme altogeather inuisible was no true and proper Church but to vse their termes a Platonicall idaea or a carkasse of a Church If any reply that when Protestants affirme the foresayd definitions properties and marks of the true Church they meane not by the name of the true Church that which is simply and absolutely the true Church but that which is the true visible Church I aske why then do they simply call it the true Church if they do not so meane why are not their words conformable to their meaning Besides the Church wherof they giue the foresayd definitioÌ„s and marks they call not only the true Church but also the Church properly so termed the spouse and body of Christ the Catholike church and such like which cannot agree to any which is but a Church in appearance only and in the sight of men but only to that which is the Church in very deed and in the sight of God Further more according to the opinion of Protestants these two termes True and Visible in the nature of the Church do one destroy the other as these two True and Painted exclude each other in the nature of a man For they imagine that the true Church is a society in something that is inuisible to wit in iustification and predestination Wherupon they deny any ill or reprobate Christians to be of the true Church Wherefore as he should speake fondly who should say A true painted man so according to their owne opinion they speake as fondly when they say The true visible Church But as we can only say the true picture of a man attributing the word True to the picture not to the man so they should only The true appearance or shew of the Church gâ—uing the word True to the shew not to the Church it selfe But they are ashamed to speak so least when they inquire the marks of the true visible Church Why ProtestaÌ„ts somtyme call the visible visible Church the true Church it should appeare that they seeke not the marks of the true Church indeed but only of the shew shadow or shape of the Church And yet in very truth they seeke but the marks of the shadow of the church For the inuisible Church consisting only of the iust and elect which alone they will haue to be the true Church hath no certaine marks else we should know certainly who were the iust and elect And this themselues confesse for thus writeth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 8 ProtestaÌ„ts giue no marks of the true Catholike Church The question is not of the marks of the inuisible Church Againe VVe say the marks of the Catholike Church simply so called are knowne to God alone And D. Humfrey to 3. reason of F. Campian pa. 281. sayth that the marks do not reach vnto the nature of the true Church And the reason is manifest because as I sayd otherwise we should know who were the iust and elect 4. If any againe reply that when Protestants say The true visible Church they meane the visible Church true in doctrine in which speach there is no contradiction according to their owne opinion because they admit that the visible Church that is the society in true doctrine and right vse of Sacraments into which Church or society the wicked or reprobate may enter may be true in doctrine though they graunt not that such a Church or society be the true Church in nature or essence Which perhaps Vorstius meant in his Antibellarm pa. 180. when he sayd The outward Church is not without cause called the true church of Christ by reason of the prosession of true doctrine I answere if they so meant why did they not speak so were they ignorant that it is one thing to be true in doctrine or in speach and another to be true in nature as a lyer is a true man in nature of man but not true in his speach Or if they did know this why did they abuse the words and their hearers Moreouer though in this sense their words did not destroy themselues as they did in the former yet fondly should they as they vse to do assigne the truth of doctrine for the marke of the true Church in doctrine For this were to assigne a thing for a mark of it self as if to know a true man of his word one should giue this marke that it is such as speaketh truth Besides this were rather to define what is a true man then to giue the marke to know who is a true man And yet marks are giuen to know which is the true Church not what is the nature of the true Church 5. If yet any reply that the visible Church or
society in profession of true doctrine and right vse of Sacraments is termed of Protestants the true Church not because this Church or society is of it self the true church or the society instituted by God but because alwayes in or vnder it there is the true Church to wit the society in iustice and predestination by reason that in euery company of them that professe true doctrine and rightly vse the Sacraments there are some who are sociated and vnited in iustice and predestination Which D. Whitaker intimateth when Cont. 2. quest 4. cap. 1 pag. 485. he sayth The visible Church which holdeth and professeth true sayth is the true Church only of the part of the elect and predestinated I answere that this supposeth a thing doubtfull and perhaps false For what certainty can there be that in euery particuler company of them who professe the true fayth rightly vse the Sacraments there is alwayes a coÌ„pany of the iust and elect when as Christ sayth Many are called but few are chosen Matt. â—0 especially if as Protestants say one or two make a church Surely Danaeus Cont. 4. pag. 689. seemeth to deny this saying These visible companies are sometymes a part of that true Church sometymes none But admit that in euery company of true professors there be always a company of iust and elect what reason were this to terme the society in profession of true fayth the true Church if in deed the society in iustice predestination be the only true Church This would suffice to say that the apparent Church could neuer be separated from the true Church but not to call that society the true Church which indeed is only the outward appearance of the true Church And much lesse would it suffice to call it the church properly so termed the spouse and body of Christ the Catholike Church the Church which we professe to belieue as the Protestants haue termed the visible Church Neither can these epithets or names be giuen to any other society then to that which hath the true nature and substance of the Church indeed because they signify as properly and expresly that only Church as she can be expressed of vs by any words whatsoeuer And sith Protestants haue giuen them all to the visible church they must needs confesse that shee hath the nature and substance of the very true Church indeed and consequently that an inuisible Church is no true Church indeed 6. Fourthly I proue that the Church cannot be inuisible ProtestaÌ„ts somtyms say that the church cannot be inuisible because oftentymes Protestants do confesse it The Apology of the Confession of Ausburg chap. of the Church The Church is principally the society of fayth and of the holy Ghost in the hearts which yet hath her outward markes that she may be knowne Luther vpon the 4. chap. of Genesis tom 6. fol. 56 The Church was neuer so voyd of externall marks that it could not be not knowne where God was certainly to be sound And vpon 51. psalm tom 3. fol. 474 For Christ will not lye hid in the world but will be preached not between wals but vpon the house top Melancthon vpon the 11. of Daniel tom 2. pag. 511 It is necessary that the Church be a visible company Againe VVe seigne not an inuisible Church like to a Platonicall idea And in the Preface of his 3. tome he thinketh it so absurd to put an inuisible Church as he sayth To what tendeth that perdigious speach Monstruous to say the Church was inuible which denyeth that there is any visible Church We must needs confesse a visible Church And vpon the 3. chap. 1. Tim. tom 4. pag. 398 Others sayth he setting aside wholy the externall shew do speake of an inuisible Church as of a Platonicall idaea which is no where seene or heard Kemnice in his common places title of the Church cap. 3 God will haue vs to know where and which is the Church Therefore she must be knowne not to God only but also to vs and therupon is defined to be the visible company of them who imbrace the Ghospell of Christ and rightly vse the Sacraments Iames Andrews in his book against Hosius pag. 210 VVe are not ignorant that the church must be a visible company of teachers and hearers Againe The Church is and is called a company of men chosen of God in which the word of God soundeth incorrupt c. Hunnius in his treatise of Freewill pag. 91 God in all tymes hath placed his Church as in a high place and hath exalted it in the sight of all people and Nations Hutter in his Analysis of the Confession of Auspurg pag. 430 The elect are not the whole Church no if you speake only of the true church For the church consisteth not only of inward sayth in Christ but also of the outward administration of the word Sacraments Now as farre as this in outward rite is performed so farre the true Church truly is visible Beurlin in the Preface of his Refutation of Sotus I confesse the Church of Christ is alwayes to be acknowledged visible And he addeth that all confesse the same The same doctrine is taught by Gesner loc 24. by Adam Francis in his 11. place and by other Lutherans Amongst the Sacramentaries thus writeth Vrsin in Prolegomenis ad Catechcsin pag. 2 The Church must needs be seene in this world that the elect may know vnto what company they must adioyne themselues in this life Iunius Cont. 4. lib. 3. cap. 13. affirmeth that it is impious to say that the Church can wholy want a visible forme Keckerman in the 3. book of his Theologicall systeme writeth that the Church must always be sensible that other nations may know to what church they ought to adioyne themselues and that Confession of sincere doctrine can neuer faile wholy nor the visible church wholy erre Danaeus in his booke of the visible Church dareth to say that who denieth the true church of God and that visible to haue byn from the beginning of the world he without doubt sheweth himselfe to be ignorant in holy scripture Amongst our English Protestants M. Hooker in his 3. booke of Ecclesiasticall policy pag. 126 God hath had euer euer shall haue some Church visible vpon earth D. Feild in his 1. booke of the Church cap. 10 For seing the Church is the multitude of them that shall be saued and no man can be saued vnlesse he make Confession vnto saluation for fayth hid in the heart and concealed doth not suffice it cannot be but they that are of the true Church must by profession of the truth make themselues knowne in such sort that by their profession and practise they may be discerned from other men And D. White in defence of his Way cap. 4. pag. 390 I acknowledge the prouidence of God who hath left the records of history to confirme our fayth and freely graunt our religion to be false if the
continuall descent thereof from Christ cannot by such record be shewed Moreouer at sometyms they not only confesse that the Church is alwayes visible but also graunt that the scripture teacheth the same in those parables of the barne and the net For out of them Caluin 4. Protestāts confesse that the Scripture affirmeth that the Church is alwayes visible Institut cap. 1. § 13. inferreth that the Lord pronounceth that the church shall be vexed with this euill till the day of iudgemēt to be burdened with the mixture of the wicked Of the same opinion is D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 2. pag. 471. and others But that church which contayneth the wicked is the visible Church for the inuisible they will haue to hold only the good The Scripture therefore testifieth that the visible Church shall euer be Yea Protestants now and then take it so ill that it should be sayd that they teach that the visible Church perished for many ages that D. Sutliue in his answere to Exceptions cap. 7. sayth that Bellarmine lyeth in saying so And D. Whitaker loc cit pag 472. sayth we slaunder them when we affirme they put such a Church as at sometymes can be seene of none And sayth that in this matter there is no controuersy about the thing but about the manner to wit no question whither the Church be alwayes visible or no but in what manner it is visible because forsooth we will haue the Church to be at all tymes visible clearly and of all men and they will haue it to be at sometymes visible but obscurely and of few The like sayth Kemnice in his Common places title of the Church cap. 3. Reineccius in the 4. tome of his Armour cap. 8. and D. Morton in the 1. part of his Apology lib. 1. cap. 13. But yet that in this matter we neither bely nor sclaunder them is manifest by what we haue rehearsed in the 4. chapter before going in the 5. number and those that follow To which I add that Caluin in the Preface of his institutions setteth the state of this question betwixt vs Protestants in these words Vpon this hinge hangeth our controuersy that they Papists will haue the forme of the church to appeare and be visible at all tymes On the contrary we say that the church may consist of no apparent forme And I would to God that Protestants would constantly agree which vs in this matter of doctrine that the church of God is alwayes visible to some either of those that are in it or out of it that the debate might remaine only about the matter of fact VVhy Protestāts contradict thēselues about the inuisibility of the Church whither the Protestāt Church before Luther appeared were seene of any either Protestant or other But Protestants standing betwixt truth and lyes whiles they consider the nature of the Church of God especially as it is described in scripture confesse that it must needs be visible not only to her children but to others also But when they look back vpon the state and condition of their owne church before Luther began are compelled to deny the same as before we most euidently shewed which thing alone if it were well considered would discouer sufficiently that in their own consciences they acknowledge their Church not to be the true Church of God Inuisibility cōtrary to the ends of the Church 7. Fiftly I proue that the Church cannot be inuisible because that were contrary to the ends for which the Church was instituted of God whereof one was that men should worship him after that entier manner of worship which man is to giue which is to honour God not only with heart and mind but also with tongue and deed as it is euident and Caluin in his Confutation of a Hollander many wayes proueth that the Church must render to God not only inward but also outward worship But an inuisible Church worshippeth God only in heart and mind as Whitakers words are Another end of the Church is to feed her children with the word and Sacraments to correct and gouerne them by discipline and to defend them from enemies as also is manifest and scripture teacheth Which offices a Church which neither seeth her children nor is seene of them cannot performe Likewise another end is to conuert the world and those who are out of her to the fayth and worship of God which she can no way do if neither her doctrine nor example be seene of them And yet as Luther sayth vpon the sixt chapter of Isaias tom 4. fol. 234 The Church is in perpetuall practise of conuerting others to the fayth Inuisibility against the nature of human societies 8. Sixtly it is against the nature of a society of men amongst themselues for to be inuisible For as men consist of a body which is visible by the colours and of a soule which is seene by the actions thereof so it is necessary that the society in which they ioyne be visible either by it selfe or by some other thing Whereupon well sayd S. Augustin Li. 19. cōt Faust c. 11. Men cannot ioyne in any religion true or false vnlesse they be bound togeather by some fellowship of visible signes or Sacraments And the same confesseth Gerlachius in his 23. disput of the Church pag. 995. saying VVe willingly confesse graunt that the church cannot be except there be some outward and visible signes by common communion and participation whereof society amongst men may consist And seauently it is contrary to the example of all other societies amongst men whither religious or prophane whereof none consisteth in a thing which is altogeather inuisible and whereby the members of that society cannot be knowne the one to the other 9. Seauenthly Against the perpetuity of the Church it is contrary to the continuance and conseruation of the Church on earth to be visible For if the Church which was in the former age had not byn seene of that which is in this age how could the Church of this age haue receiued the fayth We aske therefore how the Protestant Church of our age learned the fayth of the Church of an other age if in the ages before Luther she were so inuisible as you haue heard them confesse Protestants scared with this question like men with a thunder clap leape a sunder and euery one answeareth not what he knoweth or can proue but what seemeth to him least absurd that hereby we may perceiue that all their talke of their Churches being before Luthers tyme is but as the scripture sayth fables and vaine speaches or fancies and fictions of men speaking without either testimony or reason Some of them say that before Luther their Church receiued the fayth immediatly from God alone During Popery sayth Boysseul in his Confutation of Spondé pag. 75 the holy Ghost taught fayth without a preacher Protestant Church taught miraculously The same also intimate Iunius Cont. 4. lib.
rehearseth it is an errour of Suenckfeld that men may be saued without the outward word of God and Ministery And Melancthon in his answere to the Bauarian Articles tom 3. fol. 372. affirmeth that it is the opinion of Suenckfeld and the Anabaptists That God communicateth himself to men without the ministery of the word Kemnice in the 2. part of his examen title of the Sacrament of Orders pag. 391 Iustly we disallow of Enthusiasts and Anabaptists who imagin the exercise of the outward ministery not to be needfull And title of Pâ—nnance pag. 316 The Enthusiasts are condemned who feigne that God forgiueth sinnes immediatly and without the vse of the ministery D. Whitaker Cont 2. quaest 3. c. 11. pag. 328 VVe wholy reiect reuelations which are besides the word as Fanaticall Anabaptisticall and altogether hereticall And in his 1. booke of the Scripture cap. 3. sect 1. pag. 44 VVe must expect no more immediat reuelation It is so And he addeth that Protestants hisse out all those who pretend these kind of reuelations And in the 2. book cap. 10. sect 4 VVhy are the Anabaptists held for Heretiks if the church do know matters of fayth without all externall meanes by the only instinct of the holy Ghost Pareus in his 3. booke de Iustificat cap. 3 The exception which they make of speciall reuelation is a meere iest For besides the Prophets Apostles some few Apostolicall men God doth not deale nor hath dealt with speciall reuelations but with ordinary and will haue the Church to be content with the word and the holy Ghost working in the hearts of the faythfull And cap. 8 God will not haue his church to be taught and confirmed by Enthusiasticall reuelations but by bearing of his word and ordinary vse of the Sacraments Finally Beza in the Conference of Montbelgard pag. 407. sayth That we haue no testimony in scripture of extraordinary meanes of infusing fayth Besides it was the fashion of both old and new heretiks to boast of speciall reuelations Of old heretiks witnesseth S. Augustin in his booke of heresies and Caluin in his booke of true Reformation pag. 322. Of Munster Carolstade and the Sacramentaries Luther testifieth the same vpon the 22. of Esaiae tom 4. fol. 280. Of Gentilis Caluin in his booke against him Of Storcke Manlius in his Common places pag. 482. Of Peucer and Bergius Schusselburb lib. 4. Theol. Caluin art 1. pag. 172. that I may say nothing of Luther The Protestant Church not taught by ordinary meanes Zuinglius and Caluin 12. Others therefore teach that the Protestant church before Luther receiued the fayth not by any extraordinary way but by ordinary meanes to wit by hearing some true doctrine of Popish preachers and some by reading scriptures Thus D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 2. pag. 424. Behold new fables and fictions for we are like to heare no other kind of stuffe of Protestants in these matters of fact not only lesse proued then the former but also lesse probable or possible For it was at least possible that God alone should haue taught his church but that before Luthers reuolt either Popish or Protestanticall preachers or the Scripture should haue taught Protestancy hath neither shew of probability nor possibility Not Protestant preachers because before Luther there were none at all as hereafter both D. Whitaker and others shall confesse For the present it may suffice that Luther vpon the 22. psalm tom 3. fol. 344. writeth That there was lest only the scripture and that comprised not in voice but in letters by which we might restore our selues to the fayth And Against Catarine tom 2. fol. 140. he sayth that the vocall ghospell being choaked and extinguished by Papists was silent in all the world Neither could the Scripture teach Protestancy not only because it teacheth no such doctrine but also because it plainly professeth Rom. 10. that none can come to fayth but by bearing of preachers lawfully sent as hereafter we shall see Protestants do confesse In the meane tyme it may suffice that Danaeus in his book of the visible church pag. 1069. writeth that S. Paul sayth that fayth commeth by hearing not by priuate reading and that we open a gap to Fanaticall spirits for to contemne their Pastors if we say that reading alone will suffice to get fayth which Protestants haue experienced For thus writeth Luther in the Preface of his Catechisme tom 5. fol. 645 There are found some this day euen of the Nobility who dare say we need no more Pastors or preachers that bookes suffice out of which euery one may learne the same things by himselfe without any mans teaching And Caluin vpon the 2. Thess cap. 4 Certaine phanaticall fellowes do bragge that they need no more the help of teachers because reading may abundantly suffice 13. Neither could those imaginary Protestants learne Protestancy of Popish preachers First because Protestants as before his shewed coÌ„plaine that Papists had extinguished all their fayth Againe because now no man learneth Protestancy of Popish preachers and besides because Papistry and Protestancy are directly opposite as Luther sayth in cap. 3. Micheae tom 4. fol. 446. and tom 7. epist ad Eslingenses and against King Henry tom 2. fol. 497 Or as Brentius speaketh in his Apology of the Confession of Wittenberg pag. 703 they differ in the very principles or as Beza writeth in his Confession cap. 7. pag. 56 In the very summe of saluation And as D. Whitaker affirmeth in his oration that the Pope is Antichrist ProtestaÌ„cy Popery quit opposite Papistry is more repugnant to Protestantisme then hoat to cold black to white How then is it possible that they should haue learnt Protestancy of Papists who teach so coÌ„trary doctrine Lastly because Protestants themselues deny it For Luther vpon the Graduall psalmes tom 3. fol. 516. thus writeth In Popery there was neuer heard one pure word of sinne of grace of the merit of Christ And fol. 568 Vnder the Pope all pulpits all Churches did sound out nothing but wicked doctrine And in cap. 2. ad Galat. tom 5. fol. 297 Seeing Papists know not what fayth is it is impossible that they should haue fayth and much lesse teach it to others And the Apology of the Confession of Auspurg in the Preface No man taught that sinnes were remitted by sayth in Christ Caluin 4. Instit cap. 2. § 2. sayth that in Popery the doctrine without which Christianity cannot stand was all buryed cast out And in Respons ad Versipellem pag 360 In Popery there soundeth the bare and empty name of Christ And vpon the 2. cap. 2. Tim There is a horrible destruction of the gospell in Popery Wherfore none learnt the Protestant Ghospell either in Popery or of Popish preachers Besides althogh they cold haue learnt the faith of Popish preachers yet they should be ashamed to say that they had learned it of them whom they account the bondslaues and ministers of Antichrist
they knew not the Apostolicall doctrine And D. Whitaker de Scriptura lib. 2. cap. 8. sect vlt Howsoeuer they were enuironed with most grosse darknesse yet they told some sparckes of truth and shewed them to others And what other thing I pray you is this but to confesse that such were but Protestants in part and in some sort Yea they name some whome they confesse to haue reprehended only certaine abuses amongst the Papists as Melancthon in his Answere to the Bauarian articles tom 3. fol. 369. and Illyricus in his Catalogue lib. 15. confesse of Hilten It remayneth yet for the accomplishing of this demonstration that we also shew by the Confessions of Protestants that the true Church of God can neuer want Pastors as they haue confessed theirs to haue wanted for the space of some ages That the true Church cannot be without Pastors CHAP. VIII 1. THAT the Church can neuer be without Pastors I proue first out of the Confessions of the Protestant faith For thus professe they to belieue in the Confession of Saxony cap. 12 The Sonne of God hath giuen ministers of the Ghospell vnto the Church to the end it do not quite perish Againe He would haue alwayes a company in mankind in which the Sonne himselfe appointed and conserued the Ministery of keeping and spredding his doctrine The Confession of Suitzers cap. 18 God hath alwayes vsed ministers for to setle and gather him a Church and also for to gouerne and preserue it and vseth the same now and further will vse them whiles the Church shall be on earth The French Confession art 25 VVe belieue the Church cannot consist if it haue not Pastors who haue the office of teaching The Confession of the low Countries art 30 VVe belieue that the true Church ought to be gouerned and ruled by that spirituall policy which God hath taught in his word so that there be Pastors and ministers in it And the Confession of Strasburg Seing the â—hurch is the Kingdome of God it hath diuers functions of ministers 2. Secondly I proue it because for the church to be without Pastors is to want some part of the essence and definition giuen by the Protestants themselues For Luther Proposition 15. to 1. fol. 385. thus defineth a Church It is a number of baptized persons and belieuers vnder one Pastor And tom 2. fol. 366. he sayth The publike Ministery of the word whereby the Mysteries of God are dispensed must be instituted by holy ordination as the thing which in the Church is the cheifest and principallest of all Kemnice in his Common places title of the Church pag. 146 The Church consisteth of Pastors and learners Gerlachius in his 22. Disput pag. 966 The Church is not a company meeting by chance or disordered but called by the voice of the cryers of the word for to heare the doctrine of the Ghospell Caluin 4. Institut cap. 2. § 7 The Ministery is the cheifest sinew and soule of the Church Beza of the Notes of the Church pag. 9 By the name of the Church properly taken it is certaine that not only Pastors but also stocks are vnderstood Iunius Cont. 5. lib. 1. cap. 15 God instituted orders in the Church for the essentiall outward constitution therof D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 6. pag. 508 The Church cannot subsist without Pastors of whome it is taught For doctrine doth make and constitute the Church and is her soule and life And cap. 18. pag. 546 The Church is no other number then that which holdeth the pure preaching of the word and right vse of the Sacraments And cap. 17. dag 541 Syncere preaching of the word and lawfull administration of the Sacraments do make the church in so much as whersoeuer they be there the Church is and where they be not the Church is not D. Feild in his 2. booke of the Church cap. 6 The Ministery of Pastors and teachers is absolutely and essentially necessary to the being of the Church And lib. 1. cap. 10 Bellarmine laboureth in vaine in prouing that there is and alwayes hath byn a visible Church and that not consisting of some few scattered Christians without order of Ministry or vse of Sacraments for all this we do most willingly yield vnto Yea the Philosophers by the light of reason perceiued that it is impossible they should be a Common wealth without Magistrates This same also is manifest by many other definitions which Protestants haue made of the Church and we haue rehearsed them before in which they place true preaching and administration as essentiall parts of the true Church which yet cannot be without Pastors 3. Besides this were against the definitions of the Church giuen by the holy Fathers For thus writeth S. Cyprian epist 79 The Church is the people vnited to the Priest and the flock cleauing to the Pastor And this he proueth out of those words of our Sauiour Math. 16 Thou art Peter and vpon this rock will I build my Church S. Hierome also in his dialogues against the Luciferians It is no Church which hath no Priest S. Ignatius in his epist ad Trallianos VVithout these Priests the elect Church is not no congregation without these no meeting of Saints And whereas Danaeus lib. 4. de Eccl. cap. 8. sayth that these Fathers define only a visible church that auaileth nothing because indeed there is no Church on earth which is not visible in profession of faith Againe Pastors shall be at least of the essence of the visible Church and consequently the Protestant Church which before Luther wanted Pastors was no visible Church Furthermore S. Cyprian proueth his definition out of those words of Christ Matt. 16. which as is certaine and Protestants confesse are spoken of the true Church in the sight of God And S. Ignatius sayth that there is no elect church no congregation of Saints without Priests which he must needs meane of the true Church And Saint Hierome simply sayth it is no Church which hath no Priests which he could no wayes say if the true Church in the sight of God could be without Priests And hereby also is refuted Sadeel in Repetit Sophism Turriani pag. 652. when he sayth The definition of S. Cyprian is not essentiall nor properly teacheth what the Church is but what a one it ought to be For S. Cyprian inferreth out of his definition that if one be not with the Bishop he is not in the Church And Saint Hierome pronounceth one Hilaries sect to haue perished with him because he left no Pastor behind him And for this cause the Fathers do still obiect vnto heretiks the want of succession of Pastors as an euident marke that they are not the Church as euen Protestants themselues confesse For thus writeth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 6. pag. 509 The Fathers rebuked heretiks that they wanted succession of Bishops Sadeel of Vocation of Ministers pag. 546 S. Augustin oftentyms opposed this succession against the Manichees and
Donatists Zanchius of the Church pag. 138 I admit that succession of true Bishops is a marke of the Church and of this speake the Fathers The like confesse Caluin Respons ad Versipellem pag. 358. and 4. Institut cap. 2. § 3. Beza epist 1. Plessy de Eccles cap. 3. Fulke de Success pag. 36. D. Morton Apol. part 1. lib. 1. cap. 13. Iames Andrews cont Hosium pag. 89. and others Neither is it true which D. Whitaker and Sadeel say that the Fathers did not think that they conuinced the Heretiks not to be the Church because they wanted succesion of Pastors For S. Irenaeus sayth that hereby he confoundeth heretiks and that this is a most full demostration S. Augustine writeth that this argument of succession held him in the Church S. Athanasius calleth it a notable and admirable argument And Sadeel himselfe loc cit sayth that with this battering ramme S. Cyprian did especially vanquish the Nouatians And Peter Martyr in his Common places tit de Schismate writeth that S. Augustines argument taken from the succession of Pastors was very euident against the Donatists ProtestaÌ„ts confesse necessity of Pastors 4. Thirdly I proue that the Church cannot be without Pastors because eftsoones the ProtestaÌ„ts confesse it Luther vpon 10. chap. of Genesis tom 6. fol. 125 The Church cannot consist without continuall vse of the word And of the Notes of the Church tom 7. fol. 151 The Church cannot be without Pastors Melancthon vpon the. 3. cap. of Math. tom 1. fol. 258 God will alwayes haue some publike Ministery He will not suffer the publike ministery to be destroyed And in cap. 16. pag. 489 There is no Church where there is no true Ministery And ibideth in his sermon vpon the rock pag. 176 The Church is built vpon the Ministery And tom 1. in loc cap. de Eccles fol. 227 VVe must not seigne a Church without the Ministry And cap. de numero Sacramentorum fol. 334 The Ministry cannat be quite destroyed And in his dispute of Ecclesiast policy tom 1. Lutheri fol. 442 The Church cannot exist this ministry being extinguished Kemnice in his Common places tit of the Church cap. 4 There are promises extant of the perpetuall conseruation of the Ministry in the Church Gerlachius Disput 22. pag. 940 The publike Ministry is alwayes conserued Iames Andrews against Hosius pag. 330 No man denieth that the Church cannot be without Bishops Oecolampadius vpon the 62. cap. of Isaias pag. 30â— God raiseth vp at all tymes Apostles and preachers Bolanus in his Synâ—agme lib. 7. cap. 11 The function of ordinary Ministers after the Ecclesiasticall order is one setled is perpetuall and to endure to the end of the world Caluin 4. Institut cap. 2. § 4 For neither the light and heat of the Sunne nor meat and drinck are so necessary to cherish and sustaine the present life as the Pastorall function is for to conserue the church on earth And § 3 God hath setled foreuer the way of gouerning and holding his Church by Ministers And § 4 The church can neuer want Pastors and teachers Beza de Notis Eccles pag. 60 The church can neuer want either the seed of the word or sowing or sowers Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 197 The Ghospellers acknowledge the 3. other orders to be perpetuall in the Church to wit Pastors Priests and Deacons D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 3 cap. 2. pag. 469 I answere that there were alwayes Pastors and sheepe and that there shall be euer Pastors to the end of the world And quest 5. cap. 6. pag. 508 I confesse the succession of Pastors to be necessary Againe I answere that the Church cannot stand without Pastors D. Fulke de Succes pag. 22 I graunt that the succession of Pastors is necessary in the church And pag. 95 The true doctrine of Christ and the Apostles neuer wanted cryers D. White in defence of his way cap. 35. pag. 381 The Church shall neuer want Pastors And his Maiesty in his Monitory epistle pag. 61 Neither can hell stand without some order and distinction The Diuels are deuided into Legions and haue their Princes how then can any compaâ—â—on earth stand which is confused and disordered without all difference of orders or dignity You see how confused a thing Protestants account the Church to be without Pastors and that they speake far otherwise of the Church when they consider the true nature thereof then when they looke vpon the condition of their owne Church in former tymes before Luther Neither do they only sometymes confesse that the Church cannot be without Pastors but also acknowledge that Scripture â—oâ—h teach so For thuâ— Melancthon in his foresayd dispute fol. 483 Scripture requireth Pastors VVhere the Church is there must needs be lawfull ordination of Ministers which ordination is one of the proper giftes of the Church according to that of the 4. chap. to the Ephesians He hath giuen Pastors c. Kemnice in the 2. part of his examen tit de Sacramento ordinis pag. 192 The Sonne of God himselfe will conserue in the Church with perpetuall calling the Ministry of those who teach the Ghospell So sayth Paul Ephes 4. Caluin 4 Institut cap. 3. § 2 In these words Ephes 4 he sheweth the Ministry to be the cheife sinew wherewith the faythfull hung togeather in one body and insinuateth also that the Church cannot otherwise be safe vnlesse it be propped with these helpes in which God would place her safety The like he hath in cap. 4. Ephes and 1. Cor. cap. 6. and 12. and 1. Tim. cap. 3. D Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 19. pag. 549 This place of Esay cap. 59 My spirit c. sheweth that the true preaching of the word shall be perpetuall in the Church D. Whitgift in his Answere to the Admonition pag. 17 The place of Mathew 9. sheweth that Ministers are necessary in the Church D. Fulk ad Cauillat Stapl You do that which is done already whiles you proue out of the Apostles writings that the continuance of the Pastors and Doctors is of no lesse certainty then the continuance of fayth and doctrine And de Succes pag. 180 The Scriptures promise perpetuall succession of Pastors and Doctors Preaching necessary to fayth 5. Fourthly I proue this same because Protestants sometymes do teach that preaching which cannot be done without Pastors is necessary to ingraft fayth in men For as before we rehearsed they condemne the Anabaptists and Suenckfeldians in that they teach that men can come to fayth without preaching And Luther tom 1. fol. 54. writeth that the administration of the word by a Priest is needfull for faith And Cont. Caterin tom 2. fol. 140. sayth that by the vocall word the Church is conceiued formed nourished begotten and conserued And de instituendis Ministris fol. 372 Seing the church is brought forth nourished and conserued by the word of God it is manifest that she cannot be without the word or if it be without
If neither God nor man told them this then it is 2. Pet. 1. as the Scripture speaketh an vnlearned fable which cannot be proued by any diuine or humane testimony a fiction a dreame which they would be ashamed to vtter if they were not compelled by necessity to say somewhat But as S. Hilary sayth he is not ashamed of folly who hath lost religion Fiftly I proue this Lib. 7. de Trinit because Protestants euen by their manner of speach do be wray that they are not certaine that their Church was in Popery For D. White in his Way cap. 33. pag. 338. sayth It is more then probable Osiander in his Manuel englished pag. 65. sayth It is Credible Gerlachius tom 2. disput 22. sayth How many shall we think there were Others confesse that they know not those Protestants whome they say to haue byn in Popery Luther in psalm 45. tom 3. fol. 447 Vnder Popery there were alwayes and yet are some belieuers whome we know not Know not D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 476 VVe say there were in tymes past many thousands of men in Popery who professed our fayth and adored not the beast whome albeit we cannot name Can not name yet God knew Besides some of them say that there was no face or shew of their Church in Popery D. Whitaker loc cit p. 477 VVe say that there were so few good in Popery as they appeared not Appeared not And Cont. 4. quest 5. cap. 3. pag. 682 VVe surely say that in tymes past the Church lay hid in Popery And Luther vpon the 90. psalm fol. 495 The Church was in Popery but truly so hidden as to him that would iudge of the outward appearance it might seeme to be no where Caluin also 4. Institut cap. 2. § 12. speaketh in this sort of his Protestants whoâ—e â—he imagined in Popery In whome all things are so out of order as there may rather seeme the face of Babilon then of the citty of God By what appearance then iudge they when then say that their Church was in Popery 4. Sixtly What kind of Persons they challenge I proue that the Protestant church was not in Popery by the Persons whom they challenge Luther cont Caterin tom 2. fol. 140. writeth thus VVhere ye see no ghospell as we see none in the Synagogue of the Papists there doubtles is no Church vnlesse you except infants and simple folke And fol. 155 whome in all the world hath not the Pope subdued Infants silly ones except perhaps infants and silly persons saued by an vnknowne Counsaile M. Bale Cont. 1. cap. 74. writeth that their Church since Phocas the Emperours tyme VVas in lurking holes and amongst idiots Gerlachius disput 22. Idiots sayth that Infants were no small part of their Church Osiander loc cit pag. 65. that they were a great part And as Lobechius addeth disput 10. pag. 202 The noblest part A worthy Church vndoubtedly which for many ages consisted of infants idiots and such silly persons And they more silly who giue credit to so silly an affirmation of Protestants without all proofe and they most silly of all who relinquishing the Catholike Church adioyne themselues to such a childish and silly Church so sillily affirmed and without proofe Seauenthly Protestants themselues do plainly professe that the entire substance and essence of their Church was not in Popery but only some part thereof And we as hath byn often sayd speake not of a Church in part or in some sort but of a Church which hath all the essentiall and substantiall partes The whole essence of a protestaÌ„t Church not in Popery and may be simply and absolutely tearmed a Church Caluin 4. Institut cap. 2. after he had sayd § 1. that it is certaine there is no Church where lyes and falsity haue gotten the vpper hand he straight sayth § 2 Seing matters go so vnder Popery VVe may gather how much of the Church remayneth there And addeth that vnder Popery That doctrine without which Christianity standeth not is all buryed and thrust out And Respons ad Sadolet pag. 128. writeth That in Popery there appeareth scarce any scattered and torne remnants of the church Scarse any remnants Only rubbish Peter Martyr in locis tit de discessu a Rom. Eccl. col 1493 Now there are left among Papists only some rubbish and parcels of old walles togeather c. Sonis Resp ad Spondeum cap. 2. pag. 32 Antichrist hath left nothing in all the building but some old wals But old wals Sadeel Praefat. lib. de Verbo scripto The Roman Church is so depraued and corrupted that whiles we seeke the Church in the church we are forced to behold only ashes of the Church Only ashes The Apology of the Church of England part 4. cap. 9. diuis 3 These men now haue left nothing remayning in the Church of God that had any likenesse of his Church Nought but ruins And part 6. cap. 17. diuis 1 VVhen we saw that nothing remayned in the temple of God but pittifull spoiles and decayes we c. Finally Luther in Psalm 22. tom 3. fol. 132. No trace sayth that in Popery there was no trace of the Church And in psalm 17. fol. 285 They haue brought matters to such passe Name only that where the Church of God was heretofore there is nought but heathenish superstition and the name only of the church remayning the substance is quite lost The same also meane those who say that in Popery were some small footsteps some reliques and parcels of the church albeit they had not this exclusiue terme Only But if in Popery the doctrine without which Christianity cannot stand were wholy buryed and shut out If therein scarse appeared torne parcels of the Church only ashes thereof were seene if nothing remayned but old wals rubbish and ruines nothing entire and like to a Church and the name only remayning the substance were quit lost doubtles there was no absolute and true Protestant Church in Popery but only in part and in some sort Which Daneus plainly intimateth when he saith Cont. 4. lib. 3. cap. 13. pag. 387 Some footsteps of the Church remayne yet in that Popish company as if the ruines of a house cast downe and the bare walls were called a house equiuocally Or as Caluin speaketh Respons ad Versipellem pag. 357 In some part the Protestant Church was heretofore in Popery 5. That I may therefore gather togeather all that Protestants say of their Church in Popery befor Luthers tyme Concerning the persons whereof it consisted they were infants idiots silly ones and perhaps not they neither Concerning the substaÌ„ce it was only ruines rubbish old walles ashes and name only of the Church Concerning the number it was (a) Luther in psalm grâ—â—t f. 368 de Missa loc 7. fol. 236. Gerla disput 22. Acontius l. 1. Strat. p. 25. Sadeâ—l ad
Sophis pag. 596. ad Thes Posnon 18. Very small slender reliques few remnants and scarce a few reliques so small reliques one or two persons Touching the place wherein she was that was lurking holes or rather none at all For so sayth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 2. pag. 468 The holy and pious men were togeather with their Pastors dispersed into this or that place without any certaine aboad or Succession And quest 5. cap. 4. pag. 503 Our men were in tymes past scattered here and there Touching the state of their Church that was (b) â—up c. 2. quite fallen downe Mouching the face or shew thereof that was rather of Babylon then of the Church As for the Condition it was afflicted of Antichrist with sauadge domination was miserably brought to naught and all her affaires most desperat For profession of fayth she made none at all For externall rites and worship she was compelled to keep very Babylonicall heathenish idolatricall and Antichristian rites For piety that was all driueÌ„ out Touching fayth that was quite extinct As for her Conseruation that was by meruailous and miraculous meanes by meere miracle And lastly for the testimonies whereby either her being are any of these points are proued they are pure Pythagoricall that is their owne words which is as themselues say arguments of fooles or rather lyes for who so speaketh of himselfe speaketh lyes 6. My eighth reason is because Protestants should haue sayd that their Church had bene in any company rather then in Popery For Luther lib. coÌ„t Regem Angliae tom 2. fol. 334. writeth that Popery is the most â—â—stilent abomination of Satan which hath byn or hereafter shall be vnder heauen And in cap. 25. Genes tom 6. fol. 342 Popery is a Congregation of diuels and of most wicked men And lib. cont Papatum tom 7. fol. 479. saith It is the last mischeife of the world and to which all the Diuells with all their cunning power cannot bring a greater Caluin ad Vsâ— sipel pag. 360. VVhitak cont 2. q 6 c. 1. Ochin diâ—l 25. Horne of the suâ—r p. 101. Others say that Popery is the body of Satan and Antichrist the dungeon of errors heresies that it is worse theÌ„ any sect of heretiks yea then Paganisme or Turcisme And almost all of them cry that it is the Synagogue of Satan and Antichrist Moreouer Luther in Actis exustionis decretalium tom 2. fol. 123. pronounceth that it were safer liuing in the wildernes to see no man then to conuerse in the Popish Kingdome And in cap. 2. Galat. tom 5. fol. 327 VVhosoeuer is earnestly affected towards Godlines let him tremble at the name of Popery And Protestants commonly gather out of that saying of the Apocalips Go out my people that it is the commaundement of God that all pious men should goe out of Popery If then Popery be the Synagogue of Satan and Antichrist worse then any hereticall Turkish or heathenish company or any other whom all the diuels which all their cunning could raise If all pious men ought to tremble at the hearing of the name thereof and rather liue in a desert then therein If finally it be the CommandemeÌ„t of God that all godly men should goe forth of Popery how came it to passe that in former tymes the godly forsooth Protestants liued in Popery and in Popery alone that for so many ages Would godly men abid in that company and only in that company and so long tyme which was the worst that could be before which they shold haue preferred the wildernes haue shaken at the name thereof were commanded to come out from thence by Gods expresse commandement Surely the Protestants must not only haue byn children and simple but also impious and vngodly What I could not or would not the spouse of Christ lurke for so many ages but in the stewes of the diuell Could Christ be no where but with Antichrist Would only Antichrist for so many ages affoard Christ and his church a harbour or lurking place l. 1. de mor. Manich. c. 16. O straightes sayth S. Austine O incredible absurdities For what greater straights what more incredible absurdity can there be theÌ„ to thrust Christ and his Church into the diuels stewes and that for many ages togeather 4. Instit c. 16. §. â—â— But as Caluin himself sayth There is no meruaile if these reprobate spirits as if they were frantique do thrust in most grosse absurdities for to defend their errors for God iustly punisheth their pride and obstinacy which such giddinesse 7. Ninthly I argue and aske what is the meaning of the foresayd ridle The Church was in Popery but Popery was not the Church First I suppose that by Popery heere they meane not as did Boysseul popish doctrine as if the sense were that the Protestant Church consisted of Popish doctrine as we say that the Popish Church consisteth to wit formally of Popish doctrine the Iewish Church of Iudaisme the Turkish of Turcisme because this sense were too far from the question which demaundeth the place and not the forme or doctrine of the Protestant church in former tyms Besides it were too too absurd to say that the Protestant Church consisteth in the contrary doctrine which he condemneth Supposing therfore that hereby Popery they vnderstand the company of Papists their meaning cannot be that their Church was in the company of Papists as in a multitude of men amongst whom they liued only but did no way participate of their doctrine or worship both because in this manner it had byn knowne to Papists which notwithstanding they deny as before we shewed and anone shal be proued to be false as also because in this sort their Church may be sayd to be in Iudaisme Turcisme the like if they liue among Iewes or Turcks which is so absurd as ProtestaÌ„ts deny their meaning to be such For thus Beza epist 10. quest 4 The Church was in Popery which can no way be sayd of the Turks And M. Perkins lib. cit after he sayd that the Church was long tyme in Popery addeth VVhich cannot be likewise sayd of Turks and other Infidels that the Church was conserued or that yet any hidden Church is conserued among them Neither can their meaning be that the Protestant church was in tymes past in Popery as a part in the whole to wit because it consisted of some that belieued both Protestancy and Popery or if they did not belieue Popery yet they professed it because after this manner Popery should no lesse haue byn the Church the Church should haue byn in Popery For as the church should haue byn in Popery because it consisted of such a part of Popery so Popery shold haue byn the church because such a part of Popery had byn the Church Besides it implieth contradiction that one should belieue both Popery and Protestancy which as Protestants say are right opposite in many fundamental points If
4. quest 5. cap. 3. pag. 682. writeth that those feigned Protestants Perhaps vsed Popish ceremonies for customes sake And pag. 689 Antichrist deceiued the elect and seduced them The very elect erred And Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 474 In Popery there were many Protestants who communicated with Papists Gerlachius tom 2. disp 22 They were driuen into the common opinions with an vniuersall and fatall ouerflow of superstitions And Casaubon epist ad Peron pag. 10. writeth that the godly communicated with Babylon D. Feild lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 13 The authors of those Popish errours and those that were free from them were of the same Communion D. White in his way pag. 171 The children of God abode in the communion of the Roman Church And in the defence cap. 44. pag. 394 VVe do not hold a definite number of persons distinct from the members of the Church of Rome and liuing apart in another society by themselues in secret as it were the 7. sleepers lying hid in a mountaine but we affirme this company liued in the middest of the Church of Rome it selfe and were the visible Prosessors therof This also is that which Caluin would when 4. Institut cap. 2. § 12. he sayth that his Churches in Popery were prophaned with sacrilegious impiety corrupted and almost killed with pernicious doctrines in which lay halfe buryed the ghospell ouerwhelmed godlines banished and all things so out of order as there seemed rather the face of Babylon then of the citty of God And vpon the 23. of the Acts VVe complaine that the Church was corrupted of them Papists the temple of God prophaned Li. 2. cont Cresc c. 17. that it differed litle from a swinescot See sayth S. Augustine to what a precipic◠the difficulty to find where to get out hath brought these men They sayd their Church was in Popery and afterward found not how to creep out but by this most steep craggy precipice For what steeper precipice what greater absurdity can there be then to say that the church of God which the Protestants will haue theirs to be for many ages denyed her fayth professed infidelity forsook Christ worshipped Antichrist or to vse their owne words Did vse very Babylonicall and Antichristian rites was corrupted with pernicious doctrine prophaned with sacrilegious impiety Epist 40. Epist 27. and out of which godlines was banished God forbid sayth S. Cyprian that a company of fallen persons should be called the Church Againe God forbid his mercy and inuincible power neuer permit Epist 1. that a company of fallen persons be called the Church And Beza himselfe The Church is a community of Saints not a company of excommunicated or sacrilegious persons And shall we think that before Luther arose the Church of God for many ages was nothing else but a company of fallen sacrilegious hypocrites denyers of Christ and worshippers of Antichrist Is such a company the holy Church Is the Communion of such the Communion of Saints which we belieue in our Creed Is such a society the spouse and mysticall body of Christ the wife of the lambe the Kingdom of God Surely a fit Church for protestants and a fit company to which the forsakers of the Catholike Church may adioyne themselues and most worthy to be eschewed detested of all that loue Christs or their owne honour For who is he either pious or well in his wits who will make himselfe of that company which for many ages consisted all of lapsed Hypocrites denyers of Christ and worshippers of Antichrist The whole Scriptures and Fathers say that the spouse of Christ is honest and chast and cannot be deflowed But this protestant harlot did for many ages prostitute her selfe to Antichrist 10. Moreouer this kind of company which thus communicated with Antichrist and professed his doctrine could not be the visible Protestant Church Conf. Anglic art 19 For her they define to be a company which professeth Christs true doctrine and rightly vseth his Sacraments But this foresayd company as themselues write Durst not prosesse their opinion had no Ministery did obserue Babylonicall and heathenish rites Nor were they their inuisible Church which alone they will haue to be the true Catholike and proper Church because she according to all their opinions is the company of Saints elect only The Confession of Auspurg art 7 The Church properly so called is the congregation of Saints who truly belieue and obey Christ. And D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 1. cap. 3 Thus we define the Catholike Church It is a company of holy men whome God hath chosen in Christ to euerlasting life This definition sayth he excludeth all hypocrites But those who worshipped Antichrist were no Saints obeyed not Christ were hypocrites Therefore they were no Catholike or true church Againe it is the common doctrine of Protestants that naughty great sinners are no mē ers of the true church For thus the Confession of the Low-countries art 29 Hypocrites belong not properly to the Church Caluin 4. Ill mē not the true church by Protestā◠Institut cap. 1. § 7 Into that Church which is indeed before God none are admitted but such as both by grace of adoption are the sonnes of God and by sanctification of the spirit true members of Christ Peter Martyr in his places tit de Eccles col 1368 VVe affirme that such wicked men are not indeed before God members of the Church Arctius in locis part 3. fol. 50 The Church properly so called consisteth only of the true members of Christ Bucer lib. de vi vsu Ministerij pag. 558 The true Church consisteth only of those that are borne a new D. Whitaker cap. 3. cit VVe all belieue that Catholike Church which we professe in our Creed to consist of no euill or reprobate persons but only of the elect iust and holy And c. 7 VVe deny ill men to belong to the Church which is the body of Christ M. Perkins in his exposition of the Creed col 795 An ill man cannot be a member of the Church Adā Francis loc 11. de Eccl Ill men are only in name members of the Church And finally Musculus in locis tit de Eccl. pag. 299 Not so much as the name of the Church ought to be giuen to the wicked But they who were such as the Protestants before described were no Saints were not iust were not sanctified but ill wicked hypocrites if euer there were any therefore they could not be the true Catholike and proper Church before God Furthermore Protestants vse to teach that those who communicate with Papists do cut themselues from the true Church The French Confession art 28 VVe think all those who adioyne themselues to these Popish actions and communicate with them do separat themselues from the body of Christ Luther in cap. 13. Genes tom 6. fol. 163 VVho acknowledgeth the Pope for master he hath no part with Christ And in cap.
28. fol. 396 If the Pope must be worshipped Christ must be denyed And de Missa priuata tom 7. fol. 475 VVhosoeuer is vnder the Pope and obeyeth him cannot be saued Caluin against Seruer pag. 607 Is it not a profanation of the sacred vnity to professe one God and faith with an impious and prophane company And Respons ad Versip pag. 362 How wicked and soule treachery is it to abide in that sacrilegious company of Papists And D. Whitaker ad Rat. 3. Campiani None abide with the lambe in the mountaine who haue any commerce with Antichrist And Caluin in Confutat Hollandi lib. de vitandis superstitionibus bringeth many proofes to shew that the faithfull may not communicate with the false Church and therto citeth the letters of Melancthon Bucer Peter Martyr and those of Zurich and the same is commonly taught of Protestants How then did not those Protestants separate themselues from the body of Christ how were they saued who in tymes past communicated with papists How were they saued vnlesse God be an acceptour of persons and tyms that he will cut of some from his body and from hope of saluation who communicate with Antichrist and not others at these and not in former tymes Againe Protestants teach that the Church ought to professe her fayth as besides the testimonies before repeated the Preface of the Confession of Saxony sayth They that are demaunded must needs tell the doctrine And the CoÌ„fession of Bohemia art 2 They teach that they must vndoubtedly belieue all the articles of the Creed and confesse them with the mouth Luther in 1. Petri cap. 2. tom 5. fol. 464 If any now as the Emperour or other Prince should aske me my fayth I must plainly confesse it to him And de Scru. Arbit tom 2. fol 432 Truth and doctrine must alwayes be preached openly and neuer kept secret or crookt and turnd awry D. Feild lib. 1. de Eccl. cap. 10 For seeing the Church is the multitude of them that shall be saued vnlesse he mak coÌ„fession vnto saluation for fayth hid in the heart and concealed doth not suffice it cannot be but they that are of the true Church must by the profession of the truth make themselues knowne in such sort that c. And the Preface of the Syntagme of Confessions VVhen euery one ought according to the Apostles precept giue a reason of his hope how much more the Church And D. Whitaker Cont. 4. quest 6. cap. 2. pag 696 True sayth can no more be separated from confession with the mouth then fire from beat or the sunne from its brightnes and beames What fayth then had those protestants which as is sayd durst not professe their mind And Cont. 2. qoest 3. cap. 2. pag. 472 It is not lawfull for the godly to dissemble true Religion or make shew of false nor to conceale what they think of Religion if they be examined of them who haue authority to aske them of their fayth But it is not credible that in so many ages in no part of the Christian world no Catholike Magistrate should aske any protestant of his fayth especially if it be true that Luther writeth in psalm 22. tom 3. fol. 344. that Papists do so examine the body of the Church that all her bones may be counted that is none of them can by hid VVherefore we must not imagine that there are any hidden bones of Christ all are bewrayed and counted wheresoeuer they are either by the espials of secret confession or by the tortours or examiners Which sheweth that if there had byn any true protestants heretofore they would haue byn discouered 11. Finally they are brought to these straights that sometymes they say that the protestant church which they imagine was heretofore in popery did consist of those who were papists both in opinion and profession This Caluin intimateth in the words before cited when he sayth that his church was corrupted with pestilent doctrine And Luther de Missa priuata tom 7. fol. 231. saying The very elect were seduced in that great darknesse And in cap. 9. Isaiae tom 4. fol. 95 Behold sayth he the whole face of the Churches vnder Popery Did not they all who truly felt the burden of sinne imagine that they should by good works satisfy for their sinnes Which thing alone would suffice to blot them out of the role of protestants D. White in defence of his way cap. 36. pag. 350. sayth those imaginary protestants were corrupted some more some lesse with those errors which sayth he now we fly And cap. 40. pag. 394. graunteth that they were infected with damnable heresies D. Whitaker lib. 2. de Scriptura cap. 8. sect vlt. sayth They were beset with most thick darknes Nappâ—r in cap. 12. Apocal. pag. 195. that their visible Church in tymes past VVholy embraced the errors of merits and indulgences c. And Morgersterâ—â— tract de Eccl. pag. 41 These things were in tymes past to be forgiuen the godly that they belieued the Pope to be â—hrists vicar and head of the church Popery to be the church Saints to be prayed vnto Masse to be the Lords supper Are these men think you in their wits who call them godly and say they must be pardoned who belieued Antichrist to be Christs vicar Antichrists Synagogue to be the Church of Christ and horrible idolatry such as they account Masse prayer to Saints to be seruice of Christ The same also they meane when they challenge the simple ignorant Papists for theirs or confesse the vulgar Roman Church to be the true Church or as others of them speake graunt the Roman Church but deny Popery the Popish or Roman Popish Church For they imagine that the simple Catholike people neither doth now nor in former tyms did belieue those points of fayth which themselues deny But this they feigne of the simple Catholike people and cannot proue it Besides there is no Catholike â—o simple as doth not vertually belieue all points of Catholike fayth which Protestants deny sith he actually professeth to belieue whatsoeuer the Catholike Church teacheth Neither is there any at all who doth not belieue iustification by good works which point alone would suffice to make them no Protestants Besides Caluin 4. Institut cap. 8. sayth that we affirme him to be no Christian who doth not vndoubtedly agree to all points of doctrine as well affirmatiue as negatiue And the same sayth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 8. pag. 519. D. Morton part 1. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 9. and D. Willet in the Preface of his Synopsis Yea as before we rehearsed Cap 2. they confesse that before Luthers reuolt all from head to foot were drowned in the pudles of Popery that none dreamed of that which is the cheifest point of Protestancy Wherfore Schusselburg tom 8. Catal. Haeret. pag. 440. seemeth to say That befor Luther arose Popery was the true church like as the Synagogue of the Iewes was before the comming
were certaine that D. Martin Luther were fallen into so foule and impious errours we first of all would not only yield him vp to the law but also would punish him and cast him out And in their Epistle to Pope Leo 10. ibid. fol. 206. Most holy Faoher we deuout and obedient children of your Holynes do most humbly earnestly beseech c. And below Neither would we euer seeme such as would pertinaciously hold any opinion contrary to the Catholike doctrine ready at all tymes to obey yours and the holy Churches behests in Christ And in another letter to Fredericke the Elector fol. 227. Aboue all thinges we exceedingly like that your highnesse simply and purely honoureth the holy Church and the Pope Neither will we euer be of any other mind VVe preferre nothing before the iudgment of the Roman Church And not only the Vniuersity but the people of VVittemberg were also Catholiks as Luther declareth in these wordes to Fredericke Elector fol. 330. It cannot be denyed that the Reformation of doctrine and religion in this Church of VVittemberg began by me 3. Fredericke also the Elector Frederike Elector first Catholke and Luthers chief Patron was a Papist For thus himselfe writeth to Cardinall Raphael tom 1. Lutheri fol. 228. Your kindnes God willing shall neuer see that I haue any other mind or will then to shew my selfe obedient and officious vnto the Catholike Church And his Counsailers tom 2. fol. 116. professe that he is an obedient sonne of the Holy Catholike Church And likewise tom 1. fol. 101. Fredericke the Elector aboue all loueth the Catholike and Apostolike truth Besides as Luther writeth tom 7. sermone de simulacris he put siluer statuaes in the Church thinking thereby to merit at Gods hands And tom 2. lib. de abroganda Missa fol. 268. He deceaued by Papists did greatly increase and adorne the house of All Saints He founded also a Colledge of Canons where he kept Masse vntill the end of the yeare 1524. as Chytreus testifieth lib. 11. histor Saxon. and Luther intimateth in formula Missae tom 2. fol 387. saying Be not you or any other afraid that in our VVittemberg that sacrilegious Tophee remayneth as yet which is the wicked and lost mony of the Princes of Saxony I meane the temple of All Saints 4. Pomeranus Bugenlage the Pomeran and first Protestant of VVittembrge had beene before a Papist For as Scultet concione saecul pag 15. reporteth when he first read Luthers booke de captiu he sayd Since the beginning of the world the Sunne neuer beheld a greater heretike then Luther Of Osiander Osiander thus writteth Danaeus respons ad Leonicum pag. 1518. He was a most wicked Frāciscan Erier His proper name was Hosen that is hose or hosier but of hosier he would be called Hosion that is a holy man 5. The same also we manifest of the Captains of the Sacramentaryes among whom Zuinglius Zuinglius writeth thus of himselfe epist ad Fratres tom 1. fol. 341. I will not deny that in tymes past I receaued guists of the Pope For then I thought it lawfull to vse the Popes liberality when I thought it a pious and godly matter to defend to my strength his Religion and fayth And Luther lib. de Coena writeth that Zuinglius was become seauen tymes worse then when he maintayned Popish religion Likewise Oecolampadius Oecolampadius Zuinglius his cheifest partener thus witnesseth of himselfe respons poster ad Porkey merum pag. 108. I entred into a Monastery being of a good age and a man Doctor and with mature aduise To which Hospin addeth part 2. hist fol. 35. He entred two yeures before into the Monastery of our Sauiour neere to Auspurge and there became a Monke fearing some danger of the common wealth by Luthers writings Pelicanus And ibidem fol. 42. he sayth that Pellican was a Franciscan And fol. 213. that Bucer Bucer became a Dominican in his childhood of whome also and Peter Martyr D. Andrewes Respons ad Apol Bellar. sayth They left their monkish life 6. Of Caluin Caluin thus testifyeth himself lib de scandalis pag. 100. Vnder the Popes tyranny I was free to marry since God deliuered me from thence c. And respons ad Sadolet pag. 122. If I would haue prouided for my matters I should neuer haue left your faction In his Testament God deliuered we from the deep darknes of Idolatry wherein I was drowned And Pareus lib. 2. de amiss grat cap. 1. VVhence were Luther and Caluin but of Papists The same appeareth out of his life written by Beza where he sayth that he had a benefice in the Cathedral Church of Noyon and the cure of a Parish thereby and that he was first put in mind of Protestancy by Robert Oliuetan That Peter Martyr Peter Martyr was long tyme both Catholike and Canon regular Simler testifyeth in his life which also he affirmeth of Zanchius Zanchius saying that he was one of the 18. companiōs that forsaking Popery followed Peter Martyr who also in his preface de Natura Dei sayth that he was 35. yeares of age when he left Babylon 7. Concerning the Lutherans in generall Lutherās in general thus writeth Luther epist ad Erford fol. 500. In which errour of Antichrist we being all stifled enthralled wlth a grieuous and miserable slauery did serue the God and Prince of this world seruing the same in sinnes and all kind of impiety And tom 4. in cap. 43. Isaiae fol. 179. VVe are accounted heretikes of the Pope as who haue deuided our selues from that Church wherein we were baptized and instructed In cap. 4. Galat. tom 5. fol. 377. VVe old men were brought vp in that Popish fayth and haue so swallowed it that it hath entred the most inward sinewes of our harts And therefore we forget it with no lesse paynes then we learne the true sayth Ye heare how hardly the very first Protestants could become Protestants leaue to be Papists And in cap. 11. Genes tom 6. fol. 129. he thus boasteth VVe are holy Apostataes for we haue fallen from Antichrist and the Church of Satan Melancthon likewise in cap. 7. Math. tom 1. fol. 406. VVe were heeretofore subiect to the Popes kingdome Tom. 2. cont Suenefeld pag. 200. VVe departed from the Popes Churches Tom. 3. ad Art Bauar fol. 364. There was necessary cause that we should forsake the Papists And tom 4. in Act. VVormat pag. 403. VVe haue iust cause of departure from the Popish congregation and with good conscience we forsooke the consent of so many Nations Iames Andrewes cont Hosium pag. 332. The more aged doe gratefully acknowledge that they came from you that is lest you and your doctrine And Schuffelburg in Epist dedicat tom 8. Catal. haeret hath these wordes It is behoofull to haue before our eyes the causes whereon our consciences may in the stormes of tentations rely why in this our age Ancestours
Castro should say that the fornamed persons did come forth in such sort as we mean that is came out of the Protestāt lurking holes or to haue bin secret Protestāts before Luther appeared seeing he only saith that they came forth in such sort as he saith Luther came forth to wit forth of the Catholik church of Catholiks became heretiks 3. Fiftly I proue it out of the common doctrine of Protestants wherin they teach that euery one ought to adioyne himselfe to the visible Church if so he can conueniently For so teacheth the Confession of the low countryes art 28. the French art 26. Melancthon in cap. 8. Matth. Caluin 4. Institut cap. 1. D whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3 cap. 2 and others commonly But these former Protestants if any such had bin might conueniētly haue ioyned themselues to Luthers cōpany after that they saw him to preach securely and out of danger Seeing therfore no such came to him it is manifest that there were no such at all Finally this is manifest otherwise For suppose that before Luther they lay so close as that they worshipped God only in hart and soule yet when they saw Protestancy to be preached publiquely and securely and that they might liue openly and amongst men who will imagine that they would preferre darcknes before light and lurking holes before townes and citties and alwayes keep in deserts Certaidly such kind of fellowes should be rather batts or owles then men Besides being iust men forsooth why did they not afford God externall worship whē they might securely doe it Why did they not according to Christs commandement celebrate the memory of his Passion by receiuing of the Sacraments 4. Out of these I compose the seauenth demonstration If after that Luther securely preached Protestancy neuer any ancienter Protestant came forth and adioyned himselfe to his company there were no Protestants before But no such euer came forth Ergo. But if there were no Protestant before Luther vndoubtedly he was the beginner of that company That the Protestant Church and Religion is new CHAP. XIII THE eighth demonstration with which we will proue that Luther was the beginner of the Protestant Church and religion we will frame out of Protestāts Confessions of the nouelty therof First therfore they say that in the iudgment almost of all men it is new and that it is almost impossible Now in almost all mens iudgement to wipe away from it the spot of noueltie Thus Illyricus in the Preface of his Catalogue VVhen Doctours raysed of God preach the Protestant gospell and doe inueigh against contrary errors they seeme in the iudgement almost of all men to bring a new doctrine vnheard of before and to impugne the old Againe It is very hard and almost impossible to remoue the hatefull marck of nouelty from the Protestant doctrine Almost impossible To which D. Fulke lib. de Success pag. 454. addeth that the Protestant religion VVas altogether new to most nations 2. Secondly in equiualent words they oftentymes call their Religion new or begun of new For as we shal straight rehearse they terme it in the blade renascent reuiuing borne a new renewed repayred restored raysed againe resuscitated And what can be meant by these termes but a religion either new or newly erecteth such as Christs religion is not For neither is it new in it selfe neither can it be begun or raysed anew because it can neuer fall Luther in cap. 22. Genes tom fol. 208. writeth thus Borne anew In the beginning of the gospell borne a new Monetarius c.. In cap. 31. fol. 434 Nine assemblies haue beene held since the Ghospell began to be borne a new In cap. 32. fol. 458 After the light of the Ghospell was borne againe In cap. 48. fol. 643. Borne againe At the beginning of the Ghospell rising againe In cap. 49. fol. 662. They desire to extinguish the light of the Ghospell rising againe In cap. fol. 342. I remember that before these tymes of the Ghospell borne a new And in the Praefat. Deuter. tom 3. Ienen fol. 75. The rising againe or rather springing Ghospell Rising againe Thus speaketh Luther Melancthon Apol. pro Luthero tom 2. Lutheri fol. 194. You oppose against the rising light of the Ghospell And respons ad Clerum Colon. tom 2. pag. 97. The beginning of the pure doctrine rising againe And in cap. 7 Matth. tom 1. Renewed fol 398 He termeth it renewed doctrine Carion in Chron. pag. 706. calleth their Church the renascent Church Iustus Ionas Epist dedicat lib. Lutheri de Iudaeis tom 7. fol. 166. God would that in our time the Gospel should be borne againe vnder the house of Saxony Reuiuing Besoldus in his Preface of the 4. part of Luthers Cōmētarie vpon Genes hath these words In the begining of the Church borne anew O siander in his Manual englished pag. 62 Our doctrine is renewed And his sonne Lucas Epist Euchar The doctrine of the gospel borne againe The author of the Sponge in Daneus pag. 13. Christianity greene calleth it the light of the Ghospell borne againe the Euangelicall doctrin reuiuing or quickning againe Kemnice in locis part 2. p. 106. In the beginning of the Ghospell borne againe Amongst the Sacramentaryes Zuinglius speaketh thus in supplicat ad Suithenses fol 121 Christianity being greene christianity rising againe And in Eccles fol. 41. New born truth Which phrase he repeateth disput tom 2. fol. 607. Gesnerus in Bibliotheca sayth of Luther The new borne Church doth owe much vnto him Recalled Ghospell Muscle Epist dedicat locorum I was in the beginning of the new rising Euangelicall truth Bucer in Retract pag. 642. vseth these words Beginning of the new born Ghospell Among the Ministers of the recalled Ghospell Beza in cap 3. Rom. v. 20. They by whose Ministery God in our age hath recalled to light Christs Ghospell almost buryed Gualter Praefat. in Rom. How much harme the Anabaptists did at the beginning of the new borne Ghospell Quickning againe Martyr in locis tom 2. pag. 228. In the beginning of the Ghospell born againe And in Epist dedicat comment ad Rom. The Ghospell quickning againe Hospin Epist dedicat 1. part histor The Euangelicall truth borne againe Sohinus in Methodo Theol. pag. 215. Among the Doctours of the Church borne againe And Caluin 4. Institut cap. 7. § 24. The doctrsne of the Ghospell borne againe lib. de scand pag. 76. 94. The ghospell borne againe Admonit 2. ad Westphalum pag. 784. The Ghospell is borne againe And cont Scruetum pag. 592 Of the Ghospell borne againe And in like manner he speaketh ordinarily Sadel respo ad Arthurum cap. 7. The Church borne againe Paraeus in Miscellan Vrsini pag. 26. The light of the Ghospell borne againe Danaeus respons ad Solnec pag. 1565 In the very beginning of the Ghospell borne againe Plessic de Eccles cap. 11 Christ borne againe Cambden in apparatu Annalium The rising
religion of Protestants Christ borne againe Vsher de Success cap. 8. In the beginning of the Ghospell born againe Scult in Praesat 4. partis Medullae Thou wert in the floure of the Church borne againe In the floure of the Church Moreouer Luther tom 1. in dis fol. 410. calleth his doctrine A doctrine repayred in this age And Praefat. ad Galat. tom 5. fol. 270. sayth In these later tymes the holesome knowledge of Christ was againe resuscitated Iames Andrewes lib. cont Hosium pag. 1 The Lord by the Ministery of Luther hath resuscitated the doctrine of the Ghospell And pag. 349 Repaired Among our men after the doctrine of the Ghospell was resuscitated Kenice Praefat. in lib. de vnione hypostat Resuscitated It is now three score yeares since the ancient serpent raised againe the heresy of Berengarius for to oppresse as they say in the hlade the doctrine of the Ghospell then first restored by Luthers Ministery Ghospell in the blade Caluin l. de Coena cap. 10 This controuersie began betweene them who were the chiefest captaines in restoring the doctrine of the ghospell and bringing it backe as it were when it was lost Restored Lib. de libero arbit pag. 147. The purity of the Ghospell was restored by Luthers labour especially Et epist ad Ducem Somerseti God would haue me to be one of those by whose labour he restored this tyme the sincere doctrine of the Ghospell Danaeus in method scripturae pag. 400 There are 54. years past since that tyme that the pure light and doctrine of the Ghospell was first restored to the world Apol. Eccles Angl. part pag. 64. It is no new thing though at this day the religion of Christ be entertained with despits and cheks being but lately restored and as it were comming vp againe a new Ibid. cap. 17. Our desire was to haue the temple of the Lord restored a new Iezier de bello Euchar. fol. 72 Euen from the beginning of the restored Euangelicall light M. Bancroft in his Suruey cap. 8. In this later age of the world it hath pleased God to restore vs the light of the Ghospell And M. Alenson in praef contro 4. Whitakeri After the restauration of the Ghospell And many more as we see in the chapter following call their ghospell restored Religion By which it may appeare that D. Andrewes Respons ad Apol. Bellarm cap. 1. did vntruly deny that their men call their fayth a restored fayth But whiles he denyeth that their men termeth it so he clearely sheweth what those meane who terme it so to wit that they meane a religion borne or framed a new according to the very substance thereof And in truth what els could they meane by so many termes and so often repeated of a religion greene in the blade borne againe rising againe resuscitated renewing reuiuing recalled repaired brought backe againe restored but a religion substantiall produced instituted and founded a new 3. Thirdly this is proued because they write that in the tyme of Luther of Melancthon of Zuinglius of the Anabaptists and such others was the beginning the very beginning the first beginning the originall the entrance the cradle the dawning the new rising of their Church and religion as appeareth in the aforesayd testimonies of Luther Melancthon Besoldus Kemnicius Musculus Gualter Peter Martyr Danaeus Vsserius Gezler And besides Luther in cap. 3. Genes tom 6. fol. 33. hath these words In the beginning of the Ghopell Carolostadius c. Georgius Fabritius lib. 8. Orig. Saxon. pag. 13. God would that true and holesome doctrine should haue her beginning in the vniuersity of VVittemberg Caluin epist ad Montis belgardenses col 590. ProtestaÌ„cy had its beginning in WitteÌ„berg edit 1617 In this our age the ghospel did slow out of the church of VVittemberg Brentius Praetat lib. Andreae contra Hosium Did not we all in the beginning of the reuealed ghosâ—ell with one mouth disproâ—e your Popish impietyes And in Recognit pag. 327 They cannot deny that euen from the beginning of the reborne ghospell the Zuinglians c. And I. de Maiest Christi pag. 109 Euen from the beginning of the reuealed ghospell Melancthon c. WitteÌ„â—ergenses in Resur Orthodoxâ— consensu pag. 22. Luther recaÌ„ted some things which in the beginning of the reborne doctrine of the ghospell he graunted to the Papists Lobechius disput 12. Straight after the beginning of the shining truth in the yeare 1520. c. Pappus defens 1 cont Sturmium pag. 19. Thou saydst that there were no such Theses published since the beginning of reâ—â—gion I shew thee the contrary that Luther and Philip held the â—â—me Sleidan prefat histor The beginning of Protestanâ—y was slender and almost contemptible and one only Luther â—â—re the brunt of all the world Zanchius lib. de perseueâ—at 192 Anabaptists in the beginning of ProtestaÌ„tisme In the beginning of the Ghospell the sect of Anabaptists â—â—ose Caluin epist 63 If in the first beginning of the church â—ising againe this example of tyranny doth now peep what will 〈◊〉 shortly And epist â—78 In the beginning of the ghospell â—â—rne againe Epist 269. The beginnings of the kingdome of Christ euery where in our ages were almost base and contempâ—â—ble Respons ad Sadoset p. 133 New rysing After the new rising of be ghospell Plâ—ssie de Eccles cap. 11. VVhat shall we thinke â—at the new starre anno 1572. did signify but the new birth of â—hrist on earth by preaching of the word And he addeth New birth â—â—at as Christ first borne put the Idols oracles to sâ—â—nce so borne againe he hath made the Popish miracles to vanish Scultete part 1. Medullae in Irenaeo cap. 9. The dawning In this age the dawning of the Euangelicall truth hath shined a new vnto vs. Zuinglius lib. de Prouid tom 2. fol 352 The Lantgraue laboureth that the infancy of Religion be piously nourished The infaÌ„cy And Gesner in Bibliotheca sayth Luther did happily set forward the infancy of Religion The Alogy of the Church of England part 2. c. 2. diuis 1. writeth that Anabaptists and Libertynes haue beene stirring in the world euer since the ghospell did first spring M. Powel de Antichristo c. 32. How many wars haue beene since the light of the ghospell arose the Heluetian the Protestant warre c. Vsserius I. de Success Eccl. c. 8. At the beginning of the ghospall borne againe Thomas Bilney c. M. Bale cont 8. cap. 68. speaking of the beginning of protestancy calleth it The rising of the new Hierusalem Horne in his harbour Second birth The second birth of Christ And Brocard in cap. 2. Apocal the second comming of Christ But surely if the yeare 1520. were straight after the beginning of Protestancy If Luther Second comming Melancthon Zuinglius the Anabaptists and such like were from the beginning at the beginning and straight after the Rising of Protestancy If the dissention amongst Protestants
werâ— in the first beginning of their Church If finally Protestant doctrine had its beginning in the Church of VVittemberge slowed from thence without doubt it is a new doctrine anâ— Church which either had neuer been before or waâ— newly founded and restored Besides what otheâ— thing can signify The new rising the new birth the seconâ— comming of Christ but another substantiall beginninâ— and repayring of Christs religion and Church afteâ— it had been quit ouerthrowne The same also theâ— insinuate when they say that the light of the ghospell was in their tyme new kindled or lightned againe Kindled againe Luther tom 2. fol. 305. alias 307. God in thâ— last tyme hath kindled againe the light of the ghospell And iâ— cap. 17. Genes tom 6. fol. 210. He hath kindled againe for vs the light of the Ghospell Melancthon in cap. 11. Dan. tom 2. fol. 314. God hath againe kindled for vs the light of the ghospell which againe he repeateth in his common places tit de gratia The same hath Vitus Theodorus Praefat. Comment Luth. in Psalm Kemnitius in locis tit de Iustificat pag. 109. 247. The Elector in Edicto de lib. concord Zuinglius Praefat. Elench â—om 2. fol. 5. sayth Christ hath lighted againe in our tyme the lanterne of his word Wherefore falsly doth Boysseul in confutat Spondaei pag. 25. deny that their men say they kindle a new the doctrine of saluation But as before I sayd of D. Andrewes Boysseul by denying that their men say they kindle againe the doctrin sheweth vs that those who indeed say so do meane of a substantiall production of light as in truth the word kindling doth signify 4. Fourthly I proue the nouelty of the Protestant Church and religion because they doe sometymes in plaine termes call it new fresh vnused vnacustomed newly planted altogeather new and newly erected Luther Praefat. formulae Missae tom 2. fol. 384. I was alwayes slow and fearefull for the weaklings in sayth from whome could not suddenly be taken so old and iniured nor ingrafted so fresh vnaccustomed manner of seruing God In Psalm 45. tom 3. fol. 439. he sayth Neither was there euer any new word reuealed without miracles Fresh and and vnaccustomed Which after he had proued by the example of Abraham Moyses and Christ he addeth So we also haue our Miracles And in cap. 19. Gen. tom 6. fol. 238. he sayth that Papists do sore vrge them saying Your doctrine is new and vnknowne to our forefathers which he answearing denyeth not that his doctrine is new but rather granteth it saying VVhat belongeth it to vs what God hath iudged of those who dyed heeretofore Now the word is preached vnto vs we must not be Inquirers who aske God why he hath reuealed his doctrine at this tyme and not in former ages And in cap. 12. fol. 148. he writeth in these words Heere surely Abraham doth shew no small trouble of conscience which euen in his banishment is wounded with this dart to thinke in this sort Looke to it Thou art all alon a stranger wheresoeuer thou goest thou carryest with thee a new and strange religion Art thou alone holy hath God care of thee only and hath he cast off so many people and nations The like sayth Luther we also suffer when our aduersaryes with open mouth demand of vs Are all who went before vs and followed the Popes religion damned Yee see how plainly he intimateth his trouble of conscience about the newnesse and strangenes of his religion And in Appendice confess in Hospin part 2. fol. 188. he sayth Because our doctrine seemed at that tyme very new and wonderfull scandalous to the whole world Seemed very new to the whole world it behoued me to deale moderatly And in the Epitaphe of his tombe is engrauen this verse A new light of the Ghospell he spred throughout the world Melancthon Praefat. in tom 2. â—urther thus speaketh of him He did so illustrate these writings that after a long darcke night there seemed to the iudgment of all pious and prudent men to arise a new light of doctrine New in the iudgement of al wise men The vniuersity of Wittembrg in Sentent de Missa in Luthero tom 2. fol. 349. writeth that the abolishing of priuate CoÌ„munion Is in this tyme a thing altogeather new As Luther ibidem fol 385. sayth that Communion vnder both kinds is a rite ouer new Spalatine whome ProtestaÌ„ts account a very graue man in his relatâ—on of the Confession of Auspurg sayth Neuer such a coÌ„fession Such a confession was neuer made not only a thousand yeares agoe but not since the beginning of the world neither in any history nor in any ancient Father or Doctor it such a Confession to be heard of Huber in Antibellarminum libro 4. capite 3. Our Church hath a new forme not vsed at that tyme when the Pope had all Wittembergenles in Prefat Refutaâ— Orthodoxi Consensus call the Protestant Church lately planted Lately planted and as yet tender George Fabritius libro 7. Orig. Saxon. pag. 858. speaking of protestancy sayth New doctrine Duke George was greatly against this new doctrine who was deceiued by the ancienter vse of his forefathers And lib. 8 pag. 21. writeth that euen the Prince Electour himselfe at the first did not much defend Luthers reformatioÌ„ as being new And Freschelius Archdeacon of Wittemberg Preface in Comment Melancthonis in Math. calleth the Protestants company according to the age therof a Childish camp A childish camp In like sort doe the Sacramentaries speake for thus Zuinglius Parenesi ad ciuitatem Suithensem tom 1. fol. 110. First of all in humble manner we entreat this that our cause doe not seeme to you absurd by reason of the newnesse therof And in Supplicat ad Suithenses he doth almost openly confesse that he goeth about to giue men new precepts and lawes And those of Zurich in Sleidan lib. 4. write that their ministers doe teach them now fiue yeares and that at the begining this kind of doctrine seemed new because they had neuer heard any such thing before Sadeel de vocat pag. 543 Seemed new God hath brought into light the reborne Church as a yongling and pag. 555. that he hath layd a new foundation of the Church and erected againe the Church Caluin Respons ad Sadolet pag. 131. A new foundation maketh a man speake thus to God in defence of his becomming a Protestant I being offended at the nouelty did hardly giue eare vnto it Bastingius epist dedicat Catechis Erected a new It seemed good to God in our time to erect his Church a new Beza in Confess cap. 4 sect 49 God would preserue the reliques of his Church in Poperie till he had erected it againe Erected againe The Apologie of the English Church part 4. cap. 4. Diuis 21 Forty yeares agoe and vpward it was an easy thing for them to deuise against
vs these accursed speeches and others too when in the midst of the darcknesse of that age it first began to spring and to giue shine some one glimmering beame of truth vnknowne at that time and vnheard of when as yet the thing was but new the successe therof vncertaine and when there could be imagined against vs no fact so detestable but that the people then would soon beleiue it for the nouelty and straungenesse of the matter Ibid. diuis 1 How often haue they set on fire Princes houses to the end they might quench the light of the gospell in the very first appearing of it M. Fox in his Acts set forth anno 1610. pag 788. writing what passed anno 1523 speaketh thus But in the blade Then the doctrine of Luther first beginning to spring and being but in the blade was not yet knowne wherto it tended nor to what it would grow D. Rainolds in his Conference cap. 5. sect 2. sayth that Protestants haue not had long tract of time And a late Chronicler thought to be M. Good win writing the life of K. Henry 8. 1521. sayth In the meane time our king moued at the nouelty of Luthers doctrine c. To all which I adde that Erasmus whome Protestants as is before shewed doe challenge as one of theirs writeth thus to the Brethren of the low couÌ„treis New Ghospell do not they bring a new Gospel who expound it otherwise then the Church hitherto hath don But Why I pray you should the Protestants religion seeme new to all the world and in the iudgement of all pious and prudent men if indeed it were not new How should so many so famous Protestants so often and in so many different kinds of writings to wit in prose in verse in peaceable in contentious writings in Historicall in dogmaticall in speech to men to God himselfe haue sayd so plainly and so many wayes that Protestant religion was new fresh vnwonted vnused wholy new newly planted erected anew if they had not thought that it was indeed new For as Luther sayth It is impossible but that the conscience will some time bewray it selfe 5. ProtestaÌ„ts first refuted If any answeare that the fore sayd ProtestaÌ„nts doe not meane that their religion was absolutely new First I aske why then doe they absolutely say so and that so often and in so many kind of writings Why do they so often and in so weighty a matter write otherwise then they think Besides it cannot be proued that they did not meane that it was absolutely new when they spake so otherwise then because perhappes at other times they sayd the contrary Which kind of proofe in Heretikes is friuolous as partly hath bin shewed before partly shall be more hereafter Moreouer this is like the excuse of the Marcionists who wheÌ„ they had brought in a new God yet would not haue him to be called absolutely new but only newly knowne or discouered 6. Fiftly I proue the nouelty of Protestant religion because euen then when in words they deny it to be new in very deed they confesse it to be new in such sort as sufficeth for me to proue that Luther was the Author therof and that it is not the religion of Christ to wit that it is of new erected built set vp according to the very substance and essence therof in such sorr as a house falleÌ„ downe but newly raised in walls roofe and other such substantiall parts may be called a new house Because Christs Church and religion cannot be new in this sort being such as can neuer fall For they confesse that the antiquity of their Church was abrogated and that it is a religion refined and reformed and that they are refiners and reformers D. Morton 1. part Apol. lib 1. cap vlt writeth that Protestants Challenge the first antiquity but abrogated by mens fault Iunius Cont. 4. lib. 4. cap. 7 sayth The continuance of the old and Catholike doctrine is renewed But surely that thing whose antiquity hath bin abrogated and broken of is new For the kingdome in Caesars time was new in Rome although it began with the citty it selfe because it had bin abrogated for diuers ages Wherupon Riuet Epitom-Cont tract 3 cap. 21 sayth Things are called new when they are renewed and vsed after interruption Besides whether a thing once abrogated and taken away and afterward restored be to be called new or no it sufficeth to me that the Protestant religion is in such sort new as a house fallen downe and newly raised may be called nâ—w because the Church religion of Christ cannot be new in this manner nor the antiquity therof abrogated and cut of In like sort Muscle in locis tit de noua doctrina pag. 417 Albeit he deny that they make new doctrine yet he confesseth that they renew doctrine And that he meaneth of a substantiall renouation wherin the very substance of a thing is renewed it appeareth by the precedent page where he sayth that old matters abrogated fallen down for some ages are renewed A Church therfore and religion fallen downe they doe renew that is erect a new Wherupon the French Confession Beza Bastingius as is before recited say that their Church is againe a new erected and others cal her a Church Reuiued resuscitated reborn and assigne a new birth and begining of her which words doe manifestly signifie a new substantial production or making of her which whether it be called a nouatioÌ„ or renouatioÌ„ maketh not much to the purpose seing it is either a substantial production or first making of that which neuer had bin before or a reproduction and second making of that which though it had bin before yet was fallen and the substance therof corrupted and perished Of which nouation or renouation Luther was the Author Besides they call themselues Renewers or Refiners ProtestaÌ„ts call themselues reformers and their Church or religion Reformed or refined D. Andrewes Respons ad Apol. Bellarm. cap. 1 VVe are Renewers VVe call our religion reformed Caluin Epist 341 VVe carry the name of the reformed Church Iunius lib. 4. de Eccles cap. 16 VVe hold the Reformed Christian saith And in the same sort speaketh the Scots Confession the Consent of Poland D Whitaker Prefat cont cont 1. quest 2. c. 16. 17. cont 2. quest 5. c. 2. others commonly I aske therfore what kind of forme of religion haue they taken away by their reformation and what a one haue they giuen Surely they haue changed the very substantiall forme For to omit al other points they haue taken away the former manner of obtayning remission of sinnes by the Catholike faith and good workes and brought in a new of obtayning the same by special faith only and vndoubtedly the way to obtaine remissioÌ„ of sins is substantiall to a Church and religioÌ„ But they who take away the substantiall forme and bring anew doe make a new thing and such a
mutation ought rather to be termed a formation then reformation But whether it be called a formation or reformation it skilleth little it sufficeth as I sayd that it is a substantiall mutation of religion the Author whereof Luther was and such a mutation as cannot happen to the religion and Church of Christ Moreouer it is the shift of old and new heretiques to bring in new religions vnder the name of Reformation Of the Marcionists thus writeth Tertullian They say that Marcion did not so much innouate the rule of faith as reforme that which heretofore was corrupted L. 1. cont Mar. c. 20. And he himselfe after he was become a Montanist This is shewed of vs that the discipline of Monogamie is neither new nor strange yea both ancieÌ„t and proper to Christian L. 1. de Monogam c. 4. that you may thinck the Paraclete Montaâ—us to haue bin rather the Restorer then beginner therof And of Seruetus thus write those of Zurick in Caluin cont Sâ—ruet pag. 626. He goeth on to thrust vpon the Church a most corrupt doctrine vnder the shew of restitution of Christianity 7. Sixtly because the Protestants designe the place the occasion the yeare day and hower when Protestancie began The place we haue heard already out of Caluin and Fabritius was Wittemberg the same doth Luther insinuate in cap. 49. Isaiae tom 4. The place where ProtestaÌ„â—y began fol. 192 saying Now VVittenberg is blasphemed as the fountaine of all heresies but it will come to passe some yeares hence that it shall be praised of Posterity as Gods garden from whence the Gospell was propagated into Germanie and all parts of the world And Mathew Index in Edicto aeterni deâ— That clamour against Antichrist came out of the durty townes of barbarous and base Germany â—rotestanâ—y began â—n a durty owne of barbaâ—ous couÌ„â—y A sit place no doubt from whence so durty filthy and barbarous an heresy should spring For sooth Wittemberge is the Protestants Syon from whence their law should come S. Austin thought it ridiculous madnesse that the Donatists shold say that the Church was to be renewed out of Africa the third part of the world â—e vnit c. â— shall we think it wisedom to imagin that it should be renewout of a durty and barbarous corner of Duchland The occasion of it was Tezelius his preaching of Indulgences â—he occaâ—on of the â—ginning â—f proteâ—ancy for thus writteth Crusius l. 10. Anal. Sueu pag. 5.8 Tezelius boldnesse stirred vp Luthers mind to set vp conclusions against those indulgences on the gates of the temple of All Saints in VVittemberg the last day of October which was saturday The day of the weeke month Hence now came the occasion beginning sayth he of correcting the christian religion Schusselburg Praef. tom 8. Catal. haeret Old men remember it recorded in writing for remembrance for euer and publiquely extant that this was the cause that the Gospell flourished againe in our age that Iohn Tetzele carryed about pardons of sinnes to be sold in the Popes name And Kemnice 4. part Exam. tit de Indulgentijs pag. 78 It is knowne to all the world that the impudent and impious sale of pardons aboue 50. yeares ago gaue entrance to the holesome repurging of heauenly doctrine And Manlius in Calendario On All Saints eue first of all conclusions against Indulgences were fastned by Luther vpon the gate of the Church of VVittemberg castle in the yeare 1517. at twelue of the clocke The lame lay Melanccthon â—â—â—fat in tom 2. The year houre Lutheri Sâ—eâ—dan Carion and others We haue then the place where to wit Wittemberg the yeare 1517. the day of the month the last of October the day of the weeke Saturday and finally the very houre to wit twelue of the clocke when first Protestancy began to arise And as Vincent Lyrin sayth Cap. 34. VVhat heresy euer was there which sprung not vp vnder some certaine name in a certaine place and tyme. 8. LutheraÌ„s say that the Sacraâ—â— doctrine is new Seauenthly I proue the nouelty of Protestancy by the mutual testimony of the Lutherans against the Sacramentaries and of the SacrameÌ„taries against the Lutherans For of the Sacramentaries doctrine thus testifieth Luther in defens verboruÌ„ Coenae tom 7 fol. 381. Neither doth any thing set forth this heresie more then noueltie And tom 2. Zuâ—nglij fol. 383. Carolstadius first raised his errour Melancthon Epist ad Miconium calleth it new doctrine and addeth that Carolstadius first raised this tumult Heshusius lib. de reali praesentia fol. 2 Carolstadius the vnhappy author of this discord Kemnice in fundamentis Coenae pag. 116 Carolstadius was the first author of this strife And Hospin part 2. Histor fol. 68. writeth that Melancthon impugned the Sacramentaries doctrine as a thing altogether new and fol. 46. that Pomeran disallowed Zuinglius doctrine as a noueltie And in Narrat dissipatae Eccles Belg. pag. 179. The Lutherans say to the Caluinists your doctrine is new and pag. 213. your doctrine is of late And Confes. Mansâ—eld The Sacramentary doctrin is iustly suspected of vs. First for the nouelty therof because it arose in our tyme. Neither ought the Sacramentaries to accept against these testimoÌ„ies as if they were the testimonies of the aduersaries For such aduersaries they are as themselues account them their brethren in Christ and members of the same Church Besides though themselues be aduersaries both to Catholiks and Lutherans neuerthelesse they will haue their testimonies to be takeÌ„ against theÌ„ in matters of fact Moreouer because the Sacramentaries themselues doe sometime confesse the same For Zuinglius tom 2. Respons ad Struthionem fol. 303. calleth Carolstadius The first teather of the truth of the Eucharist And in Subsidio fol. 244. he calleth his opinion the exposition of the ancients brought back is it were after it was lost Lasco Epist ad Reg. Poloniae Abolished by iniury of times and restored as it were after it was lost Lauather de dissidio Euchar. fol. 2. writeth that the Senate of Zurich VVas troubled which the newnesse of the matter And fol. 5. that when Occolampade had set forth his booke the Senate of Basle moued with the nouelty of the matter forbid his book to be sold vntill it had bin examined by Censors And fol. 1. that Zuinglius opinioÌ„ was not heard of by the common people In like sort the Sacramentaries write of the proper opinions of the Lutherans For of their impanation or mixture of Christs body and bread in the Eacharist Caluin Defens 2. SacrameÌ„taryes say the Lutheran opinions are new cont Westphalum pag. 786. sayth It is a new doctrine and till now vnheard of that bread is substantially the body of Christ Oecolampadius responsione poster ad Perkeymer pag. 18. Those new Doctours graunt to bread that it is substantially the body of Christ And of the Lutherans vbiquity wherwith they make Christs body to
be euery wher Caluin pronounceth Admonit vlt. ad Westphalum pag. 829. that it was not borne long since And Alcsius apud Hospiâ— part 2. fol. 201. sayth I know both the tyme when this opinion was first broached to the Church and who was Author thereof Authores Admonit de lib. concord cap. 3. pag 95. No man taught this their opinion before Luther Do they not bring forth new deuises and not heard of before in the Church Beza also lib. de Omnipraesentia carnis Christi pag. 509. calleth it a doctrine vnheard of in the Church Finally Clenuitius apud Heshus lib. cit calleth the very Confession of Auspurg A new and fifth Ghospell Thus Protestants testify the newnesse of each other doctrine 9. Eightly I proue the newnesse of Protestancy by the new and before vnheard of nams The names of Protestats are new which Protestants giue to themselues and to their Church and religion For they call themselues Protestants or Ghospellers and their Church and Religion Euangelicall and reformed D. Andrewes respons ad Apol. Bellarm. c. 1. Protestants is our name D. Willet in the Preface of his Synopsis VVe refuse not the name of Protestants This name agreeth fitly to our profession Praefat. consensus Poloniae VVe are termed Ghospellers Iezler lib. de bello Euchar. fol. 31. VVe will be called Gospellers and woe be to them who call vs otherwise His maiesty in his declaration against Vorstius pag. 49 The men of our Religion doe estsoones take to them the name of Gospellers D. Morton part 1. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 7 If ye aske where is the Euangelicall and reformed Church all will straight point their finger to the ProtestaÌ„ts assembly But surely all these names are new and neuer heard of before Luther neither can there be any name designed which before Luthers time was proper to the Protestant company But it is incredible that there should haue bin such a company and yet that it neuer had any proper or peculiar name giuen either by those of that company or of any others 10. Lastly I proue the nouelty of the Protestant Church by that that Protestants knowing well the newnesse therof deny that the greatest antiquity among Christian Churches is a marck of the true Church of Christ as doth Iunius lib. de Eccles cap. 16. yea some of them are so offended at this marck of Antiquity as they bid vs (a) Luth. tom 2 fol. 367. shut our eyes at it and say that it is a (b) Raino Confer c. 5. diuiss 2. bastardly marke and rather a mark of the (c) Ples l. de Eccles c. 3. Synagogue of Antichrist theÌ„ of the church of Christ Neuertheles seeing it ought to be vndoubted amongst Christians that since Christs Church was founded by him it neuer failed or perished and that it is manifest that he founded his true Church before any false Christian in imitation of him began a false Christian Church it ought also to be certain that she which amongst all Christian Churches is the most ancient is the very true Church of Christ Neither would euer Protestants deny this if they did not too wel know that their Church is far yonger then the Roman as being according to their saying her daughter 11. Out of all which hath beene recited in this chapter I make my eight demonstration in this sort If the Protestant Church and Religion were in Luthers tyme new or builded or begun a new he was the Authour and beginner thereof But so it was as hath beene made manifest by the aforesayd confessions of Protestants Therefore Luther was the Author thereof That Protestants do plainly confesse that Luther was the Author and Beginner of their Church and Religion CHAP. XIIII THE ninth demonstration that Luther was the Author of the Protestant Church and religion shall be taken out of Protestants open confessions thereof First therefore they say that he was the first who openly preached Protestancy Luther Praefat. in tom 1 The Duch men did looke what would be the euent of so great a matter which before none either Bishop or Deuine durst touch Ibi. fol. 159. It is said Luther first of all in our age did taxe the Popes abominations and illustrate the ancient and pure doctrine of the Church And Praefat. disput fol. 370. Luther the first that preached his Ghospell I first allowed the marriage of Bishops In cap. 3. Galat. tom 5. fol. 333 Many gaue God thankes that by the Ghospell which by Gods grace we then first of all preached c. In cap. 4. fol. 387. God in this later tyme hath againe reuealed the truth of the Ghospell by vs vnto the vngratefull world Epist ad Argentinenses tom 7. VVe dare boast First published Christ that Christ was first published by vs. Melancthon Praefat. in tom 3 VVith what ioy did men receaue the first sparckle of light discouered by Luther praef in tom 2. Lutheri God by him restored the Ghospell to vs. Againe He recalled the minds of men to the Sonne of God First spark of Protestancy and as the Baptist shewed the lambe that taketh away the sinnes of the world And praefat in tom 3 VVhen there was great darcknes in the Charch and the light of the Ghospell was oppressed Luther layd open the iustice of fayth The vniuersity of VVittemberg in Hospin part 2. histor fol. 250 Out of this Church and schoole did shine the first light of pure doctrine touching God and Crist The first light which our new aduersaryes are forced to graunt though they burst with enuy Amsdorfe Alber and others write that Luther was the first vnder heauen who impugned externall sacrifice Priesthood in the new testament Schusselburg lib. 2. Theol. Caluin fol. 130. sayth that Vtenhonius a Caluinist was impudent when he wrote that he heard Conrad Pellican say that many learned men in Germany held the doctrine of the â—hospell before Luther appeared and that Pellican himselfe had reiected Purgatory before Luthers name was heard of This lye sayth Schusselburg the later Caluinists haue refuted And fol. 228. he affirmeth that Luther began the refining of the doctrine of the Ghospell This praise sayth he we truly and with good right giue to Luther though the Caluinists take it in very ill part Morgerstern tract 145. sayth It is ridiculous to thinke that before Luther any held the pure doctrine and that Luther receaued it of them and not rather they of him Milius in explicat confess August art 17. If Luther had had orthodoxall forerunners in his office Had no predecessours there had beene no need of a Lutheran reformation The Author of the booke entituled Prognostica or Finis mundi pag. 12. Luther as is confessed first brought in the ghospell at the end of the world The first that brought in the Ghospell Brentius lib. de Coena in fine God raised vp Luther to carry before vs the torch of the knowledg of Christ. And Smedensted apud Hospin
also in that name it cannot be sayd that they are called so in disgrace or contemp Fourthly it appeareth to be false that D. Morton lib. cit and D. Sutliue lib. de Eccles cap. 2. say It is rather to be attributed to a lye then to Luthers desert that Protestants call themselues Lutherans For as we see Luther himselfe called them so and therin they follow his example Neither skilleth it that Luther did once dislike this name because he did oftentimes vse it it was vsuall to Luther to allow and disallow the same thing Fiftly we see it to be false which D. Whitaker writeth cont 2 quest 5. cap. 2 pag. 494 None of vs euer called himselfe a Lutheran we acknowledge not these names nor are we delighted with them This name our aduersaries haue fastened vpon vs only vpon malice and enuie Neither are we called Lutherans but of the Papists False also is that which D. Fulke sayth de Success pag. 188. that they acknowledge no other name proper to their religion but the name of Christians and Catholiques These I say are false for Luther whome D. Whitaker accounteth his father and the Lutherans whome he termeth his brethren in Christ doe call themselues so and are well pleased with that name Besides they are so termed of the Sacramentaries and common people and therfore not of Papists only nor vpon malice and enuie but as Grauer sayd truly for distinction sake and that most iustly For as S. Athanase sayth VVho deriue the origen of their saith from other then Christ iustly carry the surnames of their Authors But Protestants as we haue shewed confesse that they deriue the origen of their faith from Luther Therfore iustly they beare his name 8. Out of all which hath bin rehearsed in this chapter I thus frame my ninth demonstration of this Matter If Luther and many other famous Protestants sometimes indeed some times in plaine words do confesse that Luther was the Author of their Church and religion he ought to be so taken and esteemed But they do soe confesse Ergo. The Minor is euident by all that is sayd in this Chapter And the Maior by what we sayd in the Preface For so many and such principall Protestants knew well the origen of their religion and willingly would not lye to the disgrace and ouerthrow therof That Protestants cannot proue their Church to haue bin before Luthers time by any probable argument or sufficent testimonie CHAP. XV. THE tenth and last demonstration for to proue that Luther was the first Author of the Protestants Church and religioÌ„ I will take from hence that albeit Protestants doe sometimes boldly affirme their Church and religioÌ„ to haue bin before Luthers time Yet they can neuer proue it by any reasonable argument or sufficent testimony Which thing alone would suffice to shew that as I sayd before it is a fable vainely feigned falsely affirmed and fondly beleiued It hath bin alwayes the fashion of heretiques boldly to auouch any thing but few things to proue euen in shew This S. Augustin doth often obserue in the Manichees and Donatists and some of his sayings we haue alleadged before Of Eunomius S. (a) Lib. 2. cont Eunom Basil noteth the same and S. (b) Serm. 6. in psal 118. Ambrose of all heretikes saying Heretiques are wolues they can howle but proue nothing And this doe Protestants confesse For thus D. Whitaker cont 2 quest 5. cap 18 Heretikes are wont to boast and promise truth In Diatrib but not to proue it Of Luther thus writeth Zuinglius tom 2. fol. 473. and 509 One argument he hath in all these matters He sayd it And fol. 447 Luther relyeth only vpon his â—oyes and deuises Fol. 395 Thou puttest forth whatsoeuer the motion of thy affections do appoint and when a reason of thy saying is exacted of thee thou standest naked vnarmed And of the Lutherans thus writeth Erasmus They say it and for that alone they will be belieued Of the Sacramentaryes in like manner Luther writeth in defens verb. Coenae tom 7. fol. 384. One word not easily ouerturneth all these thinges for if you deny them then as butter melteth in the sun so they quaile And the same is euident to all that read the bookes either of Lutherans or Sacramentaryes In the meane tyme they cry to vs that that Pythagoricall word He sayd it hath no other place but in (c) VVhit lib. 2. de script cap. 10. sect 5. Bullenger in comp l. 1. c. 3. Christ and the Scripture that in other it is the proper argument of (d) Vorstius Antibel p. 468. fooles that to affirme any thing beside scripture is to (e) Powel l. 1. de Antic c. 19. trifle that til we proue our affirmatiue they will stand in their (f) Luth. tom 2. fol. 437. negatiue and exact (g) Vorstius l. cit Fulke de success p. 74. demonstrations that is either expresse testimonies of scripture or forcible reason deduced from thence Now we say the same to them They affirme their Church to haue bin before Luthers time We deny it vntil they proue it Neither let them affirme it only which is the proofe of fooles wilfull men but if they cannot bring demonstrations therof at least let them produce some credible testimonie or some effectuall reason and argument Otherwise their beliefe in this matter Scorp c. 11. is as sayth Tertullian a peruerse beliefe which will not belieue thinges proued and belieueth thinges which cannot be proued 2. That in this matter they be destitute of all credible testimonie appeareth sufficently by what hath heretofore bin rehearsed of their owne confessions and now we will shew that they want also all probable reason or argument For all their arguments herein be reduced to this one Our doctrine is the doctrine of Christ Therfore our Church was alwayes since Christ For thus agreeth D. Whitaker cont 2. q. 5. c. 3. p. 498 I vse this argument VVhat Church soeuer keepeth the doctrine preaching of the Apostls she is the Apostolical Church But our Church doth so Therefore c. Of the Maior sayth he no controuersy can be made And cap. 5. p. 505 It was our Church which was in the tyme of the Apostles and afterward vnto the Apostasie But how doe we proue this By this reason that our Church keepeth the same faith and doctrine which the Church in the Apostles time and afterward kept And cont Dureum sect 1 If thou holdest Christs doctrine thou art a Catholike And sect 2 It must needs be the true Church of Christ which keepeth conserueth Christs doctrine deliuered in his word Dancus cont 3. pag. 388. VVith vs is the true Church of God because we restore the true doctrine of Christ Lubbertus lib. 5 de Eccles cap. 1 If the doctrine which our Church professeth be the same which Christ deliuered then our Church is that which Christ instituted D. Fulke lib. de Success pag. 27 Seeing we are
participation of Sacraments communication of publike prayer and such like other Ecclesiasticall exercises to wit when one thought he agree with the rest of the Church of Christ in the principall heades of Christian fayth yet I know not for what light causes withdraweth himselfe from the rest of the Church and communicateth not with her in the sacraments Such sayth he are properly called schismatikes M. Perkins in cap. 5. Galat. vers 21. Heresy is in doctrin Schisme in manners order and gouernement D. Fulke de Success pag. 165 There may be schisme in the Church where the same doctrine is held on both partyes the one wanteth lawfull succession D. Field lib. 1. of the Church cap. 7 Some professe the whole sauing fayth but not in vnity as schismatiks Dancus in August de haeres cap. 3. He is a schismatike who retayning the same doctrine of fayth and that entire yet without probable and better reason followeth not the decent rites of the Church The same he hath Apol. pro Heluet. Eccles pag. 1485. Bullinger tom 1. Decad. 5. serm 2. Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 190. D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 5. cap. 10. D. Rainolds Praelect 1. col 2. Heshusius in 1. Cor. 1. and others 5. Now that proper Schismatikes to wit such as willfully separate themselues from the Communion of the Church be not members or parts of the Church is cleare by the testimony of the Fathers That Schismatikes are out of the Church the confessions of Protestants and manifest reason S. Augustin lib. de fide symbolo cap. 10. sayth Neither doth an heretike belong to the Catholike Church nor a schismatike Tract 3. in 1. Ioan. All heretikes all schismatikes are gone out of the Church Lib. 3. de Baptism cap. 19. All heretikes and schismatikes are false Christians And lib 2. cont Crescon cap. 29 I thinke not that any so doteth to belieue him to belong to the vnity of the Church who hath not charity The like he hath in many places S. Ambrose lib. 7. in Luc. cap. 11. Vnderstand that all heretikes and schismatikes are separated from the kingdome of God and from the Church S. Optatus lib. 2. The Church cannot be with any heretikes or schismatikes S. Fulgentius de fide ad Petrum cap. 38 Belieue most stedfastly and doubt nothing that not only all Pagans but also all Iewes Heretiks schismatiks which end this life out of the church are to go into euerlasting fire The same teach S. Hierome S. Chrysostome loc cit S. Ignatius Epist ad Smyrnens S. Iren. lib. 4. cap. 62. S. Cyprian lib. de vnit epist 42.51.55 S. Prosper de vocat Gentium cap. 4. and the rest The protestants confessions of this matter we related heeretofore amongst whome say Lib. 1. c. â— num â— that this is an vndoubted truth Reason also conuinceth the same for as Caluin confesseth 4. Institut loc cit The coÌ„munion of the Church is held with two bandes to wit consent of doctrine and fraternall charity But Schismatikes breake the band of fraternall charity therefore they are not within the Church Againe Danaeus lib. 3. de Eccl. c. 5. sayth This is the marke that thou art of the visible Church that outwardly thou professe the fayth communicate with the rest of the Church in the same SacrameÌ„ts but schismatikes doe not communicate in Sacramentes with the rest of the Church And D. Feild lib. 2. of the Church cap. 2. sayth Communion in Sacramentes vnder lawful Pastours is an essential note of the true Catholike Church but Shismatiks want this communion And Casaubon epist ad Card. Peron pag. 9. The true Churches of Christ are vnited in the vnity of fayth and doctrine and coniunction of minds and in true charity and offices of charity especially of mutuall prayer But Schismatikes are not vnited in charity and offices of mutuall prayer Finally only Catholikes are members of the Catholike Church as is euident and (a) VVhi. conc 2. q. 5. cap. 3. Protestants confesse But Schismatikes are not Catholiks as the very name doth declare the Fathers doc teach and (b) Gesner loc 24. Field l. de Eccles c. 7. Protestants acknowledge 6. By this it appeareth that the foresayd Maior which is the foundation of Protestants in this matter is not only false but also so manifestly false as out of this question it is commonly denyed of Protestants themselues Besides it is not only false but also so improbable that neither it is proued of Protestants nor can be any other wayes then by proofe of fooles or willfull men that is by their owne saying For D. Whitaker as we haue seene proueth it no other wayes then by saying it is out of controuersy D. Fulke that it is manifest But Luther more boastingly sayth l. de Missa priu tom 7. f. 247. This is our solid foundation and most stedfast rocke VVhersoeuer true doctrine of Christ or the Ghospell is preached there is necessarily the true holy Church of God And who doubteth of this sayth he may in like manner doubt whether the Ghospel be the word of God A notable proofe surely and fit for Pythagoras schoole and a sound foundation on which to fayned a Church should rely and a fit rock for them to build vpon who haue left the rocke vpon which Christ built his Church Wherefore that I may imitate S. Augustine in the like matter Lib. 1. cont Gaudent cap. 33. I aske whether God or man hath told them that wheresoeuer true doctrine is there is the true Church If God let them read it out of the Scripture where indeed we read that where the true Church is there true doctrine is but contrarywise that where true doctrine is there the true Church is there we neuer read If men haue told you this Behold a fiction of man behold what you belieue behold what ye serue behold for what ye rebell ye run mad ye burne Againe what kind of men were they surely no other then your selues And what is your authority I say not with vs but euen with your selues Is as one of your part sayd the iudgement of Lutherans or Sacramentaryes the square of truth Moreouer Pareus l 3. ce â—â—stifie cap. 13. seeing that three things are essential or substantial to the true church to wit true doctrine lawfull Pastours and people following their Pastours nor any thing can be vnles all the essentiall parts be it is sophistry and madnesse to inferre that that company is the true Church wherin one only of these parts is to be found If they say that by the true Church they meane not her which is true in nature or essence of the Church but only her which is true in doctrine of whose essence is only truth of doctrin First they deceaue the Reader For we speak only of the Church true in essence not of that which is only true in doctrinâ— as a schismaticall Church may be Besides if they meane such
part 2. histor fol. 232 He first in our age brought into the world the light of the Ghospell after it had beene extinguished Thus the Lutherans And in like manner the Sacramentaryes Zuinglius respons ad Luther tom 2. fol. 380. thus speaketh Luther Thou first camest into the field Ibidem in Exeges fol. 335. VVe willingly acknowledge thee to be the chiefest defender of the Ghospell the Diomedes who durst set vpon the Roman Venus the Ionathas who durst alone assaile the campe of the Palestins Bucer de Coena pag. 675. calleth Luther our first Apostle of the pure Ghospell and 673. sayth Luther first in our age did impugne superstitiō Caluin writeth that he began to take the cause in hand and first shewed the way First shewed the way Danaeus lib. de Baptismo cap. 15 Luther first gaue others occasion to thinke rightly of mans iustification before God Lauather de distid Euchar. anno 1546. Luther first in our age did by diuers writings openly inueigh against Popish errours Author Orthodoxi consensus in Praefat. Apol Luther and Zuinglius were the first who began to reprehend inueterate errours Againe The first teachers of Germany Luther Melancthon c. Amongst English Protestants M. Iewell in defens Apol. part 1. cap. 7. diuis 3 Thus I say in this later age after your so long darcknesse Luther was the first that preached the Ghospell of Christ M. Fox in his Acts pag. 402 Luther opened the veine long before hidden M. Wotton in his examination of the title of the Roman Clergy It might be truly sayd that Luther was the first who in that tyme did publish Christ especially in the chiefe points of the Ghospell which is iustification by fayth in Christ And in this respect it is an honour for Luther to haue been a sonne without a father a scholler without a maister Scholler without a maister Yee see how plainly they say that Luther first preached the Ghospell first brought in the Ghospell first shewed the way first published Christ discouered the first sparcle first layd open the iustice of fayth had no orthodoxall Predecessours was a sonne without a Father and a scholler without a maister and that in the article of iustification by only fayth which the soule hinges and summe of Protestancy 2. Secondly without Luthers help no man had knowne a iote of Protestancy Luther cont Regem Angliae tom 2. fol. 497 Vnles we had opened the way they were like to haue vnderstood nothing at all either of Christ or of the Ghospell Nothing at all In cap. 15. 1. loc tom 5. fol. 134 The gospell is by our labour and diligence brought into light and they first learnt it of vs without our paynes they could neuer haue learnt one word of the Ghospell And fol. 141 God hath called vs by his holy spirit Not one word that by vs Christ might be manifested known to the world This prayse they cannot take from vs that we were the first carryed away the prize of bringing the Ghospell into light of which they would not haue knowne one iote vnlesse by our paines and study it had beene brought forth And ibidem in cap. 17. Matth. he sayth that without him the Sacramentaries and others would not haue knowne neuer so little of the Euangelicall truth Not one iote Zuinglius in Exegesi tom 2. fol. 358. writeth these wordes of Luther If they had not had it of vs Neuer so little doubtlesse they would haue knowne nothing of And those of Zurich in their confession write thus Luther boasteth that himselfe is the Prophet and Apostle of the Germans who hath learnt nothing of any and all haue learnt of him None knew any thing but what they haue knowne by him 3. Thirdly they write that Luther did kindle the Protestant light Schusselburg tom 13. Catal. haeret pag. 897 Luther kindled the Protestant light By Luthers ministery the cleare light of the Ghospell is kindled againe for vs Lobechius disput 1. pag. 6. By this mans Ministery the Lord hath kindled in Germany the light of the heauenly truth M. Iewel defens Apol. part 1. cap. 7. diuis 3. pag. 56. Luther and Zuinglius were appointed of God to kindle againe the light which you had quenched Verheiden in his Images at the Image of Luthers Thou first didst preach the Ghospell with so great constancy Tho◠didst lighten the torch of the Ghospell to the world And at the image of Zuinglius he sayth of him and Luther Laid the foundation These two Architects laying the foundation of the Euangelicall kingdome D. Whitaker cont 4. quest 5. cap. 3. pag. 693. Luther lighted a torch which no flouds can put out And in Praefat. tom 2. Danaei it is sayd God raysed vp Luther for to kindle and restore to the world the light of his Ghospell And what is it to be a kindler of light but to be Authour therof 4. Fourthly they say that Luther was the renewer the Founder the Restorer the setler and promulgator of their Church and Religion Zuinglius in Exegesi tom 2. fol. 358. writeth that Luther challengeth to himself all the instauration of sayth Illyricus in Schusselburg tom 13. Catal. haeret fol. 850 This same religion was renewed and setled by Luther Hamburgenses ibidem fol. 658. Renewed religion setled it Luther truly the renewer of diuine worship Heshusius lib. de praesentia Christi sayth of Luther He was that notable instrumens by which true religion was renewed Saxonici in the conference at Aldburg Scripto 7. pag. 319. speake thus Since the tyme of the Ghospel renewed by Luther Hemingius in Schusselburg lib. 2. Theol. Caluin Pap. 133. Luther restored the ancient worship which our first parents receaued of God and which Christ commended to his Church Caluin admonit 2. pag. 147 By his endeauour principally the purity of the Ghospell was restored And pag. 768. God raysed Luther others Restored purity of the Ghospel by whose Ministery our Churches were founded and instituted The Protestant Princes in Germany in Schusselburg tom 13. catal pag. 877. write that the King of Nauarre willingly affirmeth the French Churches to acknowledge Luther to be their Father in Christ. Or as Thuanus lib. 79. histor reporteth their wordes That Luther is esteemed and honoured of the French Churches as their Father in Christ and that by his ministry truth was first pulled out Beza de Haeret. puniend pag 148 Luther the Renewer of Christian Religion Renewed Religion And in his Images The principall instrument of Christianity renewed in Germany Danaeus cont 5. pag. 1135. reckoneth Luther amōg those of whom saith he all other men haue receaued what light of the Ghospell they haue And lib. 1. de Euchar. cap. 1. First Renewer of the Church truth termeth him the Renewer of the Ghospell of Christ. And Apol. pro Eccles Heluet The first renewer of the Church Hospin part 2. hist fol. 134 The first
renewer of Euangelicall truth and doctrine Bucer Resp ad Episc Abrincen pag. 613. writeth that God by Luther hath merueilously and happily restored the summe of the Ghospell in our age Restored the summ of the Ghospell Restored Religion D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 5. cap. 12. pag. 528 Luther only tooke vpon him to restore religion corrupted and to renew the ancient and true doctrine And ad Rat. 10. Campiani calleth him the Renewer of the old sayth or as the English Apology termeth him the promulgator of this doctrine D. Humphrey in Prolegomenis pag. 82. saith VVe reuerence Luther as a great renewer of Religion And what is it to be a renewer Restorer Setler of a thing corrupted especially if he restore the summe thereof as Bucer sayd that Luther restored the summe of Religion but to be an Author or maker of it according to the very substance thereof 5. Finally they plainly graunt that Luther was the first to whom Protestancy was reuealed that he layd the first foundation of Protestant Religion and that he was the captaine Luther first to whome Protestats was reuealed Author and Begetter therof Luther himselfe in sermone Quid sit homini Christiano praestandum tom 7. fol. 274. speaketh thus to Protestants I was the first whome God set in these lists I was also the first to whome God vouchsafed to reueale these thinges which are now preached vnto you Behould Christian Reader a new (a) Theod. l. 2. c. 18. Aetius surnamed Atheist who sayd that those thinges were now reuealed to him by God which hitherto he would haue to be hidden vnto all A new (b) Basil l. cont Eun. Eunomius who sayd that he had seund a new way to God and vnheard of which none before had perceaued A new (c) Vinc. c. 42. Nestorius who gloried that he first vnderstood the Scripture A new Cataphryge (d) Athan. de Synod who sayd VVe haue the first reuelation of vs beginneth the Christian sayth For of thee Luther began the Protestant fayth and thou wert the first to whom the God of this world as the Apostle speaketh vouchsafed to reueueale those thinges which haue beene preached to Protestants Praescrip cap. 34. To thee alone that I may vse Tertullians wordes hath truth been reuealed Forsooth thou hast found greater fauour and more plentifull grace at the Diuells hands Againe in exposit Papaselli tom 2. Laid the first foundation of Protestācy fol. 398. Luther hath these words VVhen I layd the first foundation of this cause as Bullinger Praefat. Comment in Ioan. writeth of Zuinglius saying VVhen Zuinglius layd the first foundation of Euangelicall doctrine Moreouer Luther tom 1. fol. 206. writeth thus to his most inward fellow Melancthon The citty is full of the noyse of my name An Herostratus and all men desire to see the man the Herostratus of so great a fire Ye see how in a letter to his most assured friend he confesseth himselfe to be the Herostratus that is the Author of that fire wherewith not the temple of Diana but the temple of God burneth Melancthon also acknowledged the like as it appeareth by these words of Luther in a letter to him tom 9. Wittemberg Germ. fol. 416. Thou writest Author leader that for my authorityes sake thou didst follow me as the author and leader or captaine in this matter Behould how Melancthon accounted Luther the Author And what suspicion is there that Melancthon should in this matter write otherwise to him then he thought Schusselburg tom 8. Catal. pag. 363. defineth true Lutherans or Protestants to be those who imbrace the doctrin of the Gospell amending Popish abuses of which amendement sayth he Luther was the Author And the same meane they who call Luther the Author of the Protestant reformation For they protest amendment or reformation is indeed as hath beene shewed before a substantiall mutation or change of religion and therefore the Authour of such an amendment or reformation is indeed the Author of a new Church and religion D. Sutcliue lib. 2. de Eccles cap. 3. pag. 237. writeth in this manner VVho were the first Authors of raysing the Church fallen downe Author as Cranmer and other our Bishops also Luther Zuinglius c. And cap. 7. pag. 328. The Princes who first followed the Authours of restoring religion Osiander in Sleidan fol. 22. sayd that Luther Melancthon had made a certaine diuinity which sauoured more the flesh then the spirit Maker Lobechius disput 1. pag. 26. calleth Luther the first deuiser of the Confession of Auspurg Deuiser And Melchior Neofanius Pastour of the Church of Brunswich in loc Kemnitij part 2. sayth How much doth all Duch-land owe to worthy Luther for his great deserts who was the Author of pure Religion Authour D. Couel also in his defens of Hooker art 19. pag. 130. plainely confesseth that some Protestants make Luther and Caluin Authours of the religion which they hold And M. Horne in his harbour maketh England speake in this manner Begetter I am thy Country England which brought forth blessed man Iohn VViclise who begot Hus who begot Luther who begot truth And heereupon it ariseth that as Rescius in his Ministromachia p. 15. reporteth the Lutherans call Islebium where Luther was borne their new Bethleem A new Bethleem Forsooth because there was borne their new Messias the begetter Author and founder of their religion Mark now Reader how Luther by his owne and other Protestants confession was the first to whome Protestant doctrine was reuealed layd the first foundation of the Protestant cause was the Authour of the Protestant amendment or reformation was the deuiser of the first Protestant Confession was the Herostratus of the Protestant fire finally was the leader maker begetter and Authour of the Protestant Church and Religion Which is in plaine termes the very same which in all this booke I endeauour to proue Iustly therefore may Protestants sing to Luther as Lucretius did to his Epicure the Author beginner of Epicurisme Lib. 3. Those also of Basse were not ashamed in the Epitaph of his tombe to call Oecolampadius the first author of Euangelicall doctrine in that citty as report Hospin and Lauather in their Hostories an 1531. and Iunius lib. 4. de Eccles cap. 8. Neither was it peculiar to Luther to spread deuises vnder the name of religiō For thus writeth Iezler de bello Euchar. fol. 26. of Ministers Matters deuised of some few we thrust vpon the whole world And King Henry 8. when he began to encline to Protestancie set forth articles with this title Articles deuised of his Maiesty 6. And from this euidēce acknowledgement that Luther was the Author of Protestant religion it proceedeth First that Luther oftentimes calleth it his doctrine his gospell his word his cause his part For so he speaketh tom 1. fol. 138. tom 2. fol. 23. Protestancy is Luthers doctrine 29.