against our Doctrine Cath. So have ye against ours and by your consequence ye must not judge of it Ye are best be judged by the great Turke if ye will not admit of the Pope to be Judge of Controversies in Religion Yet it s not credible that God would have us be judged by Turkes or Jewes What thinke you Master Doctor Min. But why should the Pope or Roman Church judge us Protestants and we not judge them Cath. Your Protestant Churches are not yet come to yeares of discretion Our Church was in possession of judicature before yours was born ye must produce better evidence then we can shew before you can rationally pretend to deprive us of what we possessed these 16. hundred yeares 19 Min. I never met with a more obstinate Clowne then thou art Cath. Why do you say I am obstinate Is it because I take not the word of your English Church that is of 12. or 7. men in matters of Faith and Sacraments against the testimony of all Catholick Councells and the tradition of the whole Church Min. I wonder that thou didst not make mention of tradition before now Woe to them that prefer the traditions of men before the Word of God! Cath. I do not take Scripture as you interpret it to be the Word of God Our Preachers teach us that the Word of God must necessarily involve Gods meaning and sense But ye Protestants intrude your own fancies and dreames and make them a part of Gods Word rejecting the true sense and meaning of Scripture which the Catholick Church had learned of the Apostles and preserved from the first age of Christianity to this present Minist What a calumny is this Name but one fancy or new interpretation of ours intruded into Scripture Cath. Do not ye say that the respect we give to Images is idolatry or at least forbidden in Scripture as a thing inclining men to idolatry The Catholick Church condemned long since this fancy of yours as heresie and ye make the common people believe that we are idolaters for holding that sense of Scripture which hath been taught and practised in the Church since the beginning as learned men assure us and they say the second Councell of Nice do testifie 20 Min. Worship of Images is dangerous and therefore forbidden in Scripture Cath If that be so how did all the Church approve of it for so many ages and stick to it still notwithstanding your contradictions We have men of conscience and learning how is it possible they should damne themselves and others for worship of Images Min. I see there is no ground to be expected by discoursing with thee because when thou art pressed with Gods cleare Word thou dost recurre to the tradition and practise of the Church and to I know not what miracles Therefore I fear God hath delivered thee over to Sathan as an obstinate and reprobate Heretick Cath. Make it appear to me that your sense of Scripture is Gods meaning and then I will not contradict your Doctrine But I see no prudent ground to believe that your new interpretations contrary to the practise and tradition of the ancient Catholick Church should be dictated by God On the contrary side ye can not deny that we Catholicks have all the reason in the world to stick to our old sense of Scripture confirmed by so many miracles and testimonies of antiquity 21 Let this suffice to shew how illiterate Catholicks may convince the most learned Protestants Our cause is so good and cleare that common sense is enough to defend it and confound our greatest and most able adversaries No Catholick Clowne can be convinced by any learned Protestant if he be not more then ordinarily simple Truly there is nothing more incredible then that all the visible Churches of the world should have beene forsaken by God and in damnable errours for so many ages as Protestants pretend and that to reform the world God should pick out amongst all men the most â—icked who continued or rather encreased their abominable and scandalous conversation after they begun to preach their new Ghospell See the lives of all new Reformers in the three Conversions of England and in the prudentiall Ballance if you doubt of this assertion Is it not a meere foppery to thinke that 12. or 7. men who modeld the new Church of England in Edward the VI. time should judge better of Christian Faith matter and forme of Sacraments and of religious ceremonies then the Councells of Lateran and Trent and all the world in former ages Is it not impossible and contrary to Christs owne promises that the exercise of true Religion and Faith should be as invisible as the English Church is at this present in times wherein Christianity through the mercy of God doth flourish in all parts of the world The Catholick Church was never brought to be invisible by the Arrians though by them much persecuted Let any Catholick Clowne but reflect upon these and other things visible to all the world and he may confidently dispute and convince the most learned Protestant CHAP. XV. Of the difference between Christian Faith and the historicall beliefe of Protestants THat supernaturall Faith is a speciall gift of God is granted even by Protestants themselves The superuaturality of it consists not in believing an extravagant and improbable object because that may be done naturally For there is nothing however so false and improbable to the understanding that will not at length be believed by men if constantly reported to them by others of whom they have a good opinion and not contradicted by any whose testimony they value The Turks believe that Mahomet was a great Prophet and Saint The Jews believe that the Messias is not yet come The Puritans believe that every one of themselves is inspired with a Divine spirit c. And though every one of these stories be false improbable and also contradicted by Catholicks yet because these Sectaries have a good opinion of their owne Congregation and a very bad one of us Catholicks they believe the first reject and contemne the second Turks Jews and Puritans do not believe these fond articles of their own Religion with any supernaturall Faith their beliefe is meerly historical just as children believe the history of the Knight in the Sunne Don Quixote de la Manche c. All Christians have not supernaturall and Christian Faith Many who received it in their Baptisme loose it by heresie Hereticks are called Christians because they are baptized and not because they are endued with Christian beliefe They believe some mysteries of Christian Religion but with a meere historicall Faith They assent to the mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation not because God revealed them but because they are pleased to judge it very probable or certain that God revealed some such thing That their owne fancy or opinion and not Gods Revelation doth move Protestants to believe what they do believe of Christian Religion is evident
God revealed it reserving to his owne private â—udgement or to that of his first Patriarchs Luther Calvin Chillingworth c. the decision of this controversie VVhether God revealed it or no But the Catholick believes absolutely and doubts not but God revealed what the Church proposeth as revealed submitting his judgement in matters of Faith to whatsoever the Church doth define or declare 4 The obstinacy of Heresie may be well compared to the obstinacy of Rebellion Heresie being indeed a Rebellion of private and proper judgement against Gods authority and veracity appearing sufficiently in his Church Put the case that a Province of Spaine or France did reject any Lawes or Ordinances made by their King and intimated by his Officers to the people and proclaimed in the same Provinces In case these Lawes and the said Officers who have all the exterior signes or markes whereby the Kings authority is usually discerned were contemned by the people not because they doubt of their Kings legiflative power but because they will not believe he made such Lawes or gave any such Commission to his Officers would not the people notwithstanding all this pretended ignorance be Rebells and obstinate against their Soveraigne would it excuse them from the guilt of Rebellion to alledge in their owne behalfe that they did not thinke or believe the King commanded any such thing as his Officers pretended and proclaimed Their very excuse involves obstinacy and Rebellion The obedience and duty which Subjects owe to their King must be extended also to his Officers they must obey their Soveraigne not onely when himselfe commands but also when the Officers that have the ordinary signes of his authority do command in his name 5 This is the case of Hereticks They protest if they had thought or believed that the Doctrine of the Roman Church was revealed by God they would embrace it with all their heart But they do not consider that this very If or doubt is their crime and heresie What reason or prudent ground have they to doubt that Goâ— doth speake by the Roman Church as Kings do by theâ— Officers No Officers or Ministers have more authenâ—tick and credible signes of their Kings authority the the Roman Catholick Church hath of Gods Commission and trust of proposing his Revelations and interpretinâ— his meaning of Scripture as is demonstrated in the 14â— and other Chapters Now its sufficient to know that thâ— signes of the true Church are Miracles Sanctity of Doctrine and life conversion of Nations continuall succession from thâ— Apostles to the present age both of Pastors and Doctrine c. These signes are obvious to our senses and may bâ— perceived by all people Clounes Souldiers and other illiterate persons that will inquire and examine the history of their owne Countrey or the Religion of their Ancestors Whatsoever amongst all the Christan Churches hath these signes That Church must be heard obeyed and believed as having Gods authority and Commission to decide all doubts and controversies of Faith whosoever believes not her Definitions and obeyes not her Decrees is an obstinate Heretick and Rebell CHAP. V. Of the Catholick Church 1 SEeing the obstinacy of Hereticks is against Gods Revelations as they are proposed by the testimony of the Catholick Church it s required something be said of this Church That there is a Catholick and visible Church in this world is granted tacitely by all Hereticks seeing every Sect oâ— them pretends to be the whole or at least one part of the Catholick Church 2 The Catholick Church is a multitude or Congregation of men whose testimony doth so sufficiently propose their Doctrine to be Gods Word and the true meaning thereof that it is evidently imprudence and infallible damnation in any person whosoever not to acquiesce iâ— the said testimony and not to believe without the least doubt what it proposeth as Divine Revelation There are but two wayes to convince the understanding of man the one is evident and cleare reason the other is authority To some things its necessary even for salvation we give our assent though no evident and cleare reason appeareth authority that is the testimony of lawfull witnesses must be taken for reason and supply the want of it It is unreasonable and damnable not to honour our Princes and Parents though they have no other evidence or reason to shew that they are our lawfull Princes or Parents but the authority and testimony of lawfull witnesses God therefore having decreed that men should believe some mysteries above reason commanded all to believe under paine of damnation whatsoever the Church saith he revealed It is not unreasonable that God should condemn us for not believing the testimony of the Catholick Church in matters of Faith which are above reason seeing we shall be condemned if we believe not the testimony of our Neighbours concerning our Princes and Parents Is it a lawfull excuse for any man to say If I had believed such a man to be my Soveraigne I would obey him or such a woman to be my Mother I would honour her If there be lawfull witnesses for Prince or Parents their testimony is to be believed the very not believing them is a crime though there be no more evidence for it then the said testimony Therefore à fortiori the not believing the testimony of the Church confirmed with so many signes in matters of Faith is a crime and obstinate heresie 3 Some Protestant Divines of the English Church are so civill as to admit of us Roman Catholicks and so eharitable as not to exclude any Christians from being a part of the Catholick Church yet we have reason to thinke that it s no civility or kindnesse but interest that moves them to open the dore to us because if they reject us themselves can not pretend to be a Church having neither succession of Bishops nor without begging our testimony any solid proofe that Scripture is Gods Word What Bookes of Scripture they are pleased to accept of as Divine Revelation they do it upon our score and word but the sense which we delivered to them with the said Books as the most principall part of Gods Word they do refuse never being able hitherto to give any tolerable reason why they take our word more for the letter oâ— Scripture then for the sense and meaning of it If we deserve credit in one why not in both being no lesse against our conscience and as much in our power to corrupt the letter as the sense But of their obstinacy in this particular and others I shall discourse more at large when speake of Protestancy Now I will proceed in the discovery of the true Church CHAP. VI. VVhether all Christians be the Catholick Church or whether it may be composed of any two or more Congregations of them if not agreeing in all matters whatsoever which any one Congregation or Church pretends to be revealed by God 1 THis is as much as to demand Whether Catholicks and Protestants
time invented when the Councell defined it The Church doth not make new articles of Faith when it defines any controverted Doctrine it onely declares that such Doctrine was delivered to the primitive Church though perhaps it was not proposed generally to all Churches and Catholicks it groundeth the definition upon Scripture or Tradition The same which Protestants object against the word Transubstantiation did the Arrians against Consubstantiality in the Councell of Nice saying it was a novelty and not in Scripture 11 The lawfulnesse of worshipping Images is sufficiently proposed as Divine Revelation by the second Councell of Nice in these words VVe do unanimously professe to stick to Ecclesiasticall traditions which are in force eather by custome or writing whereof one is the making of Images Which is agreable to the Ghospell and profitably invented for the beliefe of Gods true Incarnation This supposed following the beaten rode and the steps of our Divine and holy Fathers and observing the tradition of the Catholick Church wherein the holy Ghost doth inhabitate we define that holy Images ought to be worshipt c. of Christ of our Lady Angells Saints c. For so the discipline of our holy Fathers doth conclude as also the tradition of the Catholick Church which from one end to the other hath received the Ghospell 12 Notwithstanding this cleare testimony of the Catholick Church Protestants confound the worship of Images with idolatry not distinguishing between an Image and an Idol Idol signifies the likenesse of a false God Image is the likenesse of any thing that doth or may exist translating in the English Bible Image for Idol and make the poore ignorant people believe that we Catholicks dare not set downe in our Cathechismes the first Commandement at full as it is in Scripture because it forbiddeth worship of Images whereas out of the very text it appeares that God forbids onely the likenesse of any thing to be adored as God or made to that purpose In Canisius the Jesuite his Cathechisme is set downe the first Commandement as it is in Scripture In all other Cathechismes the substance of the first Commandement is set downe for in adoring but one God is implyed we must not worship any other things as Gods It might be as well objected against our Cathechismes that in the last Commandement we put in briefe onely these words Thou shalt not covet another mans goods omitting oxes and asses c. which these wise Objectors put us in minde of Cathechismes being briese instructions for childrens memory require the shortest expression of the substance of every Commandement 13 But when Catholicks urge Protestants with the same Commandement because they have their owne statues and pictures made which are as much prohibited by the Commandement as the statues or Images of Saints they can finde an explanation for the text and distinguish betweene civill and religious worship we honour say they Kings and Princes Images with a civill worship onely and not religiously as ye do the Images of Saints which religious worship is due to God alone I would faine know why can not religious worship have a latitude and be more and lesse supreme and inferror as civill worship hath Its civility not onely to worship Kings but also noble men and others ho are their servants but the supreme civilâ— worship is due onely to the King himselfe an inferior deâ— gree is due to his servants to every one according his calling What inconveniency is it to hold the same with proportion of religious worship The supreme religiouâ— worship which is called Latria is due to God alone why may not there be an inferior degree of religious worshiâ— due to Saints and their Images religious worship being onely an exterior acknowledgement of some religious oâ— supernatur all excellency in the person worshipt Saint Poter is knowne because he was a Saint and not because hâ— was a Fisher Sure Protestants will not deny that thâ— Saints who enjoy God have a supernaturall excellencâ— bestowed upon them by his Divine Majesty Thereforâ— the Saints and by consequence their Images may be hoâ— noured with a religious worship of an inferior degree 14 As for the danger of idolatry amongst the commoâ— people we Catholicks have no reason to apprehend any having so long experience of the contrary We resort more to the Church or Chappell where one Image is the another according the graces which we receive our selâ—s or the miracles which we credibly heare to be done 〈◊〉 others To perswade us not to believe any such miraâ—es is to take away all beliefe and society amongst men â—s evident some miracles done at these Images are true â—ough some may be false For its impossible that all the â—atholicks and many Hereticks should conspire togeâ—er to deceive the world and damne themselves for a â—ing which if false imports most of them nothing If â—ere be miracles the worship of Images can not be unâ—wfull because God induceth not men by miracles to â—nne rather there is an obligation of believing that it is â—ry lawfull And as for the danger of idolatry there is 〈◊〉 more in worshipping Images then there is that the â—mmon people of England should cry up an Image or atue of the King for their King and rebell with it aâ—inst himselfe CHAP. XII VVhether Protestancy be Heresie BY Protestancy I meane all and every point of that Doctrine of Protestants wherein they differ from any Tenet which Roman Catholicks hold as a point of Faith The articles of Christian Religion in which they and we agree â—n not be properly called Protestancy because they are infferent to both and were believed by us Roman Cathoâ—ks long before any Protestants were seene or heard of 〈◊〉 the world Most of the articles of Protestancy are neâ—tive that is not ot believe Transubstantiation Purgatory 〈◊〉 lawfulnesse of praying to Saints or worshipping them in â—ir Images c. so that to be a Protestant is not to beve Protestants on the other side say that to be a Caâ—lick is to overbelieve and to be a Protestant is to beâ—ve onely that which is necessary But then we aske who all be Judge of what is necessary and superfluous Not â—man Catholicks say they because they are a part and â—cerned By the same reason we may exclude all Proteâ—nts from judging and not onely Protestants but all Christians because every Church of Christendome pretends to believe all that is necessary all therefore and evâ—ry one may be excepted against as a part and concerneâ— So that if Roman Catholicks be excluded from determâ— ning what is necessary to be believed we must be judge by the Turks Pagans or Jewes in the controversies 〈◊〉 Christian Religion and of Scripture Me thinks we Caâ— tholicks are beter conditioned more prudent and moâ—â— provident in our beliefe then Protestants because thougâ— we should believe too much we can not be damned foâ— want of necessary beliefe we may lend some to oâ— Neighbours and reserve to
was thought by Her Majestie dangerous to Monarchy Therefore the titles of Archbishops Bishops Deanes and Chapters were retained as also in her owne Chappell some Images the Altar and a Crucifix upon it Though the titles of the Catholick Clergy were bestowed upon persons who favoured the new Religion yet the Ordination was not because that which was instituted by Edward the VI. was judged invalid by all Catholicks and so declared by publick judgement in Queene Marys reigne in so much that leases made by King Edwards Bishops though confirmed by the Deane and Chapter Brooks novell cases Placito 463. fol. 101 printed at London 1604. were not esteemed available because they were no saith the sentence consecrated nor Bishops Some Protestants are so charitable as to say that King Edwards Bishops were declared no Bishops to the end Bonner and other Catholick Bishops restored by Queene Mary might make the leases voyd let the world judge whether 3 Bonner and others who loft their Bishopricks for conscience sake alone would commit so great a sacrilege as must needs follow out of declaring invalid King Edwards new forme of Ordination They who renounced the propriety for Religions sake would not damne themselves for the profit of new leases 14 Seeing therefore it concerned the Queene to have consecrated Bishops and that in King Edwards reigne the Catholick Consecration was held to be superstition most of the Clergy then being Zuinglians or Puritans the Queene endeavoured by all possible meanes to have such as she named for the Bishopricks consecrated by Catholicks but they all resolved not to make Bishops in that Church whereof themselves refused to be Members An Irish Archbishop prisoner in the Tower was offered his liberty and great rewards if he would consecrate the newly elected but he denyed to commit so great a sacrilege CHAP. II. Of the Nullitie of the English Protestant Clergy 1 THe Queene notwithstanding all this reluctancy of Catholick Bishops named in her Letters Patents Anthony Kitchin Bishop of Landaf amongst others to consecrate Parker and his fellowes because he was the onely man amongst all the Catholick Bishops that tooke the oath of Supremacy in her reigne But this frailtie was not a sufficient ground to thinke that he would consecrate Parker and others whom he knew to be Hereticks and averse from the Doctrine of the Roman Catholick Church which himselfe so constantly adhered unto the Supremacy onely excepted during his life Sacroboscâ— lib. de investig Christi Ecclesia cap. 14. D. Champ. cap. 14. Many others of the Catholick Bishops complyed with Henry the VIII in that particular who now refused to ordaine Parker the same was Landaffe resolved to do but at last by faire words and promises they prevailed with the old man to give them a meeting at the Nags head in Cheap-side where they hoped he would ordaine them Bishops despairing that ever he would doe it publickly in a Church because that would be too great and too notorious a scandall for Catholicks amongst whom Landaffe desired to be numbered Bonner Bishop of London being well informed of all that passed sent one Master Neale his Chaplaine an honest and learned man who had formerly beene Lector in Oxford to the Bishop of Landaffe forbidding him under paine of excommunication to exercise any such power of giving Orders in his Diocesse wherewith the old man being tertified and otherwise also moved in his owne conscience refused to proceed in that action alledging chiefly for reason of his forbearance his want of sight Which excuse Parker and the rest interpreting to be but an evasion were much moved against the poore old man and whereas hitherto they had used him with all curtesie and respect they then turned their copy reviling and calling him doating foole and the like some of them saying This old foole thinketh we cannot be Bishops unlesse we be greased alluding to the Catholick manner of Episcopall unction 2 Being thus deceived of their expectation and having no other meanes to come to their desire they resolved to use Master Scoryes helpe an Apostata religious Priest who having borne the name of Bishop in King Edward the VI. time was thought to have sufficient power to performe that office especially in such a streight necessity as they pretended He having cast off together with his religious habit all scruple of conscience willingly went about the matter which he performed in this sort having the Bible in his hand and they all kneeling before him he laid it upon every one of their heads or shoulders saying Take thou authoritie to preach the VVord of God sincearly And so they rose up Bishops of the new Church of England 3 This story of the Nags-head was first contradicted by Mason in the yeare 1613. yet so weakly and faintly that the attentive Reader may easily perceive he feared to be caught in a lye and convinced by some aged persons that might then be living and remember what passed in the beginning of Queene Elizabeths reigne In the yeare 1603. none of the Protestant Clergy durst call it a fable or a tale of a Tub as some now doe Bancroft Bishop of London being demanded by Master VVilliam Alabaster how Parker and his Collegues were consecrated Bishops answered He hoped that in case of necessity a Priest alluding 〈◊〉 Scory might ordaine Bishops This answer of his was obâ—â—cted in print by Holiwod against him and all the English â—lergy in the yeare 1603. not a word replyed Bancroft â—imselfe being then living I have spoken with both Caâ—â—olicks and Protestants that remember neare 80. yeares â—nd acknowledge that so long they have heard the Nagsâ—ead story related as an undoubted truth In the beginâ—ing of the late Parliament some Presby terian Lords preâ—nted to the upper House a certaine Booke proving that â—â—e Protestant Bishops had no succession nor consecraâ—ion and therefore were no Bishops and by consequence â—ad no right to sit in Parliament Hereupon Doctor Morâ—on pretended Bishop of Durham who is yet alive made 〈◊〉 speach against this Booke in his owne and all the Bishops behalfe then present he endeavoured to prove succession from the last Catholick Bishops who said he â—y imposition of hands ordained the first Protestant Bishops at the Nags-head in Cheap-side as was notorious â—o all the world c. Therefore the aforesaid Booke â—ought to be looked upon as a groundlesse Libell This was told to many by one of the ancientest Peeres of Engâ—and present in Parliament when Morton made his speech And the same he is ready to depose upon his oath Nay he can not believe that any will be so impudent as to deâ—y a thing so notorious whereof there are as many witnesses living as there are Lords and Bishops that were that day in the upper House of Parliament 4 This narration of the Consecration at the Nags-head have I taken out of Holiwood Constable and Doctor Champneys workes they heard it from many of the ancient Clergy who were prisoners for
the truth to give way to the Parliament to pull downe Parliament Bishops who were so farre from being de Iure Divino that they were not so much as de Iure Ecclesiastico 30 And thus much I thought fit to produce at the present in confutation of what either hath or may be said in behalfe of the English Protestant Clergy and report me to the judgement of the impartiall Reader how much he ought to rely upon their ministery that by so many titles is proved to be null But though any person should not be convinced of the nullitie of their Ordination he can not but harbour a prudent doubt thereof there being so evident reasons and motives for it as have beene set downe in this Chapter Now to receive the Sacraments from Priests of so doubtfull authority is without all doubt a damnable sacrilege it being a thing in the highest degree against the light of reason and the rules of Faith to expose to so manifest hazard the reverence of the Sacraments and the remedy of our soules It is time now to passe from the historicall relation of the introduction of a new found Heresie and the intrusion of a new fashioned Clergy to a more strict and Scholasticall examination of the nature of Heresie and Catholick Faith CHAP. III. Of Heresie 1 BEfore Protestancy be compared with Heresie its necessary to declare what Heresie is Catholick Divines commonly define it to be an obstinate errour against any Doctrine of the Catholick Church But because Protestants do not agree with us in determining what the Catholick Church is that we may not be engaged in a new dispute before we explaine what we have in hand I thought fit to define Heresie in such a sort that the definition may seeme indifferent to all Christians and suppose or beg nothing to favour Catholicks or condemne Protestants because if adversaries agree not in some principles they can not come to an issue to end the Controversies 2 The definition is this Heresie is an obstinate errour against the VVord of God or the true sense thereof sufficiently proposed as Divine Revelation How shall it be knowne when any verity is sufficiently proposed as Divine Revelation The bare word or testimony of men doth not seeme to be a sufficient proposall of Gods revealed truths because every Sect give their word and testimony in favour of their owne Religion assuring us that God revealed the doctrine and interpretation of Scripture which they follow And yet the contrary is evident seeing God can not reveale the contradictions nonsence and contrary Tenets which are taught in so contrary Religions Therefore the testimony of men if not confirmed by some supernaturall signe or miracle can not be a sufficient proposall of Divine Revelation 3 But if any Doctrine be testified by lawfull witnesses to be Divine Revelation and their testimony be confirmed by miracles all men are bound to believe that the said Doctrine was revealed by God This is the reason why the perfidious Jewes did sinne grievously in not believing the Doctrine of Christ being confirmed with so many evident miracles It is not necessary every person see a miracle that the true Faith and Doctrine of the Catholick Church be sufficiently proposed to him as Divine Revelation it s enough that he can not prudently deny or doubt that miracles have beene wrought in confirmation of the Doctrine proposed Christs Doctrine was sufficiently proposed as Divine to many Jewes who were not present at his miracles it s enough they were credibly reported Saint Augustine proved that miracles were wrought in confirmation of Christian Religion by this ingenious Dilemma Either the world believing such strange and improbable things to human sense as our Faith teacheth and so contrary to our naturall inclinations did see them confirmed by miracles or no. If they did see miracles we have our intent If they did believe without seeing any miracle we have our intent also because that very beliefe is the greatest of all miracles for how is it possible that sober and wise men should be so mad as to believe and embrace a new and strange Doctrine so repugnant to their senses and contrary to their liberty and naturall inclinations if they had not beene wrought upon by some supernaturall power and signes In one word therefore we may conclude that onely Faith or Doctrine is sufficiently proposed as Divine Revelation which is not onely proposed as such by the testimony of a Church but of such a Church whose testimony hath beene confirmed by unquestionable miracles either seen by the believer or at least so credibly reported to him by the testimony of honest and learned men that it were want of prudence in any person whosoever to deny the truth and sufficiency of such a testimony and proposall CHAP. IV. In what doth the obstinacy of Heresie consist 1 THere was never any Heretick so madly obstinate as to give God the lye to his face and in plaine termes all Sectaries acknowledge him to be Truth it selfe and therefore not capable of deceiving or of being deceived The obstinacy of Hereticks is against Gods verities not as they are uttered immediatly by himselfe but as they are proposed by his Church If God himselfe were pleased to speake immediatly to men in such a manner that it were evident and cleare to them the words and sense which the Church proposeth were dictated by himselfe we should be little troubled with Heresies none would be obstinate All the obstinacy of Hereticks proceeds from the difficulty they finde in believing that God doth speak or declare his sense by the Church this once granted our understanding hath no difficulty to ubmit by an implicite Faith to whatsoever the Church proposeth as Gods Revelation or Word 2 Against cleare evidence there can be no obstinacy the object of it must be involved in some obscurity otherwise the will which is the source of obstinacy could not master the unstanding He who denyes what is cleare and evident is more mad then obstinate There is nothing more generally acknowledged or more cleate and evident to the understanding of all Christians then this proposition If God said or meant any thing it s very true The obstinacy therefore of Hereticks doth not contest with this cleare and confessed truth it onely doubteth or denyeth that God said or meant any such thing as the Church pretends but no Heretick ever denyed or doubted but that if God meant or said what the Church pretends it must be true 3 The difference therefore betweene an Heretick and a Catholick is not that the Heretick denyes or doubts all that to be true which he thinks God revealed or meant but the difference consists in this that the Heretick doth obstinatly deny or doubt that God said or meant what â—he Church proposeth as Divine Revelation and the Catholick doth firmely believe he did say and meane whatsoever the Church proposeth as revealed The Heretick believes what the Church proposeth onely conditioâ—ally If
age That is to say in every Century or age there were honest men and lawfull witnesses who testified that Henry the IV Ancestors descended from Saint Lewis though one onely age could remember or see Saint Lewis yet the next ensuing did see the first and heard their testimony the third did see the second c. In every age did live men whose testimony might be relyed upon It must be granted therefore by all that the knowledge which is grounded upon a continuall and never interrupted tradition is sufficient for lawfull witnesses 6 That the Roman Catholick Church hath a continuall and never interrupted tradition of its Faith and sense of Scripture being taught by Christ and the Apostles can not be denyed by our adversaries it being evident to the world that they who contradicted any article of this Faith we now professe in former ages were looked upon and condemned as Hereticks which is an infallible argument that we in every age received our Doctrine from the former not as the word of men but as the Word of God or as Divine Revelation for if it were not believed as Divine Revelation why should we condemne men as Hereticks because they denyed it Neither do Protestants deny that we believed our tradition and the testimony of our Church to be grounded upon Divine Revelation they onely say we were mistaken and that both our tradition and testimony of the Roman Church was fallible But then we urge that they acknowledge both were infallible in delivering to them the Scripture and testifying that it was the Word of God therefore in delivering and testifying all the rest seeing the same testimony delivering many things together must be of equall authority in all and equally believed by them who accept of it as a lawfull proofe All our pretended Reformers had no other ground in the yeare 1517. to believe Scripture as Divine Revelation but the testimony of the Roman Church Therefore they ought to believe all the rest or not to believe Scripture 7 I said it concernes also our adversaries to grant that their reformed Churches have no lawfull witnesses in matters of Faith because there can not be that sufficient knowledge which is required in a lawfull witnesse of Faith without tradition whereby it may appeare that the Faith and sense of Scripture of this age doth agree with that of the primitive Church If once our adversaries acknowledge lawfull witnesses of things past long since without a constant and never interrupted tradition every man whose spirit of ambition moves him may pretend to be true heire of any hereditary crowne or estate and without further proofe then his owne word and spirit or some obscure text of Scripture will exclude Kings and others whose rights are grounded upon tradition But if tradition be so necessary to preserve and make credible the testimony of men in matters of estates and rights in the Common-wealth it can not be superfluous to make credible the testimony of men concerning matters of Faith 8 It remaines now we prove that the testimony of the Roman Catholick Church hath beene confirmed with supernaturall signes or miracles But seeing there are in the Roman Church lawfull witnesses who prove that the Faith which they now professe is the same with that of the primitive Church miracles also are proved by the same witnesses it being granted by Protestants themselves that miracles were wrought in the primitive Church to confirme the Faith which Christ and his Apostles taught Yet in the Roman Catholick Church there are now lawfull witnesses and have beene in every age since Christs preaching that there have beene miracles done in confirmation of the Roman Faith This is evident to all who read the Ecclesiasticall Histories of present and past times Neither can our adversaries deny that we have lawfull witnesses for miracles now wrought in our Church even in confirmation of that Doctrine wherein we differ from them and reported by so credible testimonies See the 13. Chap. that it were imprudence in any person whosoever to deny them which is enough to propose sufficiently our Doctrine as Divine Revelation But Protestants do not believe our miracles because they imagine that they are against Scriptures that is against their owne interpretation of it and that some miracles have beene false and forged We do not say that all things which the common people thinke to be miracles are really true miracles but we affirme that true miracles there are in our Church and very frequent confirming that very Doctrine which Protestants reject the forgery or knavery of some particular wicked men in feigning miracles can not prejudice all especially such as are seene and experimented by persons of knowne integrity and learning able to discerne betweene true and false miracles otherwise it will follow that all the new Testament must be called in question or denyed to be Gods Word because Saint Thomas his pretended Ghospell or Nicodemus his writings are condemned as forged or Apocryphall That no reformed Church of Protestants can have lawfull witnesses to propose sufficiently their Doctrine as Divine Revelation is evident because for the space of 1500. yeares they were without any visible Church or tradition therefore their witnesses also are invisible and by consequence not lawfull or credible Fox and others made a certaine Catalogue of men who opposed the Doctrine of the Roman Church in former ages but they were known Hereticks and did neither agree amongst themselves nor with Protestants in their Tenets or Religion as hath beene demonstrated by Father Persons in his Examination of Fox his Kalendar and by many others 9 I conclude therefore that seeing Protestants grant there is and hath alwayes beene a Catholick Church upon earth and that Church must have lawfull witnesses testifying their Doctrine to be Divine Revelation it being evident that no Congregation of men can produce any such lawfull witnesses but the Roman Catholicks amongst whom I include also them of the Greeke Church who agree with us it s also evident that there can be no Church Catholick but the Roman CHAP. XI VVhether Transubstantiation and the lawfulnesse of the worship of Images be sufficiently proposed by the testimony of the Roman Catholick Church as Divine revelation and whether Protestants have any lawfull exceptions against them 1 THere are so many Bookes printed in defence of these Catholick Tenets that I judge it superfluous to treate of them ex professo I will onely answer some exceptions that Protestants have made against them to my selfe in diverse occasions That the Roman Church doth propose these articles sufficiently as Divine Revelation is cleare because it proposeth them by the same testimony and confirmed by the sames signes whereby it proposeth Scripture to be Gods Word this last proposall Protestants themselves grant to be so sufficient that no man may in prudence deny it Therefore the same must be said of all the rest and in particular of Transubstantiation and worship of Images 2 But let us
our selves as much as is neceâ— sary But Protestants stand upon such nice termes witâ— God and the Church that if they come not short of whâ— is necessary as twenty to one they will their Neighbouâ— shall be nothing the better for their beliefe 2 I might urge this argument in a serious way and vâ— home if this were its proper place But to returne to thâ— question whether Protestancy be Heresie I answer thâ— all opinions or Tenets whether negative or affirmativâ— that Protestants hold contrary to that which the Româ— Catholick Church believes as an article of Faith are Hâ— resies which I demonstrate in this manner Whatsoevâ— opinion is contrary to any Doctrine sufficiently propose as Divine Revelation is Heresie but all Protestants prper Tenets or opinions are contrary to some Doctriâ— sufficiently proposed as Divine Revelation Therefore 〈◊〉 Protestants proper Tenets or opinions are Heresies Thâ— first proposition is granted by our very adversaries anâ— hath beene proved in the 3. and 4. Chap. The second 〈◊〉 cleare by what may be borrowed from the same Chapter and from the so and I apply to our question by this syâ— logisme All the proper Teners of Protestancy are coâ— trary to some Doctrine which the Roman Catholiâ— Church doth testifie to be Divine Revelation that is 〈◊〉 have beene revealed by God to the primitive Church bâ— the testimony of the Roman Catholick Church is a sufâ— cient proposall of any Doctrine to be Divine Revelatioâ— Therefore all Tenets or opinions proper to Protestancâ— are contrary to some Doctrine sufficiently proposed Divine Revelation 3 If the second proposition of this last syllogisme argument be demonstrated Protestancy is demonstrated â—o be Heresie Therefore I prove it in my judgement â—ery clearly That testimony is a sufficient proposall of Sods revealing any Doctrine to the primitive Church which testimony is confirmed by miracles and hath conâ—inued without interruption being exhibited in every â—ge from the time of the Apostles to this present by hoâ—est and knowing men But the testimony of the Roman Catholick Church hath all this Therefore it s a sufficient â—toposall of any Doctrine to be Divine Revelation or to â—ave beene revealed by God to the primitive Church That the testimony of the Roman Church is confirmed by â—â—iracles even in those very points of Doctrine wherein â—rotestants differ from us is so evident that no prudent â—an if not obstinate can deny and is particularly proved 〈◊〉 the 13. Chap. For how is it possible that all the world â—as I said before should conspire to abuse Protestants and â—amne themselves by feigning miracles and that not â—nely in this age but in every age since the primitive Church The forging of some is no prudent proose that â—ll are forged If there are no miracles in the Roman Caâ—olick Church in confirmation of Transubstantiation Purâ—atory Worship of Images c. there is no Faith to be given my men whosoever 4 Now it remaines onely to be proved that there hath â—een a continuall succession of honest and learned men â—f the Roman Church in every age since the primitive Church to this present who did beare witnesse that the Doctrine which every respective former age delivered to â—he next ensuing and we believe as Faith was revealed by â—od to the first Christians But this being evident by the â—ondemning as Hereticks all those who in any age held â—rotestant Tenets and being also proved in the 10. Chap. â—s superfluous and troublesome to repeate it here againe Whosoever desires to be informed more at large and of â—very point in particular let him read the Protestant Apoâ—gy for the Roman Church There he will finde what I â—ay to be so cleare that our very learned Adversaries are â—orced to acknowledge it and recurre to that old and â—esperate shift of Hereticks who say that the word of â—en is not to be believed as if the word of the same men who assure us that Scripture is the Word of God were credible in that but in nothing else Of this we have saiâ— enough before in the 5. Chap. 5 Yet I will not omit to argue against Protestants aâ— Saint Augustin did against Jewes and Pagans with that inâ— genious Dilemma whereof I made mention in the 3. Chap Either the first learned and honest men who adored thâ— Blessed Sacrament believing there was no bread in it worshipt Images c. did see miracles to confirme thesâ— pretended novelties which crept in as Protestant say tâ— the Church or they did see no miracles to confirme them If they did see miracles I have my intent If they did seâ— none I have also my intent because the greatest of all mâ— racles is that wise and learned men should without anâ— miracles seene adore for God that which seemes to be piece of bread and worship a statue or picture which 〈◊〉 not onely contrary as Protestants say to cleare Scripturâ— but also to common sense and reason By the same Di emâ— ma I prove that every point of the Doctrine of Catholick against Protestants was sufficiently proposed as Divinâ— Revelation Either it was sufficiently proposed to the firâ— Christians who believed it or not If it was Protestancâ— is Heresie If it was not how is it possible that not onely the first who believed or taught these superfluities buâ— all the wise and honest men of the world for many age before the pretended Reformation should impose upon themselves unnecessary articles as necessary and therebâ— betray posterity and damne themselves for believinâ— things which had no ground in Scripture nor were testiâ— fied to them by any credible testimonies of the Christianâ— who went before them to be Divine Revelation All thaâ— Protestants can say in their owne defence hath beene conâ— futed in the 3.4.7.8 and 9. Chap for all must be reduceâ— to three heads 1. That Scripture and Fathers are cleaâ— against Roman Catholicks 2. That the private spirit iâ— for Protestants 3. That Protestants are neither obstinate nor Hereticks because they do not believe that God reâ— vealed Transubstantiation Purgatory c. All these threâ— evasions and more have beene confuted in the foremeâ— tioned Chapters to which I remit the Reader 6 I do not see what exception Protestants can adde tâ— their former against the testimony of the Roman Cathâ— lick Church unlesse they say I that it is not make anâ— thing prudently credible as Divine Revelation because we Catholicks can not make appeare by reason how what we say is true as how accidents can be without their proper subject c. but upon this score they may as well reject the mystery of the Trinity Incarnation as Transubstantiation The Catholick Church is not the Author of the Doctrine it proposeth it s onely a witnesse as Christ himselfe declared when he sent the Apostles to preach Ye shall be my witnesses in Hierusalem c. Act. 1. Onely God who is the Author of Catholick Doctrine can give a cleare reason of some mysteries and