alleadge for this that the books of Scripture like the Sun shew themselves to be such to him who hath the spirit But I would ask at such why the Rev. St. James Epistle the second of St. Peter and two of St. John did not shew themselves to be Scripture to Luther that spiritual man and the Protestants very first Apostle in the work of reformation in the end you say Let any judge whither it be safest that the revealed will of God be your rule and determiner or the dictats of self contradicting creatures Where you seem to rubbe on Catholicks But Sir this toucheth not them at all for they profess not to believe self-contradicting creatures but the unanimous consent of Councils and fathers or the Catholick Church known to be the only Church established by Christ and his Apostles and by the continued succession of Popes Bishops and Pastors the unity universality and gifts of miracles in all ages c. Which Christ hath called the ground and pillar of truth 1. Tim. 3. 15. and against which he assureth us the gates of hell shal not prevail Math. 16. 18. and which he hath commanded us to hear otherwise to be holden as heathens and publicans Math. 18. 17. so you see that the written word maketh the Church our judge which we should obey and that ye who make so much of the written word do not believe it when ye do not obey her And here I remarke that Protestant Ministers and preachers deceive the people in that they ground their faith on the written word only and Roman Catholicks say they on humane tradition and their Churches authority which being composed of men is subject to errour Whereas the contrar is true for Roman Catholicks believe nothing which the written word believing both the tradition of the Church and Apostles doth not expresly warrand As for the Church what is more expresly said then what I have cited both to prove that we are bound to hear her Mat. 18. 18. and hold her authority infallible Math. 16. 18 and the house of God which is the pillar and ground of truth 1. Tim. 3. 15. Neither doth it avail you to say this is not said of the Roman Church which is not the universal Church but a particular one a strumpet c. For we speak not of any particular Church when we say that the Church is infallible nor when we say the Roman the Catholick do we understand the particular Church at Rome But that Church which professeth constantly the Romans faith spread in saint Pauls time through all the world As we call yet the Roman Empire that which hath its seat in Vien of Austria Yea Protestants calling their own the reformed Church cannot say but we have one Church on earth which Christ commanded us to hear constantly And if the reformed Church be the true Church then she must have taken the place from that church which was deformed and had fallen into an errour and so deserved no more to be called the pillar and ground of truth or to be heard Moreover the very pillars of the Protestant Religion grant all the world to be in an errour before themselves and so against the express written Word must deny the infallibility of any Church whatever For Calv. Instit lib. 4. cap. 18. saith they made all the Kings and People of the earth drunk from the first to the last and Hospinian epist 41. saith Luthers separation was from all the world White in his defence chap. 37. saith Popery was a leprosie breeding so universally in the church that there was no visible company of men free from it Jewel in his Sermon on Luke 11. The whole world Princes and people were overwhelmed by ignorance and bound by oath to the Pope which if it be true that the Church in former ages did erre the reformed Church may erre that themselves do not deny Thence it followeth clearly that the Protestant Church is not the house of GOD called the pillar and ground of truth that she is not Christs Church against which the gates of hell shal not prevail that none are bound to hear her in matters of faith being subject to errour And so Protestants may well desire men to read the Scripture and believe what they found there but not urge any man to follow their doctrine but in so far as they find it conforme to Scripture which all Roman Catholicks protest they do not As for traditions are we not commanded to hold them in the clear written Word 2. Thess 2. 15. Hold the traditions which ye have learned whither by word or our epistle Protestants read documents but documents by word and traditions are the same thing on which place Chrysost saith It is evident that the Apostle did not deliver all things by writ but many things by word which are worthy of credit as wel as the other That is Christs word as well as his writ therefore we call them divine and Apostolical traditions Aug. lib. 5. de Trinit cap. 23. speaking of rebaptization The Apostle saith he commanded nothing of it but that customâ— which is believed to proceed from the Apostle is opposed against Cyprian in it as many things are which the whole Church holdeth and therefore are believed to be commanded by the Apostles though not written Aâ—d in the first age saint Dennis chap. 1. speaking of the Ecclesiastick hierarchy saith These our chief captains of Priestly function did deliver to us the chiefest and supersubstantial points partly in written partly in unwritten institutions Epiph. Haeres 61. is of the same minde we must hold traditions saith he for the Scripture hâ—th not all things and Tertullian de praescrip grounds his faith on the authority of the Church and what tradition I believe saith he I received from the present Church the present Church from the primitive that from the Apostles the Apostles from Christ Here I hope you see you must either admit traditions as necessar in themselves and infallible in their authority or else disclaim both Scripture and Fathers All that Protestants can say either against the authority of the Church in general Councils or Apostolick traditions delivered by her is that all her decisions and traditions flow from men and so are not infallible But I answer neither were the Prophets Apostles Evangelists who penned the Scripture but men yet I hope their writtings are not fallible or subject to errour Because they were inspired directly and assisted by the Spirit of God The Fathers of the Church have to this day that promise verified to them Math. 28. 20. which was made as well to their successours as to themselves As for that some Protestante speak of an invisible Church composed of the Elect it is but a shift to delude the ignorant for as it is a Maxime of law Idem est non esse non apparere i. e. it is the same not to be and not to appear to be in the matter of any
directly answered by me whither on man or many should be judge of controversies To this he saith I dare not answer because I will not grant the power either to the high Bishop or general council nevertheless he findeth this to have been the constant practise of the Church both in the Old and New Testament established by the express word of God and received by the Fathers in all ages for in the Old Testament from Deut. 17. from 8. to 13. we read that GOD did command the people in matters of controversie to go to the Priests Levits and judge who should be in those days appointed by him for that end saying and thou shalt do according to the sense of the law which they shal teach thee and according to the judgement which they shal tell thee Remark he saith not according to the sense of the law which thou shalt read but which they shal teach thee not taken according to the privat judgement and spirit but according to the judgmeÌ„t which they shal tel thee where God promiseth out of their mouth judicii veritateÌ„ truth and verity in judgement or as you turn it sentence of judgement See for this also 2. Chr. 19. 8. where Jehosophat established what was first instituted Viz. a council of Levits Priests and chief fathers of Israel to judge not only between brethren and brethren blood and blood but also betwixt law and coÌ„mandments statutes and judgements Not leaving law and commandments to the peoples privat reading and interpretation as you do in your rule of faith In the 11. verse he concludeth thus Amaziah is over you in all matters of the Lord where it is evident that the council and chief Priest is established judge of controversie and not the written Word as every one readeth and expoundeth In the New Testament again you have this practise clearly set down Acts. 15. Where Paul and Barnabas though Apostles themselves go up to Jerusalem about the question of circumcising the Gentiles converted to the faith And there was holden the first council in which this is decided not out of Scripture but by the authority of the Council it self It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and us said they having the assured promise of the assistance of the Holy Ghost as the Church hath at all time Wherefore after the Apostles councils have decided with the same authority and upon the same infallible ground of the Holy Ghosts assistance promised to the Church Many controversies are acknowledged by Protestants for points of faith without express passage of Scripture Marcion teaching that Baptism should be conferred more then once and Donatists that Baptism conferred by Hereticks should be reiterated as invalid are condemned in the council holden at Rome under Melchiadâ—s Pope in the year 313. now what passage of Scripture I pray you is for this Sâ—bellius putting one person only in the God-head is câ—ndemned in the council of Alexandria under Pope Cornelius in the year 319. but scripture maketh no mention of persons Nestorius putting two persons in Christ is condemned in the Generall Council holden at Ephesus under Pope Caelestin the year 434. Yet neither doth the Scripture speak of thâ—â— The Monotheliâ—s giving to Christ one will in two Natures are condemned in the third general Câ—uncil holden at Constantinople under Pope Agathon the year 679. albeit there be no formal scripture for this So you see it belongeth both in the Old and New Testament to the high Priest and general Council to decide controversie either by Scripture if there be any passage clear for that point or without Scripture by Apostolick tradition conserved in the Church which scripture it self warranteth 2. Thess 2. 15. Hold fast the traditions which ye have learned either by word or our epistle but it seemeth you care not who be condemned or by whom if you take away all power on earth to condemne your selves Every Protestant will be condemned by none but Scripture and yet will make none judge of the Canon Version and sense of Scripture but himself All your answer is that we grant the Promulgation of the law to the pure Gospel Church but you shew not what is this pure Gospel Church neither can you infallibly prove the purity of the Gospel it self or that there is a Gospel or the true sense of the Gospel but by the Catholick Church her authority Hear Aug. contta Ep. fund cap. 5. Where he saith I my self would not have believed the Gospel were it not that the authority of the Church moved me to it Now the Catholick Church is that whose faith is spread through all the world in the Apostle Paul his time which maketh her to be justlie called the Catholick Roman Church and whose faith hath been in all ages since Christ which all the records of the Protestant writters witness of the Roman Church wherein the succession of Popes Bishops Councils is made conspicuous to all who have written Chronology or Church history in every age none whereof make mention of your Church or of men professing your tenets before Luther and Calvin from whom ye dissent in many things Answer first This is a prolix reply the Pro. Du. 1 substance of which might have been taken up in seven or eight lines As it is spacious so it is an impertinent rapsodie and like a beggers cloak clouted here and there with divers parcells without any method or cohesion It seemeth to have been taken out of some Index and cast in here to fill the page For the answer was That the promulgation of the law is not denyed to the pure Gospell-Church which is not the Roman-Church for it is impure Is not this a direct answer You prove that there hath been a Ministerial-Church in the old and new Testament which we doe not deny but this is the point did they so pronounce sentence and decide Controversies that all discretive judgement was taken from people or called they themselves infallible whether they had scripture warrand or not Or wil the promise of presence to the Apostles Prophets and penners of Scripture in measure and duration agree to any Church Officers now on Earth Or should promises made to the Universal-Church agree to any particular Church such as Rome Or will promises made to the collective body of the Church agree to the representative unless these be proved you fight with your own shadow For we are much for the authority of Christs Church and think that her judgment of old and late should sway privat men unless they can prove by scripture or sound reason that she erreth We are much for the authority of all lawful Councils and we give them all reverence in regard of the authority of their constitution but if they depart from the scriptures we owe them not active obedience Well speaketh our learned Camero tom 1. tract de infallibilitate ecclesiae So oft as any thing is decreed by a Council or assembly of men appointed by lawfull autharity
Of 150. Bishops in the first Council of Constantinople anno 381. Where the Bishop of Constantinople is decreed to be the chief next the Bishop of Rome Thirdly Of 200. Bishops in the first council of Ephesus anno 431. where in the third action it is defined that saint Peter was the head and prince of the Apostles and that the power of binding and loosing is granted to him who in his successours liveth and exerciseth judgement unto this very day Fourthly Of 600. Bishops in the Chalcedon council in the year 451. where in the third action also Pope Leo is called universal Bishop Patriarch of old Rome and sentence is pronounced against Dioscorus in the name of Leo and sunt Peter to acknowledge Leo Peters successour The Fathers in particular I do not cite for their citations in this would make a volumn Only I engage that of a 100. there be 90. clear for this And not one against it Is not Popish faith resolved into a lie say you viz. the infallibility of Pope or Council You should have said Pope and Council putting tâ—em together as the head and chief members which represent the whole body of the Church As the Parliament doth the whole Kingdome and then if you doubt of their infallibility you deny the express words of Scripture which calleth the Church the ground and pillar of truth 1. Tim. 3. and which assureth us that the gates of hell shal not prevail against her Math. 16. 18. Yea you take away all possible means to know infalliblie what is true Scripture what is the true sense thereof which is to make us doubt of all and leave us no sufficient ground to believe undoubtedlie any thing You take away Christs promise to be with the Church to the end of the world Matth. 28. 20. Yea you take away an Article out of the Creed I believe in the holy Catholick Church and leaving men either to the dead letter of Scripture which killeth many or the privat spirit which deceiveth more or natural reason which can be a motive of faith to none you cast loose all Religion every one reâ—ecting or receiving Scripture as he pleaseth Expounding Scripture as he pleaseth and following in both no infallible rule or guide but his own opinion fancie imaginatioÌ„ In the fourth part you say that all the positives of the reformed Religion were mantained in the primitive Church the first 300. years But if this were true it would be made good no otherwise but by the Fathers writtings in the first three ages after Christ Now if they had all your positive tenets why do your learnedest writters openly disclaime them as I have shewed formerly Why saith Luther your Apostle lib. deserv arbitrio cap. 2. the authority of the Fathers is not to be reguarded and in his Collâ—q cap. de patribus In the writtings of Hierom there is not aword of true faith of Chrysostom I make no account Basil is of no worth he is wholly a Monk Cyprian is a weak Divine But I must not insist on this because you may in some measure deny the greatest parts of controverted points betwixt you and us to be positive tenets Albeit there be none of them but justly may be called so For you not only deny for example the real presence invocation of Saints use of Images that a man is justified by faith and works c. But ye positively believe that Christs Body and Blood is not reallie present in the Sacrament that to invocat the Saints is to give Gods worship to creatures that to make use of Images is idolatrie that a man is not justified by faith only Therefore I instance only two upon which all your visible reformation is grounded First That the whole visible Church may erre Secondly That we should believe nothing but what is in the written Word Now I have made it appear reflecting on your sixt answer that both these positive tenets are against the express wordes of Scripture and Fathers How then did the Church in the first 300. years hold all the positives and what you affirme As for your negatives and what you deny you grant they cannot be there because the controversies were not then stated But this is a bold and open calumnie for not one point is denyed by you but the Fathers in the first 300. years have clearlâ—e asserted And so the controversie betwixt you and us was sufficientlie stated even then You deny real presence and transubstantiation but in the second age Justin Martyr Apol. 2. ad Antonium saies as Jesus Christ incarnat had flesh and blood for our redemption so are we taught that the Eucharist is the flesh and blood of the same Jesus incarnat And in the third age Cyprian serm de coena Domini saith the bread which the Lord gave to his Disciples being changed not in shape but in nature by the omnipotencie of the Word is made flesh Secondlie Ye deny the sacrifice of the Masse asserted in the first age by St. Andrew in the book of his passion written by his Disciples I daily saith he sacrifice the immaculat Lamb to Almightie GOD who when he is truelie sacrificed and his flesh eaten remaineth intire and alive And in the third age by Origen hom 13. on Exod. Ye think your self guiltie and worthilie if any part of the consecrated Hoste be lost by your negligence Thirdlie Ye deny Purgatory asserted in the second age by Tertullian lib. de anima cap. 58 seeing we understand Matthews prison which the Apostle demonstrats to be places below and the least farthing is every smal fault delayed to be paied till the resurrection none will doubt but the soul will recompence something in places below And in the third Age It is one thing being cast into prison not to go out thence till he pay the uttermost farthing another presently to receive the reward of faith One thing to be affected with long pains for sins to be amended and have all sins purged with suffering sayeth Cyprian ep 52. ad Antonium Fourthly ye deny Prayer for the dead allowed in the first Age by S. Clemens ep 1. de sancto Petro where he saith Peter there taught to give almes and pray for the dead And in the same age by Tertul. lib. de cor militis we make yearly oblations for the dead Fifthly ye deny invocation of Saints and Angells recommended in the secong Age by S. Dennis Eccl. hierarch part 3. cap. 3. saying I constantly affirm with the divine scripture that the prayers of the saints are profitable for us in this life after this manner when a man is inflamed with a desire to invocat the saints and distrusting his own weakness betakes himself to any saint beseeching him to be the helper and petitioner to God for him he shall obtaine by that mean very great assistance And in the third Age Origen on the Lambent sayeth I le begin to fall on my knees and pray to all the saints to succour me
hoâ—ny or milk â—o the Sacrament of the Supper Neither is it reason to â—rgue from tâ—e name to the thing Wâ— call it Baptiâ—m with the Scripture And seeing his implyeth washing with water â—â— is grâ—â—â— superstition to do this without a warrand which hath â—o relation to washing 〈◊〉 would have mâ— râ—semblance with that then salt The name Sacrament is acknowledge I not to be a Scripture word But what Logick is thâ—â— The seals of the Covenant are named Sacraments by the Church Ergo we may adde materials to the work without a warrand The practise of the Baptist objected by me seemeth unanswerable for you fail by it as by a rock which is not candid dealing Yet it is your ordinar manner to pass with silence material arguments Seventhly Ye adde to the Bible humane § 7. Inst traditions which ye equalize and in a sort preferre to it This is point blank contrar to the Word Deut. 4. 2. Rev. 22. 18. If any man adde to these things GOD shal adde to him the plagues written in this book so ye have â—o fear a plague in due time Reply These are open calumnies made Papists Reply to deceive the people in Pulpits as I have shewed reflecting on your sixt answer And prove againe summarily by this Syllogism what is expresly contained in Scripture is not contrar to it But this is expresly commanded 2. Thess 2. 1. Hold fast the traditions which ye have received Neither are your citations of Deut. or Rev. to any purpose For when it is said there If any man shal adde to these things GOD shal adde to him the plagues written in the book Of necessity it must be understood of these books only adding any thing as a part of them otherwise it will exclude all other Scripture as well as tradition But it may be you think the Revelation the last written book of Scripture and that St. John there did speak of all the Bible But this is a conceit out of ignorance seeing Chemnitius your great Gun sayes his Gospel was written after the Revelation And some say so of his Epistles in the very last of which and last verse he sayes I have many things to writ unto you but not with pen and ink but I trust to come unto you and speak face to face But ye would not have believed him speaking face to face who will believe nothing but that which is written Answer You again defend traditions by your old argument A genere ad speciem affirmative Prote ∣ stants Duply which is none concludent as I have proved fully already upon the sixth question to which I referre the Reader And your answer to the 4. Deut. and Rev. 22. confuteth your self For you grant that it is not lawful to adde any thing as a part of these books Then say I it is as unlawful to adde traditions as a part of the Bible and make an entire object of faith with both which is your doctrine If the Pirrat was faulty for taking a ship Alexander was more faulty by taking of Nations We will put nothing to the Scripture that way For then we might make a new Bible and nothing into our Creed but what was written by the Penneâ—s of it You make me ignorant of the time when the Revelation was written and goes about to father that on me which came not into my mind How far and wherein we hold traditions Vide supra on Quest sixth I have no delight to make repetitions Eightly Ye mis-regard the Lords-day and § 8. Inst celebrate dayes of your own devysing contrar to and without any warrand from the Word see Gal. 4. 10. You reply that these are calumnies for we Papists Reply are taught to keep the Lords-day most religiously and with it the holy dayes of Christs-Birth Circumsion adoration by the Kings presentation in the Temple the feasts of the Mother of GOD of the twelve Apostles of some Martyrs and other Saints upon the same ground of Apostolick tradition and ordinance of the Church which the Scripture commandeth us to hear hold fast so what we do in this is neither contrar to Scripture nor without warrand from the written Word And your citation may be as well applyed against your observation of dayes of humiliation and thanks-giving For that place forbiddeth only Heathenish or Jewish days or dismal days superstitiously keeped on frivolous remarkes See Hierom on the place Aug. cont Argenant cap. 16. and in his epist 118. cap. 7. and hear the same Aug. speaking of all our holy dayes in express terms which Protestants taking away what St. Aug. saith may creep in both ungrateful forgetting of Christs mysteries and unkind oblivion of his Saints You call this Argument a Calumnie but it in too well known how small regard is had Prote ∣ stants Duply to the Lords day throughout the Popes Dominions And how farre other dayes of humane institution are by you preferred to them And for Aug. whom you cite as the main patron of them he was so far from approving the trash of his time brought in by the devices of men in the worship of God that in his 119. ep he sayeth If they continue they will become Heathnish and Judaize in many things So according to Hieroms exposition on the text Gal. 4. 10. concerneth you for some of your stust is Judaicall some Paganish Polyd. Virgil de invent lib. 4. in proaemio sayeth That a verie world of Jewish and Heathnish ceremonies pestereth the Lords field Agrippa de Vanit cap. 6. sayeth That Christians now are more oppressed with ceremonies then the Jewes were The Jewish holy dayes were but few in respect of the Romish for they had but their Passover Pentecost feast of Tabernacles of Trumpets Reconciliation New-Moons Purim and Dedication the most of which were of divine institution These have holy dayes for every Saint All saints all soules for the Cross Corpus Christi two dayeâ— every week Lent fast c. without any warrand from scripture or pure antiquitie For Aug. sayeth ep 86. against Urbicus we are indeed commanded to fast but I find not the dayes prescribed in the Evangelicall or Apostolicall writtings The same saith Socrates that it was left by the Apostles to every mans free choise lib. 5. cap. 22. and Erasmus on the 11. of Matth. complaineth that in Hieroms time there were few holy dayes beside the Lords day but now they were unreasonable and burdensome because of their multitude Thus you see neither Hierom nor Aug. savour your holy dayes unless it be in yoâ—r Utopian tractate contra Argentinant for there is non-such among his workes You might easily perceive that Gal. 4. 10. doth not militate as much against our dayes of humiliation or thanksgiving as your holy dayes if you woâ—ld consider First We have more regarde to he Lords-day nor any of these this we desiderar mâ—inly in you for as ye preferre humane traditions to the Scripture so do you these your dayes