Heathens Pagans and infidells And in his Apology for the Switzers Churches he defineth Schisme to be a separation from the rest of the body of the Catholike Church Zanchius also in his treatise of the Church cap. 7. reacheth that Schismatikes are not in the Church And suâ—us in his 3. booke of the Church c. 5. approueth the fame of such Schismatikes as separate themselues from the whole Church The strangers in England writing to Beza in the 24 epistle haue these words in their 13. article VVhosoeuer is lawfully excommunicated of a particuler Church or cutteth himselfe of vpon vnlawfull causes and with scandall in that doth loose all priuiledge of the Catholike Church And Beza answereth them in the name of the Church of Geneua in this manner Your thirteenth article we wholy receiue at most orthodoxall Casaubon in his 15. exercitation against Baronius num 6. It is an vndoubted truth that how often soeuer a pious flock is ioyned to a true Bishop there is a Church of God in so much that if any forsake that Church it cannot be doubted but that he is out of the Church Finally Chamier in his epistle to Armand excludeth Schismatikes out of the Church because sayth he they want the sincerity of the Sacraments English ProtestaÌ„ts Amongst our English Protestants his Maiesty in his foresayd epistle to Cardinall Peron All those testimonies of Augustin proue only this that there is no hope of saluation for those who leaue the Communion of the Catholike Church which the King willingly graunteth D. Whitaker in his 2. controuer 5. quest 6. cap. sayth It is false that hereticall and Schismaticall Churches be true Churches Againe The Catholike Church consisteth not of diuided but of vnited members And cap. 2 The true and Catholike Church is that which consisteth of Catholiks D. Fulke in his booke of the succession of the Church VVhat auailed it them to eternall saluation to haue byn sound in Religion and doctrine seing they were cut of from the Communion of the true Church in which alone saluation is and from her true head VVhat skilleth it whether one being drawne by heresy or Schisme from the body of Christ be subiect to euerlasting damnation D. Humfrey in his answere to the 3. reason of F. Campian VVe confesse that he is vndone who is separated from the followship of the Church And D. Feild in his first booke of the Church cap. 7 The name of the Catholike Church is applyed to distinguish men holding the sayth in vnity from Schismatiks And in his 2. booke c. 2. he sayth that Schismatikes are not Catholike Christians Thus we see how Protestants sometymes do teach that the true Church consisteth of Catholiks of members vnited not deuided that it hath no Schismes or Sects That Schismatiks are not Catholiks that their vnity is not true nor Catholike that their Churches ought to be forsaken that they are not vniuocally Churches nor true Churches that they are not members of the true Church but out of the Church altogeather out of the Church and actually neither of the visible nor inuisible Church and that this is an vndoubted truth which coÌ„fession of theirs must be well noted and kept in mind for thereby is ouerthrowne as we shall see in the 2. booke their only argument wherwith they endeauour to proue that their Church was before Luther and also is defaced their only essentiall mark of finding the true Church by the truth of doctrine For Schismatikes as we shall heare them confesse in the 2. booke hold true doctrine and neuertheles as here they acknowledge are not of the true Church They exclude those that deny any fundameÌ„tal article 5. In like manner they do commonly debarre from their Church all such as deny any principall or fundamentall point of fayth Melancthon in his booke of common places in the title of the Church They are not members of the Church who pertinaciously maintaine errours opposite to the foundation And in his answere to the Bauarian articles Saints may haue errours but not such as ouerthrow the foundation In his examen of those that are to take orders Agreement in the foundation LutheraÌ„s is a thing necessary to the vnity of the Church And vpon the 3. cap. of the 1. epistle to Timothy The foundation is held in the Church otherwise there should be no Church at all And in his 79. proposition tom 4 It is most certaine that those companies are not the Church of God who either are altogeather ignorant of the Ghospell or impugne some article of the foundation that is some article of fayth or doctrine of the decalogue or maintaine open idols Chemnitius in his common places pa. 3. title of the Church Neither can these be acknowledged for the true Church who imbrace fundamentall errours And the Lutherans in the conference at Ratisbon Ses 14. Hutter in his Analysis of the Confession of Auspurg Gesner in his 24. place Adam Francis in his 11. place and other Lutherans commonly agree that the Church cannot erre Fundamentally or in the Foundation And the Confession of Saxony giueth this note to know who are in the Church SacrameÌ„taries Those who hold the Foundation As for Sacramentaries Caluin in his 4. booke of Institutions cap. 2. num 1 So soone as a lye hath broken into the castle of Religion the summe of necessary doctrine is inuerted the vse of Sacraments is fallen certainly the destruction of the Church ensueth euen as a mans life is lost when his throat is cut or his vitall parts deadly wounded And soone after It is certaine that there is no Church where lyes and errour haue gotten to the toppe And cap. 19. num 17 VVithout doubt the Church of the faythfull must agree in all the heads of our Religion Sadeel in his answere to the Theses held at Posna cap. 12 I thinke the matter is thus to be defined by the word of God that if any in what Church soeuer dissent in the foundation of sayth and be obstinate in their errours such appertaine not to the vnity of the Church The like he hath in his answere to Arthure cap. 12. Vesinuâ— in his Catechisme quest 54. cap. 4 The whole Church erreth not nor wholly nor in the foundation Polanus in his Thesis of the Church sayth The Church erreth not in the foundation The same teacheth Zanchius in his treatise of the Church c. 7. Lubbertus in his 2. booke of the Church c 3. Vorstius in his Anti-bellarmin pag. 139. Bucanus in his 41. place and other Sacramentaries commonly And with them herein agree our English Protestants English ProtestaÌ„ts For thus sayth his Maiesty in his epistle to Cardinall Peron The Churches are vnited in vnity of sayth and doctrine in those heads which are necessary to saluation And D. Whitaker in the preface of his Controuersies The foundations of sayth are of that nature that one being shaken nothing in all religion remaineth sound And Contr. 2. quest 4. cap.
1 We say that the Church cannot erre in things simply necessary Which he often repeateth in the 2. cap. And quest 5. cap. 17 If any fundamentall doctrine be taken away the Church straight way falleth And cap. 18 The fundamentall articles are those on which our fayth relyeth as the house vpon the foundation Againe If any fundamentall and essentiall principle of fayth be ouerturned or shaken it cannot be truly called a Church And quest 6. cap. 3 That is no true Church which taketh away one only foundation The same he teacheth in his 1. booke of the scripture cap. 7. sect 8. and cap. 12. sect 3. M. Perkins in his explication of the Creed If any man or Church retaine or defend obstinatly or of willfull ignorance a fundamentall errour we must not account them anymore Christians or Churches D. Sutliue in his first booke of the Church cap. 1 Those blemishes take away the name of the true Church which are against the grounds of fayth D. Feild in his 2. booke of the Church cap. 3 Purity free from fundamentall and essentiall errour is necessarily required in the Church D. Morton in the 1. part o◠his Apology booke 2. cap 38 Purity of doctrine in fundamentall principles of fayth is required to the being and constitution of the Church And in his answere to the Protestants Apology l. 4. c. 3. Sect. 5 The deniall of fundamentall doctrines doth exclude men from saluation and disannulleth the name of the Church in the gainsayers D. White in his way to the Church pag. 110 VVe do not thinke euery company to be the true Church that holdeth only some points of the true fayth but it is requisite that the foundation be holden And in his defence of the way cap. 17 A fundamentall point is that which belongs to the substance of fayth and is so necessary that there can be no saluation without the knowledge and explicite fayth thereof And surely they all and at all tymes ought to affirme this seeing they deliuer truth of doctrine as an essentiall marke of the Church which they must needs vnderstand and so Vorstius in his Anti-bellarmin pag. 148. expresseth it of true doctrine in fundamentall points And this their doctrine touching this matter I earnestly commend to the memory of the Reader because it is necessary to find out what a Protestant is and also is one of the grounds whereby it may appeare that there was no Protestant Church before Luther because before him there was no company which held all the same fundamentall points of doctrine which Protestants do hold 6. Finally They exclude all that deny any article of fayth they sometyms shut out of their Church all those who deny any one point of fayth be it fundamentall or other For thus writeth the Apology of the Confession of Auspurge The Church of Christ is not among them who defend naughty opinions contrary to the Ghospell And Luther in his epistle to Count Albert It is not inough if in other things he confesse Christ and his Ghospell For who denieth Christ in one article or word denieth him who is denied in all because there is but one Christ Lutherās the same in all his words And vpon the 17. cap. of Deuteronomy Faith suffereth nothing and the word tolerateth nothing but the word must be perfectly pure and the doctrine alwayes sound throughout And vpon the 17. cap. of S. Matthew Fayth must be round that is belieuing all articles though small ones For who belieueth not one article rightly belieueth nothing righly as Iames sayth VVho offendeth in one is guilty of all and so who in one article doubteth or belieueth not at least obstinatly dissolueth the roundnes of the graine and so can do no good And vpon the 5. cap. to the Galathians In diuinity a small errour ouerthroweth all the doctrine Doctrine is like to a Mathematicall point it cannot be deuided that is it cannot suffer either addition or detraction And when Zuinglius and his followers desired of the Lutherans to be esteemed as their brethren Melancthon as Hospinian reporteth in his Sacramentarian history fol. 81. roughly sayd vnto them VVe meruaile with what conscience they can account vs for brethren whome they iudge to erre in doctrine And againe fol. 82. Luther grauely spake vnto them saying he greatly merueiled how they could hold him for a brother if they thought his doctrine to be vntrue And the same Melancthon togeather with Brentius writeth thus to the Lantgraue Perhaps Christians who are entangled in some errour which they do not obstinatly defend may be tolerated as brethren but they which not only bring false doctrine into the Church but also maintaine it are not to be acknowledged for brethren And againe Melancthon in his examen of those who are to take orders tom 3. There are in that company of the Church many who are not Saints but yet agreeing in doctrine The Deuines of Wittemberg in their refutation of the orthodoxall consent pag. 73 Like as he who keepeth the whole law and offendeth in one as Iames the Apostle witnesseth is guilty of all so who belieueth not one word of Christ albeit he seeme to beliue the other articles of the Creed yet belieueth nothing and is to be damned as incredulous For euery heretike did not impugne euery article of fayth but commonly each of them of purpose impugned some one or other whome neuertheles the Church iustly condemned as heretikes if they pertinaciously stood in their errours Schusselburg also in his 3. tom of the Catalogue of Heretiks pag. 85. Christian fayth is one copulatiue and who denieth one article of fayth calleth in doubt the whole body of the heauenly doctrine Which he repeateth againe in the next pag. And tome 8. pag. 361 The Lutherans do fly him who depraueth the doctrine of truth in any article whatsoeuer And in his 2. booke of Caluinisticall diuinity article 1 VVe are certaine by the testimony of Gods word that an errour in one false doctrine obstinatly defended maketh an heretike For S. Chrysostome vpon the epistle to the Galathians sayd most truly that he corrupteth the whole doctrine who ouerthroweth it in the least article And Ambrose wrote rightly to the Virgin Demetrias That he is out of the number of the faythfull and hath no part in the inheritance of Saints who disagreeth in any thing from the Catholike truth Sacramētaries Thus the Lutherans Peter Martyr in his epistle to the straungers in England tom 2. loc col 136 VVe answere all the words of God as farre forth as they proceeded from him are of equall waight and authority and therefore none may receiue this and reiect that as false Iames sayth boldly who sinneth in one becommeth guilty of all That if it haue place in keeping of the commandements is also true in points of fayth Sadeel in his index of Turriās Repetitions pag. 806 I sayd that it was no true Church which teacheth doctrine repugnant to the
that before Luthers tyme they seeke their Church in Popery and amongst the Papists 2. Secondly I prooue this same out of that which diuers tymes they graunt that the Roman Church holdeth all the fundamentall articles of fayth That Papists hold the foundation of fayth which themselues commonly teach as hereafter shall be shewed to suffice to make a Church Their Confession of Auspurg in the 21. chapter hath these wodrs This is almost the summe of doctrine among vs in which as it may seeme there is nothing which differeth from scripture or from the Catholike Church or from the Roman Church LutheraÌ„s so farre as it appeareth by writers All the dissention is about some few abuses which haue crept into Churches without certaine authority Whereby we see that the first and auncientest Protestants The suÌ„me of faith in Popeâ—y publikly professed that they differed not from the Roman Church in the summe of doctrine but that all their disagreement was about some few abuses And albeit the wordes be somewhat altered in the printed copies yet that they were in the originall copie which was presented to Charles 5. Emperour is manifest by Fabritius who repeateth them so out of that copie by Pappus in his 3 defence against Sturmius who so also reporteth them by Zanchius in his dispute between two Deuines where he repeateth these wordes out of the said Confession There is nothing in our doctrine which differeth from the church of Rome as far as it is knowne by writers and finally by Hieremias Patriarch of Constantinople in his censure vpon the said Confession it being sent vnto him by the Protestants where he thus writeth to them Yee say yee agree in all things with the Latins Cocleus anno 1â—28 VseÌ„berg causa 17. and that the difference betwixt you and them is only touching some abuses likwise Luther in his foresaid epist cont Anabap VVe confesse that in Popery is much good belonging to Christians yea all Christian good All ChristiaÌ„ good to wit that in Popery is the true Scripture true baptisme the true Sacrament of the altar the true keyes for remission of sinnes the true office of preaching the true Catechisme as the Lords prayer the ten commaundements and the articles of faith Whereupon Schusselburg in his 8. tome of the Catalogue of heretikes pag. 439. saith VVe deny not but that Luther sayd that all Christian goods are in Popery What was needfull to saluation and came from thence vnto vs Iohn Regius in his consideration of the censure c Albeit the Ministery of Papists be corrupted with many traditions and inuentions of men yet it had that which was necessary to saluation to wit the Canonicall scripture the Creed c. Leonard Crenâ—zen The bishop of Rome holdeth the same foundation of the Catholike faith 1. Cor. 3. The fouÌ„dation of Fayth which I and the Catholik Apostolik Church do acknowledge although there be some difference of opinions in certaine circumstances Thus the Lutherans Of the Sacramentaries SacrameÌ„taries Iunius in his 5. controuersy lib. 3. cap. 19. writeth thus of Papists Lutherans and Caluinists VVe agree in the essentiall foundation Essentiall foundation Zanchius in his foresayd preface In despite of the Diuell that Church of Rome hath kept the principall grounds of fayth Principall grounds of fayth Boysseul also in his forenamed confutation pag. 79 VVe acknowledge that it is pure in the cheife articles of Christian Religion And Vorstius in his Anti-bellarmin pag. 188. It is manifest that there are many in that company of Papists who rightly hold the fundamentall points The fundamentall points of our Religion And of the English Protestants his Maiesty in his monitory epistle pag. 148. plainly intimateth that Papists do stick vnto the auncient foundations of the old true Catholike and Apostolike fayth M. Hooker in his 3. booke of Ecclesiasticall policy pag. 128. sayth Touching those maine points of Christian truth wherein they constantly still persist English ProtestaÌ„ts we gladly acknowledge them to be of the family of Iesus Christ D. Whitaker in his 2. cont quest 5. cap. 14 Papists haue the Scripture Baptisme Catechisme the articles of fayth the ten commandments the Lords prayer The main points and those things came to vs from them D. Whitgift in his answere to the admonition pag. 40 Papistry confesseth the same articles of fayth that we do although not sincerely And pag. 62 Papists belieue the same articles of fayth that we do M. Perkins in the preface of his reformed Catholike By a reformed Catholike I vnderstand any one that holds the same necessary heads of Religion with the Roman Church The necessary heads yet so as he pares of and reiects all errours in doctrine whereby the sayd religion is corrupted D. Morton in his answere to the Protestants Apology lib. 3. cap. 18. sect 1 VVe may graunt that God may cooperate with them to the conuersion of Infidels The ghospell of saluation so far as the Ghospell of Christ which is the power of God to saluation is preached by them D. White in defence of his way cap. 38 In the substantiall articles of fayth we agree with them Lastly D. Hall in his foresayd booke sayth The substantiall articles that the Romane Church is one touching the common principles of fayth Those things which she holdeth together with vs make a Church As farre as she holdeth the foundation she is a church 3. Thirdly the same point is proued The articles which make a Church by that they graunt some to be saints whom they acknowledge also to haue liued and died Papists For of S. Bernards holines thus writeth Luther vpon the 4. cap. to the Galathians Bernard a man so holy pious chast c. The Apology of the Confession of Auspurg in the chapter of answere to the ArgumeÌ„ts Antony Bernard That they say some Papists be saints Francis Dominicke and other holy Fathers Brentius in his Apology for the Confession of Wirtenberg pag. 297 I iudge Bernard to haue byn a man indued with great piety and to liue now happily with Christ Caluin in his 4. booke of institutions c. 7. num 22 Gregory and Bernard holy men Vorstius in Anti-bellarmin pag. 181 VVe graunt Bernard indeed to haue byn pious Lubbert in his 6. booke of the church c. 7 VVe think Bernard to haue byn truly holy D. Whitaker cont 3. quest 5. c. 14 I take Bernard to haue byn holy indeed And D. Morton in his Apology part 2. lib. 2. c. 23 I confesse Bernard was a Saint And as plainly do they confesse that he was a Papist For thus Luther in the place now cited Let vs imagine that Religion and discipline of the ancient Popery to flourish now and to be obserued with that rigour with which the Eremits Hierome Augustin Bernard Francis and many others obserued it And in his booke of abrogating Masse Bernard Bonauenture Francis Dominicke with their
sooner giue him interest in the couenant then the child that is descended of him For how can the fathers beliefe lay hold on the promises and couenant of God for his children and cannot do it for himselfe 6. These allegations demonstrate The suÌ„mâ— of Protestants ConfessioÌ„ touching Papists that by the Confession of the Protestants the starkest Papists such as are of beliefe that the masse the Popes primacy and all things else of his are good vpright and of God are soldiers vnder Christ may attaine to saluation may be Saints yea that there are among them both many and great Saints That there is in the Church of Rome what so is necessary to saluation the summe of fayth the ground-works the essentiall ground-works the principall grounds of fayth the cheife articles the fundamentall heads the necessary heads the cheife parts the Ghospell of saluation the kernell of Christianity and all Christian good Lastly that the Church of Rome Is a limme and member of the vniuersall Church of the Catholike Church a member of the true Church and is of the family of Iesus Christ that it is mother to the children of God that it is the Church of God the temple of God the body of Christ the Spouse of Christ that it abides yet in the couenant is not yet cast of or put away is not yet killed but is yet aliue Which words plainly import that the Roman or Popish Church is a true Church in the sight of God 7. But is it credible Note that such as make profession of Christian religion should mount to that height of impiety as dare to reiect diuorce themselues from that Church which they confesse remaynes yet in the couenant of God which Christ hath not yet reiected Is it credible that they feare not to impugne to make bitter inuectiues to disgorge curses and execrations against her whom they acknowledge to be their Mother which bore them to Christ to be the Church of God to be the body and Espouse of Christ What can be more lewd and impious then to rage and raile against their owne mother against the Church of God against the very body and Espouse of Christ What strang and monstrous blindnes is it not to perceiue that whiles they confesse the church of Rome to be the church of God Espouse of Christ they acknowledge their owne to be the Synagogue of Antichrist and strumpet of the Diuell For Christ cannot haue two Espouses repugnant each to other Now the Protestant church and church of Rome are parts so opposite as can neuer make one For they iarre and disagree mainely in diuers weighty points as namely touching the canon and exposition of the Scripture touching sacrifice and the Sacraments touching the worship of God his Saints touching the meanes to obtaine remission of sinnes and many the like Whereupon Beza in Confes cap. 7. pag. 56 VVe dissent sayth he from the Papist about they very summe of saluatioÌ„ And others say no lesse as shall be shewed hereafter in the 2. booke and 6. cap If ours be true Religion sayth S. Augustin to the Donatists which yet came nearer to Catholiks then Protestants do yours is superstition Lib. 2. coÌ„t Gaud. c. 11. Againe If our communion be the Church of Christ yours is not Christs Church Lib. 1. de Bapt. c. 11. for that is but one which so euer it be And in another place VVhen they approue that Church which as is manifest we communicate with all and they do not by that their testimony they acknowledge themsâ—lues conuinced Lib. ad Donat post codat and giue you plaine notice if you be wise what you ought to forgoe and what it behoues you to cleaue to and retaine And S. Cyprian epistle 76 If the Church were on Nouatus side it was not with Cornelius Num. 4. 8. The Protestants now and then perceiue as much when they acertaine vs as hath byn shewed in the first chapter that who so seuereth himselfe from any particuler congregation which is a true Church excludes himselfe wholy from the church Caluin saw it when 4. Insti c. 2. § 10. he wrote thus VVe cannot graunt them Papists that they are the church but the necessity of subiectioÌ„ obedieÌ„ce will befall vs. If they be churches the power of the keyes is in their possession If they be churches that promise of Christ VVhatsoeuer ye bind on earth shall be bouÌ„d in heauen takes effect in them M. Perkins perceiued it to when in his explicatioÌ„ of the Creed col 794. he sayd Zanchiuâ— lib. 1. de Eâ—cl c. 7. As long as any church forsakes not Christ we may not withdraw our selues from it The reason is apparant because in so doing we should depart from Christ or Christ shold be parted euen as we are rent and disioynted from the church wherein he is And in his Reformed Catholike tract 22. col 470. Whâ—re he sayth VVe ought not to deuide our selues from any nation or people which hath not before cut it selfe of from Christ D. Feild likewise saw it in his 3. booke of the Church c. 47. Where he makes this acknowledgement Surely if he can proue that we confesse it the Church of Rome to be the true Church he needeth not vse any other argument But we haue clearely prooued it by sundry plaine confessions of many famous Protestants And hitherto we haue discouered how they sometyme harbour and receiue Papists into their church now we will shew that they vse the like curtesy towards the rest CHAP. III. That Protestants acknowledge for members of their Church sometyme those that deny as well fundamentall as other articles of their fayth sometymes Heretiks Schismatiks yea their profest and sworne enemies THAT they esteeme all such to be members of their Church as swarue from the Christian fayth only in points not fundamentall themselues in the preface of the Switzers Confession declare in these words Mutuall consent and agreement in the principall points of doctrine in orthodoxe sense and brotherly charity was of religious antiquity thought abundantly sufficient And D. Whitaker cont 4. quest 1. c. 2. pag. 527 God forbid that they should be no longer of the number of the faythfull who are in some points of a contrary opinion so they assent in the cheife and principall and necessary matters And for as much as the Protestants opinion herein is well knowne for whâ—Ì„ it is obiected vnto them that their churches disagree in points of fayth this serues them for excuse I think it needlesse to alleage any more of their sayings He that will may looke the Confession of Saxony cap. de Eccles Luther tom 7. lib. de not Eccles fol. 149. Melancthon tom 4. in ca. 3. 1. Cor. Kemnitius 1. part Examinis tit de bonis operibus pag. 332. Zuinglius tom 1. in Prefat lib de Prouident Caluin 4. Institut cap. 1. § 12. and cap. 2. § 1. Beza epist 2. Zanchius in prefat lib.
de natura Dei Hospin part 1. Histor lib. 1. cap. 2. Vorstius in Anti-bellarmin pag. 116. and others moe And as their iudgements are different touching the fundamentall articles of fayth so in determining who are to be accounted members of their Church their opinions are vnlike Some of theÌ„ say that the summe the cheife and principall heads of fayth and all things necessary to be belieued are comprized in the Apostles Creed The Apostles Creed The principall heads of fayth sayth Caluin 2. Institut c. 16. § 8 are set downe in the Creed And it is as D. Whitaker sayth lib. 3. de Scriptura cap. 3. sect 1. a list of the cheife heads of fayth It containes sayth M. Perkins in his Reformed Catholik col 476. all points of Religion which we are necessarily to belieue Hemingius in Syntagmate pag. 196 It containes the ground-work of the whole frame of Religion Vrsinus in Cathechesi The summe of those things which the Ghospell proposeth vnto vs to belieue that we may be partakers of Gods couenant is comprehended in the Apostles Creed Pareus lib. 1. de Iustificat cap. 9. hath these words In the Creed is layd open the summe of that doctrine which we must belieue to saluation The same teacheth Luther tom 7. in 3. symbol fol. 138. Confessio Pasatina in initio prefat Syntagmat Confes the French Catechisme Brentius in Prolegomenis pag. 244. The Catechisme of Heidleberg part 2. Bullinger in compendio fidei lib. 6. cap. 2. and tom 1. decad 5. serm 2. Polanus in Analysi Catechismi Basse Boysseul in confutat Spondei p. 10. Raynolds in Apol. Thes pag. 241. Carleton in Consensu tract de Eccles c. 9. The same is intimated by Zanchius lib. 1. epist pag. 219. and by Musculus in locis tit de Eccles pag. 309. These men then if the sequele of their doctrine be correspondent to the premises must needs acknowledge that the profession of the Apostles Creed though ioyned with the denyall of whatsoeuer other articles of fayth sufficeth to make a Protestant and a limme of their Church And some of them there be who confesse it For Bullinger lib. cit cap. 11. fol. 83. sayth All that we comprise in the 12. Beliefe of the Apostles Câ—eâ—d sufficient to saluation articles is the true and Christian fayth vnto which whosoeuer cleauech he beliueth right is approued of God is iustified and made partner of euerlasting life Caluin cont Gentil pag. 659 The confession of fayth contayned in the Apostles Creed ought to be inough for all modest Christians And Musculus in the place last quoted They are wonderfull vnreasonable and vnaduised who not content with this beliefe exact of the faythfull that they belieue yet other things which are neither mentioned in the Apostles Creed nor in baptisme Aretius in locis part 3. fol. 67 The articles necessary to saluation are those which the Creed hath set vs downe As for the rest since the matter cannot be decided variety of iudgements must be borne with all Polanus also in the place before cited These articles of the Creed if they be vnfaynedly belieued suffice to purchase saluation nor is it required we should belieue ought besides And Hall in â—ua Roma irreconcil sect 1 VVe are all one and the same Church as many as in any part of the earth worship Iesus Christ the only Sonne of God and Sauiour of the world and professe the same common beliefe comprised in the Creed The Creeds 2. Some of them will haue the grounds of fayth to be contained in the Creed as Plessy lib. de Eccles c. 5. Hereupon Marke Antony de Dominis in consil suae profect pag. 18. 20. sayth Restore peace and charity to all Christian Churches which professe Christ by the essentiall cognisances of beliefe Others ad to the Creeds the 4. generall Councels or at least one of them as D. Andrews in Respons ad Apol. Bellarmin cap. 1. pag. 52 That which is set downe in the Creeds and 4. generall councells The Creeds the 4. generall â—ouncels is to vs a sufficient obiect of fayth And in Tortura Torti pag. 127 Nor do we lightly discerne and try heresy by other touch-stone then by examining whether it be repugnant tâ— any of the three ancient Creeds or 4. ancient generall councells And Melancthon tom 3. l. de iudicijs Synodorum fol. 389. sayth of himself that he is not without the Church because he faythfully imbraceth all the articles of the Apostles and Nycen Creed Musculus also in the place aboue quoted puts downe this conclusion As many as belieue the Apostles and Athanasius Creed hold all the Catholike fayth and are not heretkes but Catholiks Some of them are of opinion that al the fundamental points of beliefe are contayned in the Creed and decalogue The Creed and Decalogue as Melancthon tom 1. in cap. 7. Matth. pag. 402. tom 3. in respons ad artic Bauar fol. 363. Vrsinus in Miscellaneis Thes 8. pag. 1â—4 M. Perkins in his exposition of the Creed col 789. Some of them say they are in the Creed the decalogue and Lords prayer The creed Decalogue and Lords prayer as Luther tom 7. in Enchirid. fol. 118. Beza lib. de notis Eccles pag. 52. Keckerman lib. 1. System Theol. 201. D. White in the preface of his way and in his defence of the same cap. 8. pag. 54. Others reckon the 10. commandements the Creed the Lords prayer the Sacraments as D. Whitaker cont 1. quest 4. cap. 4. The creed Decalogue Lords prayer Sacraments And the Ministry pag. 342. howbeit quest 5. cap. 9. pag. 362. he omitteth Sacraments putteth in Catechisme in exchaunge Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 24. vnto which Ieslerus lib. de bello Euchar. pag. 40. adioyneth the ministry And these men according to their seuerall decisions concerning the fundamentall points of beliefe must with like diuersity require in a limme of the Protestant Church either the beliefe of the Creed alone and decalogue or must adde besides as each think it needfull the Lords prayer the Sacraments Baptisme and worship of Christ the Catechisme and the Ministery 3. But sometymes they giue larger scope demaund farre lesse to wit Baptisme only or faith in Christ Let him let Chrâ—sâ—ianity staÌ„d saitâ— D. Andrews in respons cit cap. 5. pag. 126 in baptisme and worship of Christ. M. Morton in his booke of the Kingdome of Israel and the Church pag. 91 In what place soeuer any society of men adore true God in Christ they professe the substance of Christian Religion Baptisme alone Ierlach us disput 22. de Eccles pag. 662 VVheresoeuer baptisme remaines curier in regard of its substance thither reacheth the territory of the Catholike Church Luther de Notis Eccl fol. 150. Againe If they acknowledge true baptisme both in oâ—rs and in other congregations they must yeld that in the same there is likewise the Catholike Church And Hurterus in his
yea not so much as the outward face of a Church and that they exhort the Court of Parlament with perfect (d) Pag. 32. hatred to detest the present state of the Church that no (e) Pag 33 Iew no Turke no Papist could possibly haue spoken more spitefully of their Church and state and that they seeke to shake nay to ouerthrow the (f) Pag. 6. foundations grounds and pillars of their Church Finally that the Puritans will not account the Protestants their (g) Resp ad schedas Bancrofts suruey c. 33 brethren and yet the Protestants neuerthelesse acknowledge Puritans for their (h) Resp ad schedas Oxon. resp ad Miâ—len Lonfer ad Hampton Court p. 44. brethren and fellow-labourers in the Lords haruest In Scotland likewise as his Maiesty witnesseth That which was Catechisticall doctrine in one assembly was hardly admitted for sound and orthodoxe in another and yet these assemblies excluded not one another from the Church What can be therefore more cleare and euident then that both the Lutherans and Sacramentaries acknowledge when they list those to be members of their Church who deny fundamentall articles of their fayth 6. A third proofe may be drawne from the Protestants demeanour and carriage towards the Fathers ProtestaÌ„ts say the fathers dissent fundameÌ„â—ally from theÌ„ whome they claime and challenge for their fellow-cittizens and yet confesse plainly to omit what they acknowledge concerning other points that they were of a contrary beliefe in the article of Iustification by sole fayth wherein as shall be here after shewed they say the soule the summe and definition of Protestantisme consisteth Luther tom 1. In the art of iustification by only faith colloq German apud Coccium tom 1. pag. 131 In which errour that works ioyned with fayth do iustify were many of the Fathers And tom 5. in cap. 3 Galat. fol. 358. he sayth that of the difference which he espied between the law and the Ghospell as that the law taught iustification by works the Ghospell by sole beliefe There is nothing to be found in the works of the old Fathers Augustin held it in part Hierome and the rest knew it no Melancthon tom 1. in Dominicam Trinitaris pag. 89 It is meruaile that the cheife Doctours had no knowledge of the iustice of fayth Tom. 2. lib. de Eccles pag. 134 Chrysostome reckons vp many wayes and meanes to obtaine remission of sinnes as almes deeds teares and other works The Centuriatours of Magdeburg cent 3. cap. 4. col 79. seqq say that the Doctours of the third age Make workes the cause of our iustice in Gods sight Cent. 4. c. 4. col 293 In this article of iustification this age reuolted wholy from the doctrine of the Apostles And Cent. 5. in Prefat they say of the Fathers of that age Chrysostome and the residue attribute iustice vnto works they make works the meanes of saluation and ascribe iustification either in part or formally or wholly vnto works Gerlacinus tom 2. dispat 13 The ancient Fathers would haue the iustice life and saluation of a Christian man consist in obseruing Gods commaundements as Hilary Origen Tertullian Eusebius Chrysostomâ— Augustine c. Kemnitius in locis part 1. cit de Iustificat pag. 242. sayth that the Fathers Intermingled sometymes and entwyned the doctrine of good workes with the article of iustification sometymes plied and bended the article of iustification to good works And part 2. tit de lege pag. 106 If the Fathers disputes be all layd together the summe of them is this in effect that sinne and infirmity of nature is manifested by the law to the end we may search out a Phisitian by whose grace it may be so healed as it be able to satisfy and fullfill the law and so we be saued And ibidem in orat de lectione Patrum pag. 3. The suÌ„me of the fathers doctrine is iustification by works he sayth of S. Cyprian He had a fundamentall errour And pag. 4. of S. Hilary He held an erroneous opinion touching the foundation Caluin also lib. cont Ver si pellem pag. 353 Three maine points of our sayth to wit the corruption of our nature free and vndeserued iustification and Christs Priesthood are so darkly and obscurely touched in the ancientest writers that no certainly can be drawne thence Againe VVe shall neuer learne by the Fathers how we may be reconciled to God how the obedience of Christ is freely and vndeseruedly reputed ours Martyr in locis cit de scriptura col 1432 Other Fathers think good works much auaileable to iustification Hospin in epist dedicat part 1. Histor All the Fathers well nigh do now and then sprinkle and cast on with all the leauen of good works and attribute iustification to them either in part or formally or wholy Parcus lib. 4 de Iustificat c. 12 The Fathers both Greek and Latin especially those that wrote before the Pelagian bickerings fancied ouer much and tooke too great a liking to the Philosophers doctrine concerning the iustification of worcks Finally M. Perkins in Problem cap. de Iustificat sayth that the old writers consound the law with the Ghospell and do not distinguish the iustice of the law from the iustice of the Ghospell 7. To them who in this manner ioyne friendship and Communion as well with such as renounce fundamentall articles of fayth as with those whose beliefe is contrary in articles not fundamental whâ—â— meruaile is it if all heretiks and Schismatiks seeme fit companions and worthy to be accounted their brethren and fellow-cittizens But let vs heare their owne words wherein they acquaint vs what ranke heretiks Schismatiks hold amongst them Luther tom 7. serm de Dominica 20. post Trinit fol. 262. sayth They are frantique and beside themselues who go about to seuer the Church corporally from heretikes Hemingius in Syntag. Institut pag. 192 In the outward society of the Church are many heretiks and Schismatiks Salomon Gesner in locis loc 24 Are heretiks then in the Church By any meanes Brentius in Praefat. Recognit Christ giues not ouer the conseruation of his sheep in the middest of heresies but they must be such as do not quite take away the foundation and Ministery Reineccius tom 4 Armatur cap. 6. pag. 35 VVe affirme there are heretiques euen in the true Church Hutteâ—us in Analysi Confest August pag. 435 Neither were heresies without the territory and limits of the true Church Plessy in his booke of the Church cap. 2. affirmeth plainly that all hereticall and Schismaticall congregations are truly the Church And ibid. pag. 25. he sayth Although particuler Churches be insected with heresies from top to toe neuerthelesse they are parts of the vniuersall Church as long as they professe the name of Christ Moulins in his Bukler of fayth part 1. sect 89 An hereticall Church may be sayd to be a true Church euen as man blemished with a canker or infected with the plague is notwithstanding a true
saluation wholy ouerturned And lib. de Necess Reform fol. 47. that the safety of the Church dependeth vpon this doctrine no lesse then mans life dependeth of his soule Pareus in Prooem lib. de Iustificat On this alone the hinges of our comfort and saluation do hang. And lib. 2. cap. 2. affirmeth that it was the cheifest cause of the separation of the Protestant Church from Popery And lib. 4. cap. 2. sayth The only doctrine of obtayning iustice and saluation by only sayth and of loosing them by incredulity is the sincere and proper ghospell all other doctrine in the scripture belongeth to the law And those of Geneua Prefat Syntag. Confess auouch that this article is the groundworke forme and soule of Christian religion The soule the summe of Euangelicall doctrine of which men are called faythfull and true Christians without which the knowledge of other articles hath no holesome fruit For it is the substantiall inward and formall cause of saluation of which all Sacraments instituted by God are and were pledges and seales vnto which article all the other do tend as to their center and in which mans felicity consisteth 5. Neither do our English Protestants make lesse account of this their article of iustification by only fayth For D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 6. cap. 3. pag. 562. sayth It seemes to be the cheifest of all and most fundamentall The Prore Puppe as in which the Prore and puppe of our saluation consisteth and who faine any other meanes of Iustification do ouerthrow the foundation and most necessary heads of Christian religion and are fallen from saluation and euerlasting life And Respons ad Rat. r. Camp he writeth thus of their doctrine of Iustification by only fayth If Iames or a heauenly Angell disallow it he is impure wicked and to be detested to hell D. Humfrey in his oration de vitando fermen to calleth this article The cheifest point and hinges of fayth D. Fulke de Success pag. 4. The principall head of the ghospell M. Fox in his acts pag. 440 The foundation of all Christianity And pag. 770 The fouÌ„dation The only principall origen of our saluation And finally M. Powell lib. 2. de Antichristo cap. 5 The summe of the doctrine of sayth Neither is it to be merueiled that Protestants so highly esteeme this their article both because it is the cheifest bait wherwith they draw men vnto them as also because as Luther confessed it is their cheife defence without which they had long since perished and finally because Iustification being one principall end of religion if speciall fayth be the only meanes to attaine to iustification vndoubtedly it ought highly to be esteemed of that religion which belieueth it to be such a meanes ProtestaÌ„ts esteeme of only faith Thus we see that according to the common opinion of Protestants to belieue himselfe to be iustified by only fayth is the cheifest article the foundation the stay the head the fountaine the summe the last end the prore and puppe the hinges the proppe the castle the bulwarck the essentiall difference the definition the soule the forme the formall cause the only rocke the only safegard of Protestancy the only way to heauen which falling the church yea God himselfe falleth But none can be a Protestant without the foundation head soule forme summe definition c. of a Protestant Therefore none can he held for a Protestant vnlesse he professe to belieue to be iustified by only speciall fayth Whomesoeuer therefore Protestants cannot proue to haue held this article they cannot with any reason and coulour challenge for Protestants And because as it shall hereafter appeare they cannot proue that any one before Luther held this article nay on the contrary we will proue that Luther first deuised it they cannot with any appearance of truth auouch that there was any Protestant before him And in like sort whome we can proue not to haue belieued this article we may euidently conclude that they were no Protestants That it is necessary for a Protestant to belieue all the fundamentall articles of Protestancy CHAP. VII â— BESIDE the foresayd article of Iustification by only fayth it is also necessary to the making of a Protestant of a member of the Protestant Church Vâ—â—â—d l. 3. de Eccles c. 2. that he belieue at least all the fundamentall points of Protestancy either explicitly or implicitly so that he obstinatly deny no one of them This is manifest First because as I shewed before cap. 1. it is the common opinion of Protestants that all those are out of the Church whosoeuer deny one fundamentall article Num. 3. Againe because themselues say that the name of a fundamentall article doth insinuate that it sustaineth the Church as the foundation sustaineth the house Besides all Protestants assigne truth or purity in doctrine for the mark of the Church As the Confession of Ausparg cap. 7. The English Confession cap. 19. The Suiâ—zers cap. de Eccles and other Protestants commonly and their meaning is Truth essentiall to the Church that it is the essentiall marck Wherupon D Whitaker Controuers 2. quest 5. cap. 17. pag. 541. sayth that it is absolutely necessary and the essentiall marck And at Rat. 3. Campiani that it is the substantiall note His Maiesty in his epistle to Cardinall Peron that in is the substantiall forme of the Church Caluin epist 190. The purity of doctrine is the soule of the Church And the same say Sadeel ad Sophism Turriani loc 1. Author de Eccles in Danaeo pag. 1029. Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 145. D. Willet cont 2. quest 3. pag. 102. Yea D. Morton part 1. Apos lib. 1. cap. 6. affirmeth that Protestants account the truth of Euangelicall doctrin the cheifest and almost only essentiall inseparable and perpetuall marck of the Church And hence it proceedeth that they put the truth of purity of doctrine in their definition of the Church as an essentiall part thereof as the French Confession cap. 27. The Magdeburgians Cent. 1. lib. 1. cap. 4 col 140. Melancthon tom 1 in cap. 16. Matthaeâ— D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 20. pag. 552. Sadeel ad Sophism surriani loc 21. and others commonly But this purity of doctrine if it must be in any articles especially it must be in those which are fundamentall as is manifest and the Protestants do graunt For thus writeth D. Morton part 1. Purity in fundameÌ„tal points essential to the Church Apol. lib. 2. cap. 38. Purity in the fundamentall principles of fayth is necessary to the being and making of the Church And D. Feild lib. 2. de Eccles cap. 3 Purity from fundamentall errour is necessarily required to a Church And the like hath Vorstius lib. cit pag. 148. Nay the English Confession art 19. defineth the visible Church of Christ to be a congregation of faythfull men in which the pure word of God is preached and the Sacraments duely ministred according to Christs
ordinance in al those things that of necessity are requisite to the same And his maiesty ep cit Whitâ—k Cont. 2. q. â— c. 18. Sutla l. 1. de Eccl. c. 1. Mort. Apol. l. 2. cap. 3â— It is needfull that the churches be vnited amoÌ„g themselues in vnity of saith and doctrine in those points which are necessary to saluation And hereupon diuers Protestants deny those Corinthians who denyed the Resurrection and those Galathians who ouerturned the Ghospell of Christ to haue byn members of the Church because they denyed a fundamentall point point of Christian fayth Wherefore vnlesse Protestants will deny their common doctrine in this matter reiect their owne definition of the Church cast away their only marke of the Church and leaue no marke of her at all they cannot auouch any one to haue byn a Protestant who dissented from them in any fundamentall point of doctrine 2. If any one say that although he who denyeth any fundamentall point of Protestancy cannot be of the visible Protestant Church yet may he be of their inuisible Church I answeare that as shall be shewed hereafter there can be no Church which is inuisible in profession of fayth howsoeuer it be inuisible in iustice and predestination and therefore none can be of the inuisible Church who is not also of the visible Againe Protestants will haue none to be of the inuisible Church but such as are iust But how is he iust who denieth Gods faith and maketh him a lyer and that in a principall point of religion Besides Protestants say that none can be a member of the inuisible Church vnlesse he be also a member of the visible Church if so conueniently he may 3. Moreouer the holy Fathers most frequently Leo. Ierm 4. de Nat. Hier. lib. 3 â—oÌ„t Ruffi Aug. l. de haer q. 11. in Mat. 18. de ciuit c. 51. Basilius in Theodor. lib. 4. c. 19. and sometymes also Protestants themselues do teach that it is necessary to a faythful and belieuing man that he deny no one article of fayth and much lesse a fundamentall or principall article Finally Protestants are wont to laugh at Catholiks if they proue any Father to haue byn a Papist because he held some fundamentall point of Papistry For thus writeth Pareus lib. 1. de amiss gratiae cap. 1 It is ridiculous for him to conclude S. Augustin to haue byn a Papist because in this errour he agreed with them no lesse them if you inferre that we are Papists because we agree with Papists in some truth And D. White in defence of his Way cap. 45. pag. 432 His holding of some things superstitiously which the Church of Rome hath entertayned proues not that he professed the same fayth the Church of Rome now doth because the fayth of the sayd Church comprehends much more then he held and what he held is now otherwise expounded and applyed then by him it was And in his Way pag. 298 If he would deale faythfully and to the point he should not say Bernard professed the Roman fayth and was a monke but he should haue shewed that be professed the present Roman fayth as the Councell of Trent and the Iesuits haue set it downe at least in the fundamentall points thereof Let them then abide the law which themselues haue made and let not them conclude any one to haue byn a Protestant because he agreed with them in one or more points vnlesse he agreed with them at least in all fundameÌ„tall points of their doctrine I adde also that against Protestants we do rightly conclude that the holy Fathers were Papists if we do shew that they dissented from Protestants in one or more fundamentall points For they will not deny but that the Fathers were either Papists or Protestants But Protestants they were not if they denyed their doctrine in any fundamentall point thereof therfore they must needs be Papists And the like is not of others whome Protestants cannot coÌ„clude to haue byn theirs if they can proue that they were none of ours Because neither we wil graunt nor they can auouch that such were either ours or theirs as they graunt of the holy Fathers What is necessarily required to a ProtestaÌ„ts Be it therefore certaine and assured that to a Protestant is necessarily required that either explicitly or at least implicitly and vertually he belieue all the fundamentall points of Protestancy and willfully deny no one of them And that therefore Protestants can no way challenge any who reiected any one of their fundamentall and principall articles It remayneth that we set downe the fundamentall articles of Protestancy lib. de vnie baptism c. â—â— because Protestants themselues agree not herein but as S. Augustin sayd that the Donatists did concerning sinnes which they would haue to exclude men out of the Church so Protestants in a strange fashion distinguish the fundamentall points of their fayth deuising rules of distinction amongst them not out of the scriptures but out of their owne heads Which be the fundamentall heads of Protestancy CHAP. VIII 1. THAT we may determine which be the fundamentall articles of Protestant religion we must first shew How much ProtestaÌ„ts esteeme the Conf. of Ausp that all Protestants professe to receiue the Confession of Auspurge at least in the principall and fundamentall articles thereof Of the Lutheran Protestants this is manifest For in their conference at Aldeburg both parties of them agreed to admit it for a rule of their disputation And ibidem pag. 404. those of the Electors side do say VVe referre our selues and do looke vnto the Confession of Auspurg as to the foundation of religion next after the word of God And other Lutherans in Zanchius in Supplicat ad Senat. Argentinens pag. 70. The fouÌ„dation of Religion do appoint that it be taught according to the Confession of Auspurge presented to Charles the 5. anno 1530 and the Apology thereof subscribed at Numberg and that it be the square and rule of all religion in all articles The square of religion Heshusius lib. de present corp Christi in caelo affirmeth that amongst the Lutherans all that are promoted to degrees and cure of soules do sweare to the Confession of Auspurg and the Apology thereof They sweare to it The same testifyeth Lobechius disp 1. pag. 12. and as Lauatherus addeth anno 1530 The lawes of the vniuersity of VVittemberg do streightly forbid to defend any opinions which are contrary to this Confession Heâ—â—â—sius also lib. cit writeth The authority thereof most holy that the authority thereof ought to be most holy amongst all godly men Westphalus cont Laskum affimeth that it containeth the summe of doctrine founded in the word of God Ernestus Regius in vita Vrbani that it is the square and rule of controuersies in the Church Lobechius lib. cit that it is the rule of sayth and doctrine distinguishing the orthodoxall Church from the heterodoxall Reineccius in armatura tom
1. cap. 28. CoÌ„taineth the suÌ„me of doctrine affirmeth that it was inspired from heauen and written by instinct of the holy ghost Nay some Lutherans as testifieth Laskus epist ad Regem Poloniae sayd that they would rather doubt of the doctrine of Paul The Rule of fayth then of the Confession of Auspurg And with the Lutherans herein conspire the Sacramentaries For as Bucer confessed in the Conference of Ratisbon The Protestants condemne all writings Inspired froÌ„ heaueÌ„ which are repugnant to the Confession of Auspurge and the Apology thereof Caluin admonit vlt. ad Westphalum pag. 797. sayth Surius anno 154â— Touching the Confession of Auspurg I answere thus that as it was published at Ratisbon there is not one word in it contrary to our doctrine And epist 236. sayth that be wittingly and willingly subscribed to it Beza epist 1. writeth in this sort I define those to be our Churches which hold the Confession of Auspurg the French Confession c. And Apol. 1. cont Saintem pag. 297 Neither is the Confession of Auspurg such as any pious man may reiect it Zanchius loc cit receiued the Confession of Auspurge as the square and rule of all doctrine And as Vorstius writeth Respons ad epist Parci pag. 91 In the vniuersity of Heddelberg they vsed to sweare to no Confession but to that of Auspurg Or as D. Whitaker affirmeth Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 5. pag. 505 The Confession of Auspurg is receiued of all Protestants vnlesse perhapps it be in one word or two rather then in any opinion And in truth seing all Sacramentaries professe to hold the Lutherans who follow the Confession of Auspurg for their brethren in Christ and besides when we obiect vnto them their dissention in matters of fayth they appeale vnto their harmony or syntagme of Confessions amongst which the Confession of Auspurg is placed as do those of Geneua Prefat Syntagmatis the Switzers Prefat suae Confess Beza epist 1. Sadeel Indice Repetit Turrian pag. 808. and respons ad Theses Posnan c. 11. Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 168. D. Feild lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 12. 42. D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 8. pag. 521. D. Andrews Respons ad Apol. Bellarm. c. 1. D. Fulke de Success pag. 287. 304. D. White in his way to the Church pag. 138. and others commonly When as I say the SacrameÌ„taries do thus they must needs approue the Confession of Auspurg at least in all the principall and fundamentall points thereof For I hope they will not hold theÌ„ for brethren in Christ whome they see to dissent from them in fundamentall points of Christian fayth nor say that those Confessions agree which are repugnant in the very foundation of beliefe VVhich the coÌ„fess of Ausp accouÌ„teth fundameÌ„tal articles 2. But this Confession of Auspurg so generally receiued and of so high account with Protestants as we haue rehearsed hath set downe and declared which be the fundamentall points of Protestancy For in the beginning thereof is set this title The principall articles and after that many Protestanticall opinions are rehearsed thus it sayth of them cap. 21. The suÌ„me of Protest doctrine This is the summe of the doctrine which is deliuered in our Churches And â—fterward naming certaine controuersies of Indulgences Pilgrimages the like it sayth of them These kind of matters we haue let passe that those things which are the cheifest in this cause might be easierly knowne Againe Cheifest points those things only are rehearsed which were necessary to be told And finally VVe would present these articles before written in which our Confession might be extant Only necessary and the summe of their doctrine who teach vs might be seene And in another edition of this Confession in Melancthon tom 3. thus is written in the end thereof VVe haue comprised the summe of Euangelicall doctrine necessary to Churches SuÌ„me of doctrine necessary Wherefore vnlesse Protestants will reiect their first and most maiesticall Confession of Auspurg they must needs confesse that the articles thereof are the summe of Protestant doctrine the principal articles of their fayth are they only which are necessary to be told and the summe of Euangelicall doctrine necessary to Churches But surely such are fundamentall articles 3. Neither doth the sayd Confession alone but also many other great Protestants acknowledge the articles of it to be fundamentall For thus hath the Apology of that Confession in Melancthon tom 3. fol. 91 Truth necessary to the Church VVe haue comprised in the Confession of Auspurg almost the summe of all Christian doctrine And Melancthon himselfe in the preface of that Apology writeth that that Confession is truth necessary to the Church And likewise in the preface of his 3. to me I gathered together the heads of confession comprising almost the summe of the doctrine of our Churches The whole forme of the Confession was after sent to Luther who wrote back that he had read and allowed this Confession And tom 4. Respons ad Staphylum pag. 817. sayth that the Confession of Auspurg contayneth the whole body of doctrine And in Prefat 2. tom Luther 11 The summe of doctrine which our Church preached is publikely comprehended in the Confession of Auspurg The whole body of doctrine Likewise the D. of Wittemberg in the preface of his Confession speaking of the Confession of Auspurg sayth thus VVe commanded our preachers to write the summe of their doctrine And the Ministers of the Elector in colloq Aldeburg scrip 3. pag. 21. say VVe doubt not but the summe of doctrine reuealed from heauen is dextrously plainly and most sweetly contayned in the Confession of Auspurg And pag. seq VVâ—â—â— the Confession of Auspurg we comprehended the summe of doctrine Kemnice Praefat. lib. de coena The summe of holesome doctrine is comprehended in the Confession of Auspurg out of the word of God Westphalus defens altera cont Laskum sayth It containeth in briefe the summe of Christian doctrine Iames Andrews lib. cont Hosium pag. 22 The summe of pious doctrine is contained in the Confession of Auspurg Finally the Lutherans as the Sacramentaries of Newstad write in Admonit de lib. Concord cap. 4. Note pag. 116 do place in the role of heretiks as erring in the foundation of sayth and saluation all those who find any sault with the Confession of Auspurg or dissent from it in any article And as touching the Sacramentaries themselues the Palatin Confession pag. 198. sayth thus That Confession of fayth which was presented at Auspurg and the Apology annexed thereto was taken out of the doctrine of the Apostles Prophets and the foresayd Creed as a certaine litle summe Caluin lib. 1. de Lib. arbit pag. 142 VVhen at Auspurg there was to be exhibited a forme of Confession Melancthon the Author thereof would not make any stay but only in that doctrine Doctrine necessary to saluation which alone is proper to the
Church and necessary to saluation to be knowne 4. According therefore to the verdict both of Lutherans and Sacramentary Protestants theâ—e Confession of Auspurg contayneth the summe whole body of Protestant doctrine and only those things which are necessary to be told and that only doctrine which is proper to the church and is necessary to be knowne for saluation Whosoeuer therfore dissenteth from the Confession of Auspurg dissenteth from Protestants in the summe and body of Protestancy in things that are necessary 〈◊〉 doctrine necessary to the Church and necessary â—o â—â—â—nation But vndoubtedly who oâ—ssenteth in sâ—ch things dissenteth in fundamentall points And thâ—s manner of examining who is a Protestant cannot be disliked of Protestants because themselues vsed it against the Anabaptists in their Conference at Frankentall wherein they proue that the Anabaptistia were not before the yeare of Christ 1522 For say they if you read ouer all histories you shall not find any people from the beginning of the world who had a Confession of sayth like to yours They are therefore of opinion that it is necessary for an Anabaptist that he hold their CoÌ„fession Why then may not we say the like is necessary to a Protestant Besides Sadeel in Refutat Thes Posnan pag. 866. sayth that we ought to iudge of the fayth of the reformed Churches by the Confessions of their fayth which rule we now follow 5. And if any Protestant do not thinke that the articles of the Confession of Auspurg be fundamentall let him take the Confession of Saxony Fundam articles according to the CoÌ„fess of Saxony to which many principall Protestants subscribed and which they composed with mind to present it to the Councell of Trent For this Confession affirmeth her articles to be fundamentall saying cap. 23 This is the summe of doctrine which with one mouth we preach in our Churches And soone after It is true doctrine and necessary to the Church And Hospin part 2. Hist fol. 215. sayth that the composers of this Confession auouch this in summe that that writing contayneth clearly and fundamentally the princâ—pall articles of Christian fayth and doctrine of Sacraments instituted of Christ Or if he please let him take the Confession of Strasburg According to the CoÌ„fession of Strasburg which in the end thus writeth of the articles thereof These are the cheife points in which our men haue somewhat gone from the common doctrine of the Clergy Or else the Scottish general CoÌ„â—essioÌ„ wherin thus speake the Scots VVe belieue confesse and subscribe According to the CoÌ„fession of Scotland and affirme before God and the whole world that this only is the true Christian sayth which pleaseth God and bringeth saluation to men which is now layd open to the world and receiued of diuers Churches and Kingdoms especially of the Scottish Church For these Confessions do affirme that their articles are principall necessary to the Church and their doctrine the only true Christian doctrine which bringeth saluation But surely such articles be fundamentall Therefore the articles of these Confessions be fundamentall articles in Protestancy And consequently that a man be accounted a Protestant according to the iudgement of these Confessions it is necessary that he professe their articles Or finally let him make choice of the Bohemian Confession According to the CoÌ„fession of Bohemia in the Preface whereof it is written thus VVe imbrace and hold all things which belong to the true Church and without which she can be no where on earth For without doubt such things are fundamentall 6. But if any will not admit either the articles of the Conâ—ession of Auspurg or of Saxony which are Confessions of Lutherans nor the articles of the Confessions of Strasburg or Scotland which are Confessions of Sacramentaries not finally the articles of the Bohemian Confession which is sayd to be the Confession of the Waldenses to be the fundamentall articles of Protestancy First he shall shew that touching which are fundamentall articles he agreeth neither which LutheraÌ„s nor Sacramentaries nor Waldenses Againe besides that which we haue repeated out of Protestants concerning their account of the Confession of Auspurg he shall herein reiect those Confessions to which Protestants as themselues say yeld almost as much as Papists do to the Councell of Trent Vorstiue in Praefat. Antibell Praefat. Syntagm Conf ssionum which they hold for authenticall writings and which they say haue byn sealed with the bloud of many martyrs and approued of Kings Princes and common wealthes most excellent Deuines great seruants of God Assuredly if there be any certainty or worth in Protestant doctrine it is in their Confession of fayth Moreouer he can name no other articles which Protestants by publike and common iudgement haue agreed to be fundamentall and therefore either they haue not by publike consent determined which articles they hold for fundamentall or certainly no iudgement or decree of theirs is to be more esteemed of them then that which we find in their Confessions of fayth If Protestants be not certaine which are fundam articles they are not certaine of their Church Wherefore either they are to be held for fundamental articles or else Protestants are not certaine which are fundamentall articles of their fayth And if they be not certaine herof they cannot be certaine what is the essence or substance of a Protestant or who is a Protestant who not seing as I shewed before the only essentiall forme and substance of a Protestant they put in the beliefe of their fundamentall articles Either therefore they haue not yet determined which are their fundamentall articles and consequently they haue not determined what is the substance of a Protestant or who is a Protestants who not who is a member of their Church who an alien or that which they haue determined in their forsayd Confessions is to be taken for their decree and determination in this matter Finally I regard not what articles this or that Protestant iudgeth to be fundamentall for I might set downe which Luther tom 1. in Praefat. Disput fol. 419. or which Zuinglius Prefat Conf. fidei or which Beza in fine breuis Confess or which Bullinger Praefat. Compend haue reckoned for fundamentall articles but I would determine this matter out of their publike Confessions of fayth Sadeel ad Thes Posnan c 12. Beza epist 1. Rainold praelect 4. because they cannot deny them but in denying their fayth as also because they are of more authority amongst Protestants and finally because themselues require vs so to do 7. Let it be therefore assured and stedfast that according to the iudgement generally of all Protestants it is necessarily and before all matters required to a Protestant that he belieue Iustification by only speciall or particuler fayth What necessary to a Protestant because this is the soule life definition and all in a Protestant and moreouer according to the iudgements of the foresayd Confessions that he belieue
at least virtually and implicitly all their articles and wittingly deny none of them because as we see they are fundamentall articles of Protestancy without which one cannot haue the whole essence or substance of a Protestant nor be an entire and absolute Protestant We speak of any who are ProtestaÌ„ts only in part but only in part and in some sort And we as hath byn often sayd treat here only of an entire and absolute Protestant such as at least hath all the substantiall parts of a Protestant and endeauour to proue that Luther was the author of such a company and of such a faith and religion and regard not whither that before his tyme there were any who were Protestants only in part and in some sort and held only some part of Protestant religion but not the whole substance thereof And hereupon we frame an inuincible argument to proue that there was no true Protestant or Protestant church before Luther The definition of a true ProtestaÌ„t Euery true Protestant belieueth Iustification by only speciall faith and at least virtually and implicitly belieueth the articles of the Confession of Auspurg or of Saxony Scotland Strasburg or Bohemia But there was no man no Church before Luther who thus belieued Therefore no true Protestant or Protestant church The Maior is the very definition of a true Protestant gathered partly out of the common doctrine of all Protestants partly out of the foresayd Confessions of their fayth The Minor being negatiue is sufficiently manifest by that neither Luther nor any in his tyme or to this day could produce any one man or company who before Luthers preaching had belieued in that sort This foundation therefore touching the essence and substance of a Protestant and Protestant Church being layd to wit that he only is a true absolute Protestant who belieueth Iustification by only speciall fayth and the foresayd other fundamentall points of Protestancy and that the Protestant Church is a company of such belieuers and the Protestant religion such a beliefe and worship of God I will endeauour in this next book out of Protestants testimonies and Confessions to proue that Luther was the first beginner of their Church and Religion The end of the first Booke THE SECOND BOOKE Of the Author or Beginner of the Protestant Church and Religion CHAP. I. That Protestants confesse that the substance of their Church and Religion was perished when Luther began THE first demonstration wherewith we will proue that Luther was the author and first beginner of the Protestant Church and religion we will take out of Protestants Confessions of the substantiall destruction of their Church ProtestaÌ„ts confesse their religion was perished religion principall article of Iustification by only fayth before Luther arose For of the destruction of their fayth and religion thus writeth Luther himself tom 1. Proposit 62. fol. 375 Certaine it is that our Apostaticall Bishops raigning Gods fayth perished Perished And lib. de Captiu Babylon tom 2. fol. 77 The Popes tyranny hath many ages agone extinguished the fayth Extinguished And lib. de abâ—og Mist fol. 249. he sayth to the Catholikes Ye haue extinguished the Ghospell And lib. de pijs ceremon is fol. 387 alià s 393 Destroyed The doctrine of the ghospell lay destroyed by humane traditions Tom. 3. in psalm 1. fol. 126 VVhat thinkest thou was in the Church but a whirle wind of Gods wrath by which we were thrust into so many so different so inconstant so vncertaine and those infinite glosses of Lawyers Christ altogeather vnknown and opinions of Deuines in the meane tyme Christ being altogeather vnknowne stumbling into many quicke sands gulfes and snares of conscience were knockt together And in psalm 22. fol. 345 Christ together with fayth is now extinguished Christ and fayth extinguished And fol. 348 Fayth lyeth extinct And in psalm 51. fol. 460 The former age could neither vnderstand nor soundly teach the greatest and weightiest points Praefat. in psalm Grad fol. 509 God punisheth contempt so as he plainly taketh away his word whereof Popery is a notable example Al knowlâ—dge of Christ wholy extinct in which we see it hath so fallen out And fol. 568 Fayth it selfe was plainly extinct Tom. 4. Praefat. Eccl. fol. 1 The schooles of Deuines haue wholy extinguished most assured fayth in Christ togeather with all the knowledge of Christ Tom. 5. in cap. 2. Galat. fol. 306 The Papists with their impious and blasphemous doctrine haue not only obscured but simply haue taken away Not only obserued but simply taken away the Ghospell and ouerwhelmed Christ And fol 322 Christs ghospell being obscured yea truly ouerwhelmed the Pope c. In c. 4. fol. 376 This most common and most receiued opinion of the vncertainty of the remission of sinnes was surely an article of fayth in all Popery Christ shut out of the Church wherewith truly they ouerwhelmed the doctrine of fayth destroyed fayth and shut Christ out of the Church Fol. 400 The Pope hath vtterly extinguished Christian liberty In cap. 1. Petri The sincere knowledge of fayth was extinct In cap. 15.1 Cor. fol. 134. VVithout our helpe they had neuer learnt one word of the Ghospell Without Luther not one word or iot of the Ghospell And fol. 141 They had not knowne one iote of the Gospell vnlesse by our labour and study it had byn brought forth into the world â—om 6. in cap. 3. Genes fol. 43 Holesome doctrine was by little and litle extinct In cap. 4. fol. 57 The light of the word was extinguished by wicked Popes In cap. 17. fol. 199 That I may say all in one word the Pope hath truly buryed Christ In cap. 48. fol. 643 The Pope hath obscured nay destroyed the doctrine of sayth In cap. 49. fol. 660 The Pope hath truly obscured the doctrine and taken away the Promises Christ truly buried that we knew not what Christ was Fol. 666 He hath extinguished the Gospell Tom. 7. lib. de Missa fol. 230 The knowledge of Christ was truly abolished and destroyed This ye Papists ye cannot deny the matter it selfe proclaimeth it And fol. 231 All true VVorship of God being extinct from the bottom c. Epist ad Fredericum Electorem fol. 506 Knowledge of Christ truly destroyed The Pope of Rome hath most plainly rooted out the Ghospell truly oppressed and ouerthrowne lib. cont Papatum fol. 469 Fayth was weakened choaked and extinguished and Christian liberty lost Thus plainly speaketh Luther almost in all his Latin comes of the substantiall destruction of his fayth and Ghospell before that as he sayth he brought it againe into the world Ghospell most plainly rooted out To which he addeth in his 7. Dutch tome in his admonition to the Germans This abomination was increased so that they blotted out and supprest the words of this Sacrament and fayth so that neither a letter nor point of them remayned in all Popery in all
masses and bookes Thus Luther 2. In like manner the Protestants in Sleidan lib. 1. fol. 258 The Pope made lawes by which true knowledg was vtterly oppressed Melancthon tom 2. Lutheri fol. 192 Scholasticall diuinity being receiued fayth was destroyed the doctrine of works being admitted The Magdeburgians Praefat. Centur. 5 Extreme abolitioÌ„ of religion There was an extreme abolition of true Religion and the word of God vnder Popery Caluin Praefat. Institut In former ages men had extinguished the light of God And 1. Institut cap. 11. § 9 Many ages since true religion was drowned and ouerthrowne 4. Institut cap. 2. § 2 The substance of Christianity buried Vnder Popery that doctrine without which Christianity cannot consist was all buryed and shut out Respons ad Sadolet pag. 128. he sayth that the necessity to leaue the Roman Church was That the light of diuine truth was extinct the word of God buryed c. And p. 130. Cheifest points of doctrine ouerthrowne from the root maketh this speach vnto God in defence of his forsaking the Roman Church There were not a few profane opinions which euen by the ground ouerthrow the cheifest points of that doctrine which thou diddest deliuer vnto vs by word Lib. de necess Refor pa. 49 VVhen the word of God was choaked with these so many so thick darknesses Luther stept forth c. pag. 62 None prayed to God with assured sayth that is in earnest neither could they for Christ being buryed in that manner as he was c. Word of God ended Respons ad Versipell pag. 358 They haue extinguished the doctrine of saluation In Psycopan pag. 388 The word of God being ended by peruerse vse and sloth now returneth to light In Rom. 11. vers 22 The truth was taken away The light put out S. deel de vocat Minist pag. 552 God suffered that light to be put out which should perpetually haue lightned vs in gouerning our life Pure worships banished Crispin Praeâ—at operum Occolampadij Both the doctrine of saluation and piety were taken away they banished out of the Church all pure worship of God Celius secundus Cario de amplitudine regni Dei lib. 1. pag. 33 True Christ taken out of the world And so by litle and litle true Christ was taken out of the world and Antichrist put in his steed And Hospin part 1. Histor lib. 4. pag. 291. writeth that after 800. yeares after Christ the light of the holesome and true doctrine began to be darkned till it was vtterly put out The light cleane put out Thus forraine Protestants both Lutherans and Sacramentaries 3. Amongst English Protestants thus writeth M. Bale Cent. 4. c. 6 Holesome truth perished from the earth Cent. 1. pag. 69 From this tyme anno 607 purity of heauenly doctrine vanished out of the Church The truth perished froÌ„ earth In his Apology against Priesthood and vowes fol. 3 Two things haue cheifly byn the cause of the vtter decay and full destruction of Christian religion c. Vanished out of the Church M. Powell in â—tinerarium Cambrâ—ae lib. 2 cap. 7. sayth that about the yeare 1189 There was the cheife raigne of darknesse in so much that not only preaching of the true word but also the true religion was banished and scarce the name of Christianity remayned Vtter decay full destructioÌ„ of religioÌ„ M. Fox in the Protestation before his Acts affirmeth that about the yeare 1215. and 1080 Christian sayth was extinguished And pag. 840. that Christian Religion was wholy changed into Idolatry D. Fulke ad Cauillat Sâ—apletoni Scarse name of Christianity remayned Scarce could he fiue hundred yeares after banish the true doctrine of saluation out of the Churches of Europe And finally the Apology of the English Church part 5. cap. 13. diuis 1. sayth that Papists haue broken in peeces all the pipes and conduicts haue stopped vp all the springs and choaked the fountaine of liuing waters and by damning vp all the fountains of Gods word haue brought the people into a pittifull thirst Item Not a sparck of diuine light found VVith great distresse went they scattering about seeking some sparck of heauenly light to refresh their consciences withall but that light was already throughly quenched out so that they could find none This was a rusull state this was a lamentable forme of Gods Church It was a misery to liue therein without the Ghospell ProtestaÌ„ts light thoroughly quenched out without light without all comfort Thus write these learned Protestants both English and strangers of the destruction of their doctrine their fayth their religion and Ghospell before Luther arose which do so plainly testify the substantiall destruction therof as I may well vse S. Augustins words in the like occasion If I should speake thus they would resist and cry Lib. 1. de pec mer. c. 9. that I speake not truly thought not truly For in these words if they were spoken by others they would imagin no other meaning then that which in the foresayd Protestants they will not vnderstand 4. ProtestaÌ„ts confesse their lundam art perished Neither write they otherwise of the destruction of their principall and most fundamentall article of Iustification by only fayth For thus the Confession of Anspurg cap. 20 VVhen the doctrine of fayth which ought to be principall in the Church lay so long vnknowne Sole faith vnknown as all must needs confesse that there was a most profound silence of the iustice of fayth that in sermons only the iustice of works was spoken of in Churches c. And tit de bonis operibus pag. 25 Horribly ouerwhelmed In tymes past certaine absurd opinions horribly ouerwhelmed this doctrine in which the vnlearned faigned that men did satisfy the law of God In the meane tyme there was great silence how Christ is to be apprehended by fayth And pag. 27 The was no word of fayth which is necessary for remission of sinnes And pag. 19 In tymes past there was great silence in Churches of the exercises of sayth And Praefat. Apol. Confess August in Melancthon tom 3. fol. 27 All Churches Monasteries schooles briefly all bookes of late diuines No man taught c All Prot. coÌ„fort vnknown were before mute of the iustice of fayth No man taught sinnes to be forgiuen by fayth in Christ Sacraments were impiously profaned after that opinion that they iustify by the work wrought was receiued And this opinion did wholy oppresse the doctrine of saith Praefat. Conf. Saxoniae All this comfort which is necessary to euery one how a man conuerted to God is iustified was vnknown The Protestant Princes and Cities in Sleidan lib. 21. fol. 240 The contention is about the doctrine of sayth and of the true knowledge of God which is the cheifest head of Christian life and of pure religion Vtterly extinct And it cannot say they be denyed that this doctrine was vtterly extinct and
the Waldenses and therefore the Bohemian Confession is not the Waldenses Confession Nor albeit therein be mention of iustification by only fayth can it be inferred that therefore the Waldenses did belieue it Finally as I haue often sayd and it must be alwayes inculcated I regard not whome any one sayth to haue byn Protestants but whom he proueth to haue byn such Neither whome he can proue to haue byn Protestants in part and in some sort but whome he can proue to haue byn absolutely and wholy Protestants at least for the substance of Protestancy Neither will it auaile any whit to complaine that we haue burnt the writings of the Waldenses by which they might proue that they were true Protestants For if they haue nor wherwithall to proue they were true Protestants they in vaine do feigne it Besides we asked of Luther his followers to produce one man Waldensian or other who had byn a true Protestant before Luthers preaching for which end there was no need of writings but of liuing men Wiclif was no true Protestant 6. In like sort I proue that Wicliffe and his followers were not true and absolute Protestants First because the Wiclifists are by name condemned togeather with other heretiks of Protestants in their Apology of the Confession of Auspurg chap. of the Church in these words VVe haue plainly inough sayd in our Confession that we disalow the Donatists and VViclifists Secondly because neither in Wiclifs booke nor of any of his schollers is there any signe of sole iustifying fayth neither did euer any Catholike writer contend with them there about Thirdly because as Melancthon writeth in his epistle to Myconius in his 1. tom printed at Bâ—sle pag. 416 VViclif neither vnderstood nor held the iustice of fayth Yea Husse his principall follower as we shall anon rehearse belieued that works did iustify And Wiclif himselfe in Thomas Walden tom 3. tit 1. cap. 7. bid euery one hope in the proper iustice of his life and men to trust in their merits which thing alone doth separate him farre inough from the Protestants campe Fourthly because the Wiclifists are reckoned amongst Heretiks of many Protestants as of Schusselburg tom 3. Catal pag. 190. of Kemnice in fundament is Coenae pag. 114. of Pantalcon in his Chronicle and of Matthias Hoe disput 27. they are termed most monstrous monsters And D. Cay in his 2. booke of the antiquity of Cambridge obiecteth Wicliffe to the Oxford men as a flaine of their vniuersity Fiftly wiclif taught diuers things which Protestants dislike And to omit these things which Catholikes obiect vnto him Canisius to 3 antiq lectionum Rokesana Prince of the Hussites in his dispute with Catholiks before the King of Bohemia hath these words These are the articles of VViclif That tithes are meere almes That the Clergy ought to haue no ciuill gouernment If a King be in mortall sinne that he is no more a King Which last article Osiander in his 15. Century repeateth thus There is no temporall Lord no Prelate no Bishop whiles he is in mortall sinne And Melancthon in his foresayd epistle VViclif doth plainly sophistically and seditiously wrangle vpon ciuill dominion And in his dispute of the right of Magistrats VViclif is mad who thinketh the wicked to haue no Dominion And in his Commentaries vpon Aristotles Politiques VViclif would haue those who haue not the holy ghost to loose their Dominion So that I meruaile how D. Andrews in his answere to the Apology of Bellarmine could say that it is a sclaunder that Wiclif taught so when as not only Catholiks but euen Hussites and Protestants do affirme it Moreouer Wiclif as Osiander reporteth in the place aforecited did condemne lawfull oathes and taught that all things fell out according to absolute necessity And Melancthon in his sayd epistle giueth this sentence of him I haue looked into VViclif but I haue found in him many other errors Wiclife held not iustice of sole faith by which one may iudge of his spirit He at all vnderstood not nor held the iustice of sayth He fondly confoundeth the ghospell and politique affaires would haue Priests to haue nothing proper c. And in his common places chap. of Ecclesiasticall power That superstition of VViclif is pernicious and seditious which driueth the ministers of the Church to beggery and denyeth that it is lawfull for them to hold any thing proper M. Stow also in his Cronicle anno 1376. writeth that he taught that Neither King nor lay man could giue any thing to the church for perpetuity Finally Vadianus in his fiâ—t book of the Eucharist pag. 168. confesseth that in many things he fouly erred Hussites no Protestants 7. Husse likewise and his partners we proue not to haue byn true and absolute Protestants First because it cannot be proued that they held the foresayd article of iustification by only fayth and the other fundamentall points of Protestancy Secondly because Husse is by name reiected of Luther who in the defence of his 30. article tom 2. thus writeth of him He agreeth not with me He gaue not a litle to the idol of Rome He seemeth not to repugne against the Popes Monarchy And vpon the 2. psal tom 3. fol 395 Husse did not condemne the sacrifice of Masse as we do And vpon the 9. chapter of Isaias tom 4. fol. 108. he sayth that Husse held a doctrine most pestilent most pernicious horrible and wholy impious yea very diuelish And in his Lypsicall dispute tom 1. fol. 260 I know and that very well that an euill Prelate is not to be reiected and therefore I damne the article of Husse And both there and other where Tom. 1. fo 30. 291. 292. 251. oftentymes denieth himselfe to be a Bohemian by which he meant an Hussite And in his table-talkes chapter of Sâ—ermers sayth Husse belieued that works with fayth do iustify which point alone excludeth him from the number of Protestants Husse belieue not sole faith And in the chapter of Antichrist Husse departed not one iot from the Papists but only reproued vices and naughty life Which also affirmeth Hierome of Prage Husse his fellow in M. Fox vpon the 11. chapter of the Apocal. Where also M. Fox himselfe writeth that Husse agreed with the Papists touching transubstantiation Masse Vowes Predestination Free will formed fayth cause of iustification and merits of works which plainly declare how litle he held of Protestancy Lastly when Bellarmine wrote that there was not in the world when Luther began any religion but Paganisme Iudaisme Mahometisme Grecisme Nestorianisme Hussites heresy and the Romane fayth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 3. pag. 502. denyeth these to haue byn all For sayth he our Church was then In which words he professeth the Protestants to be a different church from the Hussites Iunius also lib. 4. de Eccles cap. 6. acknowledgeth that some Protestant deny Hussites to be of their Church And Luther vpon the 53.
Chapter of Isaias tom 4. fol. 220. thus writeth There is no religion in the world which receiueth this opinion of iustification by only fayth and we our selues in priuate do scant belieue it though we publikely defend it By which words he sheweth that neither Hussytes nor Waldenses nor any Christians besides Protestants and scarce they also do belieue the principall and most fundamentall article of Protestancy howsoeuer openly they professe it That the Church cannot be so inuisible as Protestant confesse theirs to haue byn before Luthers tyme. CHAP. VI. 1. BY the name of the Church we vnderstand not as I sayd before only the men but men sociated or the society of men in the fayth worship of God Wherfore that a church be sayd visible not only the men but their worship of God must be visible Neither by this word visible do I vnderstand here that only which can be seene but whatsoeuer is sensible according both to the vulgar phrase of speach wherewith we say See how it soundeth as S. Augustine noteth and also after the phrase of scripture Lib. 10. Confess c. 35. wherein as the same holy Doctour obserueth All sensible things are called visible And Protestants as is before shewed do confesse that before Luthers rising their Church was simply inuisible Lib. 1. de mor. Manich c. 20. and vnseene of any either of those within or without her And necessarily they must say so because they can name none at all who before Luther arose did see a company of men who professed to belieue iustification by only fayth and the rest of the fundamentall principles of Protestancy yea they affirmed that it was so inuisible Ca. 4. n. 11. as it implyed contradiction to haue byn seene of any That the Church cannot be inuisible 2. Now that the Church Militant or liuing on earth cannot be so inuisible I proue first because it is against an article of fayth of diuers Protestants And if perhaps any hereupon imagine that either Protestants neuer graunted the contrary or that if they did graunt it their testimonies against themselues are not to be accepted let him read what hereafter I write touching that matter in the last chapter of this booke Wherefore in the Confession of Saxony cap. 15. they professe in this sort God will haue the Ministery of the ghospell to be publike he will not haue the voice of the ghospell to be shut vp only in corners but will haue it beard of all mankind Therefore he will haue publike and seemely meetings and in them he will haue the voice of the ghospell to sound He will also haue these same meetings to be witnesses of the Confession and separation of the Church from the sects and opinions of other Nations God will haue his Church to be seene and heard in the world and will haue her deuided by many publik marks from other people And the same they repeat in the Consent of Polony cap. de Coena And the same Confession of Saxony cap. of the Church VVe speake not of the Church as of a Platonicall idaea but we shew a Church which may be seene and heard The eternall Father will haue his Sonne to be heard in all mankind VVherefore we say that the Church is in this life a visible company c. SecoÌ„dly it is against their owne definitions of a militant Church ProtestaÌ„ts definitioÌ„s of the Church For the foresayd Confession of Saxony defineth the Church in this life to be a visible company The Magdeburgians in their 1. Century lib. 1. c. 4. col 170. do thus write The Church may be thus defined The Church in this life is a company of those The câ—urch in this life who imbrace the sincere doctrine of the Ghospell and rightly vse the Sacraments And the very same definition giueth Melancthon tom 4. in cap. 3.1 ad Tim. pag. 398. Hutterus in his Analysis of the confession of Auspurg pag. 444. saith This Church which is sayd to be and to be belieued The Church which we belieue is not a Platonicall idea but the visible company of those that are called Zanchius also in his treatise of the Church cap. 2 The militant Church is the company of the elect and truly saythfull Church militant professing the same sayth partaking the same Sacraments c. Hereof properly speake the scriptures when they call the Church the spouse of Christ the body of Christ redeemed with the bloud of Christ sounded vpon a rock Gerlachius tom 2. Disput 22 Defining the Church as it is on earth we say that it is a congregation of men Church on earth who called by the voice of the Ghospell heare the word of God and vse the Sacraments instituted of Christ. 3. Thirdly it is against the properties and markes of the true Church assigned by the Protestants themselues to be altogeather inuisible For thus their Confession of Auspurg cap. 7 The Church of Christ properly so called The proper Church hath her marks to wit pure doctrine c. The Confession of Saxony cap. 12 The true church is discerned from other nations by the voice of true doctrine and lawfull vse of Sacraments The true Church The French Confession art 27 VVe belieue that the true church ought to be discerned with great care VVherefore we affirme out of the word of God that the Church is the company of the faythfull who agree in following the word of God and imbracing true religion wherein also they daily profit growing and confirming themselues mutually in the feare of God The Confession of the Low Countries art 29 By these markes the true Church shall be discerned from the false if in her the pure preaching of the Ghospell be of force by these markes it is certaine that the true Church may be distinguished The Confession of Scotland art 18 It is necessary that the true Church be discerned from the false by euident marckes least being deceiued we imbrace the false for the true to our eternall damnation Againe VVe belieue the markes of the true Church to be true preaching of the word c. Melancthon in his answere to the Bauarian articles tom 3. fol. 362 It is euident that the true Church is a visible company And vpon the 16. to the Romans tom 1. pag. 486 She is the true Church who teacheth the Ghospell aright and rightly administreth the Sacraments Danaeus in his booke of Antichrist cap. 17 The proper definition of the Church This is the proper definition of the Church that the true Church is the company of the faythfull who serue God purely and keep the notes of adoption instituted by him such as are the heauenly word the Sacraments and discipline By these 3. marks the false Church is distinguished from the true Lubbert in his 4. booke of the Church cap. 2 VVe say that the Church doth shew her selfe to be the true Church by the sincere preaching of the word of
lyers they gainesayd themselues May a man accused of crime expound figuratiuely his open Confession of that crime because at other tymes he denyed it Againe Protestants themselues reiect this kind of proofe For as we did see the Ministers of the Prince Electour did reprehend those of the Duke of Saxony because they auoyded Luthers testimonies by opposing other places of his And the Ministers of Saxony pag. 303. say It is a friuolous kind of argument He sayd well sometymes therefore heere Besides it will be as equall for me to inferre that Protestants in those testimonies which he produceth did speake figuratiuely because in those which I alleage they manifestly sayd the contrary For to vse Luthers wordes Tom. 2. fol. 220. By this rashnes and licence ye giue your aduersary leaue to turne it against you Certainly if they clearly haue sayd both we cannot deny but they thought both or ye must confesse that your pleasure shall be the rule and square to know what they speake properly what figuratiuely Moreouer Protestants crie that the holy Fathers contradicted themselues How often sayth Luther doe the Fathers fight with themselues Tom. 2. Assert Art 2. cont Cochleum Praefat. Institut They are men that fight against themselues VVe find the Fathers to haue taught contraryes to haue slumbered And Caluin The Fathers doe often skirmish amongst themselues and sometymes fight with themselues The like sayth Melancthon com 1. Lutheri fol. 341. Iacobus Andreae cont Hosium pag. 282. Beza Praefat. in nouum Testamentum and in Schusselburg lib. 4. Theol. Caluin art 32 Pareus lib. 2 de Grat. lib. arbit cap. 14. lib. 4. cap. 4. Polanus part 1. Thes de Notis Eccles Apologia Anglica And D. Whitaker lib. 5. cont Dureum Wherefore either they must shew some priuiledge whereby Protestants be more excepted from contradicting themselues then the holy Fathers in their opinion were or they must not inferre that they sayd not that which they did in places by me alleaged because other where they sayd the contrary Furthermore Hosp to 2. fo 12. Beza in CoÌ„spicil Zuing to 2. fol. 412. 458. 460. because both the Fathers and Protestants also as I shewed in the Preface doe teach that Heretikes are wont to contradict them selues And the Sacramentaries both say and shew by many examples that Luther oftentymes hath gainsayd himselfe And of Sacramentaries Schusselburg lib. 1. Theol. Caluin art 20. writeth That it is their property to contradict themselues 7. Lastly touching the weight of the Protestant Confessions which we produce let him not think that it is any way impaired in that they haue at other tymes sayd the contrary as if in this matter they were not to be belieued because they haue byn taken in two tales For the Confessions of those that are accused be of greatest force against themselues because as I sayd no man willingly lyeth against himselfe neither can these be discredited by any words of theirs spoken in their owne behalfe For what will it auayle a criminall person if he deny an hundred tymes the cryme which he once openly coÌ„fessed And protestants haue not once but oftentyms most plainly most openly most freely confessed those things which I alleage Againe though no credit be to be giuen to a lyer who gainsayth himself in matters for his owne behalfe or against any others neuerthelesse in a matter against himselfe the greatest yea euen the diuels open free Confession ought more to be credited then any other mans testimony whatsoeuer Wherfore we alleage Protestants sayings not as testimonies but as Confessions neither produce them as witnesses but as Criminels confessing the truth against themselues And as Saint Ambrose sayd Serm. 5. de â—â—uctis I admit not the diuels testimony but his Confession so I accept not the Protestants testimonies but their confessions Let their testimony be of no credit either for themselues or for others or against others vndoubtedly it is of great force against themselues As the Latin Oratour sayd Thy testimony which in another mans matter would be light is in thine owne matter because it is against thg selfe most weighty Besides Protestants cric that it is found to produce the Criminels as witnesses in their owne cause and that any witnesse in his owne cause is to be reiected Vorstius Antibel pag. 44â— 456. Iuâ—â— Def. part 2. c. 3. D. 5. VVhitak cont 4. q. 6. c. 2. q. 4. c. 2. Whereupon in the question of Supremacy they refuse the testimonies of all Popes though neuer so ancient neuer so learned neuer so holy How much better may we reiect the testimonies of Protestants when they speak in behalfe of their religion and yet admit their Confessions when they speake against it These therfore lawes of answearing so iust so equall and approued of the ProtestaÌ„ts themselues if he will not keep who goeth about to answeare my foresayd arguments it will easily appeare that in very deed he could not answeare them And if none endeauour to answeare them it will yet more appeare that they can no way answeate them that this kind of dealing with Protestants out of their owne Confessions is the fittest of all to stop their mouthes FINIS The Translatour to the Reader THE Author adioyned hereto a Catalogue of the Protestant Books with their seuerall impressions out of which he gathered the testimonies by him alleaged but because I thought it not needfull for those that read this English copy I haue omitted it The Reader if he please may see it in the Authors Latin Copy THE INDEX OR TABLE OF THE CHAPTERS CONTAYNED IN THESE BOOKES The first booke of the essence or substance of the Protestant Church and Religion CHAPTER 1. That sometymes Protestants admit very few into the Châ—rch and â—equire very many thinges to the making of a member thereof Chap. 2. That at sometymes Proâ—estants account Pâ—pists to be of the Church Chap. 3. Thâ—t sometymes Protestants acknowledge all that deny either fundamentall or other articles of fayth Heretikes Schismatikes and their professed enemies to be members of their Church Chap. 4. That sometymes they do graunt Idolaters Infidels Atheists and Antichrist himselfe to be members of their Church Chap. 5. That Protestants sometymes account all their brethren who vnder the name of Christians oppose themselues against the Pope Chap. 6. That it is necessarily required to a Protestant that he belieue Iustification by only speciall fayth Chap. 7. That it is also necessary to a Protestant to belieue all the fundamentall points of Protestancy Chap. 8. Which are the fundamentall points of Protestancy and what a Protsteant is THE SECOND BOOKE Of the Author or beginner of the Protestant Church and Religion Chap. 1. THat Protestants confesse that their Church and Religion was substantially perished when Luther began Chap. 2. The shiftes wherewith Protestants would delude their confessions of the substantiall destruction of their Church and Religion refuted Chap. 3. That Protestants confesse that all and euery one followed a differenâ— Church and Religion from theâ—rs before Luther began to preach Chap. 4. That Protestants graunt that their church and Religion was quite inuisible b fore Luther appeared Chap. 5. Those which say there were any visible Protestants before Luther refelled Chap. 6 That the Church cannot be so inuisible as Protestants confesse theirs to haue byn before Lut e s tyme. Chap. 7. That Protestants acknowledge that there were no Protestant Pastors before Luther Chap. 8. That the Church cannot be without Pastors Chap 9. That the Protestant Church was no where before Luther arose Chap. 10. The Sophistries wherewith some Protestants would seeme to proue that in tymes past the Protestants Church was in Popery refuted Chap. 11. That all the first knowne Protestants had byn Papists before tymes Chap. 12. That no auncienter Protestant then Luther stept forth and adioyned himselfe to Luthers company when he preached securely Chap. 13. That the Protestant Church Religion is new Chap. 14. That Protestants doe in plaine termes confesse that Luther was the Author and beginner of their Church and Religion Chap. 15. That Protestants cannot proue by any sufficient witnes or any probable argument that their Church was before Luther Chap. 16. What he must obserue who will vndertake to answeare this Worke. FINIS
that Protestants as (u) Lib. 2. c. 9. Lactantius wrote of Cicero cannot be more sorely confuted then they are by Protestants themselues Faults escaped in the printing Page Line Fault Correction 8â— 11. himelf himselfe 82. 27. vnles he vnles he be 96. 6. numb 66. numb 96. 107. 19. The There 109. 23. light of dele of 120. 4. credible incredible 127. 7. the these 23â— 6. dele haue bin 237. 2. be be by 140. 6. fourth third 147. 33. waye waxe 154. 7. in is 168. 23. sonde sponge 169. 3. one our 170. 33. 1525. 1535. 181. 14. should only should only say 184. 27. predigious prodigious 205. 31. boasteth boasteth that â—19 vlt. Taye Faye 211. 33. of fayth faith of 222. 21. first fifth If any other faults haue escaped it is desired of the Gentle Reader to correct them of his courtesy the Author being far absent from the Print THE FIRST BOOKE Of the substance of the Protestants Church and Religion and of their vncertainty therein CHAP. I. BECAVSE as after Plato and Aristotle Tully sayth very truly VVhosoeuer will according to the order of reason treat of any thing Lib. 4. must first define or explicate the nature thereof that it may be knowne what it is whereof he speaketh and Protestants agree that the definition is the very ground of all disputation before I do shew Caluin 3. Institut cap. 4. §. 1. Sadeel in Refut Thes â—osnan cap. 2. who was the first author of the Protestant Church and Religion which I will do in the second booke I will in this first define and determine what is a Protestant and what is the Protestant Church and Religion And because Protestants in this matter as in all others are variable and inconstant sometymes requiring many things to the making and constitution of a Protestant sometymes being content with very few things sometyms stretching the bounds of their Church most largly otherwhiles drawing theÌ„ very strait according as it serueth to their present purpose I will first discouer this their vncertainty about so weighty a matter afterward out of their owne principles and confessions of fayth set downe what is indeed necessary to the very substance and being of a Protestant and of their Church and Religion And in this Chapter I will shew how few they sometymes do admit to be of the Church and how many things they require to the making of a Protestant and in some chapters following how many they at other tymes do graunt to be of their Church and how few things they account necessary for to be a member thereof That done I will make manifest what is indeed necessary thereto They exclude Papists 2. First of all therefore they sometymes exclude Catholiques whome they terme Papists out of the Church as is manifest by all their writings in so much that the French Protestants in the 28. article of their confession say VVe openly affirme that where the word of God is not receiued nor there is any profession of obedience due thereto nor any vse of Sacraments there properly speaking we cannot iudge to be any Church VVherfore we condemne the Popish Conuenticles And D. Whitaker in his second booke against Dureus 2. section is so earnest that he sayth I will not allow the very name of a lawfull Church vnto the Roman Church because it hath nothing which a true Church ought to haue And both he in his 2. Controuersy 6. question 3. Chapter D. Sutliue in his first booke of the Church 3. cap. and lib. 2. cap. 9. M. Perkins in his reformed Catholique towards the end Caluin in his book against the Chaunter of Lions Beza in his of the notes of the Church the Confession of Saxony in the Chapter of the Church and many others do reckon diuers articles or euery one whereof they pronounce Papists to be â—ut of the Church And because their opinion hereâ—n is well inough knowne and hereafter also we â—hall haue occasioÌ„ to shew how haynously they conâ—emne the Popedome or Papistry I will heere reâ—earse no more of their sayings touching this point The like sentence they sometymes pronounce of the â—nabaptists Anabaptists and Atians For thus speaketh the conâ—ession of Auspurg Cap. 9. They condemne the Anabapâ—â—sts who disallow the baptisme of infants and think them to â—â—e faned without baptisme And the Confession of Switâ—erland cap. 20. VVe condemne the Anabaptists who deny â—at infants ought to be baptized The same is manifest by â—he English Confession c. 38. by the Confession of â—asse c. 24. others Of Arians Arrians they giue this verâ—ct in the forsayd Confession of Auspurg in the first â—rticle They condemne all heresies risen against this article of the Trinity as the Manichees Arians Eunomians c. â—nd in like sort the French Confession art 6. the â—nglish art 1. the consent of Poland and others in 〈◊〉 much as in England the Protestants haue burnt me Arians 3. Sometymes also they thrust out all hereâ—ckes Heretiks For thus writeth Luther in his explication of â—e Creed Neither Gentile Iew Heretike LutheraÌ„s or any sinner is â—ued vnlesse he make attonement with the Church and in all â—ings thinke do and teach the same And the Magdeâ—â—rgians in the preface of their 6. Century Neither â—eretikes nor deuisers or patrons of sanaticall opinions are of â—â—rist but they are of Antichrist and of the diuell and apperâ—â—ne to Antichrist and the diuell they are the impostume and â—â—e plague of the people of God The ministers of the Prince Elector of Saxony in the Conference held at Aldburg in the 3. writ cast out of the Church all VVho say they wittingly and willingly defend such corruptions of doctrine as haue byn condemned by the lawfull iudgment and consent of the Catholike Church And the Ministers of the Duke of Saxony in the 4. writ of the sayd Conference pronounce this sentence VVhosoeuer they are that do cloak and defend corruptions of the word of God that is of the articles of fayth after they haue byn admonished we iudge not to be true members of Christ vnlesse they repent And Vrbanus Regius one of the first and cheifest scholers of Luther in his Catechisme sayth All Heretikes are out of the Church The same teacheth Schusselburg a principall superintendent amongst the Lutherans in his Catalogue of heresies and many others As for the Sacramentaries SacrameÌ„taries thus professeth the French Confession in the 6. article VVe detest all Sects and heresies which haue byn reiected by the holy Fathers as S. Hilary S. Athanasc S. Ambrose S. Cyrill Whereupon Sadeel in his preface of his answere to the abiured articles sayth Our Confession of fayth condemneth all Heretikes Likewise the Confession of Basle in 24. article writeth in thiâ— sort VVe driue away all whosoeuer dissenting from the society of the holy Church do either bring in or follow strange wicked doctrines And Peter Martyr in his Commoâ— places in the title
of heretiks This in summe I will say heretikes are not otherwise to be dealt with all then Infidells 〈◊〉 Iewes Caluin also in his 2. booke of Institution cap. 15. number 1. Rightly Augustin denyeth Heretikes haue the same foundation with the godly albeit they preach tâ—â— name of Christ And in his instruction against the Libertines That we may speake properly Heretikes are not oâ—ly like to wolues or theeues but much worse Beza in his booâ— of punishing Heretiks If one terme Heretikes saithleâ— apostatas he shall giue them their due title And againe Heretikes affirme Christ in word and deny him indeed Danaeus in his 5. Controuersy and 691. pag. An heretike condemned by lawfull iudgement and actually cast out of the Church is not of the visible Church nor of the inuisible neither actually or apparently so long as he remaineth in that state Polanus in his 7. booke which he termeth Syntagma cap. 5. Heretikes whiles they remayne such are not members of the Catholique Church And Vorstius in his Anti-bellarmin pag. 79. The Ghospellers do esteem Antichrist in common to be euery heretike who opposeth himselfe eyther openly and plainly or closely and indirectly to Christ and his doctrine And in the 121. pag. There is no controuersy betweene vs and our aduersaries touching heretikes Schismatikes and Apostatas properly and truly so called that they are altogeather out of the Church of Christ Thus forraine Protestants In England English Protestants his Maiesty in his epistle to Cardinal Peron written by Casaubon The King damneth and detesteth those who either haue departed from the sayth of the Catholike Church and are become heretikes or from the Communion and are become Schismatikes The Apology of the Church of England part 3. diuis 3. VVe condemne all sortes of the old heretiks as the Arians the Eutichians c. and shortly all them that haue a wicked opinion either of God the Father or of Christ or of the holy Ghost or of any other point of Christian Religion for so much as they be confuted by the Ghospell of Christ we plainly pronounce them for damnable and detestable persons and defy them euen to the diuell D. Whitaker in the preface of his Controuersies If we be heretikes it is reason they should warne all theirs to fly from vs. And Controuer 2. question 1. cap. 4. That he proueth heretikes and Apostatas and Schismatikes not to be members of the true Church maketh nothing against vs. None of our men euer taught that The like he hath question 5. cap. 1. and 18. D. Sutliue in his first booke of the Church cap. 1. Heretikes are not of the Church D. Morton in his Apology 1. part 1. booke cap. 3 affirmeth that Heretikes are not to be accounted of the â—hurch in truth but in name not indeed but equiuocally Finally D. White in his way to the Church pag 110. All hereticks teach the truth in some things and yet we deny them to be the Church of God And in the defence of the same way cap. 8. sect 1. There is little or no difference betweene the Diuell and an Apostata or Heretike 4. The same censure they sometymes giue of Schismatikes They exclude Schismatiks as appeareth by the words of his Maiesty D. Whitaker and Vorstius already rehearsed Besides Luther in his great Catechisme tom 5. pag. 628. affirmeth the sense of that article The Communion of Saints to be this I belieue that there is on earth a litle Congregation of Saints agreeing in all things without sectes or Schismes And Melancthon in his book against Swenfeild tom 2. LutheraÌ„s pag. 201. Neither is there more then one Church the Spouse of Christ neither doth this company consist of diuers Sectes Salomon Gesnerus in his Common places the 24. place of the Church Catholiks are opposite to Schismatikes heretiks The same teacheth Schusselburg in his 8. tome of the Catalogue of heretikes pag. 726. 727. Amongst the Sacramentaries the Switzers in their Confession SacrameÌ„taries article 17. do thus professe VVe so much esteeme the Communion with the true Church of Christ as that we teach that those cannot liue before God who communicate not with his true Church And the French Protestants in theirs article 26. VVe belieue that none can lawfully withdraw themselues from the assemblies Bullinger in his Epitome or Compendium of fayth 6. booke 11. cap They be out of this Church whâ— vpon enuy or contention separate themselues from her withouâ— cause will haue some thing peculiar to themselues Musculus also in his common places in the title of the church The vnity of Heretiks and Schismatikes is bastard and diuided True entier and Catholike vnity is not among Schismatikes And in the title of Schismatikes A Schismatike putteth himselfe in daunger of losse of his saluation in departing from the Communion of the flock of the Lord. For by that departure he is not only separated and diuided from that Ecclesiasticall and externall society of the faythfull but also from participation of the bloud and spirit of Christ Caluin likewise in his treatise of the necessity of reforming the Church VVe do professe the vnity of the Church such as is described by S. Paul to be most deare vnto vs and we accurse all them that shall any way violate it And in his fourth booke of Institutions chap. 1. numb 2 Vnlesse vnder Christ our head we be vnited to all the rest of his members there is no hope for vs of the euerlasting inheritance For we cannot haue two or three Churches vnlesse Christ be torne in pieces And num 4. Out of the lap the Church there is no saluation departure from thence is alwayes pernicious Againe num 10 God maketh so great account of the Communion with his Church as he holdeth him for a renagate and fugitiue whosoeuer obstinatly separateth himselfe from any Christian society which retaineth the true vse of the word and Sacraments And he addeth that the forsaking of the Church Is the deniall of God and Christ The like doctrine he deliuereth in his Catechisme vpon the 1. Cor. cap. 1. and other where Polanus in his Theses part 2. sayth Schismaticall Churches are to be forsaken And Bucanus in his places loc 41. of the Church quest 33. auoucheth Schismatiks to be out of the Church and quest 5. that they are not vniuocally a Church that is they haue not the true nature of a Church The same sayth Danaeus in his treatise of Antichrist cap. 17. And in his 3. booke of the Church cap. 5. writeth thus Schismaâ—ikes actually excommunicated and cast out of the Church by lawfull sentence are no more of the visible Church For sayth he the marke that you be of the visible Church is this that you outwardly professe the fayth and communicate in Sacraments with the rest of the Church And he addeth that such are neither actually of the inuisible Church but only in possibility and that the holy Fathers liken sucâ— to
written word of God And his Maiesty in his Monitory epistle pag. 97. English ProtestaÌ„tâ— in Latin I call God to witnes that I hold him not for a Christian who in this learned age belieueth that to wit that Enoch and Elias are to come And D. Morton in his answere to the Protestants Apology lib. 4. c. 2. sect 3. after he had sayd that in a Church albeit corrupted with errour and superstition yet if it do not ruinate the foundation the erroneous superstitious professors may be saued adddeth VVhich notwithstanding we must so vnderstand as that the errour and superstition do not proceed from knowledge but from ignorance which ignorance is not affected but simple Thus we see that Protestants somtymes confesse that true fayth is like a graine or Mathematicall point which cannot be parted that the articles of fayth are one copulatiue and cannot be deuided that who so obstinatly denieth one article belieueth truly none that the obstinate deniall of any one poynt of fayth is sufficient to damne or to make an heretik and no brother of the faythfull or member of the Church And finally that she is no true Church who willfully maintaineth any one thing repugnant to the Ghospell or word of God Which indeed is most true and is the doctrine of the holy Fathers and Catholiks and I would to God Protestants would constantly stand vnto it 7. By all which hath byn rehearsed in this chapter out of Protestants it appeareth how many sortes of Christians Protestants do sometymes exclude out of the Church namely Papists Anabaptists Arians al Heretiks all Schismatiks all those who deny any fundamentall point of fayth and finally al who obstinatly deny any point whatsoeuer of fayth or of the word of God And how many things they sometymes require to the making and being of a Protestant to wit that he belieue all and euery point of their fayth and obstinatly dissent in none To which their doctrine if they would as I haue sayd alwayes constantly stand it would easily appeare first how small a company the Protestants Church is and how little it is spread through the world and much lesse Catholike or vniuersal seeing there is no Prouince nor scarse any citty in which all Protestants agree amongst themselues in al points of their doctrine Secondly it would easily appeare that the Protestant Church was neuer before Luther seeing there is no apparence that before him there was any company of Christians who in all points of doctrine agreed with Protestants But ProtestaÌ„ts as I sayd in the Preface accommodate their doctrine and opinions to tymes and occasions And the tymes when they deny Papists to be of the Church are when they exhort them to leaue the Roman Church or excuse their owne reuolting from her or when they dehort others from returning to her For at all these tymes it serueth to their purpose to deny that Papists are of the Church or in the way of saluation which at other tymes as we shall see in the next chapter they are content to graunt And the tymes when they exclude Anabaptists Arians Heretiks Schismatiks and all that deny either fundamentall or other articles of fayth out of the Church are when either the euidence of truth enforceth them thereto or when they are ashamed to acknowledge such vgly monsters for brethren and members of their Church or would exhort such as haue left their company to returne vnto them and keep others from forsaking them or finally would brag of the agreement and purity in doctrine of their company For at those tymes it serueth their turne to renouÌ„ce all the foresayd kind of men whom at other tymes especially when we demaund of them who were of their Church before Luther they are most willing to receiue as their kind brethren diligently scraping gathering such shreeds and clouts when they perceiue their owne nakednes and beggary which themselues when they thought they were rich and had no need thereof most disdainfully cast on the dunghills as shall appeare in the chapters following CHAP. II. That Protestants sometymes account Papists for members of their Church IN the former chapter we haue seene how sparing Protestants sometyms be in admitting others into their Church now we shall see how liberall they be at other tymes in so much that they graunt not only all those whome in the former chapter they reiected but also their professed enemies idolaters Infidells Atheists Antichrist himselfe and all whosoeuer vnder the name of Christians impugne the deeds or doctrine of the Pope to be their brethren their fellowes and members of their Church This we will shew concerning the Papists in this chapter and of the others afterward 1. That Protestants sometymes do acknowledge Papists to be in the Church is manifest First by their open confession thereof LutheraÌ„s For in the preface of their Confession of Auspurg speaking of themselues and Papists Papists serue vnder christ they say VVe are all soldiers vnder one Christ And Luther in his epistle against the Anabaptists as Caluin in his booke against the Chaunter of Lions and D. Whitaker in the place hereafter cited do confesse writeth The kernel of Christianity in Popery That in Popery is true Christianity yea the kernell of Christianity and many pious and great Saints Againe If Christianity be vnder the Pope then it must be the body and member of Christ And vpon the 28. chapter of Genesis VVe confesse that there is a Church among the Papists because they haue Baptisme absolution the text of the Ghospell and many godly men are among them Caluin in his 140. epistle to Soziâ— I think I haue sufficiently proued that in Popery there remayneth some Church albeit halfe destroyed and if you will broken and deformed And vpon the 2. câ—ap of the 2 epistle to the Thessalonians The Body of Christ I confesse it is the temple of God in which the Pope ruleth and he calleth it the very sanctuary of God And de vera reform pag. 332. SacrameÌ„taries â—ayth that S Paul affirmeth that Antichrist whom he will haue to be the Pope shall sit in the temple of God And lib. de scandalis pag. 103 In the midest of Gods temple And lib. cont Precentorem pag. 372 In the very sanctuary of God And Respons ad Sadolet In the midest of Gods sanctuary Surely this is to graunt that the Romane Church in which the Pope sitteth is the very temple and very sanctuary of God And in his answeare to Sadolet VVe deny not those to be Churches of Christ which you gouerne In his 4. booke of Institutions chap. 2. num 11. he sayth that among Papists Gods couenant remayned inuiolable Not yet killed And num 12 VVe deny not that there are Churches among them Neither deny we but there remaine Churches vnder his the Pope he meaneth tyranny but which he hath almost killed Iunius in his book of the Church cap. 17. writeth that the Popish
Analysis of the Confession of Ausburge pag. 525 As many as are enrolled for Christs soldiers by sacred baptisme or at least wise are ioyned to him by profession of fayth are euery one of them members of the Church simply taken as it signifieth the company of them that are called Serauia defens contra Bezâ—m cap. 2. pag. 31 As long as there remaines amongst them the new and old testamâ—nt together with the Sacrament of baptisme and beliefe in God the Father and in the Sonne and holy Ghost and they trust to be saued by the Sonne of God and his death albeit they adioyne a number of their owne wicked forgeries they are notwithstanding parts and members of the vniuersall Church The ministers of the scattered Church of the Netherlands in sua narrat pag. 71 No man can ProfessioÌ„ of Christ nor ought to giue sentence in the Church of an others condemnation of whome it is not publikely knowne that he is fallen away from the foundation of the Apostolicall Confession vttered by the mouth of Peter Oecolampadius epist ad Bucerum apud Hospin part 2. ProfessioÌ„ of Christ God and man Histor fol. 112 VVe are gladly at peace withall those that confesse with vs and teach Iesus Christ true God and true man in vnity of person And Bucerus apud eundem fol. 84 VVho so preach the same Christ with vs we account them ours what estimate soeuer they make of vs. Beza de lib. notis Eccles pag. 30 VVe say it is a true definition of the true Church whether generally considered or in particuler wherein it is sayd to be a company which acknowledgeth one Sauiour To acknowledge one Sauiour For sayth he this alâ—ne is the only ground-workâ— of that spirituall house of God Christ Iesus is the soule of that mysticall body the only rule and square of that building And the Confession of Bohemia artic 8. defines the Catholike Church to be all Christians That are associated in one beliefe concerning Christ and the holy Trinity The faith of Christ and the Trinity The Confession of Basse artic 5. hath this assertion VVe belieue the holy Christian Church c. VVherein all those are Citizens that confesse Iesus to be Christ the lambe of God which taketh away the sinnes of the world and shew openly the same beliefe by works of charity Acontius l. 3. Stratagem Satanae pag. 119. concludes that nothing else is necessarâ—ly to be belieued Beliefe of one God Christ but That there is one God and Christ his Sonne made man and raised from the dead and that saluation is purchased by his name and not by any other name nor by the works of the law And Luther vpon the 7. of Math. fol. 86. closeth vp all with this epilogue The head and summe of Christian doctrine is this That God saueth by Christ that God sent and gaue his Sonne by whome alone he pardoneth our offences and doth iustify and saue vs. This sayth he and nothing else it behoues thee firmely to belieue Sometyme to belieue their article of iustification by only fayth is as much as they require in a limme of their Church The only article of iustification sufficeth or think needfull to saluation Luther tom 7. tract in 3. symbol fol. 140 I haue found by experience that who so haue truly and sincerely belieued that principall article of Christian fayth concerning Iesus Christ though they had their errours and faults haue at last notwithstanding byn saued And tom 4. in cap. 42. Pareus in 1. Galat. lect 8. Iezler de bello Euch. fol. 77. Isaiae fol. 178 If we abide in this article we are secure from heresies and retaine remission of sinnes which pardoneth our weaknes in ciuill dueties and beliefe And in cap. 43. fol. 200 VVho so belieueth this article is out of danger for euer falling into error and the holy Ghost must needs assist him And Brocard vpon the 2. cap. of the Apocalips fol. 45 The former Ministers who were before the first councell of Trent determined that we ought not to contend but that their Supper should be common which had receiued one doctrine touching iustification Caluin de vera Eccles reform pag. 316. writeth thus I know it is the common saying of a great many that so the doctrine of vndeserued Iustification continue sound we should not be so stifly contentious about the rest And the Author of the Preface in Syntagma Confess after he had affirmed that the article of iustification is the ground work the forme and soule of Christian religion makes this demaund How can they then but haue peace one with another whosoeuer are fellow-partners of so great good And he saith it is An vnseemly and hainous thing that betweene such there should be emnity and debate And indeed all Protestants should teach so since they make this article the definition the summe and very soule of Protestantisme as shall be herrafter shewed in the 6. chapter Sometymes in a member of their Church they require only some one point of Christianity or but the profession of Christs name For Sturmius apud Hospin in Corcord discord c. 24. testifieth that Bucer sayd He would neuer condemne any one in whome he saw any point of Christianity Any point of Christianity And Plessy lib. de Eccles cap. 2. affirmeth that the Church may be infected with heresy from top to toe yet be a part of the vniuersall Church as long as it professeth the name of Christ And Moulins in his buckler of fayth pag. 43. The vniuersall visible Church is the company of all them who professe themselues to be Christians Thus we see that to a member of the visible Church yea to fayth to Christianity to a member of the true and Catholike Church to eternall saluation as Protestants sometyme iudge and determine litle or nothing sufficeth Do not these men go about to expose the Church meanes of saluation vnto scorne and mockery What Iew or Turke did euer make his Synagogue so common 4. ProtestaÌ„ts challenge those that deny eueÌ„ fundameÌ„tall articles Albeit the former allegations do sufficiently conuince that when Protestants calculate the limmes and members of their Church they take to make vp the number such as renounce the very fundamentall articles of their beliefe yet to make it more euident and to preuent all colour of doubt I will adde other proofes besides And first we haue in this behalfe their owne Confessions For Beza lib. de Notis Eccles pag. 45. teacheth plainly that some errours euen in some fundamentall heads of fayth may creep into the Catholike Church And D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 4. cap. 3. pag. 490 It is manifest that the true Church may erre for a tyme euen in necessary points The like hath Hutterus in Analysi Confessionis Augustanae pag. 453. and Iunius doth intimate as much lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 17. D. Whitaker againe cont 2. quest 5 cap. 17 VVe gather
that the Church may for a tyme swarue from the truth euen in some fundamentall points and be notwithstanding safe And Zanchius lib. 1. epist pag. 221. will not haue vs forsake any coÌ„pany on occasion of false opinions which swarue from the groundwork of fayth D. Hall likewise in sua Roma irreconc sect 1. sayth that the true Church may foster such errours As by deduction and consequence destroy the foundations of beliefe D. Fulke in his serm vpoÌ„ the Apocalips hauing made this obiection to himselfe that seing the Church is the Espouse of Christ it cannot be that he suffered it to be possessed so many ages with damnable errors answeares it in this manner VVhat Christ himselfe hath sayd that the errors of false Prophets should be exceeding great in as much as the very elect if it might be should be led into errour And lib. de Succes Eccles pag. 122. he sayth It seemes not fitting to take from the Grecians the name of a Church whome notwithstanding he confesseth to be ensnared with grieuous errors Now a grieuous errour according to D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 4 cap. 1. dissolues the foundation and may therfore be termed fundamentall M. Perkins in his exposition of the Creed col 790 VVhen an errour is repugnant to the foundation either directly or by necessary consequence if it proceed of weaknes he in whome it is ought to be reputed a member of the vniuersall Church And vpon 1. Galat. v. 2 If a Church through frailty fall into errour although it concerne the foundation notwithstanding it remaynes yet a Church as is certaine by the example of the Galathians And vpon the epistle of Iude v. 19 The Church of Gaelatia through weaknesse remoued it selfe vnto another Ghospell and erred in the foundation yet Paul writeth to it as to the Church of God D. Willet affirmeth the same in his Synopsis cont 2. q. 3. pag. 104. And Melancthon tom 2. lib. de Eccl. pag. 123. toucheth the same string when he sayth The true Church it selfe may haue errours which obscure and darken the articles of fayth And tom 4. in cap. 9. Rom God gathereth alwayes some company in which the foundation is kept sometymes lesse pure sometymes more D. White in his way pag. 111 Some articles lying in the very foundation may be belieued not so clearly Nay sometymes they dare auouch that those very Corinthians that denyed the resurrection and those Galatians also that changed the Ghospell of Christ into another Ghospell were of the Church Luther in 1. cap. Galat fol 215. Perkins loc cit For thus the Switzers Confession c. 17 VVe are not ignorant what manner of Churches those of the Corinthians and Galathians were in the Apostles tyme which the Apostle accuseth of many and grieuous crimes and yet termeth them the holy Churches of Christ And Caluin 4. Institut cap. 1. § 27 Most greiuous sinnes possesse sometymes whole Churches The Apostasy of the Galathians was no small offence the Corinthians were lesse excusable then they howbeit neither of them are excluded from the Lords mercy Sadeel in his answere ad Thes Posnan cap. 12. pag. 866 The Galathians and Corinthians though corrupted with errour and disagreeing each from other about the cheife groundwork of beliefe and that not concerning the manner but touching the matter it selfe retained notwithstanding the name of a true â—hurch And hence he gathereth that the debate and disagrement betweene the Lutherans and Caluinists concerning the Eucharist doth not let either of them from being of the true Church 5. The deeds of the Lutherans and Sacramentaries yeld vs a second kind of proofe For the Electorall or milde Lutherans in colloq Aldeburg scripto 8. call themselues LutheraÌ„s professe that theÌ„selues differ fundamentally Fellowes and companions of the same Ministery fellow-cittizens and fellow-soldiers of those of Saxony or rigorous Lutherans of whome notwithstanding scripto 6. pag. 111. they giue this censure They haue shewed themselues to dissent from our Churches in the foundation Againe VVe will make it euident that they impugne the fundamentall doctrine And scripto 4. pag. 4 Our opinion is that we disagree not about impertiment matters only or things of no consequence but about the maine and cheifest matters And scripto 7 This one thing they ayme at and bend all their endeauours to vndermine and ouerturne the groundwork of sauing doctrine And pag. 374. they complaine that those of Saxony do often cry out of them that they are worse then any idolaters And the Sacramentaries in Praefat. Apologet. Orthodoxi consensus write thus of the Lutherans They haue hitherto suffered among them such as call in question the doctrine of iustification of originall sinne of free will of the Ghospell of the law and vse thereof of Christs descent into hell of his person of the election of Gods children and many other articles of no small moment which things they easily put vp because all these go vnder the name of Lutherans Now that the Sacramentaries likewise acknowledg the Lutherans for their brethren is apparent by the Apology of the Church of England by the consent of Poland by the preface of the Syntagme of Confessions SacrameÌ„â—taries challenge LutheraÌ„s by the Conferences of Marspurg and Montbelgard and other publike writings and registred acts and yet they see and openly exclaime against their errours in fundamental points of fayth Of Luther thus writeth Zuinglius tom 2. Resp ad Luther fol. 401 And yet say they differ fundameÌ„tally from theÌ„ VVe iudge thee a worse seductour impostour and denyer of Christ then was Marcion himselfe And fol. 430. Luther as yet is entangled and sticks fast in two errours exceeding grieuous and in most foule ignorance Of Melancthon thus sayth Caluin epist 183 Either he openly impugneth true doctrine in the cheifest heads or else hideth his meaning craftily or not very honestly And epist 179. he complaineth that Melancthon endeauoureth to ouerthrow his doctrine of predestination VVithout which sayth he the knowledge of Gods free and vndeserued mercy is vtterly lost The like he sayth epist 141. Sturmius lib. de Ratione incundae Concordiae sayth plainly that the Lutherans do pluck vp the foundation of Christian Religion And Bullinger in fundamento firmo writeth that the very infidelity of the Iewes and Gentils is by the Lutherans brought into the Churches Cureus in Exegesi Sacramentaria pag. 91 Surely the controuesy between the Lutherans and Sacramentaries is concerning the foundation The Sacramentaries in the Preface of the Conference at Mulbrun say that the Lutherans Teare in preces and adulterate the articles of the incarnation of the true humane nature c. VVhich articles say they no Christian man can doubt but are the groundwork of saluation And in the foresayd preface They are at variance not about the Lords supper only but touching the person of â—hrist touching the vnion of his diuine and humane nature touching the vbiquity of his body and corporall manducation thereof
contrary opinions Thirdly we see how infamous a society Protestancy is into which all heretikes and Schismatikes likewise Idolaters Infidels Antichrist Atheists are admitted What sinke euer did receiue such filth Surely such a rable deserueth better the name of hell then of the holy Church Fourthly we see how monstruous a company it is which consisteth of so different and opposite members What they meane by a Protestant in tymâ—past Fiftly we may gather what Protestants meane when they say Protestants haue byn alwayes or before Luther For they meane not that there haue byn alwayes some who belieued at least all their fundamentall articles but that there were alwayes some who as they speake opposed themselues against the Pope or his errors whether they were otherwise Schismatiks Heretiks infidels or Atheists Of which kind of men I deny not but there haue byn alwayes some rable but none but a mad man will say that it was the holy Church spouse of Christ Sixtly we see how litle ProtestaÌ„ts account of their Church fayth and religion and belieue nothing lesse then that it is the church of God or fayth of Christ For who doubteth but Schisme heresy infidelity Atheisme are most pestilent plagues and infernall darknesse directly opposite to ecclesiasticall Communion and fayth which are the forme life soule of the Church And who can imagin Note that he can associate and vnite together formes so contrary as are light and darknesse life and death truth and lies or that the society in darknesse lies and death as are the societies in Schisme Heresy and infidelity can become one with the society in light life truth as the Church is If therfore seriously they belieued their Church to be the church of Christ they would neuer thinke that she could become one with the society in Schisme heresy and infidelity And this sometymes Protestants themselues perceiue For Brentius in Appendice Recognit thus speaketh to the Sacramentaries when they desired to be held for brethren of the Lutherans whome yet they condemned of heresy If they iudâ—e our opinion to be impious with what face do they desire to ioyne themselues with that Church which maintayneth impious doctrine and to be held of her for brethren VVhat fellowship sayth Paul is there of iustice with iniustice or what CoÌ„munion of light with darknesse or what agreement of Christ with Belial or what for the saythfull with the infidell VVherefore if they desire this sincerely and in earnest they manifestly shew that they make mockery of religion as if it skilled not which one follow so he may passe his life peaceably and quietly In like manner those of Wittenberge in their Refutation of the orthodoxall consent pag. 636. say VVe cannot wounder inough that seing they not only accuse the doctours of our Church of horrible and damned heresies but also haue long since condemned them to wit of Arianisme Nestorianisme Eutichianisme Marcionisme Manicheisme and the Monothelites heresies neuerthelesse they dare account vs for brethren and desire our brotherhood VVho that is carefull of piety and truth can persuade himselfe that these Sectmasters do in earnest handle religion For if we be such as we are iudged of them our friendship and fraternity is to be detested not desired Thus speake the Lutherans to the Sacramentaries which no whit lesse falleth vpon theÌ„selues because they also challenge the Hussites and other old heretiks whome they cannot excuse from holding vile heresies Finally we see how vncertaine Protestants be in determing what a Protestant is and what is necessary to the essence making of a Protestant consequently how vncertaine they must be whome to hold for one of their houshould whome for a stranger whome for a brother whom for an enemy which church or company they must imbrace which they must fly which they must account the spouse of Christ which the Synagogue of Satan Then the which vncertainty nothing can be more miserable in matter of religion Wherefore sith they are so vncertaine in this matter we must therin setle some certainty and that according to their own principles That it is necessary for a Protestant to belieue with only speciall fayth that himselfe is iustified CHAP. VI. 1. ABOVE all things it is most necessary to an inuisible or true Protestant in the sight of God as they terme him that with only speciall or peculiar fayth he belieue some thing belonging to himselfe to wit that he is iustified in Christ or as they vse to speake that with fayth he apprehend Christs iustice and apply it vnto him elf in particuler And to a visible Protestant in sight of men it is in like sort necessary that he professe himself to belieue with such a fayth that he is iustified in Christ For example For Luther to haue byn a true Protestant before God it is needfull that he haue truly belieued himselfe to be iustified by only the foresayd speciall fayth which he had of his own iustice which faith they call speciall or particuler because it was particuler to Luther no man being bound to belieue Luther to be iustified besides himselfe And for Luther to haue byn a visible Protestant in the sight of men it was needful in like manner to haue professed himself to haue belieued that he was iustified by only the sayd fayth The same I say of Caluin and of euery Protestant in particuler That according to their doctrine it is most necessary to a Protestant that he belieue himselfe to be iustified by only speciall fayth is manifest First because they teach that a man is iustified by only speciall fayth wherwith he belieueth something belonging to himselfe alone not by an vniuersall or Catholike fayth whereby he belieueth the mysteryes of Christian religion common to all and which euery one must belieue for this fayth they call historicall and say it may be in such as are not iust yea in hipocrites and Deuills Seing therefore in their opinion no man is a true Protestant in the sight of God but only he that is iust nor any iust but who hath a speciall or peculiar fayth wherewith he apprehendeth Christs iustice to himselfe it is manifest that according to their principles none can be a true Protestant before God vnlesse he haue the foresayd speciall fayth and in like manner that none can be a visible Protestant before men vnlesse he professe to belieue iustification by only speciall fayth because none can be accounted to be of any religion vnlesse he professe to belieue those meanes of obtayning iustification and remission of sins which that religion teacheth Caluin 3. Instit cap. 2. § 16 None is a true faythfull man None faythfull without speciall fayth but he who with a solid persuasion that God loueth him assureth himselfe of all things from his goodnes c. And § 39. he sayth VVithout this Christianity standeth not And in Rom. 1. v. 7 Hence we gather that none do rightly account themselues faythfull vnlesse
say the Church can be destroyed 8. If any reply that S. Augustin vpon the 128. psalme sayth that the Church was once in Abel alone and Tertullian lib. de poenit cap. 10. the Church is in one or two I answere that S. Augustin there by the Church vnderstandeth those only whome the scripture by name hath canonized as it hath Abel for otherwise it is manifest that in Abels tyme there were others that were of the Church besides himselfe to wit Adam and Eue. And Tertullian by the Church vnderstandeth not the Catholike or vniuersall Church as we do but any number of Christians such as were those domesticall Churches which S. Paul sometymes saluted 9. The last refuge may be that what Protestants haue sayd of the destruction of the Church and fayth they meant not of their owne Church and fayth but of some others But this is a fond shift For first as I haue shewed they meane the destruction of the true Church and fayth Eyther therefore their Church and fayth is not the true but false or else they meane of their owne For the true Church and fayth is but one as the Apostle sayth Ephes 4 One God one fayth And the Nycen Creed I belieue one church S. Cyprian lib. de vnit One God one Christ one Church and one sayth S. Hilary ad Constant VVhatsoeuer is besides one fayth is not fayth but treachery And S. Leo serm 4. de Natiuit Vnlesse it be one it is no fayth Nay Luther lib. cont Papaâ—um tom 7. fol. 461 Christ knoweth not two kinds of vnlike Churches but one only Church Caluin 4. Inst cap. 1. § 2 VVe cannot find two or three churches vnlesse Christ be pluckt in peeces And in his Catechisme As there is one head of the faythfull so they must all be vnited in one body that there be not many Churches but one only And hereupon inferreth Sadeel in Refutat Thes Posnan art 61. that what is sayd of the true Church is sayd of theirs Seeing sayth he the true Church is one and not many as often as the truth of doctrine shineth openly so often we say the true Church and therfore our Church was visible Secondly because as we haue seene they speake of the destruction of their most principall article of iustificatioÌ„ by only faith which they affirme to be the life soule and summe of their Church Thirdly because they estsoones speake of the destruction of the Ghospell but by the name of the Ghospell they meane their owne doctrine as by the name of Gospellers they vnderstand themselues as hereafter shall appeare Finally because they professe that by the name of a Protestant Lutheran or Caluinist they vnderstand a true Christian Sadeel lib. de peccat remiss cap. 1 Ours that is the true Christian Catholikes opinion D. Fulke lib. de Succest pag. 186 I will neuer deny that Iewell was a noble Protestant that is a Christian And ad Cauillat Staplet The community of Christians whome ye call Protestants Hutten in Expostul cum Erasmo Against Lutherans that is maintayners of the truth Schusselburg tom 7. Catal. haeret Pap. 73 A Lutheran or true Christian is c. And lib. 2. Theol. Caluin fol. 131 Lutherans that is true seruants of Christ Beza cont Illyricum pag. 168 VVe perceiue no difference betweene Sacramentaries and Christians Hospinian part 2. Histor fol. 384 The Sacramentaries that is the orthodoxall And Danaeus cont Bellarm. pag. 311 The Caluinists that is Christians pag. 169 A Caluinist that is a godly man 10. Wherefore out of all whâ—ch hath byn sayd in this and the former Chapter I thus make my first demonstration to proue that Luther was the Author and first beginner of the Protestant Church and religion If the Protestant Church were not at all when Luther began he was the author thereof But it was not at all Therefore he was the author of it The Maior or first proposition is euident For if it were not at all when Luther began he was the beginner of it The minor is manifest by the foresayd CoÌ„fessions of Protestants wherein they plainly say that it was substantially perished That euery man followed a Church and religion different from the Protestant before Luther arose CHAP. III. 1. THE second demonstration wherewith we will proue Luther to haue byn haue byn the Author of the Protestant Church and religion we will take from the Protestants confessions that wheÌ„ Luther first began all the world and euery man imbraced a different religion Luther in the Preface of his first come Here see euen by my case The whole world how hard it is to yet out of errours which are confirmed by the example of the whole world and by long custome as it were changed into nature And to 2. this is written in his Epitaph O Christ Long custome he shewed thâ—e when all the world was ouerwhelmed with darkenesse And lib. 1. de captiuit Babylon fol. 72. being to write against Masse he sayth Neither let it moue thee that the whole world hath the contrary opinion and custome And fol. 68 There is almost this day nothing more receiued or more seâ—led in the Church then that Masse is a sacrifice Againâ— So many ages I set vpon a thing which being approued by the custome of so many ages and consent of all is so ingrafted as it is needfull to change almost the whole face of the Church Consent of all And lib. de â—â—râ—g Miss fol. 244 How often did my trembling hart quake and reprehending me obiected that their strongest and only argument Art thou only wise what did all erre Only Luther wise were so many ages ignorant Behold how Luthers heart or conscience did tell him that he alone knew Protestancy and that for many ages all were ignorant of it And in hiâ— table talkes fol. 10 These cogitations were very troublesome to me Thou only hast the pure word of God all others want it And lib. cit de Missa â—ol 247 The common people without doubt are most fully persuaded that all men are holpen by Masses for it seemeth incredible that all the world should be so forsaken of God And fol. 256 It seemes incredible to them that Luther alone should be wise Contra Cochlaeum fol. 408 The Sophisters and Monks haue seduced the whole world to trust in works The whole world vnder the Pope Tom. 3. in psal 82. fol. 481 In tymes past the whole world was vnder the Popes Dominion Tom. 5. â—n 4. Galat. fol. 388 In former ages Paul was vnknown to the whole world Tom. 6. in cap. 11. Genes fol. 130 The wicked impostour so he termeth the Pope hath deceiued all the word in c. 37. fol. 506 The whole world was horribly brought into madnes and solly by Papists In cap. 19 fol. 238 In the former age all things lay in darknesse Tom. 7. epist ad D. Sabaudiae fol. 483 VVe confesse that the world was by the Pope most miserably seduced
therefore were but halfe Protestants For to vs it sufficeth that we shew Luther to haue byn the Author and beginner of whole and true Protestants such as held all points that are necessary to the making of an absolue Protestant Those confuted who say there were some visible Protestants when Luther arose CHAP. V. What a maÌ„ Illyricus was 1. SOME Protestants when we aske of them who were the visible Protestants before Luther began do not themselues name any but send vs to Illyricus or M. Fox So playeth D. Whitaker lib. 3. against Duraeus sect 12. Colloq Aldeburg Hosâ— part 2. fol. â—c 4. Beza epist 55. in Mat. 20 ver 15. in 4. Ephe. Sâ—uitet Praefat. in tom 1. Pareus lib. 5. de Amâ—sl grat cap. 1 Melancâ—h tom 2. Hesk. in Antid Schâ—sselb Praf to 2. Kemnit loc p. 261. and lib. 7. sect 1 D. Fulke of Succession pag. 324. Schusselburg in 8. tom of his Catalogue of Heretiks pag. 365. Vorstius in his Autibellarm pag. 159. Lubbert lib. 5. of the Church c. 2. and others These men do manifestly shew that theÌ„selues know not of any such visible Protestants For they would neuer lay the burden of answering this question vpon others if they could haue answered it themselues And besides they declare that they know no author worthy of credit to whome they might send vs for the answere of this so important demaund else they would neuer haue referred vs to Illyricus or M. Fox For Illyricus in the iudgement of most Protestants both Lutherans and Sacramentaries was a vagabond a hell hound an heretike a Manichee deceitfull a lyar an impostor a falsifier a Cauiller a sclaunderer a singular inuenter of sclaunders a sycophant in his own iudgement impudently blasphemous a broacher of doctrine which bringeth in Epicurisme and mortality of the soule and ouerthroweth all religion and who had nothing to impugne truth withall besides an audacious ignorance and a very diuilesh spirit This and much more write the Protestants themselues of Illyricus wherefore to send vs to such a man is plainly to confesse that they know no man of credit to whome they may referre vs. And of the like stuffe is Fox a most impudent patcher of lyes who in his false Martyrologe proposeth theeues traytors sorcerers murderers of themselues Anabaptists Papists professed enemies and some then aliue for Protestant Martyrs as Allen Cope sheweth in the sixt book of his dialogues Beside those whom Illyricus nameth before Luther himselfe dares not cal Protestants but VVitnesses of truth because forsooth they disliked some doctrine or fact of the Pope And such witnesses also they are as some of them be Popes themselues as (a) Lib. 19. Pius 2. some famous Papists as (b) Lib 15. Peter Lumbard and Gratian whome himselfe calleth the (c) Lib. 15. 16. Pillars of the Religion of the Roman Antichrist and sayth they renewed Popery euen from the foundation some professed aduersaries of ProtestaÌ„ts as (d) Lib. 19. Clichtoucus some of the holy Fathers who as before was seene condemned the very soule and summe of Protestancy some those who only disliked the corrupt manners of some Popes as (e) Centur. 6 cap. 1. Richard Hampell some Atheists as (f) Lib. 19. Machiauell some who any way (g) Praf Catal. gainsayd either the doctrine or deed of any Pope Surely for Illyricus to bring such witnesses after he had searched in all corners and raked in all chanels doth manifestly bewray that there can no true Protestants be found before Luthers tyme. For Illyricus though neuer so impudent would haue byn ashamed to haue bragged of such silly witnesses if he could haue found any true Protestants whatsoeuer Besides such felloweâ— may be only sayd to haue byn Protestants and can no way be proued to haue byn simply and absolutely Protestants such as we speake of And we care not whom any one may say to haue byn Protestants for as Luther sayth Tom. 2. fol 437. what is more easy then to say any thing but whome he can proue conuince to haue byn such without which his saying is but voluntary and ridiculous and the beliefe therof rash and vnreasonable 2. And as for those which M. Fox produceth for Protestants before Luther they liued in the year of our Lord 1521. as himselfe writeth pag. 749. in the edition of 1596. that is in the 4. year of Luthers new preaching and we aske for Protestants before Luther Besides they all abiured their fayth as himselfe confesseth pag. 750. and soone after dyed for sorrow or lingered away with shame and we aske for Protesters not Abiurers Moreouer no one of them is found to haue held that cheife and fundamentall article of Protestancy of Iustification by speciall faith albeit as Fox writeth pag. 550 There was such diligent inquisition made as that no article could be so secretly taught amongst them but it was discouered Wherefore these wretched Abiurers were no ProtestaÌ„ts but some reliques of the Wiclifists or Lollards whereof we will intreat anone The waldenses were no ProtestaÌ„ts 3. Others say that the Waldenses were the visible Protestants before Luthers rising but there is no apparent reason to say that they were true absolute Protestants to wit such as held all the whole substance necessary to a Protestant For first there is no writer before Luthers tyme who sayth that they belieued to be iustified by only fayth Neither can any such thing be gathered either out of their own opinions or out of the writings of Catholiques against them at those tymes And Illyricus in his Catalogue of witnesses printed at Geneua 1597. lib. 15. pag. 544. writeth their opinions out of an ancient Catholique writer and pag. 559. out of Aenaeas Siluius and pag. 539. relateth their Confession out of Sleidan and himselfe pag. 536. reckoneth 13. of their articles of which he hath these words These are the articles of the VValdenses albeit others part them into more branches and make them more But in none of them is there any trace of only iustifying fayth The same I say of their Confession which the sayd Illyricus hath in his Catalogue printed at Geneua 1526. yea there col 1832. he sayth that Husse and Hierome of Prage did add vnto the doctrine of the Waldenses the article of free iustification by only fayth as sayth he Syluius intimateth wherein albeit he belye both Husse and Hierome also Syluius Num. 7. because neither they knew of any such iustification as shall straight appeare neither Syluius intimateth any such matter yet it clearly bewrayeth that the waldenses belieued not iustification by only fayth Moreouer Luther as we shall now rehearse confesseth that the Waldenses knew nothing of his imputatiue iustice by only fayth How then can they be sayd to haue byn true and absolute Protestants who wanted the very soul summe and definition of a Protestant Secondly they not only belieued not iustification by only fayth but belieued the contrary
about to shew any other kind of Pastors Finally all those who affirme that the vocation or Mission of Luther and their first Ministers was extraordinary must needs say that there were no former Protestant Pastours of whome they could haue byn sent or approued ProtestaÌ„ts say the Church may be without Pastors 4. The same also they insinuate when they teach that the Church may be without Pastors which they affirme that thereby they may defend the being of their own Church before Luther when it had no Pastors Luther in cap. 4. Oseae tom 4. fol 295 As if the Church were tyed to any certaine order of Ministery The Confession of Saxony cap. 12 God estsoones restoreth the Ministery Caluin of true Reform pag. 332 I graunt indeed that it can neuer fall out that the Church perish but when they referre that to Pastors which is promised of the perpetuall continuance of the church in that they are much deceiued For the Church doth not perish streight if Pastors he wanting Beza of the notes of the Church pag. 55 Ordinary succession and vocation of Pastors was not always needfull or perpetuall Sadeel in Answere to the abiured articles pag. 533 It is false that the outward Ministery must be perpetuall The same he hath in Repetit Sophism Turriani pag. 763. Iunius and Danaeus lib. 4. de Eccles cap. 8. Bucan in his 41. place de Eccles quest 19 Sometyme the outward and vsuall ministry of the church being interrupted the Church is extraordinarily nourished of God as it were in the desert Keckerman in his Theologicall Systeme lib. 3. pag. 397 The Church is often pressed so that the order of succession of Pastors must be somewhat interrupted And Vorstius in his Antibellarm pag. 158 The ordinary succession vseth oftentymes to be interrupted for some tyme. Luâ—bert in his 5. booke of the church cap. 5 VVe say that the church may for a short space be depriued of Pastors D. Whitaker c. 6. before cited pag. 510 I gather that true and lawfull succession may be broken of and that it is not a true but only an accidentall note of the Church because it pertaineth not to the essence of the Church but only to her externall state And pag. 512 VVe say that ordinary succession hath oftentymes byn interrupted and cut of in the true Church D. Morton lib. cit cap. 17. writeth thus The matter of the proposition to wit where there is no succession there is no Church ye know to be weake And cap. 18. he affirmeth this saying to be false Succession of doctrine cannot be deuided from succession of persons And cap. 23. sayth Succession of fayth may be without succession of doctrine and succession of doctrine without succession of persons D. Fulke lib. de Succes pag. 319 Yea euen the very publike preaching of the word may be silent for a tyme and the Church being depriued for a tyme of this ordinary meanes of her saluation may be preserued so long of God And D. VVhite in his way to the Church pag. 87 All the externall gouernment of the Church may come to decay in that the locall and personall Succession of the Pastors may be interrupted And pag. 403 For the externall Succession we care not it is sufficient that in doctrine they succeded the Apostles and primitiue Churches and those faythfull witnesses which in all ages since imbraced the same 5. By the foresayd Confessions of Protestants it is most cleare that when Luther began to play the Pastor there was no Protestant preacher at all For they acknowledge that they are no Church for any ordinary succession that the true order of the church perished that the true Ministery was taken out of the Church true knowledge of diuine ordination was extinguished and ordination abolished and decayed That the Church had no true Ministery and that she was destitute of true Pastors And that they meane these words both of a substantiall vniuersall destruction of true Ministry is manifest both by the selfe same words and others also For they adde withall that the state of the church was quite ouerthrowne ordinary vocation wholy corrupted that ordinary vocation was no where no place left for ordinary vocation and there were none of whome those who freed their Church from Popery might receiue imposition of hands that the state of the Church was so interrupted that God must raise vp Pastors extraordinarily that the true ranck of ordination was so cut of as that their needed a new succour and a new foundation lastly that the Ecclesiastical order the vaine names therof only remayning was ouerthrowne from the foundation and lawfull order quit abolished that there was not left so much as the slenderest shadow of the cheifest parts of ecclesiasticall vocation In which words either they say that there was neuer a Protestant Pastor at all or that can be sayd by no words whatsoeuer And such was the state and condition of the Protestant church not for a small tyme but as themselues say for some ages And for this cause vsually they call Luther his first partners their (a) Plessie l. 1. de Eccl. c. 11. Napp in 14. Apocal. first ministers first (b) Sadeel de Vocat pag. 556. teachers first (c) Gâ—alt Praefat. in ep ad Rom restorers of the ghospell first (d) Perk. in â— Galat. cap. 11. preachers of the ghospell first restorers of the house of God Apostles and Euangelists 6. Finally I proue that there was no true Protestant preacher before Luther out of the reall coÌ„fession of all Protestants For none of them all can by any sufficient testimony or argument proue that there was any such Pastor Wherefore this is rashly affirmed and fondly belieued 〈◊〉 Marc. â— Either proue sayth Tertullian that which thou belieuest or if thou prouest it not how doest thou belieue it And that common argument of theirs wherewith they vse to proue that they had a Church and Pastors at all tymes because they bring the Scripture to proue their doctrine to be true we shall hereafter shew to be a most vaine Sophisme And besides themselues do ouerthrow it in teaching as we haue seene that the Church may be without Pastors wherby it would not follow that they had Pastors albeit they could by the Scripture proue that before Luther they had a Church Moreouer then those who endeauour to name some Protestant preachers or Pastors before Luthers tyme do plainly shew that there was no true and absolute Protestant Pastor to wit such as taught iustification by only faith and the rest of the fundamentall opinions of Protestancy For the Apology of the Church of England pag. 103. sayth That they gaue not so cleare a light but lightned as it were some sparck The Confession of Saxony cap. 12 That they ioyned stable vnto the foundation Cruciger and Rorarius in Luther tom 1. fol. 202 That they had some litle light D. Fulke of Success pag. 131 That perhaps in all points
common both to good and bad touching his ascending vp to heauen and his sitting at the right hand of his Father of all these points they contend and that with such exceeding heat of disputation as that old heresies not a few long since abolished and condemned begin againe to lift vp their head as if they were recalled from hell The like they haue ibidem in Prolegomenis Of the controuersy which is betweene the Lutherans Sacramentaries about the â—eall presence of Christs body in the Eucharist Martyr in locis tom 2. p. 156. giues this iudgement The contention and difference therein concernes the cheife heads of Religion Caluin epist 292. sayth that the opinion of the Lutherans doth By mischeiuous iuglings and legierdemains ouerturne the principles of fayth Beza in his 5. epist that it destroyeth the verity of Christs body And epist 81. that it recalleth from hell the folly and doting errours of Marcion and Eutiches Bucer cited by Hospin part 2. Hist fol. 84 It followeth thereupon that Christ is not true man Paraeus in cap. 3. Galat. lection 37 There is nothing more directly opposite to Christian Religion then to think that the body of Christ doth indeed lye hid really vnder the bread and that the same is truly eaten with the mouth Sadeel in tract de Coniunctione c. pag. 369. that it ouerthroweth the true nature of the true body and bloud of Christ VVhich thing sayth he we still lay to their charge And tract de Sacramentali manducatione pag. 26. that it is a word of euils pag. 267 That it traines after it idolatry And pag. 268 that it â—annot stand with the verity of Christs body Hospin part 2. citat fol. 2. that it is the foundation of Papistry And fol. 181 The base and pillar which sustaineth all the whole blended and disordered heape of abuses and all the bread-worship whicâ— hath vnder the Popedome byn deuised and brought in Lauaterus lib. de dissid Euchar. fol. 7. that it is the Foundation of the Popedome Cureus in Spongia that it is the foundation the strength the throne of the God Maozim and of the Popish state Caluin de Coena p. 8. in CoÌ„s pag. 754. Beza in fo 6. v. 23.62 ad 4. Demonstr Illyrici Zanâ—hius in Confess c. 16. sect 12. And Vrsinus in Catechism quest 78. cap. 3. sayth As long as the opinion of the corporall presence is maintained Popish adoration and oblation and the whole Popish masse is kept on foot And there is not one Sacramentary but thinks the verity of Christs body and his ascention sitting at the right hand of the Father cleane taken away if he should say he were substantially in the Eucharist Whereupon Zanchius tom 1. Miscell in iudicio de dissidio Coenae pag. 553. sayth There are two maine reasons why the one party to wit the Sacramentaries renounce the presence of the body The one that the article of Christs ascension into heauen may be kept entire the other that the nature and verity of his humane body be not destroyed Nay some of the Sacramentaries in their Confessions of faith condemne the opinion of the Lutherans as mad and blasphemous For Confess Crengerina cap. de coena Domini sayth VVe condemne their madnes who auouch and maintaine flesh-eating that is who hold that Christs naturall and very body raw and bloudy without any change or transubstantiation at all is receiued with the very mouth And the Scots in their Confess pag. 159. say they Detest that blasphemous opinion which auoucheth Christs reall presence in the bread wine and that he is receiued by the wicked or taken into the belly This and much more of the like is sometymes the Sacramentaries plea against the reall presence of Christs body in the Eucharist and yet at other tymes they professe that this controuersy is not of so great weight and moment as that it should dissolue Ecclesiasticall Communion and fellowship For so teacheth Martir apud Simlerum in vita eius the author of the orthodoxe Consent Prefat Apologet. Hospinian part 2. Histor fol. 78. Caluin de scandalis pag. 95. In Consens p. 764. Beza lib. de coena cont Westphalum pag. 258. M. Perkins in his exposition of the Creed col 792. and others Nay as we sayd before these men besought the Lutherans who stedfastly maintaine the reall presence to hold them for brethren and members of their Church They can then find in their conscience to haue fellowship and Communion with those men whose doctrine they condemne As Frantike blasphemous whose doctrine they say destroyeth Christs ascension What kind of men Sacramentaries challenge for brethren and the verity of his humane nature subuerteth the principles of fayth and cheifest points of religion recalleth the doting follies of Marcion and Eutyches establisheth the Kingdome of Antichrist traines after it idolatry and a world of euills Fy on these meÌ„ beliefe who think the maintenance of an opinion which as themselues professe ouerthroweth the principall articles of Christian fayth drawes after it idolatry and most foule heresies layeth the foundâ—tion whereon Antichristianity is raised of so sleight consequence as it ought not to dissolue fraternity and Communion What regard of fayth or saluation may we think these men haue There is yet another point oâ— Luteranisme touching the vbiquity or presence of Christs body euery where reproued of the Sacramentaries and held in extreme dislike of which they likewise exclaime that it is (a) Beza respons ad acta montisb l. pag. 252. forged and composed of Eutychianisme and Nestorianisme that the heresies of (b) Caluin 4 Instit c. 17. p. 17. Marcion and Eutyches yea well nigh (c) Hosp pref par 2. all old heresies are by it raised againe from hell that it subuerteth the whole (d) Perkins expos Symb. coll 792. Creed that it takes away the (e) Sadeel de verit hum nat cheife heads of Christian Religion that there is scant any one article of Christian beliefe which it doth not vtterly abolish And yet these selfe same Sacramentaries stile them who defend this opinion (f) Sadeel sup Most flourishing Churches and made earnest sure to be held for (g) Beza in colloq moÌ„tisbel pag. 462. brethren of those very men who vpheld this doctrine against them and maintayned it to their face Nay the particuler Churches of Sacramentaries themselues consist of parts mainly disioyned in matters of beliefe SacrameÌ„taries say there is fundameÌ„tall differeÌ„ce amoÌ„g them Examples hereof we need not seeke a broad Our owne Protestants tell vs how the Puritans their brethren allow not of the booke of common prayer but hold it to be full of (a) Whitgift resp ad Admonit p. 145. 157. corruptions and all abominations and teach that Protestants (b) Ib. resp ad schedas wickedly mangle and wrest the Scriptures that they haue no (c) Resp cit pag. 6. Pastours that they haue not a true Church
no fayth Infants without all faith according to Protestants and consequently that they are infidels whence it ensueth that they account some infidels to be actually of the church Caluin 4. Institut cap. 16. § 19 I will not lightly affirme that they infants are endued with the same fayth we find in our selues And § seq he sayth Infants are baptized for future repentance and sayth Now if they dye before they are of yeares God reneweth them by the vertue of his spirit which we do not comprehend in such manner as himselfe alone knoweth how to bring to passe Lib. cont Seruet pag. 647. he sayth that that sentence of the Scripture VVhosoeuer belieueth not in the Sonne of God abideth in death and the wrath of God remayneth vpon him belongeth not to infants but only to such as are obstinate And in cap. 5. Rom. v. 17 That you may be partaker of iustice it is needfull that you be faythfull because it is receiued by sayth To infants it is communicated by a speciall manner Bucer in cap. 19. Matthaei pag. 404 Paul sayth that sayth commeth by hearing the word preached and in the same sort all the Scripture speaketh of sayth Seing therefore infants heare not the word preached they cannot haue this kind of sayth But out of that that infants want sayth nothing lesse can be concluded then which some thinke that therefore they cannot please God Infants are blessed by the grace of God and merits of Christ But if they be taken hence in their infancy they shall know God and reape felicity by some other knowledge then fayth Musculus in locis tit de baptismo Infants haue yet no fayth Againe Infants are saued by Gods election though they be taken out of this life not only vnbaptized but euen before they haue fayth Beza in Confess cap. 4. sect 48 It doth not appeare to vs that infants are endowed with that habit of fayth Infants haue not so much as the habit of fayth which we sayd was required to the receiuing of the matter and effect of the Sacraments nor is it likely that they are And in colloq Montisbel pag. 407 VVherefore though the children of the faythfull want sayth yet is not baptisme vnprofitable to them And part 2. Respons ad acta Montisbel pag. 124 All eit infants haue no sayth of their owne especially actuall yet rightly are they baptized according to the forme of the Couenant I will be thy God and of thy seed which is apprehended by the parents to themselues and their children And pag. 129 I confesse that sayth is required that infants comprehended in the Couenant may please God but I deny that they can or ought to be endowed with their owne fayth inherent in them Dancus l. 4. de baptismo cap. 10. pag. 268. proposeth to himselfe this question VVhat is the fayth which in baptisme we require in infants and answereth None Vrsinus in defens argument Bezae God receiueth infants into the Church without fayth Peter Martyr in 1. Cor. 7. pag. 94 Seing the holy Scripture doth not tell me that infants belieue or those miracles are wrought in them neither see I that it is necessary for their saluation I think it is inough that they be thought to be saued because by election and predestination they belong to the people of God are endued with the holy Ghost who is the author of fayth hope and Charity Perhaps they will answeare out of Augustins opinion that they are saued by the sayth of others to wit of their parents But the Prophet sayth that euery one is saued by his owne sayth not by other mens sayth VVherefore we answere more easily who exact expresse and actuall fayth in those that are of yeares but in the children of Christians who are brought to be Christened we say fayth is begun in its principle root because they haue the holy Ghost firm whence all both fayth and other vertues do flow D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 6. c. 3. pag. 566 Baptisme doth not infuse any sayth or grace into infants And he sayth plainly that infants haue no fayth And lib. 8. cont Duraeum sect 77 Albeit in the Sacraments fayth which receiueth the word of promise be necessary yet that sayth is not needfull in infants albeit it be not to be doubted but the holy Ghost effectually worketh in them after a secret and wonderfull manner M. Perkins de praedestinaâ— tom 1. col 149 Infants which dye in the Couenant we belieue to be saued by tenour of that Couenant but they were not chosen for fayth or according to fayth which set they had not And 〈◊〉 â—â—rie causar cap. 25 Elected â—nfants dying in the wombe or soone after they be borne are saued after a hidden and vnspeakeable manner ingrafted in Christ by the spirit of God Luther tom 6. in cap. 25. Gen. fol. 322 Vnbaptized infants haue no fayth Melancthon in locis tit de baptismo to 3. fol. 238 It is most true that sayth is required in all that are of years But concernâ—â—g infants sayth he the matter is otherwise Infants 〈…〉 Kemnitius part 2. Exam. tit de baptism pag. 89. telleth vs that some Protestants are of opinion that infants are indeed saued by the grace of God but without sayth Nor doth their saying that the seed or root of fayth or else an inclination or disposition to fayth which some of them affirme infants to haue help them any thing it all both because Scharpe cont 1. de Iustifi graunteth that this seed can neither haue the knowledge nor applying of the promises and therefore is not Protestant faith and because Musculus in locis tit de fide art 7. confesseth that they distinguish and put a difference betweene fayth and this hidden seed Now if it be no fayth it maketh not him faythfull in whome it is And lastly because as themselues acknowledge they are not assured whither infants haue any such seed or no. For Caluin lib. 4. cap. 16. § 9. cit VVhether they haue at all any knowledge like vnto fayth I choose rather to leaue it vndetermined And he addeth that the manner of their renewing is knowne to God alone To these allegations you may adde that M. Perkins in his Reformed Catholike cont 16. sayth a man may be saued by a desire to haue sayth And neuerthelesse confesseth that this desire is not indeed sayth And in 2. Galat. col 91 God accepteth the will and desire to belieue for beliefe it selfe Now as long as a man hath not fayth but only a desire thereof he is an infidel 5. You might think that hauing made this graunt of saluation to infidels their liberality wold rest here and not passe these bounds ProtestaÌ„ts challenge Antichrist but they go yet further and bestow it sometymes euen vpon him whome they sweare yea belieue as an article of their fayth and that with as great certainty and assurance is they belieue God is in heauen or Christ is the
of the building is set vp And Zuinglius Respons ad Billi tom 2. fol. 261. When one obiected vnto him the dissention amongst the Sacramentaries in expouÌ„ding Christs words of the supper answereth No man ought to be offended with this diuersity more then with the difference among many captaines Tertull. praes c. 41. Athanas orat 1. coÌ„t Arian Hieron ad Cresiphont August in Psal 80. Beda l. 1. in Iob. c. 7. who go about to conquer a castle whiles one would haue it battered another vndermined and a third would haue it scaled For all agree to destroy the castle the difference is only about the way not about the summe of the matter And so concludeth that if any SacrameÌ„taries haue erred They erred sayth he in the letter not in spirit in the summe they agree all The summe therefore wherein all Protestants agree is to ouerthrow the Popish castle and Catholike fayth in which also the ancient heretikes agreed amongst themselues as the holy Fathers do testify and who attempteth that by what meanes soeuer erreth not in spirit but in letter only not in the summe but in some circumstance only of ProtestaÌ„cy But with what spirit they are led herein let them heare of their owne Prophet Luther defens verb. coenae tom 7. l. 411 VVhat a kind of spirit is that sayth he which hath no other end but to weaken the aduerse party without all doubt it is no other spirit then the Diuell 3. Fourthly because they describe paint name a Protestant by departure from the Pope and Popish doctrine The Confession of Wittenberg in Prefat describeth Protestants to be such as haue changed in their Churches a kind of Popish doctrine which had byn vsed for many yeares and some other ancient ceremonies M. Perkins in the Preface of his Reformed Catholik sayth By a Reformed Catholike so he termeth a Protestant I vnderstand any one that holds the same necessary heads of Religion with the Roman Church yet so as he pares of and reiects all errors in doctrine whereby the sayd religion is corrupted D. Willet in the Preface of his Synopsis A Protestant is he that professeth the ghospell of Iesus Christ and hath renounced the iurisdiction of the Sea of Rome and the forced and vnnaturall obedience to the Pope Schusselburg tom 13. Catal. Haeret. pag. 23 A Lutheran or true Christian is he who hath seuered himselfe from Papists c. And tom 8. pag. 363 True Lutherans are they who imbrace the doctrine of the ghospell amending Popish abuses You see how in all these descriptions of a Protestant the denyall of the Pope and Popish doctrine is put as a certaine difference which concurreth to the making and distinguishing of a Protestant from all others Hereupon D. Audrews Apol. Cont. Bellarm. cap. 1. sayth Sauing this Protestation that they will not suffer certaine Popish errors and abuses our fayth is no other then yours is or ought to be And he addeth that they call their religion reformed only because it is purged from certaine deuises and corruptions which had crept into it And sayth that Bucer and Peter Martyr did only pluck vp certaine cockle which Papists had sowed In like sort Boysseul in his Confutation of Sponde pag. 724. sayth Take away your Popery that which dependeth thereof and you and we shall be but one church because we shall haue but one Confession of fayth Moreouer Plessy in the forefront of his mystery of iniquity painteth a Protestant with a torch in his hand setting fire to the tower of Babylon by which he vnderstandeth the Popedome And finally Luther in exempl Theol. Papist tom 2. fol. 401. calleth himselfe an Anti-papist as of his principall end or office and sayth that he was called by diuine reuelation to destroy the Popes Kingdom D. Humfrey also termeth Ochinus a stout Anti-papist as if to be a Protestant and an Anti-papist were all one 4. Fiftly because the same opinions which in Papists they detest in other who are opposite to the Pope they dissemble or extenuate Lubbert lib. 1. Replicat cap. 4. sayth The Lutherans dispute not with vs about the Canon of Scriptures nor we with them And lib. 4. de Concil cap. vlt VVe contend not with the Churches of Saxony which keep images in the Churches And yet they dispute most eagerly against Catholiks about the Canon of scriptures and images The Scots in their general Confession professe to detest Popery for maintayning the reall presence of Christs body in the Eucharist for making the signe of the Crosse for denying infants without baptisme to be saued And in their other Confession c. 22. they say they shunne the Communion of the Popish Church Conf. Augustus â—visit â—axon Liturgia Augliaâ— Conference at Hampt Court because her ministers are not Ministers of Christ because the permitteth women to christen in case of necessity and yet dissemble that the Lutheran Protestants allow all these points and that the English Protestants admit Popish Priests for sufficient ministers command the making of the crosse in baptisme allow womens baptisme in case of necessity but because they are against the Pope as well as the Scots their opposition to the Pope like sole fayth couereth all and maketh that the Scots impute not these matters to them And if at any tyme the Catholiks do set before their eyes the errors or dissentions amongst them either they impudently (a) Laâ—ko Erastus in Schussel l. 4. Theol. Caluin p. 310. Feild l. 3. of the Church cap. 24. deny them or greatly extenuate them saying that they are not about the (b) Apol. Anglis foundation not of (c) Whit. CoÌ„t 2 q. 5. cap. 8. weighty matters of light matters not of the (d) Bucer in Schussel lib cit Caluin de rat concord p. 862. matter but of the manner of (e) Epist Monitor things indifferent of I know not what titles and finally only of (f) Mart. in loc tit de Euchar. §. 65. Hosp part 2 fol. 134. 163. 109. BruÌ„sfeld resp ad Erasm words Surely I imagine as they say that all sinnes in the elect faythfull are veniall but in others all are mortall so they deeme that all errors in those that are opposite to the Pope are veniall and light but in Papists all are haynous and mortall So much the alteration of the person changeth the case with them Hereupon Q. Elizabeth enacted not that it should be treason for any one to dissuade froÌ„ that religion which she had established vnlesse it were done with intention to induce him who was dissuaded to the obedience of the Bishop of Rome And hereupon also some of them openly professe that they more esteeme Turks then Papists forsooth because the Turke agreeth with them in hatred of the Pope and Popery in respect whereof they little regard the consent in the mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation and Passion and other articles of Christian fayth Sixtly they make the forsaking of Popery an
they certainly assure themselues that God loueth them M. Perkins in his exposition of the Creed col 780 No man can belieue himselfe to be a member of the Church What fayth is according to Protestants vnlesse he firmely and certainly persuaded that he is predestinated to eternall life Besides Caluin in his litle Catechisme cap. de fide defineth iustifying fayth to be a certaine and stedfast knowledge of our heauenly Fathers goodwill towards vs. The like definition he hath 3. Pareus l. 1. de Iustit cap. 11 Instit cap 2. § 2 Luther in cap. 4. Ioelis tom 4. and generally all Lutherans and Sacramentaries except that where some define it to be a knowledge others say it is an assurance or confidence of Gods fauour Hence it is manifest that they account none a iust or faythfull man vnlesse he haue a speciall fayth of his iustification and Gods fauour towards him 2. Secondly I proue the same out of diuers commendations of Protestants touching the necessity and excellency of this article For Luther tom 1. in disp fol. 410. sayth In vaine he belieueth other articles who denieth that we are iustified by only fayth And tom 2. lib. cont Missam fol. 390. he sayth The Summe that this article is the summe of his doctrine and Ghospell And lib. de votis fol. 278. that this is the definition of a Christian who belieueth to be iustified by the only works of Christ alone The Definition without his owne Tom 3. in Psalm Grad fol. 573 That the only knowledge of this article conserueth the Church And fol. 576. that it is the summe of Christian doctrine The Sun the sunne which lightneth the Church which falling the Church falleth Tom. 4. in cap. 53. Isaiae fol. 200. he writeth that it is as it were the foundation on which the Gospell relyeth and which alone distinguisheth his religion from all others Fol. 201. that it is like the liuely fountaine whence all treasures of diuine wisedome do flow The fouÌ„dation and the foundation of all the Church and Christianity And Prefat in Ionam that it is the cheife of Christian doctrine and the summe of all the scripture Tom. 5. Prefat in Galat. fol. 269. he affirmeth that it is the only rock of the Church And 273 The rock VVho holdeth not this article are sayth he either Iewes or Turks or Papists or Heretiques And fol. 274. that in this doctrine alone the Church is made and consisteth And fol. 333. he plainly confesseth that it is his only defence Their defence without which as he speaketh both we and heretiks togeather with vs had long since perished Tom. 6. in cap. 21. Genes fol. 265. he termeth it the cheifest article of fayth And tom 7. epist ad Liuones fol. 499. auoucheth that it is the only way to heauen and the summe of Christian life The only way And finally in the first article concluded at Smalcald In this article are and consist all which in our life we teach witnesse and do against the Pope the Diuell and all the world This and much more writeth Luther in commendation of the necessity and excellency of the article touching iustification by only fayth And of the contrary beliefe concerning iustification by works tom 5. in cap. 3. Galat. fol. 257. he sayth It is the sinck of all euills And in cap. 4. fol. 402 That it taketh away the truth of the Ghospell faith Christ himselfe 3. With Luther herein agree the Lutherans For the Confession of Auspurg cap. de discrimine ciborum sayth that this article is the proper doctrine of the ghospell And the Apology therof cap. de iustificat that it is the principall place of Christian doctrine And cap. de poenit the cheifest place and principallest article about which they fight with their aduersaries and the knowledge wherof they account most necessary to all The Confâ—ssion of Saxony that this article being extinguished there is no difference betwixt the Church and other men The Confession of Bohemia The suÌ„me of all Christianity and piety that this article is held of them for the cheifest of all as which is the summe of all Christianity and piety The vniuersity of Wittemberg tom 2. Lutheri fol. 248 It is the cheifest article of the ghospell The Ministers of the Prince Electour in Colloq Aldeburg pag. 1. say that this article is as it were the summe and last end to which all the other articles do look vnto And those of the D. of Saxony pag. 132. affirme that as long as this doctrine standeth Luther standeth yea Paul yea God This doctrine falling Luther falleth This falling God falleth Paul falleth God falleth and all men are necessarily damned Those of Magdeburg in Sleidan lib. 21. call this article the stay of saluation Melancthon tom 2. Lutheri fol. 506. termeth it the cheifest article Kemnice part 1. Examen tit de Iustificat pag. 231 The cheifest place And in locis part 1. tit de Iustificat pag. 216. writeth that it is like the castle and principall bulwarck of all Christian doctrine and religion Lobechius disput 22. The Bulwarck pag. 515. addeth that it is one of the cheifest points of our sayth because the prore and poupe of Christianity is contayned therein and on it hangeth the hinges of our saluation Scnusselburg tom 8. Catal. haeret affirmeth it to be the cheifest article wherein consisteth our saluation and which is the head of our religion Finally to omit other Lutherans Brentius in Apolog. Wittemberg part 3. pag. 703. sayth The essentiall differeÌ„ce that the essentiall difference betwixt a Protestant and a Papist is that of the Protestant religion these are the first principles The scriptur Christ the Sonne of God sayth or assurance of Gods fauour towards vs for Christs sake 4. Neither do Sacramentaries dissent herein from the Lutherans For the Confession of Basse auoucheth it to be the first and cheifest point in Euangelicall doctrine The French Confess art 18. calleth it the foundation Zuinglius in Isagoge fol. 268. sayth it is the summe of the Ghospell Bucer Respons ad Abrincens pag. 613. And Gualter Prefat in Ioan. write that about this article is almost all the whole substance of dispute with them and Papists Bullinger in Compend lib. 5. cap. 1. termeth it the cheifest point of holy Euangelicall and Apostolicall doctrine And lib. 8. cap. 8 The highest and cheifest head of Christian doctrine and of fayth Peter Martyr in locis tit de Iustif col 939. sayth it is the head fountaine and stay of all piety Tom. 2. epist ad Peregrin col 136 The summe of Summeâ— It is the summe of summes and cheifest head Caluin 4. Institut cap. 11. § 1. that it is the cheifest proppe of religion lib. 11. § 17 The summe of all piety And Respons and Sadolet pag. 125. that the knowledge thereof being gone Christi glory is extinct religion abolished and hope of
a new doctrine brought in And lib. 13. â—ol 304 It cannot be denyed that there was no word taught of receiuing grace by Christ of remission of sinnes Luther in Catechismo Maiori tom 5. fol. 627 No maÌ„ belieued iustification without works Popery raigning fayth wholy neglected and obscured was in pitifull plight No man belieued Christ to be a Lord who had reconciled vs to the Father without our worcks Tom. 7. in c. 5. Matthaeâ— fol. 23 The Popish company saying nothing of the cheifest article of iustification by fayth in Christ c. And in 3. Symbol fol. 140. I haue obserued that all errours heresies and all impiety came into the church principally because this article or this part of Christian sayth in Iesus Christ was despised and neglected or vtterly lost And in the Epitaphe grâ—uen vpon Luthers tombe is this verse He restored to the world the difference lost before which is meant of the difference which Luther taught to be between the law and the ghospell that the law teacheth iustification by good works the ghospell by only fayth without which difference Luther professeth that Christianity cannot stand And in his table talkes cap. de morte he thus speaketh Shew me one place of iustification of fayth in the decrees in the decretals in the Clementines in all the summes and sentences Coccius to 1. pag. 1217 in all the sermons of Monks in the statutes of Synods in all the Postilles in all Hierome Gregorie c. Thus assured Luther was that before he preached of this principall article of iustification by only fayth there was no news in the whole world 5. The same confesseth his Copemate Melancthon who tom 2. Respons ad Clerum Colon. pag. 96. hath these words The doctrine of pennance was ouerwhelmed there was no word of fayth by which remission of sinnes is to be receiued and pag. 97 The doctrine of true inuocation and of the exercises of fayth lay dead If any sayth he denie that such was the state of the Church be may be disproued not only by testimonies of honest men but also by the bookes of Monkes And pag. 99 There was no speach of the hope of free mercy And lib. de vsu integri Sacramenti pag. 188 The Popes haue destroyed the true doctrine of fayth And the same Melancthon or Carion in Chronico lib. 4. pag. 418. seq These errours being setled and established by publike authority drew after them a great ruine wherewith they wholy destroyed the doctrine of iustice before God and free remission of sinnes And pag. 439 Schoole diuinity qu te trampled and extinguished the least sparkles of pure doctrine The least sparkles extinguished touching the law the ghospell fayth and iustification before God And pag 4â—3 They haue quite taken away the difference betweene the law and the ghospell Vigand lib. de bonis malâ—s Germaniae The difference betwixt the law and the ghospell was quite blotted out after the Apostles tym Quite blotted out The Magdeburgiâ—ns Preâ— Câ—â—tur 13. The doctrine of sayth without works was extinct The matter it selfe shewed that pure doctrine was vtterly supprest Kemnice in lâ—cis part 2. â—â—t de Iustificat pag. 246 In all ages the light of holesome doctrine touching iustification first decayed after more and more obscured and last was plainly lost and extinguished And pag. 244 Plainly lost In our tyme God hath restored the doctrine of iustification out of most thick darknesse And Humius Praesat lib. de libero arbit The article of â—ustification was by Luther brought into light of out of the more then Chymerian darknesse of former ages Thus the Lutherans 6. The like Confession make the Sacramentaries For thus writeth Caluin Respons ad Sadolet pag. 125 VVe say that doctrine of Iustification by only fayth was by you blotted out of the memory Blotted out of memory of men Lib de Necess Reform pag. 46 The vertue of fayth was vtterly extinct the benefit of Christ destroyed mans saluation ouerthrown And lib. de vera Reform pag. 322 By these the Apostolicall doctrine was corrupted nay destroyed and abolished Corrupted nay destroyed Iezlerus de bello Euchar. fol. 24 The doctrine of iustification was most sowly darkned corrupted Pareus lib. 5. de Iustificat cap 3 The doctrine of grace began to be obscured and at last to be vtterly oppressed in Popery Only nam of Christ remained Finally M. Fox in his Acts printed 1610. pag. 391. sayth In these later dayes the only name of Christ remayned among Christians As touching fayth the end and the vse of the law of grace and iustification by sayth of liberty of a Christian man there was no mention nor any word almost spoken of Thus both Lutheran and Sacramentary Protestants confesse their doctrine of iustification in which as we haue seene they affirme the definition life soule and all points of a Protestant to consist to haue perished byn extinguished horribly ouerwhelmed vanished out of the church no spark thereof to be found the light therof cleane put out and vtterly extinct before Luther start vp And consequently they must needs also confesse that the substance of their Church and religion was perished which could not be without the soule life definition and summe thereof 7. Neither do they lesse openly confesse that their Church was perished ProtestaÌ„ts confesse that their church perished For thus sayth Luther lib. de Captiu Babylon tom 2. fol 76 But now fayth being not spoken of the Church is extinguished by infinite laws of works and ceremonies Respons ad Catharin fol. 140. after he had sayd that the Church is conceiued formed borne nourished and conserned only by the vocall word he addeth Extinguished By the Pope and Papists the vocall ghospell being choaked and extinct was silent through all the world Tom. 3. in psal 17. fol. 285 And now that common sort of preachers reprobate what proposeth it to vs in the Church of the deeds of Saints but some small works vntill faith being extinguished there become nothing but heathenish superstition where once the Church of God was the name only of the Church left Name only of the Church left the substance quite lost In psalm 22. fol. 332 This day vnder the Popes dominion there is not lest one trace of the Church which appeares And 10. 6. in cap. 49. Genes fol. 666 The order of the Church perished The Pope hath extinguished swallowed vp the Church Caluin Respons ad Sadolet pag. 132 The matter came to that passe that it was manifest and euident to the learned and vnlearned that the true order of the Church then perished the Kingdome of Christ was throwne downe Christs Kingdome throwne downe when this dominion of the Pope was erected 4. Institut cap. 3. § 4. after he sayd that Apostles Euangelists Prophets were instituted only for that tyme when Churches were to be set vp or to be drawne from Moyses to Christ
Catholike or vniuersall church Finally this shall yet more appeare out of the chapter following where we shall see that they teach that the whole world did fall from the fayth 5. Their fourth shift is That they meane of a substantiall perishing that by the words Destruction decaying failing ouerthrowing and such others they meane not a substantiall perishing of the fayth or Church but only an accidentall corruption of becomming worse But this shift also is soone refuted First because Luther sayth of his fayth doctrine or ghospell that it dyed was neglected ouerwhelmed extinct blotted out taken away ouerthrowne lost Cap. 2. n. â—â— abolished forgotten and rooted out And that he might put it out of all doubt that by these words he meant a true and substantiall destruction or perishing he added vnto them most significant aduerbes saying that it was truly ouerwhelmed wholy extinct vtterly extinct Ib. extinct from the bottome plainly extinct plainly taken away simply taken away quite taken away vtterly buryed vtterly lost wholy abolished and blotted out and most plainly rooted out And least any one might also cauill that these words are not meant of a true and substantiall destruction he sayd further that the Pope hath obscured nay extinguished the doctrine of fayth They haue darckned nay wholy ouerwhelmed Christs Ghospell They haue not only obscured but absolutely taken away the ghospell Lib. 1. de peccat mer. c. 4. Surely as S. Augustin sayth such kind of words needs no Expositor but only a reader In like sort other Protestants say of their fayth or ghospell that it was banished cast out extinct ended choaked buryed obscured till it was vtterly extinguished Num. 2.3 that it perished from the earth and vanished out of the Church They add also that it was wholy ouerturned vtterly extinct quite changed into idolatries ouerturned from the root and that there was an vtter abolition an extreme salling away and full destruction of it so that not so much as one litle sparke could be sound but it was quite extinct scarce the name of Christianity was left 6. Besides of their principall and most fundamentall article of Iustification by only fayth they say C. 1. n. 4. 5. 6. that lay long vnknowne that there was profound silence of it that no man taught it that it was neglected lost blotted out extinct and horribly opprest that it was corrupted nay extinct and abolished that no man belieued it that it was vtterly extinct plainly lost quite lost wholy suppressed wholy oppressed wholy trampled wholy dasht out vtterly blotted out quite extinct quite taken away quite neglected and blotted out of the memory of men and not only obscured but quite extinguished But if this doctrine were so extinct as no man belieued it and blotted out of mens memory surely not only the Profession of their fayth but also their fayth it selfe was vtterly perished and consequently also their Church whereof this article is the life soule summe definition and all Num. 7. 7. Of the Church also they say that it was banished fayled was oppressed extinct ouerturned fallen wholy fallen that it fell to Antichrist that the old foundation thereof was remoued and a new layd that the order of the Church perished that there was a slaughter of the whole Church that Christs Kingdome was throwne downe razed to the ground that in the temple of God there was nought but pittifull ruines that the Church was from the foundation rooted out and ouerthrowne by the ground and that where it once was there remayned only the name the substance being quite lost Surely either by these manner of speaches is signified a substantiall destruction or that cannot be plainly signifyed by any manner of words Besides the formes of speach do more clearly signify a substantial destruction theÌ„ those which Protestants condemne in some heretiks For Caluin lib. cont Seruetum pag. 657. condemneth Seruet for saying that there had byn a long banishment of the Church from the earth and that she had byn driuen out of the world And yet as we see Danaeus sayth that the Church was banished Powell that all true religion was banished D. Fulke that the true doctrine of saluation was driuen out Anâ— Crispin that all true worship of God was driuen out D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 471. and otherwhere condemneth the Donatists and other Heretikes for saying that the Church perished and yet Bale sayth that holesome truth perished from the earth And Lobechius vnder Elias his name that the Church quite perished Moreouer they say that the Church may be reduced to one or two which is indeed to say that the Church may substantially perish Num. 8. for the Church is defined to be a company or multitude in the English Confession article 19. That the Church cannot consist of one in the French art 27. in the Suitzers art 17. and in the Flemish art 27. But one or two are not a company Whereupon Danaeus lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 16. sayth It is written of Vlpiaâ— the Lawyer in the ciuill law that at least three persons are required to make a Colledge and if to a Colledge much more to the Church And Lubbert lib. 2. Replicat cap. 3. sayth plainly that one man makes not a Church And Polanus in Syntag. lib. 7. cap. 1 One man though neuer so holy cannot be a church Beurlin also in Refut Soti Neither do we call the solitude of one man which worshippeth God the Church And D. Whitaker lib. 1 de Scriptura cap. 11. Sect. 4. How can the Church be in one seeing the very name of the Church doth signify a company or multitude If therefore there be but one there is no Church For the Church cannot be imagined to be but in many Iuel DefeÌ„s Ap. part x. c. 1. Fulk de Succes p. 89. Beza in Catech. c 5. Brent in Prolog q. 4. And much lesse can one or two be the Catholike Church that is as the Protestants themselues expound it the Church spred throughout the whole world because one or two cannot be spred throughout the world Whereupon the Scots in their Confession cap. 18. say that two or three make not the vniuersall Church And Zuinglius lib. de vera falsa relig tom 2. fol. 192 VVho sayes that the Church signifieth some few erreth like to him who sayth that people signifieth the King Surely it should be a notable flock which consisted of one or two sheep a worthy Kingdome which had but one or two subiects and a strange Catholike or vniuersall Church which contayned but one or two faythfull persons What can the gates of hell preuaile so farre against the Church as they can reduce her to one or two Christians What other thing is this then to say that the Church can perish For seing the Church cannot be imagined but in company or multitude who sayth â—hat the Church can be brought to one or two doth indeed
that is to be iustifyed by good works For thus sayth Luther of them in his table-talkes chap. of Suermers The VValdenses are holy workmen and belieue not that sayth without works doth iustify and know nothing at all of imputatiue iustice Cocciuâ— 10.1 lib. 8. And Bennet Morgenstern in his treatise of the church p. 1â—4 speaketh thus vnto them Yee confirme the doctrine of Antichrist touching good works iustification c. And theÌ„selues in their Apology printed at Hanow togeather with the history of Bohemia pag. 256. plainly shew that they belieue a man to be iustified by fayth charity hope penance and works of mercy and do say That deuout prayer doth purge and pennance cleanse a man 4. Thirdly the Waldenses are condemned of Protestants both Lutherans and Sacramentaries Melancthon in his Counsailes part 2. pag. 152. writeth See Refut Orthod Consensus pag. 418. I reioyce that you agree with vs in the summe of doctrine I know the VValdenses are vnlike And in Carions Chronicle printed at Paris 1357. he sayth that they sowed errors denyed all oathes and all forme of prayer besides the Lords prayer Morgenstern in his fornamed booke pag. 79. giueth this verdict of them They haue proudly neglected the light of doctrine which is kindled from heauen in this age haue with tooth and naâ—le by writing among their own men secretly defended those most grosse erros which in the year 1523. were discouered by Luther Besides Selnecer as he reporteth affirmed that they had grosse errors and such as were not to be borne withall Leonicus Antisturmius also in Danaeus in his answere to his Sonde pag. 1516. pronounceth them to be impious and Schusselburg in his 3. tâ—me of the Catalogue of heretiks pag 188. reiecteth them as heretiks Camerarius in his booke of the Church in Bohemia Poland c. pag. 273. writeth thus VVe can say that the VValdenses were neuer one with our Churches nor our men would euer ioyne themselues to them Whereof he giueth these two reasons because the Waldenses would not haue extant any publike declaration of their fayth and for peace sake did vse the Popish masse For these two causes sayth he our men did not ioyne themselues to them neither did they think that they could so do with good conscience Caluin also epist 278. thus writeth to the Waldenses themselues VVe abide in one opinion that the forme of your Confession cannot be absoluâ—ely admitted without danger And M. Iewell also in defence of the Apology part pag. 48. sayth plainly of the Albigenses They are none of ours D. Humfrey to the third Reason of F. Campian pag. 371 They are not wholy ours And Osiander in his 13. Century lib. 1. cap. 4. Pantaleon in his Chronicle pag. 98. Melancthon in the foresayd Chronicle of Carion reckon them amongst heretiks But the Albigenses were all one for religion with the Waldenses as D. Fulke sayth in these words lib. de Success pag. 332 That epistle of the Arch-bishops doth proue that the Albigenses VValdenses were all one The same also confesseth Illyricus in his Catalogue in 4. to pag 536. Where also pag. 561. he speaketh in this sort The VValdenses or Albigenses Yea the Waldenses themselues in the Bohemian Confession if it be theirs do insinuate that they are condemned of the Sacramentaries wheras they say in the 13. article that they who deny the supper of the Lord to be the true flesh and bloud of Christ do call them Idolaters Antichrist and men branded with the marke of the beast Besides Illyricus in his forecited catalogue writeth that the Thaborites who indeed sayth he followed the opinions of the Waldenses were grieuously vexed and persecuted of Rokesana and other Hussites Wherefore sith Protestants commonly challenge the Hussites for their brethren they ought not to claime also the Waldenles whose doctrine the Hussites did persecute Certainly the Confession of Bohemia which is sayd to be theirs doth plainly distinguish them from Protestants especially from Sacramentaries For art 2. they say VVe must keep the commandements in hart deed Art 5. that those which repent must confesse their sinnes to a Priest and aske absolution of him Art 9. that Priests ought to be single Art 11. that Sacraments are necessary to saluation And art 13. that the Eucharist is the true body of Christ as say they Christ plainly sayth This is my body of which word we ought to belieue the plaine sense not decliming to the right or left Whereupon it is no meruayle that Caluin in his 249. epistle denieth it to be lawfull for a Christian man to imbrace the Waldenses Confession in these words Consider you whether it be lawfull for a Christian man to imbrace the forme of the Confession of the Waldenses who without any distinction bind vp all in one bundell of damnation who precisely confesse not the bread to be presently the body of Christ Surely we think not 5. Fourthly I proue the same because the Waldenses hold many errors which the Protestants condemne Illyricus in his foresayd Catalogue pag. 545. relateth out of an ancient writer aboue 300. years agoe that they taught that a Priest being in mortall sinne cold not consecrate the Eucharist that euery oath is a mortall sinne that they disallowed matrimony And likwise out of Aeneas Syluius that they sayd it was lawfull for euery one to preach that he who was guilty of mortall sinne was not not capable of any secular or ecclesiasticall dignity Neither auayleth it any thing that now in the CoÌ„fession of Bohemia which is sayd to be the Waldenses Confession there is found the article of iustification by only fayth because that Confession was presented in the yeare 1525. as the very title thereof declareth in the Preface mention is made of Charles 5. Emperour which was after Luther had preached some years As also because Hospinian part 2. Histor fol. 11. sayth SacrameÌ„taries haue corrupted the Waldenses CoÌ„fessioÌ„ that the Waldenses Confession was renewed or rather corrupted by the Sacramentaries as the Waldenses themselues say in the Preface of their Confession printed anno 1538. as witnesseth Schusselburg lib. 2. Theol. Caluin art 6. fol. 55. Moreouer Illyricus in his Catalogue in fol. col 1502. writeth that after Luther was knowne the VValdenses did greedily purchase greater knowledge Morgenstern in his foresayd booke pag. 79. sayth that they borrow the best part of their doctrine from the Lutherans And D. Fulke in his booke of Succession pag. 360. that they learnt of those of Basle to amend certaine errors which they had receiued from their ancestors Why then shall we not think they receiued the doctrine of iustification by only fayth from Luther especially sith as I befor sayd there is no mention of it amongst them in former tymes Againe Iurgenicius in the 2. chap. of his warre of the 5. ghospell affirmeth that the Authors of the Bohemian Confession do professe in the beginning thereof that they would neuer conioyne themselues to
22 I deny sayth be this Succession of Pastors to be alwayes notorious to the world And in his answere to Stapletons Cauillat who will acknowledge that she alone it the true Church who can shew her Pastors in a continuall succession D. Humfrey to 3. Reason of F. Campian p. 288. confesseth that not so much as the names of the Pastors who taught their Church were extant D. Whitaker Cont. 2 quest 5. cap. 6. page 508. thus writeth VVhat then was the succession of our Pastors alwayes visible No. For this is not needfull Though therefore our Pastors were not in tymes past manifest neither can we name then yet c. D. Morton in the first part of his Apology lib. 1. cap. 21. sayth that the Catholike church cannot alwayes shew the ordination of Pastors D. White in his way to the church pag. 410 I haue shewed the teachers of our fayth do lawfully succeed and so alway haue done though not outwardly and visibly to the world The like he hath pag. 411. and 436. Sadel wrote his book de vocatione MinistroruÌ„ against such Protestants as thought that their ministers wanted all lawfull calling because sayd they they haue no perpetuall visible succession from the Apostles vnto these tymes And himselfe there pag. 560. confesseth that visible succession hath byn broken of for many years in the church Thou seest good reader how they plainly confesse that before Luther start vp their Pastors were vnknowne to the world not manifest their succession not always visible their names not extant nor they can be named of Protestants And indeed and effect they all confesse the same when as none of them can produce any one man worthy of credit who heard any Protestant preacher who before Luther arose preached iustification by only fayth and the other fundamentall points of Protestancy 2. Secondly Luther eyther complaineth or boasteth for sometyme he alone preached Protestancy In his Preface vpon his 1. tome At first I was alone Luther alone And in his booke of the captiuity of Babylon tom 2. fol. 63 At that tyme I alone did role this stone And against the King of England fol. 497 I alone stood in the battell I alone was compelled to cast my selfe vpon the weapons of the Emperour and the Pope I stood alone in danger forsaken of all helped of none And vpon the graduall psalmes tom 3. fol. 5â—5 In the beginning of my quarrell I took all the matter vpon my selfe and did think that by Gods help I alone should sustaine it And otherwhere as before is reported he sayth that without him others should not haue knowne one iot of the Ghospell Melancthon in the Preface of the Acts of Ratisbon tom 4. pag. 730 sayth Luther alone durst medle with the errors of the Popes schooles Zuinglius in his Exegesis to 2. termeth Luther Ionathas who alone durst set vpon the campe of the Philistians And Caluin in his Admonition to Westphalus pag. 787. saith Luther alone doubted not to set vpon all Popery Besides Luther as before we haue rehearsed writeth that the only scripture was left whereby men might recouer the fayth But if at that tyme there had byn other Protestant Pastors the scripture had not byn alone and without Luther men might haue learnt the gospell Neither had Luther byn left alone and forsaken of all The Protestant Ministery wholy perished but some of them would haue stept out and seconded him especially after they saw that the preached without all danger 3. Thirdly Protestants do sometyme plainly say that their ministery was wholy perished before Luther arose Taken away Luther in his booke of priuate Masse tom 2. fol. 249 Papists haue taken out of the Church the true Ministery of the word And of the Institution of Ministers fol. 372. Aboloshed he writeth that Protestant ordination was by Papists abolished and extinguished And vpon the graduall psalm tom 3. fol. 568 The Church had no true Ministry vnder Antichrist No true Ministery Vpon the 25. of Genesis tom 6. fol. 319 In our tyme after those Popish monsters the true knowledge of the word and of diuine ordination was extinguished And vpon the 49. chap. fol. 655 Extinguished VVe are not the church for any ordinary succession Caluin epist 290 Because the true ranck of ordination was broken of by the tyranny of the Pope now we need haue new help to raise againe the Church BrokeÌ„ of And in Answere to Sadolet pag. 132. he writeth that when the supremacy of the Pope was set vp the true order of the Church perished Perished And of true reformation p. 322 Not without cause do we auouch the Church of God for some ages to haue byn so ioâ—ne and scattered that is it was destitute of true Pastors Beza in his Catechisme Destitute of Pastors title of the Church cap. 5 sect 18 In our tyme it came to passe thinges being so fallen downe that there was left no place for ordinary vocation And epist 5. pag. 39 In our tyme ordinary vocation Ordinary vocation no where which no where was neither could nor ought to be expected And Epist 24 Ye know being taught by fresh examples how the publike ministry being as it were ouerwhelmed for a tyme yet the church of God remaineth And epist 81 The matter came to that passe Ouerthrown to the grouÌ„d that the Ecclesiasticall order was wholy ouerthrowne euen to the foundation the vaine names therof only remayning And lib. de Notis Eccles pag. 82 They who in our memory haue freed the church from the tyranny of Antichrist had none of whome they might lawfully aske or receiue imposition of hands And epist 86 It is maniâ—est that for some ages lawfull order was quite abolished in the Church Quite abolished none not so much as the slenderest shadow of the cheifest part of ecclesiasticall calling remayning The French Confession art 31 Sometymes as in our age the state of the Church being interrupted it was needfull that some Pastors should be extraordinarily raysed of God Sadeel also de Vocat Ministrorum p. 556. sayth that true Order of Pastors was interrupted D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 6. pag. 510 VVe say that our mens calling was not ordinary but extraordinary Wholy corrupted because ordinary calling was wholy corrupted Againe The state of the Church was fallen and wholy ouerturned And pag. 612 VVhen ordinary succession was corrupted God found an extraordinary way by which the Church might be restored For God would that this restauration should be made not in the old foundation that is in succession of Bishops but after a certaine new extraordinary manner And D. White in defence of his way cap 49. pag. 421 Finding no other kind of Pastors sayth that the Protestant Pastors were euen those who liued in communion of the Roman Greek Armenian and such like Churches and addeth that his aduersary doth deceiue the reader when he intimateth that Protestants goe
28. fol. 396 If the Pope must be worshipped Christ must be denyed And de Missa priuata tom 7. fol. 475 VVhosoeuer is vnder the Pope and obeyeth him cannot be saued Caluin against Seruer pag. 607 Is it not a profanation of the sacred vnity to professe one God and faith with an impious and prophane company And Respons ad Versip pag. 362 How wicked and soule treachery is it to abide in that sacrilegious company of Papists And D. Whitaker ad Rat. 3. Campiani None abide with the lambe in the mountaine who haue any commerce with Antichrist And Caluin in Confutat Hollandi lib. de vitandis superstitionibus bringeth many proofes to shew that the faithfull may not communicate with the false Church and therto citeth the letters of Melancthon Bucer Peter Martyr and those of Zurich and the same is commonly taught of Protestants How then did not those Protestants separate themselues from the body of Christ how were they saued who in tymes past communicated with papists How were they saued vnlesse God be an acceptour of persons and tyms that he will cut of some from his body and from hope of saluation who communicate with Antichrist and not others at these and not in former tymes Againe Protestants teach that the Church ought to professe her fayth as besides the testimonies before repeated the Preface of the Confession of Saxony sayth They that are demaunded must needs tell the doctrine And the CoÌ„fession of Bohemia art 2 They teach that they must vndoubtedly belieue all the articles of the Creed and confesse them with the mouth Luther in 1. Petri cap. 2. tom 5. fol. 464 If any now as the Emperour or other Prince should aske me my fayth I must plainly confesse it to him And de Scru. Arbit tom 2. fol 432 Truth and doctrine must alwayes be preached openly and neuer kept secret or crookt and turnd awry D. Feild lib. 1. de Eccl. cap. 10 For seeing the Church is the multitude of them that shall be saued vnlesse he mak coÌ„fession vnto saluation for fayth hid in the heart and concealed doth not suffice it cannot be but they that are of the true Church must by the profession of the truth make themselues knowne in such sort that c. And the Preface of the Syntagme of Confessions VVhen euery one ought according to the Apostles precept giue a reason of his hope how much more the Church And D. Whitaker Cont. 4. quest 6. cap. 2. pag 696 True sayth can no more be separated from confession with the mouth then fire from beat or the sunne from its brightnes and beames What fayth then had those protestants which as is sayd durst not professe their mind And Cont. 2. qoest 3. cap. 2. pag. 472 It is not lawfull for the godly to dissemble true Religion or make shew of false nor to conceale what they think of Religion if they be examined of them who haue authority to aske them of their fayth But it is not credible that in so many ages in no part of the Christian world no Catholike Magistrate should aske any protestant of his fayth especially if it be true that Luther writeth in psalm 22. tom 3. fol. 344. that Papists do so examine the body of the Church that all her bones may be counted that is none of them can by hid VVherefore we must not imagine that there are any hidden bones of Christ all are bewrayed and counted wheresoeuer they are either by the espials of secret confession or by the tortours or examiners Which sheweth that if there had byn any true protestants heretofore they would haue byn discouered 11. Finally they are brought to these straights that sometymes they say that the protestant church which they imagine was heretofore in popery did consist of those who were papists both in opinion and profession This Caluin intimateth in the words before cited when he sayth that his church was corrupted with pestilent doctrine And Luther de Missa priuata tom 7. fol. 231. saying The very elect were seduced in that great darknesse And in cap. 9. Isaiae tom 4. fol. 95 Behold sayth he the whole face of the Churches vnder Popery Did not they all who truly felt the burden of sinne imagine that they should by good works satisfy for their sinnes Which thing alone would suffice to blot them out of the role of protestants D. White in defence of his way cap. 36. pag. 350. sayth those imaginary protestants were corrupted some more some lesse with those errors which sayth he now we fly And cap. 40. pag. 394. graunteth that they were infected with damnable heresies D. Whitaker lib. 2. de Scriptura cap. 8. sect vlt. sayth They were beset with most thick darknes Nappâ—r in cap. 12. Apocal. pag. 195. that their visible Church in tymes past VVholy embraced the errors of merits and indulgences c. And Morgersterâ—â— tract de Eccl. pag. 41 These things were in tymes past to be forgiuen the godly that they belieued the Pope to be â—hrists vicar and head of the church Popery to be the church Saints to be prayed vnto Masse to be the Lords supper Are these men think you in their wits who call them godly and say they must be pardoned who belieued Antichrist to be Christs vicar Antichrists Synagogue to be the Church of Christ and horrible idolatry such as they account Masse prayer to Saints to be seruice of Christ The same also they meane when they challenge the simple ignorant Papists for theirs or confesse the vulgar Roman Church to be the true Church or as others of them speake graunt the Roman Church but deny Popery the Popish or Roman Popish Church For they imagine that the simple Catholike people neither doth now nor in former tyms did belieue those points of fayth which themselues deny But this they feigne of the simple Catholike people and cannot proue it Besides there is no Catholike â—o simple as doth not vertually belieue all points of Catholike fayth which Protestants deny sith he actually professeth to belieue whatsoeuer the Catholike Church teacheth Neither is there any at all who doth not belieue iustification by good works which point alone would suffice to make them no Protestants Besides Caluin 4. Institut cap. 8. sayth that we affirme him to be no Christian who doth not vndoubtedly agree to all points of doctrine as well affirmatiue as negatiue And the same sayth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 8. pag. 519. D. Morton part 1. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 9. and D. Willet in the Preface of his Synopsis Yea as before we rehearsed Cap 2. they confesse that before Luthers reuolt all from head to foot were drowned in the pudles of Popery that none dreamed of that which is the cheifest point of Protestancy Wherfore Schusselburg tom 8. Catal. Haeret. pag. 440. seemeth to say That befor Luther arose Popery was the true church like as the Synagogue of the Iewes was before the comming
part 2. histor fol. 232 He first in our age brought into the world the light of the Ghospell after it had beene extinguished Thus the Lutherans And in like manner the Sacramentaryes Zuinglius respons ad Luther tom 2. fol. 380. thus speaketh Luther Thou first camest into the field Ibidem in Exeges fol. 335. VVe willingly acknowledge thee to be the chiefest defender of the Ghospell the Diomedes who durst set vpon the Roman Venus the Ionathas who durst alone assaile the campe of the Palestins Bucer de Coena pag. 675. calleth Luther our first Apostle of the pure Ghospell and 673. sayth Luther first in our age did impugne superstitiō Caluin writeth that he began to take the cause in hand and first shewed the way First shewed the way Danaeus lib. de Baptismo cap. 15 Luther first gaue others occasion to thinke rightly of mans iustification before God Lauather de distid Euchar. anno 1546. Luther first in our age did by diuers writings openly inueigh against Popish errours Author Orthodoxi consensus in Praefat. Apol Luther and Zuinglius were the first who began to reprehend inueterate errours Againe The first teachers of Germany Luther Melancthon c. Amongst English Protestants M. Iewell in defens Apol. part 1. cap. 7. diuis 3 Thus I say in this later age after your so long darcknesse Luther was the first that preached the Ghospell of Christ M. Fox in his Acts pag. 402 Luther opened the veine long before hidden M. Wotton in his examination of the title of the Roman Clergy It might be truly sayd that Luther was the first who in that tyme did publish Christ especially in the chiefe points of the Ghospell which is iustification by fayth in Christ And in this respect it is an honour for Luther to haue been a sonne without a father a scholler without a maister Scholler without a maister Yee see how plainly they say that Luther first preached the Ghospell first brought in the Ghospell first shewed the way first published Christ discouered the first sparcle first layd open the iustice of fayth had no orthodoxall Predecessours was a sonne without a Father and a scholler without a maister and that in the article of iustification by only fayth which the soule hinges and summe of Protestancy 2. Secondly without Luthers help no man had knowne a iote of Protestancy Luther cont Regem Angliae tom 2. fol. 497 Vnles we had opened the way they were like to haue vnderstood nothing at all either of Christ or of the Ghospell Nothing at all In cap. 15. 1. loc tom 5. fol. 134 The gospell is by our labour and diligence brought into light and they first learnt it of vs without our paynes they could neuer haue learnt one word of the Ghospell And fol. 141 God hath called vs by his holy spirit Not one word that by vs Christ might be manifested known to the world This prayse they cannot take from vs that we were the first carryed away the prize of bringing the Ghospell into light of which they would not haue knowne one iote vnlesse by our paines and study it had beene brought forth And ibidem in cap. 17. Matth. he sayth that without him the Sacramentaries and others would not haue knowne neuer so little of the Euangelicall truth Not one iote Zuinglius in Exegesi tom 2. fol. 358. writeth these wordes of Luther If they had not had it of vs Neuer so little doubtlesse they would haue knowne nothing of And those of Zurich in their confession write thus Luther boasteth that himselfe is the Prophet and Apostle of the Germans who hath learnt nothing of any and all haue learnt of him None knew any thing but what they haue knowne by him 3. Thirdly they write that Luther did kindle the Protestant light Schusselburg tom 13. Catal. haeret pag. 897 Luther kindled the Protestant light By Luthers ministery the cleare light of the Ghospell is kindled againe for vs Lobechius disput 1. pag. 6. By this mans Ministery the Lord hath kindled in Germany the light of the heauenly truth M. Iewel defens Apol. part 1. cap. 7. diuis 3. pag. 56. Luther and Zuinglius were appointed of God to kindle againe the light which you had quenched Verheiden in his Images at the Image of Luthers Thou first didst preach the Ghospell with so great constancy Tho◠didst lighten the torch of the Ghospell to the world And at the image of Zuinglius he sayth of him and Luther Laid the foundation These two Architects laying the foundation of the Euangelicall kingdome D. Whitaker cont 4. quest 5. cap. 3. pag. 693. Luther lighted a torch which no flouds can put out And in Praefat. tom 2. Danaei it is sayd God raysed vp Luther for to kindle and restore to the world the light of his Ghospell And what is it to be a kindler of light but to be Authour therof 4. Fourthly they say that Luther was the renewer the Founder the Restorer the setler and promulgator of their Church and Religion Zuinglius in Exegesi tom 2. fol. 358. writeth that Luther challengeth to himself all the instauration of sayth Illyricus in Schusselburg tom 13. Catal. haeret fol. 850 This same religion was renewed and setled by Luther Hamburgenses ibidem fol. 658. Renewed religion setled it Luther truly the renewer of diuine worship Heshusius lib. de praesentia Christi sayth of Luther He was that notable instrumens by which true religion was renewed Saxonici in the conference at Aldburg Scripto 7. pag. 319. speake thus Since the tyme of the Ghospel renewed by Luther Hemingius in Schusselburg lib. 2. Theol. Caluin Pap. 133. Luther restored the ancient worship which our first parents receaued of God and which Christ commended to his Church Caluin admonit 2. pag. 147 By his endeauour principally the purity of the Ghospell was restored And pag. 768. God raysed Luther others Restored purity of the Ghospel by whose Ministery our Churches were founded and instituted The Protestant Princes in Germany in Schusselburg tom 13. catal pag. 877. write that the King of Nauarre willingly affirmeth the French Churches to acknowledge Luther to be their Father in Christ. Or as Thuanus lib. 79. histor reporteth their wordes That Luther is esteemed and honoured of the French Churches as their Father in Christ and that by his ministry truth was first pulled out Beza de Haeret. puniend pag 148 Luther the Renewer of Christian Religion Renewed Religion And in his Images The principall instrument of Christianity renewed in Germany Danaeus cont 5. pag. 1135. reckoneth Luther amōg those of whom saith he all other men haue receaued what light of the Ghospell they haue And lib. 1. de Euchar. cap. 1. First Renewer of the Church truth termeth him the Renewer of the Ghospell of Christ. And Apol. pro Eccles Heluet The first renewer of the Church Hospin part 2. hist fol. 134 The first
a true Church and vnderstand their foresayd Maior vniuersally it is false for not euery true Church in that sense is Apostolicall or hath euer beene For a schismaticall Church is true in doctrine and yet is neither Apostolicall nor hath euer beene And if they vnderstand their Maior particulerly the conclusion followeth not because it is deduced out of pure particuler propositions And thus much of the Maior 7. Secondly the foresayd argument is a sophism because of the Minor by which one vnknown thing is proued by another one false thing by another not only false Protestāts proofe out of a thing more vnknowne but also impossible For it is more vncercertaine that the Protestant Church holdeth the doctrin of Christ then that she was before Luther For albeit she were not before notwithstanding it was not impossible that she should haue beene but that she holdeth the doctrine of Christ is both false and impossible also And as Luther sayth in defens verb. Coenae tom 7. fol. 385. It is a mad mans part to proue vncertaine things by others as vncertaine And D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 3. cap. 3. All proofe is by thinges that are more knowne Which also he hath cont 2. quest 5. cap. 18. Sadcel praefat lib. cont Traditiones Daneus l. 4. de Eccles cap. 2. D. Morton part 2. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 37. Pareus lib. 3. de Iustificat cap. 1. Wherupon Luther tom 2. Praefat. assert Antic fol. 95. writeth Aristotle and all sense of nature sheweth that vnknowne thinges must be proued by thinges more knowne and obscure thinges by manifest If therefore as Pareus sayth lib. 1. de Iustificat c. 20. when the Aduersarie is brought to that that eitheir he gainesayth himselfe or beggs that which he is to proue assuming that in his proofe which is in debate or trifleth by repeating now and then the same thing he is vanquished surely then Protestants are vanquished whom in this smal work we haue shewed oftentymes to gaine say themselues now including these within the Church now excluding them now affirming the Church to be inuisible now denying it now to haue alwayes Pastours now denying it and the like And in this argumment with which alone they proue the existēce of their Church before Luther they assume in the Minor that which most of all is in debate Caluin 4. Insticut c. 1. § 12. Narrat de Eccles Belg. p. 196. And the Maior they can proue no otherwise then by trifling by repeating it and saying that it is out of all doubt I add also that the sacramentaryes say that the Lutheran Church erreth euen in the fundamentall points and the like say the Lutherans of the Sacramentaries and scarce there is any Protestant who doth not thinke that the Church whereof he is doth erre in some points What reason then haue they out of the truenesse of the doctrin of their Churches to inferre their perpetuall existence 8. Thirdly I adde that the manner wherwith Protestants doe proue the Minor of their foresayd syllogisme is sophisticall and not such as they exact of vs for proofe of our doctrine For commonly they exact of vs to shew that our doctrine is contained in expresse words in Scripture or as Luther sayth lib. de seru arbit tom 2. fol. 440 inso manifest testimonies as are able so to stop all mēs mouths as they are not able to say any thing against it But manifest it is that such be not the proofes wher with Protestants proue their doctrine For to omit other points where is in expresse words in scripture that fundamentall point of their doctrin that we are iustified by only faith Say the contrary is so expresly in S. Iames epistle Tom. 6. in c. 12. Gen. as therfore Luther blasphemously sayth S. Iames doted And the Lutherans for that very cause deny his epistle to be canonicall Besides VVhitak cont 1. q. 4. cap. 3. Protestants doe now confesse that the scripture is not of it selfe sufficient to end all questions of faith and that Schismatikes cannot be conuinced by scripture How then can they sufficiently proue al the points of their doctrine by scripture VVhitak loc cit p. 490. Plessy l. de Eccles c. 9. Againe themselues acknowledge that they need certaine meanes to attaine to the right sense of the Scripture and that their meanes are humane and not infallible as knowledge of tongues conference of places and such like and with all that such as the meanes be such is the exposition of Scripture If therfore their meanes be not infallible how can their vnderstanding of the scripture be infallible Moreouer they scarce euer proue any thing by both principles out of scripture but almost euermore adioyne one human principles as easily will appeare if their proofs be brought to a syllogisticall forme as well obserue the most learned Bishop of Luçon in his defence of the Principall articles of faith cap. 3. 5. And how can they be infallibly certaine of the conclusion which they cannot know but by one human principle whereof they can haue no such certainty Furthermore because many of their proofes doe not only consist of one humane principle Protestats conclude against sense which is not at al in the scripture but also they inferre a conclusiō directly contradictory to that which the scripture in most expresse words teacheth of that matter As for example when they proue that the Eucharist is of not the very body and bloud of Christ alwayes one of their principles is humane and besides their conclusiō is flat contrary to expresse words of scripture which affirmeth that it is Christs very body and bloud And who is he in his wittes that will perswade himselfe either that the scripture meaneth that the Eucharist is not the body bloud of Christ which directly it neuer sayth rather then that it is his body and bloud which it as expresly sayth as euer it sayth any thing or that that proofe is not sophisticall which out of one humane principle at least inferreth the contrary of that which the scripture most expresly teacheth Lastly they neuer proued any one point of their doctrine any otherwise then euer Heretiks do that is in their own iudgmēt neuer before any iudge or general Councell which Luther himselfe confesseth in c. 27. Gen. tom 6. fol. 368. in the words In the affaire of the Gospell we haue decided the matter against al the impiety of the Pope without form of law VVe accused not the Pope neither could we for there was no iudge Yea their doctrin hath bin cōdemned according to all forme of law in the Generall Councel of Trent of the Patriarch of Constantinople to whō they appealed and of al other kinds of Christians 9. Fourthly I say that the foresayd argument is a sophisme in that in a sēsible matter as the Church is it concludeth against the sense of all men For nether did any see the Protestant Church before Luther