It s very credible that if Master Laud had found successe in his first attempts he would in time reforme the forme of the English Ordination and thrust in some words expressing the power of Priests and Bishops seeing he and others of the Protestant Clergy of late Kallend an 3. Ed. Vl. c. 12. Mason pag. 94. did differ so much in opinion concerning Priesthood and Episcopacy from those who lived in King Edward the VI. time and in the beginning of Queene Elizabeths reigne He could not misse with six Prelats and six other men learned in Gods Law whereof the greater number might devise as warrantable a forme of making Bishops and Priests as was devised by the same number in King Edwards time Yet all had beene in vaine because neither Master Laud himselfe nor any of the rest then living could consecrate others even with the Catholick forme seeing none of them all had valid Ordination as hath beene demonstrated Therefore it was thought expedient to cover the want of the reality of true Ordination with an exterior formality of long cloakes and surplises and supply the want of Sacrifice with crosses and candlesticks upon the Altars 26 Master Mason commends much the wisdome of the English Church that so discreetly and religiously pared away all superfluous Ceremonies in Ordination and saith it was a singular priviledge of Master Parker that being the 70. Archbishop after Saint Austin the Apostle of England yet of all that number he was the onely man that received Consecration without the Popes Bulls and superfluous Aaronicall ornaments How discreet and religious the English Church was in paring away pretended superfluities in Ordination can not be determined by Master Mason untill he makes appeare that all is superfluous in that kinde which he and the Puritans who made the English Rituall in King Edward the VI. time fancied superfluous It is not the part of any particular Church to pare away any thing that hath beene delivered to them by antiquity to be observed Though some words have beene added to ancient formes of Ordination for their greater explanation or solemnity yet none were ever so rash as to pare away any especially those that seemed to signifie the power and authority intended by the Ordainer 27 To conclude this matter I say with Saint Ierome Ecclesia non est quae non habet Sacerdotem How can the Protestant Church be the true Church seeing it hath not any one Priest or Bishop Though it were not evident that it hath no valid Ordination yet so many manifest uncertainties and doubts as themselves must acknowledge concerning their Ordination doth demonstrate the nullitie of their Church For if there remaine but one solid and prudent doubt of the validity of Ordination of any Church its impossible it should be the true Catholick and Apostolick because a doubtfull Clergy makes a doubtfull Church and a doubtfull Church is no Church The first step to Christian and Catholick beliefe is the well grounded credibility excluding all prudent doubts of that Church whereof we are members if we have any prudent ground to doubt of the Clergy we have the same to doubt of our Church and of the Faith or Doctrine proposed by its testimony and the true Faith admits of no such doubts Therefore Protestants before they can prudently believe to have true Faith or be in the Catholick must cleare all the doubts heretofore objected against their Ordination which I will briefly summe up 28 First they must prove clearly that the story of the Nags-head was a fable and consequently that Master Neale and the other Catholicks who said they were eye-witnesses of what passed were impudent Impostors and content to be convicted as such in the same place and time that they invented so palpable a lye Secondly they must make appeare evidently that all the Catholicks of that time both Bishops Priests and others who believed Master Neale and suffered much for conscience were all runne mad because they believed so great a foppery or if they did not believe him they were most wicked and sacrilegeous persons to engage posterity by their relation and testimony to reordaine the Protestant Clergy Thirdly they must demonstrate that all the first Protestant Bishops and others consecrated by them did conspire not to contradict the story of the Nags-head and their owne invalid consecration for the space of fifty and odde yeares to the great discredit of themselves and their whole Church where as they might easily stop their adversaries mouths by producing witnesses and Records of the pretended solemne Congregation at Lambeth being so often demanded in printed Bookes by whom and how were they ordained Fourthly it must be made appeare to the world that Bancroft Bishop of London could be ignorant of the publick Registers of Parkers Ordination at Lambeth himselfe being so much concerned in it and in the knowledge of it if he were not ignorant of the publick Registers why did he answer so fondly and contrary to the very Protestant principles that a Priest might ordaine Bishops in case of necessity Fifthly it must be manifestly proved that not onely Bancroft was ignorant of the publick Registers but that all the Bishops of England who were present in the late Parliament knew nothing of them whereas Doctor Morton pretended Bishop of Durham affirmed publikely in the upper House that the first Protestant Bishops were consecrated at the Nags-head This answer all the rest approved by their silence and were glad to have that retiring place against the Presbyterians who proved clearly that they were not consecrated at Lambeth as Master Masen pretends But if Doctor Morton and the rest of the Bishops knew any thing of Masons Booke and Registers as infallibly they did why did not they stick to that This proves evidently that none of them did give credit to Masons new found Registers 29 Sixthly supposing Master Masons forged Records were true it must be made cleare that there was in their Ordination a competent number of true Bishops and consequently that the Bishops of Edward the VI. were validly consecrated notwithstanding the Declaration of the contrary by publick Acts and sentences in Queene Maryes reigne Seventhly if there was not a competent number of true Bishops whether in the beginning of Queene Elizabeths reigne there as any such necessity as Protestants pretended having then in England 14. Catholick and true Bishops Eighthly it must be made appeare that Barlowe was consecrated who was the principall Consecrator of Parker for if he were how is it possible that in all the Registers of England and Wales there should be no mention of his Consecration Lastly it must be proved clearly that the forme used in the ordaining of Protestant Ministers and Bishops is valid It will be a very hard taske to cleare all these doubts and exceptions How unfortunately was Charles the First late King of England misinformed in matter of his Bishops and Clergy What scruple could he have had if he had knowne
God revealed it reserving to his owne private â—udgement or to that of his first Patriarchs Luther Calvin Chillingworth c. the decision of this controversie VVhether God revealed it or no But the Catholick believes absolutely and doubts not but God revealed what the Church proposeth as revealed submitting his judgement in matters of Faith to whatsoever the Church doth define or declare 4 The obstinacy of Heresie may be well compared to the obstinacy of Rebellion Heresie being indeed a Rebellion of private and proper judgement against Gods authority and veracity appearing sufficiently in his Church Put the case that a Province of Spaine or France did reject any Lawes or Ordinances made by their King and intimated by his Officers to the people and proclaimed in the same Provinces In case these Lawes and the said Officers who have all the exterior signes or markes whereby the Kings authority is usually discerned were contemned by the people not because they doubt of their Kings legiflative power but because they will not believe he made such Lawes or gave any such Commission to his Officers would not the people notwithstanding all this pretended ignorance be Rebells and obstinate against their Soveraigne would it excuse them from the guilt of Rebellion to alledge in their owne behalfe that they did not thinke or believe the King commanded any such thing as his Officers pretended and proclaimed Their very excuse involves obstinacy and Rebellion The obedience and duty which Subjects owe to their King must be extended also to his Officers they must obey their Soveraigne not onely when himselfe commands but also when the Officers that have the ordinary signes of his authority do command in his name 5 This is the case of Hereticks They protest if they had thought or believed that the Doctrine of the Roman Church was revealed by God they would embrace it with all their heart But they do not consider that this very If or doubt is their crime and heresie What reason or prudent ground have they to doubt that Goâ— doth speake by the Roman Church as Kings do by theâ— Officers No Officers or Ministers have more authenâ—tick and credible signes of their Kings authority the the Roman Catholick Church hath of Gods Commission and trust of proposing his Revelations and interpretinâ— his meaning of Scripture as is demonstrated in the 14â— and other Chapters Now its sufficient to know that thâ— signes of the true Church are Miracles Sanctity of Doctrine and life conversion of Nations continuall succession from thâ— Apostles to the present age both of Pastors and Doctrine c. These signes are obvious to our senses and may bâ— perceived by all people Clounes Souldiers and other illiterate persons that will inquire and examine the history of their owne Countrey or the Religion of their Ancestors Whatsoever amongst all the Christan Churches hath these signes That Church must be heard obeyed and believed as having Gods authority and Commission to decide all doubts and controversies of Faith whosoever believes not her Definitions and obeyes not her Decrees is an obstinate Heretick and Rebell CHAP. V. Of the Catholick Church 1 SEeing the obstinacy of Hereticks is against Gods Revelations as they are proposed by the testimony of the Catholick Church it s required something be said of this Church That there is a Catholick and visible Church in this world is granted tacitely by all Hereticks seeing every Sect oâ— them pretends to be the whole or at least one part of the Catholick Church 2 The Catholick Church is a multitude or Congregation of men whose testimony doth so sufficiently propose their Doctrine to be Gods Word and the true meaning thereof that it is evidently imprudence and infallible damnation in any person whosoever not to acquiesce iâ— the said testimony and not to believe without the least doubt what it proposeth as Divine Revelation There are but two wayes to convince the understanding of man the one is evident and cleare reason the other is authority To some things its necessary even for salvation we give our assent though no evident and cleare reason appeareth authority that is the testimony of lawfull witnesses must be taken for reason and supply the want of it It is unreasonable and damnable not to honour our Princes and Parents though they have no other evidence or reason to shew that they are our lawfull Princes or Parents but the authority and testimony of lawfull witnesses God therefore having decreed that men should believe some mysteries above reason commanded all to believe under paine of damnation whatsoever the Church saith he revealed It is not unreasonable that God should condemn us for not believing the testimony of the Catholick Church in matters of Faith which are above reason seeing we shall be condemned if we believe not the testimony of our Neighbours concerning our Princes and Parents Is it a lawfull excuse for any man to say If I had believed such a man to be my Soveraigne I would obey him or such a woman to be my Mother I would honour her If there be lawfull witnesses for Prince or Parents their testimony is to be believed the very not believing them is a crime though there be no more evidence for it then the said testimony Therefore à fortiori the not believing the testimony of the Church confirmed with so many signes in matters of Faith is a crime and obstinate heresie 3 Some Protestant Divines of the English Church are so civill as to admit of us Roman Catholicks and so eharitable as not to exclude any Christians from being a part of the Catholick Church yet we have reason to thinke that it s no civility or kindnesse but interest that moves them to open the dore to us because if they reject us themselves can not pretend to be a Church having neither succession of Bishops nor without begging our testimony any solid proofe that Scripture is Gods Word What Bookes of Scripture they are pleased to accept of as Divine Revelation they do it upon our score and word but the sense which we delivered to them with the said Books as the most principall part of Gods Word they do refuse never being able hitherto to give any tolerable reason why they take our word more for the letter oâ— Scripture then for the sense and meaning of it If we deserve credit in one why not in both being no lesse against our conscience and as much in our power to corrupt the letter as the sense But of their obstinacy in this particular and others I shall discourse more at large when speake of Protestancy Now I will proceed in the discovery of the true Church CHAP. VI. VVhether all Christians be the Catholick Church or whether it may be composed of any two or more Congregations of them if not agreeing in all matters whatsoever which any one Congregation or Church pretends to be revealed by God 1 THis is as much as to demand Whether Catholicks and Protestants
was fundamentall and not fundamentall I see no reason why the Catholick Church of this age should court Protestants more â—hen the Church of the fourth and fifth age did Arrians Nestorians c. I am sure the Arrians were more in number then Protestants and much more learned they had a more certaine Ordination of Priests and Bishops and many of them were of as good life and conversation as any Protestants are or were since the beginning of the pretended Reformation Why therefore should Protestants be a part of the Catholick Church and not Arrians or Nestorians If Protestants be admitted as part of the Catholick Church the Turkes Jewes and all others who believe there is one God may with reason complaine that they also are not looked upon as Catholicks For they and we agree in the two fundamentall articles which onely according the opinion of many learned Divines are necessary necessitate medij to wit that there is a God and that he is Remunerator Turkes and Jewes believe this therefore they agree both with us and Protestants in fundamentalls Let us all therefore be parts of the Catholick Church And though Jewes or Turkes be not baptized that can not prejudice them according the principles of Protestants their implicit or conditionall faith will excuse them as well as Protestants from damnation If God revealed the necessity of Baptisme or that Scripture is his VVord saith a Turke I believe both but untill that be made cleare unto me I am not more bound to believe either absoluly and without doubt then Protestants are to believe Transubstantiation I see no reason why this implicite and conditionall faith should not save Jewes and Turkes as well as Protestants if the mysteries not believed by either be equally proposed Therefore Protestants are no more part of the Catholick Church then Turkes or Jewes I am certaine we have no more need of the testimony of the one then of the other to establish what ought to be believed as Catholick Faith or what articles are fundamentall CHAP. VIII VVhether any reformed or Protestant Church of the world be the Catholick and Apostolick Church And whether their pretended clearnesse of Scripture doth sufficiently propose their doctrine as Divine Revelation 1 IN the fifth Chapter num This definition of the Church is clearly insinuated in Scripture Act. 1. v. 8. Luc. 24.48 Ioan. 18.37 Act. 5.32 Act. 2.32 Act. 4.33 Rom. 10. Math. 28. c. 2. it hath beene said that the Catholick Church is a multitude or Congregation of persons whose testimony doth so sufficiently propose their Doctrine or Faith to be Gods Word and the true meaning thereof that it is evidently imprudence and infallible damnation in any person whosoever not to acquiesce in the said testimony and not to believe without the least doubt what it proposeth as Divine Revelation The testimony of the true Catholick Church must not be credible onely to silly soules that believe any thing they heare by reason of their ignorance or because they were not rightly informed it must be credible to the most prudent and informed persons by reason that the said testimony is confirmed with so cleare signes and markes of Gods providence in planting and propagating the Faith professed by the true Church that all circumstances considered no informed and prudent person may judge any other Church to have as much as a probable appearance of the true one when they are compared with the Catholick 2 How the Protestant Churches and Reformation did beginne hath beene said in the first Chapter which supposed let us now examine whether any person can prudently believe that either the Protestant Church of England or that of Stratzburg or Zurick or Geneva be the true Catholick Church of God The ground of the beliefe of these and all other reformed Churches are reduced to two one is cleare Scripture pretended against the Roman errours as they call them the other is the private Spirit whereby they interpret the true sense of Scriptures to be contrary to the Tenets and Doctrine of the Roman Catholick Church This is all the evidence which Protestants have to prove that each of their owne Congregations is the true Spouse of Christ and that the Church of Rome is the VVhore of Babylon Miracles they do not pretend to and as for the two other signes which most of their Authors brag of that is the sincere preaching of the Word of God and the lawfull administration of the Sacraments these two can not be knowne nor perceived untill that whereupon they depend be first known to be the true sense of Scripture or the true Faith be knowne But when the true Faith is knowne we have no more need of signes to bring us to the knowledge of it or the true Church that professeth it then a Pilot hath of markes to be guided by into the haven after he is within safe and at anchor Therefore these two signes of Protestant are not true signes because they are as unknowne and as hard to be found out as the Church it selfe which â—s contrary to the nature and essence of a true signe 3 As for the first ground of Protestancy and Reformation which is the pretended clearnesse of Scripture against the Doctrine of the Roman Church it can as little confirme the testimony of the Church of England or Zurick c. as the Turkes Alcoran First they tell us that Scripture is against Transubstantiation Purgatory worship of Images c. We deny it and bring at least as cleare texts of Scripture for our selves as Protestants do against us They say the words and sense of Scripture are so cleare against our Doctrine that none can deny them Yet we reply that we are not so impious nor obstinate as to maintaine Doctrine point blank against Gods Word and sense Now the question is whether the testimony of Protestant Churches against us or ours in our owne behalfe and defence concerning the clearnesse of Scripture be most credible to sober and prudent men I answer that the testimony of Catholicks of the obscurity of Scripture against Transubstantiation worship of Images c. is not onely more credible then the testimony of Protestants to the contrary but also that the testimony of Protestants saying that Scripture is cleare against Transubstantion worship of Images Purgatory c. may be demonstrated to be false 4 That this may not be thought a vaine undertaking suppose that our controversie with Protestants concerning the clearnesse and obscurity of Scripture in controverted points is to be understood after all combinations and confronting of texts which seeme to have relation oâ— dependence one of the other I suppose also that somâ— Catholick Doctors have read and considered Scripture and all controverted texts as diligently as Protestants aâ— may appeare by their printed Bookes wherein they answer all Objections made by Luther Calvin Iewell c. 〈◊〉 thinke it also no discredit for Protestants to admit thaâ— at least some of our learned men and
was thought by Her Majestie dangerous to Monarchy Therefore the titles of Archbishops Bishops Deanes and Chapters were retained as also in her owne Chappell some Images the Altar and a Crucifix upon it Though the titles of the Catholick Clergy were bestowed upon persons who favoured the new Religion yet the Ordination was not because that which was instituted by Edward the VI. was judged invalid by all Catholicks and so declared by publick judgement in Queene Marys reigne in so much that leases made by King Edwards Bishops though confirmed by the Deane and Chapter Brooks novell cases Placito 463. fol. 101 printed at London 1604. were not esteemed available because they were no saith the sentence consecrated nor Bishops Some Protestants are so charitable as to say that King Edwards Bishops were declared no Bishops to the end Bonner and other Catholick Bishops restored by Queene Mary might make the leases voyd let the world judge whether 3 Bonner and others who loft their Bishopricks for conscience sake alone would commit so great a sacrilege as must needs follow out of declaring invalid King Edwards new forme of Ordination They who renounced the propriety for Religions sake would not damne themselves for the profit of new leases 14 Seeing therefore it concerned the Queene to have consecrated Bishops and that in King Edwards reigne the Catholick Consecration was held to be superstition most of the Clergy then being Zuinglians or Puritans the Queene endeavoured by all possible meanes to have such as she named for the Bishopricks consecrated by Catholicks but they all resolved not to make Bishops in that Church whereof themselves refused to be Members An Irish Archbishop prisoner in the Tower was offered his liberty and great rewards if he would consecrate the newly elected but he denyed to commit so great a sacrilege CHAP. II. Of the Nullitie of the English Protestant Clergy 1 THe Queene notwithstanding all this reluctancy of Catholick Bishops named in her Letters Patents Anthony Kitchin Bishop of Landaf amongst others to consecrate Parker and his fellowes because he was the onely man amongst all the Catholick Bishops that tooke the oath of Supremacy in her reigne But this frailtie was not a sufficient ground to thinke that he would consecrate Parker and others whom he knew to be Hereticks and averse from the Doctrine of the Roman Catholick Church which himselfe so constantly adhered unto the Supremacy onely excepted during his life Sacroboscâ— lib. de investig Christi Ecclesia cap. 14. D. Champ. cap. 14. Many others of the Catholick Bishops complyed with Henry the VIII in that particular who now refused to ordaine Parker the same was Landaffe resolved to do but at last by faire words and promises they prevailed with the old man to give them a meeting at the Nags head in Cheap-side where they hoped he would ordaine them Bishops despairing that ever he would doe it publickly in a Church because that would be too great and too notorious a scandall for Catholicks amongst whom Landaffe desired to be numbered Bonner Bishop of London being well informed of all that passed sent one Master Neale his Chaplaine an honest and learned man who had formerly beene Lector in Oxford to the Bishop of Landaffe forbidding him under paine of excommunication to exercise any such power of giving Orders in his Diocesse wherewith the old man being tertified and otherwise also moved in his owne conscience refused to proceed in that action alledging chiefly for reason of his forbearance his want of sight Which excuse Parker and the rest interpreting to be but an evasion were much moved against the poore old man and whereas hitherto they had used him with all curtesie and respect they then turned their copy reviling and calling him doating foole and the like some of them saying This old foole thinketh we cannot be Bishops unlesse we be greased alluding to the Catholick manner of Episcopall unction 2 Being thus deceived of their expectation and having no other meanes to come to their desire they resolved to use Master Scoryes helpe an Apostata religious Priest who having borne the name of Bishop in King Edward the VI. time was thought to have sufficient power to performe that office especially in such a streight necessity as they pretended He having cast off together with his religious habit all scruple of conscience willingly went about the matter which he performed in this sort having the Bible in his hand and they all kneeling before him he laid it upon every one of their heads or shoulders saying Take thou authoritie to preach the VVord of God sincearly And so they rose up Bishops of the new Church of England 3 This story of the Nags-head was first contradicted by Mason in the yeare 1613. yet so weakly and faintly that the attentive Reader may easily perceive he feared to be caught in a lye and convinced by some aged persons that might then be living and remember what passed in the beginning of Queene Elizabeths reigne In the yeare 1603. none of the Protestant Clergy durst call it a fable or a tale of a Tub as some now doe Bancroft Bishop of London being demanded by Master VVilliam Alabaster how Parker and his Collegues were consecrated Bishops answered He hoped that in case of necessity a Priest alluding 〈◊〉 Scory might ordaine Bishops This answer of his was obâ—â—cted in print by Holiwod against him and all the English â—lergy in the yeare 1603. not a word replyed Bancroft â—imselfe being then living I have spoken with both Caâ—â—olicks and Protestants that remember neare 80. yeares â—nd acknowledge that so long they have heard the Nagsâ—ead story related as an undoubted truth In the beginâ—ing of the late Parliament some Presby terian Lords preâ—nted to the upper House a certaine Booke proving that â—â—e Protestant Bishops had no succession nor consecraâ—ion and therefore were no Bishops and by consequence â—ad no right to sit in Parliament Hereupon Doctor Morâ—on pretended Bishop of Durham who is yet alive made 〈◊〉 speach against this Booke in his owne and all the Bishops behalfe then present he endeavoured to prove succession from the last Catholick Bishops who said he â—y imposition of hands ordained the first Protestant Bishops at the Nags-head in Cheap-side as was notorious â—o all the world c. Therefore the aforesaid Booke â—ought to be looked upon as a groundlesse Libell This was told to many by one of the ancientest Peeres of Engâ—and present in Parliament when Morton made his speech And the same he is ready to depose upon his oath Nay he can not believe that any will be so impudent as to deâ—y a thing so notorious whereof there are as many witnesses living as there are Lords and Bishops that were that day in the upper House of Parliament 4 This narration of the Consecration at the Nags-head have I taken out of Holiwood Constable and Doctor Champneys workes they heard it from many of the ancient Clergy who were prisoners for
well versed in Scripture have so much honesty as not to conceale from the world that true sense of Scripture which seemeth to themselves cleare and evident after the combination and examination of all controverted texts But to be briefe and decline all comparisons which are odious let us suppose for the present which Protestants ought to take as a courtesie that learned Protestants and learned Catholicks are equally honest and equally learned both honest and both learned if the contrary be not made appeare by the ensuing demonstration 5 It is impossible for men equally learned and equally honest to have any controversie about the sense of any words of Scripture if the sense be cleare and evident But Protestants and Catholicks who are supposed to be equally learned and equally honest have controversies about the sense of such words of Scripture as concerne Transubstantiation worship of Images and other controverted points Therefore its impossible that the sense of such words of Scripture as relate to Transubstantiation c. should be cleare and manifestly against the Doctrine of Catholicks Therefore the testimony of all Protestant Churches maintaining the clearnesse against them is not onely incredible but manifestly false Because the testimony of Catholicks though in their owne defence is made evidently true by the controversie it selfe a visible and undeniable effect that can proceede from no other cause amongst learned and honest men but from the obscurity of the words and sense wherein their judgements differ If they squable about what is cleare both parties or at least one is ignorant or not honest We Catholicks have no reason to thinke that all our Doctors want knowledge and sincerity its cleare to all Christenâ—ome that in our Church we have in all parts of the world â—oth learned and honest men and if Protestants thinke â—he same of themselves they must grant that our controâ—ersies do manifestly demonstrate the obscurity of Scripture 6 Seeing Scripture is obscure and in no place cleare against Transubstantiation worship of Images Purgatory c. what ground or warrant had the first Protestants for their pretended Reformation would not all the world have reason to laugh at us Catholicks if we should part with that ancient sense of Scripture in favour of Transubstantiation Purgatory c. which we received from the Church that went before us assuring it was revealed by God upon the bare word of Luther Calvin Knox or the â—2 persons that made the Ritual and pretended to reforme in Edward the VI. time the Sacraments both in matter forme and number What signes or miracles did they shew for their extraordinary Mission and Apostleship of reforming the Doctrine of the Catholick Church If any man who received his Land by inheritance from his Ancestors ought not to part with it if not forced by better evidence then his owne how can we part with our Faith and sense of Scripture which is the ground of all our supernaturall inheritance and happinesse untill Protestants shew a better title then the inheritance or continuall succession of our Doctrines from the Apostles They must produce better evidence then their pretended clearnesse of Scripture If they laugh at Quakers notwithstanding all the texts of Scripture which they have at their fingers ends against Protestant Doctrine how do they imagine did Catholicks looke upon the first pretended Reformers One advantage these new Quakers have against all Protestants which Protestants have not against Catholicks and it is that a new Quaker may say with truth to an old or new Protestant he hath as prudent ground and as good evidence for his owne interpretation of Scripture and Religion as the Protestant hath for his their fancies the onely ground of both their Faith being much alike and their Mission being not warranted by any precedent Church This the Protestants can not object against Catholicks because we had alwayes the word and warrant of a precedent visible Church for our interpretation of Scriptures and Religion CHAP. IX VVhether any Puritanicall Congregation be the Catholick Church by reason of their pretended spirit 1 THere not a trades-man or simple woman amongst the purer sort of Protestants who do not imagine themselves to be more infallible in interpreting Scripture then the Pope and all the generall Councells together This infallibility they attribute to the Spirit of God which they all pretend to have But this fond imagination is as easily refuted as the clearnesse of Scripture hath beene in the former Chap. because every pure Protestant or Puritan pretends to have the Spirit of God but that Spirit contradicting it selfe according the diversity of Tenets which the purely inspired hold it is impossible it should be the Spirit of God who can not inspire contradictions Yet they are so obstinate that its impossible to perswade them to the contrary though you may clearly convince them The Pope must be Antichrist Catholick Kings the horns of the Beast religious Orders rags of Rome wherewith the VVhore of Babylon adornes her selfe The Puritans must onely be the Elect the Saints and pure Zealots of the beauteous discipline of Sion which to carry on though whole Nations be extirpated their holy Spirit doth not onely rid them from any remorse of conscience but assures them no worke can be more meritorious If you inquire of them how they know whether this spirit of theirs be good or bad of God or the Divel Calvin their Patriarch and Master answers that they do discerne it as clearly as they do white from black sweet from sower and light from darknesse his proofe is the experience and testimony of every one of the faithfull Brethren concerning the purenesse of his owne spirit 2 This Calvinisticall and private spirit being so hidden and undiscernable can not be a sufficient and prudent ground at least for any man that hath it not to believe it is the Spirit of Truth and of the Catholick Church Men who are not in the true Church must be led into it by some credit and exteriour signes And though Faith be a gift of God yet it is communicated by preaching and hearing Rom. 10. We do not deny that God must helpe all Catholicks interiourly with his supernaturall grace and spirit but the difference between the Puritan and Catholick spirit is that the Puritan spirit inspireth a beliefe contrary to reason the Catholick spirit inspires a beliefe non contrary but agreable to reason Though Christian Faith be above reason it is not unreasonable But it can not be agreable to reason that any person believe a Puritanicall spirit without any more proofe of the goodnesse of it then a Puritans word against a sense of Scripture which hath beene continued in the Roman Churches since the primitive times as is evident by tradition testimony of Fathers and acknowledged by the Magdeburg Centuries and other Protestant Writers Therefore the private spirit can not be a sufficient proposall of the true Faith or a credible and convincing signe of the true Church
age That is to say in every Century or age there were honest men and lawfull witnesses who testified that Henry the IV Ancestors descended from Saint Lewis though one onely age could remember or see Saint Lewis yet the next ensuing did see the first and heard their testimony the third did see the second c. In every age did live men whose testimony might be relyed upon It must be granted therefore by all that the knowledge which is grounded upon a continuall and never interrupted tradition is sufficient for lawfull witnesses 6 That the Roman Catholick Church hath a continuall and never interrupted tradition of its Faith and sense of Scripture being taught by Christ and the Apostles can not be denyed by our adversaries it being evident to the world that they who contradicted any article of this Faith we now professe in former ages were looked upon and condemned as Hereticks which is an infallible argument that we in every age received our Doctrine from the former not as the word of men but as the Word of God or as Divine Revelation for if it were not believed as Divine Revelation why should we condemne men as Hereticks because they denyed it Neither do Protestants deny that we believed our tradition and the testimony of our Church to be grounded upon Divine Revelation they onely say we were mistaken and that both our tradition and testimony of the Roman Church was fallible But then we urge that they acknowledge both were infallible in delivering to them the Scripture and testifying that it was the Word of God therefore in delivering and testifying all the rest seeing the same testimony delivering many things together must be of equall authority in all and equally believed by them who accept of it as a lawfull proofe All our pretended Reformers had no other ground in the yeare 1517. to believe Scripture as Divine Revelation but the testimony of the Roman Church Therefore they ought to believe all the rest or not to believe Scripture 7 I said it concernes also our adversaries to grant that their reformed Churches have no lawfull witnesses in matters of Faith because there can not be that sufficient knowledge which is required in a lawfull witnesse of Faith without tradition whereby it may appeare that the Faith and sense of Scripture of this age doth agree with that of the primitive Church If once our adversaries acknowledge lawfull witnesses of things past long since without a constant and never interrupted tradition every man whose spirit of ambition moves him may pretend to be true heire of any hereditary crowne or estate and without further proofe then his owne word and spirit or some obscure text of Scripture will exclude Kings and others whose rights are grounded upon tradition But if tradition be so necessary to preserve and make credible the testimony of men in matters of estates and rights in the Common-wealth it can not be superfluous to make credible the testimony of men concerning matters of Faith 8 It remaines now we prove that the testimony of the Roman Catholick Church hath beene confirmed with supernaturall signes or miracles But seeing there are in the Roman Church lawfull witnesses who prove that the Faith which they now professe is the same with that of the primitive Church miracles also are proved by the same witnesses it being granted by Protestants themselves that miracles were wrought in the primitive Church to confirme the Faith which Christ and his Apostles taught Yet in the Roman Catholick Church there are now lawfull witnesses and have beene in every age since Christs preaching that there have beene miracles done in confirmation of the Roman Faith This is evident to all who read the Ecclesiasticall Histories of present and past times Neither can our adversaries deny that we have lawfull witnesses for miracles now wrought in our Church even in confirmation of that Doctrine wherein we differ from them and reported by so credible testimonies See the 13. Chap. that it were imprudence in any person whosoever to deny them which is enough to propose sufficiently our Doctrine as Divine Revelation But Protestants do not believe our miracles because they imagine that they are against Scriptures that is against their owne interpretation of it and that some miracles have beene false and forged We do not say that all things which the common people thinke to be miracles are really true miracles but we affirme that true miracles there are in our Church and very frequent confirming that very Doctrine which Protestants reject the forgery or knavery of some particular wicked men in feigning miracles can not prejudice all especially such as are seene and experimented by persons of knowne integrity and learning able to discerne betweene true and false miracles otherwise it will follow that all the new Testament must be called in question or denyed to be Gods Word because Saint Thomas his pretended Ghospell or Nicodemus his writings are condemned as forged or Apocryphall That no reformed Church of Protestants can have lawfull witnesses to propose sufficiently their Doctrine as Divine Revelation is evident because for the space of 1500. yeares they were without any visible Church or tradition therefore their witnesses also are invisible and by consequence not lawfull or credible Fox and others made a certaine Catalogue of men who opposed the Doctrine of the Roman Church in former ages but they were known Hereticks and did neither agree amongst themselves nor with Protestants in their Tenets or Religion as hath beene demonstrated by Father Persons in his Examination of Fox his Kalendar and by many others 9 I conclude therefore that seeing Protestants grant there is and hath alwayes beene a Catholick Church upon earth and that Church must have lawfull witnesses testifying their Doctrine to be Divine Revelation it being evident that no Congregation of men can produce any such lawfull witnesses but the Roman Catholicks amongst whom I include also them of the Greeke Church who agree with us it s also evident that there can be no Church Catholick but the Roman CHAP. XI VVhether Transubstantiation and the lawfulnesse of the worship of Images be sufficiently proposed by the testimony of the Roman Catholick Church as Divine revelation and whether Protestants have any lawfull exceptions against them 1 THere are so many Bookes printed in defence of these Catholick Tenets that I judge it superfluous to treate of them ex professo I will onely answer some exceptions that Protestants have made against them to my selfe in diverse occasions That the Roman Church doth propose these articles sufficiently as Divine Revelation is cleare because it proposeth them by the same testimony and confirmed by the sames signes whereby it proposeth Scripture to be Gods Word this last proposall Protestants themselves grant to be so sufficient that no man may in prudence deny it Therefore the same must be said of all the rest and in particular of Transubstantiation and worship of Images 2 But let us
our selves as much as is neceâ— sary But Protestants stand upon such nice termes witâ— God and the Church that if they come not short of whâ— is necessary as twenty to one they will their Neighbouâ— shall be nothing the better for their beliefe 2 I might urge this argument in a serious way and vâ— home if this were its proper place But to returne to thâ— question whether Protestancy be Heresie I answer thâ— all opinions or Tenets whether negative or affirmativâ— that Protestants hold contrary to that which the Româ— Catholick Church believes as an article of Faith are Hâ— resies which I demonstrate in this manner Whatsoevâ— opinion is contrary to any Doctrine sufficiently propose as Divine Revelation is Heresie but all Protestants prper Tenets or opinions are contrary to some Doctriâ— sufficiently proposed as Divine Revelation Therefore 〈◊〉 Protestants proper Tenets or opinions are Heresies Thâ— first proposition is granted by our very adversaries anâ— hath beene proved in the 3. and 4. Chap. The second 〈◊〉 cleare by what may be borrowed from the same Chapter and from the so and I apply to our question by this syâ— logisme All the proper Teners of Protestancy are coâ— trary to some Doctrine which the Roman Catholiâ— Church doth testifie to be Divine Revelation that is 〈◊〉 have beene revealed by God to the primitive Church bâ— the testimony of the Roman Catholick Church is a sufâ— cient proposall of any Doctrine to be Divine Revelatioâ— Therefore all Tenets or opinions proper to Protestancâ— are contrary to some Doctrine sufficiently proposed Divine Revelation 3 If the second proposition of this last syllogisme argument be demonstrated Protestancy is demonstrated â—o be Heresie Therefore I prove it in my judgement â—ery clearly That testimony is a sufficient proposall of Sods revealing any Doctrine to the primitive Church which testimony is confirmed by miracles and hath conâ—inued without interruption being exhibited in every â—ge from the time of the Apostles to this present by hoâ—est and knowing men But the testimony of the Roman Catholick Church hath all this Therefore it s a sufficient â—toposall of any Doctrine to be Divine Revelation or to â—ave beene revealed by God to the primitive Church That the testimony of the Roman Church is confirmed by â—â—iracles even in those very points of Doctrine wherein â—rotestants differ from us is so evident that no prudent â—an if not obstinate can deny and is particularly proved 〈◊〉 the 13. Chap. For how is it possible that all the world â—as I said before should conspire to abuse Protestants and â—amne themselves by feigning miracles and that not â—nely in this age but in every age since the primitive Church The forging of some is no prudent proose that â—ll are forged If there are no miracles in the Roman Caâ—olick Church in confirmation of Transubstantiation Purâ—atory Worship of Images c. there is no Faith to be given my men whosoever 4 Now it remaines onely to be proved that there hath â—een a continuall succession of honest and learned men â—f the Roman Church in every age since the primitive Church to this present who did beare witnesse that the Doctrine which every respective former age delivered to â—he next ensuing and we believe as Faith was revealed by â—od to the first Christians But this being evident by the â—ondemning as Hereticks all those who in any age held â—rotestant Tenets and being also proved in the 10. Chap. â—s superfluous and troublesome to repeate it here againe Whosoever desires to be informed more at large and of â—very point in particular let him read the Protestant Apoâ—gy for the Roman Church There he will finde what I â—ay to be so cleare that our very learned Adversaries are â—orced to acknowledge it and recurre to that old and â—esperate shift of Hereticks who say that the word of â—en is not to be believed as if the word of the same men who assure us that Scripture is the Word of God were credible in that but in nothing else Of this we have saiâ— enough before in the 5. Chap. 5 Yet I will not omit to argue against Protestants aâ— Saint Augustin did against Jewes and Pagans with that inâ— genious Dilemma whereof I made mention in the 3. Chap Either the first learned and honest men who adored thâ— Blessed Sacrament believing there was no bread in it worshipt Images c. did see miracles to confirme thesâ— pretended novelties which crept in as Protestant say tâ— the Church or they did see no miracles to confirme them If they did see miracles I have my intent If they did seâ— none I have also my intent because the greatest of all mâ— racles is that wise and learned men should without anâ— miracles seene adore for God that which seemes to be piece of bread and worship a statue or picture which 〈◊〉 not onely contrary as Protestants say to cleare Scripturâ— but also to common sense and reason By the same Di emâ— ma I prove that every point of the Doctrine of Catholick against Protestants was sufficiently proposed as Divinâ— Revelation Either it was sufficiently proposed to the firâ— Christians who believed it or not If it was Protestancâ— is Heresie If it was not how is it possible that not onely the first who believed or taught these superfluities buâ— all the wise and honest men of the world for many age before the pretended Reformation should impose upon themselves unnecessary articles as necessary and therebâ— betray posterity and damne themselves for believinâ— things which had no ground in Scripture nor were testiâ— fied to them by any credible testimonies of the Christianâ— who went before them to be Divine Revelation All thaâ— Protestants can say in their owne defence hath beene conâ— futed in the 3.4.7.8 and 9. Chap for all must be reduceâ— to three heads 1. That Scripture and Fathers are cleaâ— against Roman Catholicks 2. That the private spirit iâ— for Protestants 3. That Protestants are neither obstinate nor Hereticks because they do not believe that God reâ— vealed Transubstantiation Purgatory c. All these threâ— evasions and more have beene confuted in the foremeâ— tioned Chapters to which I remit the Reader 6 I do not see what exception Protestants can adde tâ— their former against the testimony of the Roman Cathâ— lick Church unlesse they say I that it is not make anâ— thing prudently credible as Divine Revelation because we Catholicks can not make appeare by reason how what we say is true as how accidents can be without their proper subject c. but upon this score they may as well reject the mystery of the Trinity Incarnation as Transubstantiation The Catholick Church is not the Author of the Doctrine it proposeth it s onely a witnesse as Christ himselfe declared when he sent the Apostles to preach Ye shall be my witnesses in Hierusalem c. Act. 1. Onely God who is the Author of Catholick Doctrine can give a cleare reason of some mysteries and
there must be good correspondence betweene both Rationall creatures are saved by a rationall way There is a generation of men that thinke none can enter into the true Church by Faith if he leaves not his wits behind him at the doore so great an antipathy they conceive is betweene Faith and Reason that to embrace the one is to renounce holy and exclude tâ—e other This errour proceeds from confounding the mystery believed with the beliefe It s very certaine that the truth of Divine mysteries ought not to be censured by human understanding because they are above its reach that which seemeth to man very improbable may be an infallible verity But that we fall not into extreames on the other side its fit we know that no person is bound to believe any mystery he understands not before he seeth reason to believe it though that reason cleares not the mystery yet it makes manifest our obligation to believe it None is bound to part with his ovâ—ne Religion or opinion before he knoweth upon what score There is nothing so much and so properly our owne as our thoughts our lands and all other properties may be forced from us our thoughts can not they remaine free though our selves should be slaves Seeing therefore its a right of nature not to part with our owne goods being in possession unlesse better evidence be produced by others then we can shew for them the same right must be extended to our thoughts even in matters of Faith because the Law of grace doth rather perfect then destroy the Law of nature and equity 3 To prove that Protestancy is manifestly against reason it s enough to prove that it is manifestly against reason to believe as Protestants do There is not one article of any Protestant Church opposite to the Roman Catholick Faith that is not manifestly against reason in this sense This assertion may be proved first because Protestancy is Heresie as hath beene proved in the 12. Chap. and Heresie is manifestly against reason for Heresie involves obstinacy and an obstinate man is manifestly unreasonable because he is guided by his will not by his understanding None can properly be obstinate if not convinced convinced none can be but by cleare reason or by lawfull witnesses to whose testimony evident reason commands all men give credit and submit their judgements if there be not cleare evidence against it All Common-wealths do acquiesce in and take the word of honest men in both publick and private affaires as in punishing Malefactors disposing of inheritances c. That the Catholich Church hath a great multitude of lawfull witnesses and testimonies against Protestancy hath beene demonstrated Therefore Procestancy is manifestly against naturall reason which dictates to all rationall creatures to conform themselves to the testimony of lawfull wicnesses when they have no evidence against the said testimony Protestants can not pretend evidence of reason against Catholick Tenets because they are above reason Evidence of the private spirit is ridiculous and incredible to others therefore unfit for the true Catholick Church as hath beene proved in the 9. Chap. There remaines onely their pretended evidence or clearnesse of Scripture which hath beene alsoo confuted in the 8. Chap. Other lawfull witnesses against ours they have none unlesse we grant that an invisible Church never heard of before Luther hath lawfull testimonies And as for the sentences of some Fathers which they wrest in their owne behalfe we produce others against them of the same Fathers in which they explaine themselves Therefore it s manifestly against reason to believe as Protestants do because they have no prudent ground for Protestancy their Faith is not above reason but below it that is unfit to be embraced by any rationall creature 4 Another manner of proving Protestancy to be manifestly against reason is by this cleare principle When witnesses and testimonies are contrary they onely are to be believed who confirme what they say with visible and evident signes Reg. 3 Salomon judged that the child about whom there was so great a dispute betwixt the two women did belong to her who shewed a visible and sensible horror against the dividing of the infant into two parts Though the other was confident enough in testifying the child was her owne yet because her testimony was not confirmed by any exteriour and visible signe the contrary testimony was preferred and believed by Salomon If we will judge of Religions as wise and rationall men we must examine which of all Christian Churches testimony is confirmed with evident and visible signes No Protestant Church all of them being invisible for so many ages can pretend so evident and visible signe The Roman Catholick Church doth not onely pretend to visible signes but they are so evidently appearing in the said Church that no Protestant can deny them without forfeiting his judgement or his ingenuity The visible signes of the true Church must have so evident a relation to God the Author of both Church and Faith that whosoever will reflect upon the said signes can not prudently deny that they are a sufficient proofe of God being the Author of the Doctrine or Faith confirmed by them There can not be a more rationall and sufficient proofe of any Doctrine being taught by Christ and his Apostles then a continuall succession from them to us both of Pastors and Doctrine delivered from age to age by the Doctors of the Church See this in Esay 59.21 Psal 45.16 Ephes 4.11.12 5 As for our succession of Pastors it is confessed by Protestant Our succession of Doctrine from the Apostles to this present must also be granted because they could never tell us though continually pressed in that particular point when did the Roman Church fall from the true and sincere Faith which confessedly it once professed And And truly before Protestants prove that the Roman Faith was changed in any age they must first prove that all the Pastors and Doctors of that age did conspire together to damne both themselves and posterity or if they did not conspire to so incredible a thing it must be necessarily said that in that age wherein the first change of any article of Faith happened all the Catholicks of the world weremad or slept for the space of a hundred yeares because if they were awake and sober its impossible but in some parts of the world nay in every part and Countrey some learned and honest men would contradict so damnable and abominable practises and advertise future ages of the innovation of Christian Religion contrary to cleare Scripture and the knowne beliefe of all Catholicks in former ages It s as evident therefore that we Roman Catholicks have not changed that Faith which we received from the Apostles as it is evident that there was not any age wherein all the world conspired to damne themselves and their posterity or as it is evident that there was not any age wherein all the world was so benummed stupified or