England to bee no true ministery Assertion An. Dom. 1604. pag. 277. 218. doth make demonstration of it in this maner The Queenes Royall Maiestie being neuer capable of any part of spirituall power The same could not bee deryued from her parson to the Archbishopps and Bishops Nemo potest plus Iuris in alium transferre quà m ipse habet No parson can transferre more authoritie vnto an other then hee himselfe hath And thus much concerninge Couell cont Burg. pag. 60. WottoÌ„ def of Perk. pag. 442. the first proposition The second is thus proued by D. Couell and D. Whitakers cited and allowed by him in this words The Church of Christ according to her authoritie receaued from him hath warrant to approue the scriptures to acknowledge to receaue to publishe and commaunde vnto her children Mr. Wotton witnesseth the like in this maner The Iugdment of the Churche wee ar so far from discrediting that wee holde it for a speciall grounde in this matter of scriptures Therefore that Iudgment which may in no wayes bee discredited in the greatest matter must needs bee infallible For euery witnes that is fallible may iustely bee discredited in such busines especially My fourth Argument is this whatsoeuer doth support and sustayne the truthe in which and no where els the truthe is preserued which is a diligent and warye keeper of Christs true doctrine committed vnto it chaungeinge nothinge at any time diminisheinge nothinge addinge nothinge not loseing her owne nor vsurpinge things belonginge to others must needs bee of Infallible Iudgment and free from error But the true Church of Christ is suche Therefore it is infallible in Iudgment and free from error The first propositions is euidently true for truthe once committed vnto one and continually so supported sustayned and preserued without chaunge diminution addition losse or vsurpation must of necessitie and Infallibly still bee truthe for neither truthe nor any thinge els so mayntayned and kept vnuiolable can by any possibilitie bee ouerthrowne or altered The seconde proposition is thus proued by this Protestants Mr. Ormerods Ormerod pict pap pap 93. words bee thus The Church is called a piller because it is like vnto a piller For as a piller dothe supporte and vnderproppe a buildinge and maketh it more stable firme and stronge so the Church doth sustayne and supporte the truthe for the truthe is no where preserued but in the Churche D. Sutcliffe Sutcliffe against the 3 conuers pag. 79. approueth this sentence Christs true Church is a diligent and wary keeper of doctrines committed to her and chaungeth nothinge at any time diminisheth nothinge addeth nothinge superfluous looseth not her owne nor vsurpeth things belongeinge to others Therefore Christs true doctrine committed to the true Church and continued and preserued longe time in the Church of Rome Christs true Church as this Protestants graunt in the next chapter must needs still be there and that still the true Church of Christ because that euer preserueth and neuer looseth or chaungeth the truthe nor any part thereof fundamentall or not fundamentall Lastely in this Question I argue thus whatsoeuer Societie or Companie hath authoritie in controuersies of faith and out of it there is no saluation remission of synnes or hope of eternall life must needs bee infallible in Iugdment free from error and onely to be obeyed in such things aboue all other Consistories Conuenticles or priuate parsons But the true Church is such Therefore Infallible in Iudgment free from error and so to be obeyed The first proposition is euidently true otherwise men were some times bownde to bee Hereticks or beleeue errors because authoritie is to bee obeyed and not resisted and Hereticks might be saued or God our moste good and mercifull Lord and Sauiour compelleth and necessitateth man to bee damned which be euident blasphemies The second proposition is proued by these English ProtestaÌ„ts first their booke of Articles to which they all sweare or subscribe Booke of Articl articul 20. reconfirmed by his maiestie Feild pag. 69. Couell def of Hoocker pag. 76. defineth thus The Church hath authoritie in controuersies of faith D. Feild hath this sentence There is no saluation remission of sinnes or hope of eternall life out of the Churche Like is the Iudgment of D. Couell and others And thus much of the Infallible highest Authoritie Iudgment Commaunding and Bindinge power of Christs true Church in generall Which can be but one as that Article of our Creede I beleeue the holy Catholick Church not Churches teacheth vs. And these Protestants in their Articles define it Artic. 19. A congregation of faithfull men c. not congregations And thus comment vppon it â—here Rogers vpp their Articl pag. 86. 88. 89. is but one Church And proue it by these scriptures Rom. 11. 5. 1. Cor. 10. 17. 1. Cor. 12 12. 13. 27. Rom. 12. 4. 5. Gal. 3. 28. and add thus all Gods people agree with vs in this point And cyte for it the Protestant confessions of Heluetia Boheme Gall. Belgia Augâ—st Wittenb Suew And these Protestants before haue so taught vs when they define or descrebe it allwayes in the singular number onely by these their names and distinctions blessed companie of holy ones houshold of faithe spouse of Christ Church of the liueing God piller of truthe c. And in all verbes relatiues or demonstratiues of it so singularly speakeing of it as her communion her directions her Iudgment her Children her Definitions hath warrant to approue to publish to commaunde is a diligent keeper of doctrines committed to her chaungeth nothinge diminisheth nothing c. Which by no possibilitie can bee verified of the Protestants either in England or any other nation none of them in particular or all together haueing clayming or pretending either infallibilitie in Iudgment to warrant any one article in controuersie but voluntarily and generally teachinge that Thesis generalâ—â— est it is a generall Morton Apol. part 2. pag. 315. willet Antil praef engl pag. 71. 120. 150. 4â— pref to the Read in Antil Artiâ—l of Relig. art 21. Relation of the state of Religion cap. 47. c. Comm vppon the Articl of Engl. Protest by Mr Rog. in pref Maxime there is none in their Church whose Iudgment is of Infallible authoritie Neither Prince Parlament Cowncell Ministery or their Church hath any priuilegd from error but they haue and doe erre in things pertayning to God Neither challenge any Iurisdiction generall to bynde others to their Religion but absolutely confessinge The Protestant ar without any meanes to take vp their controuersies No Prince with any preeminence of Iurisdiction aboue the rest no Patriarke one or more to haue a common Superintendance or care of their Churches And their publick comment vppon their Articles to which they haue all subscribed assureth vs is to be so for relatinge vnto vs how in the begynninge of their Reuolt from the Church of Rome to persuade the world they laboured by all
means they could to come to vnitie amonge themselues as in the true Church it must bee Crammer and others vsed all deuises and Caluyne wrote vnto him sayeing That might his labours stand the Church insteed ne decem quideÌ„ Maria it would not greeue him to sayle ouer ten seas to such a purpose But this proued a worke of much difficultie if not altogether vnpossible in mans eyes Where they well might haue left out their addition if not and haue playnely sayd without any exception as it hath playnely proued that it was altogether vnpossible in mans eyes especially in the common order of proceedings amonge them which by their owne Relation was this That euery kingedome and free state or principalitie which had abandoned the Religion of Rome should diuulge a breife of that Religion which amonge them was taught and beleeued Wherevppon as this men tell came forthe the seuerall Protestant confessions or Religions of the seuerall Protestant Congregations of Wittemberge Ausburge Bohem Sueue Scotland Heluetia Fraunce Belgia Basile Saxonie England in their 39. Articles c. amonge whome euen those of England it selfe what contradiction there is euen in matters by their owne doctrine fundamentall and essentiall in Religion demonstration is lately made by this same maner and methode by their owne authorities and will be also manifest in this worke And yett The Answ of Orford â—â— the 1000. pet Articul 19. 21. this men which say they ar the learnest ministerye in the worlde and definitiuely condemne all Churches as Ierusalem Alexandria Antioch and Rome and generall Councells themselues of error and may not pleade Ignorance for themselues to excuse them from error Neither can they with the least pretence of truth affirme their acknowledged lyeing and erroneous Churche to be the true Church of God except they will also moste blasphemously teach and mayntayne that prima veritas and eternall truthe is eternall August lib. de mendas falsehood or with the damned Priscillianists that God in his Reuelations to his Church and in the holy scriptures hath deliuered lyes and errours commaundinge vs to beleeue them For they haue before assured vs that the true Church of God warily keepeth all doctrine committed to her chaungeth diminiâ—heth addeth loseth vsurpeth nothinge Therefore this chaungeing diminishinge loseinge and vsurpinge Church of Protestants cannot be this true Church of Christ by their owne doctrine And as materiall essentiall and fundamentall it is in Religion concerninge the true grounde and fowndation of faith and as greate a falsehood to say in the meanest or least point of faith that truth is error God a lyar or his Church a seducer as so to affirme in the greatest and moste concerninge mystery of Religion The true groundes and fowndation of true beleeueinge equally weakened or ouerthrowne in the one as the other And the first proposition which our Catholick Preists and brethren prisoners at Wisbych offered to the vice-chaunceller of Cambridge and that vniuersitie that is Ecclesia protestantium non est vera Christi Ecclesia The Protestant Churche is not the true Church of Christ is here sufficiently questioned and by themsels not longe since more then sufficiently demonstrated to bâ— Pulâ—â—â—a propositio really Demonstrat of Recuse dem 2. 3. 4. c. and sincerely a true proposition and not scoffingly as hee pleaseth to parenthesize And so will be defended or proued by those propownders of it As also their second proposition for of the third in his proper place dâ—tur externus Iudex in rebus fidei there is an externall Iudge in matters of faith will bee maynâ—ayned not onely in such sense as the Vniuersiâ—ie of Cambridge accordinge to the nature of their Church and Religion graunteth that is fallible and deceatfull But as our Brethren accordinge to the nature of true Faithe Religion and the true Church infallible intended it and still offer to make it good for the Romane Church euer synce the time of Christ and so hereafter When our English Protestant vniuersitie for their so lately as they terme Vicech of Camb D. Carey his letter Aug. 7. it reformed Church and light of the Ghospell ar driuen to this Answeare in these words Your second question is affirmatiue auerring an externall Iudge in maâ—ters of faith If you vnderstand a Iugde infallible in his sentence wee deny what you affirme otherwise wee gaynesay not your assertion Which in their owne meaninge aboue remembred is pulchra propositio for their Illuminated Church which will haue no Iudge or Iudgment in matters of faith aboue all things most infallible and certainely true except wee will allowe it for an Article of faithe or an infallible truthe that the Iudge and Iudgment must be fallible and deceatefull And the Religion and faith so adiudged and propownded to bee followed and with diuine faith to be beleeued against the nature thereof to be false erroneoes fallible or deceatefull for such as the Iudge is the Iudgment and difficultie adiudged must needs be And yett further one scruple more there is in this busines which because Cambridge is now busyed enough against pore prisoners without bookes I wish that Oxford could resolue how it can stand with the Integritie and sownd doctrine of a Reformed Church and spoken consequenter like a learned vniuersitie to graunt as they haue done and must doe by their Religion to this day that there be and must be so many Supreame and Independant Iudges and heaps in their Churche as I haue before remembred from themselues Religions Churches seuerall and different Confessions or Professions of Faithe euery one absolute of it self and without dependance of any other and to vse their owne wordes Without any meanes to take vp their controuersies no Prince with any preeminence of Iurisdiction aboue the rest no Patriarke to haue a common superintendence or care of their Churches Their lett sup Aug. 7. And yett now the vniuersitie of Cambridge haueing as they write warrant from our Kinge to accept our Preists challendge God graunt they performe their warrant Ioyneth with them in this position datur externus Iudex there â—â— an externall or one externall Iudge in matters of faith If there is but one externall Iudge for Iudex externâ—â— and externall Iudge in the singular number is but one then those Churches or Church of theirs which from their begynning haue had so many supreame Iudges and Iudgments cannot be the true Church of Christ which as now the graunt hath but one And if their former both doctrine and practise of many such Iudges is true then their present doctrine and graunt of onely one is false and inferreth a false Church But I leaue them to our Preists at Wisbych Onely here I will adde because they haue now allowed one externall Iudge in matters of faith in the true Church to whose Iudgment all must be obedient otherwise hee is not to be named a Iudge they must also against their owne limitation allowe that his Iudgment
is infallible otherwise the whole Church might erre which D. Feild Feild pag. 203. l. 4. cap. 5. with priuiledge denyeth in these words Wee thinke that particular men and Churches may erre damnably because not withstanding others may worship God arright but that the whole Church at one time cannot so erre for that the Church should cease vtterly for a time and so not be Catholicke beinge not at all times and Christ should some times be without a Church Therefore the Vniuersitie of Cambridge by warrant from our Kinge alloweinge the one and D. Feild with publicke applause in the name of all English Protestants as his words wee thinke ar wittnes attesting the other and all English Protestants before assureing vs that they and all their Churches doe or may thus erre they cannot haue or be this true Church of Christ And because there is no other in any probable Iudgment left to be free from such damnable erring but the Romane Church because there reason telleth vs the Church cannot cease but be Catholick in all times and Christ cannot be without a Church This externall and Infallible Iudge is in the Romane Church and that this freed from damnable error is the true Church of Christ but of this in the next chapter CHAPTER II. WHEREIN DEMONSTRAtion is made by these English Protestant Doctors themselues writing or allowed as before synce the begynninge of Kinge IAMES his Raigne in England that the Romane Church is the true Church of Christ NOw it will be no difficult thinge to proue euen by this Protestants themselues that the Romane Churche that I meane which submitteth it selfe to the Iurisdiction of the Pope of Rome as the vicar of Christ Successor to S. Peter and supreame heade thereof is the true Churche of Christ for being generally graunted by Protestants that either their conuenticle and congregation or the Church of Rome is the true Church of God and their clayme and title thus shamefully by them selues excluded and ouerthowne it must needs follow by iust consequence that the Romane Church is that blessed companie of holy ones howshold of faith spouse of Christ and Church of the liueinge God priuiledged with such Immunities and commaunding power as is declared and by English Protestants ascribed to the true Church in the former chapter whereupon the ProtestaÌ„t offerres of conference speake of themselues and Offer of conference pag. 16. their cause in these words If the ministers bee inâ—â—â—or they protest to all the worlde that the Pope and the Churche of Rome and in them God and Christ Iesus himself haue had greate wronge and Inâ—ignitie offered vnto them in that they ar reiected and that all the Protestant Churches ar Scismatiâ—all in forsakeinge vnitie and communion with them And a little before speakinge of some positions Offer sup pag. 11. amonge them offered then to bee disputed They write in these termes diuers of the propositions ar suche that if the ministers should not constantly holde and mayntaine the same against all men they cannot see how possibly by the Rules of diuinitie the seperation of our Churches from the Churche of Rome and from the Pope the supreame heade thereof can bee iustified But to mâ—ke particular and direct probation of the is Catholicke doctrine by these Protestants I argue thus from their owne diuinitie in the 2. Article of their Religion of Articles of Relig. articul 12. artic 19. the necessarie and vnseparable by them vnion of faith and good workes and their definition of the true Church in their 19. Article subscribed vnto by all English Ministers and it is in this maner Whatsoeuer Church hath in great multitude men vertuous learned fraught with the loue of God and the truthe aboue all thinges men of memorable Integritie of hart and affections preachinge much both of faith and pietie with wonderfull zeale and spirit That must needs be the true Church of Christ But the present Church of Rome is such Therefore it is the true Church of Christ The first proposition is euidently deduced from those two Articles of their Religion and cannot be denyed The Minor proposition consisteth of the expresse words of their Protestant Relator of the Relation of the state of Religion â—ap 48. state of Religion and so nothing remayneth to be further proued My second Argument is thus framed where The outwarde state and glorie of the seruice doth engender quicken encrease and norish inward reuerence respect and deuotion which is due vnto soueraigne Maiestie and power Where deedes of charitie be exceedinge the life of some of their Religions incomparable in seueritie where there is excellent order of gouernment singular helps for encrease of godlines and deuotion and profiting of vertue That is the true Church of Christ But the present Church of Rome is such Therefore it is the true Church of Christ The Maior proposition is manifestly true by Protestants in their Article of the Church in these words the visible Church of Articul 19. sup Christ is a congregation of faithfull men in which the pure word of God is preached c. in all those things that of necessitie ar requisite to the same All which ar conteyned in the first proposition The seconde is their owne expresse words Relation of the state of Religion c. 9. c. 22. c. 26. c. 48. written and published of the present Romane Churche by their Relator of Religion for confirmation of bothe which Arguments the same Protestant Author not ignorant of so many differences in Religion betweene the Romane Church and them persuading an vnion betweene them onely requireth Catholicks to giue ouer fyue things all dispensable and not any Relat. c. 48. one of them essentiall as hee teacheth Which is as greate testimonie as a true Protestant can giue to the true Church for their common doctrine to defend their manifest errors is this that the true Church may er in matters not essentiall and fundamentall The words of D. Willet Willet Antil-pagâ— 43. Art 19. Feild of the Church Sutcl against D. Kell Dâ—â—â— persuas Wotton pag. 28. Middles p. 201. Powell consid at these to errors of doctrine which ar not fundamentall euen the true Church of Christ is subiect So their booke of Articles of Religion so D. Feild ordinarily in his bookes of the Church so D. Sutcliffe D. Doue one of their Bishops Mr. Wotton Mr. Middleton Mr. Powell and all the rest that made Protestants and Puritans but one Church do and must acknowledge And the benefites which this Protestant Relator assureth his brethren to fynde by vnion with the Romane Church hee setteth downe in these termes they shall finde excellent order of gouernment singuler Relat. sup helpes for encrease of godlines and deuotion for the conquering of sinne for the profiting of vertue Which be all the happines that the true Churche can giue or man enioy in this life For all our combate is to conquer sinne to haue vertue
moste worthy and ruleing authoritie in them And if saluation is to be had in it it must likewise by that title be the true Church of Christ For D. Feild with D. Feild pag. 69. Couell def of Hook pag. 76. Couell and others before haue giuen their sentence in these words There is no saluation remission of sinnes or hope of eternall life out of the Church Then of necessitie that Church wherein there is not onely hope but by the aduersaries themselues an assured certaynetie of saluation and eternall life which cannot be had without remission of sins must needs be onely the true Church of Christ The Minor proposition is thus proued by these Protestants first his Maiesties Kings speach in parlam words be these I acknowledged the Romane Church to be our Mother Churche this in publicke Parlament and in the conference at Hampton court in this order No Church Confer at Hampt pag. 75. ought further to seperate it selfe from the Churche of Rome either in doctrine or ceremonie then shee hath departed from her self when â—hee was in her florisheinge and best estate Which before is proued by these Protestants shee hath not done in any essentiall and fundamentall thinge which is all they require And this will more then aboundantly appeare through out this treatise hereafter And D. Conell writeth thus of this present Romane Couell def of Hook pag. 68. Church toucheing the maine points of Christian truth they constantly persist in them Protestants doe gladly acknowledg them to be the family of Iesus Christ They of Rome were and are still in the Churche a parte of the house of God a limme of the visible Church Which hee addeth also to haue been Mr. Hookers sentence telling vs that Hook l. 5. pag. 188. what hee writeth of the Church of Rome is but to giue her her due and wee acknowledge them to be of the family of Iesus Christ And hee concludeth thus It is straunge for any man to deny Couell sup pag. 73. pag. 76. them of Rome to be of the Church And againe Wee affirme them of the Romane Church to be parts of the Church of Christ and that those that lyue and dye in that Church may be saued And all kindes of Protestants when they combate amonge themselues rather prefer the Churche of Rome then their fellow Protestants The Relator writeth thus The Relation cap. 45. Lutherans in Germanie both the Cleargie and layetie openly protest they will rather returne to the Church of Rome then ioyne with the Sacramentary Protestants such as bee in England And of these Mr. Iacob writeth thus The Bishops of England when they deale with Puritans must ioyne Iacob pag. 73. playnely with the Catholicks in their Answers if they will mayntayne themselues Lastely the Puritans haue written against these Protestants Offer of conf pag. 16. as is cited before in these words If the Ministers be in error they protest to all the worlde that the Pope and the Church of Rome and in them God an Christ Iesus himselfe haue had greate wronge and Indignitie offered vnto them in that they are reiected and that all the Protestant Churches ar Scismaticall in forsakeinge vnitie and communion with them Then if the Lutherans or parlamentary Protestants or Puritans all or any of them ar to be beleeued against others none of their congregations but onely the Church of Rome at this present is the true Church of Christ whose communion of all men is to be embraced directions followed and Iudgment to be rested in Now after all these Protestant wittnesses I come to D. Morton hee agreeth with his former Brethren concerning things necessarily required to a true Church and in these words The beleefe of some Articles ar so absolutely necessarie Morton App. lib. 4. cap. 2. sect 3. pag. 443. for the constitution of a true Church as a reasonable soule is for the essentiall being of a man such as concerne the knowledg of the vnitie of the godhead and of the trinitie of the parsons together with the true and faithfull apprehension of the natures of Christ the Messias God and Man the power of his death and resurrection by whome wee haue remissions of sins and after death life euerlastinge Wherefore wee presume that in a Church although corrupted with error and superstition yett if it doth not ruinate the foundation the erroneous and superstitious professors may be saued euen by vertue of that tenor which is in capite videlicet Christ Iesus the Lord and Author of life which notwithstandinge wee must so vnderstand as that the error and superstition do proceede not from knowledge but from ignorance Now that the present Romane Church inuiolably holdeth all these necessarie things to a true Churche is graunted by many Protestants before and his Maiestie whome this doctor should allowe entreateing of such as they terme them necessarie points writeth thus Wee hope that K. Iames ag D. Conrad Vorstuis pag. 60. no Papists shall euer be found to erre in any of those mayne points And concerning our scholemen Masters in diuinitie with vs hee vseth these words In the maine growndes of Christian Religion they ar worthie of all commendation And Pag. 63. sup toucheinge those doctrines which D. Morton will name our errors and superstitions hee addeth thus If the subiect of Vorstius Pag. 46. 47. supr his heresies had not beene grounded vppon questions of a higher qualitie then such matters as ar in controuersie at this day betweene the Papists and vs wee doe freely professe that in that case wee should neuer haue troubled our selues with the busines in such fashion By which words it is manifest that hee did not thinke that any opinion which Catholicks hold doth either exclude vs from the true Church or from saluation otherwise the maintayners of such things though as neare frends as the Netherlanders to England were feruently to be admonished But D. Morton himselfe will Morton App. lib. 5. cap. 25. pag. 663. cleare vs in this matter and in this maner and in these wordes If wee should not acknowledge Gods holy prouidence as in the Greeke so in the Romane Church by whom haue beene preserued the lawes of the commaundements conteyninge the same of morall obedience the Symboll and Creede Apostolicall which hold the same of the fundamentall Articles of faith the two Sacraments Baptisme and the Eucharist and the Scriptures of the old and new Testament in their first originalls of Hebrue and Greeke being the euidences of our heauenly Fathers will and conteyninge in them all truth necessarie vnto saluation wee might bee worthely Iudged both impiously vnthankefull vnto God and maliâ—ious against that Church Therefore if D. Morton requireth onely as before such necessary points and Articles of faith to a true Church and here acknowledgeth them in the Romane Church and protesteth they might bee worthely iudged malicious against that Church if they should deny it It is euident
authoritie in such cases is priuate Therefore no Protestant Interpretation is binding or Iuridicall The Maior proposition is thus proued by D. Feild Feild l. 4. c. 19. pag. 235. in these wordes Wee confesse that neither conference of places nor consideration of the antecedeÌ„tia and consequentia nor lookinge into the originalls are of any force vnlesse wee fynde the thingâ— which wee conceaue to be vnderstoode and ment in the places interpreted to be consonant to the Rule of faithe And hee writeth thus againe priuate Interpretation Feild pag. 226. is not so proposed and vrged as if they would binde all others to receaue it The Minor proposition That all Protestant expositions in respect of a bindeing and Iuridicall power are priuate is thus proued by this Protestant Argument No Interpretation or Interpreters wanteing Iurisdiction and authoritie to commaunde their Interpretations and expositions in matters of faith to be beleued as suche is to be accompted byndeing and Iuridicall But all English Protestant Interpretations expositions and definitions by their owne Iudgment want this bindeing and commaundeing authoritie in matters of faithe Therefore they are not Iuridicall and byndeinge to be beleeued The Maior is euidently true for where there is not power and authoritie in things those things cannot be rightly and iuridically commaunded or bindeing men to doe or beleeue them The Minor proposition is proued by D. Feild in these wordes As before wee made Feild pag. 228. three kinds of Iudgment the one of discretion Common to all the other of direction Common to the Pastors of the Churche and a third of Iurisdiction proper to them that haue supreame power in the Church So likewise wee make three kindes of Interpretation the first priuate the seconde of publickâ— direction and so the Pastors of the Church may publickly propose what they conceaue of it And the third of Iurisdiction and so they that haue supreame power that is in the Bishops assembled in a generall Councell may interpreate the scripture and by their authoritie suppresse all them that shall gaynesay such Interpretations and subiect euery man that shall disobey such determinations as they consent vppon to excommunication and Censures of the like nature Hitherto D. Feilds wordes playnely declareing that in his Iudgment the Protestants neither haue nor can haue this Iuridicall and commaundeing Iudgment or Interpretation because as is proued by themselues before they neither haue had nor can haue any generall Councell in which alone he placeth this Iurisdiction and bindeing power For proposeing without authoritie which hee giueth there to Bishops is not Iuridicall and coactiue If hee shall answeare that in the first three hundred yeares there was no generall Councell and yet matters of Religion were decided and embraced hee condemneth himself and all Protestants in this busines for either hee must leaue that primatiue Church absolutely without Iurisdictâ—on and power which is moste absurde or leaue it to them that both truely claymed and vsed it the Popes of Rome as these Protestants haue before acknowledged And aboue all men D. Feild must be of that opinion for hee Feild pag. 202. hath written and allowed in this maner Wee must reuerence the authoritie of all Catholiâ—ke Doctors whose doctrine and writeings the Church alloweth wee must more regarde the authoritie of Catholicke Bishops more then these the authoritie of the Apostolicke Churches amongst them more especially the Church of Rome of a generall Councell more then all these Therefore by this Protestant Doctor in tyme when generall Councells cannot be the highest deciding and Iuridicall sentence and power is in the Church and Pope of Rome And by this hee is also preuented from sayinge that Protestants may commaunde such Interpretations and definitions within their owne temporall Territories for so they should not moste reuerence and respect next to a generall Councell the Church of Rome the next Iudge as hee hath written but quite the contrary their owne stubborne and disobedient wills which in such causes is Hereâ—icall or Scâ—maticall vsurpation and yet D. Feild in his diuision of Interpretations before assigneth no Iurisdiction at all to inferior Bishops to commaunde either in the whole Church or in Prouinciall in such cases Further I argue thus No opinions or Articles not grownded vppon the worde of God are to be beleeued or commaunded as matters of faith But all Protestants deductions and Interpretations in these controuersies are such not grownded vppon the word of God therefore not to be beleeued or commaunded as Articles of faith The Maior is the Common doctrine of Protestants The Minor is proued both before when Protestants haue depriued themselues of Councells Popes and all true proposers of the word of God tying themselues to their owne doctrines and deductions and is thus further confirmed by D. Couell in these wordes Couell def of Hook pag. 85. Doctrines deriued exhortations deducted Interpretations agreable are not the word of God Therefore the whole Religion of Protestants against Catholicks beinge thus fownded vppon so deceatefull a grounde as humanee deduction is cannot truely and Iuridically be commaunder Yet it is so manifest to all that their Religion consisteth wholly on their Imagined Interpretations and deductions that Mr. Wotton and Wottoâ— def of Perk. pag. 467. c. others are enforced absurdely to say that deduction from scripture maketh a matter of Faithe otherwiâ—e hee â—annot make any articlâ— of faith to be in their doctrine against vs. And D. Feild himself so resolute before against these priuate Interpretations and expositions seemeth to be of the same minde to defend their Religion in makeing such deductions to be matters of faith by euery priuate deduction his wordes be these Wee Feild pag 226. say that men not neglâ—cting that light of direction which the Churche yeeldeth noâ— other helps and meanes may be assured out of the nature of the things themselues the Conference of places the knowledg of tongues and the sutable correspondence that one parte of dyuine truth hath with an other that they haue sownde out the true meaneinge of it And by this assurednes hee seemeth to vnderstand assurednes of faith makeing their priuate deductions and Interpretations the worde of God as M. Wotton before cited doth in Wotton def of Perk. pag. 467. these wordes Wee acknowledge both and holde all matters concludeth Logically out of the scriptures to be the word of God as well as if they were expressely sett downe in it worde for worde Therefore I may lâ—wfully take it is a Common Protestant doctryne both Doctor Feild and M. Wotton speakeinge for their Protestants in the plurall number wee say wee acknowledge c. so that by their Religion M. Feilds or M. Wottons Logicke vaine and vncertayne deduction is of higher authoritie and more to be beleeued then any generall Councell or Articl of Relig. art 21. other externall Rule of Religion for all these by them as is presently to be proued may erre euen in
faithe or be thought requisite or necessarie to saluation Now to proue my second proposition D. Feild will testifie that both these scriptures and the right order of deductions from them in matters of faith are deliuered vnto vs by tradition onely his â—ordes be these Much contention there hath Feild l. 4. pag. 238. cap. 20. beene about traditions some vrgeing the necessitie of them and other reiecting them For the cleareing whereof wee must obserue that wee reiect not all for first wee receaue the number and names of the Authors of bookes diuine and canonicall as deliuered by tradition This tradition wee admitt The number Authors and integritie of the partes of these bâ—okeâ— wee receaue as deliuered by tradition Thus much for the scriptures that their number Authors partes and euery chapter verse and sentence is by tradition Then their pretended deductions from thence must needs be such for in euery theologicall Syllogisme they must needs take eyther the one or both propositions from this graunted tradition and their conclusion must much rather be tradition as also the maner of deduceing for they graunt they are not expressely in scripture and to decide this D. Feild wittnesseth againe in this order The Feild sup pag. 238. 239. seconde kinde of tradition which wee admitt is that summarie comprehension of the cheife heades of Christian doctrine conteyned in the Creede of the Apostles which was deliuered to the Churche as a Rule of her faith The orderly connexion and distinct explication as these principall Articles gathered into an Epitome iâ— rightly named a tradition And howsoeuer hee will contend that the Articles are in scripture or may thence be deduced in which his fellowes in Religion hereafter will giue him deniall for Christs discendeing into Hell communion of Saincts and others yet hee must needs graunt that the Creede of the Apostles being composed by them and deliuered to the Church as a Rule of her faith before the scriptures of the new testament wherein hee will say it is conteyned were written is absolutely a Tradition And yet hee maketh it so absolute a thinge that to vse his wordes in it are implyed and whence are inferred all conclusions Theologicall But that the Feild supr cap. 20. true explication also of scripture is a tradition hee wittnesseth in these wordes The third is that forme of Christian doctrine and explication Feild pag. 239. of the seuerall partes thereof which the first Christians receauinge of the same Aposiles that deliuered to them the scriptures commended to posterities This may right be named a tradition for that wee neede a playne and distinct explication of many things which are somewhat obsâ—urely conteyned in the scripture Therefore seing these deductions from scripture are not without tradition and thinges obscurely conteyned may not be receaued as articles of Religion by them without a playne and distinct explication by tradition and the playne things of scripture by them before as also that epitome of our faith the Apostles Creede are traditions it is manifestly proued that all Articles and matters of faith are by tradition by these their writeings Further I argue thus whatsoeuer doctrine is of that necessitie that the denyall Feild 〈…〉 obstinately is Heresie must needs be a matter of faith and necessarie to saluation But by these Protestants there is such doctrine onely by tradition Therefore some matters of faith and necessarie to saluation are beleeued onely by tradition The Maior proposition is euidently true yet further confirmed by these Protestants D. Couells Couell exam pag 202. Ormer dial 2. wordes be these Hereticks are neyther simple Infidells nor Idolaters but obstinately erringe in some fundamentall poynt M. Ormerod writeth thus hee is an Hereticke which so swarueth from the wholesome doctrine as contemning the Iudgment both of God and the Church persisteth in his opinion Thus wee see that Heresie is not without deniall of a matter of faith wherein both the Iudgment of God and the Churche is contemned The Minor is proued by D. Feild in this maner where first to vse his wordes hee alloweth for a cleare Instance not to be proued by Feild pag. 240. scripture the perpetuall virginitie of Mary and after confesseth that Hiluedius for pertinatiousely deniall thereof was condemned of Heresie In that hee saith this is no point of Christian faith but a Feild sup cap. 20. seemely truthe deliuered vnto vs by the Church of God fitting the sanctitie of the blessed Virgin and the honor due to so sanctified a vessell of Christs Incarnation as her bodie was hee speaketh truely in allowing it for a Tradition but denying it to be any point of Christian faith and yet telling vs that Heluidius for deniall of 〈◊〉 was condemned of Heresie hee both contradicteth himself the truth and his fellowe Protestants before assureing that Hereticks be they that obstinately erre in fundamentall points as D. Couell writeth or as M. Ormerod noteth swarue from the wholesome doctrine as contenininge the Iudgment both of God and the Church Where it is euident that a matter of faith is denied in euerye Heresie and also that things deliuered onely by tradition as D. Feild acknowledgeth the perpetuall virginitie of our blessed Ladie to be are the worde and Iudgment of God Further these Protestants seeme to condemne the Anabaptists and denyers of the necessitie to baptise Infants yet D. Feild writeth thus Feild pag. 239. The foarth kinde of Tradition is the coÌ„tinued practise of such things as neyther are conteyned in the scripture expressely nor the example of such practise expressely there deliuered Of this sorte is the baptisme of Infants which is therefore named a tradition because it is not expressely deliuered in the scripture that the Apostles did baptize Infants nor any expresse precept there found that they shoulde doe it And his wordes of the plurall signification The fourth kinde of traditions such things of this sorâ—eâ— c. are sufficient argument that hee alloweth diuers other Traditions of this nature That which he addeth wee fynde the scripture to delyuer the grounds of it is expressely Feild pag. 228. Couell def of Hook pag. 85. against himself before and D. Couell thus assureing vs in these wordes doctrines deriued exhortations deducted Interpretationâ— agreeable are not the worde of God and D. Feild Feild supr pag. 226. priuate Interpretation is not so proposed and vrged as if they woulde binde all others to receaue it Yet all men are bownde to receaue and firmely beleeue articles and matters of faithe Further D. Willet telleth vs that Vigilantius Willet Antilog pag. 13. was condemned of Heresie for denying reuerence to Relickes and yet Protestants generally teach that doctrine is not conteyned in holy scriptures D. Feild writeth Feild pag. 138. l. 3. cap. 29. in these wordes Aerius condemned the custome of the Churche in nameing the deade at the altare and offeringe the sacrifice of the Eucharist for them For this his
Protestant preacher in his more then vncharitable booke against Catholicks witnesseth of Prot. proof-part 1. c. 9. cap. 8. c. his owne brethren in Religion the English Protestants Of the more then irreligeous and prophane behauiour of their cleargie of English Protestants in abuseing falsefieing peruertinge the holy Scriptures Fathers Councels and all Authorities for Religion I haue for this point sufficiently entreated before to proue that they are not iust or righteous but most vniust and impious by their owne testimonie What other syns they are defiled with let their owne liues and the world censure But suer I am they are not voide of all greuous sinnes which they must be if they be iustified and in grace and such they must be in deed before they knowe themselues to be such except they can know that to be which is not as their sharp wits would seeme to doe in this and other questions of Religion Then seeing it is to apparant that Protestants are not iust either by their Imagined assureinge faith or howsoeuer let vs further examine by these writers and Protestant professors whether it is in it self possible that this supposed faith should Iustifie The contrary whereof thus I demonstrate from their owne writings All men that pretend to be iustified by this Imagined faith must needs be iustified by some act or acts thereof But no man is Iustified by any act or acts thereof Therefore no man is iustified by it The Maior is manifest The Minor is thus proued by Protestants First D. Feild with Feild pag. 177. others doth and of necessitie must affirme that in this busines of their fantasied Iustification their deuised faith hath twoe and onely twoe acts One going before iustification teaching vs to pray entreate God and humble ourselues when wee are not iust and this act as hee acknowledgeth it to goe before Iustification so hee thus freely confesseth that it doth not iustifie The second Act as hee telleth vs doth followe Iustification and so by no possibilitie because the cause cannot be after the effect caused by it that is able to iustifie wherefore his owne words of this Act of their inuented faith be these Shee doth not actiuely Iustifie but findeth the thinge done Therefore seeing they teach there be but two acts in their new faith the first and second te laste which admitt no more and neither the one nor other nor both together because they graunt there is no partiall influence or cooperation from them to that purpose dothe doe or can iustifie there is no possibilitie of Iustification by such idle faithe for so two contradictoryes should be true man is iustified by some act of faith man is not iustified by any act of faith Which in Logicke and nature is knowne to be vnpossible and a stupide absurditie to affirme it This matter is further proued by D. Couell who reiecting Luthers Couell def of Hooker pag. 42. opinion in this question graunteth a seperabilitie of faith and workes and that faith as they commonly graunte doth not iustifie Then Iustification cannot possibly be by onely faith which in an other treatise hee declareth by example in these words Faith is the fowndation of spirituall buylding of Gods howse charitie the Roofe without which the best are Couell against Burges pag. 148. but as howses vncouered that cannot longe continue Then iustification which is the Roofe of our spirituall buildinge in this world is and musts needs be the worke and buildinge of charitie and not of faith alone Which demonstratiuely is true by his graunt that faith and the works of charitie may be seperated for they consent that without such works man is not iustified therefore not possibly by this their Poeticall faith Further both the present Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury D. George Abbot against D. Hill and D. Feild also doth often tell vs that the Greeke Church is the true Church of Christ Then supposing from my first chapter in the first part of this worke by the graunt of the same D. Feild Protest proaf part 1. cap. 1. D Couell D. Sutcliffe M. Wotton and M. Ormerod that the direction thereof is to be followed her Iudgment to be rested in that it hath authoritie to commaund her children the Iudgment of it is a very speciall grownd of faith supporting the truthe as a piller doth vnderpropp a building is a diligent and true keepr of doctrines committed to her chaungeth nothing diminisheth nothing at any time addeth nothing superfluous looseth not her owne vsurpeth not things belonging to others and that there is no saluation remission of syns or hope of eternall life out of the Church All which be the verie words of those laste cited Protestants related in that place From which graunts thus I argue No doctrine or opinion that is a thinge moste horrible vnworthie any Christian against the lawe of God and light of nature is or can possibly be true But the paradoxe of Protestants that this their supposed onely faith doth iustifie is such Therefore it neither is or can be true The Maior is euidently true and to affirme the contrary is to denie all true Religion and the Authoritie of God for yf hee should or could teach or reueale to men to followe doctrine that is horrible vnworthie a Christian against his owne lawe and naturall light such doctrine could not be true nor hee honored as God but to be accoumpted a deceauer and seducer The Minor or second proposition be the expresse words of the Greeke Church so true to be obeyd and followed in doctrine by these Protestants as before is cited For Hieremias Patriarke of Constantinople cheef in Hieremias Patriarcha constant in censura cap. 5. that Church in his censure against Protestants vseth these words in this article The doctrine that onely faith doth iustifie is a thinge moste horrible vnto or thie any Christian against the lawe of God and the light of nature Therefore these men mayntayning so horrible doctrine by the censure of the true Church as they teach and out of which as they affirme before there is no saluation remission of syns or hope of eternall life are so farre from being iust iustified or to be saued by faith or any other meanes in their proceedings that by their owne confession they haue left vnto themselues no hope of eternall life or saluation at all Moreouer I argue thus Nothing which cannot be defended without graunting and mayntayninge more new and straunge absurdities and impossibilities is or can be true doctrine But this Protestant assertion of their onely assuring faithe iustifying is such therefore it neither is nor can be true The first proposition is euidently true for euery truthe may and is defended without any absurditie or inconuenience The seconde proposition is also manifestly proued from D. Feild and others before To whome I add M. Wotton who laboureing what hee can to defend this his forged faithes iustification and answere that place
Minor now thus proued by them M. Perkins speaching of the doctrine of that time in the Church in this matter speaketh thus There was in the Church Intercessio singularium Perlins probl pag. 89. prosingularibus Intercession to Saincts in particular for men or things in particular This hee testifieth for inuocation to Saincts and their prayers for men in particular for hee had with other Protestants graunted before a generall Intercession of the Saincts for those that lyue Pag. 88 sup And citeth for particular inuocation the histories of Eusebius and Palladius And addeth further thus The auncient Fathers were wont in their Masses In liturgijs to recite the names of Pag. 89. sup Martyrs and Saincts requiring further and asking our Lord that hee would graunt this or that by their prayers or intercessions Hee might haue Pag. 93. sup added more with truth if it had pleased him that those Auncient Masses or liturgies had diuers particular prayers vnto Saincts And this doctrine of particular prayer and inuocation of Saincts was so generally vsed both in the publicke Masses and by the Fathers of that time That this Protestant writer both freely acknowledgeth it and calleth it syn and sacriledge in them his words be these The auntient Fathers especially Perkins sup pag. 93. after 400. yeares of Christ did syn in the inuocation of Saincts yea were guiltie of sacriledge And for this doctrine so chargeth amonge others these holy and learned Fathers S. Pag. 94. sup Paulinus Fortunatus S. Leo S. Ephrem S. Fulgentius P. Damianus Prosper c. And this is the straunge Idolatrie wherewith some of these men haue so fondly accused Catholicks and therefore notwithstanding all their shewe of desire to be tryed by the Fathers M. Ormerod seeing how they Ormerod pict pap pag. 26. condemne Protestants for deniall of this prayer and inuocation speaketh thus of those holy and learned Fathers They did not ponderously consider of this question Is not this a ponderous consideration of so worthie a Protestant writer to condemne all antiquitie of want of consideration when the lett not with his humour and yet hee writeth further thus Allthough the Auncient Fathers Pag. 27. sup had all ioyntly embraced this opinion yet are not wee therefore bownd to receaue it Where hee dealeth as old Protestants were vsed to doe not to regard any Authoritie but what pleaseth them But to proue by the confession of Protestants that this was the doctrine of the primatiue Church this is sufficient Yet I add M. Middleton who writeth Middleton papistom pag. 129. thus Austin teacheth vs That Christians celebrated the memories of Martyrs for these two intents That wee may be associate to their meritts and holpen with their prayers And D. Morton alledgeth Morton Apol. part 1. pag. 227. 228. how all Antiquitie taught inuocation of Saincts Lastely in this Question I argue thus No doctrine which denieth any Article of our Creede is true or to be receaued But the deniall of Angells and more strongely of Saincts whose Communion is in the Creede to offer vpp our prayers which wee in earth make is to deny an Article of our Creede Therefore it is not true nor to be receaued The Maior is euident by Protestants The Minor is thus proued by D. Couell Couell against Burges pag. 89. who disputing against Burges the puritane who called this an vsurping vntruthe and taxed the Booke of Tobias because there the Angell saide hee was one of the seuen holy Angells that offer vp the prayers of the Saincts of God Answereth Couell sup pag. 90. in these words If it be an an vsurped vntruthe for the Angells to offer vp the prayers of the Church vnto God in the mediation of his sonne wee shall peraduenture depriue our selues of a greate parte of their Ministery and dissolue that communion of Saincts which wee professe to beleeue as an Article of Gods truthe Therefore I will by these Protestants conclude in this matter that the doctrine of the Romane Church herein is Orthodoxe and true and the contrary heretofore taught by Protestants false and impious And the rather because it seemeth by the Kings Canons to be excommunication Kings Canons An. 1604. can 8. to deny this Catholicke doctrine for in these Canons it is excommunication Ipso facto to affirme or teach that the forme and maner of making and consecrating Bishops Preists and deacens conteyneth any thinge in it that is repugnant to the word of God And yet the Protestant Author of the booke called Abridgment thus Abridgmēt An. 1605. pag. 30. testifieth of the oathe in that Booke of ordination The oathe of supreamacie is thus concluded so helpe mee God and all Saincts and the holy Euangelists Which the late edition by Barker Booke of Mak. Bish c deacons Oath sup hath left out The Churches that were dedicated to Saints in this Kingedome euen in the time of the Christian Britaynes and Saxons after the honor and worship that was done and due vnto them how they are named euen by Protestants the Tutelar patrons of our nation there be to many Theat of gr Britan. Examples in the late Theater to be recited CHAPTER XI WHEREIN IS PROVED BY these English Protestant writers that the Ceremonies of the Romane Church so much heretofore impugned by them are now contrariwise in their Iudgment adiudged holy auncient reuerent decent c. THE third thinge which the Protestant Relator in this his desired Attonement requireth the Church of Rome to giue ouer is to leaue their offensyue Ceremonies as hee termeth them what they be in particular hee doth not expresse but by the writings of others his Associates in Religion wee may iustely suppose hee moste aymeth at the ceremonyes vsed in the holy sacrifice of Masse crossings candells and such as I will iustifie by themselues in this Chapter particularly reciting them or the cheefest which I now omitt in this place to auoyde Repetitions to which I am often forced And first concerninge Ceremonyes by what Authoritie they may be ordayned and being so duely ordayned of what authoritie and reuerent estimation they ought to be ensueth thus by these Protestants Their publicke Articles haue thus Articul Relig. 20. sentenced The Church hath power to decree Rites or ceremonyes and authoritie in controuersies of faith Then much more must that her authoritie needs extend to accidentall things in Religion such as these ceremonies are D. Couell Couell modest examinat pag. 64. 65. telleth vs they be to be had in such Respect that to vse his words The primatiue Councells haue condemned them as Hereticks onely for being stiffely opposite in this kinde And entreateth Couell sup pag. 56. of them in these words following Wee call them Ceremonies properly all such things as are the externall Act of Religion which haue their commendation and allow ance from no other cause but onely that in Gods worshipp they are vertuous furtherances of his
Latines and Romane Church in all opinions and ceremonies vsed before their seperation For to make manifest the Antiquitie of these holy ceremonies by that his prescribed time of seperation first D. Willet Willet Antil pag. 169. telleth vs it was before the writing of the tripartite historie which hee citeth to that end and was twelue hundreds of yeares synce D. Downame is of the like opinion Downame Booke of Antichrist denowncing it to haue beene in the dayes of the primatiue Churche before they take any exception to the Churche of Rome D. Feild is of the same mynde all of them assigning Feild l. 3. c. 1. pag. 62. Sutcliff subuor pag. 89 epist dedicat Willet Antilog pag. 263. 271. it longe before the 600. yeare which D. Sutcliffe D. Willet and others allowe for an vnspotted time in Religion and ceremonies thereof And thus wee see that those things which to their ignorant Readers and Auditors they will seeme to reprehend themselues in their owne Iudgment and Rule in such causes haue moste highely and vndenieably confirmed and iustified Againe I argue thus from the Relator himselfe Those Ceremonies which breede order in the Church auoyde scandall giue propagation vnto Religion breede vnitie and doe ingender quicken encrease and norish the inwarde Reuerence respect and deuotion which is due vnto soueraigne Maiestie and power and of themselues are decent reuerent and significant are to be allowed retayned and adiudged such as become true Religion But the present Ceremonies of the Romane Church at this day are such Therefore to be allowed retayned and adiudged for decent holy reuerent c. The Maior proposition is without all question true and more then the Protestants require in this case The Minor is Relation of Religion cap. 47. proued by this Relator speaking of the Church of Rome and the ceremonies thereof in these words For order in the worlde for quiet in the Churche for auoyding of scandall for propagatinge and encrease of what greate power that vnitie is which proceeds from authoritie the papacie may teache And againe The outward state and glorie of their seruice doth ingender Relation sup cap. 6. quicken encrease and norish the inwarde reuerence respect and deuotion which is due vnto soueraigne Maiestie and power Their outward gestures are decent Cap. 5. reuerent and significant Then these holy Ceremonies hauing so greate allowance from our Enemyes themselues for their decencie reuerence signification vertue and antiquitie must needs be so embraced preserued and exercised and may not be termed offensyue ceremonyes by that or any Protestant And to exemplify particularly in those ceremonies of the present Church of Rome which be moste disallowed of our English Protestants I argue thus Those ceremonies which were vsed in the primatiue Church of Rome when it was in her best and florishinge state a Rule to all c. ought or may still be practized and obserued But those ceremonies which the present Romane Church now obserueth and are so much disliked by many English Protestants are such Therefore they ought or may still to be vsed and with reuerence practized The Maior proposition is often graunted before Articul of Relig. 20. An. 1562. by these Protestants and thus defined in the 20. Article of their Religion The Church hath power to decree Rites or ceremonies and authoritie in controuersies of faith So that whether these ceremonies belonge to faith or manners being practized or ordayned by our Mother Church of Rome and the gouernors thereof when by all confessions it was holy and the true Church of Christ they are religeously to be embraced and receaued The Minor proposition is thus proued by these men M. Hull in his worke intituled Hull Romes polecies pag 82. 13. 83. 84. 85. 86. Romes polecies thus recompteth them Lent embringe dayes friday altares lynnen Albes corporalls preists Roabes the feaste of S. Peters chaynes the feast of Candlemasse The exaltation of the crosse the Saincts fastinge euens Annoyntinge the sicke annoynting Bishops crossinge with Chrisme in Baptisme Saincts Shrynes Hymnes pax to be caryed about to be kissed the paschall Tapar on Easter Eauen to be hallowed organes and Church instruments singeing of psalmes in order with Antiphones Masse for the deade canonicall howres processions processions to goe rownde about the Churche euery sonday Hitherto the words of this Protestant writer Others of them as D. Morton D. Couell M. Ormerod Morton Apol. part 2. pag. 141. Couell examinat Ormerod pict parit G. 2. 1. 3. 4. Theat of gr Britan. pag. 298. 299. 351. c. doe add holy water holy fonts interrogatories in Baptisme dedication of Churches introyte of Masse wafer cakes to be consecrated in the holy Mysteries Gloria in excelsis the Ringe in Marriadge And others are added by their Theater before and other Protestants And they tell vs further the names of those sacred Popes and Pastors of the Church that vsed approued constituted or confirmed vnto vs these sacred Ceremonies to haue beene in the primatiue Church when it truely was by his Maiesties graunt in her best estate and Mother Church to prescribe vnto other prouinciall Kinges speache in parlam Churches her daughters and as they then were and now should be her obedient children And they name them as followeth Telesphorus Calixtus Stephanus Siluester Sixtus Hull sup pag. 82. 13. 83. 84. 85. 86. Morton Couell Ormer sup Vigilius Honorius Bonifacius Sergius Leo Innocentius Zozimus Vitellian Celestine Pelagius Vrbanus Agapitus Damasus Higinius Pius Celestinus Alexander All which ruled the Church and liued longe before Protestants exception to the Church of Rome K. in parlam Kinge in Confer at Hampton pag. 75. and when it was in her florishing and best estate such as wee may not depart from it by his regall sentence Of what higthest and commaunding authoritie ouer others the Popes of Rome were in those vnspotted dayes of Christianitie hath beene proued before To which I add that D. Couell doth not onely tell vs that Metropolitanes Archbishops Couell modest exam pag. 111. c. came from thence and who to whome should be obedient and Superior and were so vsed before the first generall Councell to testifie that this supreamacie was from Christ immediately and not from Councells But hee further speaketh thus Eyther Euaristus Bishop in the See of Rome in the Couell supr pag. 162 yeare 112 or as some say Dyonisius first assigned the precincts to euery parish and appointed to each Presbiter a certaine compasse whereof himself should take charge alone Hitherto his words Then if this supreame and binding authoritie was in that chaste and florishinge time of true Religion in the Bishop of Rome ouer all Preists Bishops Archbishops Metropolitanes c. to appoint constitute and decree not onely what ceremonies and solemnities should be vsed in all Churches but to rate and proportion out what power priuiledge and iurisdiction all Pastors prelates and spirituall Rulers should enioy
The Maior or first proposition is euidently true otherwise God hath bownde man to followe and embrace heresie or error of necessitie hee must bee damned without all hope of saluation except heresie false opinions error or infidelitie could bringe to heauen which is against the holy Scriptures true Religion which by no possibilitie can either bee vntrue or vncertayne being reueled by God himselfe and against the light of reason it selfe that men vnder penaltie of damnation should bee tyed to bee obedient to that sentence for obedience whereof they were likewise assured to bee damned which is to accuse God moste mercifull of the greatest Tyranny The Minor or second proposition is proued and the first also in this words of D. Feild D. Feild epist dedicat before hiâ— bookes of the Churche There is no parte of heauenly doctrine more necessarie in this dayes of so many intricate controuersies of Religion then diligently to searche out which amonge all the socities of men in the worlde is that blessed companie of holy ones that housthold of faithe that spouse of Christ and Church of the liueing God which is the piller and grownde of truthe That see they may embrace her communion followe her directions and rest in her Iudgment Hitherto the wordes of this Protestant Doctor by which is euidently concluded the moste certayne truthe of those two Propositions in the Argument before But to auoyde all friuolous obiections and distinctions of these men concerninge the Church generall particular triuÌ„phant militant c. Hee playnely affirmeth that this supreame and infallible iudge is the present militant Church in tymes of controuersies as is demonstrated by this his words Which amonge all the societies of men in the worlde is that blessed companie of holy ones c. Where his words societies of men and in the worlde are manifest testimonie that hee assigneth the present militant Church on earthe and no other to haue this supreame and infallible authoritie and Iudgment to decide controuersies which is alsoe proued by all the rest of the Protestant citations in this chapter hereafter And if their words were not so cleare that they cannot bee wrested otherwise yett the Question it selfe doth make it manifest for all the faithfull people that euer were and be now in many thowsands deceased out of this life cannot now be assembled in a Cowncell to giue sentence And much lesse can they that are not yett borne be so gathered together to pronownce Iudgment and yett all this belonge vnto and ar or shall bee members of the vniuersall Churche further this is conuinced by his cited words That householde of faith which cannot bee possibly ment but onely of the militant Church For in the triumphant Church seeing God in himselfe and truely and perfectly knoweinge without beleefe all sacred misteries faith as the Apostle saith is euacuated in them and turned into knowledge and as for those that ar not yett borne though hereafter in their time ordayned they at truely to beleeue yett now they neither haue faith nor knowledge of any thinge nor any other qualitie or any being at all Thirdly this is euident also in his laste words Embrace her communion followe her directions and rest in her Iudgment Which Protestants will not and cannot meane of the triumphant Churche and by no possibilitie can either bee vnderstoode or verefied of the true beleeuers to come hereafter and not yett produced into this life for this as yett haueing no essence or beeinge for themselues can haue no communion giue no directions nor pronownce Iudgment for vs now extant to embrace and followe And this is inuincibly further proued in the Arguments followeinge Therefore secondely I argue thus That which hath Authoritie in controuersies of Religion to define what is true and good to ouerrule all inferiour and particular Iudgments and bynde all men to beleeue and embrace the definitions thereof must needs bee of Infallible Iudgment and haue the supreame and highest power to commaunde and no man to disobey yt But the true Churche of Christ is such Therefore it hath Infallible Iudgment the highest power on earth and may not bee disobeyed but in all thinges to bee obeyed by all people The maior proposition is euidently true for Authoritie is to bee obeyed by all subiects otherwise it were not authoritie And there were non to commaunde non to bee obedient And definitions in matters of faithe as they must bee moste certayne vndoubted and infallible as euery article of faithe is and of necessitie must needs bee So they ar as firmely to bee beleeued and professed except wee will bee Hereticks and obstinately incur damnation The seconde proposition is thus proued by D. Couell who writeth of the Church in this Couell def of hooke pag. 30. wordes That whiâ—h by her ecclesiasticall authoritie shee shall probably thinke and define to bee true or good must in congruitie of reason ouer rule all other inferiour Iudgments whatsoeuer And to them that out of a singularitie of their owne aske vs why wee thus hange our Iudgments on the Churches sleeue wee answere with Sâ—lonion â—wo ar better then one For euen in matters of lesse moment it was neuer thought safe to neglect the Iudgment of manye and rashlie to followe the fancye and opinion of some fewe Hitherto this Protestant doctor directly proueinge the second proposition for which hee is cited which also is confirmed by the Arguments followinge Thirdly I argue thus whatsoeuer hath authoritie from Christ to approue the scriptures to bee a speciall grownde in the matter of scriptures to publishe and commaund to her children in Matters of Religion is the higest Iudge and of Infallible Iudgment But the true Churche of Christ is such Therefore it is the highest Iudge and infallible in Iudgment The Maior proposition is euidently proued and confessed before and of all men cannot bee excepted against by Protestants commonly attributeing the highest and consequently infallible Iudgement to the scriptures for if they haue their allowance and Infallibilitie soe much as belongeth vnto vs and our knowledge from the authoritie and approbation of the Churche The Church so giueing them allowance and warrant of Infallibilitie must needs bee as much or more Infallible at leaste concerninge vs in which maner wee dispute accordeinge to that Rule of Logicke Propter quod vnumquodque tale illud magis That which is the cause why any thinge is so is rather so it self Which is euident thus in this case For if the scriptures so much as appertayneth to our knowledge haue not approbation and Infallibilitie of truthe but at they at approued and published for such by the Churche This Church which so giueth them such allowance and warrant of Infallibilitie must needs likewise bee infallible which thoughe it needeth not confirmation being iustified by a Maxime in the light of nature may yett for Protestants bee further made manifest by the Protestant Author of the Assertion who to proue the ministery of
argue thus all those Bookes which Protestants in their authorised communion booke and bookes of Honolyes allowed by their conuocation and parlament and our Kinge doe prescribe to be vsed as canonicall scriptures as well as others and are so cited and practized ought to be receaued and allowed for canonicall But those Bookes which they denie and Catholicks receaue for canonicall are suche Therefore they ought to admitt them into the Canon of Holy scriptures The Maior proposition is euident for bookes Rules lawes and directions proposed by true authoritie as those be supposed of Protestants ar to be obeyed and followed The Minor proposition is likewise l. 1. homel l. 2. homel Artic. 25. Communion B. Tabl. direct of seruice Suruey of the Booke of comm prayer pag. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. Petit of 22. Preach exc ag hom and except 4. ag comm Booke Articl of Relig. Articul 6. moste certaine for their bookes of Homelyes receaued in the 25. Article of their Religion doe ordinarily so cite them and their Communion booke so termeth and vseth them too often to be alleadged in this place Whereuppon to be breife the Protestant Author of the Suruey of the booke of Common prayer affirmeth playnelye and often vrdgeth it That the Protestants of England must approue with the Romane Churche these bookes for canonicall So likewise doe the 22. preachers of London in their petition If any man shall Answeare that the Articles of their Religion exclude them from the canon of the scripture and so they cannot be saide to receaue them I answeare him againe that this is so farre from freeinge them in this point that it both excludeth them defineing and embraceing so contradictorie doctrines in so important busines from all hope of truthe and further proueth that these men buildeing all vppon scriptures haue either no scriptures at all or els such doubtfull vncertaine and vnresolued scriptures that true Religion which must be moste assured and infallible cannot be grownded or mayntayned by them For proofe whereof I will first recite their subscribed Article in this question and then frame my Argument Their Article is sett downe in these Articl of Rel. articul 6. definitiue wordes Holy scripture conteineth all thinges necessarie to saluation so that whatsoeuer is not read therein nor may be proued thereby is not to be required of any man that it should be beleeued as an Article of the faithe or be thought requisite or necessarie to saluation In the name of holy scripture wee doe vnderstand those canonicall Bookes of the old and new testament of whose authoritie was neuer any doubt in the Churche Of the first part of this Article I am to entreate in my chapter of Traditions hereafter Of the later part I will speake in this place onely first admonisheing my Readers in what ample maner D. Feild and others of that Religion Feild l. 3. c. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. pag. 60. 62. 63. 64. c. Feild l. 3. Titul c. 1. 2. take this worde the Churche for breuiate whereof the Titles of the first and seconde chapters of his third booke be these Of the diuision of the Christian worlde into the Greeke Latine Armenian Aethiopian and Nestorian Churches c. 1. of the harshe and vnaduised Censure of the Romanists condemninge all these Churches as Scismaticall and Hereticall cap. 2. Now this supposed I argue thus No bookes whose authoritie haue at any time beene doubted of in the Churche are by this Protestant Article to be allowed for Canonicall scriptures But all bookes that either Protestants or Catholicks receaue for canonicall haue in the Iudgment of these Protestants beene doubted of in the Church Therefore by these Protestants there be no canonicall scriptures at all The Maior proposition is euidently proued by their recited article defineing those bookes canonicall of whose authoritie was neuer any doubt in the Churche The Minor proposition is directly proued by D. Willet who writeth Willet Synop quaest 1. of scripture pag. 2. 3. edit An. 1594. and after published againe directly and at large how euery booke both of the old and new testament haue not onely beene doubted of but also denyed in this their Churche I suppose the laste edition of his booke was since the commeing in of his Maiestie my prescribed time otherwise it is so directly there proued by him that no Protestant can deny it And to shew the pitifull case of this their Protestant Article and Religion their Protestant Bishop of Wincester D. Bilson suru pag. 664. Bilson within my limitation writeth thus The scriptures themselues were not fully receaued in all places no not in Eusebius time Hee saith the Epistle of Iames of Iude the second of Peter the seconde and third of Iohn ar contradicted The Epistle to the Hebrues was contradicted the Churches of Syria did not receaue the seconde epistle of Peter nor the seconde and third of Iohn nor the Epistle of Iude nor the Apocalipse the like might be saide for the Churches of Arabia Will you hence conclude that these partes of scripture were not Apostolicke or that wee neede not receaue them now because they were formely doubted of Therefore the Protestants of England haue no certayne and vndoubted scripture if they will stand to their suscribed Articles and their owne subscription Which this Protestant Bishop before seeing the absurditie thereof hath refused to doe Therefore they may not as they doe denie those other bookes which Catholicks admitt vppon so greate and highest warrants before in Protestants Iudgment because in former tymes they haue beene doubted of as those laste recited by the testimonie of their Bishop and all the rest as D. Willet hath wittnessed haue beene To these I might add more Arguments from these Protestants true Greeke Churche and the generall Councell of Florence both allowed by some of these writers and yet alloweing and warranting for canonicall all bookes receaued by Catholicks And other Arguments by them but these ar sufficient for this matter at this time And as demonstration is made that these Protestants either haue no true scriptures at all or not the true Canon of holy scriptures So it is as euident that their Religion cannot be proued true and infallible as true Religion is by euidences that in their proceedings ar doubtfull fallible or no holy canonicall scriptures but by them excluded from that number and sacred Canon CHAPTER V. OF THE INTEGRITIE AND excellencie of the Latine vulgare translation of scriptures vsed in the Romane Church and Protestants false corrupt and erroneous Translations in their owne Iudgment and Censure NOW lett vs entreate of the vulgare Latine translation of holy scriptures handled in the next Chapter for whose allowance by these Protestants I argue by them in this maner That Latine Translation of scriptures which is to be vsed in scholes and pulpits and for antiquitie to be preferred before all others was vsed in the Church thirteene hundred yeares agoe by S. Augustine preferred
thinke be plurall That whosoeuer by their Interpretations should allowe such absurdities cannot haue the true interpretation of scriptures Now the Minor is easely proued by him also for all men are bownde to obey lawfull superioritie and authoritie such as hee saith a generall Councell hath ouer all Christians in these cases his wordes before cited be these They that haue supreame Feild l. 4. â— 16. pag. 228. power that is the Bishops assembled in a generall Councell may interpret the scripture and by their authoritie suppresse all them that shall gaynesay such Interpretations and subiect euery man that shall disobey such determination as they consent vppon to excommunication and Censures of like nature Wherefore seing generall Councells haue this bindeing and commaundeing power ouer all men by these Protestants and yet by their Article before may erre and haue Art 21. sup erred euen in things pertayning vnto God the whole Christian worlde with so many absurdities may be in this damnable error the Church might cease not be Catholicke Christ Feild pag. 203. should be without a Church which D. Feild before esteemeth greate absurdities Againe thus I argue They which straungely peruert bely depraue abuse and falsefye holy scriptures cannot be thought to be true interpreters of them But M. Parkes so testifieth of our Parkes ag lymbom def of the 1. 2. 3. testim English Protestants Therefore they cannot be thought to be true Interpreters of them Notheing remaineth in this Argument to be proued Further I argue thus No Interpreters or expositors of scripture whose Interpretations be partiall vntrue seditious sauoureing of Treason poysen the Ghospell c. are to be Iudged true and Iuridicall But the English Protestants hy their owne testimonyes be such Therefore not to be iudged true and iuridicall interpreters The Maior is true and euident And the Minor thus proued first by the Protestant Confer at Hampt pag. 47. conference in these wordes The notes annexed to the Geneua translation some are very partiall vntrue seditious and sauoureing toâ— much of daungerous and trayterous conceits Yet these were allowed and published as publicke and approued interpretations An other Protestant writeth in this maner The Bishops Aduerment An. 1604. notes betray our Lord and Redeemer and befoole the rocke of saluation they are the verie poyson to all the Ghospell M. Ormerod writeth thus of his fellowe Ormer pict purit q. 4. Protestants They fill the margents of their bookes full of places of scripture in a wronge sense that by this meanes they might more easely deceaue the simple people They neither care for Maior Minor nor Conclusion so they may say some thinge They point their margents with shamefull abuseing of scripture To these I might add more arguments as that by their owne testimonies they are Hereticks Scismaticks haue no ttue Churche no true Religion and the like as amonge other reasons from themselues why Catholiks may not communicate with them in spirituall and religeous affayres is proued in a late treatise against them I will therefore passe them ouer as allready proued CHAPTER VII WHEREIN BY THESE PROtestants is proued that vnwritten traditions lawfully proued are the word of God equally as the holy scriptures That many such are and all confirme the doctrine of the Church of Rome and condemne Protestants Religion AFTER this entreateinge of holy scriptures the written worde of God lett vs come to that parte of his sacred worde delyuered by traditions and vnwritten verities preserued and proposed to faithfull Christians by the holy spouse and Church of Christ whose Iudgment Rule and direction is so dignified aboue all Inferiour Iudgments by these Protestants before Concerninge the validitie and authoritie of truely proued traditions I argue thus All Rules Groundes and Authorities in matters of Religion that are equall with holy scriptures in the Iudgment of Protestants the highest Rule in such causes are â—eghely to be reuerenced and obeyed of all Christians But the holy traditions and vnwritten verities deliuered by Christ and Apostles being lawfully proued are of this nature Therefore to be reuerenced embraced and receaued The Maior proposition is euidently true for where there is absolute equalitie there is not inferioritie but paritie as is manifest in all equalities The Minor is thus proued in this maner first M. Wotton speakeing of such hath these Wotton def of Perk. pag. 405. pag. 436. supr words out of all question wee are bounde to keepe them and telleth vs that M. Perkins was of the same opinion D. Feild speaketh thus concerninge traditions In this question by tradition wee vnderstand such partes of Christian doctrine or Feild pag. 238. l. 4. cap. 20. discipline as were not written by them by whomâ— they were first deliuered For thus our Aduersaries vnderstand traditions which they diuide into diuers kindes First in respect of the authors so makeing them of three sortes Diuine Apostolicall and Ecclesiasticall Secondly in respect of the matter they concerne in which respect they make them to be of two sortes for either they concerne matters of faiâ—he or matters of manners and these later againe either temporall or perpetuall vniuersall or particular All these in their seuerall kindes they make equall with the words precepts and doctrines of Christ the Apostles and pastors of the Church left vnto vs in writeinge Neither is there any reason why they should not so doe if they could proue any such vnwritten verities For it is not the writeing that giueth things their authoritie but the worthe and credit of him that deliuereth them though by worde and lyuely voyce onely Thus the authoritie of Traditions is iustified by Protestants to be equall with the scriptures if they can be proued Now because Protestants mayntayneinge the sufficiencie of scripture for matters of faith deny traditions of that nature I argue in this maner All Articles and matters of faith are in Protestants Iudgment proued and deliuered to vs by tradition Therefore some articles and matters of faith are in their Iudgment or so must be graunted to be deliuered by tradition The consequence is euident for euery generall proposition includeth the particular The Antecedent is thus proued by them Whosoeuer doe graunte those things which by them conteyne all matters and Articles of faith to be delyuered by tradition must needs allowe traditions in matters of faith But these Protestants doe so Therefore they must allowe such traditions The Maior is euident for whatsoeuer conteineth all excludeth none and so comprehending all comprehendeth also some and the parts of that all The Minor is likewise proued in this maner supposeing the Common opinion of these Protestants set downe in the sixt Article of their Religion Articl of Relig. art 6. in these wordes Holy scripture conteyneth all things necessarie to saluation so that whatsoeuer iâ— not reade thâ—rein nor may be proued thereby is not to be required of any man that it should be beleeued as an Article of the
rash and inconsiderate holdenes and presumption in condemninge the vniuersall Church of Christ hee was iustely condemned For the practise of the Churche at that time was not euill in any of these things neither doe wee concurre with Aerius in the reprehension of that primatiue and auncient Churche What was this practise of the primatiue Church concerning the deade for deniall whereof Aerius was condemned as D. Feild hath told vs I will recite from other Protestants M. Middleton assureth vs thus Middleton papistom pag. 64. 45. 46. 51. 47. 48. 49. S. Chrisostome taught it to be the Apostles ordinance to pray for the deade it was a tradition in the primatiue Church receaued from the fathers to pray for the deade and begg mercie of God for them The deade were prayed for in the publicke liturgies of Hull Rom. pole pag. 86 Morton Apol. part 1. pag. 273. Basile Chrisostome and Epiphanius The Churche in Epipbanius time vsed to craue mercye for the deade M. Hull saith Leo 15 Leo the pope appointed Masses for the deade D. Morton citeth from Caluine this ipsi veteres preces fundebant pro defunctis The auncient fathers prayer for the deade And to giue finall content to D Feild the sentence of his true Greeke Church is Gennad Schol. def 5. cap. 3. this The doctrine of purgatorie prayer and sacrifice for the deade was a Tradition of the Apostles That which the Latines call Purgatorie they of the Greeke Church name Catharteâ—ion They were onely Scismaticorum sectatores followers of Scismaticks which denied it The seing Protestants doe ordinarily teach that prayer for the deade is not conteyned either expressely or deducebly in scriptures it must needs be by tradition for denyall of which tradition Aerius was condemned of Heresie and the vniuersall Church at that time by D. Feild taught prayer for the deade for hee telleth vs that Aerius in his opinion contemned the vniuersall Church of Christ and so must D. Feild confesse of himself and his fellowe Protestants if they deny this to be a Tradition as they haue denyed the Bookes of Machabees where this veritie is taught to be caconicall scriptures to gaynesay this primatiue and Catholick doctrine And from hence thus I argue againe by the Rule of S. Augustine allowed by D. Feild whatsoeuer the whole Church holdeth not Feild l. 4. c. 21. pag. 242. being decreed by the authoritie of Councells but hauing beene euer holden may rightly be thought to haue proceeded from Apostolicke authoritie But the Catholicke doctrine of prayer and sacrifice for the deade is such by the testimonie of these Protestants Therefore a tradition from the Apostles by these Protestants The Maior consisteth of the verie wordes of S. Augustine as they be translated and allowed by D. Feild in this maner Feild pag. 241. Hauing sett downe the kindes and sortes of traditions it remayneth to examine by what meanes wee may come to discern and by what rules wee may Iudge which are true and Indubitate traditions The first rule is deliuered by S. Augustine Quod vniuersa Aug. l. 4. cont Donatist cap. 23. tenet ecclesia nec concilijs institutum sed semper retentum est non nisi authoritate apostolica traditum rectissimè creditur Englished by D. Feild as in the Maior proposition where rectissimè creditur is moste rightly beleeued hee hath translated may rightly be thought The Minor proposition is proued before by these Protestants in teacheing this doctrine to haue beene the doctrine of the vniuersall Church resisted by Aerius and also that it was an Apostolicke tradition which all Protestants of England must needs graunt vnto by S. Augustines and D. Feilds first Rule before for by their proceedings they are so far from graunteing that this doctrine is defined by Councells and by that title to be embraced That they playnely teach in the Articles of their Religion the definition of a generall Councell in matters of faith not taken out of scriptures as they teach this is not is nothing worthe The Articl of Relig. art 21. wordes of their Article be these Things ordeined by generall Councells as necessarie to saluation haue neither strength nor authoritie vnlesse it may be declared that they be taken out of holy scripture Hitherto their subscribed article And that this is a thinge necessarie to saluation must needs also be yeelded vnto by these Protestants telling vs before both that Aerius was condemned of Heresie for denying it as also that Heresie is arror in some fundamentall point Couâ—ll sup which must needs be necessarie to saluation My next Argument shall be taken from the next Rule of D. Feild to knowe true traditions and my Maior proposition shall be his verie wordes thus next followeing The second Rule is whatsoeuer all or the Feild supr pag. 242. moste famous and renowned in all ages or at the leaste in diuers ages haue constantly deliuered as receaued from them that went before them no man contradicting or doubting of it may be thought to be an Apostolicall Tradition But the Catholicke doctrine of prayer for the deade praying to Saincts single life of the cleargie especially in the Latine Church and others in their proper place to be proued such by these Protestants are in this state Therefore by Protestants they be Apostolicke traditions The Maior is the very sayinge and sentence of D. Feild before and the Minor concerning prayer for the deade also before allowed by these Protestants the others are to be proued in their order this now sufficeth The first proposition for my next Argument shall be D. Feilds third and laste Rule to knowe true and indubitate traditions and is deliuered by him in these wordes The third Rule is the constant testimonie Feild supr l. 4. c. 21. pag. 242. of the pastors of an Apostolicke Church successiuely delyuered But prayer for the deade c. is so proued by such testimonie therefore an Apostolicke tradition The maior is D. Feild sentence And the Minor is before proued by these Protestants for if the vniuersall Church as before by them consented is this veritie not onely one Apostolicke Church sufficient for his Rule but all did consent vnto it otherwise it could not be said the doctrine of the vniuersall Church And of all Churches Apostolicke there can be no question with Protestants bur the Church of Rome euer taught thus and D. Field hath told vs before that Feild l. 4. c. 5. pag. 202. amongst Apostolicke Churches the Church of Rome is more specially to be obeyed reuerenced and respected Further thus I argue whatsoeuer thinges are either approued by these Protestants themselues for true and indubitate traditions or allowed by them that the primatiue Church and fathers receaued for such are to haue that allowance But the signe of the crosse mixture of water with wine in the Eucharist reuerence of holy Imadges and Relicks sacrifice and prayer for the deade vowes of chastitie and single life of
of his nature is righteousnes onely mans transgression syn Which might also be sufficient for an other Argument for if onely transgression of the lawe is synne and vniustice then good workes the keeping of the lawe must needs be Iustice And in an other place thus the same Author speaketh of prayer a part of good workes Prayer is the best meanes both to Couell modest examinat pag. 176. testifie our dutifull affection and moste effectuall to obtayne whatsoeuer wee wanting can desire at Gods hands D. Sutcliffe thus commendeth this good worke By prayers wee obtaine remission of Sutcliff ag D. Kellison pag. 72. 73. sins By prayers wee obtayne Gods grace And yet it is euident euen in Protestants doctrine that they which haue remission of syns and Gods grace are iust and righteous in their phrase of speakeinge Good deeds done in grace meretoreous by English Protestants Now that good deeds done in grace are also meritorious thus I argue Whatsoeuer is rewarded rewardable bindeth an other to giue for it was by antiquitie and now also properly called meritt is meritorious But good workes done in grace are such Therefore they are meritorious The Maior is euident And the Minor thus proued first by D. Couell which speaketh thus That Couell def of Hooker pag. 51. 52. workes of perfection to which wee are not bownde haue greater reward then keeping of the precepts Then bothe the one and other must needs haue their reward the one greate and the other greater and consequently be so meretorious and deserueing for euen in our vulgare language and proprietie of speache reward is not but where deserueing is signifyeing a Retribution or payeing againe for a thinge Againe the same Protestant Doctor writeth thus in Coueli sup pag. 40. 44. playne termes Rewards doe allwayes presuppose such duties performed as are rewardable It was the phrase of Antiquitie to call our vertuous attaynment by the way of meritt The phrase of the Latine doth properly make one to meritt of an other and as it were to binde him to him who doth any thinge which pleaseth and delighteth him for whome it is done Which sufficiently proueth that second proposition And from this graunt this matter is thus further demonstrated by their Articles to which they haue all subscribed Articl of Relig. Articl 12. where it is thus defined good workes which are the fruites of faith ar pleaseing and acceptable to God in Christ Vppon which words good workes doe please God their publick glosse is in these Rogers in art 12. prâ—pos 1. pag. 53. words God hath commaunded them to be done and requireth righteousnes not onely outward of the body but also inward of the mynde and hath appointed for the vertuous and godly rewards both in this life and in the world to came and to the wicked punishments spirituall corporall and of body and soule eternall in the pitt of Hell And for this doctrine cite these scriptures Matth. 5. 16. Ioh. 15. 12. Phil. 2. 14. c. 1. Thess 4. 3. c. 2. Tim. 2. 19. Iames 2. Matth. 5. 22. 26. c. And all these Protestant Confessions Heluetia Basile Boheme Fraunce Belgia Ausburge Saxonie Wittemb Sueue Therefore wee need not be doubtfull of it by Protestant proceedings But to make it further and without all exception moste apparantly true I further argue in this maner That which was taught by the true primatiue Church in this point is true doctrine But meritt of good workes was then taught by it Therefore it is true doctrine The Maior is euident before And the Minor is proued thus by these Protestants D. Morton from Caluyn acknowledgeth Morton apolog part 1. pag 275. 276. Couell modest exam pag. 120. Sutcliff subuers pag. 50. that the word meritt was vsed of the Auncient Fathers in obtayning rewarde D. Couell assureth vs thus Diuers both of the Greeke and Latine Church taught freewill meritts and inuocation of Saincts as Catholicks doe D. Sutcliff telleth vs that within the first 600. yeares time of truth with him and other Protestants the doctrine of meritts and good deeds was taught And M. Wotton acknowledgeing that the auncient Fathers vsed the name of meritt in this question concludeth thus The doctrine of meritts as it was held and taught by the auncient Christians wee acknowledge and embrace Therefore seeing Protestants as M. Wotton generally Wotton def of Perk. pag. 339. vndertaketh in their name acknowledg for true the doctrine of the Fathers concerning meritts and as before by Protestants the Fathers and the present Romane Church agree in this poynt Protestants also must subscribe vnto them And not to make these Protestants singular in this consent I will add M. Bell to their number hee Bell tryall of the new Religion cap. 9. writeth thus True it is I freely graunt that the holy Fathers doe often vse the word meritt and doe often call the workes of the faithfull meretorious And doth not onely yeeld that to be worthie and meretorious is all one but that such workes of the faithfull are rewarded with heauen I Argue againe in this order workes that are rewarded in heauen may or ought to be done in respect of reward and bringe a speciall worthines vnto the workers of them are meretorious But the good deeds of Christians done in grace be such Therefore they are meretorious The Maior is euident before both by the description of reward by the graunt of Protestants and in respect that M. Bell last cited hath assured vs that to be worthie and to be meretorious is all one The Minor is thus proued first M. Ormerode writeth thus You meaning Catholicks Ormerod paganopapis pag. 53. doe notoriously slaunder vs Protestants beareing the world in hand wee teach that none ought to doe good in respect of reward be it knowne vnto you wee are farre from teacheing that a man ought not to doe good in respect of reward M. Wotton hath these words God will reward the Wotton def of Perk. pag. 302. pag. 334. leaste good worke of any of his children And agayne They that are iustified shall haue a speciall worthynes in themselues when they shall come to receaue their inheritance because they shall be truly and fully sanctified Where not onely a reward is graunted to good workes but that they make the doers of them meritinge and worthy of their eternall inheritance and that this worthynes is caused by grace and Iustice whereby they are iustified and bringe forth workes of such worthe value and deserueinge And to cleare further this name of reward which some of them would violently wrest from the true and proper meaneing thereof in this question Thus I argue againe whatsoeuer is so effectuall that reward or stipend cannot be denyed vnto it without iniustice is meretorious But good workes done in grace are such Therefore they are meretorious The Maior is manifest for that which is due by iustice is due by Title and
ensue Transsubstantiation the Sacrifice of Masse worshipping of Imadges Iustification by workes the supreamacie of the Pope prohibition of Marriadge in the cleargie which hee calleth the grossest points of popery Hee addeth also an equalitie of Bishops onoly approueth the Hebrue scripture Iustification by faith and disliketh free will These bee all their Exceptions neither doth the Booke of Articles of their Religion make mention of any other much materiall except Sacraments whereof hereafter then either such as I haue allreadie handled or bee comprised in these Cataloges Allthough all in these remembred are not the doctrine of the Parlament Protestant Church of England But Additions and new Inuentions of particular Puritanes as D. Willets Hebrue scriptures equalitie of Bishops c. In which excepting that which I haue spoken of the scriptures before consonant to the Councell of Trent I must leaue him to bee censured as a periured man hauing sworne to their Articles by their owne Religion lawes and proceedings For the rest most of them bee proued by themselues before as Popes supremacie Indulgences Imadges Iustification by workes or inherent Iustice not onely by faith and free will All the others I am now to examine And first of Transsubstantiation and Christs reall presence in the blessed Eucharist Because it comprehendeth as well this maner of Christs presence and a true Sacrifice as they all graunt vppon proofe of that veritie as the question also of D. Sutcliffs termed half communion For if Christ bee substantially truly and wholly present in both kinds Then it is not an half but whole communion and receauing of Christ for hee must needs bee equally receaued and participated vnder the one as vnder boâ—h kindes and formes according D. Thom. 3. p q. 80. ar 3. Gabr. lect 84. Ric. d. 11. Caiet 3. p. q 3. ar 3. Sot d 12. q. 1. ar 12. pet Sot lect 20. Euchar Lâ—des Claud. de Saincts Ruard alij to the common opinion of schooles aswell longe before the Councell of Constance as after teaching that no more fruite is communicated and giuen to the Receauers and Communicants by both then by one kinde this supposed I Argue thus in this Question Whatsoeuer doctrine the highest binding authoritatiue and commaunding Iudgment which by these Protestants before is a generall Councell hath determined defined concluded is to bee embraced and mayntained But the doctrine of Christs reall presence and Transsubstantiation is such Therefore to bee embraced and maintayned The Maior is euident and often graunted by many of these Protestants among whome D. Feild writeth thus The Bishops assembled in a generall Councell may interpret Feild l. 4. c. 16. the scripture and by their authoritie suppresse all them that shall gayne say such Interpretations and subiect euery man that shall disobey such determinations as they consent vppon to excommunication and censures of like nature The Minor is also proued Couell defof Hook pag. 21 Parkes against Limbom pag. 176. Tom. â— CoÌ„cil in Concil Later Bergam hist an 1213. Genebr hist an 1215. Palmer Floren. chron an 1215. Concil Lateran cap. 1. by them directly in this maner for first both D. Couell and M. Parkes cite and allow the Councell of Laterane as a Rule of faith And hauing present in it the Patriarkes of Greece Constantinople and Hierusalem 70. Metropolitanes 400. Bishops and other Fathers aboue 800. together with the Legates both of the Greeke and Romane Empire with the Orators of the Kings of Hierusalem Fraunce Spayne England so especially binding vs and Cyprus I trust the rest of them cannot deny it to bee generall if euer any was so termed this beeing farr the greatest that euer was in the worlde now that it defined Christs reall presence in the blessed Sacrament is euidently demonstrated by these expresse words of the Councell graunted by Protestants Verum Christi Corpus Sanguis in Sacramento altaris sub speciebus panis vini veraciter continetur transsubstantiatis pane in Corpus vino in Sanguinem potestate diuina The true bodie and blood of Christ is truely conteyned in the Sacrament of the altare vnder the formes of breade and wyne the breade beeing transsubstantiated into his bodie and the wine into his blood by the diuine power Therefore all English Protestants are Feild l. 4. c. 16. suppressed by D. Feilds sentence before from gayne saying it And to shew further that this was no new and straunge doctrine then first held and defined but of the auncient primatiue Fathers thus I argue againe in this question Whosoeuer held that there is in this Sacrament a conuersion mutation of one thinge into an other and not in shape but in nature that breade is made Christs bodie that the visible creatures are chaunged into the substance of Christs body blood c. Doe and must needs graunt transsubstantiation and Christs reall presence in the B. Sacrament But the auncient Fathers doe this Therefore they teach and graunt Transsubstantiation The Maior is euident those termes beeing equiualent with transsubstantiation and seme the verie same both in effect and name The Minor is proued by M. Perkins in these Perkins probl pag. 153. 154. words The Auncients when they speake of the supper haue many formes of speache which shew a conuersion Ambrose vseth the name of conuersion and the name of mutation Ciprian saith it is chaunged not in shape but in nature Origen saith that breade is made the body by prayer Gaudentius saith Christs bodie is made of breade and his blood of wyne Eusebius Emissenus saith that the Preist by secret power doth chaunge the visible creatures into the substance of Christs bodie and blood And that the breade doth passe into the nature of our Lords bodie Anselmes saith that the breads doth flitt into Christs bodie Fulbertus saith it is transfused Algerus saith it is transiected and transferred into Christs bodie Hitherto this Protestants words of those auncient Fathers doctrine in this point to which hee might haue added many more and more conuincing But hee knew these too many and manifest against them as appeareth by this his friuolous glosse vppon their expresse sentences confounding and confuting himself in his owne words which bee these But the Auncient Doctors where they speake of the conuersion and chaunge of the breade they vnderstand the chaunge of the vse and condition not of the substance What man but impudent and voide of all shame and grace would Father vppon so many holy and renowned Learned Fathers so grosse equiuocation or rather flatt lyinge to speake one thinge and meane an other as hee speaketh and this in so cheefe and materiall article of Faith and Religion wherein not the least equiuocation may bee vsed if it could saue the life of thousands or millions of men And to confound this Sacramentarie by his owne fellowes First D. Feild Feild pag. 150. writeth thus The bodie of Christ is present in and with the sanctified Elements The primatiue Church