But the first is true because the submission of Berengarius satisfied the Roman Council of 113. Bishops without Transubstantiation Therefore the Second A masculine proofe That in the time of Nicholas the second Transubstantiation was not hammer'd out as it is now believed we easily grant because it is as ancient as the time of Christs last Supper But that Pope Nicholas did not understand the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is a meere forgery indeed without a syllable of proofe Berengarius was held an Heretick for denying not the word but what is signified by Transubstantiation in that quality written against by the prime Divines of those dayes In so much that Fox confesseth that about the year of our Lord 1060. the denying of Transubstantiation began to be accounted heresy and in that number was put one Berengarius who lived about the year 1060. that is 200. years before the Council of Lateran And Ioachim Camerarius in his Book Intituled Historiae Narratio pag. 161. Transubstantionis dogma de evanescentia panis post annum 850. tanquam in quieta posessione mansit usque ad Berengarii tempora annum Christi 1050. The doctrine of Transubstantiation of the vanishing of the Bread after the year 850. remained as it were in quiet possession untill the time of Berengarius and the â—…ear of Christ 1050 80. This Berengarius twice recanted his errour first in a Roman Council under Pope Nicholas the second anno Dom. 1059. in which recantation there is not a word of Consubstantiation for there he acknowledgeth that after Consecration the Bread and Wine are not only a Sacrament in regard of the species remaining but also the true Body and Bloud of Christ our Saviour into which the substance of Bread and Wine is changed for the substance of Bread and Wine remaining cannot identically be affirmed of the Body and Bloud of Christ. 81. This to have been Berengarius his meaning is evident by the words of his second recantation under Pope Gregory the seventh Ego Berengarius corde credo ore confiteor panem vinum quae ponuntur in Altari per mysterium sacrae Orationis verba nostri Redemptoris substantialiter converti in veram propriam vivificam carnem sanguinem Iesu Christi Domini nostri post Consecrationem esse verum Corpus Christi quod natum est de Virgine c. I Berengarius do believe with my heart and onfesse with my mouth that the Bread and Wine that are put upon the Altar by the Mystery of the holy prayer the words of our Redeemer are substantially converted into the true proper and vivifying Flesh and Bloud of Iesus Christ our Lord and that after Consecration are the true Body of Christ that was borne of the Virgin 82. Note that he sayes the Bread and Wine are substantially converted into the true Body and Bloud of Christ which Conversion the Council of Lateran 136. years after exprest by the word Transubstantiation So false it is that the Doctrine it self began only then The Council of Lateran was the greatest that ever was held in the Church of God whereat were besides the Pope the two Patriarchs of Constantinople and Ierusalem in person the two of Alexandria and Antioch by their Substitutes the first being hindered by sicknesse the second by the Turk 70. Metropolitans or Primates 400. Bishops 800. Abbots Priors The Embassadours of the two Emperours of the East and West and of the Kings of England France Arragon and Huâ—… 83. Now that so many â—…ed grave and judicious men of several Nations from all parts of the Church should unanimously conspire to forge a Novelty no man contradicting nay that after the Canons of this Council publish'd all Christians in the world should come to their respective Churches and fall down to adore upon their knees what they before believed to be only Bread and Wine and a meer figure of Christs Body and Bloud as Protestants do is a most desperate phansie 84. Truly the ancient Fathers sayings in this matter are so plain using the words Transmutation Transelementation Transfaction Creation and the like that divers Learned Protestants themselves cited in the Protestants Apology confesse a far greater antiquity of Transubstantiation then the Council of Lateran There you shall read that Gregory the great and Austin brought into England Transubstantiation that Chrysostome doth seem to confirm Transubstantiation that Eusebius Emissenus did speak unprofitably of Transubstantiation that in Cyprian there are many things that seem to affirm Transubstantiation that Damascen taught Transubstantiation The reason is clear because those expressions of the Fathers import some reall change not in the species or outward accidents of the Bread and Wine which still remain and appear the same therefore in the inward substance rightly termed Transubstantiation Those words of Berengarius in your Margin taken out of Floriacensis if truly cited speak no intrinsecall impâ—…ession upon Christs Body but onely an extrinsecall denomination derived from the outward formes of Bread as S. Chrysostome exprest himself Thou seest him thou touchest him thou eatest him So Abraham was truly said to see touch and entertain Angels for the shape they appear'd in Against the denying the Cup to the Laiety The sixteenth Demonstration 85. Whatsoever our Saviour Christ in the institution of the Eucharist commanded all his Apostles to doe was likewise a command to all Christians But our Saviour commanded all his Apostles to drink of that Cup he had newly Consecrated Therefore to drink of that Cup newly Consecrated was a command to all Christians Therefore the withdrawing the Cup from the Laiety neither was nor could be from the beginning 86. The Argument to conclude must run thus and yet it halts extreamly of one Leg for our Lord by those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Drink you all of it intended onely that all the twelve Apostles then present should drink of that individuall Cup he had blessed without powring in and consecrating more Wine This intention of Christ is manifest for he said not onely drink you all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but having consecrated the Cup he said Drink ye all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of it Secondly out of St. Mark who addes and they all drank of it Could all present and future Christians drink of that individuall Cup Thirdly out of St. Luke Take this divide it amongst your selves Were all Christians commanded to take that very Cup and divide it amongst themselves Fourthly Christ said to his Apostles take eat and divide Were all Christians commanded to take both kindes with their own hands as Priests doe 87. True it is that St. Paul 1 Cor. 11. mentions both kinds and exhorts to receive not unworthily but commands not both kinds nay rather insinuates an indifferency when he maketh this inference wherefore whosoever shall eat of this Bread or drink this Cup of our Lord unworthily shall be guilty of the Body and Blood of our Lord.
against the whole Church is most insolent mâ—…dnesse saith S. Austin Ep. 118. 18. You erre no lesse absurdly when you say that in the fourth Session of the Council of Trent the Roman Church is made to differ as well from her ancient and purer self as from all other Churches besides her self This is meerly begg'd and not prov'd Might not all former Hereticks have said the same of all Generall Councils that condemn'd them Did either the Council of the Apostles Act. 15. or the first four Generall ones make the Church differ from her self by reason of their Definitions or Decrees why then the Council of Trent in particular Because say you that Council defin'd many meerly humane writings and many unwritten Traditions to be of equall authority with the Scripture anathemat zing all that should not receive them The Council of Trent defined no writings to be of equall authority with the Scriptures but such as those Orthodox Fathers by the assistance of the Holy Ghost confirming ancient Tradition judged to be the Word of God nor any unwritten Traditions but such as were either immediately received by the Apostles from the mouth of Christ himself or inspired to the Apostles by the Holy Ghost and so handed down in a perpetuall succession unto them Of such Traditions the Apostle speaks 2 Thes. 2. Hold the Traditions which you have been taught whether by word or Epistle Hence it is clear saith S. Chrysostome that the Apostles delivered not all things by writing but many things also unwritten both which are worthy of equall belief Is not this the very Definition of the Council of Trent And might not all the Hereticks that ever deni'd any part of Scripture as the Cerinthians deni'd the whole New Testament but S. Matthew's Gospel the Marcionists Gnosticks Manichees all the old Testament as Luther the Epistle to the Hebrews S. Iames and the Apocalyps and all that ever denâ—…'d Apostolicall Traditions as Arius Nestorius Eutyches and other Novellers did might not I say all these have used the same plea against the Church or Councils that defined Canonicall Books or Apostolicall Traditions against them A strange objection and stranger reformation that justifies all Hereticks in the world As for the anathema hath it not ever been the Style of all Generall Councils to lay a curse upon the refusers of their Definitions And if the point of Infallibility was both believed and virtually defined by the first Generall Councils justly imposing upon mens consciences an inward assent to their Decrees of Faith upon pain of Anathema why not as well by the Council of Trent 19. But I wonder what you mean in saying that the Roman Church was made to differ from all other Churches besides her self If by the Roman Church you mean not onely the City and Diocesse of Rome but all other Churches united with that particular Church whose Bishops sate voted in the Council of Trent then you speak a Chymera there being but one true Catholick Church in the world which is the Roman that never differ'd from her self in matters of faith except you intend a Heterogenial Church patcht up of all condemn'd Sects in the world opposite one to anothre 20. Upon the premises your Reformers say you met together and concluded a Secession As if Protestants revolted not from the Pope long before the Council of Trent or the pretended new Creed as you call it But let us see the quality of those Reformers to wit your Kings your Clerâ—…y and your Layty too What Kings I pray Hen. the 8. the first broacher of the Schisme with Dalila in his â—…ap Edward the 6. a young Child and Qâ—… Elizabeth a woman fit heads to consult of Religion Yet were they all successively by Acts of Parliament either created or declar'd Supreame heads of the Church of England a Prerogative never châ—…lleng'd by any Christian Prince before The following Kings found the breach made and the Schisme completed What Clergy but Cranmer that Arch-Sycophant who according to Hâ—…story by his whispers in the Kings car was the first au thour of the Secession from the Pope and as â—…e pretended Bishop Bramhill confesses struck the nail home What Clergy but intruders when under Edward the 6. Protestantisme was establishâ—…t in England contrary to the liking of most of the true Bishops of that time And when under Qâ—…een Elizabeth all the Bishops but one were deposed and by Cambdens confession eighty Curates fifty Prebendarics fifteen Presidents of Colledges twelve Arch-Deacons and six Abbots lost their places when also the inferiour Clergy in a Convocation appointed by that very Queen protested against the Reformation What the Laiety too have they against all Antiquity power to define matters of Religion When Theodosius the younger sent his Ambassadour to the Council of Ephesus which was the third Generall one he writ to the Council that he sent him Ea Lege upon that condition that in questions of Religion he should have nothing to doe giving this reason It is not lawfull for him that is not a Bishop to meddle in businesses and consultations of the Church The same said Basil the Emperour to the Laiety in the seventh Generall Council 'T is not lawfull for you to treat in Ecclesiasticall Causes And long before that Iustinian If the businesse be Ecclesiasticall let no Civil Magistrate deale in such questions c. But in fine what Laiety was it but a Cromwell and such like flatterers It was generally conceived and truly as I think saith Weaver in his Monuments pag. 101. that those politick wayes for taking away the Pope's authority and suppressing religious Houses were principally devised by Cromwell And Bishop Gardner in Fox pag. 1344. saith The Parliament was with much cruelty constrained to abolish and put away the Primacy from the Bishop of Rome 21. Yea but these Reformers did not consult flesh and bloud O no! King Henry consulted the spirit when lusting after Anne Bolen he tore himself from the Pope for refusing him the grant of a Divorce and to satisfie his avarice he seized upon all the goods of Monasteries What spirit the Protectour and Parliament under Edward the Sixth consulted whether God or Mammon let Baker tell you There you may read how divers Bishops were committed to prison for misliking the Reformation and all of them dispossessed of their Bishopricks and that which is worse the Bishopricks themselves were dispossessed of their revenues A Parliament was held wherein divers Chantries Colledges Free Chappels Fraternities and Guilds with all their Lands and goods were given to the King which being sould at a low rate enriched many and enobled some and thereby made them firm in maintaining the change thus Baker Queen Elizabeth bred up a Catholick and by a Catholick Bishop consecrated Qâ—…een consulted Eternity when to buy a Crown she sold her Religion Or expect the Church of Rome should have been their Physician which was
â—…n at Ierusalem 'T is a notoâ—…ious vanity in yoâ—…â—…-men to be alwayâ—…s pecking arâ—… grâ—…ones Who denies that mâ—… mâ—…y of time other Churches might prevent 〈◊〉 Roman and in that sense pâ—…ecisely be either Mâ—…hers oâ—… Sâ—…sters her as you please The Motherhood of the Roman Church consists in her prioâ—…ity nor â—…f time but of Dignity and Jurisdictâ—…on grounded â—…pon S. Peters Pâ—…imacy who as he was Father anâ—… Head of all Bishops so the Roman Church in which by his Successours he still lâ—…veth and governeth saith S. Chrysologus is the Mother and Head of all Churches or with S. Cyprian The root and originall of the Catholick Church The Church of Caesarea began after that of Ierusalem and yet was made her Metropolitan as the first Council of Nice declared and Antioch was her Primate Even so Antioch Ierusalem and all other Churches founded before the Roman were afterwards made subject unto her For which reason Iuvenal the Bishop of Ierusalem said publickly in the Council of Ephesus that the ancient Custome and Apostolicall Tradition was that the Church of Antioch is to be ruled and judged by the Roman 33. You falsifie Gildas egregiously and by misplacing his words make him say what he never dreamt of namely that Christian Religion was planted in Britany in the dayes of Tiberius Caesar about seven yeares before S. Peter came to Rome But Gildas having spoken of the extreame desolation of his Countrey caused by the Warres with the Romans which Warres beginning not under Tiberius or Caius who never Warred with the Britains but under Claudius lasted 40. yeares Interea saith he In the mean time to wit during those Warres there appeared and imparted it self to this cold Island more remote from the visible Sun then other Nâ—…tions the true and invisible Sun which in the time of Tiberius Caesar had manifested himself to the whole world I mean Christ vouchsafed to impart his Precepts c. Here Gildas onely sayes that during the Warres with Claudius the Sun of justice that manifested himself to the world by his Preaching in Ierusalem under Tiberius appeared at length to the Britains that is in the dayes of Claudius in whose second year S. Peter comming to Rome was entertained by a noble British Lady named Claudia Rufâ—…ina But when all the Jewes were banisht from Rome he took that occasion to go Preaching into France and from thence into Britany where he planted the Gospel founded Churches and ordained Priests and Deacons as Metaphrastes recounts and S. Peter himself in the time of S. Edward the Confessour revealed to a holy man so hath Alredus Rhieuallis left upon Râ—…ord 500. yeares since Whence it appeares that not S. Ioseph of Arimathea in the time of Tiberius but S. Peter in the time of Claudius founded the British Church after he had founded the Church of Rome and fixt his Seat there 34. But let us suppose Christianity to have been in Britany before St. Peter came to Rome was it then planted in the Soil upon the hills and dales of the Land or in the hearts of the Britains if in the hearts then I ask were those Britains English men or did the Saxons receive their Christianity from them Had not England as England the first newes of Christ from Rome by St. Austin the Monk whom blessed St. Gregory diâ—…ected to our Conversion And are not all English Protestants now living who call themseves a Christian Church the off-spring of those first converted Saxons what hideous ingratitude is it then to smother the memory of so incomparable a benefit by still prating of old Britany whose faith whencesoever it sprung up first lasted not but Paganisme overgrowing it perisht in a short space root and branch till Pope Eleutherius replanted it durably yet so as it never spread thence to us English so great was the Britains hatred to the Saxons for usurping their Kingdome I conclude therefore with the two Roâ—…al testimonies of our Kings the first of Henry the 8. professing that all the Churches of the Faithful much more England acknowledge and reverence the most holy See of Rome for their Mother The second of King Iames of gloâ—…ous memory in the summe of the Conference before Majestie affirming that the Roman Church was once the Mother Churche let Sir Edward Cook â—…e the Appendix We do not deâ—…y saith he but that Rome was the Mother Church and had thirty two Virginal Martyrs of her Popes a row 35. Thus having gone over the undemonstrable principles of your Sermon asserting much and proving nothing I come now to your pretended demonstrations But first I must mind you that in case you should demonstrate as you promise the Novelty of our pretentions and evince the antiquity of your own yet to the maâ—… truth or falsity of Religion by your own confession 't were but a Topick reaching no farther then a mere probability which may in it self be as well false as true For in your third page you cite and approve the principle of Vincentius Lirinensis who say you to prove the truth of any Doctrine argues the case from a threefold Topick the universality the consent and the antiquity of tradition wherefore in your opinion not only universality of place wherein a Doctrine is believed or the consent of Fathers that believe and teach the same but also antiquity of time though from the beginning when it is believed is but a bare Topick And yet God knows this very Rule is your open condemnation Since it is impossible for you or all the Protestants in the world to shew that any one point of Doctrine wherein you differ from the Roman Church was ever believed not only in all places at all times or by all the Fathers but not so much as any one place at any one time or by any one Father nay or by any one person before Luther except perhaps by some such as were noted and condemned for Hereticks Doctor Pierce's Engagement to domonstrate the Novelties of the Roman Church Page 6. and 7. We cannot better put them to shame then by demonstrating the Novelties of their pretensions whil'st at the same time we evince the sacred antiquity of our own Thus you 36. Who can but wonder that a Doctor understanding what a demonstration is should esteem the flourishes of a Pulpit demonstrations and then blunder out nothing but old arguments which have been answered a hundred times over If you say the sence of Scripture on your side is evident Our men ten to one more in number equall in Learning not to say more and as upright in conscience doe averre the contrary And the conâ—…st it self destroyes your assertion For whence I pray arises this very controversie amongst men of equall abilities to judge a right but from the obscurity of Scripture Did ever men in their right wits having their eyes open dispute whether the Sun shin'd at mid-day To Demonstrations from universall
stickler in that Schismaticall Council at Wormes died a while after in despaire roaring out that he was damn'd for adhering to Henry the King against Pope Gregory and that the rest of those Schismaticall Bishops upon repentance both writ to the Pope for pardon and went themselves after the King into Italy to be absolv'd from their Schisme He addes that after the Pope had absolv'd the King he said Masse and before Communion taking the sacred Hoste in his hand in presence of the King and the whole assembly protested that he received it as the judgement of the crimes objected against him by the Schismaticks that if he were innocent he might be free'd from all suspition if guilty be suddenly struck dead upon the place That then the Pope received very confidently half the holy Hoste and after the Peoples loud congratulation of his innocency he turn'd to the King inviting him to receive the other half of the Hoste as a Canonicall clearing himself from the crimes objected also against him but that the King pretending an excuse declined the triall But if all were true that you cite out of Goldastus whom Gretser charges with three hundred lyes 't would onely prove the misgovernment of one Pope and nothing at all against the Roman Church or Supreamacy of Saint Peter's Chayre 122. In the last part of your work where you should have proved the power of particular Nations to reforme the Church in matters of Faith or alter what is ordered by the universall Church for the common good and that by separating from the whole world as Luther did you name not one Nation City Family or Orthodox man that ever did it atempted it or thought of it To sooth your Auditours you rake out of the Channell of sixteen hundred yeares a few examples in matter of fact wherein Princes either intrenching upon the immunities of the Church or asserting a pretended right have sometimes clasht â—…ith the Roman Bishops or medled de facto in Church affaires but have they therefore in their severall Kingdomes made themselves absolute Heads of the Church immediately under Christ as Henry the eighth did ordering Laymen Vicar generals in spirituality As Cromwell was and sate in the Convocation House amongst the Bishops as Head over them all Did they deny or renounce the Supreamacy of Popes in the spirituall government of the Church Have they challenged as born and in-bred to their Crowns Supreame power in all causes both Spirituall and Civill Did they part from the Pope the Papacy the Roman Church and all ancient Christian Churches in the world or ever made Lawes to reverse the Decrees of Generall Councils in matters of Faith and not upon that very score been accounted Hereticks This you shall neither find in Iustinian's Code nor in Zeno's Henoticon nor in Charles the great 's Capitulars 123. The Code was compil'd a nefandissimis hominibus by most wicked men saith Spondanus And that unhappy Emperour by medling too much against his own rule in Ecclesiasticall affaires ruin'd his Empire fell into open Heresie persecuted Orthodox Bishops and died suddenly Yet Baronius and others very probably judge that his Lawes concerning the Church were drawn up by Epiphanius and Menas Patriarchs of Constantinople but publisht in the Emperour's name for the better observance For first he often professeth that in Ecclesiasticall affaires he decreed nothing but according to the holy Canons Secondly Iohn the second Pope in a Letter to him confirmes those Lawes as being informed by two Bishops Hypathius and Demetrius his Legats that they were made by the consent of Bishops in conformity to the See Apostolick and Decreâ—… of the Fathers Thirdly because the Emperouâ—… in the Code Tit. 1. lege 8. sayes he will 〈◊〉 suffer any thing to passe concerning the affaires of the Church which shall not be referr'd 〈◊〉 his Blessednesse the Pope because he is Heâ—… of all the holy Prelates Zeno was a profess'â—… Eutychian who put out a profession of Faith call'd Henoticon in which embracing the Faiâ—… of the three first Generall Councils he left out the Council of Chalcedon He was in fine buâ—…ied alive 124. Charles the Great 's respect to the See Apostolick is most renowned in the Christian world Of devotion to the Church he caused the Ecclesiastical Laws to be drawn out of the sacred Councils and Decrees of Popes into 168. Capitula or Chapters where with much modâ—…sty he excuseth himself saying that he does not prescribe Lawes to Bishops but only minds them to see the Decrees of their fore-â—…athers observed There even as they are in Goldastus his thiâ—…d Tome he sayes The Ecclesiastical and Canonical authority teacheth that Councils must not be held without leave of the Roman Bishop there that by the incitement of the See Apostolick and the Council of Bishops he forbid Church-men to bear Armes there Ordering that according to the Council of Nice suits arising between the Clergy and the Layety be decided in Provincial Councils He addes Yet without prejudice of the Roman Church to whom in all causes reverence ought to be kept Constantine the Great openly profest that he could not judge of Bishops The designes of the two late Emperours Ferdinand the first and Maximilian the second were ever pious and full of devotion to the Roman Church nor can you show that at any time that most Catholick House of Austria had the least thought of reforming the Church in points of Faith by their own authority However they might perhaps by the advice of learned men propose to the Pope what they thought fit in present circumstances for quieting the Empire Of twenty Kings of Iuda some were severely punish't for intermedling in Priestly functions Others as Kings and Prophets too might by Divine instinct reform even in matters of Religion Others not without the consent and aid of Priests destroying Idolatry restored discipline But which of them ever undertook a Reformation against the whole Iewish Clergy or by disowning the High Priests authority Of Cooks fraudulent allegations for our Kings of England see a solid Refutation in Persâ—…s against Cook 's fifth part of Reports where you shall find all Antiquity speaking the great respect of the British and English Kings to the Roman Church See also my Lord of Chalcedon in the Protestants Schisme Page 36. and the pages following 125. In a word Sir by the whole rapsody of your Marginal Transcripts you shew only what was done but quo jure with what right not a tittle If from matter of fact you conclude a power tell me your sense of this illation The long Parliament outed Ministers put down Bishops dissolv'd your Church Therefore they had right to doe it If you abjure this consequence to what end such a crowd in the margin quoting Histories of what was done but proving nothing of the right and power to do it 126. Doe the examples of some few secular Princes unduly handling Church affairs or actually opposing