19. VVhether the Visible Church of God can wholy erre or not 20. VVhether set tymes of fasting from certaine meates be appointed only for Polytick order but with all for spirituall Considerations § 22. Besides the former disagreements touching the twenty Catholike Articles aboue recited There are certaine Catholike Points maintayned by diuers Protestants to be of that indifferency of Nature as that the belieuing or not belieuing of them it not in any sort necessarily to be exacted through any danger to the party belieuing them or not belieuing them The beliefe of which Points in particular other Protestants do hould as most impious superstitious and not standing with the Saluation of the party belieuing them The Articles are these following 1. Touching the Beliefe of Praying to Saintes 2. Touching the beliefe of the Reall Presence 3. Touching receauing vnder Both or One kind only 4. Concerning Freewill 5. Concerning the Indifferency of honoring the Reliques of Saintes 6. Touching our B. Lady being preserued from Originall sinne 7. Touching Satisfaction and Merit of Works 8. Concerning the Popes Primacy 9. Touching the Indifferency of Priuate Masse 10. Touching not only the Indifferency of Priuate Masse but of seuerall other Catholike Points so iointly maintayned in the Protestant Writings § 23. Now to all these former disagreements among the Protestants are adioyned certaine Porismata or Resultancyes ineuitably rising from a true Consideration of diuers of the said dissentions and Disagreements THE PREFACE Wherein First are discouered the seuerall sleights vsed by Protestants to charge the Church of Rome with Dissentions in doctrine Secondly it is proued that the Necessity of Vnity in Fayth ought to be in the Church of Christ. HORRENTIA Martis Arma Virumque cano Vndertaking to record the vnnaturall and blouddy Wars which the Protestant wageth against the Protestant in matter of Fayth And intending in this Ensuing discourse to dismantle and lay open to the view of all the naked state of Protestancy so far forth as it concernes its want of Vnity and the immortall Dissentions among the Professours thereof and further well remembring that our Aduersaries through their Serpentine calumny of some among them are euer ready pressed by way of Recrimination to obtrude though most wrongfully the like dissentions vpon vs Catholiks Therefore I haue thought good in the front hereof to remoue such Replies and surprize all Obiections by preuention as may seeme to fix vpon the Catholiks that blemish or Scar wherewith Protestancy lyes here iustly chargeable I herein imitating the proceeding of a carefull Generall in the Wars who first labours to preclude and forestall the Enemy of all Passages and Wayes whereby the approach of his forces might endanger him and then drawes out his owne Troupes for the assaulting of his said Enemy Well then to the point 1. First we are to obserue which the yawning and heedles Reader perhaps will not espye that in doctrines there are to be considered two things as Beza (a) Beza â—n Epist Theolog. Epist 18. sayth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 explicandum sempe◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nunquam nisi sobriè prudenter attingenâ—um well noteth to wit The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying a Categoricall or Positiue assertion that such a thing is true in doctrine hath euer reference to the Conclusion As for example That Saintes in Heauen do heare vs. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath respect only to the Manner or some other Circumstance of the Conclusion As whether the Saintes do heare vs by behoulding all things intuitiuely in God in whom they see all things Or that they heare our Prayers through their celerity and incredible speedines of the Motion of their soules who in the smallest tyme are able to descend and ascend from Heauen to earth This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Conclusion in Fayth is that in which all Catholikes continuing Catholiks do vnanimously agree But touching the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or manner of such a point or Conclusion they dissent sometymes among themselues Because the manner of a point in doctrine is for the most part of that Adiaphorous and indifferent Nature as that seuerall learned Men may teach seuerally touching the said Manner without any breach of Fayth And we are thus warned from being ouercurious and searching into the Manner of the Conclusion by an ancient Father who sayth (b) Nazianzeâ—â— Orat 1. 〈◊〉 Theologia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And thus accordingly hereto all Men are obliged to belieue all decreed Articles of Fayth yet not euer to belieue the particular Manner or Reason thereof Which manner being a Point but of Indifferency is often reduced for triall to some Scholasticall subtilty or apprehension 2. I am to aduertize the Reader that whereas there is Questio Juris and Questio Facti we are heere to obserue that matter of Fact but not matter of Fayth may be controuerted among Deuines without any want of Vnity in doctrine because the Sentences determinations passed vpon matter of Fact may and ought to be altered vpon later and better Informations touching the matter of Fact And in this sense and vpon this Occasion were alterable the Decrees obiected against vs by some Protestants of Pope Formosas by Pope Steuen the 6. and Pope Sergius the 3. Which decrees were after confirmed againe by Pope Romanus Theodorus 2. and Iohn 10. Now the reason of altering the said decrees originally proceeded from matter of Fact to wit whether Formosus was truly and Canonically elected Pope and consequently had full power to make those decrees or was but only a schismaticall Pope And thus these other Popes maintayned seuerall Opinions touching his Election being but matter of Fact and according to their different iudgments therein did abrogate or confirme the decrees of the said Formosus 3. A Third Obseruation may heere be taken from the authority of S. Austin thus writing Sometimes (c) S. Austin l. de Baptismo Contra Iulian. Telag l. 1. c. 2. the most learned and best defenders of the Catholik Rule do without breaking the Frame of Fayth not accord And more Diuers (d) August de Baptism contra Donat l. â—â— c. 18. men be of diuers iudgments without breach of Peace vntill a Generall Councell allow some one part for cleare pure Thus according hereto we are instructed that if any doubt of Points concerning Fayth and Religion do occur and rise neuer before determined by the Authority of Gods Church Christians may maintayne different Opinions touching the same Points vntill the Voyce of Gods Church hath definitiuely and sententionally decreed the said Points one only way And according to this Caution the Controuersy houlden betweene the Thomists and Scotists concerning the Conception of our Blessed Lady much insisted vpon against vs by our Aduersaries may be houlden without any violence to Vnity in Fayth seing this Controuersy is not yet determined and defined by the Church
dreaming him already to haue beene come he first appeared But I hasten to other Points The IX Paragraph I Will next intreate of the Church and First of the Visibility of the Protestant Church seuerally mantayned by seuerall of our Aduersaries Secondly whether in the Protestant Church there hath beene Personall succession and Vocation of Ministers Thirdly who be the Persons of Members that Constitute the Protestants Church Fourthly whether the present Roman Church be the true Church of God and the same Church with the Protestants Lastly whether Papists as the Protestants call the Catholiks dying Papists may be saued In all which seuerall points the Reader shall fynd strang Dissentions in the Protestants writings touching them 1. And to begin with the Visibility of the Protestant Church we fynd most Protestants confidently to iustify the Visibility of it in all Ages And according hereto D. Field with a most frontles impudency thus writeth We (q) D. Field in his booke of the Church l. 3. c. 8. pag. 76. firmely belieue all the Churches of the World wherein our Fathers liued and dyed to haue beene true Protestant Churches of God c. And that they who taught imbraced and belieued those damnable Errours which the Romanists defend against vs were only a Faction Which words necessarily imply that the Protestant Church was in his iudgment euer visible In like sort a litle Booke written in the yeare 1624. and intituled A Treatise of the Perpetuall visibility and succession of the true Church in all ages written as is thought by the last pretended Archbishop of Canterbury D. Abbots or els by D. Whyte or D. Featly in proofe of the vninterrupted visibility of the Protestant Church iustifyeth their like iudgment herein Finally D. White and D. Featly in their priuate Conference in London some yeares since with M. Fisher and M. Sweet of the Society of Iesus with great venditation in words auerred the continuall Visibility of the Protestant Church in all ages and the greater Part of Protestants do mantayne the same Now let vs see how these men are crossed and impugned in this their Tenet by other learned Protestants First D. Iewell merely crossing D. Fields former most bold shameles assertion thus sayth The (r) In his Apology of the Church part 4. l. 4. truth meaning the Protestant Fayth and Religion was vnknowne at that tyme and vnheard of when Martin Luther and Hulderick Swinglius first came vnto the knowledge and preaching of the Gospell And vpon this it proceedeth that Bucer styleth Luther The (s) In Epist Anno 36. ad Episcopum Hereford first Apostle to vs of the reformed Doctrine With these former agree Benedictus Morgensterne the Protestant thus saying It is ridiculous (t) Tract de Ecclesia pag. 145. to say that any before the tyme of Luther had the purity of the Gospell And Conradus Schlusselburg the Lutheran is no lesse feruent in this point thus auerring It is (u) In Theolog. Caluinist l. 2. fol. 130. impudency to affirme that any learned men before Luther did hould the Doctrine of the Gospell From all which authorities it appeareth that before Luthers first breaking out the Protestant Church was inuisible throughout the whole world But let vs see what more the Protestants confesse contrary to the assertions of infinite other their Brethren touching the inuisibility of the Protestant Church during the seuerall ages before Luther First then Caelius secundus Curio a learned Protestant thus teacheth Factum (x) De amplitudine regni Dei p. 212. est vt per multos iam annos Ecclesia latuerit c. It is brought to passe that the Church for many yeares hath beene latent and that the Citizens of this Kingdome could scarsly ac ne vix quidem and indeed not at all be knowne of others In the same Dialect writeth M. Perkins saying We (y) In his exposition of the Creed pag. 44â— say that before the dayes of Luther for the space of many hundred yeares an vniuersall Apostacy ouerspred the whole face of the earth and that our Church was not then visible to the World Doctour Fulke speaketh heere of more particularly touching the time of the Protestants Churches Inuisibility saying The (z) In his answere to a Counterfeyte Catholike p. 16. Church in tyme of Boniface the third it being anno 607. was inuisible and fled into wildernes thereto remayne a long season The forsaid D. Perkins in another of his Bookes writes more expresly of this point his words are these During (a) In his exposition of the Creed the space of nyne hundred yeares the popish Heresy hath spred it selfe ouer the whole earth M. Napper riseth higher acknowledging thus (b) In his Treatise vpon the Reuelation pag. â—8 Betweene the yeares of Christ 300. and 316. the Antichristian and Papisticall reigne began reigning vniuersally without any debatible Contradiction one thousand two hundred and sixty yeares Yea the said M. Napper in another place ascendeth to higher tymes thus writing During (c) Vpon the Reuel in c. 11. 12. euen the second and third age to wit after Christ the true Church of God and light of the Gospell was obscured by the Roman Antichrist himselfe with whome conspireth M. Brocard saying During (d) Vpon the Reuelat pag. 100. the second and third age after Christ the true Temple of God and light of the Gospell was obscured by the Roman Antichrist Sebastianus Francus a great Protestant more liberally acknowledgeth of this point writing in this manner For (e) In Epistol de â—brogandis in vniuersum omnibus statutis Ecclesiast certaine through the worke of Antichrist the externall Church together with the Fayth and Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure And that for these Foureteene hundred yeares the Church hath not beene externall and Visible With whom D. Fulke as forgetting what before he had written touching anno 607. fully agreeth auerring thus The true (f) In his answere to a Counterfeyte Catholike p. â—3 Church decayed immediatly after the Apostles tyme. Thus much concerning the Protestant Church where we see that whereas most Protestants do teach that it hath in all ages continued Visible diuers others most remarkable Protestants do not only dissent from these former in teaching the contrary Doctrine to wit that the Protestant Church hath beene wholy inuisible for many ages But also these later disagree among themselues touching the tyme of the Latency of their Church Some of them designing a shorter tyme others a longer tyme of its Inuisibility Yea one and the same Authour at seuerall tymes writeth seuerally of the tyme of their Churches Inuisibility as appeareth by the aboue alledged different iudgments of Doctour Fulke and M. Napper So wonderfull are their contentions herein 2. In this Passage I come to the Doctrine of Personall succession and vocation of Ministers in the Protestant Church differently mantayned by different Protestants For first Caluin challengeth to himselfe
Authoriries of the ancient Fathers Whose Pens were euer imployed against euery then new arising Doctrine not bearing Vnity to the Fayth of Gods Vniuersall Church we fynd S. Athanasius thus to Wryte Jllud (y) Orat. 1. contra Arianos quoque prorsus admirabile c. This also is very wonderfull that all Heresyes in coyning diuers things do differ in themselues and do iointly agree in defence of falshood S. Chrysostome sharpeneth his penne in this sort against the Enemyes of Vnity in Fayth Omnes Infideles (z) Opera imperfect in Math. hom 20. qui sub diabolo sunt c. All such Infidells or Misbelieuers which are in the power of the Diuell are not vnited but are deuided through diuersity of Opinions And such is the want of Fayth among Hereticks who neuer agree in one consent of Things but maintayne as seuerall Opinions as themselues are seuerall in number Thus S. Chrysostome S. Hilarius in this sort pensilleth out the face and countenance of disagreing Heretiks (a) L. 7. dâ— Trinitate Haeretici omnes contra Ecclesiam veniunt c. All Heretiks do assault the Church But whiles Heretiks do mutually ouercome one another they ouercome nothing therin since their Victory when one Heresy doth euen fight against another is finally become the TriuÌ„ph of the Church Tertullian (b) L. de Praescription aduersus Haeres 41. writes of this point in this manner Inspectae Haereses omnes c. All Heresyes being truly looked into are deprehended to dissent in many things euen with thiâ— owne Authours I will conclude with Irenaeus Videmus (c) L. 1. c. 5. in initio nunc corum inconstantem sententiam c. We now see their inconstant iudgment who if they be but two or three in number how diuersly they teach the same things And further the said Father Durum (d) Vbi supra c. 1â— est omnium describere sententias c. Jt is a difficult thing to set downe the different Sentences of all Hereticks For greater breuity of this point I refer the Reader to the testimonies of S. Ierome (e) In Math. â—4 S. Austin (f) Contra Epist Parmenian l. 3. c. 4. S. Ambrose (g) L. de fide ad Gratianum c. â— and the Councell of (h) In de cretis Synod Niâ—e nae contra Haeresâ—m Arianam Nyce And thus far touching the Fathers herein Now in this last place to ascend to the sacred Authorities of Gods Word which are the stamps sealing vp the Truth of all the former Humane Authorities which testimonies I reserue hitherto wherewith to close yp the Iudgment of the Reader herein And first to shew the Vglines of Dissention we read (i) Luc. 11. Euery Kingdome deuided in it selfe shall perish And vpon this ground the Prophet thus prayeth Destroy (k) Psalm â—5 O Lord and deuide their Tongues implying hereby that their deuided Tongues in iudgment shall occasion their destruction And another Prophet in further proofe of this point thus hath left recorded Their (l) Ose â—0 Hart is deuided they shall now perish And the Wiseman instructeth vs in these Words God (m) Prouerb 6. hateth him that raiseth vp Contentions among Brethren All which Scripturall Authorities as they shew the malice wickednes of Disunion and Dissention in generall so they implicitly and potentially proue that Want of Vnity in Doctrine cannot stand with true Fayth Therefore the more reason had the Apostle S. Paul to vse this his feruerous admonition to the Christians of his tyme saying I beseech (n) 1. Cor. 1. you Brethren that there be no dissentions among you Not forsaking (o) Hebr. 10. the fellowship which we haue among our selues Neither is the Apostle lesse slow in recommending the Vertue of Vnity in expresse words though this be coincident with the former for thus he instructeth his followers I beseech (p) 1. Cor. 1. you that you all speake one thing be you knit togeather in one mind and one iudgment (q) Ephes 4. Endeuoring to keep the Vnity of spirit in the band of peace God is the God (r) 1. Cor. 14. not of diuision but of Peace And according hereto we read that our Sauiour prayed for the Members of his Church that they may be One (s) Ioan. 17. And to conclude according to this his prayer it is recorded that the Multitude of them which belieued were (t) Act. 4. of One Hart and One Soule so luxuriant abounding we fynd the sacred Scriptures to be â—or the extirpation of all Dissention and Diâ—ision out of the society of Christians and â—or the entertayning of Vnity among them in all Matters of Religion Now then hauing thus demonstrated the Necessity of Vnion in matters of Fayth both from diuine and humane Authorities and withall hauing in the beginning aboue as it were beset all wayes passages by which our Aduersaries might in a vulgar iudgment seeme to assault vs by their pretence of some weake and feeble Reasons (u) Szegedin the Protestant in loc om pag. 1â—4 thus saith Vnity one of the Notes of the Church for proofe of Diuision in Fayth to be in our Catholike Church it remayneth that we hasten to shew whether Vnity in Fayth as being a Marke of the true Church euen by the iudgment of Protestants themselues can be found in Protestancy Or in place thereof implacable and irreconcileable Disagreements and Warres A most foule scarre or moale to remayne vpon the Fayth of the supposed Chiefe Professours of the Ghospell So indisputably true it is that Protestancy lyes exposed or rather becomes thrall to all Fluctuation Inconstancy in doctrine And with this I say I will hasten to present to the sight of the Reader that face which is ingendred of so many Contradictions in Fayth and I will be content for the tyme to become the Protestants Herauld in blasing the Armes of their Contentions So shall the Reader withall discerne that the Protestants Pens are euer prest and ready to discharge vpon their owne Brethren for matter of Fayth and Religion euen whole Volleys of shot of most reproachfull Words and intemperate Language ΑΔΕΛΦΟΜΑΧΙΑ OR THE WARRS OF PROTESTANCY The I. Paragraph BEFORE we enter into the distentions of the Protestants touching particular Doctrines seuerally maintayned by seuerall sydes of them I will first lay open with what kind and brotherly language one Sect of them and yet all good Protestants doth entertayne another Now this Discors Concordia this disagreeing Harmony of theirs consisteth of many parts To wit First of the Lutherans against the Sacramentaries I meane the Swinglians and Caluinists then reciprocally of the Caluinists against the Lutherans Secondly The Lutherans among themselues Thirdly The Caluinists among them selues Fourthly The Moderate Protestant against the Puritan and the Puritan against the Moderate Protestant within which Clause are comprehended the Eâ—gâ—â—sh Moderate Protestants and the English Puritans 1 And to
extraordinary calling as being sent from no Man but only from God in these words Quia (g) Lascitius the Protestant reciteth this saying of Caluin l. de Russorum Muscouit Religione c. 13. Papa tyrannide c. Because through the tyranny of the Pope true succession of Ordination was broken of Therefore we stand in neede of a new Course herein and this Function or calling was altogether extraordinary In this Opinion conspire most other Protestants especially of the more earnest sort According hereto M. Perkins (h) In his workes printed anno 605. fol. 916. writeth that the calling of Wicliffe Hus Luther Oecolampadius Peter Martyr c. was exâ—raordinary And Doctour Fulke iumpeth with the former saying The (i) Against stapleton Martiall pag. 2. Protestants that first preached in these dayes had extraordinary calling Thus far in Defence of extraordinary calling in these dayes Now the Reader shall see how others more sober Protestants do wholy reiect this extraordinary calling immediatly from God â—xcept it be confirmed with miracles as it was in the Apostles First M. Cartwright thus writeth To (k) In his second Reply part 2. pa. 14â— minister the Sacraments is an hoâ—our in the Church which none can take to him â—ut he which is called vnto it as Aaron was Musculus the great Protestant writeth thus Vecatio (l) In loc Comm. pag. 394. quae immediatè est à Christo iam in vsu non est vt erat olim c. The calling immediatly from Christ is not now in vse as it was in former tymes The Bishop of Winchester thus teacheth They (m) In his perpetuall gouerment of the Church l. â— p. 111. can haue no part of Apostolicall commission that haue no shew of Apostolicall succession D. Sarauia agrees with the former saying Speciem (n) In defens tract contra respons Beza p. 306. 307 illam extraordinariae vocationis ad Ecclesiae ministerium non admitto c. I do not approue that shew of extraordinary calling seing it is not warranted with any authority of Scripture or certaine example Now whereas diuers other Protestants do teach that all extraordinary calling to the ministery is accompanyed with working of Miracles or els is a meere illusion In this manner and restriction writeth Luther saying Vnde (o) Tom. 3. len Germ. fol. 491. venis quis te misit vbi sigilla quod ab hominibus missus sis Vbi miracula c. And Amandus (p) In partitionib Theol. l. 1. p. 308. Polanus (q) In his soueraigne Remedy against Schism p. â—5 Henoch Clapham (r) In loc Comm. p. 304. Musculus and many others too loÌ„g to write do maintayne the same Yet this wholy makes against the calling of Luther himselfe Caluin and all other Sectaries of this age touching their vocation Seing it is granted by Doctour Fulke in these words It is (s) Against the Rhemish Testam in Apoc. 13. knowne that Caluin and the rest whom Papists call Archheretiks do worke no miracles with whom D. Sutcliffe conspireth saying We (t) In his Exam. of D. Kellisons Suruey printed 1606. pag. 8. do not practise miracles nor do we teach that the Doctrine of Truth is to be confirmed with miracles Thus much touching the contrary and Crossing-Iudgments of the Protestants concerning the necessity of Personall Succession in the Church of Christ 3. I next come to discouer their disagreements touching such persons as they acknowledge to be members of the Protestant Church in which point we shall fynd wonderfull opposition among the Protestants First I will shew all such sorts of persons which many Protestants exclude from being members of their Protestant Church And First we find all Heretikes to be excluded and herein I will begin with the iudgment of the Lutherans then of the Caluinists Touching the Lutherans the Centurists thus write (u) Cent. 6. in the Preface Neither Heretiks nor deuisers of Phanaticall Opinions are of Christ but they are of Antichrist and the Deuill And Luther is of the same iudgment saying (x) In his Explicat of the Creed Neither Gentill Iew Heretike or any sinner can be saued vnlesse he make attonement with the Church and in all things do teach the same he meaning his owne Protestant Church To come to the Sacramentaries Caluin thus teacheth (y) Instit l. 2. c. 15. Num. 1. Rightly Austin denyeth Heretiks to haue the same Foundation with the Godly albeit they Preach the name of Christ. D. White All (z) In his way to the Church p. 10. Heretiks teach the truth in some things Yet we deny them to be of the Church of God The Confession of Basil (a) Art 24. We driue away all whosoeuer dissenting from the Society of the holy Church do bring in or follow strange wicked Doctrines To conclude D. Sutcliffe (b) In his booke of the Church c. 1. Heretiks are not of the Church Now here I am to aduertise the Reader that seeing most of these Testimonies as also diuers other following do speake literally of the true Church of God that therefore the Protestants meane thereby their owne Protestant Church seeing they teach it alone to be the true Church of God To come to Schismatiks they are in like sort reiected from being members of the Protestant Church For first Luther thus writeth I belieue (c) Luther in his great Catech. tom 5. pag. 628. there is on earth a little Congregation of Saintes agreeing in all things without Sects or schismes Melancthon Neither (d) In his booke against Swenkfeld tom 2. pa. â—01 is there more then one Church of Christ Neither doth this Company consist of diuers sects D. Fulke thus accordingly teacheth What (e) Of the Succession of the Church skilleth it whether one being drawne by Heresy or schisme from the body of Christ be subiect to eternall damnation D. Whitaker It is (f) Controuers 2. q. 9. c. 9. false that Hereticall and Schismaticall Churches are true Churches To conclude with D. Field The name (g) Of the Church l. 1. cap. 7. of the Catholike Church he thereby vnderstanding his owne Protestant Church is applyed to distinguish men houlding the Fayth in the Vnity from Schismatikes The Anabaptists are in like manner by diuers Protestants disclaymed from being members of their Protestant Church For thus doth the Confession of Switzerland teach We (h) Cap. 20. condemne Anabaptists who maintayne that Infants are not to he baptized The Confession of Ausburg teacheth the same saying We (i) Cap. 9. condemne the Anabaptists who disalow the Baptisme of Infants and thinke them to be saued without Baptisme Which Confession of Ausburg doth in like sort eliminate and exclude the Arians from their Church in these words We (k) Act. 1. condemne all Heresies rising against this Article meaning the Article of the Trinity as the Maniches Arians Eunomians c. That the Papists as the
tymes of the Apostles my iudgment is that those tymes had plus conscientiae scientiae minus and we scientia plus conscientiae minus The Archbishop of Canterbury thus vanteth against those ancient tymes The (m) In his Defence of the answere to the Admonition pag. 472. 473. Doctrine taught professed by our Bishops at this day is more perfect and sounder then it was in any age after the Apostles I will close vp the Aristarchian and censuring iudgments of the Protestants against the ancient Fathers merely contrary to the former alledged Protestants with the scurrilous and depressing words of Luther passed vpon them who thus in one place writeth The (n) Tom. 2. Wittenb anno 1551. lib. de seruo arbitrio Fathers of so many ages haue beene plainly blynd and most ignorant in the Scriptures they haue erred all their lyfe tyme and vnlesse they were amended before their deaths they were neither Saints nor appertayning to the Church And further The (o) In Colloq mensal lib. de seruo arbitrio Apology of Philip Melancthon doth far excell all the Doctours of the Church and exceedes euen Austin himselfe And of his owne iudgment with reference to their iudgments he thus Thrasonically boasteth I (p) Contra Henricum regem Angliae eare not if a thousand Austins a thousand Cyprians a thousand Churches stood against me But to come to particular Fathers marke how Luther showers downe words of reproach against them In the (q) In Colloq mensa lib cap de Patribus Ecclesia writings of Ierome there is not a word of true Fayth in Christ sound Religion Tertullian is very superstitious I haue houlden Origen long since accursed Of Chrysostome I make no account Basill is of no worth he is wholy a Monke I waygh him not of a hayre Thus Luther and with this I end this Paragraph aduertising the Reader that besides the dissentions which these last alledged Protestants haue with the former Protestants acknowledging the Fathers authorities and worth these sharpe censures deliuered in so full a manner against the Fathers make greatly in proofe of our ancient Catholike and Romay Fayth Seeing they irreplyably proue that those most blessed and learned Fathers so neere to the dayes of our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles were Papists in Fayth and Religion and not Protestants The XI Paragraph CEasing to discourse further of particular Fathers how they are admitted by some Protestants and reiected by others I will ascend to speake of Generall Councells which consist of the Assembly and confluence of many hundred of Fathers touching which point we shall fynd great contrariety of opinions among the Protestants And first for the reiecting of the authority of Generall Councels we fynd D. Whitaker thus expresly to say (r) L. dâ— Concil contra Bellarm. q. 6. Generall Councels may erre But Peter Martyr is more full and plaine herein shewing the reason why Councells are not to be admitted thus writing As long (s) L. de rotis pag. 476. as we insist in Generall Councells so long we shall continue in the Papists Errours In like manner D. Fulke thus depresseth the authority of Generall Councels The (t) In his answere to a Counterfeyt Catholike p. â—0 90. and p. 86. whole Church militant may erre altogether as euery part thereof Beza actually chargeth the Primitiue Generall Councells with errour saying (u) In his Preface vpon the New Testament Dedicated to the Prince of Condy. anno 1587. Euen in the best tymes meaning the Primitiue tymes the ambition ignorance and lewdnes of Bishops was such that the very blynd may easely perceaue how that Satan was President in their Assemblies But now obserue how other learned Protestants contradict their former brethrens sentences herein And first Doctour Bilson discouâ—sing of the meanes to decyde Controuersies in Fayth thus writeth To haue (x) In his perpetuall Gouerment c. pag. 37â— no Iudge for the ending of Ecclesiasticall contentions were the vtter subuersion of all peace thereupon the said Doctour concludes thus Synods (y) Vbi suprà p. 370. are an externall Iudiciall meanes to discerne errours and the surest meanes to decide doubts And he further thus writeth Yf (z) Vbi suprà pag. 374. Synods were not the Church neither at any tyme was nor indeed safely can be without tempests D. Sutcliffe as not allowing triall of Controuersies only by Scripture thus writeth (a) In his reuiew of his Examination of D. Kellisons Suruey printed 1â—06 p. 41. It is false that we will admit no iudge but Scripture for mâ— appeale still to a lawfull Generall Councell M. Hooker (b) In his Preface to his booke of Ecclesiast Policy relateth now Beza as being tyred with disputs only from Scripture submitteth himselfe finally to a lawfull Assembly or Councell And the said M. Hooker in the place aboue alledged thus further writeth We are sure of this that Nature Scripture and Experience haue taught the world for the ending of Controuersies to submit it selfe vnto some iudieâ— all and definitiue sentence meaning to the iudgment or a Generall Councell D. Field conspireth with M. Hooker herein thus writing (c) In his Treatise of the Church in his Epist. Dedicat. Seeing the controuersies in Religion in our tyme are growne so many in number and in nature so intricate that few haue tyme leasure and strength to examine them what remayneth for man desirous of satisfaction in things of such consequence but diligently to search out which among all the Societies of the men in the World is that blessed Company of Holy ones that househould of Fayth that spouse of Christ that Church of the liuing God c. He meaning the iudgment of the Church deliuered in a Generall Councell To conclude an Externall iudgment or Definitiue Sentence besides the Scripture which is chiefly the sentence of a Generall Councell is further taught by D. Baneroft (d) In his Sermon preached 1. February 1588 pag. 4â— D. Couell (e) In his modest Examination pag. 108. and 109. and finally to omit others euen by the Puritanes of whose iudgment herein sâ—e D. Baneroftâ— (f) Pag. 1â—4 Suruey The XII Paragraph TO come to Traditions That they are reiected by most Protestants it will be needlesse much to labour therein Seeing they are so luxuriant especially the Puritans and the most forward Protestants and abundant in the condemnation of all Traditions yet obserue (k) L. â— pistol Swinglij Oecolamp pag. 301. how diuers points of Christian Fayth not taught in the Scriptures are acknowledged by other learned Protestants to be Apostolicall Traditions And to begin (g) Tom. â— l. de Baptism fol. 9â— Swinglius and h Oecolampadius confesse that Baptisme of Infants is not taught in the Scripture to whose iudgment D. Field subscribeth in these words (i) Of the Church pag. â—1â— Baptisme of Infants is a Tradition because it is not expresly deliuered in Scripture
regard This refuge and tergiuersation is most poore First in that there is no more reason why a man should be rather an English Protestant then any other kind of Protestant Since all kinds of Protestancy as reiecting the authority of Gods vniuersall Church proceed Originally from the priuate Spirit to the which Protestancy euen commits Idolatry And yet there is no more reason why an English ProtestaÌ„t should assume to himselfe an infallibility of his priuate Spirit then any other foraine Protestant of other Country SecoÌ„dly because the English Protestants haue no reason to disclayme from the Protestants of other Countries if so we will belieue the English Protestants themselues for D. Iewell though most falsly thus teacheth The Lutherans and the Swinglians (s) D. Iewell in his Apology of the Church of England p. 101. within which number the English Protestants are comprehended are good friends they vary not betweene themselues vpon the principles and Foundations of their Religion but only vpon one Question which is neither waighty nor great With whom agreeth D. Whitaker speaking to his Aduersary Father Campian for his conioyning together the Lutherans and Swinglians in Fayth and Religion for this Doctour thus writeth Quòd (t) In respons ad rationes Camp rat 8. versus â—â—em autem Lutheranâ—s cum Swinglianis coniungere voluisti in eo nos quidem nequaquam offendisti c. In that thou dost conioyne and vnite the Lutherans the Swinglians together thou dost not offend vs for we willingly honour Luther as our Father and all them meaning the Lutherans and the Swinglians as our most Deare Brethren in Christ Thirdly the inueterate Dissentions euen among the English moderate Protestants themselues as also betweene the English moderate Protestants against the English Puritans both touching the Translation of the English Bible the Common booke of prayer and diuers other points of Controuersies aboue displayed manifesteth the shallownes of this former Replye Thus much concerning the auoyding of this seely Refuge I haue thought good to insist in the discouering the vanity of it in this place though it be aboue touched in the Preface only by mentioning of it because it is the ordinary Asyle or Sanctuary whitherunto many Protestants do flye when they heare the Catholikes to vpbraid them with mutuall Dissentions in the Articles of Protestancy The XXIII Paragraph NOw before I close vp this Treatise I will draw certaine Inferences or Resultancies out of the former Premisses 1. The First whereof may concerne the beliefe of the former Catholike Points by Protestants which beliefe is indeed no supernaturall beliefe I meane it is not any of the three supernaturall vertues but only it is in them a meere priuate opinion or inducement to giue a naturall consent to that which is true For the better and more cleere illustration of which point the Reader is to conceaue that two things do necessarily concurre to the producing of the Vertue of supernaturall Fayth The one is Prima (u) S. Thomas part 2. q. 8. veritas reuelans which is God The other is called the authority of the Church This prima veritas reuelans being God is otherwise called by the Deuines Obiectum formale Fidei This prima veritas doth reueale all true points of Fayth The second to wit The Authority of the Church is called Amussit Regula or the Propounder because it propoundeth to the members of the Church all such points to be belieued which God reuealed to the Church to be belieued Now to applye this to our purpose This Prima veritas reuelant as also this Propounder do indifferently propound to the Members of the Church all points of Fayth to be belieued as well as any one only point and the Persons to whom such points of Fayth are reuealed and propounded to be belieued do through the same authority of the Church belieue all points of Fayth to be reuealed alike Therefore seeing the former Protestants belieuing the former particular Catholike Articles do belieue them not through the Authority of the Church propounding them to be belieued for if they did belieue them by force thereof they would in like sort belieue all other Catholike points seeing all of them are alike reuealed by God to the Church and alike propounded by the Church to Christians to be belieued Therefore from hence it followeth that the former Protestants do belieue the foresayd Catholike Points only through the force of their owne priuate spirit which intertayneth them as points probable and true And thus the Close of all is that the said Protestants do belieue or rather giue assent vnto Truths falsly so mans Ghostly Enemy when he speaketh the truth he lyes that is they belieue truths vpon false Grounds and Principles For they belieue certaine Catholike Doctrines but they belieue not the Church teaching those Doctrines Thus much touching the first Porisma 2. The second shal be the scandall and stumbing block which these great Dissentions among the Protestants do beget in the minds of other ProtestaÌ„ts to wit a forsaking of the Protestant Religion and imbracing the Catholike Religion To begin We fynd Duditius the markable Protestant thus to confesse of this point The (x) Beza in his Epistol Theolog. Epist ad Andraeam Duditium p. 13. relaâ—teth Duditius thus to say Protestants are caryed about with euery wynd of Doctrine now to this part now to that whose religion what it is to day you may perhaps knowe but what it wil be to morrow neither you nor they can certainly tell Thus Duditius And Syr Edwin Sands in like manner thus writeth Protestants (a) In his relation c. fol. 8. are as seuered or rather scattered troupes ech drawing aduerseway c. In like sort Georgint Maior a great Lutheran thus disconsolately writeth Obijciunt (b) In Orat de Confusionibus Dogmatum veteribus recentibus nobis Papistae c. The Papists do obiect to vs Scandals and Dissentions I do freely acknowledge such to be as cannot be sufficiently lamented And Melancthon thus complayneth hereof as is aboue noted Nulla (c) Melanch in Concil Theolog. part 1. pag. 245. res aequè deterret homines ab Euangelio ac nostra Discordia no one thing deterreth and withdraweth men more from the Gospell then the Discord among our selues And vpon this ground it is that Dresserus the Protestant thus speaketh of Staphylus who was once a Protestant Oh Theologorum dissidia (d) Dresserus in Millenar â— pa. 214. ad Catholicos defecit Staphylus Staphylus reuolted to the Catholiks by reason of the Disagreements among the Protestant Deuines And dare our Aduersaries notwithstanding suggest the Protestant Church to be the true Church it being thus depriued of Vnity the inseparable marke of the true Church 3. A third may be that whereas many Protestants aboue alledged do approue and allow many Articles of our Catholike Fayth that such Confessions euen of the Aduersaries themselues do much aduantage
patiatur O remember That euery thing is short which is measured with the yard of Tyme and Eternity only long Striue therefore in a Christian contempt of Temporalities to say in zeale of spirit with S. Austin Fecisti (m) L. 1. Confess c. 1. nos Domine ad te inquietum est cor nostrum donec requiescat in te And assure your selues that what thing soeuer is as I may say out of God soone breedeth a fastidious saciety 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thus forbearing further surplusage of Words I commit you to his Holy Protection of whom through the boundles sea of his Mercy it is said If any (n) Apocalyp â— Man will heare his voyce and open the Gate he will come into him and suppe with him I beseech his Diuine Maiesty that you may auayleably interest your selues in this most comfortable Inuitation Yours in all Christian Loue and Charity B. C. Aduertisment to the Reader THIS Treatise is entituled Adelphomachia which Greeke Word signifieth A fight among Brethren because it sheweth the DISSENTIONS among the Protestants themselues touching matter of Fayth and Religion All which Protestants whether they be Lutherans Swinglians or Caluinists which are comprehended vnder the name of Swinglians do hold one another for Brethren For Doctour Whitaker in respons ad rationes Campiani rat 8. thus confesseth of this Point We willingly honour Luther for our Father and the Lutherans and the Swinglians as our most deare Brethren in Christ. A TABLE OF Such disagreements of the Protestants in matter of Fayth and Religion as are handled and set downe in the ensuing Treatise § 1. THe Contentions deliuered in most contumetious Words of one Protestant against another Protestant And first of the Lutherans against the Sacramentaries or Swinglians and Caluinists Secondly of the Swinglians or Caluinists against the Lutherans Thirdly of the Lutherans among themselues Fourthly the Caluinists among themselues Fyftly The Puritans against the moderate Protestants Sixtly the Moderate Protestants against the Puritans Within which Clause are comprehended the English moderate Protestants and the English Puritans § 2. The most splenefull Titles full of malignity of twenty Bookes made by Protestants against other Protestants their Brethren § 3. Touching other externall Comportment of the Protestants among themselues And first the prohibiting of the Sale and Reading of ech others Bookes 2. The banishing of ech other from their Territories 3. The appointing of Articles of Visitation and enquiry concerning the discouery and apprehending of ech other 4. Their committing of ech other to Prison 5. The entring into open Armes of one Party against another 6. The inhumane deportment of some Protestants against the dead Bodies of other Protestants All which seuerall kinds of Violent Proceedings are only for matter of Religion among the Protestants § 4 Disagreements touching the Scripture First what Bookes be Scripture what not 2. Touching the Translation of acknowledged Scripture either in Latin or in English 3. Touching the supposed easinesse or difficulty of the sense of the Scripture § 5. The English Protestant disagreements touching their Communion Booke of Prayer § 6. The Protestants disagreements touching Christ First touching the Nature of Christ 2. Whether Christ did merit any thing for himselfe or not 3. According to what Nature Christ suffered 4. Whether Christ dyed for all the World or but for the Elect only 5. Whether Heathens not belieuing in Christ can be saued § 7. Disagreements touching the Primacy of Peter and his successours § 8. Whether the Pope be Antichrist or not 2. Supposing him to be Antichrist at what tyme Antichrist did come § 9. Disagreements touching the Church First whether the Protestant Church hath euer beene Visible 2. Whether in the Protestant Church there euer hath beene a Perpetuall Succession and Vocation of Ministers 3. Who be the Persons that constitute the Protestant Church 4. Whether Papists dying Papists and members of the present Roman Church can be saued § 10. Disagreements Whether the Ancient Fathers of the Primatiue Church are to be admitted or reiected § 11. Whether the Authority of Generall Councells are to be admitted or reiected § 12. Whether there be any Apostolicall Traditions or not § 13. Disagreements touching the Sacraments First of the number of the Sacraments 2. Whether the knowne intention of the Church be necessary to the Administration of the Sacraments 3. Whether any of the Sacraments do imprint any indeleble Character in the Receauers of them 4. Whether the Sacraments do only signify or withall conferre Grace § 14. Baptisme in particular First Whether Baptisme be absolutly Necessary or not 2. Whether any particular forme of Words be necessary in Baptizing or not 3. Whether Lay Persons and Women in tyme of Necessity may administer Baptisme § 15. Disagreemenâ—â— whether Man hath Freewill or not § 16. Disagreements touching the doctrine of certainty of Reprobation of Predestination and of the certainty of Iustification § 17. Disagreements touching the doctrine of good Works First Whether good Works do merit or not or at least be necessary to saluation 2. Whether Perpetuall Chastity Fasting and Pouerty be gratfull and pleasing to God or not 3. Whether Vowes be now lawfull in these tymes of Christianity § 18. Disagreements touching the doctrine of Sinne First What Sinne is in its owne Nature 2. Touching the distinction of Veniall and Mortall sinne 3. Whether all sinnes be equaâ—l or not 4. Whether sinne be hurtfull to him that belieueth 5. Whether God be the Authour of sinne § 19. Disagreements Whether Absolute Princes and Magistrates ought to be now in the tyme of the Gospell and how their Authority may be resisted § 20. Disagreements touching Polygamy First whether a Man may haue many Wyues at one tyme 2. Touching diuorse and the Occasions thereof § 21. Other disagreements of Protestants touching twenty Catholike Points besides those aboue intreated of which points some Protestants belieue as true others reiect them as false The point are these following 1. Touching Christs descending into Hell presently after his Corporal death 2. Touching â—â—bus Patrum 3. Touching 〈◊〉 â—cession of Saints 4. Touching intercession of Angells 5. Touching Inuocation of Saintes 6. Touching Prayer for the dead 7. Touching the Possibility of the Ten Commandements 8. Touching the Patronage of certaine Angells ouer certaine Countryes 9. Touching Images to be in the Churches 10. Touching reuerence and bowing downe to the Name of IESVS 11. Whether the good Works of one may help another 12. Whether Christ as Man was from his Natiuity freed from Ignorance 13. Touching Euangelicall Counsells or Works of Supererogation 14. Whether it can be knowne to vs without the Churches Tradition What Scriptures be Canonicall what not 15. Whether Jnfants haue actuall Fayth in the tyme of their Baptising 16. Whether the Sacraments of the Old Testament be of equall force and vertue with the Sacraments of the New Testament 17. Touching Auricular Confession 18. VVhether temporall Punishment be reserued for sinne already remitted
Of which Controuersy D. Field thus sayth Touching (e) D. Field l. 2 â—f the Church â— 9. pag. 58. Contradictory Opinions some were named Thomists other Scotists in Controuersyes of Religion not yet determined by consent of the Vniuersall Church So idly and impertinently do the Protestants diuerberate the ayre in vpbrayding the Catholikes with this Controuersy touching the Conception of our B. Lady 4. Another Obseruation of which I thinke good to aduertise the Reader concernes certaine forlorne and broken Men yet competently learned who once were Catholiks but after did apostate from the Catholike Church by entertayning some one or other Opinion of Nouelism condemned by the said Church With euery one of which we may well expostulate in the Dialect of Josue Noster (f) Iosuâ— c. 5. es an Aduersariorum yet before their deaths most of them abandoned their said Innouations and so by their finall submission they dyed Members of our Catholike Church Such were these few following Erasmus Berengarius Aeneas Siluius Polidor Virgil Laurentius Valla Wicelius Cassander and one or two oâ—her Pseudo-Catholiks out of all which Doctour Morton (g) In his â—â—olog Cathoâ— is not ashamed to vrge that they being Papists are deuided in doctrine among themselues Now to this I answere This Obiection is of no force because the former Men did maintayne but some one or other Point against the Church comparting and interleaging in all the rest with the Catholiks But after the most part of them relinquishing their former Errours dyed Catholiks and in regard of their submission before their deaths to the Church of Rome and not otherwise they are accounted Catholiks Secondly I say that whiles these former Men did persist in their Nouelismes during all that tyme they were condemned by the Church of Rome for Heretiks and therefore it cannot be vrged that these Men were Papists at that tyme of their dissenting from the Vniuersall Church for by such their Schisme they were cut off from the Catholike Church and wholy reiected for members thereof And I freely grant that a Catholike or Papist as we are opprobriously called may become an Heretike by entertayning some Innouations But then I say he ceaseth to be a Catholike or Papist But the Case is far otherwise with the Protestants vrged in this following Treatise For first the Protestants heere produced being incomparably far greater in number then the former named Sectaries do not disagree in one or two or three Points only of Protestancy among themselues but they are distracted almost in all points of Protestancy Againe I say the Protestants by me vrged though reciprocally crossing one another contrary to the state of Berengarius Erasmus and the rest aboue specified yet during he same time of maintayning their coÌ„tradictory Opinions do still remayne Protestants accordingly they are all promiscuously acknowledged as good Members of the ProtestaÌ„t Church So great is the disparity betweene the former vrged Authours by D. Morton and the Protestants hereafter by me alledged That these Protestants whether they be Lutherans or Swinglians vnder whom are comprehended Caluinists which I am to produce notwithstanding their great discrepancy and dissentions in Fayth do remayne still Members of the Protestant Church appeareth from the iudgmeÌ„t of D. Whitaker who thus writeth to his Aduersary Father Campian happy Man who pledged his bloud for the fayth of Christ Quod (h) In respons ad rationes Campiani rat 8. autem Lutheranos cum Swingliants coniungis c. In that thou dost conioyne and vnite the Lutherans and the Swinglians together thou dost not offend vs For we willingly honour Luther as our Father and all them meaning the Lutherans Swinglians and Caluinists as our most deare brethren in Christ. And according to this tenour D. Iewell affirmeth saying The (i) In his Apolog. of the Church of England pag. 101. Swinglians and Lutherans are good friends they vary not among themselues vpon the Principles and foundation of our Religion but vpon only one Question which is neither weighty nor great And thus far of the transparency of the former Obiection touching Berengarius Erasmus c. Hitherto may be adioyned that whereas the Protestants are hereafter charged with great dissentions inconstancy touching their often altering their Common Booke of Prayer D. Doue acknowledging so much seekes to auoyd this blemish by saying The (k) D. Dâ—ne in his persuasion to English Recusants pag. 11. Papists haue done the like c. How many tymes haue their Breuiaryes beene altered But good Reader see the great difference herein The Protestants altering their Communion Booke do withall alter some points of Beliefe and doctrine seing the change of their Communion Booke resteth only in change of doctrine the later Communion Booke euer reiecting certaine Articles of Fayth which the former did allow off Now the altering of the Breuiaries consists only in inserting certaine prayers in the later which were not in the former throgh occasion of Canonization of Saints or some other vrgent Cause But there is not any alteration or change or Articles of Fayth in their different Breuiaries which is the point only here to be insisted vpon Now these Premonitions being afore acknowledged for true whereby are preuented some weake Obiections of which diuers of our Aduersaries haue made vse to seeke to proue the Catholiks disagreements in matter of Fayth it is lesse strange that some of them haue not forborne such is the scarsity and want of them to alledge (l) This obiection of different Orders in the Church of Rome is vrged by D. Fulke in his answere to a Counterfeyte Catholike p. â—5 By D. Iewell in his Apology of the Church of England pag. â—â— and by others for matter of Controuersyes that among the Papists some are called Franciscans some Benedictines others Augustines c. These do sometymes eate flesh those other feede only vpon fish most idly and ignorantly insisted vpon For what do these differences concerne matter of Fayth and Religion Do not all these seuerall Orders of Gods Church belieue all the Articles of our Catholike and Roman Fayth They only differ among themselues in liuing in a more strict or remisse course of life And this Answere is giuen by D. Field in these Words We must (m) Of the Church l. 2. c. 9. pag. 58. obserue that they who professe the Fayth of Christ haue beene sometimes in these later Ages of the Church called after the speciall names of such Men as were the Authours Beginners and Deuisers of such courses of Monasticall Profession as they made choyce to follow as Benedictins such like Thus D. Field Therefore I conclude that in regard of want of true Arguments in proofe of dissentions amoÌ„g Catholiks touching meerely matters of Religion I cannot but much approue the ingenuous and playne Confessions of some of our Aduersaries heere in our be halfe And fortably hereto we fynd D. Whitaker thus to confesse of this Point The dissentions
(n) De Eccles contra Bellarm. controuer 2. q 5. pag. 327. among the Papists are but futiles concerning things of small importance And D. Fulke agreeth with him saying As for the (o) Against Heskins Sanders c. pag. 295. consent and peace of the Popish Church it proueth nothing but that the Diuell had all things at his Will and therefore might sleepe thus truly acknowledging Vnity in Fayth in the Roman Church but most maliciously transferring the Cause therof to him who is the chiefe Enemy to Vnity But Syr Edwin Sands a most remarkable Protestant doth not only acknowledge all war of dissention in our Catholike Church but also giueth his reason thereof in these Words The Papists (p) In his Relation fol. 8. haue the Pope as a common Father Aduiser and Conductour to reconcile their iarres to decide their differences to draw their Religion by consent of Councells to Vnity c. To whose Iudgment herein subscribeth Andraeas Duditius the Protestant aboue mentioned in the Epistle Dedicatory who thus writeth The Roman (q) Beza reporteth these words of Duditius in his Epist Theolog. Epist. ad Duditium Church is not deuided with so many Dissâ—ntions but it hath the plausible apparence of Venerable Antiquity Ordinary Succession and Perpetuall Consent Thus Duditius And thus farre by way of Preuention of all such Arguments as the Protestant Wryters may seeme to vrge thereby to make their Ignorant followers belieue that the Catholiks do labour with one and the same disease with themselues touching disagreements in points of Fayth and Religion Only before I passe further I thinke good to relate that ordinary and common refuge and tergiuersation which diuers Protestants of England being vpbrayded with disagreements in Fayth among themselues are accustomed to fly vnto who thus reason I am an English Protestant I litle regard how forraine Protestants disagree among themselues I am content to range my selfe vnder our English learned Protestants who I am assured maintayne the Truth of Fayth without any contradiction or dissention among themselues Now because this point requyreth a large and full Answere therefore as willing to contract this Preface in as few words as conueniently I may I refer the Reader for his full satisfaction herein to the latter end of this ensuing Treatise viz. at 22. Paragraph where he shall see the Vanity of this silly euasion fully layed open and answered Before I come to any other Passages of this Preface I hould it not amisse to relate for the benefit of others what happened touching these former Points to my selfe In my being in Spayne a Chaplayne of the English Embassadours there resyding being my former familiar acquaintance in England oftentimes came to the place where I there studied and did much solicite and diswade me from entring into Holy Orders for then I was not Priest His chiefest argument by him alledged was taken out of D. Mortons Apologia Catholica which booke it seemes he had studyed diâ—igently touching the dissentions in doctrine of some few broken Catholiks aboue alledged as Erasmus Nilus Cassander c. as also from the dissention of the Thomists and Scotists touching the Conception of our B. Lady the Chaplaine much vrging and inferring that our Catholike Religion as wanting Vnity in doctrine in the Professours thereof could not be true This his Argument for a tyme I grant seemed very strong to me I then being but yong and not conuersant in the Protestants owne bookes thereby to discerne their dissentions in doctrine and did cause me to defer my taking of Priesthood a yeare or more longer then afore I was determined to haue done But after acquainting others of my daily familiars much read in the Protestants Writings with this my doubt they fully resolued and satisfyed me touching those Pseudo Catholiks to wit what kind of Men they were how vpon what grounds they for the tyme dissented from the then Common doctrine of the Catholike Church As also I was then informed how the Question of the immaculate Conception of the B. Virgin was not defined on either syde by the Church and that therefore it was lawfull without any breach of Vnity to maintayne either part Vpon whose learned Resolution all my former doubt instantly vanished away And indeed this Accident first be got a desire in me to looke into the Protestants Works more fully to see whether they had thy disagreements in Fayth amoÌ„g them So forcible we see the Argument drawne from waÌ„t of Vnity in Fayth though but indirectly and with mistaking vrged seemes to proue that Religion which wanteth Vnity in Fayth and doctrine cannot be the true Religion instituted by our Sauiour Iesus Christ But to recall my selfe and to proceed further In the next place of this my Preface I will demonstrate the absolute necessity of Vnion touching Matters of Fayth in the Church of God it being an acknowledged and inseparable Marke thereof and how incompatible dissentions and Errours in Fayth are with the said true Church Adulterari (r) August lib. de Vnitate Ecclesia non potest sponsa Christi Incorrupta est pudica This I will euict both from humane and diuine Authorities and will begin with humane proofes and so ascend in weight of proofes to the diuine Scriptures And first I will alledge some testimonies of Protestants themselues For do we not fynd Luther thus to teach A Kingdome (s) Luther tom 3. Witten berg in Psalm 5. fol. 166. deuided in it selfe shall not stand Neither haue any Heretiks at any tyme beene ouercome by force or Subtilty but by mutuall dissention Neither doth Christ fight with them otherwise then with a spirit of giddinesse and disagreement And more The Authours (t) Luth. tom 5. Witten berg in Galat. c. 5. fol. 416. of Schismes are disagreeing among themselues c. They byte and deuours one another c. till at the last they perish c. O see how truly his owne Words do recoyle vpon himselfe The Like want of this Vnity in doctrine do the Deuines of Manifold vrge as a Marke of a false Church against the Sacramentaries to impugne their doctrine those deuines thus writing We haue (u) Theologi Mansfeldenses in Confessione Mansfeldica Latina fol. 110. iust reason to hold in suspition the doctrine of the Sacramentaries in that they are not concordant in one and the same sentence or iudgment but are among themselues deuided so as some of them are called Carolostadians others Swinglians Occolampadians Caluinists c. And the same kind of argument is vsed by the Deuines of Heidelberge all Protestants against the Anabaptists thus vrging Si (x) Proâ—ocollo Frankaltalensi nâ— Praefatad Anabaptistas vobis Ecclesiae titulum concedere vellemus c. Yf we would grant to you the name of a Church what Sect among you should be reputed the Church of God seing you are deuided into so many Sects To come in this next place to the
the leafe and see how the more moderate English Protestant recompenseth the English Puritans Charity herein And First we find that M. Barks thus auerreth confidently The Puritans (f) In his Epist. Dedicat p. 3. are beadstrong and hardened in errour They stryke at the mayne points of fayth Shaking the very foundation it selfe Heauen and Hell The Diniuity and Humanity Yea the very soule and Saluation of our Sauiour And yet more plainely in the foresaid place They haue pestilent Heresies And finally They are hereticall and sacrilegious And further the said M. Parks thus discourseth The Creed (*) M. Parks vbi supra it selfe which alwayes hath beene the badg or cognisance whereby to discerne and know the faythfull from vnbelieuers c. is the mayne poynt in question betweene vs and the Puritans D. Couell speaking of certaine fiery English Puritans thus deliuereth his words The (g) In his Examen pag. 1. first English Ministers so far descended that some bookes and the greatest Part of Christendome was filled with vnreuerent vnholy and vnnaturall Contentions c. M. Powell is very playne with them for thus he writeth The (h) Powell in his considerations Puritans are notorious and manifest Schismatiks cut from the Church of God To forbeare diuers others like Censure passed vpon our English Puritans I will alledg these few following First of the foresayd D. Couell who registring the positions of the English Puritans among other of their positions setteth downe these following The (i) In his defence of Hooker p. 65. 74.75 statute Congregations of England are no true Church And againe The Protestant Church of England hath no forme of a Church We also thus read in the Booke of The Suruey of the pretended Discipline The (k) C. 5. c. â—4 c. 35. Puritans peruert the true meaning of certaine places both of Scripture Fathers to serue their owne turnes And againe The word of God is troubled with such choppers and changers of it Lastly besides diuers other such reprehensions of them we thus read The Catebraulls pittifull Distractions and Confusions among the Puritans proceed from such intollerable presumption as is vsed by peruerting false interpretation of holy Scripture Now by all this touching the immortall dissentions betweene our English Protestants and English Puritans we may discerne the Vanity of the Protestants answere to the Catholikes charging them in England with Controuersies in fayth the Protestants replying that their Dissentions rest only touching gouerment and other Indifferencyes but touching the mayne Articles of Protestancy they haue no Differencye at all O os impudens So ingenuously truly doth M. Parks confesse hereof saying The Protestants deceaue (l) M. Parks in his Epiâ—t Dedic the world and make men belieue That there is agreement in all substantiall Points They affirme that there is no question among them of the Truth Now the mayne Differences in doctrine betweene the Caluinists especially betweene the forraine Protestants amoÌ„g themselues and the English Protestans and the Puritans be among others these following 1. Whether the Ecclesiasticall Minister doth truly forgiue sinne or but only pronounce the remission thereof 2. Touching the Churches Visibility and Inuisibility 3. Whether in case of adultery the innocent party may marry agayne 4. Whether Christs body be really and substantially present to the Mouth of Fayth as D. Whitaker and M. Hooker do hould or but Sacramentally only present as the Puritans do teach 5. Touching Reprobation and vniuersality of Grace 6. Christs suffering in soule the paynes of Hell His descending into Hell after his death 7. Baptisme by lay persons in tyme of Neressity 8. Whether Ministers should be ordayned by imposition of handes or by the Election of the Presbytery 9. Whether Vsury be lawfull 10. Whether the Sacraments do confer Grace or but only signify it 11. Whether there hath beene since the Apostles tyme any extraordinary Calling Or whether such Calling may be 12. Whether vowes are now to be abrogated as supposed to be but Ceremoniall and parcell of the old Law 13. Whether the Roman Church be a true Church affording saluation 14. Whether the Ciuill Magistrate may be head of the Church 15. Whether the Communion ought euer to be deliuered vnder both kinds 16. Finally to omit somâ— others touching the vse of the signe of the Crosse of the Surplisse of Organs in the Church c. The II. Paragraph NOw hauing displayed in part the great Differences betweene the Protestants of all kinds among themselues and this but only from the particular sentences and wordes found here and there scattered in their writings In this next place I will demonstrate the same more fully euen from the many scores if not some hundreds of Bookes written all by Protestants against Protestants of which one Catalogue of them comprehends such bookes as are written by the Caluinists against the Lutherans Another Catalogue of bookes written by the Lutherans against the Caluinists A third by the Lutherans against the Lutherans All which three Catalogues of bookes may be found in Iodocus Coccius his Thesaurus Tom. 2. The fourth Catalogue containes the bookes written by the Protestants one against another touching the Question only of the Sacrament The Catalogue of which bookes is taken from the Protestant Wryter Hospinianus in his historiae Sacrament part 2. And all these were made betweene the yeare of our Lord 1574. and 1598. Since which tyme diuers other bookes of that subiect haue beene written by other Protestants against their owne Brethren Now in regard of the multiplicity of the said bookes of the seuerall same Catalogues and for greater breuity I refer the Reader to the two foresaid Authours Coccius and Hospinian in the places aboue alledged Yet for some delibation and tast of all the rest I will set here downe the particular titles only of twenty of the said Bookes from the vitulency and bitternes of which Titles the Reader may coniecture of all the other bookes in what spirit of Charity or rather of Serpentyne hatred and malignity they are written by Protestants against Protestants Of which twenty Bookes here alledged not any doth touch the question of the Reall presence maintayned by the Lutherans because I haue purposely forborne that subiect in relation of the Bookes here alledged in that the Lutherans agree with vs Catholikes therein 1. The First Booke then which I alledge is entituled Alberti Grauari bellum Ioannis Caluini Iesu Christi Printed Braptae Anno Domini 1598. The warr betweene Iohn Caluin and Iesus Christ written by Albertus Grauerus 2. Antiparaeus hoc est Refutatio venenati scriptià Dauide Paraeo editi in defensionem stropharum corruptelarum quibus Ioannes Caluinus illustrissima Scripturae testimonia de Mysterio Trinitatis nec non oracula Prophetarum de Christo detestandum in modum corrupit Printed Franeo-furti Anno 1598. Antipaeraeus that is a Refutation of a venemous writing published and made by Dauid Paraeus
(h) Luth. in Confess maiore in cana Domini Luther contrary to all Christians both Protestants and Catholiks Luther thus speaking of this point When I belieue that the only Humane Nature suffered for me then is Christ a Sauiour but of a base and small worth and himselfe needeth a Sauiour 4. That Christ did not dye for all the world but only for the Elect being most contrary not only to the sacred Scripture which sayth Christ (i) 1. Ioan. 2. 1. Tim. 2. dyed for the sinnes of the whole World but also almost to all learned Protestants is maintayned by (k) Calu. de arcana Dei Prouident p. 155. Caluin (l) Beza in respons ad Act. Colloq Montisbelgar part altâ—ra p. 215. 221. Beza 5. That men not belieuing in Christ may be saued a most horrid blasphemy is maintayned by Swinglius who thus writeth thereof (m) Swingl in l. Ep. Swinglij Oecol l. 1. p. 39. Ethnicus si piam mentem domi fouerit Christianus est etiamsi Christum ignoret A Heathen if he beare within him a pious mind is a Christian though he be ignorant of Christ And herevpon Swinglius concludeth That (n) Swing tom 2. fol. 18. 559. Hercules Theseus Socrates Arist des c. are now in Heauen A point so euident that Echarius a learned Protestant thus writeth thereof Quod (o) In his Fasciculut Controu printed Lipsiae anno 1â—â—9 Socrates Aristides Numa Camillus Hercules Scipiones Catones alij Gentiles c. That Socrates Aristides Numa Camillus Hercules the Scipio'es the Cato'es and other Gentills are partakers of Heauen or eternall lyfe Swinglius writeth to the King of France whom the Tigurin Deuines Bullinger Gualterus and Hardenburgius c. do defend for this his Doctrine Thus far this Protestant That (p) In his Apol. fol. 27. prafix â— tom Swingl Gualterus (q) In Confess Eccles Bullinger (r) In vita Bulling Simlerus the (s) Bullinger in his preface of allowance to Swinglius his Exposition Tigurin Deuines maintayned this former Heresy with Swinglius appeareth from the references here set downe in the Margent From Christ. I come to Christs Successour to wit S. Peter Now the Primacy of S. Peter is maintayned by Caluin thus confessing The (t) Caluin is alledged thus to say in D. Whitguifts Defence p. 173. twelue Apostles had one among them to gouerne the rest Musculus thus teacheth The (u) Musculus so alledged by Whit. guift vbi sup à pag. 66. Celestiall spirits are not equall The Apostles themselues were not equall Peter is found in many places to haue beene chiefe among the rest And D. Whitguift himselfe thus auerreth Among (x) D. Whitguift vbi suâ—rd pag. 1â—â— the Apostles themselues there was one Chiefe c. that had chiefe authority ouer the rest c. that Schismes might be compounded Yet is this doctrine wholy denyed by most other Protestant writers The VII Paragraph TOuching more particularly the Bishop or Pope of Rome being S. Peters successour that the Popes Primacy is aboue other Bishops is maintayned by Melancthon thus writing Quemadmodum (y) Melanct in the Booke entituled Câ—nturia Epistolar Theologie Epist 74. sunt aliqui Episcopi qui prasunt pluribus Ecclesijs c. As certaine Bishops are president ouer many Churches so the Bishop of Rome is President ouer all Bishops And this Canonicall policy no wise man I thinke doth or ought to disalow The same Doctrine is also defended by Iohn Husse as Luther writeth thus saying Ioannes Husse (z) In. 〈◊〉 sert Act. â—0 â—on repugnare videtur c. Iohn Husse seemeth not to contradict why the Monarchy of the Pope should not be So much different are these former Authorities to the iudgments of all other Protestants who wholy reiect the Popes Primacy Now touching the Pope being Antichrist the Protestants do thus differ from among themselues First some of them teach Antichrist is not yet come to wit (a) In Ep. â—auli Cole los Thessal pag. â—40 Zanchius Franciscus (b) In his Prognostiâ—on fâ—nis noudi p. 74. Lambertus and some others And hereupon it is that M Doue (c) In his Sermon of his second comming of Christ versus finâ—m chargeth some Protestants in this sort Some Protestants make a doubt whether Antichrist be yet reuealed or no. Now some others do thinke that Antichrist is come but that the Turke is this Antichrist Of this opinion is Melancthon for so he is alledged to thinke by M. (d) In his Theolog. Discourses p 1â—8 Haruey Of the same iudgmeÌ„t also iâ— Bucer who tearmeth the Turke Ipsissimus (e) In his lib. psalm 5. psalm 22. fâ— 146. Antichristus as also M. Fox (f) In Act. Mon. of anno 1â—76 pag. â—â—â— The VIII Paragraph TOuching those Protestants who belieue that the Pope is Antichrist obserue heere their great Dissentions concerning the tyme of Antichrists comming And first D. Willet (g) In Syn. p. â—00 placeth Antichrists first comming in the yeare 607. making Boniface the third to be the first Antichrist With whom agrees D. Whitaker saying (h) De Eccl. contrâ— Bellar. Contro 8â— Quaest 4. pag. 141. Gregory the Great was the last true and holy Bishop of that Church c Therefore because our Aduersaries demand of vs the tyme of Antichrists first comming we designe and set downe to them the very tyme of his comming With whom conspires (i) In his Answere to a Counterfayte Catholike p. 36. D. Fulke Iulius (k) Vpon the Reuel 5.10 the great Protestant maketh Hildebrand who was Pope anno 1074. to be the first Antichrist with whom D. Downam seeme to conspire in these wordes (l) In his Treatise concerning Antichrist pag. 1â—0 Gregory the seauenth alias Hildebrand was the first of the Popes who was openly acknowledged to be Antichrist Beza teacheth that Leo who was Pope anno Domini 440. did clearly (m) Beza Confess gener 7. Sect. 21. breath forth the arrogancy of the Antichristian Sea But M. Napper (n) Vpon the Reuel p. 66. ascendeth to higher tymes affirming that Antichrist came in anno Domini 313. and maintayning that Siluester the Pope was the first Antichrist But the Reformed Churches of (o) So relateth M. Hooker in his Ecclesiestic Policy Transiluania ascribe a greater antiquity to the comming of Antichrist who confidently auer that his first comming was in the yeare 200. Yet Sebastianus Francus no vulgar Protestant riseth higher placing Antichrists first comming in the dayes immediatly after the Apostles for thus he writeth For certaine (p) In Epist. de abrogundis in vniuersum statutis Ecclesiast throgh the worke of Antichrist the externall Church together with the Fayth and Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure Spectatum admissi risum teneatis So incredible and indeed ridiculous are the Dissentions of the Protestants touching who is Antichrist and at what tyme
Catholikes are contumeliously called are excluded from the members of the Protestant Church is so generally taught and but truly taught as that I need not to insist therein only D. Whitakers words shall serue at this tyme thus scurrilously rayling I (l) Contro Duraeum 2. sect 2. 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 Thus far to shew what men are not acknowledged by most Protestants and in part most truly to be members of the Protestant Church But now we will see how they are contradicted by other Protestants and sometimes by their owne pens And first we fynd the Anabaptists to be accounted mēbers of the Protestants Church for D. Whitaker thus writeth We (m) Controuers 4. 9. c. 2. p. 716. may abstaine from Baptisme so there be no contempt thereof Oecolampadius Baptisme (n) L. 2. Epist pag. 363. is an externall thing which by the Law of charity may be dispensed with and D. Morton seemes to enclyne to the same iudgment thus saying We (o) In his answere to the Protestants Apology l. 4. c. 1. sect 10. Protestants iudge the state of the Anabaptists not to be vtterly desperate Touching the Arians M. Morton iustifyeth that the Arians are of the Protestant Church because to vse his owne words the Arians (p) In his booke of of the kingdome of Israel the Church p. 94. hould the foundation of the Gospell M. Hookers words are these The Arians (q) Eccles polic l. 4. pag. 181. in the reformed Churches of Poland c. Now these Reformed Churches in Poland are Protestanticall Churches therefore the Arians are included as members of the said Protestanticall Churches Touching Idolaters whether they be of the Protestant Church or no heare what the said M Hooker writeth (r) Eccles pol. l. 3. p. 216. Christians by ezternall Profession they are all whose marke of recognizance hath in it those things which we haue mentioned yea although they he impious Idolaters wicked Heretikes c. Thus he Touching Infidells M. Fox relateth how a Protestant of Eminency for learning did thus teach A Turke (s) Act. Mon. pag. 493. Saracene or any Mahometan whatsoeuer may be saued if he trust in one God and keep the Law But if such a man may be saued then followeth that he is of the Protestant Church seeing most Protestants teach that the Protestant Church only affordeth Saluation And (t) Cent. 6. pag. 404. Bale admonisheth vs to be wary in condemning ouer rashly any Turke Finally this their most wicked opinion is already made euident by the aboue alledged testimonies of Swinglius and others who teach that Heathens dying Heathens and not belieuing in Christ may be saued That the Papists and the Protestants are members of one and the same Protestant Church is taught though most falsly by these Protestants following The Confession of Ausburge speaking of the Catholiks and the Protestants thus belieue say We (u) In Praefat. are all souldiers vnder one Christ. And Luther thus In (x) Luther in Epist. contra Anabapt Popery there is true Christianity yea the kernel of Christianity c. M. Hooker we (y) L. Eccl. pol. 3. c. 118. gladly acknowledge them of Rome to be of the Family of Iesus Christ M. Bunny We (z) In his Treatise of Pacificat are no seuerall Church from them meaning the Papists nor they from vs. D. Whitguift The (a) In his answere to the Admonition pag 40. Papists do belieue the same Articles of Faith which we do Finally D. Whyte In the (b) In defence of the way c. 38. substantiall Articles of our Fayth we agree with the Papists From all which testimonies it followeth that these said Protestants thus teaching do hould the Catholiks to be members of their Protestant Church I will conclude shewing that whom diuers Protestants hould to be Antichrist other Protestants acknowledge the same man to be in state of Saluation and consequently a member of the supposed true Protestant Church This I proue thus Most Protestants teach that the Pope is Antichrist as is well knowne yet other Protestants confesse that some Popes euen since they began to be Antichrist are saued But none are saued but such as are members of the true Church And according hereto I find M. Powell thus to write I will in (c) L. de Antichr c. 33. pag. 338. no wyse say that all the Popes from the tyme wherein Papistry was reuealed to be Antichristianity are damned With whom D. Whitaker euen in the same words thus affirmes I (d) In his answere to the first Demonstration of D. Sanders will not say that from the tyme that Papistry began to be Antichristianity the Popes themselues haue beene all damned And yet we see euen by these two last testimonies that both D. Whitaker and M. Powell teach that the Pope is Antichrist by the reason of the Word Antichristianity by them both vsed in their said testimonies I will shut vp their Disagreements touching the members of the Protestant Church with the malicious Asseueration of Musculus thus writing I imbrace (e) In loc comm de Coena pag. 552. all for brethren in the Lord howsoeuer they disagree from me or among themselues as long as they maintayne not the Popish Impiety Thus far of Protestants contrary iudgments touching who are members of the Protestant Church and who are not I will conclude their dissentions touching the Church whether the Papists as we are styled dying Papists though in part it hath beene all ready displayed out of the Protestant Church may be saued Euery man knoweth that all the Puritans as houlding Papists Religion to be idolatrous and superstitious and the Pope to be Antichrist deny to them all Hope of saluation Yet D. Some thus censureth of this point Yf (m) In his Defence against Penry p. 176. you thinke that all the Popish sort which dyed in the Popish Church are damned you thinke absurdly and do dissent from the iudgment of all learned Protestants D. Barrow I dare (n) In his 4. Sermons and two Questions disputed ad Clorum p. 448. not deny the name of Christians to the Romanists sith the learneder Writers do acknowledge the Church of Rome to be the Church of God M. Cartwright I doubt (o) In his Reply to D. Whitguifts Defence p. 82. not but diuers Fathers of the Greeke Church and who were Patrones of Freewill are saued And the same sentence is deliuered by D. Whitaker (p) Contra rat Camp pa. 74. touching the Saluation of the Ancient Fathers notwithstanding their doctrine of Iustification and merit of works D. Field We doubt (q) Of the Church l. 3. c. 46. not but that the Church in which the Bishop of Rome with more then a Luciferian pryde exalted himselfe was notwithstanding the true Church of God and that is held a sauing
Profession of the truth of Christ. To contract this point D. Couell thus expresly teacheth We (r) In his Defence of M. Hooker pag. 77. affirme them of the Church of Rome to be parts of the Church of God and that those who liue and dye in that Church may notwithstanding be saued charging other Protestants teaching the contrary to vse his owne words with ignorant Zeale Thus much touching the dissentions of the Puritans and the moderate Protestants concerning the saluation of Papists dying Papists coÌ„cluding this point with the iudgment of the Deuiues of Geneua contrary to other their brethren who teach that the Baptisme of Catholike Children either by Protestant Ministers or Catholike Priests is aualeable because say they the (s) So teach the Deuines of Geneua in the Propositions and Principles disputed 〈◊〉 Geneua p. 128. Children are comprehended within the Couenant of eternall life by meanes of the Fayth of their Parents Which very point is in like manner taught to the great dislike of many Puritans by D. Whitguift (t) In his Defence pag. 62â— and M. Hooker (u) Eccles pol. l. 5. pag. 1â—â— For most if not all the Puritans teach that Papists dying Papists cannot be saued seeing say they their Fayth is Idolatry and superstition The X. Paragraph I Next come to the Ancient Fathers because they were the most learned and eminent members of the Ancient Church where we shall see the strang diuersity of the Protestants Iudgments of them Some of the Protestants reuerencing and imbracing their Authorities others wholy betrampling their testimonies and entertayning them with all contempt and scorne And First we will alledge the iudgments of diuers Protestants admitting their Authorities and worth according hereto we fynd that D. Iewell in his Sermon at Paules Crosse thus cryed out O Gregory O Austin O Ierome c. if we be deceaued you haue deceaued vs And after in the said Sermon As I said before so I say againe I am content to yield and subscribe if any of our learned Aduersaries or if all the learned men that be aliue be able to bring any one sufficient sentence out of any old Catholike Doctour or Father or out of any old Generall Councell for the space of six hundred yeares after Christ Which challenge D. Whitaker after iustified in these words writing to Father Campian Audi (x) Whitak in respons ad ration Camp rat 5. Campiane c. Heare O Campian that most true and constant Challenge which Iewell that day made when he appealed to the antiquity of the first six hundred yeares c. That is the proffer and Challenge of vs all we do promise the same with Iewell and we will make it good D. Sutcliffe thus auerreth The (y) In his Exam. of D. KellisoÌ„s suruey Fathers in all points are for vs and not for the Pope D. Willet is no lesse confident herein thus protesting I take (z) In his Antilog p. 263. God to witnes before whom I must render an account c. that the same Fayth and Religion which I defend is taught and confirmed in the more substantiall points by those Histories Councells and Fathers that liued within fyue or six hundred yeares after Christ. Kempnitius We (a) In Exam. Concil Trident. part 1. pag. 74. doubt not but that the Primitiue Church receaued from the Apostles and Apostolicall men not only the text of Scripture but also the right and natiue sense thereof And againe We are greatly confirmed in the true and sound sense of the Scripture by the testimony of the ancient Church The Confession of Bohemia The (b) In the Harmony of Confessions pag. 400. ancient Church is the true and best Mistris of posterity and going before leadeth vs the way D. Bancroft speaking of Caluin and Beza thus sayth For (c) In his Suruey of the pretended holy Discipline M. Caluin and M. Beza I do thinke of them as their Writings do deserue But yet I thinke better of the ancient Fathers I must confesse I will conclude this their acknowledgment of the Primitiue Church and Fathers with D. Iewell with whom I first did begin he thus writing The Primitiue (d) In his Defence of the Apology Church which was vnder the Apostles and Martyrs hath euer beene accounted the Purest of all others without exception But now let vs see how Diametrically and repugnantly other Protestants stand to these former Protestants touching the Authority and dignity of the ancient Fathers And to forbeare the former Confessions of Protestants touching the Inuisibility of their Church during the first fiue or six hundred yeares after Christ aboue related which euidently demonstrateth that such Protestants who teach so long an Inuisibility do consequently teach and grant that the Fathers of those tymes were in iudgment Papists and not Protestants for if they had beene Protestants then the Protestanticall Church had most remarkably beene visible and conspicuous in the said Fathers To forbeare the iteration I say therof I will descend to the particular Reproualls giuen by the Protestants against them And first do we not find the same D. Whitaker obserue the inconstancy of this man who aboue so much maintayned D Iewells appeale thus to write Ex (e) Whitak contra Duraeum l. 6. p. 423. Patrum erroribus vester ille religionis Cento consutus est Your Popish Religion is but a patched Couerlet of the Fathers errours sowed together Pomeran the Protestants thus writeth Nostri Patres siue sancti fiue non sancti c. Our (g) Pomeran in Ioâ—au ancient Fathers whether they were holy or not holy I not much rest vpon were blinded with the spirit of Montanus and through humane Traditions Doctrines of the Deuills c. they did not teach purely of Iustification c. Neither were they sollicitous to preach Iesus Christ in his Gospell Iacobus Acontius the Protestant thus condemneth the Fathers Quidem (h) In stratagem Satanae l. c. p. 196. eò redierunt c. Certaine men meaning Protestants are gone so far as that they would haue all points to be tryed by the authorities of the Fathers c. But this custome I hould to be most pernicious and altogether to be auoided D. Humfrey so smally pryaeth the Fathers as that he rebuked D. Whitaker for renewing D. Iewels challenge in appealing to the ancient Fathers aboue related in this manner D. Whitaker (i) Lib. de vita Iewel li. printed at London pag. 212. gaue the Papists too large a scope was iniurious to himselfe and after a manner spoyled himselfe and the Church Melancthon (k) In 1. Cor. cap. 3. Presently (k) In 1. Cor. cap. 3. from the beginning of the Church the ancient Fathers obscured the Doctrine concerning Iustification by Fayth encreased Ceremonyes and deuised peculiar worships Beza thus ballanceth the Fathers with the Protestants of this age saving Yf we (l) In Epist Theolog Ep. 1. compare our tymes next to the
themselues Petra Scandali who to all good Christians is Lapis angulularis 7. Touching the Diuersity of Persons which are included within the members of the Protestant Church aboue defended by some Protestants and denyed by others Their disagreements are so vncertaine as that some admit Papists Anabaptists Arians Heretâ—kes Infidells yea by supposall Antichrist himselfe So making their Church to consist of certaine mungreâ—l Persons whereas other Protestants do exclude all these kinds from being members of the Protestant Church Now I say their irresolution and vncertainty of Iudgment is so wonderfull herein as that no Protestant can assure himselfe with what kind of men he may communicate in practise of Fayth Religion and from what men he ought to abstayne in all such spirituall entercourse and association 8. Touching the deniall of Freewill the certainty of Reprobation and of Predestination and both without any reference to our good or bad works Contrary to other learned Protestants Iudgments How do all these Doctrines most forcibly impell men to the perpetrating of the most flagitious crymes whatsoeuer Seeing vpon these their grouÌ„ds granting them by supposall for true they may iustly Apologize for themselues First that they are to be pardoned in all such their Enormous actions seeing they had not Free-will to forbeare the committing of them punishment euen in force of Reason belongeth to such only in whose power it is to do or not to do such or such a wicked thing Secondly they may Reply that seeing by their former Doctrines of Predestination and Reprobation a vicious lyfe is no way preiudiciall to a mans predestination not a vertuous life for the preuenting of ReprobatioÌ„ why may they not then liue yea become thrall to all pleasure voluptuousnes sensuality without any remorse or sting of CoÌ„science Againe by their sayd Doctrines of Predestination and Reprobation we yearely see many most lamentable Tragedies of diuers shortning their owne dayes by violent deaths wrought by their owne Hands some euen butchering themselues through a vayne hope and expectation of ariuing the sooner to Heauen And others agayne perpetrating the lyke through a most wicked and desperate conceyt of their Reprobation that it is not in their power concurring with Gods grace to preuent it so forgetful these men are of those most comfortable words of holy Scripture (i) Ezech. 18.31.32 Cast away all your transgressions c. for I desire not the death of him that dyeth This speaketh he who hath placed his (1) Psalm 18. Tabernacle in the Sunne and who himselfe being Sol increatus is not inexorable but wil lend a willing eare to him who hath true penitency of his sinnes saying to such Deleui (2) Isa 44. vt nubem iniquitates tuas quasi nebulam peccata tua 9. In lyke sort touching their Doctrines that good workes are not auaylable towards IustificatioÌ„ nor are respected by God nor sinnes or bad workes any way exitiall or hurtfull to Saluation as also that Tenet of diuers Protestants that God is the Authour of all our Sinnes what a sluce and fludgate do these Doctrines open to all turpitude in maÌ„ners and Conuersation For seeing it is nauseous and vngratefull to mans nature to weary himselfe out in the exercise of a vertuous lyfe if such a life as wanting all pleasing motiues thereto be no wayes beneficiall to his Soule as on the contrary most sweet to man to liue in all voluptuousnes pleasure and Iouialisme if so this course cannot be in any sort dangerous to him and this the more seeing he is indoctrinated by diuers Protestants that what sinnes are coÌ„mitted by him God is the Authour of them himselfe but Gods bare instrument therein they by such their beliefe running vpon the Dint of those words spoken by the Psalmist in the Person of God (l) Psalm 128. supra dorsum meuÌ„ fabricauerunt peccatores As if I would say they haue transferred the committing of their sinnes euen vpon me Thus they making God who dyed for sinne to be the Patrone of sinne 10. The Doctrine of Polygamy and Diuorce according to Swinglius and others most different from the iudgment of other Protestants how doth it sow the seeds of dissention betweene husband and wyfe to repudiate one the other and to part a sunder vpon the least dislike or discontent on eyther side boâ—h of them to mary againe they being warranted by this Doctrine to take vpon occasion of such discontents as many wyues and husbands as they will so both the parties liuing after their first Diuorce in a continuall state of Adultery and begetting and bringing forth seuerall broods of bastards 11. The Positions of some Protestants aboue alledged that no Princes or Magistrates are now to be in the tymes of the new Testament ingendreth nothing but a tumultuous Anarchy intestine simulties warrs and Traiterous insurrections of the Subiects against their Prince threating vipar-lyke an vtter euisceration of their owne Country And woe be to that Nation or Realme which nourisheth such Monsters of sedition and disloyalty and which placeth all Soueraingty and Principality in the common people the many Headed-Tyrant of Mankind since the certaine euent thereof will be that a mans owne Country shall finally become a Golgathae or field of bloud And with this my Pen giues it last pause to this short discourse AN APPENDIX In which is proued First that the ancient Fathers by the acknowledgements of the learned Protestants taught our Catholike and Roman Fayth Secondly that the said Fathers haue diuers aduantages aboue the Protestant Writers for fynding out the true sense of the Scripture WHEREAS in this former Treatise I meane in the tenth Paragraph we haue shewed how most Protestants do contemne the ancient Fathers exercising their fomy language in the eiuculation of most gaulfull words agaynst them though the sayd Fathers be by other more moderate Protestants respected reuerenced Now heere in this short Appendix I thinke it to be much conuenient First to shew the reason more particularly why the Protestants do rest disaffected agaynst the Fathers It being though aboue in part intimated in that it is ackowledged by the ProtestaÌ„ts themselues that all the Articles of Catholike Religion were with an Vniformity of Iudgment belieued taught and practised by the sayd Fathers in those most pure tymes Secondly I will make it euident euen with seuerall choaching Reasons why euery Christian Man solicitous of entertayning a true faith should prefer the ancient Fathers in the ExpositioÌ„ of the Scriptures from whence they draw of theirs and our Catholike fayth and Religion before the different or contrary expositions of them giuen by the ProtestaÌ„t Doctours The discouery of which later Point shall rest in setting down diuers conducing and auaylable Circumstances in behalf of the Fathers but altogether preiudiciall and incompetent to the Protestants Which two former Points shall be the Subiect of this short Appendix Now to begin with the first I meane in