to make an Opposition betweeâ— the Scripture and the Fathers maintaining that to follow the iudgment of the Father is to reiect and abandon Scripture thâ—â— themselues are to be pardoned for prefeâ—ring the Scripture before the Fathers Bâ— to this you mâ—y answere that seeing tâ— Fathers do vrge admit and reuerence tâ— Scripture in as high a degree as the Protâ—stants do the mayne question and douâ—â— here is not whether the Scripture is to 〈◊〉 aduanced aboue the Authority of the Fâ—thers which we all Catholikes do fuâ—â— acknowledg should be but only Whethâ—â— the Fathers or the Protestants do more truly expound the Scripture Animaduersion XLI THe Fathers haue many aduantages aâ—â— priuiledges for interpreting of Scriptuâ—â— and for true or perfect fayth of which tâ— Protestants are altogether depriued Firâ—â— the Fathers liued neare to Christ some coâ—uersing with his Apostles others in succeâ—ding ages and therefore more easy it wâ—â— for them to know what exposition wâ—â— then deliuered of the Scriptures and whâ—â— fayth was first preached Add hereto thâ—â— the very practise of their Religion then 〈◊〉 â—â—d the Church then remayning by the â—cknowledgment of our Aduersaries in her â—â—rity of fayth serued as a Comment to â—hem of the Scriptures Secondly diuers of these Fathers euen â—rom their Mothers breasts did suck those â—ongues wherein a great part of the Scripâ—ure was written And therefore they were â—uch aduantaged for picking out the true â—eaning thereof whereas our Aduersaries â—nowledg of the said tongues is gotten onâ—y by Art and Industry which euer subscribes to Nature Thirdly the Fathers deliuered their senâ—ence and interpretation of Scriptures many â—ges before the points of fayth Doctrine 〈◊〉 for which they were vrged were euer brought in question or doubt and therefore what they writ was free from all partiality of iudgment they not knowing what Innouations were to rise in these our dayes Our Protestant Ministers their â—emporall states being wholy interessed â—herein must now of necessity shape the construction of the Scriptures to the maintenance of the Religion now introduced The Fathers though writing in seuerall ages seuerall tongues vpon seuerall occasions do notwithstanding vnanimously conspire together in their writings for non est Deus dissensionis sed pacis and if any one by chance did vary from the rest he was reprehended by them But the Protestants are so contrary in their writings in maintayning meere contradictory and opposite doctrines as is most wonderfull to obserue of which point who seeeketh further to be satisfied let him peruse such bookes as are lately written vpon that subiect The Fathers did cut of all lets and impediments which might hinder either Deuotion or study Hence it is that they imbraced perpetuall Chastity contemned all riches Honours chastized their bodies with fasting prayer and other spirituall disciplines How far different our ProtestaÌ„t Doctours are from such courses I leaue to the world to iudge The Fathers I meane diuers of them did worke many true and stupendious Vide Cyprian serm de lapsis Ambr. de obitu Satyr c. 7. Optat l. cont Donat. Aug. de Ciuit. l. 22. Chrysost cont Gentiles Eusebius l. 7. c. 14. Miracles which gift of exhibiting Miracles God bestoweth only vpon them who are gracious in his sight and who truly serue him But no man can serue God truly with a false fayth The Protestant Doctours neuer yet wrought any one Miracle in confirmation of their Fayth the euidency of which point appeareth from the liberall Confession of the Protestants themselues For D. Fulke thus acknowledgeth Jt is (y) Against the Rhemish Testam in Apoc. c. 13. knowne that Caluin and the rest whom the Papists call Arch-Heretiks do worke no miracles to whose confession D. Sutcliffe subscribeth saying We do (z) In his Examen of D. Kellisons Suruey printed 1606. p. 8. not practise Miracles nor do we teach that the truth of Doctrine is to be confirmed with miracles The Fathers I speake of diuers (a) As Ignatius Polycarpus Cyprian and others of them for professing only their Christian fayth and religion haue endured with inuincible courage and immoueable resolution which they could neuer haue done but only through the particular assistance of the Holy Ghost most exquisite tormeÌ„ts yea Martyrdome it selfe of whom it may be truly said Paradisi clauis sanguis Martyris Our Sectarie Doctours excepting some Mechanicall and ignorant fellows burn't for their obstinacy in Queene Maries tyme are so far from suffering any pressures for professing their fayth as that most of them haue made their Religion a ladder to clyme vp to worldly preferments they by it only enioying as through want of its losing riches honours other such temporall aduancements The Fathers of the Primitiue Church did represent the body of the whole Church of Christ in those tymes For of necessity it must be granted that all the seuerall members of the Church of God did belieue and practise the same Religion which Gregory Theodores Austin Jerome Chrysostome Epiphanius the Gregories the Cyrills Basill Ambrose Hilary Optatus Cyprian Irenaeus Ignatius and the like did teach since in them according to the seuerall ages wherein they liued those words of the Apostle were fulfilled (b) Ephes 4. Christ hath placed iâ— his Church Pastours and Doctours c. Now all this granted it doth ineuitably follow that if the Fathers of those seuerall ages did iointly erre in their interpretation of Scripture and doctrine of fayth and beliefe resulting from thence that then the whole visible Church of Christ did damnably erre in fayth during all those ages but this mainly crosseth both the command as also the promises of Christ the first in those words Dic Ecclesiae (c) Math. 18. the second in that sentence Behould I am with you all dayes euen to the consummation of the world for neither wold Christ euer send men to a false Church nor can he be said to be euer with his Church if he suffer it to professe for many ages a false and erroneous fayth nor vpon such a supposall could the Church be truly stiled Columna (d) 1. Timoth 3.9 firmamentum veritatis Lastly the more learned Protestants do ascribe all Excellency to the Primitiue Church for purity of fayth and consequently to the Fathers and Pastours of the Church of those tymes for thus we find them to write Kempnitius thus sayth We (e) Exa Concil Trid. part 1. pag. 74. doubt not but that the Primitiue Church receaued from the Apostles and Apostolicall men not only the Text of Scripture but also the right and natiue sense thereof D. Iewell The primitiue (f) In his defence of the Apology Church which was vnder the Apostles and Martyrs hath euer beene accounted the purest of all others without exception Finally to contract this point D. Bancroft heretofore the Archbishop of Canterbury thus writeth touching Caluin and Beza For M. Caluin (g) In his Suruey of the pretended
Damnatioâ— And D. Whitaker thus auerreth It (h) Controuers 2. q. 5. cap. 9. is false that Hereticall and Schismaticall Churches are true Churches Thus far of our Aduersaries excluding Papists Anabaptists Arians Heretikes and Schismatiks from the Protestant Church and not acknowledging them to be members thereof nor their Doctrines Protestancy Now we will obserue what change and mutability of iudgment herein our Aduersaries shew at other tymes in willingly embracing all these former sort of men and some others also as good Protestants and in state of Saluation And first of the Papists Luther sayth In (i) In Ep. contra Anabapt the Popery there is true Christianity yea the Kernell of Christianity many pious great Saincts M. Hooker (k) L. Eccles Pol. 3. c. 1â—8 we gladly acknowledg them of Rome to be of the family of Iesus Christ and M. Bunny we (l) In his Treatise of pacification sect 18. are no seuerall Church from the Papists nor they from vs. The Anabaptists are admitted for good Protestants by Oecolampadius saying (m) L. 2. Ep. p. 63. Baptisme is an externall thing which by Law of Charity may be dispensed with And D. (n) In his answere to the Protest Apol. l. 4 cap. 3. sect 10. Morton we Protestants iudge the state of the Anabaptists not to be vtterly desperate The Arians are acknowledged by M. Morton to be of the same Church of which the Protestants are and he giueth his reason in these words Because (o) In his booke of the kingdom of Isâ—ael and the Church pag. â—4 the Arians hould the foundation of the Gospell And M. Hooker seemeth to intimate the same in these words The (p) Eccles Pol. lib. 4 p. 181. Arians in the reformed Churches of Poland c. hereby insinuating that those Protestant Churches of Poland did acknowledg the Arians to be members of their Church Of Idolaters M. Hooker thus fauorably writeth Christians (q) Eccles Pol. l. 3 pag. 1â—0 by externall profession they are all whose marke of recognizance hath in it those things which we haue mentioned yea although they be impious Idolaters wicked Hâ—tikes c. Infideâ—ls are also in our Aduersaâ—â—â— iudgments mâ—mbers of a sauing Churchâ— fayth for thus writeth Swinglius Ethâ—â—â— (r) Swingl Ep Oecolam l. 1. p 39 si piam mentem domi fouerit Christianus 〈◊〉 etiamsi hristum ignoret And hereupon Sâ—â—glius concluâ—eth that (s) Swingâ— tom 2. fol. 118. 559. Hercules Socrates â—ristides are now in Heauen as is in anothâ—â— place shewed Finally the Protestants are 〈◊〉 courteous as that they are content to â—â—corporate Antichrist within their Church 〈◊〉 state of Saluation This I thus proue I◠〈◊〉 ouermuch knowne and diuulged that mâ—ny Protestants do teach with full moutâ— that the Pope is Antichrist Now then let 〈◊〉 see how at other times they write of hiâ— whom they hould to be Antichrist and 〈◊〉 Religion Antichristianity Here then we fâ—â—â— D. Whitaker thus to acknowledg I will (t) D White in his answere to the first Demonstration of D. Sanders not say that from the tyme that Papistry begâ—â— to be Antichristianity the Popes themseâ—â—â— haue beene all damned And yet D. Whitaker 〈◊〉 where confidently auerreth the Pope to be Antichrist In like sort M. Powell hath the like sentence saying I will (u) In his answere to the last Demonstration of D. Sanders in no wise say that all the Popes from the tyme that papistry was first reuealed to be Antichristianity aâ—â— damned Thus much of this point whereby we may discerne the wounderfull and vnheard mutability of our Aduersaries Iudgments touching who are Protestants and Professours of that Church wherein a man may be saued A demonstration vnansâ—erabâ—e â—â—le and irrepliable to proue that the Proâ—â—â—â—ant Church and fayth such as these forâ—â—r men do restrayne or enlarge it is 〈◊〉 capable of Saluation And how then can Christian know if he will rely vpon the â—â—gments of Protestants herein to what 〈◊〉 of Protestants or within what Church 〈◊〉 may range himself for the Saluation of 〈◊〉 Soule Animaduersion LXXXXVIII â—N that there are many Catholike Articles the which the Iewes before the comâ—ing of Christ did belieue therefore it folâ—â—weth euidently that the said Articles canâ—ot be reputed to be Innouations or lately â—â—uented Doctrines but as ancient as the â—ymes before our Sauiours Incarnation I â—ill exemplify in some The Booke Eccleâ—â—asticus admit for the tyme it be not Scripture speaketh directly of our Sauiours â—â—scending into Hell in those words where it â—s said in his person I (x Eccles 24. will pierce through â—â—e sower parts of the Earth J will looke vpon all such as be a sleepe and will lighten all them that â—â—ust in the Lord A saying so pertinent for proofe of Limbus Patrum that D. Whitaker (y) Contra Duraeum l. 8 pag. 5â—7 acknowledging the true sense thereof auoydeth it by saying the Booke is not Canonicall which at this present is impertiâ—ent since here I seeke only to proue the â—â—uth of diuers of our Catholike points as being belieued by the Ancient Iewes before our Sauiours tyme in their writings whether Canonicall or not Canonicall Touching Prayer for the Dead It is warranted by the example of Iudas (z) Machab 2. Machabaeus the true seruant of God as also is taught by Rabbi Simeon who liued before Christ and diuers other ancient Rabbyes Rabbi Simeon thus writing of such as are temporally punished after this life After (a) In lib. Zoar. in cap 13. Genesis they are purged from the filth of their sinnes then doth God cause them to ascend out of that place Touching Gods Induration or hardning of Pharaos hart the Iewish Rabins so conspire in affirming with vs the same to be by Gods permission only and not by his working that Peter (b) Peter Martyr in Epist. ad Roman c. 9. Martyr and Munster (c) Munster in Annot. in Exod. c. 7. do accordingly acknowledg this Exposition Concerning Freewill that place in Eccâ—esiasticus (d) Ecclesiast 1â— to wit Say not thou he hath câ—â—sed me to erre Yf thou wilt thou shalt obserue the Commandements He hath set water and fyre before thee stretch out thy hand to which thou wilt Before man is life and death Good Euâ—â—â— what lyketh him shal be giuen him This testimony I say is so euident for Freewill that D. Whitaker in answere thereto reiecteth the authority saying De loco (e) In resp ad ras Camp rat 1 p. 25. Ecclesiasticiparùm laboro c. J make small account of Ecclesiasticus Philo the learned Iew who liued in Christ his tyme thus writeth Man (f) Philo in lib. quod Deus fit immutabelis hath Freewill to which purpose is extant the Oracle in Deuteronomy I haue placed before thee Lyfe and Death Good and Euill chuse Lyfe Concerning Angells Saints the Booke of Tobias written before Christ is so playne (g) Tob.
5. with vs touching Patronage and intercession of Angells that therfore D. Whitaker doth accordingly confesse and say thereof Jllum (h) Whitak in respons ad rat Camp rat 1. p. 15. verò Tobiae Raphaelem c. Litle do we regard the Example of Raphaell the Angell mentioned in Toby c. All this is different from the Canonicall Scriptures c. Concerning the force of Merit of Almes and other good works proceeding from true fayth in the Messias The Doctrine of the Ancient Iewes is deliuered in the Booke of Tobyâ— Almes (i) Tob. 1â— doth deliuer from Death and doth purge all sinne and in the foresaid booke of Ecclesiasticus As water (k) Eccles 3. quenceth burning fyer So Almes expiateth sinne Touching vnwritten Traditions (l) Orig. hom 5. in Numer Hilar. in Psalm 2. Origen and Hilary do affirme that Moyses did leaue many things vnwritten the knowledge whereof was continued by tradition And Rabby Iudas affirmeth the same of Moyses a thing so euident that the doctrine of the Tradition of the Iewes is confessed by (m) writing vpon the Booke in Capitulis patrum Paulus Phagius the Protestant That Monasticall Lyfe was not altogether wanting but in some sort professed among the ancient Iewes is witnessed by Iosephus thus writing The (n) Ioseph antiquitaâ—um Iudaicarum l. 18. c. â— righteousnes of the Essenes is meruaylous c. They enioy their riches in Common c. And in this course aboue foure thousand men do liue hauing neither wyfes nor seruants c. And in another place Triall (o) Ioseph l. de bello Iudaito l. 2. cap. 7. is had of a mans continency and his other manners are for two yeares tryed and then he is taken into the Company Lastly to omit for greater breuity the Doctrine of Vowes the doctrine of one Visible high Priest head of the Church in those Jewish tymes the Doctrine of the Iewes in remitting the ending of Controuersyes not to the Scripture but to a certaine visible and liuely Judge the doctrine of the Iewes concerning Confession of sinne all these being related by (p) Gala. in areanis Cathol veritatis l. 10 v. 3. Galatinus I will close this passage with Melchisedech his offering of bread and Wyne in sacrifice and the prefiguration thereby of our Sacrifice of the New Testament Of this point Rabby Phinees thus sayth Jn (q) Phinees in cap. 28. Numer the tyme of the Messias all Sacrifice shall cease but the Sacrifice of bread and Wyne shall not cease c. as it is said Psalm 100. Thou art a Priest for euer according to the Order of Melchisedech Rabby (r) Hasardan in Bereschit Rabbi ad cap. 14. Gen. Hasardan Rabby (s) Samuel in Bereschit Rabbi ad cap. 14. Genes Samuel say the like of Melchisedech his offering vp of bread and wyne in figure of the Sacrifice now in the tyme of the New Testament a point so euident that (t) Bibliander de SS Trinitote l. 2. pag. 89. Bibliander the remarkable Protestant doth not doubt to confesse the same of the old Jewish Rabins Thus far of the doctrines of the ancient Iewes before Christ his Incarnation which doctrines we Catholiks at this day hold All which doctrines are meerely Dogmaticall points without any Type or reference to Christ his comming that only of Melchisedech excepted and therefore it cannot be answered that the said doctrines should now cease vpon our Sauiours comming in flesh into the world as some ignorant men would suggest but it must needs be that the said Doctrines if they were true then they must be also true now By which so many foresaid Examples of our Catholike fayth thus affirmed by the ancient Iewes it is made most certaine that our Religion â—s not New or lately inuented but most ancient and vndoubtedly Apostolike Animaduersion LXXXXIX IT is a most impudent assertion of D. Field who thus writeth We (*) D. Fâ—â—ld in his Book of the Church l. 3. c 8. p. 76. firmely belieue that all the Churches of the world wherein our Fathers liued and dyed to haue beene the true Protestant Churches of God c. and that they which taught imbraced and belieued those damnable Errours which the Romanist do defend against vs were only a faction But see now this most vast Lye is controuled First then D. Iewell thus acknowledgeth The (u) Iewel in his Apology of the Church part 4. c. 4. Truth was vnknowne at that tyme and vnheard of when Martin Luther and Hulderick Swinglius first came vnto the knowledg and preaching of the Gospel And therefore (x) Buâ—ter in Ep. anno 36. ad Episc Hereford Bucer stileth Luther The first Apostle to vs of the reformed Doctrine And Schlusselburg the great Protestant thus contesteth the same Jt (y) In Theolog. Calu. l. 2. fol. 130. is impudency to affirme that many leâ—ned men in Germany before Luther did hold tâ—â— Doctrine of the Gospell Yea Luther himselfe thus vaunteth of himself Christum (z) Luther Ep. ad Argentinens à nobis primo vulgatum audemus gloriari And truly the force of reason assureth vs that there were no Protestants at or immediatly before the breaking out of Luther For if any were why did they lye hid and vnknowne at Luthers Rising No other pretext can be alledged but feare of persecution But this cannot be alledged For the Protestants if any then were might securely step out and ioyne themselues with Luther considering that then diuers Magistrats and Commonwealths had openly vndertaken the Patronage of Luthers Doctrine and Religion Animaduersion C. IN all points of faith the Authority of the Priuate Spirit is to be contemned as begetting nothing but Noueltyes and Innouation And let ech good Catholike anchor his iudgement vpon the authority of Christs visible Church and the chiefe Head therof assuring himselfe that although Simon the fisher was not able to determine Matters of fayth yet that Simon Peter and his Successours assisted with competency of meanes haue euer an impeacheable Soueraignty granted to them and a delegated authority from Christ himselfe for the absolute discussing and deciding of all Controuersyes in Religion Tu (a) Math. 16. es Petrus super hanc Petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam portae Jnferi non praeualabunt aduersus eum And truly if the visible Church of Christ and the Supreme Iudge therof could err in matter of fayth how could God be excused from Cruelty by threatning to all Men eternall Perdition if we be not obedient to the Church of God Dic (b) Math 18. Ecclesiae si Ecclesiam non audierit sit sicut Ethnicus Publicanus Furthermore as the Apostle saith (*) Hebr. 8. Our Testament is established in better Promisses c. meaning then the Testament of the Jewes But if it was said in the tyme of the Old Law that he who (c) Deuteron 17. presumptuously refuseth to obey the CommandemeÌ„t of
the Pryest that by Decree of the Iudge that man should dye what punishment theÌ„ is he to vndergoe who in Matters of faith and Religion contemneth the authority of the High Pryest of Christ his Church aduancing his owne priuate iudgement aboue the said Authority Animaduersion CI. IT is most certaine that Luther himself was not a perfect and entire Protestant such I meane as the present Church of England acknowledgeth for a true Protestant my Reasons are these First because Luther after his rising and euer vnto his death retayned and belieued diuers of our Catholike Doctrines disclaymed from by the Protestants of England Secondly because Luther taught and maintayned seuerall Heresies I meane Heresies euen in the iudgmeâ—â— of our now Protestants To begin with the first branch Luther euer maintayned to hâ—s deaâ—h the Reall Presence as the whole worâ—â— knoweth and therefore his followers in thâ—â— doctrine are called for distinction lake Lutherans by Swinglius and Caluin Luther taught the Doctrine of (d) Luther l. de Assertionibus Art 30. Euaâ—gelicall Councells to wit that a man may do more then that he is commanded Luther taught the Doctrine of Purgatory of which point see Tom. 1. Wittenberg 〈◊〉 Jndulgentijs And answerably to this ground he is confessed by (e) Vrbanus Regius in 1 part Operum formulae cautè loquendi de sanct cultu Vrbanus Regiâ—s a Protestant to defend Prayer for the Dead Luther defended Prayer to Saints of which point he thus writeth De (f) Luther in purgat quorundam Articulorum in Epist ad Gregorium Spalat intercissione Dinorum cum tota Ecclesia Christiana sentio iudico Sanctos à nobis honorandos esse atque indicandos Luther taught and approued the vse of Jmages as is witnessed by Beza (g) Beza in resp ad Colloq Montisbelg parâ— altera in praef Touching the making the signe of the Crosse vpon our forehead Iohannes Creucliâ—â— a Lutheran thus writeth Cùm (h) Creuelius in hiâ— refut Caeremoniâ—rum missae printed Magdeburg 163. pag 118. imus cuâ—â—tum fine surgimus è Lecto cruce nos iuxta Lâ—theri altorum piorum institutioncâ—â— signamus Finally to omit some other points wherin Luther neuer dissented from the Church of Rome Luther euer mantained that the gouerment of the Church is Monarchiall neither Aristocraticall nor Popular as appeareth out of his owne (i) Vide Luther in loc Com. Class 1. c. 3. 7. pag. 107. words Now to come to relate Luthers Heresies and such as are reputed for Heresies and some of them for blasphemies both by Catholiks and Protestants which he euer maintained without any after retraction I first alledg his impious Doctrine touching the most Blessed Trinity concerning which he thus speaketh (k) So relateth Swinglius of Luther so speaking to 2. ad respons Confut Luther fol. 474. The Diuinity is threefold as the three Persons be c. And according to this he expungeth out of the Litany this sentence Holy (l) Luth. in Euchir precum anno 1543. Trinity one very God haue mercy vpon vs and he further sayth Anima (m) Luth contra Iacobum Laetomum tom 1. wittemberg Latinê edit anno 1551. mea odit Homousion or Consubstantialis Briefly Luthers Blasphemy was so odious execrable against the B. Trinity that Swinglius (n) Swinglius tom 2. in respons ad Confutat Lutheri did purposely write against Luther touching this very point Touching the Euent of things Luther holdeth contrary to all Christian fayth that all things come to passe through a certaine Stoicall and fatall Necessity thus writing hereof Nullius (o) Luther in Assert damnat per Leonem Decimum Art 30. est in manu c. It is in no mans power to thinke Good or Euill but all things as Wicleffs Article condemned at Constance did rightly teach proceede from absolute Necessity Luther taught an Heresy wherby the propagation of Christian Religion is much hindred to wit that it was not lawfull to wage war against the Turk His words are Praeliari (p) Luth in tom 2. Wittenberg in Assert Damnat per Leonem decimum Assert 34. contra Turcas est repugnare Deo visitanti iniquitates nostras per illos Luther denyed all temporall Magistrates thus teaching hereof Among (q) Luther de saeculari potestate in â—â— 6 Germ. Christians no man can or ought to be a Magistrate but euery one is to another equally subiect Touching fayth and good works Luther thus endoctrinateth his followers Fides (r) Luther to 1 propos 3. nisi sit sine c. Except fayth be without good works it doth not iustify nay it is not fayth And further No (s) Luther in his Sermons Englished pag â—76 worke is disalowed by God except the Authour thereof be disalowed before Luther further taught as D. Couell witnesseth that (t) These be D. Couells words in defence of M. Hooker Art 15. p. 101. the Sacraments were effectuall though they were administred by Satan himself Of which point Hospinian the Protestant thus also writeth Lutherus (u) In hist Sacr. part altera fol. 14. coâ—sque progreditur c. Luther proceedeth so far herein that he maintaineth the Sacrament to be a true Sacrament etiamsi è Diabolo conficeretur though it were to be consecrated by the Deuill To conclude Luther so disualewed the sufficiency of Christ suffering in body for vs as that he most blasphemously teacheth that Christ did not suffer only in body but also his Diuinity suffered for vs His words hereof are these Cùm (x) Luther in Confess Maiore in Caena Domini credo quod sola humana Natura pro me passa est Christus vilis nec magni praetij Saluator est c. Yf J belieue that only the humane Nature suffered for me then is Christ a Sauiour but of a base small worth and himself needeth a Sauiour Thus far now in Demonstration that Luther was not an entyre Protestant and such as is allowed by the present Church of England Animaduersion CII TWo things among others concur as is in this last Animaduersion exemplifyed in Luther to make a perfect Protestant to wit That he doth maintayne all chiefe points of Protestancy Thus he is not to hould only some few points of Prorestancy and in the rest being more in number and of greater importance to partake with the Catholikes The second thing necessary to a Protestant that he doth not hould perâ—inaciously any mayne Heresy or Paradoxe wholy impugned and contradicted both by Catholiks and Protestants For this man in this respect is rather to be styled an open Heretike then a Protestant euen in the Censure of the Protestants themselues Here now I auer that this Animaduersion clearely euicteth that Husse Waldo Wicliffe and the rest so much vrged for ProtestaÌ„ts for the proofe of the visibility of the Protestant Church in those ages were no Protestants at all and consequently that the Protestant Church
they are most erroneous in the immediaâ— Obiect Animaduersion CXLII WHen the Catholikes do alledge certaiâ—â— Notes of the Church as Antiquity Vniuersality Succession Conuersion of Heathâ—â— c. our Aduersaryes seeke to auoyde thâ— force of some of these Notes and particularly of Succession and Conuersion of Gentils since they say these two Notes are claymâ—â— by confessedly false Churches seing thâ— Greeke Church houldeth Succession and thâ— Arians haue conuerted the Gothes anâ— Vandals To answere hereto I first say thesâ— two Instances are false for the Greeke Churcâ— hath its Succession as interrupted and begunne from those Intruders who begaâ— their owne separation from the Romaâ— Church about the Holy Ghosts proceeding And as concerning the supposed Conuersâ—ons of the Goths and Vandals by the Arians it is only pretended Seing the Gothes weâ—â— not at the first conuerted by the Arians buâ— being conuerted before were after by them peruerted as appeareth out of Zozomen l. 6. c. 37. and Theodoret l. 4. cap. vlt. Secondly I reply to the former Euasion That the Catholikes rather to preuent the impostures of our Aduersaryes obiecting hereto theÌ„ out of any absolute necessity of the said Notes do propound the foresaid Marks or notes not as proper alone to the true Church but only as markes inseparable though not conuertible from it so they vndertaking thereby not to set downe in the affirmatiue that where any such of these in separably marks be there the true Church certainly is but rather in the Negatiue that where these be wanting there the true Church is not But certaine it is that these Notes are wanting in the ProtestaÌ„t Church Animaduersion CXLIII I grant that the Catholike Religion is inuolued with farre more difficultyes as may be exemplifyed in the doctrine of the Reall presence then the Protestant Religion the reason therof being in that our Religion consisteth of Affirmatiue Articles the Protestants fayth so far forth as it differeth from the Catholike of Negatiues Yet to recompence this we fynd that the Protestant fayth is attended on coÌ„trary to the Catholike faith herein with diuers grosse absurdityes necessarily and immediatly flowing from the Protestants Tenets or Assertions I heere passe ouer how (9) Luth. l. de capt Babil c. de Baptism Luther houldeth that Infants at the tyme of their Baptizing haue an articulate and actual faith of all the chiefe Misteryes of Christianity That our Aduersaryes howsoeuer they disclayme from it in words teach (10) Luther in Assert damuat per Leonem Art 36. Beza in his display of Popish practises pag. 202. Sumglius to 1. de Prodentia fol. 366. that God is the Author of sinne These and many other such like absurd Doctrines I heere passe ouer only I will a little insist how (*) Luther in Assert art 32. sayth That all good works God iudging them are mortall sinne Luther and the rest do mantayne that all the good works of iust Men are Sinnes Now the absurdity of this doctrine how transparent is it Since from it would follow that the worke of fayth by which we are iustifyed should be Sinne as also that prayer wherein we pray Dimitte nobis debita nostra should be a sinne But is it not most absurd that man should be iustified by Sinne and that he should seeke by Sinne to obtaine the remission of sinne Againe from this fountayne we might thus truly Syllogize and reason All good works are to be done but some mortall sinnes are good Works Therefore some mortall sinnes are to be done Againe No mortall sinne is to be committed but all good works are mortall sinnes Therefore no good Worke is to be done These Loe are the inferences of the former absurdity to wit that all good works are mortall Sinnes that some mortall Sinnes are to be committed and that no good worke is to be donne Now whereas by way of retortion our Aduersaries and particularly Kempnitius in his Examen Concilij â—rident vpbraid vs that we teach a more blasphemous doctrine in maintayning that we are iustifyed by our owne works and not by Christ his Passion To this I reply thar in obiecting of this appeares either extreme malice in our Aduersaries or at least most wilfull ignorance Therefore to remoue this stumbling block we say that we are iustifyed by an inherent Iustice or Renouation of life in vs as by the formall Cause but we are also iustifyed by the merits of Christ his Passion as by the meritoriour Cause both which different causes may stand together without any derogation of the one to the other contrary to the intended fraud of our Aduersaries herein in seeking to confound these two different Causes Animaduersion CXLIV YF it be demanded how Luther first being instructed of the Deuill concerning his doctrine as also being of a vicious life as â—n this Treatise is in part elswhere shewed â—hould for his doctrine be so much applauâ—ed repayred vnto by the broken memâ—ers of the Catholike Church To this may â—e answered that Luther his select choice â—reparing of his doctrine to entertayne and â—t the then seuerall affected humours of â—ch peculiar declining estate and degree â—his being accompanied with the Visitation â—f Gods heauy iudgments hanging ouer â—he preuayling Sinnes of those degenerate â—â—mes was the chiefe Allectiue for the more easy imbracing of Luthers Doctrine Noâ— the choycnes of Luthers doctrine consisted to insist in some particulars in mantayning liberty of pretended Mariage in Clergy men in his exposing of Monasteries and other rich spoyles of the Church to the greedy appetite of the temporal Magistrate and finally in deluding of the simple sinfull Laity with his other licentious doctrines of Saluation by only fayth and disclayming from the necessity of Good Workâ— as houlding them needles as aboue out of his owne particular sayings we haue proued In the seuerall imbracing of all whicâ— as S. Jerome (1) Ierome contra Vigilantium in like manner said of Vigilantius his followers Luthers followers fauored not so much him as their owne Vâ—â—â— These are the fatall steps of Luthers suddaâ—â—â— rising greatnes And this is the lesse to 〈◊〉 wondred at seeing we see that the like câ— rather far greater progresse was made 〈◊〉 this kind by Mahomet through his absurd and licentious Doctrines wherewith so many Nations are euen at this day infected Animaduersion CXLV YF in retaliation of what is said in thâ—â— last aboue Animaduersion our Aduersaries shall labour to distract their Discipleâ— with vnequall obiecting insteed of answere the supposed wicked liues of certaine Popes I reply hereto that admitting for the tyme the said wicked liues of the Popes to be true and not forged yet the disparity here resteth in that those Popes were not the first Restorers of our Religion to light since they liued many ages after our Catholike Religion was vniuersally professed as appeareth aboue from the confessed antiquity of the Catholike Roman Fayth Againe I say the Question heere is not whether the high
which we Catholikes call the Sacrament of Extreme Vnction But to proceede further in this point touching the Booke of Common Prayer in those dayes I will alledge the words of M. Done an eminent Protestant who thus writeth hereof Concerning (38) M. Doue in hit persuasion to English Recusants pag. 31. the Booke of Common prayer when the Masse was first put downe K. Henry had his English Liturgy and that was iudged absolute and without exception But when King Edward came to the Crowne that was condemned and another in the place was made which Peter Martyr and Bucer did approue as very consonant to Gods word When Queene Elizabeth began to reigne the former was iudged to be full of imperfections and a new deuised and allowed by consent of the Clergy But about the middle of her reigne we grew weary of that Booke and great meanes hath beene made to abandon that and establish another Which though it was not obtayned yet do we at the least at euery change of Prince change our Booke of CoÌ„mon prayer We be so wanton that we know not what we would haue Thus this ProtestaÌ„t Now from hence I conclude First that Protestancy here in England is not so ancient as from king Edwards dayes Secondly that it was not at perfection in the middle of Queen Elizabeths reigne For if it had then beene perfect and complete there had beene no neede of a new Common Prayer-Booke For at euery change of the Common booke of prayer there was a change of points of fayth according to which points the former CoÌ„munion Booke was to be reformed corrected And therfore according to the iudgment of men of those tymes it is thus said by M. Parker The day-starre (39) M. Parker against Symbolizing part 2. cap. 5. pag. 4. was not risen so high in their dayes when yet Queene Elizabeth reformed the defects of King Edwards Communion Booke c. Yet so altered (40) Ibidem pag. 37. as that when it was proposed to be confirmed by the Parliament it was refused Animaduersion CLXXVIII THe Doctrine of Recusancy is taught both by Protestants and Catholikes Since both of them hould it a most wicked thing and not to be donne but vnder payne of damnation without finall repentance that a man should communicate only in going to the Church and to heare but a sermon contrary to that Religion which himselfe belieueth to be true For though this Act may seeme to be couered vnder pretence of obseruing the Princes commandement for feare of losing our temporall estates yet in very deed this Act of going to the Church virtually and potentially includeth a conformity in all points to the religion of that Church to the which a Man goeth and so â—t comes to be a dissimulation or rather an absolute Abnegation of that Religion which a man houlds in his soule to be the only true Religion Now that the Protestants do teach the Doctrine of Recusancy I meane not to be present at the sermons or Prayers of a different Religion I proue from (41) Caluin de vitandis superstitionibus extat in tract Theolog. pag. 584. Caluin from the Deuines (42) The Deuines of Germany alledged in this point by Sleydan in Comment Englished l. 7 fol. 87. of Germany from Melancthon (43) Melancth in Concâ— Theolog. pa. 618. from Peter (44) Peter Martyr in his discourse hereof recited in Melancth Treatise de Concil Theolog. p. 394. Martyr and to omit others from D. (45) Wâ—â—eâ— in Synops. printed 1600. pag. 612. 613. c. Willet That the Catholikes do with the like or greater feruour preach and practice thâ— same Doctrine of Recusancy is cleare by the Example in our owne Country where sinne Protestancy was first planted some scores besides of the Laity of Venerable learned priests haue chosen rather to suffâ—â— death in Queene Elizabeth her Reigne then once to goe to the Protestant Church their liues being commonly proffered them if they would conforme themselues and leaue their Recusancy But they loathed such Conditions For the more full proofe of this Verity I add the Testimonies of three most eminent most remarkable Men whose iudgments some yeares past being demanded whether the Catholikes of England might for sauing their goods liuings go to the Protestant Church to heare a Sermon did ioyntly condemne the same as most vnlawfull and impious The men were these Cardinall Bellarmine Cardinall Baronius and Mutiâ—â—Vitellescus now generall of the Order of the Society of Iesus I will heere set downe their owne words The Judgment of Cardinall Bellarmine COnsideratis rationibus pro vtraqueparte allatis existimo non licere viris Catholicis in Anglia Haereticorum adire Ecclesias multó minùs concionibus ipsorum interesse minimè autem omnium cum ipsis in precibus vel Psalmodia alijsque ipsorum Ecclesiasticis ritibus conuenire Ideo propria manu subscripsi Robertus Bellarminus Sanctae R. Ecclesiae Presbyter Cardinalis tituli Sanctae Mariae in via The iudgment of Cardinall Baronius VIsis consideratis quae superiùs diligenti peruestigatione in vtramque partem disputata reiectis omnino exufflatis quae pro parâ—e affirmatiua fuere proposita quòd scilicet liceret Catholicis adire Ecclesias Haereticorum vt superiùs sunt proposita inhaeremus saniori sententie posteriori ab Ecclesia Catholica antiquitùs recepta vsu probata quod scilicet ita facere pâ—â— non liceat quam rogo nostros Catholicos Anglâ—â— amplecti ex animo Caesar Cardinalis Baronius titul SS Nerei Achillei Presb. The iudgmeÌ„t of Mutius Vitellescus then Prouinciall now Generall of the Order of the Jesuits VJdi rationes quae in hoc Scripto pro vtraque parte afferuntur existimo non licere vâ— Catholicis in Anglia Ecclesias Haereticorâ—s adire c. Et puto hoc debere esse extra Contrâ—â—ersiam Mutius Vitellescus Prouincialis Romaâ— Prouin Societatis Iesu Thus much in generall touching the Doctrine of Recusancy mantayned by diueâ— learned Protestants and practised with losâ— of life by many Reuerend Priests here 〈◊〉 England and fortifyed with the iudgmeâ—â— of these three former most learned pious and godly Men. Animaduersion CLXXIX â—He most common abuse in England of taking a second wyfe during the lyfe of â—e first committing fornication induceth â—e to expound those words of our Sauiour â—om whence the offenders herein seeme to â—arrant their sensuall proceedings for thus â—â—r Sauiour in Mathew 19. speaketh Whosoeâ—er shall put away his wyfe except it be for forâ—â—tation and shall marry another doth commit â—dultery from which words our Aduersaâ—es seeme to infer that who doth put away â—s wyfe for fornication and marrieth anoâ—her doth not commit Adultery But this is â—hus answered To wit that this exception 〈◊〉 Fornication is only to shew that for this â—use a man may put away his wyfe for eâ—er but not that he may marry another as 〈◊〉 most playne in 5. Mark c. 10.
Treatise vpon the Reuelation p. 68. Betweene the yeares of Christ three hundred and 316. the Antichristian Papisticall reigne began reigning vniuersally without any debatable contradiction one thouand two hundred and sixty yeares M. Napper practised vniuersally throughout all Christendome almost the space of the foresaid fourteene hundred years by the learneder sort of ProtestaÌ„ts granted to be sufficient (l) That the Catholike sayth is suffiâ—ient to saluation is confessed by Cartwright in his reply to D. Whitgifts defence pa. 82. by D. Feild of the Church l. 36. 46. by D. Couell in his defence of M. Hooker p. 77. and by many others to Saluation was punished with losse of goods inprisonment and often losse of life And thus farre in an eauâ—n libration of the Lawes by which Sectaryes were punished in Q Maryes dayes and of the Statutes by which the Catholikes were persecuted in Q. Elizabeth her raigne Only â—ad hereto that it according to M. Nappers confession our Catholike Religion did raigne vniuersally from the yeares of Christ 316. yeares then it euidently followeth that it did not first then begin but was vndoubtedly in being long before it could possibly become so confessedly vniuersâ—ll which said tiâ—e so long before coâ—d not be short of the Apostle times Animaduersion X. DIuers of our Aduersaries being pressed to shew when any change of the Roman Religion came in as an innouation not being able to instance in any one dogmaticall Poynt so introduced the more easely to cast dust in the eyes of the ignorant do (m) Thus answereth D Whitaker contra Camp rat 7. saying Pilinon subito omnes canescunt And againe In Eâ—clesia Romana accidit quemâ—dmodum magno aedificio videmus enenire quod â—â—mes alâ—quo loco incipit agere c. Ita Romana Eâ—clesia temporum successione c. answere that the changes of Fayth in the Church of Rome vnespiedly did comâ— in euen as hayres of a Mans head inseâ—sibly do grow gray and as houses and edifices 〈◊〉 without any obseruation of the tyme become ruâ—nous and decaying yet certaine it is that the hayres change their former colour to gray anâ— that Houses become ruinous To examine these resemblances as mere impostures and desperate Euasions I first say that the first decay in building the first shew of whitnes in hayre is imperceptible not to be discerned whereas euery change in faith though but in one poynt or Article is most markable and subiect to obseruatioÌ„ Secondly the whitnes of the hayres of the head and the ruins of a house do not happen but by degrees and therefore at the first cannot be discerned Whereas euery Opinion in Doctrine is at the first either true or false and therfore is for such at the First to be apprehended by the vnderstanding Thirdly not any haue the charge or care imposed vpon them to obserue the changes in these petty Matters But in the Church of Christ there are euer appoynted Pastours and Doctours whose office is to marke the first begining of any innouation in Doctrine and accordingly to labour to suppresse the same Lastly these deceytfull resemblances being truly weighed do recoyle back with disaduantage to the Protestants For although we cannot shew when the first hayre began to be whyte or the first slifter in a house beganne to be a slifter yet any notable degrees of the said whytnes in the hayres or of the slifters in a house are easily discerned And therefore the Protestants are obliged euen from the nature of these their owne similitudes to tell vs at what time some sensible degrees increase of this supposed change did happeÌ„ And the manifestation of the degrees is to be made by naming the time the Persons when and by whom such or such a particular point of the Roman Religion was first sensibly introduced into the Church of Rome The which not any Protestant hitherto hath bene able to shew Animaduersion XI IT is Euident that in the ancient times diuers Innouatours did rise denying this or that Catholike Article as for example The Doctrine of the reall presence was first denyed by certaine Heretikes in (n) As witneseth Theod. Dial. 3. Ignatius his dayes which Ignatius was scholler to the Apostles The denyall of freewill taught by the Manichees as (o) Auctin l. de Haeres cap. 46. Austin witnesseth and therein condemneth them The like may be said of more then twenty articles of our Catholike Religion denied by the ancient Heretikes as els where in this Treatise is shewed Now from hence I demonstratiuely conclude that this deniall of the said Caâ—hâ—â—ike points in those ancient times doth necessarily imply that the said Catholike points were affirmatiuely belieued generally taught both in and before the times And thus through the old Heretâ— denying and impugning of our said poiâ—â— of fayth is necessarily presupposed a preâ—stency of those said affirmatiue doctrinâ— the Reall presence Freewill and of the râ—â— wherof those ancieÌ„t Heretiks Tenets are mâ—rely Negatiues I meane they preadmit a former more ancient beliefe of our said Câ—tholike doctrines For why should any Sâ—ctaries in those dayes rise vp to deny aâ— this by writing any of the said doctrineâ— if those doctrines had not beene then aâ—â— before belieued Animaduersion XII SVch frontlesse Protestants as will maintaine the Visibility of their Church for a ages undertaking to giue ExaÌ„ples of seuerall Protestants in such ages do commonly vse this Height and imposture That is they begin to instance in Luther and so vpwards to Waldo who liued about 400. years since And then they arriuing to that time though all those Examples be meerely false and impertinent shift off the instancing from that 400. yeares to the Apostles dayes which containes aboue twelue hundred yeares by saying We shall (p) So answeareth the Author of a Treatise entituled of the perpetuall visibility and succession of the true Church in all ages pa. 89. printed anno 1614. not need to ascend any higher then to Waldo which otherwise is easy to make playne thus leauing a thousand and one hundred yeares without giuing any one Example of ProtestaÌ„ts during all that long period of Ages Now â—ere I say the Protestants imposture is this To begin with Luther vpward and not downeward towards Luther therby the better to conceale from a vulgar eye the small number of those ages or Centuries for which they endeauour to proue the imaginary Visibility of the ProtestaÌ„t Church For if they had begun in instancing with Waldo who as is said liued but some 400. yeares since then euery simple man might haue discerned at the first that they had passed ouer eleuen or twelue hundred years at the least to wit from the Apostles dayes to waldo without pretending so much as one Example of Protestancy during all that large circuite of tyme and so might haue iustly challenged them for their pretermitting of so many Ages In some sort answerably hereto Card. Bellarmine chargeth
Church in the time of Boniface thâ— third which was anno 607. was inuisible fled into wildernes there to remaine a long season Now to reduce all these Confessionâ— into an Argument Thus then I dispute D. Humfrey M. Hooker and diuers others here omitted doe generally teach that the Church of Christ must necessarily euer be visible But D. Fulke M. Napper and many other Protestants for breuity here passed oue râ—â— ingenuously confesse that the Protestant Church hath for many ages beene wholy Inuisible Therfore euen in the Iudgement of the Protestants themselues the Protestant Church is not the Church of Christ This kind of arguing in many other Questions may become familiar to him who is conuersant in the Proâ—estaÌ„ts bookes or in that Catholike Booke called The Protestants Apology wherein a man may see euen thousands of ProtestaÌ„ts Confessions against themselues Now to this I annex this following that wheras the Scripture teacheth the necessary visibility of the true Church of God as also wheras diuers learned ProtestaÌ„ts do truly acknowledge that the Protestant Church hath for many ages beene wholy inuisible Therefore diuers other learned ProtestaÌ„ts throgh their inueterate malice to our Catholike Religion and as confessing the predictions in Scripture of the euer visibility and enlargment of the true Church of God not to haue beene accomplished in the Protestants Church haue flatly renounced their Christianity charging Christ our Sauiour as a seducer themselues so becomming Iewes and Turks I will exemplify this point to omit some others in these men following all before their Apostacy most eminent Protestants First then Dauid (1) See the hiâ— ory of Dauid George printed at Antwerp 1568. published by the Deuines of Basill George once Professour at Basill became a blasphemous Apostata Ochinus (2) Of Ochinus his Apostâ—â—y Zanchius witnesseth in his booke de Tribus Elohim who with Peter Martyr first planced Protestancy in England in like sort denied Christ and taught circumcision as Zanchius the Protestant confesseth (3) Of Neuserus his Deniall of Christ Osiander the Protestant witnesseth Cent. 16. part 2. pag. 8â—8 Neuserus once Superintendent of Heidelburge turned Turk anâ— was circumcised at Constantinople as Osiander the Protestant affirmeth (4) Touching Alamannus see Beza in Eâ—ist 65. pag. 308. Alamaâ—nus a Swinglian and once deare to Beza became a Jew as Beza himselfe sayth Laeliâ— (5) The Bookes of Laelius Socinus against the Trinity are yet extant Socinus a scholar in the schoole of Geneua did write whole Bookes against the B. Trinity Finally to omit many other eminent Protestants Georgius (6) That Georgius Paulus denyed the Trinity with the Turks is witnessed by Stancarus the Protest lib. de Mediat fol. 38. Paule minister of Cracouia denied the Triniâ—â— with the Turks Thus of Instances for thâ— point Animaduersion XVIII A Man cannot auoide the force of the former kind of Dispute consisting 〈◊〉 the Confessions of the Protestants by replying that other learned Protestants dâ— maintayne the contrary in the same poinâ— to the Protestanâ—s aboue by me alledged This answere is most weake thâ— reason thereof being in that there is greaâ— disparity betweene learned Protestant confessing some points which do aduantagâ— the Catholike fayth and others thougâ— as learned Protestants maintaining thâ— contrary seeing the first sort of men speak against themselues and their cause who being iudicious and learned men would neuer do but as being conuinced with the Euidency of the truth therein Whereas theâ—â— second kind of men do not admit the confessions of their brethren but speake only in behalfe of their owne Religion and so such their denyalls are to be reputed more partiall And this Animaduersion is to be remembred in many other points confessed by some Protestants and denied by other Protestants Now of what force the Argument from the authority or confession of â—n Aduersary is appeareth both from the testimony of the ancient Fathers and the Protestants themselues First then Irenaeus thus writeth hereof Jt is (a) L. 4. c. 14. an vnanswerable proofe which bringeth attestation from the Aduersaries themselues with whom conspireth Nazianzene saying Jt (b) Orat. de S. Basil is the greatest cunning and wisdome of speech to bynd the Aduersary with his owne words Now touching the Protestants acknowledging the same we find Osiander the Protestant thus to write The (c) In Ep. Eucharist confession testimony of an Aduersary is of greatest authority And Peter Martyr Among (d) Loc. tit ce Iudaeis fol. 300. other testimonies that is of the greatest weight which is giuen by the Eneâ—ies Finally D. Whitaker The (e) Contra Bellar l. de Eccles controu 2. q 5. Argument â—ust needs be strong and efficacions which is â—â—ken from the Confession of the Aduersaries And I do freely acknowledg that truth it selfe is able to extort testimonies euen from its enemies Thus much hereof Therefore I here only conclude that as a testimony of a friend against a friend so of an Aduersary in behalfe of an Aduersary is of great force and most conuincing So certaine are those words of Tertullian (f) In Apolog. Magis fides prona est in aduersus semetipsos confitentes quam pro semetipsâ— negantes Animaduersion XIX THere is great difference to be made betweene ProtestaÌ„ts speaking against themselues and yet belieuing the Protestant doctrine and Conclusion touching some circumstances wherof the Confessions are betweene some others who afore were Catholiks and after do defend some one or other point of Protestancy Since their later men do not speake against themselues but in defence of some such Protestant doctrine then newly entertained by them and consequently in defence of their ownâ— opinions And therfore such their authorities are not to ballance equally with the Confessions of the former Protestants Thâ—â— Animaduersion is giuen with reference to Erasmus Cassander Cornelius Agrippa Polideâ—Virgill Nilus and some others euery onâ— of which imbraced some one Protestanâ— Tenet or other though diuers of them after recoÌ„ciled themselues before their deatâ— to the Catholike Church by abandoninâ— their former receaued Innouations Animaduersion XX. CHoose rather to dispute with a Protestant touching matter of Fact in whicâ— may be proued the falshood of the Protestant Religion then touching any Dogmaticall point of fayth or Doctrine as receauing its proofe from the Scripture This I speake not but that the Scripture maketh most clearely for the Catholiks against the Protestants but because your Aduersary in dispute will euer cauill at your exposition of Scripture reducing it in the end against all Antiquity of the Fathers and tradition of the Church to the interpretation of his owne priuate and reuealing Spirit Now in matter of fact your Aduersary is forced to stand to the Authorities deduced from Ecclesiasticall History and other humane proofes And therefore he must either shape a probable if not a sufficient answere to them which he cannot do they wholy making against him euen
discipline and M. Beza J do thinke of them as their writings do deserue but yet I thinke better of the ancient Fathers And with this I end touching the libration or ballancing of the Fathers of the primatiue Church with our Protestant Doctours Animaduersion XLII THere is one sleight vsed by our Aduersaryes which deserues Annotation It is this They are vnwilling openly to breake with the Fathers so long as they can preteÌ„d any shew of coniunction agreement with them Therfore when they fynd any of our Catholike points to be mantayned by the Fathers they gently tearme them Naeuos Nenia and at most Errores blemishes and errours Thus fauorably they depresse in the Fathers our Catholike Doctrines because they would seeme to continue members of the same Church whereof the Fathers were But now they stile the same Opinions and Doctrines as they are belieued by vs no lesse then Heresyes blasphemyes Jdolatry c. thereby to shew that the Members of the Church of Rome are not members of Christs Church This deceitfull and different appellation is precisely kept and practised by the Centuryes Jllyricus Doctour Whytaker and diuers other Protestant Wryters Animaduersion XLIII OVr Aduersaryes deportment towards the Fathers is most full of imposture and deceyte And they vse certaine stepps or gradatious therein For first they labour to euade the authority or testimony of a Father by shaping some seeming answere to it yet still admitting the authority produced Next if the testimony obiected by vs out of any Father be for its perspicuity not capable of any euading answere then they labour to weaken the authority of the said Father by making him seeme to contradict himselfe in some other place of the same point or els to be contradicted therein by other Fathers After this manner doth D. Whitaker in question of Traditions say of (h) D. Whit. l. de Sacr. Script pag. 670. Basill Basilius secum pugnat as also chargeth S. Austin (i) D. Whit. vbi supra â—8â— with the like contrariety in iudgement touching the same doctrine of Traditions But when they are told that it is most improbable that the Fathers being such learned men as they were should without any acknoledged retractation of their former writings crosse themselues in their later wrytings our Aduersaryes then vnmaske themselues plainly calling the Fathers Superstitious blynd and open mantayners of Papistry which poynt shaâ— be made euident by these testimonyes of the Protestants passed vpon them And to begin with Luther he thus writeth of the Fathers in generall The (k) Luth. de seruo arbitrio printed anno 15â—1 pag. 4â—4 Fathers of so many ages haue beene plainly blind and most ignorant in the Scriptures They haue erred all their life tyme and vnlesse they were amended before their deaths they were neither Saints nor pertaining to the Church Melancthon ioyneth hands with Luther herein (l) Melancth in 1. Cor. cap 31. in these words Presently from the beginning of the Church the ancient Fathers obscured the doctrine concerning Iustification by fayth increased Ceremonies and deuised peculiar worships With both whome to omit the like condemning speeches of others passed vpon the Fathers conspires D. Whitaker thus scurrilously writing Ex patrum (m) Contra â—uâ—aeum p. 4â—3 erroribus ille Pontificiae religionis Cento consutus est The religion of the Papists is a patched Cloath of the Fatâ—ers â—rrours sowed together Thus â—ar of the seuerall peculiar deliueries of our Aduersaries against the Fathers Animaduersion XLIV TOuching the Controuersy whether the Blessed Virgin was conceaued in Originall sinne such Catholikes as deny the same hould the deniall thereof only as a probable and pious Opinion and not as matter of fayth we therfore are to conceaue that the Sinne of the first Parent is communicated to his Sonnes and posterity three manner of wayes First then the Sonnes of Adam are said to haue sinned in Adam himselfe in that Adam did transgresse the precept of God in Paradise And because the Sonnes of Adam were not then in actu but in potentia only therfore that sinne they contracted not in actu but only in potentia And in this sense it may be said that the B. Virgin sinned in Adam Secondly all the Children of Adam are said to be conceaued in Sinne as soone as the child beginnes to exist in the Mothers Wombe although it be then vnformed and without life because a Man then beginneth truly to exist in respect of one of his parts that part hath its beginning from a corrupt Nature and may be said to be truly vitiated by force of its generation And in this sense also we acknowledg that the Blessed Virgin had her beginning from a corrupt Nature and that by force of such generation it was due that Sinne should be contracted as soone as her Rationall soule was ioyned to her Body The third and last manner whereby men are said to be conceaued in Sinne is when their Soules are inspired into their bodies since at that tyme they beginne properly really to become Men and to haue their Wâ—â— naked of Originall Justice and consequently auerted from God and in it selfe deformed Now touching this third and last kind we hould it most probable that the Soule of the Blessed Virgin euen at the first instant of its creation and infusion into the Body was so without spot of Originall Sinne as that person of hers actually existing had neuer any Sinne she herein differing from all others in that she was freed from Originall Sinne euen in the very instant of her Animation Now here it is to be noted that the texts of Scripture vrged by the Protestants to proue that the Blessed Virgin was conceiued in Originall Sinne haue respect reference only to one or other of the first two kinds touching the propagation of Originall Sinne in Man but they haue not any true reference to this last kynd Animaduersion XLV IT is most wonderfull to obserue the great contempt and little respect our Aduersaryes giue to our Blessed Lady Diuers of theÌ„ speaking of Caluin Beza two Sodomits euen by the Protestants (n) See Schlusselburge l â— fol. 121. l. 1 fol. 93. Confessions with great obseruancy stile them (*) So D Banâ—râ—ss stileth Caluin and Beza in his Suruey of the pretended disâ—ipline M. Caluin M. Beza In like manner speaking of Luther that wicked Monke they feare not to call him the Elias (o) Fox Act. Mon. pa. 416. Conductour Chariot of Jsrael But when they come to name our Blessed Lady who is an intâ—merate Virgin the Queene of Heauen an instrument of mans Redemption the Mother of God and Sauiour of the world most of them bluntly and rudely stile her without any addition of Honour only Mary O contempt most sacrilegious and insufferable Animaduersion XLVI IN the Hymne of our Ladyes office thus begining Aue Mariâ— stella c. two passages much distast our Aduersaryes The first 〈◊〉 this Solue
some hundreds and yet remaining to be yearely seene euen with spots of bloud at the chiefe Church in Brussells in the lowe Countryes What can our Aduersaries answere herero Yf they grant the miracle they withall grant the truth of the Doctrine of the Reall Presence To deny it by saying that when one hoast is corrupted through tyme another is secretly thrust in the former place is more then absurd For would the Princes of those Countryes the Lords Bishops Prelates other Religious persons and the whole Communalty suffer themselues to be thus abused from tyme to tyme with such impostures but that they would be most desirous to find out and discry all such wicked stratagemes and deuises Truly I do not see what answere in full weight of Reason can be giuen hereto to conuince the iudgment of any sufficient Man Animaduersion LXXI THat Catholike Religion affordeth Saluation to the Professours thereof is proued seuerall wayes euen from our Aduersaries owne pennes And first Because oâ—â— Aduersaries do reach that the Church oâ— Rome notwithstanding her presumed Eâ—rours is the true Church of Christ consequently her Professours capable of Saâ—uation According hereto thus writeth D. Field (d) L. of the Church c. 46. We doubt not but that Church â—t which the Bishop of Rome with more then Luâ—â—ferlike pryde exalted himselfe was notwithstanding the true Church of God and that it held a sauing profession of the truth in Christ. D. Sâ—â—â— auerreth the same verity in these words (e) In his Defence against Penry pag. 176. you thinke that all the Popish sort wheâ—â— dyed in the popish Church are damned yâ—â— thinke absurdly and do dissent from the iudgment of all learned Protestants With theâ—â— conspireth to omit others D. Couell thâ—â— writing We (f) In his Defence of M. Hooâ—er pag. 77. affirme them of tâ—e Churchâ— Rome to be a part of the true Church of Chriâ—â— and that those that liue dye in that Churcâ— may be saued Another Reason may be taken from the lawfulnes euen in the iudgment of the learned Protestants of Chiâ—dren of Papists as we are stiled whether they be Baptized by Catholike Priests 〈◊〉 Protestant Ministers And the cause of thâ— lawfulnes thereof is deliuered by the Protestants in these words Because (g) So teach the Deuines of Geneua in their propositions and principles disputed at Gen. p. 178. the same is taught by D. Whitgâ—â—fe in 〈◊〉 Defence pa. â—23 by M. Hooker Eccles poâ— l. 3. p. 131. by otheâ— we affirme that those Children are comprehenâ— within the Couenant of eternall life by meanes of the fayth of their Parents A third Reason of the Protestants true iudgment herein concerneth the Fathers of the Primitiue Church in generall who that they liued dyed Papists is most euident by what hath beene confessed aboue by our Aduersaries Now of them Cartwrighâ— thus writeth I (h) Cartwright in his Reply in D. Whitguifts Defence p. 82 doubt not but that diuers Fathers of the Greeke Church who were patrones of Freewill are saued The like charitable opinion of the Fathers though Papists both liuing dying is deliuered by (i) Contra Raâ— Camp pag. 78. D. Whitaker notwithstanding the Fathers Doctrine touching Satisfaction and Merit of Works Finally the Protestants iudgement is also herein manifested in their commonly giuing in their writings and speaches to Austin Ierome Ambrose and the rest whom they acknowledge to Professe and dye in our Catholike fayth and Religion the name and title of Saint as S. Austin S. Jerome c. Animaduersion LXXII YF it be vrged that the Deniall of Freewill for exaÌ„ple was taught by Manicheus and consequently that the Protestant fayth therein is as ancient as those Primitiue tymes It may be replyed that this particular Heretike or that particular Heretike did teach but one or other Protestant Article in those dayes and were sustantly written against for such their Innouations the said Innouatours being Catholike in all other points And therefore you may truâ—â— infer that the vrging of such examples is merely impertinent either for the proofe of the Antiquity of the Protestant Religion or for the Visibility of the Protestant Church in those dayes Animaduersion LXXIII YF you dispute with any Protestant by writing or enterchange of letters write nothing but Matter with as much compendiousneâ— as the Subiect will beare without any Verball Excursions or digressions For this proceeding will force your Aduersary to reply if he will reply to the Maâ—ter For otherwise leauing the materialâ— point which is chiefly issuable and to be handled he will shape a reply to other lesse necessary stuffe deliuered by you And then his Reply must passe abroad by the help of many partiall tongues for a full answere to your whole Discourse Animaduersion LXXIV WHereas you may alledge diuers acknowledged Heresies both in the iudgment of Protestants Catholiks out of the Bookes concerning diuers persons who belieued some few points of Protestancy recorded in the said Bookes here I speake of Wâ—â—ldo Wiclife c. Now if here your Aduersary Disputant doth auouch as many Protestants do that these Heresies were falsly obtruded and fathered vpon the said presumed Protestants by their Enemies you may here reply that to affirme this is against the force of all Reason For seeing the same Bookes do make indifferent mention both of the Protestant opinions and of the other Heresies defended by the same Men either the said Bookes are to be belieued in both or to be reiected concerning both Yf the first then it is certaine that those men did belieue those acknowledged Heresies Yf the later then the said Bookes are not of sufficient authority to proue that there were any Protestants in those ages Animaduersion LXXV IN your proofes drawne from Scripture labour to be much practised in the Protestant Translation of it of which infinite places make for the Catholike Cause euen as the Scripture is translated by the Protestant For this Course gauleth them far more then if you insisted only in the Catholike Translation Animaduersion LXXVI I Will here set downe certaine Obseruations which will easely solue all difficulties or Argument whatsoeuer rising from Scripture or Fathers against Communion vnder one kind only 1. First whereas sundry places of Scripture and Fathers do speake indifferently oâ— only make mention of Communion vnder both kinds or do affirme the vse thereof to be lawfull yet from hence which is the point issuable cannot be inferred any precept of Christ as necessary to Saluation 2. Secondly when such places are vrged which contayne in them a Precept the same places are either vnderstood of Priests who do sacrifice whose bond is different from theirs of the Laity Or els they concerne only the tyme and place when 〈◊〉 where that custome of both kinds was obserued for the custome of the Church whether it be generall in the whole Church or particular in some notable place thereof aâ— in one Country Kingdome
Prouince c. hath the bynding force of a Law or Precept And yet the same custome once ceasing the bond of all authority produced in defence of the said custome doth also cease 3. Thirdly In the allegation of any authority for Communion vnder both kinds we are diligently to obserue whether the same maketh mention of Formes or kinds to wit of bread and wyne or only of the things contained vnder the said kinds to wit the Body and Bloud of Christ. For in the examples of the first we shall seldome or neuer find any one which importeth a Precept or Necessity And though of the later innumerable authorities may be brought yet they are all impertinent seeing the Body and Bloud of Christ are as truly receaued vnder either kind alone as vnder both And the Precept in that Case determineth only the thing and not the Kind 4. Fourthly diuers authorities alledged for Laicall Communion vnder both kinds are vnderstood only of Spirituall not Sacramentall receauing 5. Fiftly though the Fathers sometimes signify the Communion to be most complete and perfect when it is administred and receaued vnder both kinds in regard that the effects thereof are more liuely expressed yet this perfection is but only accidentall and therefore from hence cannot be inferred a Precept or Necessity For for example innumerable thâ—ngs there are which accidentally would conduce to Grace and Saluation which yet do not fall vnder any bond or Command 6. Sixtly the Fathers sometimes reprouing such as abstayned from the Chalice do only speake against the Manichees and some other Heretikes who vpon a certaine superstition abhorred Wyne as foolishly thinking it to be the gaule of the Deuill as S. Austin (k) Austin de â—aeres cap. 46. relateth and withall denied Christ our Sauiour to haue had true bloud which nothing concerneth this our Catholike Doctrine 7. Seauently which is greatly to be noted that whereas the only point iâ— Controuersy is whether Christ our Sauiour gaue absolute command not only to Priests but also to the Laity to receaue vnder both kinds As also whether the Primitiue Church did vniuersally for tyme place and as matter of necessity obserue the same yet no one testimony of Scripture or Doctour can be produced either expressely or by necessary consequence affirming the same 8. Eightly and lastly admit any authority could be produced from a Doctor moâ—â— ancient and learned which expressly and iâ— direct termes should contradict our Catholike Doctrine yet the same with any maâ— of iudgment and vertue could beare 〈◊〉 force against the infallible Decrees of Oecâ—menicall and Generall Councells of Godâ— Church Seeing not the Church vnto thâ— Doctours but the Doctours and their wrâ—tings ought and are to be submitted to thâ— Church And this obseruation hath iâ— waight and force in many other points 〈◊〉 Controuersies Thus far touching the seuâ—rall obseruations concerning Communiâ— vnder both or one kind only Animaduersion LXXVII THat sentence of Chrysostome is most truâ— Prout (l) Homil 33. in act Apost Haeresiarchae nomen ita Secta vâ—catur To whose iudgment herein D. Fâ—â— subscribes in these words Surely (m) Of the Church l. 2. c. 9. it is 〈◊〉 â—o be denied but that the naming after the name of Men was in the time of the primitiue Church peculiar and proper to Heretiks and Schismatiks Which sentences do deadly wound the Innouatours of these tymes who take their Denomination from Luther Swinglius Caluin c. And so for distinction sake they are termed Lutherans Swinglians Caluinists c. as signifying thereby that they take their doctrine and fayth from those particular men Neither can our Aduersaries retort vpon vs this Argument by saying that the Word Papist is imposed vpon vs. This proueth nothing seeing as in those ancient Heretiks I meane the Arians Entichians Manichees so in our Sectaries to wit the Lutherans Swinglians Caluinists c. these names are giuen only out of necessity to distinguish their doctrines from all other doctrines But now the name Papist was â—oyned but lately by Luther and this not out of necessity but of reproach our fayth â—nd Doctrine being acknowledged to haue â—eene in the world many hundred yeares before Luthers tyme. Againe the word Papist is not restrayned to any one Pope or to any peculiar Doctrine taught by the present Church of Rome but it is indifferently extended to all Popes and to all the Doctrines taught by the said Popes And 〈◊〉 for the names of Franciscans Bernardins c. in the Catholike Church it is cleare that these Names are not imposed for change of Fayth but only for Institution of seuerall Degrees of a Vertuous and Religious Life Animaduersion LXXVIII IN any notable change of Religion these things following are to be demonstrated or pointed out First the Authour of such a change as aboue is intimated Secondly the New Opinion or Doctrine Thirdly the tyme in which this new Doctrine was broached Fourthly the place in which it was taught Fiftly and lastly the Persons who did oppugne and resist this New Doctrine at its first appearance None of all which circumstances can be shewed concerning our Catholike Religion since the tymes of Christ and his Apostles But all these Circumstances can be made playne and discouered in the Protestant Religion therfore it demonstratiuely followeth that the Catholike Religion is the sole ancient Religion first vnchangeably proceeding from the Institution of our Sauiour that Protestancy is but Innouation and Nouelty as but lately receauing its being from some other particular Innouatours Animaduersion LXXIX NO Protestant hath more laboured to search into the change of our Catholike Religion then D. Whitaker hath done who insisteth in diuers particular Catholike Doctrines vndertaking to shew by whom as Innouations they were first brought in Therefore I will touch all his Instances shewing them to be more ancient euen by the Confession of other learned ProtestaÌ„â—s then the persons or tymes to whom they be ascribed by the said D. Whitaker Only for greater breuity I will content my selfe with one only acknowledgment insteed of many of one learned Protestant in ech example To begin D. Whitaker sayth 1. It is (n) D. Whitak Cont. Duraeum l. 7. pag. 480. manifest that who first deliuered Purgatory for a certaine Doctrine was Gregory the Great But against this bare testimony I oppose the acknowledgment of D. Fuâ—ke thus writing (o) In his Confutation of Purgatory p. 36â— pag. 303. 303. Tertullian Austin Cyprian Ierome all more ancient then Gregory the Great and a great many more do witnes that Sacrifice for the Dead and consequently the doctrine of Purgatory is the Tradition of the Apostles (p) Whitak contra Duraeum p. 490. Secondly D. Whitaker sayth Innocentius the third was the first that instituted auricular Confession for Necessary This Jnnocentius liued in the yeare 1200. To free this Pope the (q) Centurists Cent. 3. c. 6. col 127 Centurists speaking of the ancient Churches
vsage do charge Cyprian and Tertullian who liued in the second and third age For their teaching priuate Confession euen of thoughts and lesser sinnes Thirdly D. Whitaker (r) D. Whita l. contra Duâ—aeum pa. 480. affirmeth that Pope Siricius was the first that annexed perpetuall Chastity to the Clergy men or Ministers of the word This Instance is ouerthrowne by the Confession of Kempnitius (s) Kemp nit in Exam. Concil Trid. p. 50. 601. who doth reprehend Ierome Epiphanius Origen Ambrose all far more ancient then this Siricius for their impugning the supposed lawfulnes of Priests Mariage Fourthly D. Whitâ—ker sayth Qui (t) D. Whit. vbi supra pa. 480. Transubstantiationem primus excogitauit it fuit Innocentius tertius in Concilio Lateranensi who first inuented Transubstantiation was Innocentius the third in the Councell of Lateran which Councell was houlden in the yeare 1215. But I take this obiection away by the authority of D. (u) Iesuitism part 2. rat 5 pa. 628. Humfrey as els where I haue shewed who writeth that Gregory the Great and Austin both which liued a thousand yeares since at their first plantation of Christian Religion here in England to vse the Doctours owne words Jnuexerunt Transubstantiationem Fiftly the D. further proceedeth saying Who (x) Contra Duraeum l. 7. c. 480. first inuented to say that the body of Christ frangitur sensibiliter tractatur dentibus atteritur was Nicolaus the Second To this I answere saying it is but a verball obiection and quarreleth at certain phrases words which words are to be vnderstood in a sober and restrayned construction and therefore we find the like Phrases to be vsed by S. Chrysostome far more ancient then Nicolaus the second saying Christus non (y) Chrysost in Ioan. Homil. 45. se tantum videri permittit defiderantibus sed tangi manduçari dentes â—arni suae infigi Christ doth not only permit himself to be seene of those who desire to see him but also to be touched and eaten by them and their teeth to be fastned in his flesh A point so true that Jacobus Andraeas a famous Protestant but a Lutheran answereth this very obiection of Nicolaus saying (z) Andraeat in confutat Ioannis Gâ—inaei p. 274. 275. Nicolaus nihil continet quod in scriptis Orthodoxorum Patrum Chrysostomi inprimis non continetur Sixtly D. Whitaker (a) D. Whitak vbi supra pa. 480. instanceth in Pope Calixtus for introducing the Fast of Lent and of Quatuor Temporum But Kempnitius thus writeth hereof Ambrose (b) Kempnit in Exam. Concil Trid. part 2. pag. 8â— Maximus Taurinensis Theophilus Ierome and others do affirme the fast of Lent to be an Apostolicall Tradition and thus they make it more ancient by the Confession of Kempnitius then the tymes of Calixtus Seauenthly and lastly D. Whitaker thus writeth Boniface (c) D. Whita vbi supra pag. 480. the third was the first that entituled the Roman Church to be Caput omnium Ecclesiarum The Head of all Churches But this is refuted by D. Whitaker himself who affirmeth that (d) D. Whitak vbi supra pag. 480. Zozimus Bonifacius and Celestinus did challenge superiority ouer other Bishops by forging a Canon of the Nicene Councell so inconstant is this Doctour in his Instances which later assertion of his touching Zozimus Bonifacius and Celestine though it be most false so far as concernes any forging of a Canon and only inuented by our Aduersaries yet it frees Boniface the third from this supposed Innouation Thus far now of D. Whitakers Instances where we are to vnderstand that some of the former Popes did command a more strict obseruation in some points as in not Marrying of Priests touching Auricular Confession touching the Fast of Lent then afore was obserued Now D. Whitakers calumny here lyeth in a willfull confounding of the First Institution of a thing with a Renouation or practise of the same thing which imposture is aboue noted Animaduersion LXXX I Will here draw a Porisma or Resultancy out of this last Animaduersion It is this Whereas we see such Protestant Doctours and those of the greatest Rank who labour by all reading and meanes whatsoeuer to shew the beginning of our Catholike points and after all their disquisition and search they cannot find any colour or pretext to insist in more then Fiue or sixt points to be innouated and yet such their Instances euidently discouered to be of no force but most falsely alledged Therefore the Reader may here iustly presume that no instances of Innouation can be but suggested or imagined to be giuen of the Change of the Church of Rome touching the doctrines here following To wit 1. Visibility of the Church 2 Praying to Saints 3. Freewill 4. Merit of Workes 5. Workes of Supererogation 6. Indulgences 7. Monachism 8. Limbus Patrum 9. Images the 10. Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament 11. Communion vnder one kind 12. Vniuersality of Grace 13. The Necessity and vertue of the Sacrament 14. Inherent Iustice 15. the knowledge of Christ as Man 16. His being God of God and diuers others Here I say no colour how little soeuer can be giuen of Innouation or change in any of these our Catholike Articles For if any pretext or shadow could be afforded of any change of these or of any other doctrines here not specified D. Whitaker or some other of our learned Aduersaries would not haue beene altogether silent therein Animaduersion LXXXI THe Catholike Doctrine touching Praïng to Saints is chiefly deliuered in these ensuing propositions The first It is not lawfull to pray to Saincts as Authours or principall dispensers of Diuine Benefits to obtaine from them either Grace or Glory or the meanes of obtayning eternall felicity since so to pray to them were to make them Gods And therefore when it is said Our Lady helpe me c. we are not to insist in the naked words but in the sense which is Our Lady help me by her intercession and prayers to her Sonne no otherwise then S. Paul sayth of himself To (e) 1. Cor. 9. vt omnes facâ—rem saluos all men I am become all things that I may saue all meaning by his preaching and prayers for them The second Saincts are not our immediaâ—â— Mediatours by way of Jntercession to God bâ—â— whatsoeuer they demand or obtayne for vs they demand and obtaine it through Christ and his Merits and according hereto we find thaâ— all prayers of the Church made to Saincts end with this clause Per Christum Dominuâ— nostrum The third The Saincts which reigne with God do pray for vs not only in generall but it particular This is proued from those words in Ieremy Yf Moyses (f) Ieremy c. 15. and Samuell thaâ— stand before me my soule is not towards thâ—â— people From whence it is inferred that Moyses and Samuel then being dead might were accustomed to pray for the people of Israel I
and Religion Animaduersion LXXXVI STriue to be more conuersant and ready if oportunity will not suffer you to be ready in all in such Controuersies which consist in practice as about Praying to Saints Jndulgences worshipping of Images Adoration of the most B. Sacrament Communion vnder one kind c. then in others which test only in beliefe and Speculation seeing the vulgar Protestant soonest taketh exception against these former and will expect greater satisfaction from you in them Because these being subiect to their sense in regard of the daily practise of them come neeâ—est within the compasse of their narrow Capâ—city are by them often charged through the calumny of their chiefe Maisters abusing their Credulity with many supposed abuses Whereas other points of Fayth which consist chiefly in Theory and speculation are further remoued from their apprehensioÌ„s and consequently they are least intangled with the doubts thereof Animaduersion LXXXVII TOuching those Articles or Controuersies which chiefly rest in speculation be well traualled in the Question touchiâ—â— the Jnfallibility of Gods Church as also 〈◊〉 that other Question That the Scriptuâ—â— without the Churches attestation cannot proâ—â— it selfe to be Scripture and that all points of beliefe do not receaue their proofe from Scriptuâ—â— alone seeing these two Controuersies potentially include most of all other Controuersies within themselues Also be most reâ—dy in the Question touching the continuâ— Visibility of the Protestant Church seeing tâ—â— Protestants must seeke to proue thâ—â— Church euer to haue beene Visible if thâ— will auer it to be the true Church of Chriâ—â— Whereas indeed you shall find euen by tâ—â— Confession of his owne Brethren as is eâ—â—â— where in this Treatise made cleere that tâ— Protestant is not able to instance for maâ— Centuries and Ages together so much a the being but of one Protestant Animaduersion LXXXVIII THere is scarsly any one Argument oâ— Credibility which more strongly and irrâ—pliably proueth the Antiquity and thereâ—â— the truth of the Roman Religion and the Nouelty and latenes of Protestancy and consequently the falshood therof then this following There cannot be alledged any one Protestant speaking of such Protestants as are out of Controuersy and acknowledged for such both by the Catholikes and Protestants who was not either in himself or in his forefathers first a Catholike and who by dogmatizing some Protestant Opinions afore neuer generally taught did separate himself depart from the Catholike Church afore then in Being Of which sort of men those words in S. Iohn are vnderstood Exierunt (t) 1. Ioan. 1. ex nobis the very stampe or signature of Innouatours in doctrine This Assertion is most true And to exemplify it in the chiefest Protestants or maintayners but of some points of Protestancy I meane Luther Swinglius Ochinus Ierome of Prage Waldo Wicleffe Albigenses Berengarius and to rise to the Heretikes of higher tymes as Acrius Iouinian Manicheuâ— and the rest it is certaine that all these wâ—re Originally Catholikes and by introduciâ—g of some Nouelismes did depart from the Catholike Church That all these and all such others as might be alledged were originally Catholikes is demonstratiuely proued from the implicite Confessions of the learned Protestants themselues acknowledging the Inuisibility of their owne Church for so many ages together Thus for example writeth Sebastianus Francus the Protestant as aboue is sâ—ewed For (u) In Ep. de abrogandis in vniuersum omnibus Statut. Eccles certaine through the worke of Antichrist the externall Church together with the fayth and Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure and that for these foureteene hundred yeares the Church he meaning his owne Protestant Church hath not beene externall and visible with whom agreeth D. Fuâ—ke saying The (x) Fulke in his answere to a CouÌ„terfeyte Cathol p. â—i Church decâ—yed immediatly after the Apostles dayes Furthermore to enlarge my selfe in the Protestants Confession herein M. Perkins the Protestant sayth thus Before (1) Perkins in his Exposition of the Creed p. 400. the dayes of Luther for the space of many hundred yeares an vniuersall Apostasy ouerspread the whole face of the earth and that our Church was not then visible to the world M. Napper in like manner thus writeth God (2) Napper vpon Reuel in c. 11. 12. l. 2. c. 2. p. 25. hath withdrawne his visible Church from open assemb ies to the harts of particular godly men c. during the space of 〈◊〉 hundred sixty yeares the true Church abyding â—â—tâ—nt inuisible But M. Brocard conâ—esseth further in these words During (3) Broc vpon the Reuel p. 1â—0 euen the second and third age meaning after Christ the true Church of God and light of the Gospell was obscured by the Roman Antichrist himselfe I â—ill here conclude with D. Downam thus aueâ—ring The (4) D. Down lib. de Antichrist Generall defection of the Visibâ—e Church foretould 2. Thessal 2. begun to worke in the Apostles tymes So luxuriant are the Protestants in confessing the Inuisibility of their owne Church for many ages together So as we see that by the Confession of these learned Protestants it is cleere that all the former alledged Protestants or any others which could be though falsely suggested for such were Originall Catholikes Now I hence conclude that if on the one syde it be proued that euery Protestant did Originally come out and departe by venting of some Protestanticall Positions from our Catholike Church afore enioying a Priority of Being and that on the othersyde our Aduersaries cannot shew any visible Society of men professing the true Christian fayth from which as more ancient the present Roman Religion departed as it is impossible for them to do I say I hence conclude that our Catholike fayth is most ancient and therefore true and Protestancy in respect thereof but late Innouations and therefore false Animaduersion LXXXIX I Will here rest in some Animaduersions touching the Doctrine of the Reall Presence And touching the saluing of the Difficulties thereof we are to recur to Gods Power which may in part be explicated in these ensuing Propositions The first Proposition God is able to do euery thing which Mans vnderstanding is able to conceaue The Reason hereof being in that Ens Verum in generall are the Obiects of our mind and therefore what may be conceaued or vnderstood may really exist and consequently be performed The second proposition All Christian Philosophers affirme that not only things which man is able to apprehend in his mind but also many other things incomprehensibâ—e in mans vnderstanding God can effect forseing say they that Totum Ens is Intelligible and to be conceaued and that which is not Ens cannot be conceaued and that the imbecility of Mans vnderstanding is such that it supposeth many things cannot exist or be and consequently cannot be apprehended by the vnderstanding which may indeed exist and so may be performed by God Therefore say they that things incomprehensible in
do still remayne at one tyme though far remote one from another whereas these Precedent and future tymes in both which one and the same Jnstant of Duration or Eternity is are euer in a flowing and departing Motion and consequently cannot by any possibility remayne together For we see that the tyme past doth euer giue place to the tyme to come Thus far of these former Animaduersions in this place to shew that it is possible that Christs Boâ—â— may be in seuerall places at one and thâ— same tyme. Animaduersion LXXXXIV IN all Positiue and Affirmatiue Points oâ— fayth the Protestants do agree with the Catholiks the Protestants borrowing thâ— said Affirmatiue points from the Church of Rome According hereto we find Luthâ—â— thus to wryte We (y) Luther lib. Contra Ana. baptist confesse that there is vnder the Papacy most of the Christian Good yâ—â— rather all the Christian Good and that from thence it came to vs. We confesse that there is iâ— the Papacy true Scripture true Baptisme the true Sacrament of the Altar the true keyes to the remission of sinnes the true office of preaching true Catechisme c. I say further there is in thâ— Papacy true Christianity or rather the truâ— kernell of Christianity Thus Luther To the former position I adioyne this following In such points of fayth wherin Protestancy dissenteth from the Roman Church all the said points are merrely Negations to the contrary Affirmatiue Articles belieued by the Church of Rome As for example Deniall of Reall Presence Deniall of praying to Saints Deniall of Freewill and so of the rest Now from these two propositions do result these Inferences or Conclusions following The first that the Protestant as he belieueth any affirmatiue Articles with the Church of Rome in that respect he is not a Protestant but rather a Catholike as â—king the beliefe of them from the Caâ—â—olike Church as is aboue said The seâ—ond Inference That Protestancy as Proâ—stancy consisteth in Deniall of such Affirâ—atiue points which the Church of Rome â—ffirmes to be true and not in belieuing â—ith the said Church certaine chiefe points â—f Christianity The third Inference Seeing â—he reduplicatiue formality of Protestancy reâ—teth in Negations or priuations of an Affirmatiue fayth and seing Negations or priâ—â—tions haue no Entity subsistence or reall being that therfore Protestancy as Protestancy hath no reality of Being but is in it selfe a meere Non-entity or nothing consequently it followeth that Protestancy cannot proceed from God who is the Authour of things and of that which is but not of that which is not or is Nothing The last Inference shal be That Protestants by their Deniall of so many Affirmatiue Articles of Christianity may seeme to beare great Reference to Antichrist who at his comming shall by his Deniall of all points of Christian Religion seeke what in him lyeth to annihilate and ouerthrow all Christian Religion And for such his proceeding some ancient Fathers do coÌ„iecture that his name shal be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying Nego as Hyppolitus Martyr writeth in Oratione de consummatione mundi And this both by reason that this Greeke Word maketh vp the number to wit 666. which is ascribed peculiarly to Antichrist in the Apocalyps cap. 13. as also in that Antichrist his Ministers at his comming both in their Dâ—nialls and workes shall labour mightely to euert Christian Religion Animaduersion LXXXXV THough Protestancy seeme to maintaine some Affirmatiue Positions as Parity of Ministers Mariage of Priests and other Votaries Reprobation Christs only Mediatorship by way of Jntercession Christ suffering in Soule yet it is euident that these poutions are only Affirmatiue in words but merely Negatiue in sense since they are Negatiues to the Monarchy of the Churches Gouermentâ— to vowed Chastity to vniuersality of Grace to the Intercession of Saincts and to the all sufficiency of Christs Corporall Death All which our Catholike points are Affirmatiue Such is the subtility of Innouation in Doctrine as for the greater honour to inuest their Negatiue Tenets in Affirmatiue Titles Animaduersion LXXXXVI THough in shew of words Falshood as is aboue shewed may be deliuered in Affirmatiues so I here say that Truth sometimes is deliuered in Negatiue Words notwithstanding Truth is euer Affirmatiue and Falshood Negatiue and therfore the Schoolemen truly teach Intellectus (z) S. Thomas part 1. q. 17. decipituâ— non circa quid est sed circa quid non est To exemplify this Animaduersion To say God is cruel or Man is blind though these sayings be deliuered in Affirmatiue termes and false yet they are in sense and vnderstanding meerely Negatiue since Cruelty is exclusiue to Mercy and blindnes to sight so on the contrary to say God is not Cruell and Man is not blynd though they be in termes Negatiue true yet they are in sense Affirmatiue only as denying the Negation of Mercy in God and of Blindnes in Man Animaduersion LXXXXVII OVr Aduersaries cannot agree among themselues what Doctrines be Protestancy and who ought to be truly termed Protestants Can their Religion then be true and descend from Heauen Here then I will first shew within what narrow Limits our Aduersaries do confine Protestancy and the members of the Protestant Church Next then I will discouer such is the fluctuating and wauering iudgment of them herein how they are content at other times to extend and enlarge those bounds by affording Protestancâ— and the members therof a greater space or compasse as I may say to expatiate and walke in And to begin D. Whitaker thus sayth of the Papists J will (a) L. 2. contra Duraum Sect. 1. not allow the very name of a lawfull Church vnto the Roman Church because it hath nothing which a true Chuâ—â—â— ought to haue The Confession of Ausburg excludes the Anabaptists in these words we (b) Cap. â— condemne the Anabaptists who disallow the Baptisme of Infants and thinke them to be saâ—â—â— without Baptisme to which sentence the Confession of Switzerland (c) Cap. 20. subscribeth The Arians are excluded from being Protestants by the foresaid Confession of Ausburg in these termes We (d) Act. 1. condemne all Heresies rising against this Article meaning the Article of the Trinity as the Manichees Arians Eunomians c. All Heretikes are excluded out of the number of Protestants for thus D. Suâ—cliffe teacheth Heretikes (e) In his first Booke of the Church c. 1. are not of the Church meaning of the true Church and consequently in his iudgment of the Protestant Church With whom agrees D. White saying All (f) In his way to the Church pag. 10. Heretiks teach the truth in some things yet we deny them to be of the Church of God That Schismatikes are not of the Protestant Church is taught for thus writeth D. Fulke (g) Of the succession of the Church What skilleth it whether one being drawne by Heresy or Schisme from thâ— body of Christ be subiect to eternall
Body and that Christ was true Man Thus far Osiander of the Albigenses in the place cited in the margent I will conclude with Berengarius who liued anno 1051. who is challenged for a (z) Act. Mon. pa. 23. Protestant for his deniall of Transubstantiation though he after recanted this his Heresy Now Berengarius did hould diuers Heresyes so as the ProtestaÌ„t Oâ—eolampadius (*) In Oecolam Swinglij Epistolis l. 3. pag. 710. thus writeth of him Berengarius nonnulla affirmat aduersus Baptismum parnulorum Coniugium Againe Damnata est Berengarij opinio Sacerdotio Christiano parum nimis tribuenâ— Thus farre of all these former Heretykes to wit Hus Wicleff Waldo and the rest whereby the indifferent Reader may rest assured that they cannot with any iust shew of Reason and iudgemeÌ„t be alledged for Protestants as our Aduersaryes are accustomed to alledge them for the prouing of the visibility of the Protetestant Church in former Ages Animaduersion CIV ADmitting for the tyme that all these former Innouatours were entyre ProtestaÌ„ts in all Poynts not comparting with the Catholikes in any poynt of the Roman Religion Admitting also that not any of them did hould any one explorate Heresy by all sydes condemned yet are the examples of them most insufficient for the supporting of the Protestants Churches visibility My Reasons are these First The Scriptures (a) Esay 60. 40.1 Timoth. Eph. 4. besydes many other do proue that the Church of Christ must not at one only tyme or other but in all tymes and in all ages without the least interruption or discontinuance much lesse without interruption of many hundred yeares together be most visible and conspicuous This being granted I then demand what Protestants can be alledged liuing betweene Anno six hundred and seauen and anno 1220. Heere are about six hundred yeares betweene these two tymes during all which period as also for euery yeare thereof our Aduersaryes stand obliged to alledge Protestants for the Continuance of the visibility of the Protestant Church But this they are not able to effect And therefore D. Fulke with iust cause thus complayneth of the Inuisibility of the Protestant Church (b) D. Fuâ—ke in his answere to a Counterfeyt Catholikâ— pag. â—0 The Church in the tyme of Boniface the third which was anno 607. was inuisible and fled into the wildernes there to remayne a long season Secondly All the former men I meane Husse Wicleffe Waldo c. were originally Catholikes and after by forging of new Doctrine they deuided themselues from the Church then in Being and so thereby they iustifyed in themselues those words of S. Iohn (c) Ioan. 9. They went out of vs. Now this departure or going out of the Church implyeth in lieu of the continuance and visibility of their Church an interruption discontinuance defection of their Church and consequently a want of the visibility of the said Church Since it infallibly proueth that the Doctrines taught by these Men after their departure were not taught by the Church afore in being For if they had bene taught by it these Men needed not to leaue the then knowne Church for their defending and teaching of the said Doctrines Thirdly The Protestants wiâ—l say no doubt that Husse Wicleffe c. did preach the word of God and administer the Sacraments Heare then I demand seing no man taketh to himself the honour of priesthood but he that is called (d) Hebâ— 5. of God as Aaron was Who then did call Husse Wicleff Berengarius the Waldenses c. to preach the Word and administer the Sacraments or by whom were they sent But here our Aduersaries are at a stand flying to an immediat imaginary and aëry Calling For thus doth Caluin seeke to salue this difficulty Quia (e) Lascit the Protestant reciteth this saying of Caluin lib. de Russor Muscouit c. religione c. 23. Papae tyrannide c. Because through the tyranny of the Pope true succession of ordination was broken of therefore we stand in need of a new Course herein And this function or calling was altogether extraordinary With whom agreeth M. Perkins saying The (*) M. Perkins in his works printed 1605. fol. 916. calling of Wicliffe Husse Luther Oecolampadius Peter Martyr c. was extraordinary An exorbitant and phantasticall Conceite Animaduersion CV THere are two Reasons among others which euidently proue that our Aduersaries are conscious and guilty of their owne Churches Inuisibility One in that they discouer a wounderfull reluctation backwardnes when they are pressed by the Catholikes to name the Protestants liuing in such and such ages sortably hereto we find D. Fulke thus to complayne Proferre (f) Fulke de succes Eccles p. 89. me iubes toto Orbe latitantes vah quam iniquum postulas Thou willest we to produce and name those men who did lye hidd throghout the World How vniust a thing dost thou here demand And D. Wotton complayning in the like manner thus concludeth Proue (g) In his answere to a Popish Pamphlet p. 11. you that our Religion was no where helds This stands vpon you to disproue which when you do by particular Records you shall haue particular Answere Then which what can be first more absurdly spoken as expecting record of things which neuer were in being He furthermore transferring the part of prouing vpon Catholikes to which himself and his fellows only stand obliged The second Reason discouering their tergiuersation herein is in that when they are prest to instance in Protestants for seuerall ages they in lieu of Instancing flye to the Scripture then disputing the true Church of Christ must euer be Visible but theirs is the true Church as is proued out of the Scriptures Therefore their Church was euer visible A most strang and despayring Circulation Animaduersion CVI. THe like guiltines of our Aduersaries is shewed touching the supposed change of the Fayth of the Church of Rome For though this if any such change were be to be proued as being matter of fact from History yet our Aduersaries disclame from all History herein For D. Whitaker thus writeth Jt is not (h) Whitak contra Duraeum p. 177. needfull to search out of Histories the beginning of this change And againe It is (i) Whitak contra Duraeum p. 478. sufficient by comparing the Popish opinions with the Scripture to discouer the disparity of fayth betweene them and vs And as for Historiographers we giue them liberty to write what they will Thus bringing the Question as they did aboue touching the visibility of the Protestant Church to the Scriptures and their owne interpretation of the said Scriptures Which disclaming of theirs from History herein is most vnusuall and vnaccustomed since it hath bene euer the Office of Historiographers generall Councells to register and record any new arising Heresy or change in Fayth and Religion Animaduersion CVII IT cannot be denied but that a Catholike may commonly become sooner
our Aduersaryes to haue beene more grieuous then euer this of England was Animaduersion CX WHereas our Aduersaries do further vrge in behalfe of the being of Protestants in former Ages that it is often obserued that a little quantity of Copper is in a couÌ„terfeyte Coyne of Gold chaffe is mingled with Corne and yet neither is the Copper Gold nor the Chaffe Corne so say they the Protestant Church was in former ages in the Papacy The Papacy was in the Protestant Church and yet the Protestant Church was not in the Papacy According hereto M. Perkins saith The (o) In his reformed Catholike pag. 328. 329. Church of Rome may be said to be in the Church of God the Church of God in the Church of Rome with whom agreeth Beza thus writing Voluit (p) In Epist. Theol. Epist 1. pag. 15. Deus in Papatu seruare Ecclesiam etsi Papatus non est Ecclesia And D. Whitaker (q) Whiâ—ak l. de Eccles pag. 165. Ecclesia vera fuit in papatu sed papatus non fuit Ecclesia To this I reply and say it is but a froath of words artificially put together Howsoeuer many of our Aduersaries much please themselues with this conceited Answere Therfore for the better examining thereof we are here to conceaue that the sense and meaning of these words is not that the Protestant Church had in those tymes a latent and hidden being in Catholike Countries without hauing entercourse communion with the then knowne and visible Church in the Sacraments for so the true Church could not be said to be in the papacy no more then at this day in respect of its like aboad in Turkish Countries it can be said to be in Turcisme Therefore the particular manner of this strange mixture as it appeares in shew of words is thus truly expressed by Osiander the Protestant in this manner (r) In Epitom Cent. 16. part altera p. 1070. 1072. Quod semper sub Papatu aliqui pij homines fuerint c. No man denyeth but that there were vnder the papacy some holy men who disliked the Errours of the Popes although they durst not openly professe so much nisi ardere aut ad minimum exulare velint except they would burne for their Religion or at least suffer banishment Thus we see the last sublimated sense of the former quaynt sentence resolues to this point To wit that the Protestant Church in those former tymes being in or vnder the Papacy did through feare of burning or banishment dissemble their Religion and communicate in all externall right with the Church of Rome Animaduersion CXI THe Confessed Inuisibility of the Protestant Church aboue set downe during so many former ages doth potentially and vertually include the proofe of the visibility of the Roman Church during all the said ages Seing the Jnuisibility of the Protestant Church for so long a tyme is ascribed by the Protestants themselues to the worke of Antichrist they meaning therby the Pope and the Church of Rome as appeareth by seuerall testimonyes of our Aduersaryes els where in this Treatise expressed particularly of M. Napper thus saying Betweene (s) Napper in his Treatise vpon the Reuelat. pag. 68. the yeares of Christ 300. and 316. the Antichristian Papisticall reigne began reigning vniuersally without any debatable contradiction 1260. yeares And accordingly the Centurists (t) See this in Cent. 4. and so successiuely in Euery Century charge all the ages from Constantine till Luther with Papistry Thus an acknoledged defection of the Protestant Church for many Centuryes doth by our Aduersaryes owne Confession necessarily include and imply a Continuall visibility of the Catholike Roman Church during all the said Centuryes Animaduersion CXII TOuching the supposed change of the fayth of Rome I will deuyde in these three next Animaduersions all the Ages from the Apostles euen to Luthers days into three seuerall Stations or Periods of tymes First then we will see how long it is granted by the Protestants that Rome did perseuere without any alteration of her Primitiue faith Secondly we will set downe the acknowledged continuance of that tyme during all which season the now present fayth of Rome hath continued that is how long Papistry as our Aduersaries terme it hath bene publikly professed throughout all Christendome Thirdly and lastly we will then take a view of the tymes betweene these two former seuerall tymes For these two tymes being once acknowledged on all sydes to wit the tyme during which the Church of Rome confessedly kept her first fayth taught by the Apostles and the tyme during which the present Roman fayth hath continued from this day vpward it ineuitably followeth that this supposed change in Religion did either happen in the Jnterstitium and meane tyme betweene these two former Periods of tymes or els that there happened no such change of Religion in the Church of Rome at all Now concerning the first of these tymes it is granted by the Protestants that Rome retayned her purity of fayth without any alteration from the Apostles tymes till after the death of Optatus Epiphanius and Austin which is during the space of foure hundred and fourty yeares after Christ This I thus proue Wheras our Catholike writers haue much insisted for proofe of their Religion in the succession of the Bishop of Rome euen vntill Austins dayes by the Example of Jrenaus Cyprian Optatus Jerome Vincentius Lyrinensis and Austin D. Fulke answereth in behalfe of these Fathers in this sort That (*) Fulke in his confutation of Purgatory p. 372. these Fathers especially named the Church of Rome it was because the Church of Rome at that tyme as it was founded by the Apostles so it continued in the Doctrine of the Apostles which Doctour in another place thus further writeth The (*) D. Fulke in his Retentiue pag. 85. Popâ—â—â— Church c. departed from the vniuersall Chuâ—ch of Christ long after Austins departure out of this Lyfe Thus he granting that till after Austins death the Church of Rome remayned the true Church In like manner D. Iewell accordeth with D. Fulke herein touching the Argument drawne by those foresaid Fathers from succession of the Bishops of Rome saying As (u) D. Iewell in his reply to D. Harding pag. 246. well Austin as also other godly Fathers rightly yeilded Reuerence to the Sea of Rome c. For the purity of Religion which was there preserued a long tyme without spot To conclude Caluin himselfe maketh good the foresaid Argument taken from the Succession of the Bishops of Rome insisted vpon by Jrenaeus Pertullian Origen Cyprian Austin and Epiphanius in these words Cum (x) Instit l. 4. cap. 2. Sect. 3. extra controuersiam erat nihil á principio vsque ad aetatem illam mutatum fuisse in Doctrina c. Seeing it was a point out of Controuersy that nothing in Doctrine from the begining to that very age was changed these holy
fathers did take which they thought sufficient for the destroying of all new Errours to wit the Doctrine constantly and with an vanimous consent retayned euen from the Apostles dayes till their tymes Thus farre Caluin And so far now concerning the durance of the tymes euen by the ProtestaÌ„ts frequent Confessions that no chauge of fayth was made in the Church of Rome Animaduersion CXIII IN this next Animaduersion we will take into our consideration the number of those ages during the length of all which from this day vpward the present Roman faith hath by the like Confessions of the learned Protestants beene generally taught since how long the Protestants do graÌ„t that the Church of Rome hath from this day continued in her present fayth so long it followeth by their owne implicite but necessary censures that the Church of Rome neuer altered her fayth Now this poynt appeareth from the wrytings of D. Humfrey aboue alledged who shewing what Religion Austin the Monke sent by Gregory the Great who liued in the yeare 590 plaÌ„ted in England thus confesseth Jn Ecclesiam (y) D. Humfrey in Iesuitism â—art 2. Rat. 5. pag. â—27 quid inuexerunt Gregorius Augustinus Onus Caeremonâ—arum c. What did Gregory and Austin bring into the Church Aburden of Ceremonyes They did bring in the Archiepiscopall Pall for the Solemnization of the Masse They did bring in Purgatory c. or the Oblation of the healtfull Host and prayer for the Dead c. Relicks Transubstantiation c. a new Consecration of Temples c. from all which what other thing is effected then the introducing of Indulgences Monachisme Papisme and the rest of the Chaos of Popish superstitions All this did Austin she greater Monke being instructed herein by Gregory the Monke bring vnto English men Thus D. Humfrey Now from hence it appeareth that at S. Gregory his sending of Austin into England which was about a thousand yeares since our present Roman Religion was then wholy and publikely practized in Rome and that if the Church of Rome had suffered any change in fayth from that first taught by the Apostles that this change should haue beene made not since but before Gregoryes tyme and before he had sent Austin to plant in England the fayth of Christ In further confirmation of D. Humfreys iudgement herein I may alledge the Centurists who in their Index or Alphabeticall Table of the sixt Century at the word Gregory do set downe with particular figures of references where euery such mentioned OpinioÌ„ may be fouÌ„d as followeth Eiusdem error de bonis operiâ—ut de Confessione de CoÌ„iugio de Ecclesia de sanctorum inuocatione de Inferno de libero arbitrio de Iustificatione de purgatorio de paenitentia de satisfactione c. Briefly with all other particular points mantayned by the now present Church of Rome The lesse wonder therfore that Danaeus resting vpon his owne false principles thus wryteth of our Conuersion Purgatio (z) Danaeus in respons ad disputat Bellarm. part r. pag. 780. illa quam Gregorius primus fecit c. suit inebriatio Meretricis muÌ„do facta de qua est Apocalyp c. 17. 18. thus referring our Conuersion to Christianity to the worke of Antichrist Now from these former acknoledgmeÌ„ts of the learned Protestants we may infallibly conclude that from this day till we arriue at least to the age of the foresaid S. Gregory who liued about a thousand yeares since the present Roman and Catholike Religion was taught besides in our Country in diuers other Countryes and consequently seing those Countryes did receaue their Instructions in fayth froÌ„ Rome it inauoydably followeth that during all this tyme not any innouation or change in fayth was introduced into the Church of Rome Animaduersion CXIV NOw in this third place we are to take into our Consideration the number of yeares which passed betweene the first foure hundred and fourty yeares from Christ and these last thousand yeares from vs which number seeing it is sixteene hundred yeares and more from Christ to vs amounteth to about one hundred and sixty yeares Well then if here we can proue that no change of fayth was made in the Church of Rome within the compasse of this 160. yeares then followeth it inauoydably that the Church of Rome neuer to this day hath suffered any alteration in fayth and Religion since it first imbraced the Christian fayth This point I then first proue from the doctrine which was belieued and generally taught at such tyme as Constantine who was our first Christian Emperour was conuerted to Christianity which was about the yeare three hundred and twenty after Christ and therefore before the foresaid one hundred sixty yeares Now that the fayth in Constantins tyme was the same that the Church of Rome professeth at this present appeareth from the frequent testimonies of the Centurists who most elaborately and punctually do record all the particular Articles of the present Roman fayth to be belieued most constantly by the said Constantine and by the age wherein he liued Touching the fayth of Constantine and that age the Centurists spend seuerall Columnes of the fourth Century to wit from Columne 452. to Columne 497. and D. Whitaker affirmeth that Leo who was Pope anno 440. was a great (a) D. Whitak contra Bâ—llar pag. â—7 Architect of the Antichristian Kingdome Now from all this I necessarily euict that no change of the faith of Rome was made in the compasse of the said one hundred sixty yeares which tyme was set downe betweene the confessed period of the Churches purity and the acknowledged generall Doctrine of the Church of Rome But now to recapitulate the Contents of these three last Animaduersions which beare a necessary dependency and reference one to another I thus make my deduction First if the Church of Rome remayned in her purity of fayth without any change for the first foure hundred and forty yeares Secondly if it be confessed that for this last thousand yeares the Church of Rome euer professed the same fayth without any change which at this day it professeth Thirdly if it be made cleare that during the Interstitium of tyme betweene the first 440. yeares and this last thousand yeares which is but 160. yeares no change in fayth was made as appeareth from the fayth of Constantine our first Christian Emperour and the Fathers of that age What demonstration more certaine and infallible then that the present Church of Rome neuer made any change of fayth and Religion since the Apostles tymes but that she euer preserued as pure and incorrupt the very same fayth and Religion which S. Peter S. Paul and other the Apostles first planted in her And this Demonstration for I can terme it no lesse I present to the mature and diligent perusall of the Iudicious Reader assuring him that all the learned Protestants of Christendome cannot giue any satisfactory answere therto which demonstration I willingly acknowledge that I
any impugned part or branch of their Religion From which vndaunted resolution of theirs we certainely collect that this their constant determination of defending the least point of their Religion proceedeth partly from a generall instinct of God impressed in mans soule teaching ech man that death it selfe is rather to be suffered then we are to deny any part of fayth and Religion in generall And thus according hereto we find that the Athenians who were Heathens though they did erre touching the particular Obiect therin as worshipping false Gods were most cautelous that no one point should be infringed or violated touching the worshipping of their Gods The like religious seuerity was practised by the Iewes as Iosephus (s) Ioseph contra Apion witnesseth Now from these Premisses we deduce against our Adiaphorists or Neutralls in Religion either Catholike or Protestant that no points of true Religion are of that cold Indifferency as that they are not to be much regarded either in beliefe or in profession but that they are of that Nature worth and dignity as a man is obliged to vndergoe all torments yea death it selfe before he yeald or suffer the least relaps in denying any of the said verities or in any externall Profession contrary thereto Animaduersion CXXI FOr the further impugning of the indifferency of seuerall Religions and to shew that euery religion among Christians is not capable of Saluation I will drawe one demonstration out of Scripture The text is this In the (t) 1. Timoth cap. 4. larer tymes certaine shall depart from the fayth attending to spirits of Errour and Doctrine of Deuils forbidding to Marry to abstaine from Meates Heere the Apostle prophesyeth according to the iudgement of S. Chrysestome (u) Hom. 12. in Timoth Ambrose (x) In hunc locum Ierome (y) L. contra Iouinian c. 7. and (z) Haer. 25. 40. Austin of the Heretykes Encratites Marcionists Ebionites and such like who denyed Matrimony as a thing altogether vnlawfull and prohibited absolutely at all tymes and the eating of certaine Meates as Creatures impure Now these Heretykes belieued in the Trinity the Incarnation and other Supreme poynts of Christian Religion And yet eueÌ„ for these two former Heresyes touching Marriage and eating of Meates and not for their misbeleife in the Trinity Incarnation c. they are said by the Apostle to depart from the fayth of Christ and to attend to the Doctrine of Deuils But such as leaue the fayth of Christ and attend to the doctrine of the Diuels are not in state of Saluation Now these Errours heere mentioned by the Apostle are of as little or lesser consequence then the Controuersyes betweene the Catholiks the ProtestaÌ„ts therefore it standeth vpon ech Christian if so he expect to saue his soule to professe entirely and wholy the true Religion Animaduersion CXXII TOuching the Doctrine of Transubstantiation in the B. Sacrament of the Eucharist the auncient Fathers are most full therin euen by the acknoledgement of the ProtestaÌ„ts themselues First then Gregory the great is coÌ„fessed by D. Humfrey (a) In Iesuitism part 2. rat 5. to haue broght in Transubstantiation into England at his first planting of Christianity in this Country as is aboue shewed Chrysostome is reprehended by the Centurists to vse their owne words (b) Cent. 5. col 517. Quia parum commodè de Transubstantiatione dixit (c) Cent. 4. c. 4. col 295. S. Ambrose is affirmed by the Centurists in the booke ascribed to Ambrose to confirme the Doctrine of Transubstantiation which Father for the said Doctrine is also taxed by (d) L Ep. Oecolampad Swinglij l. 3. Oecolampadius S. Cyrill is reprehended by Peter (e) Ep. ad Bezam annexed to his Common places Martyr in these words I will not easely subscribe to Cyrill who affirmed such a Communion as thereby euen the flesh and bloud of Christ is ioyned to the Blessings for so he calleth the holy bread c. S. Cyprian is charged in the booke ascribed to Vrsinus the Protestant entituled Coâ—monefactio cuiusdam Theologi de sancta Caenâ— who there thus writeth (f) Pag. 111. â—18 In Cyprian are many things which seeme to affirme Transubstantiation Lastly Ignatius is acknoledged by Keâ—pnitius (g) Exa part 1. p. 94. to haue confirmed the Doctrine of Transubstantiation in that eminent place of his (h) Ep. ad Smirnenses Eucharistias oblationes noÌ„ admittuÌ„t quòd non confiteantur eucharistiam esse carnem saluatoris quae pro peccatis nostris passa est c. The truth of the Fathers iudgment touching the Reall presence is so fully confessed by our Aduersaryes as that Antony de Adamo a markable Protestant thus acknoledgeth hereof (i) In his Anatomy of the Masse p. 236. J haue not hitherto beene able to know when this Opinion of the Reall bodily being of Christ in the Eucharist did first beginne With whome conspireth Adamus Francisci another Pro estant saying Commentum (k) In Margarita Theol. pag. 156. Papistarum c. The Papists inuention touching Transubstantiation crept earely into the Church Thuâ— farre of the Protestants Confessions in this poynt whereunto we may add that these Fathers heere aboue charged with the rest of the Fathers of those Ages were the chiefe Pastours Doctours of the Primitiue Church which Church belieued herein according as it was taught by the said Fathers If then these Fathers should erre in the Doctrine of TraÌ„substantiation then should it follow that the primitiue Church yea and the vniuersall Church of Christ contrary â—o Christs (l) Math 1â— promisse therein should erre Animaduersion CXXIII YF we do take into due consideration 〈◊〉 seuerall chiefe heades and points when vnto the sentences and authorities of 〈◊〉 ancient Fathers touching the Eucharist 〈◊〉 be reduced we cannot otherwise be perâ—â—ded but that the Fathers taught vnaâ—â—mously the Doctrine of the Reall Presence and Transubstantiation seing those Heads 〈◊〉 the Fathers sentences are so agreeable aâ—â—fortable to Christs Reall being in the Sacrament and so incompetent and disproportionable to a bare Typicall Presence or being of him therein To begin then The First Head of the Fathers authorityes may be the Appellatâ—â— or Names which the Fathers giue to the Blessed Sacrament far differently from the Sacramentaryes which is an argument that Sacramentaryes differ from the Fathers iâ— beleife therein Thus the Fathers call the Sacrament The body bloud of our Lord Thâ— precious body tremenda Mysteria the fearefuâ—â— Misteries the pledge of our Saluation Our priâ—â— whereas the Sacramentaryes vsuall phraâ—â— is to call the Eucharist the Symboll or signâ— of the body and bloud of the Lord. The second Classe or Head is taken from the Comparison of this Sacrament with other things for they compare it with the Manna Paschall Lamb with Panis Propositionis and the lyke saying The Eucharist doth differ from all these things as the Truth differs froÌ„ â—â—gures the body
Tertullianus (u) Ofl. and. Cent. 33. c. 9. approbauit oblationem pro â—â—junctis Tertullian approued of Oblation for the Dâ—ad Osiander heere meaning the oblation of the Sacrifice of the Masse In further confirmation whereof we fynd D. Fulke thus to write Tertullian (x) D. â—ulk in his confutation of Purgatory pag. 361. vide pa. 103. 3â—3 Cyprian Austin Ierome and a great many more do witnesse that Sacrifice for the Dead it a Tradition of the Apostles Jrenaeus in like manner who liued anno 170. is charged by the Centurists who thus wryte of him De (y) Cent. 2. cap. 4. col 63. oblatione Irenaus l. 4. c. 23. satis videtur loqui incommodè c. Jrenaeus in l. 4. c. 23. seemeth to speake inconueniently inough of Oblation or Sacrifice when he saith That Christ had taught a new oblation of the new Testament the which the Church receauing from the Apostles offered to God throughout the whole world Thus far the Centurists of this father Jgnatius the Apostles schollar who liued anno 90. is thus censured by the Centurists (z) Cent. 2. c. 4. col 63. Quaedam ambigna incommodè dicta in quibusdam occurrunt vt in Epistola Ignatij ad Smirnenses Non licet inquit Jgnatius sine Episcopo neque offerre neque Sacrificium immolare There are certaine doubtfull and inconueâ—ient sayings which do occure in diuers place as in Ignatius his Epistle ad Smirnenses where Jgnatius sayth It is not lawfull without a Bishop to immolate or offer vp Sacrifice Which very words of Ignatius the Centurists in another place affirme to be (a) Cent. 2. c. 10. col 107. periculosa quasi errorum Semina Thus farre of the Fathers Doctrine touching the Sacrifice of the Masse a Poynt so euident that Caluin infimulateth all the Fathers within this reprehension saying The fathers did (b) Calu. in omnes Pauli Ep. in Hebr. â— 7. pag. â—â—4 adulterate the supper of our Lord by adding Sacrifice vnto it With whom to omit some others Sebastianus Francus thus recordeth (c) In Epist. de abrogandis in vniuersum omnibus staâ—utis Ecclesiasi Statim post Apostolos omnia inuersa sunt c. Caena Domini in Sacrificium transformata est To the Antiquity of the Doctrine of the Masse and Sacrifice I will subnect the consideration of the Vniuersality of the Doctrine thereof practized both in former tymes and at this present day by all the Christians of the whole world our Aduersaryes only excepted For the Christians in Asia Affrike Europe yea the Grecians Armeniant the far distant Ethiopians and the remotest Orientall Jndians of whom many neuer heard of the Roman Church in their daly recourse of Pilgrimage to Ierusalem do euer conspire and agree together as it hath beene and is obserued by Trauellers in the Doctrine of the Reall Presence and daily practise of saying and offering vp the holy Sacrifice of the Masse notwithstanding their knowne diuersity of opinions in other matters Animaduersion CXXV THe Greeke text in Luk. 22. viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hic calix nouum testamentum in sanguine meo qui viz. Calix pro vobis effunditur This Text I say by force of the Greeke in regard that the Relatine in the Greeke agreeth with Calix and not with Sanguine sheweth that Calix was shed for vs. Now seeing that Calix taken Materially could not be shed for vs therefore that which was contayned in the Calix was shed for vs But wyne could not be shed for mans redemption therefore it inauoydably followeth that the bloud of Christ was in the Calix This testimony by reason of the greeke words so expressed is so forcible and conuincing to proue that bloud was in the Cup that Beza (d) Beza in Luc. 22. seeing it could be no ways otherwyse answered said these greeke words were surreptitious creeping by nâ—gligence out of the Margent into the Text though it hath euer beene read as now we read it in all auncient Greeke Manuscripts Animaduersion CXXVI WHereas our Aduersaryes to proue that the verbe Est in the words of Consegration should be taken for significat so excluding therby all reall Presence do vrge many Texts of Scripture in which they say the said word Est must of necessity be taken for significat as Agnus est Pascha Exod 12. Septem bones sunt septem anni Genes 14. Ego sum Ostium Joan. 20. and some others To this I answeare First that in Parables and similitudes the verb Est is taken for significat and yet without any Trope The reasoÌ„ hereof being because the whole essence of all such things is placed in signification Secondly I answeare that in the examples alledged by our Aduersaryes there immediatly followeth an explication of the Trope and figure but of the words of the Jnstitution there followeth no explication Thirdly in most of the examples alledged by our Aduersaryes euer praedicatur disparatum de disparato as Christus est Ostium my meaning is that that which is of a most different Nature is said of another thing of the like different Nature which kynd of propositions seeing they cannot be by any meanes properly literally true we are forced to expound the same by Tropes and figures But in the words Hoc est Corpus meum there is no such kind of straÌ„ge vnusuall predication at least in the appearance of the words themselues Animaduersion CXXVII I do much wonder that any of our learned Aduersaryes as often they do insist in those words against the Reall presence Spiritus est qui vinificat Caro non prodest Joan. 6. It is the spirit which quickneth the flesh profiteth not For heere the literall sense of these words only is that a Carnall vnderstanding of spirituall things doth not profit as (e) Serm. de Cauâ— Domini Cyprian Chrysostome (f) Vpon this place and Origen (g) L. 3. in Epist ad Rome noâ— do expound But admit that Christ did speake of his flesh yet it proueth nothing against his being in the Eucharist both because by the same Reason we may conclude that the bread is not in the SacrameÌ„t for if the body of Christ profiteth vs nothing much lesse can a litle piece of wheaten bread profit vs. Againe if our Lord had spoken of his flesh he would not haue vnderstood it absolutely but only that the flesh without the Spirit profiteth nothing Since otherwyse our Lord should haue crossed himselfe who said Qui manducat carneâ— meam habet vitam aeternam Lastly it is no lesse then a great impiety to deny thaâ— the flesh of Christ being vnited with his Diuinity profiteth vs nothing Seeing S. Paul Coloss 1. attributes all our Saluatioâ— to the flesh of Christ for he saith that we are reconciled to God by the said flesh Animaduersion CXXVIII WHereas our Aduersaryes in further impugning of the reall Presence do obiect first the Indignity proffered by vs to Christ his body in mantayning it
Church of Christ Thou (37) Esay c. â—0 shalt sucke the milke of the Gentills and the breasts of Kings And againe it is prophesied of the Church by the Kingly Prophet J (38) Psal â— will giue thee the Heathens 〈◊〉 thy inheritance and the End of the Earth for sâ—â— thy possession Now two things are cleare the first that many Heathen Kingdomes hâ—â—e beene conuerted to Christianity by the Pope and his ministers This is proued from the coÌ„fession of D. Whitaker who acknowledging the conuersion of many Countryes made by the Church of Rome thus debaseth them The (39) Whitak l. de Eccles pag. 336. Conuersion of so many Nations after the tyme of Gregory haue not beene pure but corrupt Now that the Protestant Church neuer conuerted any Gentill King or Nation to the fayth of Christ appeareth from its coÌ„fessed Inuisibility for so many ages till Luthers tyme aboue set downe Thus then I here aâ—gue The predictions of conuerting Kings and Kingdoms to the fayth of Christ were performed by the Pope only and his Substituts and not by the Protestants Therefore the predictions for the enlarging of Christ his Church by conuerting Gentills vnto it were performed by Antichrist Christs designed Enemy How do these stand together and yet do these incompatibilityes necessarily result out of the former Assertions Animaduersion CLIV. THe example of Paphnutius his standing in the Nicene Councell in defence of Priests mariage so much insisted vpon by so many eminent Protestants is misapplied and withall in all likely hood most false It is misapplyed because where it is vrged in proofe of Priests Mariage it proueth the contrary For though perhaps Paphnutius might be persuaded that Priesthood did not dissolue Mariage afore contracted yet he sayth plainly Those (40) So relateth Socrates l. 1. ca. 8. who are made Priests before they are maried cannot after marry And this Paphnutius calleth Veterem Ecclesiae traditionem The ancient tradition of the Church So far was Paphnutius from ascribing the doctrine of Priests not marrying after the Order of Priesthood taken to the Councell of Nice Now that this example of Paphnutius is vntrue many probabilities may be vrged First because there is not so much as any Mention of this matter concerning Paphnutius made by any who did wryte of the Nicene Councell before Socrates tyme who first relateth the words of Paphnutius For neither did Eusebius Athanasius Epiphanius Theodoret nor yet Ruffinus himselfe who writ many things of Paphnutius and of the Nicene Councell all being more ancient then Socrates make any mention of this matter Now I here demaÌ„d could all these be silent in so great a busines and so earnestly debated in the Nicene Councell Secondly this example of Paphnutius seemeth to be against the third Canon of the said Nycene Councell which altogether forbiddeth Priests to haue dwelling with them any Woman other then their Mother Sister their Fathers sister their Mothers sister c. Now if as Socrates reporteth in the example of Paphnutius the Councell had left liberty for married Laymen afterwards made Priests to haue kept still their former Wynes why then was not the wyse first placed here in the exception but altogether omitted This example of Paphnutius is so much suspected to be false that Frigeuilleus (41) In his palmâ— Christiana p. 103. Ganuius a Protestant doth plainly ascribe it to the forgery of Socrates Animaduersion CLV IT will not be amisse to obserue the Protestants Method in disputing with the Catholikes touching the Reall Presence as it is taught by the Church of Rome For the Question of the Reall Presence being but propounded they quickly tell vs that Christ neuer intended or willed it which answere is made to omit all other Protestants by (42) In his Decads in English serm 8. p. 971. Bullinger And when to declare Christs Will therein we alledge his words they make then a new question of his power as denying such to be his will or sense of words vnder pretence that it is (43) So answereth whitak in his answ to M. William Reynolds pa 179. contradictory to the truth and Nature of his humane body now in Heauen and so is therby impossible And when in reply therto we proue to them directly that it is not impossible then returning per circuitum to their firster Euasion they answere that the Question (44) So answereth D. Whitak in his answere to M. Reynolds refutation pag. 192. is not of his power but only of his Will and so dancing in a round they triffle and delude vs by a subtle escape of an endles Circulation Animaduersion CLVI IT is most certaine that the doctrine of many of our Aduersaries touching the Reall Presence is inuolued with greater shew of Impossibility then our Catholike doctrine thereof is for whereas they teach that Christs reall body is really (45) So teach besides many others M. Perkins in his reformed Catholike pag. 187. and D. Fulke against the Rhâ—mish Testam in 1. Cor. 15. and truly present and yet not bodily and corporally but only Spiritually present By which word Spiritually they do not exclude the true and reall presence of his body Now how this should be free from repugnancy and meere contradiction and therfore impossible I cannot discerne For to affirme that Christs very body and not only a figure or efficacy thereof should be truly and really present and yet not bodily but spiritually present is in it selfe inexplicable and as Swinglius (46) Swimglius co 2. de vera falsa religionâ— fol. â—06 in confutation therof truly obserueth is vpon the matter no other thing then to turne his body into a Spirit For as the true substance of Christs Spirit cannot be said to be present to vs only corporally or bodily and not spiritually because it is a spirit and no Body so neither may the substance it selfe of Christs very body be said to be present to vs not bodily but only Spiritually nor at all spiritually vnlesse we do which is impertinent to the matter in hand vnderstand the word Spirituall as the Apostle doth 1. Cor. 15. because it is a true and reall body no Spirit Animaduersion CLVII VNiuersality of our Catholike Doctrine in all chiefest points dispersed througout all Nations euen by the acknowledgment of our Aduersaries as appeareth from their confessed Inuisibility of their owne Church and Religion for so many ages is a most strong Argument of the truth of our Catholike Religion My reason hereof is in that the doctrine of the Roman Church could not by any pretended corruption be deriued from that Church to so many Nations so far remote and distant ech from other Sundry of which Nations were vnknowne to the Latin Church and many of them at variance therewith in some small points Therefore from hence I conclude that our Catholike fayth was the Primitiue fayth first taught by the Apostles in all those far different Nations wherein
Virginity yet it followeth not c. 10. That the Scriptures are to be discerned so far as coÌ„cerns our taking notice of theÌ„ by the authority of the Church Austin most fully teacheth and is therefore condemned by Swinglius in these words Here (82) Swingl tom 1. fol. 135. J intreat your indifferent Iudgments that you freely speake whether this saying of Austin meaning about the discerning of Scripture by the authority of the Church be thought more audacious then fitting or to haue beene vttered imprudently 11. Touching the Bookes of Toby Iudith Hester Machabees S. Austin doth admit them all for true diuine and Canonical Scripture and for such his doing is reprehended by Hospinian (83) Hospinian hist Sacr. part 1. p. 160. ZaÌ„chius de sacra scriptura pag 32. 33. D. Fyeld of the Church l. 4. c. 23. p. 246. D. Reynolds in his conclusions annexed to his Conference conclus 2 p. 699. 700. Zanchius D. Fyeld and Doctour Reynolds 12. S. Austin is so full for the Doctrine of Traditions that they are to be receaued as that M. Cartwright speaking of one Tradition which Austin defended thus bursteth out To allow (84) Cartwrights in M. Whitguiftt Defence p. â—6â— S. Austins saying is to bring in Popery againe and further he thus speaking of S. Austin herein Yf (85) In Cartwright his second Reply part 1. pag. 84. 85. 86. S. Austins iudgment be a good iudgment then there be some things Commanded of God which are not in the Scriptures and thereupon no sufficient Doctrine contained in the Scripture 13. Touching the Sacraments conferring Grace to the worthy Receauer S. Austin for teaching our Catholike Doctrine therein is reprehended by (86) Luth. l. contra Coelaeum and Caluin lib. Instit 4. c. 14 sect vlt. Luther and Caluin 14. That Children could not be saued without being baptized Cartwright thus speaketh of S Austin herein Austin (87) Cartwright in whitguifts defence pag. 5â—1 was of mind that Children could not be saued without baptisme And hereupon then Cartwright chargeth S. Austin with Absurdity (88) Vbi supra p 516. Now in regard of this absolute Nâ—ceâ—sity of Baptisme to Children B zâ— (89) Beza in respons ad Act. Colloq Montisbelg par 2. p. 143. confesseth that Austin taught that in case of necessity it is lawfull for the Layty to baâ—â—ize 15. Touching the Reall Presence taught by S. Austin Hospinian (90) Hist Sacramen par 1. l. 4. pa. 292. 293. the Protestant chargeth and reprehâ—ndeth S. Austin therefore and particularly for these words of S. Austin When (91) Austin tom 8. in Psal 33. Christ said This is my body then that his body was carryed in his hands 16. That Austin taught that the wicked contrary to the Doctrine of the Protestants did receaue the body of Christ is confessed and reprehended by Bucer in these words How (92) Script Anglic pag. 619. often doth Austin write thaâ— euen Judas receaued the very body and bloud of our Lord Now further that Austin taught that the Sacrament ought to be taken fâ—sting is confessed by Hospinian in Hist Sacram part 1. pag. 48 In like manner that Austin taught that Holy bread was to be giuen to the Catechumeni D. Fulke confesseth thus answering therto terming iâ— A superstitioâ—â— bread giuen in S. Austins tyme to those tesâ— were Catechumeni insteed of the Sacrament Fulke against Heskins c. l. 3 c. 23. pag. 377. To passe further that the body of Christ in respect of his being in the Sacrament is to be adored in the Sacrament D. Bilson reprehendeth S. Austin for such his Doctrine Bilsâ—â— in his true difference par 4. pag. 536. To conclude touching the B. Sacrament of the Eucharist whereas S. Austin teacheth in tom 3. in Enchirid. cap. 110. saying The Sacrifice of Christs body and bloud is propitious or auaileable for the soules in Purgatory this sentence being confessed by Hutterus the Protestant and in lieu of full answere therto he sayth Jn aeternum defendi non potest This saying of Austin can neuer be defended Hutterus l. de sacrificio Missatico l 2. c. 7. p. 525. 17. S. Austin was so earnest in defence of Freewill and Vniuersall Grace that he is therfore acknowledged and dislyked by the Century (93) Cent. 5. c. 4. col 900. 501. writers The Centurists (94) Centur 5. ca. 10. col 113â— and whitak ad Rat. Camp rat 1. pa. 12. D. Whitaker do acknowledg that Iustification by works is in like manner taught by S. Austin 18. Touching the doctrine of merit of works thus writeth Osiander of S. Austin Austin sometymes in the Article of Iustification seemeth to attribute ouermuch to the merit of works c. Cent. 4. l. 4. cap. 23. 19. Touching Prayer for the Dead thus D. Fulke auoucheth Austin (95) D. Fulk in confut of Purg. pa. 349. defended prayer for the dead And that S. Austin did hould Purgatory is in like manner confessed by (96) Fulk ib. pa. 78. D. Fulke 20. Touching Inuocation of Saints S. Austin is so fully Catholike that himselfe doubteth not to pray to S. Cyprian being long before martyred which action Kempnitius thus repreheÌ„deth (97) Exa par 3. pa. 211. Austin did this without Scripture yielding to the tyme and custome 21. In proofe that Images may be worshipped Hospinian (98) Sacram part â— l. 5. c. 8. though a Protestant yet agreeing with S. Austin herein alledgeth him in proofe hereof 22. Touching the fast of Lent and other fasts S. Austin is reprehended by the Centurist Cent. 5. c. 6. col 686. 687. 23. Touching vowing of Monasticall life the Centurists (99) Cent. 5. col 710 charge S. Austin with the Doctrine thereof and Hospinian thus writeth of Austin herein Austin (100) Hosp de origine Monach. fol. 33. was a great louer of Monasticall profession according to the custome of that age To conclude this long Animaduersion Austin taught that Antichrist should be but one only man and that therfore the Popes being many cannot be truly accounted Antichrist this is confessed and dislyked by the (101) Cent. 1. l. â— col 435 Centurists Thus farre now of this passage from whence we may conclude that that Father to whom so many learned Protestants did aboue giue so high commendation and praise was in all poynts of our Catholike Roman ReligioÌ„ euen by the acknowledgment of the Protestants an entyre Roman Catholike or Papist and hereupon I referre to the iudgement of any man carefull of his saluation whether it be not more secure for one to range himselfe in faith Religion with so worthy a member of Christs Church as Austin was euen in the confession of our Aduersaryes who notwithstanding their Diuersity of Religion from him euen in relating of his Catholike Doctrynes for the most part do giue him the tytle of Saint then to dissent from him in fayth and to ioyne himselfe in Religion
â—e booke But they did wryte either a â—â—tory as the Euangelists did or Epistles â—on some speciall occasion as Peter Paul â—â—es Iudas Iohn and in the same did disâ—te or discourse of dogmaticall points of â—yth only obiter and as circumstances inâ—eed them Animaduersion CLXXI. â—He first Proposition touching Indulgences The foundation and groundworke of â—he Doctrine of Indulgences is that there reâ—ayneth in the Church of Christ a certaine â—pirituall Treasury of the satisfactions of â—hrist and his Saincts which may be applied â—o those who stand subiect to temporal puâ—ishment after the guilt of eternall punishment is remitted in the Sacrament of Penance for the better explicating of which doctrine these following propositions are to be deliuered The first proposition In one and the samâ— good action or worke of a iust man a double price or value is assigned to it the one of Merit the other of Satisfaction For example the one and same act of giuing of Almes is Satisfactory in that it is a laborious or penalâ— worke It is also Meritorious because it is a good worke proceeding from Charity Now the giuing of Almes proceeding from charity is not lesse good because it is laborious and penall vpon the same reason theâ— it followeth that the same prayer may be both impetratory and meritorious The second Proposition A good worke in that respect as it is meritorious cannot be applyed to another but it may be applyed as it iâ— Satisfactory The first part of this proposition is proued because it cannot come to passe that in respect that one doth worke well another should be said to worke well in the said Action The second part is proued because satisfaction is a compensation of the punishment or paying of what iâ— due but it is euident that one man may make compensation of punishment for another man or pay the debt of another man The third Proposition There remayneth in the Church an infinit Treasury of Christs satisfactions which can neuer be exhausted or dryed vp This is euident since the passion of Christ 〈◊〉 of an infinite worth price and dignity â—or it was the Passion of an infinite Person 〈◊〉 wit of the Word Incarnated for he was 〈◊〉 who shed his bloud for the Church â—ut did shee l it in Mans flesh Hypostaticalâ— assumpted Now the dignity of satisfaâ—ion receaues its measure from the dignity 〈◊〉 the person satisfying euen as the greatâ—es of the offence taketh its proportion â—om the dignity of the person offended â—herefore from hence it is inferred that â—â—ere is yet remayning a great part of the â—orth and price of the Passion of Christ â—â—ich may alwayes be applyed to Man The fourth proposition To this superaâ—â—dant Treasury of the satisfactions of Christ â—â—ng the passions or sufferings of the B. Virgin â—as a such other Saints who haue suffered more 〈◊〉 this world then their sins haue deserued For 〈◊〉 is euident not to speake of other Saints â—â—t the Blessed Virgin neuer committed any â—â—tuall Sinne yet it is said that the sword 〈◊〉 griefe pierced her soule Luc. 2. In like sort 〈◊〉 Iohn Baptist being sanctifyed in his moâ—ers wombe did lead a most innocent life â—â—d stood obnoxious to most few and most â—ght or small Sinnes and yet in defence of â—â—e truth hee was beheaded Therefore it â—â—nnot be doubted but that a great heape â—f passions and sufferings of the B. Virgin 〈◊〉 S. Iohn Baptist were vpon their deaths reâ—ayning of which themselues did not staÌ„d in need for the satisfying for any temporall punishment All which superabundanâ—â— of satisfactioÌ„s were layed vp in the Treasâ—â— house of the Church Thus farre of thâ— poynt only I add that so the person mâ—â— be capable of Jndulgences two things are required The first that he be in state of Grace the second that he performe all that whicâ— is inioyned to him for the obtayning of the Jndulgence Animaduersion CLXXII WHen it is said Indulgences do profit the soules of the departed only per moduâ— suffragij the meaning hereof is because Jndulgences do not profit the departed by way of Iuridicall absolution but by way of solution or payment that is by way of Satisfaction Thus when a Man giueth Almes or fasteth or goeth on pilgrimage to holy places for the reliefe of a soule departed he doth not absolue that soule from the guilt of punishment but he only offereth vp that satisfaction that God accepting thereof would free and deliuer it from the due punishment which otherwise it were to suffer Euen so the Pope doth not absolue the departed soule but out of the Treasury of satisfactions remayning in the Church offereth vp so much to God as is needfull to free and deliuer the soule For the close of these Animaduersions touching the Doctrine of Indulgences the Reader is to take particular notice and the rather through the wlilfull malitious mistaking of our Aduersaries â—ho do mightily calumniate vs in this question of Jndulgences that we teach the guilt of eternall damnation being remitted only by the Sacrament of Confession or by most perfect contrition in lieu therof when there is not oportunity of the other the subiect of an Indulgence is only a temporall punishment due to be suffered after the guilt of damnation is remitted which temporall punishment by meanes of Indulgences we hold may be either lessened or wholy taken away in a Man who is in state of Grace but not if he be in state of Mortall Sinne. Animaduersion CLXXIII IT is certaine that the English Translations of the New Testament made by the Protestants are most corrupt and in diuers places most different from the Greeke in which tongue either all or most of the New Testament was first written I will exemplify in two passages The New Testament makes mention of good or pious Traditions of wicked and Iewish Traditions expressing them both by one the same Greeke word to wit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which properly signifyeth Traditio Now the imposture here resteth For our English Protestant Translations in such Texts wherein are vnderstood Good and profitable Traditions as in 1. Cor. 2. and 2. Thess 2. do translate insteed of the word Traditions the word Ordinances But where the Texts speake of wicked and friuolous Traditions there our Aduersaries put downe most punctually as it Math. 15. in their Translation the right word Traditions Now this calumny is vsed in dislike of Apostolicall Traditions that so the ignorant Reader should neuer find the word Tradition in Scripture in a good sense but alwayes in a bad and disalowed though now in their last Translation but not in any former for the better saluing of their credit they put only in the Margent of such Texts speaking of godly Traditions the word Traditions The like course they hould in translating the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying dignus in English Worthy and the Verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be made worthy For in those Texts which
diuine Scriptures yet they are recorded and written in the Monuments of the auncient Authours and in Ecclesiasticall bookes The second reason may be the continuall vse of them For diuers Traditions are in continuall obseruation practise as the Rites and Ceremonyes of administring the Sacraments Holy-dayes appoynted tymes of fasting the Celebration of the Masse and of Diuine office or prayers and such like The third cause are certaine externall Monuments which continue for a most long tyme as most ancient TeÌ„ples or Churches in which are Altars the Holy Fonts for Baptisme the Memorialls or Toumbs of Saincts Crosses Images Ecclesiasticall bookes c. The fourth Reason is Heresy it selfe For God doth wonderfully vse the Enemyes of the Church to the preseruation of the Church For because as in euery age there haue risen vp some Heretyks who haue impugned diuers dogmaticall Traditions of the Church So hath God in ech age raysed certaine learned Orthodoxall Men who that they might better resist the Heretykes haue with most great diligence and labour searched out the Doctrine of the Church and ancient Traditions and haue transmitted them in wryting to all posterity I will ad this following obseruation in fuller warrant of vnwritten Traditions against such who restrayne the proofe of all poynts to the Scripture it selfe To wit that it is one thing for an Article of fayth to be expressed in Scripture Another thing for an Article of fayth to be grounded vpon â—cripture All Christian doctrine is not expressed in Scripture yet euery Christian doctrine is so grounded on Scripture that it may in somâ— sort or other be proued from Scripture And in this sense all Traditions receaued by the vniuersall Church of Christ may be said to be grounded on Scripture since they are grouÌ„ded vpon the authority of the Church admitting them To which Church Christ himselfe hath promised an infallibility of Truth and of not erring according to that Ego vobiscum sum omnibus diebus vsque Consummationem saeculi Math. 18. And againe Portae inferi non praeualebunt aduersum eam Math. 16. to wit against the Church of Christ Animaduersion CLXXXII PRotestancy is proued to be an intentionall thing in it selfe and voyde of all Reall fayth This is proued from the Definition of Fayth giuen by the Apostle thus defining fayth fides est sperandarum substantia rerum argumentum non apparentium That is fayth is the (50) Heb. 11. substance of things to be hoped for the argument of things not appearing This definition sheweth that fayth is a supernaturall Vertue and the Obiect thereof is that which through its owne abstrusenes sublimity cannot be apprehended or conceaued by force of Mans owne wit it transcending all Naturall Reason This we see exemplyfyed in the two supreme Articles of the Trinity and the Incarnation the Mysteryes and difficulties of which transcend all humane reason or light of Nature And hence it is that the Conclusion of the Schoole Deuines is this Quae (51) S. Thomas part 1. 2. quaest 1. fidei sunt non possunt esse scita Now to apply this Yf Protestancy be a supernaturall fayth or els it is no true sauing fayth then the Obiect of this Protestanticall fayth is of that difficult Nature as that Man through the force of Naturall reason only cannot giue any assent thereto without the speciall concurrency of Gods Grace But here I demand that seeing the Obiect of Protestancy as Protestancy is meere Negatiues and denialls as deniall of Reall Presence deniall of Purgatory deniall of Freewill deniall of praying to Saincts briefly deniall of most of the affirmatiue points taught by our Catholike Church here I say I demand what supernaturality or force of Gods speciall concurrency is required that man should giue an assent to these Negations or denyalls Nay I here say that mans naturall reason euen of it selfe without any externaâ—l help is propense and inclyning to belieue these and other such like Negations except the Affirmatiues to those Negations can be conuinced as for true either by Diuine or Humane proofe and Authority Thus it followeth that Protestancy euen from the Definition of Fayth giuen by the Apostle is no supernaturall Fayth but in respect of such a Fayth is a meere Irreality and wast of fayth Animaduersion CLXXXIII THe reasons which S. Thomas Aquinas (52) S. Thom in 3. part quaest 27. Artic 4. doth insist vpon being most probable inducements for freeing the Blessed Virgin Mary from Originall Sinne are these following The first Seeing God did decree to aduance the Blessed Virgin to so supreme dignity that she should excell euen the Angells themselues therfore it was most sutable agreeable that no priuiledg should be conferred vpon any pure Creature which was not conferred vpon the B. Virgin except such a priuiledg were repugnant to the condition state Nature or Sex But to be sanctifyed in the first instant of Creation was giuen to our First Parents As also to be sanctifyed in the first instant of Creation and neuer to be polluted with any Sinne was giuen to the holy Angells But this priuiledg is in no sort repugnant to the condition state Nature or Sex of the B. Virgin Therefore it is a pious thing to belieue that the Mother of God did not want this priuiledge Secondly because that testimony of the Heauenly Spouse ought in all probability to be accomplished and fulfilled in the Blessed Virgin Tota (53) Can. 4. pulchra es amica mea macula non est in te Thirdly because the Mother of Christ hath a singular Affinity and Coniunction with Christ himselfe Fourthly in that the Sonne of God who is the wisdome of the Father did as it were inhabitate in the wombe of the Mother after a most peculiar and wonderfull manner But it is said in holy Scripture In maleuolam (54) Wisdoms c. 1. animam c. Wisdome cannot enter into a wicked hart nor dwell in the body which is subiect to sinne Lastly because as well the honour as the ignominy of the Mother redoundeth to the Sonne Now touching the proofe of the Assumption of our B. Lady both in Body Soule pretermitting the Authority of the (55) S. Ierome writeth a sermon styling it de Eesto assumptionis Mariae The Centurists alledge that S. Austin did write a Book-entituling it de Assumptione Virginis Mariae Ancient Fathers herin I will at this present content my selfe with the Argument of S. Bernard in proofe thereof who thus disputeth Seeing God hath discouered and reuealed the Bodies of many Saincts which lay hid in diuers places that they might be honored of faythful Christians It then ineuitably followeth that if the sacred Body of the Blessed Virgin had beene still on earth he would in like maÌ„ner haue made knowne no doubt in what place or Country it did lye But it not being certainly knowne where that Body or any part thereof is in any place of the world it may irrâ—pliably
mâ—n forcible to wring out Confession then any racâ—â— torment For the proofe of this verity I refer the studious Reader to the Booke of the Protestants Apology where beginning at the Page 684. sâ—quentib at the letter M. in the margent he shall find fyfty at least of our Affirmatiue and Catholike Doctrines defended and maintayned by the most learned Protestants that euer did write I will here only reckon the tiles of diuers of the said Articles so belieued and taught by the Protestants viz. 1. Real presence 2. That Sacraments do confer grace 3. The sufficiency of Chricts corporall Death 4. That Christ descended in soule into Limbus Patrum 5. The continuall Visibility of the Church 6. The Necessity of Good works to Saluation 7. Euangelicall Counsells 8. The Doctrine of vniuersality of Grace 9. That God doth only permit sinne but decreeth it not 10. That men are not certaine of their Election 11. That to Children of the faythfull dying vnbaptized saluation is not promised 12. Free-will 13. That in regard of Christs Passion and promisse our Good works are meritorious 14. TeÌ„porall punishment reserued by God in Iustice after the sinne is remitted 15. Peters Primacy 16. Intercession of Angells 17. Intercession of Saincts 18. Jnuocation of Saincts 19. Vowed Chastity 20. Voluntary â—ouerty Chastity and Obedience 21. Prayer for the Dead 22. Purgatory 23. Limbus Patrum 24. Images in Churches 25. Worshipping of Images 26. Reuerence and bowing at the name of Jesus 27. That the good Works of one may help another 28. Power of a priest to remit sinnes 29. Confession of sinnes 30. Distinction of mortall and veniall sinne 31. The indifferency of Communion vnder one kind 32. Sacrifice of the New Testament according to the Order of Melchisedech 33. The possibâ—lity of the Commandements 34. Transubstantiation 35. That Christ is God of God 36. Thaâ— Christ as Man was from his Natiuity free from Ignorance and was full of knowledg 37 Baptisme of Women and Lay persons in tyme oâ— Necessity 38. Seauen Sacraments 39. Implicitâ— fayth called Fides implicita 40. That Antichrist is yet to come 41. Patronage and protection of certaine Angells ouer certaine Countryes and Kingd mes 42. That the Obseruation of Sunday for our â—abaoth is not alterable 43 That the alteration of the â—aboth from Saturdâ—â— to Sunday not proued by Scripture 44. Set tymes of fasting 45. The true visible Church cannot erre 46. Externall iudgment and not onâ—y Scripture appointed for determining of Contrâ—uersies 47. That the gouerment of the Church is Monarchicall 48. Which is true Scripture determined to vs only by the Church 49. That the Church of Rome is a part of the house of God 50. Vnwritten Traditions besides some other Catholike points taught by the learned Protestants Here now I demand that if the Protestants Proselyts and followers do belieue their Grand-maisters in diuers points of their owne Religion why then should not they belieue the learned Protestants maintayning our Catholike doctrines â—ntâ— abstracting from the authority of the Church both the said seuerall sorts of Protestants do maintayne their contrary Tenets euen with equall and indifferent priuiledg of their owne Priuate Spirit Animaduersion CLXXXVIII AS aboue I compared Luther being Catholike touching manners and Conuersation of Lyfe with Luther being Protestant So heere I will make another comparatiue betweene the Liues of Catholikes and of Protestants And here it is to be obserued that I will not compare the most pious men in former tymes with the best of the Protestants nor the worst men for life of the one Religion with the worst of the other but for the greater confronting of our Aduersaries and aduantage to our Catholike Cause I will compare the declining state of Catholike tymes with the best tymes of Protestancy which is presumed to be at the first entrance and beginning of Protestancy when the first Protestants enioyed the â—rimitiae and first fruites of their Religion This point will be made euident euen from the confessions of the Protestants themselues First then we fynd Luther himself thus to write From (n) Luth in postill super Euangel Dominiâ—ae primae Aduentus the tyme in which the pure Doctrine of the Gospell was first reuealed to light the world hath growne dayly worse Men are more reuengefull couetous licentious then they were euer before in the Papacy With whom Musculus agreeth thus complayning hereof Vt verum (o) Musculus in loc com in cap de Decalog pag. 62. essâ— fateor c. To confesse the truth men are become so vâ—â—ike themselues that whereas in the Pâ—pacy they were religious in their Errours and Superstition now in the light of the knowne truth they are more prophaâ—â— then the very Sonnes of the world I wiâ—â— conclude with the testimony of Erasmus thus discoursing of this point Quos (p) Erasmus Ep. ad fratres Inferioris Germaniae aâ—tea noueram c. Such men as I knew to be before vpright candid modest and sincere in theâ— Conuersation after they had embraced thâ—â— new Sect meaning of the Gospell they iâ—stantly begun to talke of young Women to playâ— dice to leaue of prayer to be most impatient reuengfull of Iniuries and to conclude to abaâ—don all humanity expertus loquor Thus far â—rvsmus And thus much of the balancing oâ— men of these two seuerall Religions Noâ— I heere refer to an indifferent Iudgmenâ— whether it be not a great blemish to Protestancy that it is confessed by the Protâ—stants that the Professours thereof euen 〈◊〉 their best tymes were far worse and moâ— wicked in manners then the Catholikâ—â— their worst and most declyning tymes Animaduersion CLXXXIX THe Protestants much solace themselâ—â— in alledging certaine Texts of Scriptâ—â— in proofe of Iustification by fayth only whâ—â— passages being truly weighed are found 〈◊〉 be most weakely or rather impertineâ—â— alledged as in Math. 9. Thy fayth hath sâ—â— thee Iohn 3 Who belieueth in the Sonne hâ— eternall Lyfe Finally to omit some oâ—â— such seeming Texts Rom. 5. We being â—â—â—fyed by fayth let vs haue peace towards God Tâ— these and such like I answere and deny that it followeth That Fayth only iustifyeth though only Fayth be named For sometymes also other Vertues are only named or the Sacraments For example Luc. 7. we read Many sinnes are forgiuen her because she loued much Iob. 12. Almes deeds freeth from death Rom. 8. By hope we are saued Finally Titus 3. He hath saued vs by the Lawes of regeneration besydes many other such passages And yet no man will gather from theâ—e authorities that Charity or Almesdeeds or Hope or Baptisme do iustiâ—y without Fayth Therfore when many different causes concur to produce one Effect the Scripture ascribeth the same Effect sometymes to one Cause sometymes to another and yet the Scripture doth not intend thereby to signiâ—y that one cause is sufficient without the other causes Now the reason why the Apostle more frequently attributes Iustification to fayth
Sauiours hands that you would beare to me both liuing and dead a charitable pitifull Remembrance at the tyme of your chiefest deuotions I meane at the tyme of celebrating that most Dreadfull Sacrifice wherein our Sauiour by the ministery of your selues daily offereth vp his owne sacred body and bloud to his Heauenly Father for the expiating of sinne in Man And with this I giue you all my last farewell shall euer remayne Yours in all Christian and religious Obseruancy N. N. P. A Table of the chiefe Controuersies handled in this Booke A. A Diaphorists in Religion who Animad 60. Adoration of Saints and Angells Anim. 34. Adoration of the holy Eucharist Anim. 166. Albigenses Waldenses what they were Animad 103. 104. Angells how they may be painted Animad 32. Antichrist his first comming assigned by Protestants Animad 35. The Pope cannot be Antichrist Animad 153. The Antinomi Heretickes descend from Luther Animad 148. Articles of Cath. Religion maintayned by Protestants Animad 187. Articles negatiue ought to be proued by Scripture by Protestants Animad 55. Atheisme in many Protestants of England Animad 193. S. Augustine highly extolled by Protestants Animad 162. The Authors vow and Prayer for the King Queene Animad 191. Cath. Authors ordinarily reiected by Protestants Animad 3. 4. 42. B. BEades their vse and antiquity Anim. 83. Blessed Virgin Mary her Virginity An. 47 Her freeing from Originall sinne Anim. 183. Her Assumption into Heauen Animad 183. A Body may be in two places at once Animad 91. C. CAluin an Enemy to the Diuinity of Christ the B. Trinity Anim. 138. Caluins exposition of Hoc est Corpus meum Animad 49. Carolostadius impugned the Masse by persuasion of the Diuell Animad 59. Catholike Religion neuer changed Animad 79. 80. Title of Catholikes and antiquity thereof Animad 175. Catholiks or Protestants whether incline more to vertue Animad 65. Catholiks and Protestants cannot be both saued Animad 176. Ceremonies derided by Protestants and Puritans Animad 63. About the Ceremonies of the Masse Anim. 16. The Churches definition of Protestants Animad 192. Church of Protestants inuisible Animad 1922 Christian Religion plantâ—â— in England when Animad 36. Communion vnder one kind Animad 28.76 Comparison betweene the liues of Catholiks and Protestants Animad 188. Conference of places of Scripture Anim. 54. Councells Generall depressed by Hereticks Animad 50. The Creed whether it contayneth all Articles necessary of Religion Animad 61. D. ABout the Decalogue or Ten Commandements Animad 30 Decrees of Popes fraudulently vrged by Protestants Animad 38. 39. Deity of Christ denyed Also the Immortality of the soule Animad 194. Difference betweene Scriptures and Fathers Animad 40. Difference betweene Protestants themselues about Scripture Animad 48. Difference betwene Preachers of Cathol and Protestant Doctrine Animad 160. Disputation with Protestants how to order Animad 20. 41. Disputing with Protestants by entercourse of letters Animad 73. Doctors and Pastors alwayes to be in the Church Animad 117. E. ELias his Example much vrged by Protestants Animad 151. About the Holy Eucharist Animad 26. 125. 126. 127. 128. 129. 130. 165. 166. The Eye of a Man wonderfull Animad 196. F. FAbricke of the world Animad 199. The Face of a Man admirable Anim. 197. Ancient Fathers their Authorities reiected ordinarily by Protestants Animad 3. 4. yet loath to break with them Anim. 42. 43. Their aduantages for interpreting of Scripture Animad 41. Their maintayning of Papistry Anim. 66. The doctrine of Freewill Animad 133. 134. 135. 136. G. GEnerall Councells depressed by Hereticks Animad 50. God the Father how he may be painted Animad 31. 32. 33. God the Author of sinne affirmed by Protestants Animad 185. Grace what concurres in working therof Animad 164. Grecians euer emulous of the Church of Rome Animad 119. H. THe Hand of a Man wonderfull Anim 196. All Heresies arising haue byn recorded by the Church of Rome Animad 118. Hereticks first deniall of diuers points of Cath Religion Animad 11. Hereticks called after the Name of their first Author Animad 77. 78. Hereticks condemne Prophets Apostles Fathers c. Animad 140. Their charge of Catholiks with the errors of the Heathens Animad 141. Holy-water and its Antiquity Animad 84. About the Hymne of Aue Maris stella Animad 46. I. THe Iewes deliuered many Articles of Catholike Religion before Christs comming Animad 98. Iewish Ceremonies many still retayned Animad 158. Images how they may be painted Anim. 31. discussed by Philosophy Animad 33. Jmmortality of the Soule denyed and defended Animad 194. About the doctrine of Jndulgences Animad 171. 172. Induration of Pharao his hart Animad 150. Inuention of a false opinion may be perhaps of no Hereticke Animad 15. Jnuisibility of the Protestants Church Animad 104. 139. 180. Iustification and Merit of Workes Anim. 29. Iustification by only Fayth Animad 189. K. OF Kinges and Queenes excommunicated and deposed Animad 191. Knowledge of a Deity what Animad 194. Knowledge of the Soule what Animad 194. L. LIbertines descended from Luther Animad 148. Euill Liues of Popes obiected by Protestants Animad 145. 146. Luthers Exposition of Hoc est Corpus meum Animad 49. Luthers Spirit being a Catholike and being an Hereticke Animad 57. Luthers Change of the Masse by persuasion of the Diuell Animad 58. 59. Luther no perfect and entyre Protestant Animad 101. Luthers doctrine why applauded Anim. 144. M. B. V. Mary her Conception immaculate Animad 44. The little respect Protestants giue vnto vnto her Animad 45. Lesse giuen to her by Puritans Anim. 47. About her Hymne of Aue Maris Stella Animad 46. Markes of the Protestants Church Anim. 13. Marriage of Priests vrged by Protestants Animad 154. Masse and the Antiquity therof Anim. 159. Merit of Workes Animad 29. Miracles depressed by Protestants Animad 70. N. NEcessity of the visibility of the Roman Church Animad 137. Neutralls in Religion what they hould Animad 60. Notes of the Church Animad 108. 142. P. PErsecution of Catholikes vnder Q. Elizabeth Anima 9. Practice in Controuersies much commended Animad 86. Prayer to Saints Animad 81. Prayer in a strange tongue Animad 169. Prayer needlesse and fruitlesse with Protestants Animad 186. Protestants their sleight in answering Cath. Bookes Animad 131. Protestants whether there were any before Luther Animad 109. 110. Protestants sooner become Atheists then do Catholikes Animad 109. What required to a perfect Protestant Animad 102. Protestants would seeme to agree with the Ancient Fathers Animad 67. Protestants voyde of all reall Fayth Anim. 182. Protestants and Iewes iumpe in many things Animad 5. Protestants agree which ancient condemned Hereticks Animad 6. Their false alleaging of Scriptures Animad 52. Protestants opposite one to another in their writings Animad 17. 18. 19. Protestants charged with a vicious Circle in their disputes Animad 21. Their flying to the Priuate Spirit Animad 22. 100. Their little respect to the B. V. Mary Animad 45. 46. Protestants maintayne diuers Articles of the Cath. Fayth Animad 187. Protestants charge Cath. Religion with teaching disobedience to Princes Anim. 191. Protestants Rebellion in France Holland Germany c. Animad 191. Protestants definition of their Church Animad 192. Protestants many of them Atheistes Animad 193. Protestants Inuectiues one against another Animad 62. â—rotestants charged with Ancient Heresies by Catholiks Animad 64. â—rotestants pretend their Writings and Memory to haue byn extinguished by the Popes Animad 68. â—rotestants borrow from the Church of Rome Animad 94. All Protestants or their Forefathers sometyme Catholikes Animad 88. They cannot agree about their owne doctrines Animad 97. Protestancy when it was in its full height Animad 177. Puritans their dishonour of the B. V. Mary Animad 47. Purgatory defended Animad 149. R. THe Reall-Presence discussed Animad 89. 125. 126. 127. 128. 129. 155. 156. 163. Reall-Presence maintayned by Protestants against Puritans Animad 7. Their Arguments also against the Reall-Presence Animad 8. Doctrine of Recusancy taught both by Catholiks and Protestants Animad 178. About the Doctrine of Reprobation Anim. 184. 190. Roman Religion neuer changed Animad 10. Roman Religion only capable of Saluation Animad 121. S. SAints to be prayed vnto lawfull Animad 27. Saluation certayne in the Cath. Roman Religion Animad 71. Scripture how to be interpreted Animad 25. 37. 152. Difficult to be vnderstood Animad 167. Why written by the Apostles Anim. 170. About the Signe of the Crosse Animad 82. Soule of Man immortall Animad 194. The similitude it beareth to God Anim. 200 Spirits be an inuisible substance Anim. 198. T. TRaditions vnwritten impugned by Protestants Animad 181. Traditions knowne by certayne Rules Animad 168. Translations of the Scriptures by ProtestaÌ„ts corrupted Animad 173. 174. The doctrine of Transubstantiation Anim. 122. 123. 124. 125. 126. 127. 128. 129. 130. Truth how it may be deliuered in negatiue words Anim. 96. V. THe Vbiquity of God Animad 93. The Virginity of our B. Lady Anim. 47. Her freedome from Originall sinne Anim. 183. Visibility of the Roman Church proued by the Jnuisibility of the Protestant Church Animad 111. 112. 113. 114. 115. 116. 180. Visibility of the Protestants Church maintayned by them Animad 12. Vniuersality a strong Argument for Cath. Religion Animad 157. The Voyce of a Man admirable Anim. 197. W. WAldenses Albigenses what they were 〈◊〉 Animad 103. 104. The taking of a second Wife often an abusâ— in Protestants Animad 179. Word of God written Animad 1. 2. 3. Words of Christ in the last Supper how to bâ— taken Animad 23. 24. The Worldes existence from Eternity impugned Animad 195. The fabricke of the World Animad 199. Z. ZWinglius his impugning the Masse by persuasion of the Diuell Animad 5â— FINIS