mind of that folly in very cleer termes and excuse farther disputes by telling them plainly and without going about the bush that the Machabees was not Canonical Scripture nor fit to be quoted in matters of Religious controversies But the Doctor argues pag. 110. that St. Austin tells Gaudentius the Christian Church receiveth those books not vnprofitably if they be discreetly or soberly read or heard what then All discreet and sober men say the same not only of the books of the Machabees but of all the other books and parts of Scripture and St. Peter sayth the same in substance of St. Paul's epistles Will the Doctor conclude from thense that St. Paul's epistles are not Canonical Scripture because men may read them indiscreetly and deprave them to their own damnation Or that there is no Scripture at all because he himself or some of his Bishoprick of Duresme do not read the Bible with sobriety and discretion these words of St. Austin in the Doctor 's judgment pag. 108. are so cleerly against the Canonical authority of the Machabees that he says Cardinal Belarmin layd his thumb vpon them and durst not relate them I am sure he pointed at them with his Pen and directed all the world to see and examin them by his quoting the book and Chapter where they are as my Lord of Duresme him-self confesseth in the margent neither could Belarmin Peron or any oâ—her Catholick Writer observe any disadvantage to their cause in those following words of S. Austin Which Doctor Cozins pretends to be so notoriously prejudicial Recepta est ab Ecclesia non invtiliter c. The Machabees is received by the Church for holy Scripture not vnprofitably if it be soberly read or heard That is sayth Doctor Cozins pag. 110. As St. Augustin els wher expoundeth him-self but where Doctor Cozins doth not because he cannot tell If those things that we read there be conferred with the sacred and Canonical Scriptures that whatsoever is therevnto agreeable may be approved and what is otherwise may be rejected According to this acute explanation which Doctor Cozins falsly fathers vpon S. Austin the most profane books and Romances Esop's Fables and Don Quixote may be received by the Church for holy Scripture as well as the Machabees if those things that we read therin be conferr'd with the sacred and Canonical Scriptures and whatsoever is thervnto agreable be approved and what is otherwise be rejected It were too tedious to note all Doctor Cozins his mistakes Let these few serve to know by what a pillar the English Canon and Church is supported SECT IV. Protestants so grossly mistaken in their letter and Translations of the Scriptures that they can not have any certainty of faith and are forc't at length by their principles to question the truth of Scriptures and of them who writ the Canonical books therof THe holy Scriptures were writen by the Prophets Apostles and Evangelists either in Hebrew Greeck or Latin the old Testament excepting some few parts writen in Chaldaick and Syriack was writen in Hebrew the new Testament for the greatest part in Greeck S. Mathew's Ghospel in Hebrew S. Marck's in Latin We have not the original writings of these Prophets and Apostles nor of the 70. Interpreters who translated the old Testament into Greek some 300. years before the comming of Christ we have only Copies for the truth and exactness wherof we must rely vpon the testimony and tradition of the Church which in so important a point God would never permit to err at least it must have bin so infallible therin as that the Copy be sufficiently authentick to be a rule of deciding controversies of faith and of directing men to holiness of life though perhaps no copy is so exact but therin may remain some erratas of the press and pen yet easily discoverable by it's coherency or incoherency with other parts of the Text. Notwithstanding the necessity of admitting some true and authentick copy of Scripture for what can it availe a Christian to believe that Scripture is the word of God if he be vncertain which copy or Translation is true and authentick Scripture Protestants pretend there is no authentick copy of Scripture in the world as may be seen in the preface of the Tigurin edition of the Bible and in all their books of Controversy seing therin they condemn the Councel of Trent for declaring that the old Latin Translation is authentick and yet themselves name no other for authentick and therfore though the Lutherans fancy Luther's Translation the Calvinists that of Geneva the Zuinglians that of Zuinglius the English some times one somtimes an other yet because they do not hold any one to be infallibly authentick it followeth from their exceptions against the infallibility of the Roman Catholick Church in declaring or decreeing a true and authentick copy of Scripture and their confession of the vncertainty of their own translations that they have no certainty of Scripture nor even of faith which they ground vpon Scripture alone Most of the old Testament as it is in the vulgar Latin Translation which the Councel of Trent declares to be authentick was â—ranslated out of Hebrew by St. Hierom and the new Testament had bin before his time translated out of Greek but was by him revewed and such faults as had crept in through negligence of the Transcribers were corrected You constraine me sayth he to make a new work of an old that I after so many copies of the Scripture dispersed through the world should sit as a certain Iudg and determin which of them agree with the true Greek and in this Cathalogue he saith Novum Testamentum graecae fidei reddidi vetus juxta haebraicum transtuli The antiquity and sincerity of the first Interpreter and the great Commendations therof to be seene in St. Austin de Civit. Dei lib. 18. c. 43. Non defuit temporibus nostris Presbiter Hieronymus homo doctissimus omnium trium linguarum peritissimus qui non è Graeco sed ex Haebraeo in Latinum eloquium easdem Scripturas converterit Cujus tamen litterarum laborem Judaei fatentur esse veracem And lib. 2. doct Christi cap. 15. togeather with the eminent Sanctity and learning of S. Hierom forceth our Adversarie Bâ—eza to confess Annotationibus in caput 1. Luc. That the old Interpreter seemeth to have interpreted the holy books with marveilous sincerity and Religion and in praefat novi Testam The vulgar edition I do for the most part embrace and preferr before all others Carolus Molinaeus in nov Testam part 30. I can very hardly depart from the vulgar and accustomed reading which in Luc. 17. he professeth to preferr before Erasmus Bucer Bullinger Brentius the Tigurin Translation and even before Iohn Calvins and all others Doctor Humfrey de ratione interpret l. 1. pag. 74. The old Interpreter seemeth to be much addicted to the propriety of the words and truly with too much
these are his words and concealed by the Bishop who also striks out of Vincentius Lirin other words wherby it did appear what a kind of keeper the Church is of the truths deposited with her and how litle danger there is of corrupting the old or admitting of new doctrin The Bishop pag. 38. sets down the sentence thus Ecclesia depositorum apud se dogmatum Custos c. Denique quid vnquam Conciliorum Decretis enisa est nisi vt quod antea simpliciter credebatur hoc idem postea diligentius crederetur c. But in Vincentius Lirinensis It is thus Christi vero Eoclesia sedula cauta depositorum apud se dogmatum Custos here first he skips over these two words sedula cauta diligent and wary because they spoiled his plot of persuading us that the Church might by negligence of its Pastors be insensibly changed and corrupted To the same intent he conceales with an c. the rest that followes which would have cleered all and left no room for the Bishops fraud for Vincentius Lirin his words are But the Church of Christ is a diligent Depositary or Keeper of the truths committed to her never changes any thing at all in them lessens nothing adds nothing nether cuts away things necessary nor adjoyns things superfluous neither looseth what is hers nor vsurpes what belongs to others Let any Christian or honest Pagan Iudge whether these words be not Diametrically contrary to what the Bishop pretends vnto in this passage viz. suspition and possibility of the Churches adding novitia veteribus novelties to the old doctrin of making a change of that faith she first received from Christ and his Apostles and of becoming Lupanar errorum which this good man and holy Martyr sayes he is loath to english and yet leaves out cuts and corrupts the Latin text of set purpose to fix vpon Christs Espouse the greatest infamy How Bp. Laud falsifies Occham to infringe St. Austins authority concerning the infallibility of the Church in succeeding ages as well as in that of the Apostles and is forced by his error to resolve his prelatick faith into the light of Scripture and the privat Spirit of Fanaticks which he palliates vnder the name of grace and therby warrants all rebellions against Church and state AN act of divine faith must be prudent that is men are not bound to believe any article therof v. g. that Scripture is the word of God vnless there evidently appear prudent and sufficient motives to exclude all moral possibility that any but God is the Author of the doctrin proposed to be believed These motives of credibility we call the signs of the Church and are the miracles of Christ and his Disciples sanctity and succession of his doctrin and Doctors Conversion of Kings and nations to christianity c. These signs or motives of credibility though they do not evidence demonstratively that our faith is true or that the Church or Congregation of men wherin they be found is the Catholick yet they demonstrat an obligation in us of believing it as we have proved elsewhere in so much that if no such signs or motives of credibility had bin none would be bound to believe any point of Christian Religion with certainty of faith and therfore St. Austin sayd he would not believe the Scripture had he not bin moved therunto by the authority of the Church because Scripture of it self hath no sufficient arguments and signs to ground a prudent and undoubted belief of its being the word of God but the signs and motives of credibility invest the Church with sufficient authority to declare both that and all other mysteries of faith and to make our Ecclesiastical Ministery and Mission more authentikly divin then any Regal Commissions or human Badges can set forth the truth and dignity of Ministers of state and officers of war Therfore as not to believe or to contemn men so qualified when they command in the Kings name is by the light of reason and consent of all nations judged obstinacy and rebellion not to be excused by pretending ignorance or want of greater evidence then those vsual signs of their employments afford so must it be obstinat heresy not to believe that what is proposed by the Church qualified with the aforesaid signs is revealed by God This supposed the main Controversy between Protestants and Catholicks is about the resolution of Christian faith for though both parties pretend that they believe because God revealed to the Prophets and Apostles the Mysteries of faith yet we say that Protestants can not shew how it may be prudently believed that Christ preached or revealed any such doctrin as is pretended vnless it be acknowledged that the Church of every succeeding age was and this present is as truly and realy though perhaps not so highly quoad modum infallible in delivering the Apostles doctrin as the Apostles were in delivering that of Christ. We do not say that Tradition or the Testimony of the Church confirmed by the foresaid signs is the prime motive and last resolution of faith but that the Tradition and Testimony of the present Church is infallible to the end it may infallibly apply the prime motive which is Gods veracity to vs and we prudently assent thervnto But the Bishop denying this is driven with Presbyterians and Fanaticks to an inbredâ—light of Scripture and to the privat Fanatick spirit with this only difference that where they say they are infallibly resolved that Scripture is the word of God by the Testimony of the Spirit within them his Lordship pag. 83.84 averrs he hath the same assurance by grace And because we object and admire that no Catholick could ever perceive this inward and inbred light of Scripture wherby all Protestants pretend they are assured it is the word of God he concurrs pag. 86 with Fanatitks in telling vs that blind eyes can not and pervers eyes will not see it It s strange his Lordship did not foresee the sad effects which this Protestant principle and presumption wrought against himself and his Prelatick Church within a very short time after he writ this doctrin and applyed the same against the Roman Catholicks He might be sure it would be retorted against the Church of England for why may not every Protestant Sectary pretend that the Prelatick Church of England is as blind and pervers in not seing the light of Scripture as Luther and Laud pretend the Roman Catholick is It is but every particular mans fancy and word no other proof is required by Protestants nor indeed can any better be produced to make good that so many honest and learned searchers of Scripture as have bin and are in the Roman Catholick Church can not or will not see the pretended light of Scripture so largely diffused among Protestants and distributed to every Fanatick Presbyterian and Prelatick whose faith can not be maintained without this rash judgment and most dangerous
Fallaise in so much as she persuaded her husband to leave Geneva and go to Lansanâ—â— where she revealed the whole matter Mahomet t is true was a Cheat but a mere cunning cheat then Luther Calvin or Cranmer c. for by his Dove or fitts of the falling sickness he made people believe that the holy Ghost appeared and inspired to him the Alcoran but the Protestant Reformers had not so much to shew for their new doctrin Canon Translations and their new sense of Scripture Mahomet was constant to his principles the Protestant Parliament and Reformers were as changable as the times and humors of the giddy people and therfore may with more reason then the Turks give the Moon crescent for the Crest of their Religions as Catholicks do the Cross. Here in England they changed with Henry 8. the Roman faith for Articles of Religion devised by the Kings Majesty As soon as he dyed they changed that faith into Zuinglianism to comply with the Protector Somerset within two or three years after they changed Zuinglianism into Calvinianism at the suit of Calvin and reformed the Liturgy accordingly After K. Edward 6. death they returned with Q. Mary to the old faith With Q. Elizabeth they restored the new but with some alterations When K. James succeeded they changed their Translations of Scripture and other things In K. Charles 1. time prelatick Protestancy was pulled down by Presbytery this by Independency c. Prelatick Protestancy being restored again by K. Charles 2. the formes of Ordination wherupon depend the validity of the prelatick Ministery Church and Sacraments were not thought sufficient and therfore are now changed into more Catholick forms and therby all is left doubtfull and changeable for if the Church of England acknowledgeth to have erred in a thing of so great importance what assurance can it have of not erring in all the rest In a word Protestants in this one Kingdom and in this one age have made moâ—â— changes of Religions then Mahometans in the ten ages they have continued and in the greatest part of the world which they have conquered These things maturely considered makes Mahometism as probable a Religion as the best kind of Protestancy and therfore it would be no great wonder if they who believe the Protestant and Prelatick Clergy and take their word and fancies for true Scripture and Christianity should alter their belief vpon the change of that Clergys testimony acknowledging that hitherto they had bin mistaken which they may confess at any time becaus their Church is acknowledged fallible and that now they find the Turks have the true faith for that they reject all such books of Scripture as any Christians ever doubted of and that as lawfully as the pretended apocrypha are rejected by Protestants vpon the same ground and likewise believe all Protestant fundamental points necessary for salvation seing they believe of Christ as much as Arians Socinians and Chillingworth with his Sect of wits nay as much as the moderat and modern Prelatick writers who say that it is sufficient to believe Christ is the word and son of God which Mahomet never denyed If any Mahumetan Prince could pretend a title to this British Monarchy with probability of prevailing why may not we think he would find the Protestant Clergy as ready to comply with his Religion therby to secure their own and promote his interest as they were ready to change the Catholick and legal Religion which was professed in Q. Maries time for complying with Q. Elizabeth and fortifying her weak title against the legitimat and vndoubted Heirs All things weighed there is less difference between Mahumetism and prelatick Protestancy then between prelatick Protestancy and Popery for that Popery and Protestancy agree only in the name of Christianity in the motive and manner of faith they differ and in the ground therof as also in the Canon letter and Sense of Scripture but Mahumetism and Protestancy though they agree not in the letter of Scripture Protestants admitting into their Canon more books therof then the Turks yet they both agree in the rule of Religion though not in the application as also in the rule wherby their Canon and sense of Scripture is discerned which is every mans privat judgment in controverted matters in that point which is not controverted to wit one Deity the consent and concurrence of the generality of the world or evident reason is the foundation as well of Mahumetism as of protestancy as also in the point of the immortality of the soul. Therfore I see no impossibility or improbability said this great wit why Mahumetism may not in time be made the Religion of these Nations without violating the principles or altering the grounds of Protestancy and the prelatick Clergy be as much applauded and rewarded for the one change as for the other The greatest obstacle is that no Mahumetan Prince can pretend a title even such as Q. Elizabeths was to the Crown God almighty deliver us from so great evils and open the eyes of them that do not see the precipices wherunto their souls are led by such principles and grant the learned prelatick Clergy grace to prefer truth before falshood conscience before conveniency and eternity before the few days which they are to enjoy Benefices and Bishopricks But in case they do not for fear of loosing their credit and conveniences recant their errors J hope the Protestant Layty will have so much curiosity as to examin whether it be possible that so many Catholick Authors as have written books of Controversies should damn and discredit themselves by forging and feigning Protestant frauds and falsifications quoting the very places and pages where they are to be found affirming that without such practices protestancy cannot be maintained to examin I say whether we Catholicks can be so wicked and witless as to accuse men of such grievous crimes without hopes of any honor or profit to our selves but rather with a certainty of an immediat discovery of our impostures If this one thing be maturely considered the Protestant Layty and their vnlearned Clergy that rely so much vpon the sufficiency and sincerity of Cranmer Jewel Fox Morton Andrews Whitaker Fulk Perkins Vsher Laud Abbots Chillingworth Bramhall Cosins Hamond Taylor c. will believe us or at least examin and certainly find most palpable vnexcusable corruptions and contradictions in every one of their own Authors books composed against the Roman doctrin and conclude with us that Piety and Policy is mistaken in promoting Protestancy and persecuting Popery and that a good revenue may be conscientiously setled if legaly demanded vpon the Crown and vpon the poor soldiers and seamen that defend these nations against forreign invasions and rebellious insurrections Seing the Pope and his Roman Catholick Clergy in all likelihood will be content to resign their right and interest in the Church revenues to his Majesty as they did in the like occasion to Q. Mary who notwithstanding
and height of an amourous passion was so blinded that to satisfy his carnal lust he assumed and annexed a spiritual supremacy to a temporal Crown may be attributed to the fondness and fancies of love That a Babe K. Edward 6. was taken with such a bable as that same supremacy may be imputed to the tenderness of his age and to the imprudence of his Vncle and Protector Somerset who by promoting that Oath and the Protestant reformation put the Kingdom into a Babylonical confusion That Dudley Duke of Northvmberland seing the Church and state so confounded did ground a title for the Lady Jane Grey and for his own son to the Crown vpon the principles and Zeal of Protestancy is but the ordinary practise of Politians that the Lady Elizabeth did reâ—â—ive her Fathers supremacy and the Protestant reformation wherby alone shee could pretend to be legitimat against two acts of Parliament never yet repeald is not so blameable in her as in them that but four years before had by an vnanimous vote in both Houses declared An Bullens marriage voyd and that same supremacy and Protestancy to be heresy That K. Iames did pardon and promote his mothers murtherers and conform himself to that Religion wherby shee and himself had bin so long excluded from their right was great clemency or a cuning compliance without which he covld hardly have compassed his ends and restored the line of the Stenarts to the British Empire That K. Charles 1. did endeavour by Ordinances and Laws to restrain and reduce the variety of Protestant opinions grounded vpon the liberty of interpreting Scripture to some kind of vniformity and subordination to Princes and Prelats had bin an act of great prudence if it had not shaken and shock't the very fundation of all Protestant Reformations that consists in an arbitrary interpretation of the obscure Texts of Scripture from which foundation and fountain necessarily floweth the priviledge of denying obedience to all civil and Ecclesiastical authority that commands any thing contrary to those interpretations of Scripture wherby every privat person or any leading men of the Protestant Congregations will be pleased to direct themselves or guide others That the Zealous and precise sort of Protestants did convene and covenant against the King and Bishops for endeavoring to deprive them of this their Evangelical liberty of the Reformation was but a natural result of the same fundamental principle of Protestancy That Oliver Cromwell by counterfaiting Zeal and piety and by humoring the privat spirits and interpretations of Protestant Sectaries did ruin his King and rais himself from a mean subject to be absolut Soveraign needs not to be enumerated among the casualties or favors of fortun there being not any thing more feasible then to dethrone a Protestant Monarch by his own Religion because it is nothing but an arbitrary interpretation of Scripture and by consequence gives such a latitud for justifying rebellion vpon the score of refining the reformation by a new sense of Scripture that every Protestant without violating the principles but rather sticking to the prerogative of Protestancy may embrace any more pleasing and popular sense of the Text however so prejudicial it prove to his lawful Soveraign or however contrary it be to the sense of Scripture established by law or by acts of vniformity But that notwithstanding so many warnings and wars as we have had so great and grave a Councel as the Parliament of England should think fit to continue the same vnsuccessfull cours of setling Monarchy the same statuts wherby Q. Elizabeth excluded the right heirs and now reigning family the same fundamental Tenet of the Reformation wherby every subject is made interpreter of Scripture and by consequence Iudge of his Soveraign and of the Government which must be subordinat to Scripture is not only to me but to the Christian world the cause of greatest admiration And becaus every Religion hath some incomprehensible mysteries I will number this among those of Protestancy but withall must beg pardon for thinking that it is rather against then above reason for to grant the principle wherupon the independency or Soveraignty of every Protestant subject is grounded and yet to make Acts of Parliament in favor of the Church of England against the same subjects independency or Soveraignty is a kind of contradiction So discerning a people as the English can hardly be hindred from seing the manifest connexion that is between the Protestant subjects liberty of interpreting Scripture and the not submitting their judgments or actions to any human laws or Government if contrary to their own interpretations And so Religious and scrupulous a people as they are will not be easily persuaded that an Act of Parliament is sufficient to dispense with their obligation and inclination of sticking to that fundamental Tenet of Protestancy I confess that in some Countreys as in France the Protestant people are now kept in so great subjection that they dare not go so far as the principles of Protestancy lead and in other more Northern Climats they are of so dull and peaceable a constitution that they want either curiosity to examin or courage to assert the priviledges of the reformation and therfore are apt to submit their Iudgments by an implicit faith to the opinions of Luther or Calvin or of their own Clergy But with us where every one thinks his own spirit as divin and his Iudgment as good as that of Luther or Calvin or of the Bishops where the stoutness and stubborness of our nature makes us venture vpon any thing wheâ—her sacred or profane where every Peasant is warranted by the law to question the prerogative of his Prince in such a Countrey I say and in such a constitution of the Government it is not to be expected that men will be less contentious in the Church then they are in the Courts nor content with less then with that supremacy of judicature allowed by the principles of Protestancy to be the spiritual-birth-right of every Protestant subject These are some of the inconveniencies whervnto the government is lyable by the principles and profession of Protestancy and though I humbly conceive that nothing but liberty of conscience can content so many dissenting parties yet I am of opinion that before such a liberty be granted some previous conferences concerning Religion like that of Hampton Court in K. James his reign be allowed but without excluding from those Conferences Papists or any party that will offer to give reason for their Religion For as to accept of a Bill of comprehension before men examin the consequences and qualifications of the Religions comprehended may breed greater confusion so to except any Christian Religion from being examined doth argue that in our Conferences we consult not conscience But it is to be feared that education and interest the two greatest prejudices not only against truth but against the examination therof will make the Bishops and their Bigots avers from any
conferences of Religion wherby their title to the churchs-livings may be questioned They will pretend and preach â—hat it is against the rules as well of piety as of policy to inquire into the truth of doctrin or into the right of possession after 100. years prescription But they do not consider or at least would not have others consider that the Roman Catholicks prescriptioÌ„ of 1000. years in England and our Prelats legal possession of lands for the same space of years was not judged by Q. Elizabeths Bishops or Parliaments a sufficient Plea against the pretensions of the Crown to the Church revenues notwithstanding the Church then was thought to be infallible in doctrin and the revenues therof were first intended for and annexed to the Prelats and preachers of the same Roman Catholick doctrin and Church Now if the Protestant Bishops think that the Catholick Bishops were legally and lawfully dispossessed of their revenues and their Doctrin legaly and lawfully condemned and changed by Luther Calvin Cranmer or the Prelaticks interpretation of Scripture confirmed by Act of Parliament how can they imagin to make the world believe that it is now either a sin or sacriledge to be dispossessed themselves of the Church revenues by an Act of Parliament confirming as probable an interpretation of Scripture as theirs or as that of Luther or Calvin is especially seing they confess their doctrin fallible and that the revenues were never intended by those that gave them for preaching or promoting any kind of Protestancy Doubtless this incoherency and their backwardness in reasoning of Religion will render their Zeal for the Church revenues as much suspected as their forwardnes in persecuting tender Consciences hath renderd their persons odious And that there may be no ground for them to work vpon nor to doubt of the Roman Catholick Clergy's loyalty and sincerity in petitioning and pressing for publick conferences of Religion it will be found I doubt not in case any such security be desired or valued that we shall as readily now as in Queen Maries reign resign all the right we can pretend to the revenues of the Church and as then bestow them vpon the Crown for the use and ease of our Country By this it may appear that we have no design but the duty of subjects or the devotion of Christians in desiring that the Protestant Clergys title be examined But they deterr the illiterat layty from this necessary scrutiny by often repeating the word Sacrilege without declaring its signification We know and so do they that it hath bin the ancient practise of God's Church to contribut with all that is Sacred without the least fear or scruple of Sacriledge to the maintenance of the State when the layty is so much empoveris'ht with wars and taxes as we are both in England and Ireland Wee see that in all Catholick Countreys the Clergy doth imitat the example of the ancient Church in the same practise Why our English Bishops Deans and Chapters ought to be exempted from so reasonable and general a custom vnless it be that they are burthend with wives and Children I do not vnderstand But sure their having wives and Children can neither â—make their revenues more Sacred nor â—heir Contributions more Sacriledge on cases of publick necessity As a â—ompetency of maintenance for themselves and for their Childrens education and application to some honest Trades is an act of Charity so to apply the rest of the Church revenues to publik uses for soldiers and seamen and to the payment of the Crown debts is not against Christianity In the conclusion of this Preface I must endeavor to excuse the bulk of my book and the positivenes of my Assertions For the first I could hardly draw into a narrower compass so transcendent a subject and yet I have placed in the end of this Treatise an Index wherin the substance of the whole book is contained to the end every one may find out with ease any point he hath a mind to read As to the positivenes of my assertions most of them being articles of my faith or deductions from my Creed I could not but utter them in the Tone of our infallible Church But becaus I speak to Protestants that condemn our infallibility I attempt to demonstrat their censure against the same is as rash as they fancy our belief is ridiculous J must also ingenuously confess that it is part of my design to diminish the authority of the Protestant and Prelatick writers but seing my arguments are taken out of their own writings and are no other then their wilfull and vndeniable falsifications of Scripture and Fathers I hope none that detests so horrid a crime will condemn my Censure or defend their credit Whether I have bin faithfull in setting down their falsifications I must submit to the Iudgment of my Readers as also beg pardon for intermedling with so much of government as necessarily depends of Religion and ought to be proportioned therunto our Protestant Statesmen will not only pardon but protect me when they reflect vpon the impossibility there is of regulating the motions or appeasing the mutinies of a body politik by a faith so vncertain as that of the fallible Church of England or by a rule of Religion so applicable to rebellion as the letter of Scripture is when left to every privat mans arbitrary interpretation THE TABLE Part I. Of the Beginning Progress and Principles in general And of the Prelatick Church of England in Particular HOw necessary a rational Religion is for a Peacable Government Pag. 1. Wherein the Reasonableness of Religion Consists Pag. 8. How dangerous it is for a Temporal Soveraign to pretend to a Spiritual Jurisdiction over his Subjects Pag. 10. The Grounds of Peace Piety and Policy Pag. 10. The Catholick World ever acknowledg'd the Bishop of Rome's Spiritual Jurisdiction over all Christians Pag. 11. The same Religion which St. Gregory the great held was by St. Augustine taught to our Ancestors Pag. 19. Of the Author and beginning of Protestancy and of Luther's Disputation and Familiarity with the Devil Pag. 22. How weakly Protestants Excuse Luther's Conference with the Devil Pag. 29. The Mass a Visible and True Sacrifie proved by the Councils and Doctors of the Church Pag. 36. The Sacrifice of the Mass offered for the Dead Pag. 37. Of the Principles and Propagation of Protestancy Pag. 39. The Fundamental Principles of Protestancy Pag. 43. Protestants affirm that if a man have an Act of Faith sin does not hurt him Pag. 46. Protestants affirm that all Christians Men and Women are Priests by Baptism Pag. 50. Of the Protestant Church of England in K. H. VIII's Reign Pag. 53. Henry the VIII weary of Queen Catharine Pag. 53. Anne Bullen's Incest and Leudness Pag. 54. Henry the VIII's Tyranny Pag. 56. Tyndal's Translation of the Bible abolish'd Pag. 59. Of the English Religion and Reformers in K. Edw. VI's days Pag. 60. The first Reformers of the Prelatick
do things of themselues good we know he may but when he doth it is always with an euill design and to the end good things may not be well don but that the manner of doing them may vitiat their goodness This Delrius in the place cited by M. r Morton says and proues by many exemples wherof the Mass is one But M. r Morton wilfully conceals and mistakes the truth of the story for Simon the Monk whom the Deuill endeavored to persuade to say Mass was neither Abbot nor Priest but only Diacon as Delrius sheweth and therfore he answered the Deuill that none ought to say Mass without the order of Priesthood and by his aduice to the contrary he was discouered to bee the Deuill though he appeared like an Angell Without doubt this was a Lutheran Deuill and perhaps the same that dissuaded Luther from the Mass because Luther learnd of him amongst other points of the reformation that lay men and euen women are Priests and may consecrat the Sacrament preach and absolue from sins Hauing sincerely related this matter of fact in Luthers own words and not concealed any thing that any of the most learned Protestants could say to interpret or excuse the same and nothing appearing wherby his instruction in protestancy by the Deuill may be denyed or justifyed I leaue it to the consideration of all wise and Religious persons whether it be policy or piety to promote a Religion whose confessed Author or Apostle is Sathan So long as the generality of a people can be made belieue that Luther did seriously and of set purpose belye himself and discredit his own reformation or that the Deuill is a sincere Interpreter of Scripture and Scripture interpreted by him is the word of God so long I say as these Nations can be made belieue so impossible things without doubt both the protestant Church and state may thriue by protestancy but how long so unlikly a persuasion will continue amongst inquisitiue though ignorant people is vncertain as also the greatness grounded thervpon It hath gained more ground in England then could be expected considering the ingenuity of the Natiues but Q. Elizabeths interest went a great way in the begining of her Reign euery Courtier and countrey gentleman expected by giuing his vote in Parliament for reuiuing the Protestant Religion wherby alone she could pretend to be legitimat her fauor and rewards out of the Church liuings and in her long continued gouernment their Children were made belieue that her Reformation was not the work of Cecil but of Christ And euer since their posterity haue bin confirmed in that opinion by false Translations of Scripture and falsifications of Councells and Fathers as shall herafter appeare It s strang so improbable a persuasion can beare such sway and beat down the Catholick truth But as the Deuill insisted most vpon discrediting the Diuine Sacrifice of the Mass in his Disputation with Luther so the Protestant Clergy striue to make that holy Mystery to be lookt vpon by their flock as a blasphemous fable and dangerous deceit We hope notwithstanding that the English Laiety will reflect upon the occasion of their mistake and consider whether it be not a grieuous sin and great folly to preferr Q. Elizabeths temporal interests which now is turned into dust before that of their souls and Whether any thing can be so vnreasonable as to giue more credit to the Deuill and to Martin Luther and his followers debauch't and dissolute Friars and Priests then to the holy Doctors and Martyrs of Christs Church euer since the Apostles in their acknowledgd writings and in general Councels who call the Mass the visible Sacrifice the true Sacrifice the dayly Sacrifice the Sacrifice according to the Order of Melchisedech the Sacrifice of the Body and Bloud of Christ the Sacrifice of the Altar the Sacrifice of the Church and the Sacrifice of the new Testament which succeded all the Sacrifices of the old Testament and that it was offered for the health of the Emperor for the sick upon the Sea and the fruits of the earth for the purging of houses infected with wicked Spirits for the sins of the liuing and dead And this is so undeniable that our learned aduersary Crastoius in his book of the Mass against Belarmin pag. 167. reprehended Origen S. Athanasius S. Ambrose S. Chrysostom S. Augustin S. Gregory the great and venerable Bede for maintaining the Mass to be a propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of the liuing and of the dead And if there can be no policy of state as things now stand in the English Monarchy to make Q. Elizabeths legitimacy and supremacy a matter or ground of Faith I am sure it cannot be Christian piety to press and preferr the reformation which she and her faction introduced for that reason of state against the Stewards before the Religion of all the ancient and learned Fathers of the Catholick Church though we had no other exception against it but that all the wit and learning of Protestants cannot make it probable in any degree that the Deuill is not the Author of Protestancy SECT III. Of the principles and propagation of Protestancy LVther after his Conference with the Deuill hauing resolued upon that Foundation of his Reformation which hee had learnt from so godly a Master endeauored to gaine as many Poets Players Painters and Printers as he could to discredit with Scoffing Ballads Pamphlets Poems and Pictures the Roman Religion which untill then had bin caled and esteemed the only Catholick and Apostolick and to divulge his nâ—w Doctrin amongst ignorant and vicious People For encouragement of the dissolute Clergy to ioyn with him he taught against the doctrin and practise of the whole Church euer since the Apostles as shall be demonstrated that Priests and professed Nuns might mary and to giue them good example he took a professed Nun for his owne wife And prevailed with this doctrin more then Iouinian the heretik For this liberty together with his principle of justification by only faith drew from sundry parts of Europe incontinent Clergymen wherof the chief were Caroâ—stadius Archdeacon of Wittemberg Iustus Ionas head of a College of Canon Regulars Oecolampadius a Monk of S. Brigits Order Zuinglius a parish Priest Martin Bucer a Dominican friar Peter Martyr a Canon Regular Bernardin Ochinus a Capuchin and some Augustin Friars of Luthers own Order Each of these hauing taken a wench were engaged in Luthers quarrel against the whole Church But their course of life and the nouelty of their doctrin being dislik't by all men that were not Libertins and not countenanced as yet by any Princes or Prelates it was thought necessary for their own preseruation and propagation of their Ghospell to make it plausible to the giddy multititude whose ignorance they knew to be as capable of incredible impressions as their nature is impatient of
since the Apostles then to take the bare word of Cranmer a man who married and vnmarried K. Henry 8. to as many women as his Majestie lik't or dislik't dissolving the holy Sacrament of Matrimony as often as the King seemed to be weary of a wife a man whose religion was nothing but his conveniency and incontinency and therfore did alter his faith as often as the tyms changed and factions prevailed and sided with every Rebel against his Prince and was so carnaly given that even in Henry 8. days when Priests were not permitted to have wives he kept a wench so constantly that he carried her about in his Visitations Let any Christian I say be judg whether this man together with Ochinus a Jew Bucer an Atheist Peter Martyr so indifferent for any doctrin that he framed his faith at Oxforâ— according to the news from London and the Parliament Diurnals Hooper Rogers and Latimer ambitious and discontented Presbiterians Bâ—le and Coverdale two lewd and runigad friars whether I say these men ought to be believed in this important point of salvation rather then the holy Fathers and Councels who as hath binâ— said hertofore cal the Mass the visible Sacrifice the true Sacrifice the dayly Sacrifice the Sacrifice according to the Order of Melchisadech the Sacrifice of the Body and Bloud of Christ the Sacrifice of the Altar the Sacrifice of the Church and the Sacrifice of the new Testament which succeeded all the Sacrifices of the old Testament Must the word of Cranmer and his fellows be a sufficient ground for prudent men to believe as an Article of Religion that the doctrin delivered as Catholick by the holy Fathers and Doctors of the Church are but fables and themselves but a company of Cheats The 32. Article was made by Cranmer and his Camerades to excuse their lewdness legitimat their bastards and make their wenches wives The second Parliament of King Edward 6. had bin so importuned by Apostata Priests and Friars who had coupled themselves with women that their petition having bin rejected by the first Parliament Edward 6. at lengh against the inclination and judgment of both houses they obtained now by meer importunity an Act to take away all positive Laws of man made against the marriage of Priests statut an 2. Edward 6. cap. 21. But then they are told in the very Act that it were not only better for Priests to live chast sole and separat from the company of women c. but that it were most to be wished that they would willingly and of themselves endeavour to keep a perpetual chastity and abstinence from the vse of women And 1400. years before that Origen Hom. 23. lib. 8. contra Celsum declared the doctrin even of the Greeck Church in these words Jt is certain the dayly Sacrifice is hindred in them who serve the necessities of mariage therfore it seemeth to me that it appertaineth only to him to offer the dayly Sacrifice who hath vowed himselfe to dayly and perpetual chastity with whomâ—agree the other Fathers S. Jerom in Apologia ad Pamachium cap. 3. desires them who like not of this doctrin not to be angry with him for telling them of it but with the holy Scriptures vvith all Bishops Priests c. vvho know they cannot offer Sacrifice if they vse the Act of mariage and said to Vigilantius c. 1. who in this point also was a Protestant and seemed to confess his owne frailty What do the Churches of the East of Egipt and of the Apostolick Sea vvho receive none but unmarried or continent Priests or if they have vviues they must cease to be Husbands And against Iovinian cap 19. 14. ad Pamachium Apol. cap. 8. Truly thou dost acknowledg that he cannot be a Bishop vvho in that state getts children if he be convicted therof he vvil not be taken for a Husband but condemned as an Adulterer But it seems out Protestant Bishops know the Scripture and the doctrin and disciplin of the primitive Church better then S. Hierom Origen and all the ancient Fathers and Councels both of the East and West Since the King 's most happy restauration they were not content to enjoy their wives and see the legitimacy of their children approved of but in the first Parliament wherin they were permitted to vote as I have bin credibly informed they atâ—empted the house of Lords should declare their spiritual peerage did communicat the same honours and privileges to their Ladys that the law doth give to Baron's wives but seing the house smile at the motion and one of the first Peers begin to rally according to his witty way vpon a subject so proper for his genius one of the Bishops not so much concerned in the suit because he was not married in the name of all the rest waved the pretention by saying there had bin a mistake in the motion Jn the two following articles they would fain prevent diversity of opinions and schisms among the Protestants of the Church of England and gain authority for the Prelats therof and reverence for their ceremonies and censures But this design is frustrated by maintaining the lawfulness of their own revolt and separation from the Church of Rome as also the Roman Catholick fallibility and fal from the true Apostolick Religion without any farther proofe or evidence of so great a fault or frailty then the fancy and privat interpretation of Scripture of some discontented and dissolute persons pretending divine inspirations and illuminations for the same and for their warant to depose their spiritual Superiours and to reform the doctrin of the whole visible Church which reformation they also introduced in so tumultuous and seditious a manner that none who considers the principles practises and circumstances of the chang can prudently commit his soule to the reformers charg or condescend to any spiritual jurisdiction and authority in their Successours For besids that they have nothing to shew for their presumption and intrusion but obscure texts of Scripture interpreted by them selves in a sense contrary to that of the whole visible ancient Church that hath bin confirmed by continual and vndeniable Miracles they can give no assurance or probability of them selves being or continuing in the right way of saluation because if all the Roman Catholick Churches did err in doctrin how can their reformations pretend not to be subject to the same mis-fortun or mistake And if the supposed frailty and fallibility of the Church of Rome be a sufficient cause to question and condemn it's authority how can the Church of England or any other Protestant congregation exact from their Sectaries greater respect and obedience then the first reformers gave to their Roman Superiours Presbiterians Independents Quakers Anabaptists c. pretend to as pure doctrin as Divine a Spirit and as much Scripture against Prelaticks as Prelaticks do against Papists and thinck there is as much reason for them to be Iudges of the truth of
every day rather loose then gain ground and the generality of these Nations can not be wrought vpon either by fair or foul means to thinck wel of that Religion or to submit their Judgments and consciences to the direction of the Bishops and Prelatick ministery The reasons are obvious to such as are not obstinat 1. The incredibility of their pretented spiritual caracter and jurisdiction 2. The incoherency of their doctrin with the fundamental principles of Protestancy Their Episcopal caracter and jurisdiction is as incredible as King Henry 8. spiritual supremacy Queen Elizabeths legitimacy and the validity and solemnity of their first Bishops consecrations They have indeed of late endeavored to excuse the latness of their Masonian Registers discovery and to cleere them from the suspitions of forgery but so faintly and fraudulently that their vindication though pen'd and published by on of the ablest Prelats of their Church hath furnished their adversaries with so many new demonstrations against their Caracter that in steed of a reply the Protestant Bishops have resolued vpon a submission to the evidence of our arguments and changed the controverted and essential part of their forms of Ordination As they endeavored of late to vindicat their Registers from forgery so they long since explained the Queens supremacy but so contrary to the known laws of the land and cleer words of their Oaths both of supremacy and Episcopal homage that neither can bear their fond interpretations and if they could the Bishops would have nothing to shew for their pretended spiritual function and jurisdiction it being manifest they cannot deduce either of them by succession from any Apostolick Church or orthodox Councel and therfor must content them-selves with what they can buy from a lay soveraign and temporal Statuts or acknowledg the truth and confess ingeniously they are but lay-men and have no lawful authority to take vpon them a spiritual function and jurisdiction seing they have no Catholick Predecessours and degenerat from the first Protestant Reformers and are ashamed to claim with Presbiterians and Fanaticks the extravagancy of a privat spirit and extraordinary vocation The incoherency also of the Prelatick doctrin maks these nations averse from the Prelatick Church and Clergy â—n the 39. Articles of Religion they declare with Luther and the first Reformers that no visible sign or ceremony and by consequence no such thing as imposition of Episcopal hands was instituted by Christ or is the necessary matter of a Priest's and Bishop's ordination and yet now of late that visible sign and ceremony is held by them-selves to be so essential that without the same no caracter of Priesthood or Episcopacy is thought to be given to the party ordained and therfor they reordain such Presbiterian Ministers as did neglect or contemn imposition of Episcopal hands 2. They maintain in the same 39. Articles that the Roman Catholick Church hath falen into damnable errors and acknowledg that only such a fal can justify the Protestants separation or excuse them from sin and schism And yet when they are pressed with a consequence that necessarily follows out of this supposition to wit that if the Roman and visible Church had so erred Protestants can have no Christian faith nor certainty of the Scriptur's being God's word or of the Trinity and Incarnation c. which they received and retain vpon the sole Testimony of the Roman Catholick Church having in their own 39. Articles declared the Greeck Church Heretical for the doctrin of the Holy Ghost's procession and therfor it 's testimony even in other Articles is invalid and it's concurrence in those other Articles with the Roman Church is vnsignificant And yet they again contradict them-selves and confess that the Roman Catholick Church is infalible in all articles necessary for saluation 3. The same inconstancy and incoherency they shew in denying that doctrinal Traditions are the word of God or that Tradition it self is a sufficient ground of Divine belief and yet when they are demanded to shew a proof by cleer Scripture of the distinction between single Priesthood and Episcopacy v.g. then they maintain that traditional doctrin is God's word and the testimony of the Roman visisible Church a sufficient evidence therof Their wavering and inconsequent way of proceeding doth manifest to the world that as wel in this as in other particulars of Christian Religion nay even in declaring which are necessary or not necessary points of faith the Prelatick Clergy hath a greater regard to their own conveniency then to God's veracity and to the revenues of â—he Church then to the saluation of souls Otherwise why should they take our Roman Catholick word for Episcopacy and not for the Pop's supremacy for the letter but not for the sence of Scripture for not rebaptising or for receiving relaps'd penitents more then for Purgatory or Transubstantiation or for keeping Sonday and not praying to Saints c. Seeing all these doctrins are equaly proposed to them as Catholick truths by the sole credible testimony and tradition of our one and the same Roman Catholick Church the testimony of the Greeck and all other Churches as hath bin sayd being rendred invalid by the hereticks wherwhith Protestants confess they are infected Some are of opinion that if the more modern Prelaticks had not forsaken their ould way of being ordained Bishops by the Queens letters patents or by some such publick testimony and superficial ceremony of their Congregations without troubling them-selves with the doctrin of the inward caracter given by imposition of Episcopal hands so contrary to the principles of the reformation a broad and to the 23. and 25. of their own 39. Articles at home they had not bin so hard put to it by their Presbiterian Brethrens arguments who stick to the Tenets and Rules of pure and primitive Protestancy detesting those formalities and dregs of Popery which Prelaticks of late have so much affected in ordaining of Ministers Mr. Hooker Dr. Couel and some other Prelaticks in their writings towards the end of Queen Elizabeths reign began to inculcat the doctrin of making Ordination a spiritual caracter imprinted in the soul by imposition of Episcopal hands and not a bare formality of the secular Magistrat's election by some outward ceremony or letters patents as all English Protestants had believed and practised vntil Hooker and Couel broacht this among their other Popish novelties and therfor were publickly blamed and complained of by Prelatick Writers and particularly by Dr. Willet in his worck vpon the 112. Psalm printed 1603. and dedicated to the Queens Majesty page 91. he saith From this fountain have sprung forth these and such other whirlpoints and bubles of new doctrine and amongst others he sets down as a novelty in the Church of England this That there is in ordination given an indelible caracter and then addeth Thus have some bin bould to teach and write who as some Schismaticks the Puritans have disturbed the peace of the Church one
were censured in these four first Councels with the Protestant exceptions and objections against the Councel of Trent especily if they wil pervse but the very first leaves of Cardinal Palavicino his confutation of Fr. Paulo Suarez or Servita his history wherin they wil find above tree hundred lyes and calumnies of that Apostata Friar in matter of fact so notorious and vndeniable that our English Prelatick Clergy wil or ought to be ashamed of the Preface they have set before it and of abusing King Iames and his Subjects with such impostures by their extolling so improbable and infamous a Libel Seing therfore the supposed change and fall from primitive Protestancy to popery hath bin from presumption and pride of a privat and censorious judgment against the publick testimony and sense of the visible Church to submission and humility of an obsequious and prudent belief from notorious rebellion against spiritual and temporal superiours to religious and dutifull obedience from gluttony to abstinence from incontinency to chastity from sincerity to flattery from Cloysters and austerity to Sacrilege and liberty from a pretence of faith alone to the Christianity of faith and good works c. It must be concluded that either Protestancy was not the pure and primitive Religion or if it was that the change therof into popery hath bin for the better and by consequence that the first Papist introduced into the world a more sacred and sincere profession then had bin taught by Christ and his Apostles But this being impious and as impossible as it is that men abandoned by God should exceed God's servants in piety or that they should establish and practice more Godly principles and more zealously promote virtue when they fel from God and the way of salvation then when they were in the same it must be granted that Popery is the pure and primitive Religion taught by Christ and his Apostles and that only weak brains or such tender plants as in their infancy received strong impressions of the possibility and existence of an invisible Christian Church vpon earth can fancy an insensible change of it's doctrin profession and ceremonies into so remarkable and different a worship of God as Popery is compared with Protestancy Congregations of Protestants living in the same Provinces Citties and Parishes with Papists and dissenting from them in the outward and oral profession of faith if they did not profess protestancy which they suppose was Christ's faith with the mouth they were dissemblers and could be no part of the true Church in the Canon and sense of Scripture in the administration and number of Sacraments in Rites and Ceremonies in the substance and language of the Liturgy in adoring the B. Sacrament in worshiping of Images in receiving of the Communion c. such Protestant Congregations I say to be invisible and never heard of in 1500. or 1000. years nor observed nor persecuted by the prevailing Papists among whom they lived is not a thing possible or intelligible much less prudently credible We see by experience in these Kingdoms how impossible it is for a Recusant not to be discerned and discovered Papists are known though not convicted Many of them through the mildn'ss and prudence of the government escape the penalties and rigour of the Law but none the observation of their neighbours and very few the menaces of both ecclesiastical and civil Courts The invisibility therfor of the Protestant Church and the insensibility of it's change to Popery is a fitter subject to ground ther-vpon a ridiculous Romance then a religious reformation Perhaps it wil be sayd that Protestants were vntil the last age among the ten tribes as the Jews of whose appearance ther hath bin of late so much talk but we heare not of Protestants among them neither did Luther Zuinglius Cranmer or Calvin pretend that they came from those Israelits or from Terra australis incognita they were born and bred neerer and they brag'd that them-selves were the first Reformers Now to their Scripture SECT III. Protestants mistaken in the Canon of Scripture maintained by the Church of England and by Doctor Cousins Bishop of Duresme OUr second Argument against the probability or possibility of Protestancy being the word or work of God is taken from the Protestants mistake of Scripture and their altering of the Canon And wheras our learned Adversaries do agree with vs in saying that neither the Scripture it-self nor the privat spirit can determin which parts of Scripture are Canonical or holy but confess that this controversy must be decided by the Testimony and authority of the Church and that above 300. years after the Apostles some of their writings were not held by all orthodox Catholicks to be Canonical which now are comprehended in the Canon and admitted as the word of God by many Protestants it foloweth 1. That the Canon of Scripture was not so sufficiently proposed to the whole Church for the three first ages as to make the denial or doubt therof Heresy 2. That the 6. Article of the Prelatick-Religion of England which admitted only such books of Scripture for Canonical of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church is false and the ground therof fallible For as all men vers'd in the Ecclesiastical History wel know and learned Bilson the Protestant Bishop of Winchester doth acknowledg in his survey of Christ's sufferings c. printed 1604. pag. 664. The Scripturs were not fully received in all places no not in Eusebius his time which was above 300. years after the Apostles he saith the Epistles of Iames Iude the second of Peter the second and third of John are contradicted as not written by the Apostles the Epistle to the Hebrews was for a while contradicted c. The Churches of Siria did not receive the second Epistle of Peter nor the second and third of Iohn nor the Epistle of Iude nor the Apocalips c. The like might be sayd for the Churches of Arabia Wil you hence inferr that these parts of Scripture were not Apostolick or that we need not receive them now because they were formerly doubted of This Argument of Bishop Bilson we apply to the Machabees and to the other books declared by the Church of England to be Apocryphal Doctor Cousins writ a book caled a Scholastical History of the Canon of Scripture for which him-self and his friends think he wel deserved the Bishoprick of Duresme that he now enjoys in defence of the Prelatick Protestant Canon and of the 6. article of the Church of England And because he tels us in his Preface that men of knowledg pressed him to publish it as a piece that would give more ample satisfaction and cleere the passages in antiquity from the objections that some late Authors in the Roman side bring against Protestants then those other writings of home or foreign Divines have don that are extant in this kind I thought fit to give Protestants a proof of the soundness of
then by the Churches which they planted Protestants contemn all these rules and because there was never any Church in the world which professed the same faith that any of their Reformers preach't or them-selves now profess they are necessitated to except against all Testimonies of ancient Fathers and Councels and against the continual and common consent of all Christian Churches concerning the proper sense of Scripture delivered to the primitive Christians and will be judg'd therin by none but by them-selves and by their own fancy of Scripture They all follow this rule of Luther the first Reformer which he layd as the foundation of all Protestant Reformations The Governours of Churches and Pastors of Christ's sheep have indeed power to teach but the sheep must judg whether they propose the voice of Christ or of strangers c. Whefore let Popes Bishops Councels c. decree order enact what they please we shall not hinder but we who are Christ's sheep and heare his voice will judg whether they propose things true and agreable to the voice of our Pastor and they must yeeld to us and subscribe and obey to our sentence and censure Luther tom 2. Wittemb cap. de Sacra Script fol. 375. And because B. p Jewel in his challenge thinking that none durst answer or accept it appeal'd to the holy Fathers of the first ages and was thervpon immediatly convicted of hypocrisy and impostures he was grievously reprehended by his own Prelatick brethren as injurious to him-self and as one who had given the Papists too large a scope and after a manner spoyl'd him-self and the Church see Doctor Humfrey in Iewel 's life edit Londin pag. 212. and the same also in Fulk's retentive against Bristow pag. 55. Ever since that foile the Prelatiks have bin more wary and one of their greatest Champions Bilson Bishop of Winchester in his true difference between Christian subjection c. part 2. pag. 353. saith in plain termes The people must be discerners and Judges of that which is taught How contrary to Luther's Reformation was the doctrin of the primitive Church and Fathers we may judg by these words of Gregory Nazianzen in the oration wherin he excuseth him-self for having bin long absent from his flock and not exercised his function Vos Oves nolite pascere Pastores neque super terminos eorum elevamini satis enim est vobis si recte pascimini nolite judicare iudices nec legem feratis legis-latoribus c. Now let any man who hath common sense be Judg whether it be in the least degree probable that not only the illiterat Protestants but even their greatest Doctors and their first Apostles Luther Calvin Cranmer c. should know better the true sense of Scripture that was delivered to the first age then they to whom those of that age told what they were taught by Christ and his Apostles or then the second which told the third what they were taught by the first and so from generation vntill Luther and Calvins tyme. That every age gave this favorable testimony to the subsequent of the sense of Scripture which it delivered can not be denyed otherwise none would have received their sense of Scripture or their doctrin as Divine whether they were sincere in delivering their testimony is the question And because none questions it but Luther Calvin c. and their followers vntill we see be ter evidence and a more cleere cause of their reformed principle and knowledg of the visible Churches apostasy then their privat spirit or Luther and Calvins new and extravagant interpretations of Scripture we dare not condemn the whole ancient visible and Catholick Church nor concurr with it's declared enemies in so rash a judgment as to affirm that the Church betrayed it's trust and posterity which rash judgment is the ground of the Protestant Reformations S. Athanasius in lib. de Decretis Nicen. Synod contra Euseb. Ecce nos quidem ex Patribus ad Patres per manus traditam fuisse hanc sententiam demonstravimus vos autem O novi Judaei Caiphae filii quos tandem nominum vestrorum potestis ostendere progenitores S. Gregor Nazian ep 2. ab Chelid Absconditam post Christum sapientiam nobis annunciant rem lacrymis dignam si enim triginta his annis fides originem habuit cum quadringenti now 1600. fere anni ab eo tempore fluxerint quo Christus palam conspectus est inane tanto tempore fuit Evangelium inanis etiam fides nostra Martyres quidem frustra martyrium subierunt frustra etiam tales tantique Antistites populo praefuerunt St. August de vtilit credendi cap. 14. saith to the Manichees what we may to the Protestant Reformers Vos autem tam pauci estis tam turbulenti tam novi nemini dubium est quoniam nihil dignum autoritate proferetis Seing therfore the Roman Catholick sense of Scripture hath for the space of 1600. years bin delivered by the visible Christian Church from age to age as the true meaning of God's word and that the Protestant sense of Scripture was never accepted of by any but condemned Hereticks and even in this last age was delivered but by a few turbulent and disagreeing persons and obnoxious â—o many exceptions much diminishing the credibility of their testimony it is at least 16. to one not only in the number but also in the quality of the witnesses that the Roman Catholick sense of Scripture is true and the Protestant false and by consequence the Protestants have no Scripture to maintain the doctrin wherin they differ from Roman Catholicks SECT VI. Protestants mistaken in the Ministery and Mission of their Clergy in the Miracles of their Church in the holiness and honesty of their Reformers ALbeit God was able to call justify and confirm the elect without any mediat means yet as Protestants confess he was pleased not to accomplish the same otherwise then in and by the ministery of his Church Therfore S. Paul tells vs Ephes. 4.11.12.13 that Christ hath placed in his Church Pastors and Doctors to continue to the consummation of Saints till we all meet in the vnity of faith The chief of these Pastors and Doctors are the Bishops vnto whom as the same Apostle testifieth it belongeth to govern God's Church Act. c. 2â— These Bishops must succeed not only in Doctrin but in caracter to the Apostles which caracter is the ordinary ministery or vocation discern'd and received by imposition of Episcopal hands 1. Tim. 4. But because Luther was only a single Priest and Calvin as most say not so much as a Priest and that both despaired of Episcopal and Priestly succession they resolv'd to remedy that want by saying that the caracter of Priests and Bishops was not distinct from that of Baptism and wheras Luther's ordination or ordinary vocation in the Roman Catholick Church was to preach the doctrin which he had receiv'd from that Church and not his new
diximus tali lege vt quae hic damus anno aetatis nostrae quadragesimo secundo propendeant eis quae quadragesimo dederamus quando ut diximus tempori potius scripsimus quam rei sic jubente Domino vt tali ratione aedificemus ne inter initia Canes Porci nos rumpant He had no great opinion of the Apostles writings as is proved by his altering the very Text of Scripture contrary to all copies both Greek and Latin and by his saying that S. Paul did not attribut so much to his own Epistles as to think that all therin contained was sacred for that were to impute immoderat arrogancy to the Apostle tom 2. Elench contra Catabaptistas fol. 10. And because the other Cantons of the Suitzers would not accept of this Reformation he sticking to the principles therof endeavored by force of arms to bring them vnder subjection and to his own Ghospel and in this attempt Zuinglius was killed sealing with his bloud what he had writ tom 1. in explanat art 42. fol. 84. that Kings and Magistrats may be deposed when they resist the Ghospel that is any privat Protestant interpretation of Scripture As for the Reformers of the Protestant Church of England they were King Henry 8. Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterbury Peter Martyr Hooper Rogers Ridley Bucer Okin The Revivers were Jewel Parker Horn c. of whose lives and conversations we have sayd somthing and enough to prove they were not fit men to reform christian Religion their doctrin they borrowed from Luther and Zwinglius the supremacy only excepted which King Henry 8. invented and therfore Bishop Iewel the chief maintainer both of the Protestant doctrin and Prelatick caracter of the Church of England in his defence of the Apology edit 1571. pag. 426. as also in the Apology part 4. c. 4. thought it necessary for the credit of the 39. Articles of the English Religion which had bin compiled out of Luther and Zwinglius writings to commend those two Pillars of Protestancy as most excellent men even sent by God to give light to the whole world in the midst of darkness when the truth was vnknown and vnheard of As for B. p Iewel him-self we remit the reader to Doctor Hardings Confutation of the Apology wherin he may cleerly discern the false lustre of this counterfeit Jewel and the value which men ought to set vpon this pretious stone layd for a foundation of the Prelatick Church and vpon the rotten stuff which he and his Successours have sould for Divine truth to English Protestants ever since he vndertook to maintaine their cause for as Doctor Heylin ingeniously acknowledgeth in his Ecclesia restaurata all the learned English Protestant Writers have borrowed from B. p Jewel what they have sayd in defense of the Protestant Religion and that is one reason why their works are so full of manifest vntruths and them-selves so frequently convicted of gross mistakes they rely too much vpon this reviver of their faith or at least would make the world believe that he may be relyed vpon in matters of faith But because Doctor Heylin makes it his busines to persuade the world that Ievel then did make good the caracter and ordinary vocation of the Church of England against Harding and that Doctor Bramhall late Protestant Primat of Ireland triumph'd over the supposed Jesuits who renewed Harding's quarrel I judged it necessary to cleer both these mistaks in few words As for Bishop Iewel we have sayd in the 1. part sect 7. of this Treatise how easily he might have stop't Harding's mouth by only naming the Bishop who consecrated Parker and his Camerades for Harding vsed no other Argument against the nullity of the English Protestant Clergy but this A Bishop must be ordained by an other Bishop but Parker and his Camerades were not ordained Bishops by any other Bishop Ergo. His proof that they were not ordain'd by any Bishop was this name the Bishop that ordained them name the place where they were consecrated This was a demand soon satisfied if ever Parker or his fellows had bin ordained Bishops especially with so much ceremony and solemnity as the new records of Lambeth report that matter Yet Jewel could never name Parker's and the first Protestant Bishops Consecrators he named indeed Parker for his own Consecrator but being press'd by Harding to name Parkers insteed of answering Harding's question whervpon depended the whole controversy the credit of his Clergy and the satisfaction of the Reader he maks an impertinent digression and long discours of the obligation which some pretended to have bin in ancient times of consulting the Bishop of Rome before they proceeded to the election and consecration of Bishops but never returned to the point of naming the first Protestant Bishop's Consecrator whom he would have named to Harding if ever they had bin consecrated And this is one part of the great victory which Doctor Heylin so much brags of The other part concerns Bramhall and the supposed Iesuits The true relation wherof is as followeth After that his Majesty and the Royal Family had bin driven out of England and France by the late vsurped powers and all Christian Princes thought it their conveniency to court the Rebells and not entertain in their Dominions the Person of our King much less embrace his quarrell it happen'd on day at Bruges that Doctor Crouder Chaplain to his Royal Highness the Duke of York in his Master's Chamber and presence without any provocation or occasion given by any of the Roman profession vtter'd very intemperat words against Doctor Goff Almoner to the Queen Mother for having taken orders in the Church of Rome after that he had received them in the Church of England To which a Catholick Gentleman answered he had don no more then what all other Protestant Ministers who became Roman Priests had continually practised and as he believed vpon good grounds Whervpon the Doctor notwithstanding the King was come to his Brother's chamber reassum'd his Argument and continued to dispute with such vehemency that being caled to read morning prayers he mistook the time of the day and in the morning read evening prayers to the congregation The cause of his mistake being known and many believing that his excess of choler argu'd a weakness in his cause Doctor Bramhall late Primat of Ireland Writ a Treatise in vindication of the English Clergys caracter which is the book so much applauded by the Prelaticks and by Doctor Heylin as vnanswerable wheras it was sudainly and so substantially answered that Primat Bramhall never durst reply notwithstanding the general concern of his Clergy and his own particular engagement and the Church of England perceiving the evidence of our arguments against the validity of their forms of ordination thought their best answer was to confess the force of our reasons and correct the errors of their Bishops by changing the forms they had composed of Priesthood and Episcopacy
not from the son to be heresy though now too late they would fain moderat the censure as also be reconciled to all Sects of Protestants in Europe 2. At the same time they endeavour to make this league offensive and defensive against the Roman Catholick Church their chief writers profess there is no cause to quarell with that Church because it is also a Christian Congregation and differs from Protestants only in things indifferent among which they place even the Worship of Images the Sacrifice of the Mass the communion under one kind the Pop's supremacy c. Wheâ—ce it must needs follow that their Protestant separation from the Roman Church can not be justifyed as confessedly not having sufficient ground to break the communion of the Church vpon the score of doctrin acknowledged by them-selves to be lawful and therfore their Protestant Reformations must be concluded schismatical This their Prelatick moderation towards our Roman Catholick doctrin is the effect of a necessary compliance with our Adversaries condemned hereticks not of any Christian charity that they bear to our principles or persons as appeareth by their quite contrary expressions in other occasions and by the severity of their statutes against Priests and Papists They can hardly excuse the errors of Arrians Nestorians c. And yet accuse vs of heresy nor can they maintain the Greek worshipping of Images to be lawfull and yet condemn the same in vs as idolatry But that which they most press against the Roman Catholick Church and wherin all sectaries dissenting from it are concerned to ioyn with Protestants is that we say ourselves are the sole Catholicks and the Pope and general Councels supreme Judges of hereticks Rather then admit our Church to be the Catholick they cantonize God's Church into dissenting congregations and canonize for Orthodox all sects of hereticks though they have no subordination connexion or communication among themselves much less that care of the common good that is among the Suitzers whose Commonwealth they would fain make a patern of Christ's Church To this end they sent their Agents to Ieremias Patriarch of Constantinople and in their printed books make honorable mention of Nestorius Dioscorus Eutiches and other hereticks brood and branches that are dispers'd in Egypt Ethiopia and East Jndies as if they had bin their Brethren wheras they do not know their Tenets and brag of their numbers in comparison wherof they say the Romanists are but few and at the best but a part of the vniversal Church and if a part they ought not to judg of the whole if they do their sentence must be slighted as invalid and partiall And though the Schismaticks and Hereticks of the Greek Church whom the Protestants so much courted have by a particular definitive sentence of Iâ—â—â—mias their Patriarch disown'd the doctrin and refused the communion of all Protestants yet are the so deserted and despised reformed Churches compell'd to maintain the indifferency of the eastern heresies even of those which the Greeks them-selves twelue times recanted having bin so many times reconciled to the Church of Rome though now again revolted and returned to some of their former errors but not without a visible marke of God's indignation and justice Protestants therfore are content to excuse the errors of the Greeks and of all other Christians though Hereticks hoping therby to obtain for them-selves the name of Catholiks and are so kind as not to exclude any that professeth Christ even after the Arrian manner from their Protestant communion not doubting but that for a return of civility them-selves will by virtue of that general appellation of Christians be countenanced by the enemies of the Church of Rome and protected from it's severity But the Greek Patriarch smelt their design and though a Rebell against the sea of Rome yet he condemned the Protestant doctrin and contemned their flattery giving them to vnderstand that the truth of Religion is never annexed to many dissenting Churches and that their agrement in Protestant fundamentalls can not be an argument of Catholick vnity or vniversality And to be rid of future importunities condemned their opinions as heresies declaring how different they are from those of the Greek Church as appeareth by his Sententia definitiva Jeremiae Patriarchae Constantinopolotani sententia definititiva de doctrina Religione Wittembergensium Theologorum edit an 1586. in this Book the Greeks detest the Protestant Religion wherof see further Hospinian in Histor. Sacram. part 2. and Responsio Basilii Magni Ducis Muscoviae c. an 1570. it appeareth by a Treatise set forth even by the Protestant Divines of Wittemberg intituled Acta Theologorum Wittembergensium Ieremiae Patriarchae Constantinop de Augustana Confessione c. That the Greek Church yet to this day professeth and teacheth invocation of Saints and Angells pag. 55. 102.128 Reliques pag. 244. 368. worshipping of Images pag. 243.244.247 251. Transsubstantiation pag. 86.96.100.240.318 Sacrifice pag. 102 104 The signifying ceremonies of the Mass pag. 97.99.100 Auricular Confession in praefat in lib. pag. 87 130. Confirmation with Chrisme pag. 78.238 extreme Vnction pag. 242.326 All the seaven Sacraments pag. 77.242 prayer for the dead pag. 93.102.109 Sacrifice for the dead pag. 95.104 Monachisme pag. 132.257 That Priests may not marry after orders taken pag. 129. See Sir Edward Sands also in his relation c. On the last leaf but five where he confirms all we have related here of the Greeks concurrence in Religion with the Roman Church As for the Protestant Doctors and Prelats exceptions against the Roman Church and Councells not being Catholick or Universall they can be of no force because their own Logicians may cleer the mistake â—y putting them in mind of the definition of Catholick or Universal which is vnum in multis one in many for â—nâ—â—â—rsality requireth two and but two conditions vnity or ideâ—â—ity of form and multitude of Subjects That a Church therfore be Universal or Catholick it is necessary and sufficient there be an vnity or identity of form which is faith and multitude of subjects which are the Professors of that faith Whether the subject of the form which is called universall be more or less so they be many is not material as to the nature and denomination of Universal or Catholick though there were but 200. men living homo say Logicians would be as much Universal as now it is with so many millions of men In like manâ—er we say though there were but 200. men in the world professing the true faith that faith would be still Universal or Catholick because it would be still one and the same in many and 200. are as properly many though not so many as 200. millions We grant that it hath bin prophecied the multitude of believers should be very numerous and spread over the whole world and accordingly it hath bin fulfill'd and now Roman Catholicks are every where multiplied yet there hath bin a time when the
absolutly necessary for salvation and not to believe it in a matter not absolutly necessary when equaly proposed by the same testimony and authority is as much as to say that God can speak by his Church litle vntruths but not great vntruths or that he may permit his veracity to be violated or vitiated in litle but not in great matters as if forsooth the authority and infallibility of the Church were to be measured by the matter it proposeth and not by the manner and supernatural marks of the proposal and by the dignity of the speaker More over their pretence of the Churches fallibility in not Fundamental articles hath no solid ground for the Protestant Church is either fallible or infallible in saying so and in it's doctrin of Fundamentals if fallible non can prudently rely thervpon either in this or in any other matters of faith if infallible then the Protestant distinction of Fundamentals must be a fundamental article of faith because they admit not any Church to be infallible in articles that are not fundamental And yet the same Protestants say the Roman Catholick Church is also infallible in fundamentals but the Roman Catholick and Protestant Church contradict on the other in this doctrin of fundamentals Therfore one of both must erre and that on must be the Protestant because it maintains that two Churches teaching contradictory doctrins may both be infallible therin Add hervnto that if the Roman Catholick Church be infallible in fundamentals or in all articles necessary for salvation how can Protestants excuse their reformation and separation from the guilt of a grievous sin and schism so vncharitable a breach is not justifiable by less then damnable or dangerous doctrin in the Church that is forsaken And what damnable doctrin or danger of damnation could or can be in adhearing to the Roman Church it being confessedly infallible in Fundamentals that is in all things necessary for salvation If therfore God's veracity is denyed even according to the Protestants doctrin and distinction by saying that the Church is fallible in fundamentals it can be for no other reason but because the fundamental articles are sufficiently proposed by the Church as revealed by God and seing the not fundamental articles are proposed by the same Church and testimony and by consequence as sufficiently as the fundamental Protestants must grant that God's veracity is no less denyed by maintaining the fallibility of the Church in not Fundamentals then in Fundamentals So that they must either acknowledg the infallibility of the Church in all articles and matters of faith whether absolutly necessary or not necessary for salvation or deny God's veracity and the foundation of all Christian belief SECT XIII The same further demonstrated and proved that neither the Protestant faith nor the faith lately asserted in a book called sure footing in Christianity is Christian belief where also is treated of the resolution of faith NOt the maâ—â—er believed but the Motive and manner of believing makes a belief Christian There may be an historical or imaginary faith of Christ as well as Divine and real that is men may believe the mysteries of Christianity 〈◊〉 they believe the roman history and fancy that such a belief is not human but Divine This we maintain to be the Protestants case and faith which is not grounded vpon Divine revelation but vpon human persuasion and vpon an imaginary evidence of God's revelation They assent not to the mystery of the Trinity or to any other because God revealed it but because they think it vndeniably evident either by the publick confession of all Christians or by the privat suggestion of their own spirit or by the principles of natural reason or by their pretended cleerness of Scripture that God revealed such mysteries as they are pleased to make choyce of for the Articles or fundamentals of their Reformations And therfore according to the diversity of the evidences wherupon they build their faith the Protestant sects are framed and divided into Prelaticks whose Motive and evidence is the concurrence of all Christians in their fundamentals of Christianity and into Fanatiks amongst whom we include Presbiterians c. who rely vpon the evidence of their spirit and the cleerness of Scripture and into Socinians who make evident reason the rule of their Religion c. That these Protestant persuasions are not grounded vpon Divine revelation or vpon God's Authority and veracity we proove because it is impossible to make an authority the motive of our belief vnless we believe all things that are equaly proposed and delivered to vs as depending of and asserted by that authority St. Austin says non can believe that the Ghospel of St. Matthew is the word of God vnless he doth likewise believe that the Acts of the Apostles is the word of God because they are both delivered as God's word by the same authority The same testimony and the same visible Church which delivered to the first Protestants the mystery of the Trinity and Incarnation as revealed by God delivered also to them Transubstantiation Purgatory c. as revealed by God and they or their followers can not pretend to have any other testimony for the engagement of God's veracity in certifying them of the truth and revelation of the articles they retain but the same testimony which delivered to them the articles they reject Therfore the reality and Divinity of the revelation being equally testified and applicable by on and the same testimony to both articles aswell to the retained as to the rejected it is impossible that Protestants can believe those they retaâ—â—â— moved thervnto by God's veracity or for being revealed by God seing the same veracity and revelation is equally and as cleerly applyed by the testimony of the Catholick visible Church to the other articles which they reject as not revealed If you ask a learned Protestant why doth he believe the mystery of the Trinity or Incarnation He will answer as all Hereticks ever did aswell as Catholicks because God revealed it But if you inquire further why doth he believe that God revealed it He will tell you because it is manifest in SVBSECT I. I Am right sorry to number among Protestants and Manichees who hould also this error of believing nothing which they did not fancy to be self evident the Author of a book called sure footing in Christianity who will needs have it self evident by virtue forsooth of tradition that God revealed all the points of our Roman Catholick doctrin Jt's pitty he stumbled so irrecoverably at his very first step pretending to see so cleerly and tread so surely vpon a plain ground had he bin as wary in the choice of his principles as he is witty in deducing his conclusions I should have followed him as an excellent Guide but he striving to raise Christian faith vnto a greater height of evidence then is consistent with it's nature and with our merit and liberty or convenient for the Government of God's
Church he hath fallen into the Fundamental error and foundation of Protestancy but yet with this difference that albeit he agreeth with Protestants in making cleer evidence of the revelation the ground or rule of faith and by consequence in destroying all Christian belief yet he takes a contrary way from them Protestants by reducing their evidence to very few points reject most of the articles of the Roman Catholick Church as incredible but the Author of the sure footing by amplifying and applying his evidence to every article of our faith makes them all more then credible that is self evident He and Protestants agree in the rule but differr in the application Neither of them will believe any thing but what they fancy evident but on party fancies all is evident the other fancies litle or nothing is evident Jf they vnderstand on another they may soon come to an accord and the sequell of their principle will be to take away all Christian belief for Christian belief must of necessity involue some obscurity in that Act or at least formality wherby we assent vnto the mystery believed Otherwise if the essence or nature of Christian faith were consistent with cleer evidence and with the want of all obscurity why may it not be sayd that the blessed have faith in heaven nay why may it not be sayd that the second person of the Trinity hath â—aith ab 〈◊〉 if it be sufficient for faith that on assentâ— to truth for 〈…〉 and speaking of an other though 〈◊〉 evidently 〈…〉 and sees also that the other speaks The sure footing therfore doth faile and 〈…〉 â—eason of the Author 's confounding the evidence of our obligation to belieue the articles proposed by the Church with the evidenâ—e of God's revealing them by the 〈◊〉 proposal of the Church The testimony of the Church confirmed by so many supernatural signes makes it cleerly euident to vs that we are bound to believe God revealed all the doctrin delivered as his by the tradition and testimony of the Church but the tradition or signes of the Church do not make 〈◊〉 or self 〈◊〉 that God hath de facto revealed 〈…〉 which the Church proposeth as Divine It is moraly evident that God revealed it but not Metaphysicaly evident according to Schoolmens expression This moral evidence of God's revealing what the Church proposeth induceth a clâ—â—r and evident obligation vpon the will and soul of man to adheare as vnalterably to the doctrin of the Church as if we had metaphysical or cleer evidence that God revealed the same and the motiue of our faith and of this adhesion is God's veracity because it is manifest by the very light of Nature that we ought to believe God would not permit such a miraculous and moral evidence of his own revealing or speaking the mysteries of christianity by the mouth of our Church vnless he did realy speake by the same Church For want of this doctrin and distinction many vnderstand not how a man can possibly or at least prudently adheare or assent to an object with greater assurance then he sees cleer reason for If by cleer reason for an assent of Divine faith be meant that the truth of the mystery assented vnto must of necessity be cleer to the Assenter either in it self or in it's necessaire connection with the Revelation it is a gross mystake for that the difference between an assent grounded vpon cleer evidence of the truth or of reason and an assent grounded vpon Divine authority is that the first is a cleer intellectual sight of the truth itself the second is not so but a cleer sight of our own obligation of assenting to the truth revealed or related because wee see cleer and convincing signs of the sincerity and veracity of the Author or relator Now our obligation of believing God to be the Author of the doctrin of the Church being evident to ourselves we are bound to assent to the same Doctrin according to the evidence of our obligation that is with greather assurance then appearance of the truth The evidence of our obligation to assent is a sufficient ground for our assurance of the truth assented vnto Wherfore albeit some Catholick Divines have pretended to maintain in their schoole disputations that God by the infinitness of his supernatural power may concurr to an Act of faith though the existence of the revelation itself were evident to the believer yet besides that most of them speak irresolutly and incoherently in that point they all grant that our Christian faith must always involve obscurity in it's assent and that that faith which would have evidence both of the existence of the revelation and of the revealers veracity would be an other kind of faith much differring from our Christian and Catholick Besides we ought to consider that it is one thing to dispute in schooles of what God may do and an other thing to believe in the Church what he hath don In the schooles they dispute even of impossibilities because they make it their business to exercise witt in speculations but in the Catholick Church our chief business consists in believing and practising The reason why Faith doth require a mixture of obscurity or want of cleer evidence is because to believe is to trust him whom you believe for the truth signified by his words and if you did see the truth in it self or know that it cannot be separated from the words spoken you can no more trust the speaker for the truth so connected with his words then trust him for the money you know to be contained in a purse which he delivers vnto your hands for though you do not see the money you see the purse wherin you have cleer evidence the money is contained To believe therfore is to take on 's word for the truth as you do his bond or bill for money for which you have no other security but his worth and veracity and the greater on s worth and veracity is the more you ought to rely vpon it and doubt the less of his performance and therfore if you require any greater assurance or evidence of the truth then his supposed inclination to the same or his veracity you do him a great injury and resolve not to trust or believe him Wherfore God's worth veracity or inclination to truth being infinit we ought not to exact a cleer sight of the truth it self nor of any things evidently connected therwith if we do we neither trust nor believe him his inclination therfore to truth being infinit we ought not to retain the least suspition or feare of being deceived either by himself or by the Church whervnto he gives the charge and signes of declaring and proposing his word to vs because he who is infinitly inclined to speak truth is inclined to do it not only when himself speaks but every way that truth can be spoken or by every person and Organ that may be prudently taken to speak by his
would follow the greater the authority is the more slow we ought to be in submitting therunto or which is the same the more inclined God is to truth and the more powerfull he is to practise the same and to keep the Church stedy to truth the more slow we ought to be in believing the Church or God's known Ministers and Messengers SECT XIV Reasons for liberty of Conscience and how much both Piety and Policy is mistaken in making Prelatick Protestancy the Religion of the state by continuing and pressing the sanguinary and penal statutes against the Roman Catholick faith and the Act of vniformity against sectaries THere is not any thing more damnable to soules or more dangerous to states then to make the laws of the land the rule of faith and temporal statuts the ground of spiritual jurisdiction It is endeed Christian piety to fence and favour Religion with Imperial edicts and Royal Decrees and therfore it was prophecied of the Church Kings shall be thy nursing Fathers and Queens thy Mothers but to found the belief of eternal verities and of Christian Religion vpon temporal statuts and to frame the doctrin of the Church and the Caracter of the Clergy according to Acts of Parliament and to the interest of the Prince is neither piety nor policy in lawfull and vndoubted Soveraigns What Queen Elizabeth did to salue the sore of her illegitimacy was as great a prejudice and ought as litle be made a president to the royall family of the Stewards as Oliver Cromwel's Tyrany the laws and Religion of both equaly tending to it's total ruin and exclusion from the Crown with this only difference that Queen Elizabeth destroy'd the Stewards by reforming the Old Religion whervpon their right was grounded but Cromwell destroy'd them by reforming the New Religion whervnto they had conformed and wherby they endeavored to setle their Throne And indeed Souveraigns can expect no greater security or better success then the Royal family of the Stewards hath had whilst the Religion which their Subjects profess hath no other certainty or setlement but what is received from an arbitrary interpretation of Scripture confirmed by temporal statuts That the Protestant prelatick Religion hath no other rule but this and the laws of the Lands is manifest by so many changes of it's articles liturgy caracter and Translations of Scripture by publick and Parliamentory authority That it hath no certainty from it's own principleâ— is manifest by the acknowledged fallibility of that Church and by the liberty of interpreting God's word and by the prerogative of judging controversies of faith which the Tenets of all the Reformations and example of the first Reformers allow to any particular person that will claim the privilege of a reformed Christian or the spirit of a godly or guifted Protestant This liberty of professing and the vncertainty of protestancy having proved in all places and persons wherunto it had access a seed of rebellion destructive not only of the substance of Religion but of the tye of alleigance it was thought necessary for the preservation of Princes and the peace of their subjects to reduce the variety and regulat the extravagancy of the dissenting reformed doctrines into publick professions of protestancy as sutable to the interest of the souveraigns and inclinations of the subjects and customs of their Countries as could be devised And because the government of England continued Monarchical and that Episcopacy doth favor Monarchy and is essential to Parliaments the protestancy of the Church of England was made prelatick notwithstanding the incoherency of Episcopacy with the very foundation of the first and pure pretended reformations And seing ther is such antipathy between the caracter of Episcopacy and the principles of protestancy that the Church of England in the beginning of Q. Elizabeths reign durst not claim that caracter or any spiritual jurisdiction by succession from the Apostles and their successors the ensuing Catholick Bishops it was content to receive both as also the confirmation of it's prelatick doctrin from an vnheard-of spiritual supremacy of a lay Prince and from Acts of Parliament and so was it made the legal Religion of the state contrary to the principles both of the ancient Catholick faith and of the new protestant reformations How contrary this setlement of prelatick protestancy by a persecution of Popery is to Christian piety may easily appeare to them who will remember what hath bin sayd hertofore of the sanctity antiquity and continuall succession of the Roman Catholick Religion from the Apostles to this present and reflect vpon the principles begining and progress of protestancy in general and of the prelatick in particular How inconsistent with policy it is to press by the severity of laws a profession so generally dislik't as the prelatick it being contrary to the ancient Religion and not agreeing with the new Reformations experience hath demonstrated when not only all foreign Roman Catholick Princes and people stood neuters not much concerned whether Protestant Prelacy or Presbytery should prevaile in England they pittied indeed the Royal family and wish'd them good success against their rebellious subjects but this they wish'd to them as Princes not as Prelatiks not only Isay foreign Catholicks were neuters but all the Protestant Churches abroad were more inclined to favor the Presbiterian and fanatick English and Scotch Congregations then the King's Religion for that they come neerer to them and to the primitive and fundamental principles of Protestancy The reason why the Prelatick persuasion is so odious to the reformed Churches abroad and so opposed by Presbiterians and other Protestant Congregations at home is because the formality of it's ceremonies and the legality of it's discipline are incompatible with the primitive spirit liberty and principles of protestancy The protestant Bishops would fain Lord it over their brethren not content with the name and power of Protestant superintendents they strive to imitat the authory and severity of the Catholick Episcopal jurisdiction in their Courts and do what they can to retain a ceremonious decency in there Churches but neither is agreable with the nature and spirit of the Protestant Reformations which consist in an independency and exemption from all spiritual superiority and ceremonie of a particular person being supreme Judge and Interpreter of Scripture This spiritual judicature is the spiritual birth-right of every Protestant and the ground wherupon Luther and his followers raised their reformations and their new sense of the Ghospel Wherfore the resâ—raiâ— of this Protestant evangelical liberty and birth-right by the rigor of our lawes in favor of the prelatick jurisdiction and disciplin must needs make the law-makers and their religion as odious to all zealous Protestants as liberty of opinion and fancied Scripture are deere to a stubborn and humorâ—om peopâ—â— Let it then be maturely considered whether any thing can be more daungerous to the safety of the Soveraign or to the tranquillity of the state then to enact lawes
in a protestant Commonweale or Kingdom wherby the very foundation and birth-right of Protestancy is made penal and the most Religious observers of the protestant rule of faith are rendred incapable of all employments both in Church and state And that all this violence is practised to support a Creed the 39. articles of a doubtful sense and a Clergy of a doubtful caracter even according to their own prelatick principles and according to the primitive principles of protestancy and to vphould a Church that professeth it's own fall and fallibility and therfore for all it self knows is no true Church but may be mistaken in it's doctrin and lead all that rely vpon it's ministery and instruction into eternal damnation and can give no satisfaction or security to such as are of their communion nor produce any thing for justifying the severity of these proceedings but a Parliaments Act of vniformity and other temporal statuts To which every Presbiterian and fanatick doth answer that lawes enacted in favor of Religion do suppose not make the Religion reasonable for though reason be the ground of all human lawes yet no human lawes can be the ground of Religion When all this is maturely considered it will doubtless appeare to be a sad case that a poore man who desires to be saved and informed of the true Church and of Christ's doctrin and conform himself therunto shall be compell'd by forfeitures imprisonment and banishment c. to the prelatick doâ—trin and Church of England and shall have no other reason 〈◊〉 redress given him for this violence and punishments but that he doth not conform to the Religion established by the lawes of the Land So much was alleadged for the Idolls and Religion of the Pagan Emperous and vpon the same ground of law did they persecute the primitive Christians Doubtless all Quakers Presbiterians and non Conformists think themseves as glorious sufferers as the holy primitive Martyrs and Confessors which persuasion in so great and zealous a multitude can not be voyd of daunger and ought to be remedyed more by reason then rigor for though from Roman Catholicks whose principles are peaceable and incline them to suffer persecution with patience no great prejudice may be feared if they will be directed by their profession yet experience hath taught that all Protestant sectaries have inherited from their first Patriarchs Luther Calvin Crammer c. the spirit of sedition and rebellion which is involved in the very foundation of protestancy Luther openly declared so much at the Diet of Worms in presence of the Emperour Charles 5. Who had objected against him tumults and disorders as vndeniable effects of his doctrin misapplying the words of our saviour Non veni pacem mittere sed gladium as if dissention and rebellion had bin a mark of the true Ghospel On the other side the Presbiterians do imitate the bloudy proceedings and principles of their 〈◊〉 Fathers Zuinglius and Calvin in deposing of Kings and Magistrats and make good the saying of Zuinglius Evangelium vult sanguinem the Reformation must be maintained by bloud So that the sanguinary statuts in favor of prelatick protestancy and the bloudy principles of Presbitery in in pursuance of their seditious spirit clashing togeather will make fine work among Christians and the prelatick Clergy which ought by their admonitions and censures to compose these disorders and be Authors of peace are despised as no Clergy and their caracter is made the subject of discord and dispute And the Protestant Bishops which ought to exercise the authority whervnto they pretend retire and recurr to the 〈◊〉 Courts for the spirituality as well as for the legality of their jurisdiction and function and confess in plain termes their Churches frailty and fallibility in doctrin and leave the state to shift for it self deprived of thâ—â—â— helps which Catholick Princes receive from the Roman Church and Clergys censures wherwith rebellious subjects are terrified and 〈◊〉 or return to their duty SVBSECT I. NEither is the daunger of disturbing the tranquillity of the state for supporting the Prelatick doctrin and caracter by temporal lawes confin'd only to Presbiterians and Fanatiks the Prelatiks them-selves if interest prevaile not more with them then conscience and coherency can not but change their Religion into a contrary persuasion when they observe that the mean between Popery and Presbytery wherin they place Prelatick protestancy and the truth of christianity hath no solid foundation or colour of reason For what can be more absurd then to pretend that as moral virtue is a mean or mixture of two extremes so the truth of Christian Religion is a mean between two contrary opinions or a mixture of Popery and Presbitery which are two extremes involving contradictory Tenets Morality I confess is a mediocrity and a kind of Mixture For liberality for example doth seeme to participat some thing of covetousness and some thing of prodigality which are extreme different but Christianity being truth and Divine truth is no mean between the two but one of the two extremes it is no mixture because truth admits no mixture of falshood nor division it can be but on one side Therfore when a Presbiterian or Fanatick saith that Scripture is the only rule of faith and Judge of Controversies the Catholick sayes it is not not both but one of them speaks truth Yet the Prelatick would fâ—ain stand like a Christian moderator or neuter between both parties and reconcile their Contradictions by reducing them to a third doctrin or to a mean between truth and falshood and the mean is to grant both the contradictory propositions and collogue with both sides And indeed that is the mean wherin Prelatick Protestancy doth consist when their writers defend it against Presbiterians they grant the doctrin of Papists when they answer and 〈◊〉 against Papists they maintain the doctrin of Presbiterians for there is no other mean to reconcile or be reconciled to contradictions but to maintain both And this was the custom of Luther Calvin Cranmer c. and is the ordinary practise of the ablest Prelaticks in their books of Controversy I remit you to one of their greatest Champions my Lord Bishop of Down in his Dissuasive from Popery you need not run through the whole book read but his first Section and you will heare him say first that Scripture alone is the foundation or rule of faith and after that it is not Then again that it is nothing els but Scripture together with the Creeds and the foure first Councells It is as impossible therfore that a 〈◊〉 man should be in his judgment a Prelatick Protestant as it is he should believe that God revealed contradictions Wherfore if interest and conveniency hath not a greater 〈◊〉 vpon his profession of faith then conscience or coherency even to the principles of the Reformation he will not continue a prelatick nor make temporal statuts his rule of faith but will either according to the prudent
all Papists in these words what shall J say here O ye principall posts of Religion and ye Arch-Governors of Christ's Church Is this your reverence which you giue to God's word to bid them avant away c. no mervaile if these men dispise us and all our doings which set so litle by God him-self and his infallible saying Thus they write and inveigh against Hosius and all the Roman Church even after they knew and had bin twice admonished that the whole ground was fals and forged by them-selves Hosius his own words are there is sprung vp a certain new kind of Prophets who have not bin afraid by the authority of Scripture to take away all authority from the Scripture Behould whither Satan at length hath brought this matter c. And after Nihil Scripturâ sanctius c. Nothing is more holy then Scripture nothing more noble or excellent there is nothing next to God himself more worthy of all veneration and reverence but what thing can there be so holy which the enemy of man-kind may not abuse to man's destruction c. Thus Hosius how hardly his words could be wrested or mistaken by Iewel and his Confederats all the world may see and ought to detest a Reformation that can not be otherwise maintain'd then by such palpable impostuâ—es SVBSECT IV. Falsificatïons and Frauds against the Bishop of Rome his supremacy JEwel and his Associats cyting a Constitution of the Emperour Iustinian against the Pope's supremacy say The Emperours words stand thus Sancimus c. Senioris Romae Papam primum esse omnium Sacerdotum Beatissimum autem Archi-Episcopum Constantinopolios novae Romae secundum habere locum which words Mr. Iewel Englisheth thus We ordain that the Pope of the elder Rome shall be the first of all Priests and that the most holy Arch-bishop of Constantinople which is named new Rome have the second place Of which Mr. Iewell and the English Church inferr that the Pope's Authority and preeminency in those days consisted only in sitting in the first place and that this dignity also was given him by the secular power of the Emperour First Iewell and his Camerades by â—n c. did hope to make the Emperour spiritual head of the Church and by consequence derive the same prerogative to all secular Princes in their own Dominions for they fraudulently omitted the words wherby the whole matter is cleered the words as they stand in the Constitution of Iustinian are these Sancimus secundum Canonum definitiones sanctissimum senioris Romae Papam primum esse omnium Sacerdotum c. we do ordain according to the determination of the Canons c. But had they not concealed these words they had discovered the weackness of their doctrin of the Queen's supremacy because those few words according to the definition of the Canons import that this ordination or declaration of the Emperour was grounded vpon the authority of the Canons of the Church which he did but confirm and command the execution of the Decrees and Declarations of Councells by his Imperial power The second fraud is that they translate primum esse omnium Sacerdotum thus that he shall be the first of all Priests wheras the Emperour vseth the present tense declaring that the Pope is the Chief of all Priests not shall be By Iewel 's falls Translation they intended to impose vpon such as vnderstand not Latin or at least are so careless as not to compare this Text with the English that Popes had not bin the first or chief of all Priests before that Decree of Iustinian and that spirituall supremacy came to them by vertue therof Not content with this fraud they add an other in the very next words of this Constitution which are these We ordain also that the most Holy Arch-Bishop of Justiniana the first which is our Country shall have for ever vnder his Iurisdiction the Bishops of the Provinces of Dacia Dania Dardania Mysia and Panonia and that they shall be invested by him and he only by his own Councell and that he in the Provinces subject vnto him shal have the place of the Apostolick sea of Rome c. Out of which words Mr. Iewel and his English Prelatick Clergy inferr thus Heere we see the Bishop of Iustiniana set in as high authority and power with in his own Iurisdiction as the Bishop of Rome with in his But had they bin as honest as the Protestant Layty take them to be all the world might have seen the Roman truth and their falshood for they deceitfully cut of the ensuing words that expound and declare the whole matter the words cut of are secundum ea quae sanctus Papa Vigilius constituit we ordain that these things shall be don and observed according to that which the Holy Pope Vigilius had constituted so that as in the former decree the Emperour professeth him-self to have ordained according to the definitions of the Canons so here in particular he professeth to have confirmed the Constitutions of the holy Pope Vigilius who had made the Arch-Bishop of Iustiniana to be his legat and to hould the place of the Apostolicâ— Sea of Rome in those Provinces not vnlike to that of St. Gregory who according to venerable Bede in his history gave the like Authority to St. Augustin our first Arch-Bishop of Canterbury by which Concession they have always bin called Legati nati sedis Apostolicae Not content to conceale the words and the truth of Imperial Decrees and Ecclesiastical Histories Iewel and the English Clergy were neither ashamed nor afraid to corrupt Scripture to the same purpose against the Pope's supremacy For pretending that the words of Christ to St. Peter Thou art a Rock and upon this Rock will I build my Church and again feed my Lambs feed my sheep were spoken as well to all the Apostles as to St. Peter in the Apology of the Church of England is quoted for profe hereof an other saying of our Saviour Quod vni dico omnibus dico that which I say to one I say to all which sentence is not found in Scripture but an otherlike it though to an other purpose to wit about the watchfulness which our Saviour would have all men vse for the day of Iudgment Quod vobis dico omnibus dico vigilate That which I say to you here present I speak to all both absent and to come be watchfull of this day wherof Mr. Iewel and his Collegues could not be ignorant and yet thus he insulted Mr. Harding affirmeth That to the rest of the Apostles it was not sayd at all feed ye c. to Peter and to non els was it sayd feed my Lambs feed my sheep yet Christ him-self saith quod vni dico omnibus dico that y say to one I say to all And quoted for it Marck the 13. SVBSECT V. Frauds and fond devices of the protestant Clergy of England to deny and discredit the Sacrifice of the Mass.
in the statuts of K. Henry 8. K. Edward 6. Q. Mary and Q. Elizabeth and against resolutions taken in so legal and general a way no rebellious designs have ever prevailed in this Monarchy nor can because in a Parliament is involved the free consent and concurrence of the Prince and people and in case it should be judged conscionable and convenient that liberty of Conscience be granted to all Christians though thereby it could be feared the Roman Catholick Religion would be restored to these Kingdoms it must be at the instance of the people and by vote of Parliament for that the Royal family and the privy Councel are at present nothing inclin'd to Popery But we hope and pray that in time God may open his Majesties and his Councells eyes to see the Divin truth and the Temporal conveniences annexed to the ancient faith wherof this Monarchy hath bin so long deprived 2. The case between the Queen of Scots and her Royal issue now reigning is very different for albeit her right was as cleer according not only to Catholick principles but to Acts of our Protestant Parliaments as it is that a man can not have two Wives at once or that Q. Elizabeths mother could not be wife to K. Henry 8. during Q. Catherins life nor her self legitimat yet the Protestant principles and her Fathers Testament seemed to favor her succession and the Queen of Scots mariage to the Dolphin of France made the English even Catholicks more slow then they would have bin otherwise in declaring for her right in the due time which was a litle before and immediatly after Q. Mary dyed because they were not inclined to be subject to a French King or governed by his Viceroy None of these circumstances and considerations now concurring it is not likely that designing or discontented persons can take any advantage against the royal family that now reigns in case liberty of conscience or even the restoring of the Roman Religion should be judged conscientious and convenient by the Parliament 3. The Protestant Clergys sincerity is now much more suspected and the common people less incensed against popery then in Queen Elizabeths dayes when the Protestant Bishops and Ministers Sermons and Bibles made men believe that Images were Idols the Pope Anti-Christ Priests Traytors Agents for the King of Spaine c. which things now are discovered to be calumnies and impostures for the Bible making Images Idols is corrected by publick authority the Pope known to be a civil person like other men not the beast of the Apocalyps Nor Rome the whore of Babylon Priests have served the King faithfully at home and abroad and if any of them hath in our late troubles negotiated with the King of Spain or his Ministers it was then intended and since hath proved and bin owned by our gratious Soveraign to have had bin for his Majesties and his Royal Highness benefit and when they were in exile in order to their subsistance and restauration not any way against their interest Wherfore seing the people of these nations are naturaly inclined to piety though whilst they were abused by the Protestant Clergy and countenanced by the interest of an illegitimat Prince they did persecute Priests and popery as the greatest obstacles of peace and salvation yet now seing they are better informed and that in this particular of our desire to apply the Church revenues to the Crown for the defence of this Empire against all forreign and domestick Disturbers we can have no design but duty to our King and love to our Countrey there can be no ground to fear that the bare word or clamors of interested Adversaries will disturb the Government or incense a well meaning multitude against Papists Priests or any other persons that desire nothing but a peacable and publick Conference in order to liberty of Conscience and to ease these Nations of those heavy burthens vnder which they grone And indeed it concerns so much the soul and state the publick good and all privat persons to examin whether English men after so many changes may not and have not bin mistaken in matters of Religion and misled by education that we have reason to hope some worthy and zealous Protestants will be pleased for their own and the worlds satisfaction to move in Parliament that our objections against the novelty of their doctrin and the sincerity of their Clergy may be taken into Consideration and a publick Tryall allowed for the discovery either of their Cheat or of our Calumny If I be found a Calumniator no other joyned with me in this work I do engage in the word of a Christian to present my self to due punishment in case J escape the pestilence wherunto J have resolved to expose my self for the benefit and salvation of my brethren but if the Protestant learned Clergy be found Cheats I humbly and only beg that the revenues which they possess may be better bestowed not vpon the Catholick Clergy but vpon the Crown for the defence and ease of the Countrey If the Protestant Religion be true by a fair Tryal it can receive no damage nor the state incurr any danger if false besides the conversion of souls to the Catholick truth the Commonwealth may declare to whom it appertains the necessity there is of seising vpon the Church livings for the preservation of the people and by their approbation conscientiously enjoy the same And albeit never any Protestant contributed to the foundation of Bishopricks or Benefices but that all such pious works in these Kingdoms have bin founded by our Roman Catholick predecessors with an express obligation of prayer for the souls in Purgatory and of preaching the Roman Religion yet I question not but that they who by vertue of the last wills and Testaments of the Founders and long prescription of lawfull Predecessors ought to be in possession of the Temporalities of the Church are so good Patriots and dutifull subjects as to declare they will resign their right vnto his Majesty whensoever these three Kingdoms will think fit to grant liberty of Conscience or to return the ancient true Religion and therby the world may be satisfyed that our quarrell with the Protestant Clergy is not for lands but for souls and of this we have given heretofore sufficient evidence in the change of Religion made by Q. Mary having then resigned our Abbeys and impropriations to the Crown wheras the Protestant Clergy in these great warrs never presented the King with any Donative out of their vast fines and revenues This backwardnes of the Bishops in so pressing a Conjuncture together with the present poverty of the people and the dangers wherunto these nations are cast for want of a publick revenue which ought to be independant of taxes that can not be seasonably and securely raysed when they are most necessary do not only justify but exact a scrutiny into the right wherby the sacred patrimony of the Church is possessed by men
Wittensbâ—rg he is so vehement against the wifes refusal of her husband's bed that he saith if the Magistrat omit it's duty in punishing her the husband must imagin that his wife is stole away by theeves and dead and consider how to marry an other for saith he yet further we cannot stop St. Paul's mouth c. his words are plain that a brother or sister are free from the law of wed lock if the one depart or do not consent to dwel with the other neither doth he say that this may be don once only but leaveth it free that so often as the case shall require he may either proceed or stay In which case as he signifieth to Wittemb fâ—l 112 a man may have ten or more wives fled from him and yet living Nay he doubteth not in case of adultery to give liberty even to the offending advlteror to fly into an other country and marry againe Luther loc cit fol. 123. Melancton consil Theol. part 1· pag 648. [o] Mr. Whitgift the Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury in his defence pag. 472. saith The doctrin taught and professed by our Bishops at this day is much more perfect and sound then it commonly was in any age since the Apostles tims pa. 473. asuredly you are not able so recken in any age since the Apostles time any Company of Bishops that taught and held so perfect and sound doctrin in all points as the Bishops of England do at this time In the truth of doctrin our Bishops be not only comparable with the old Bishops but in many degrees to be preferred before them c [a] Hooker lib. 1. Polit. Eccles pag. 86. lib. 2. sect 5. pag. 192. It is not the word of God which doth or possibly can assure vs that we do wel to think it his word for if any book of Scripture did give testimony of all yet stil that Scripture which gives credit to the rest would require an other Scripture to give credit vnto it Neither could we come to any pause wher on to rest vnless besids Scripture there were some thing which might assure vs. c. Which he lib. 3. sect 8. pag. 146. lib. 2. sect 7. pag. 116. Acknowledged to be the authority of God's Church Whitaker against Stapleton lib. 2. cap. 6. pag. 270. saith The testimony of the spirit being privat and secred is vnfit to teach and refell others and therfor we must recurr to Ecclesiastical Tradition an argument saith he ibid. cap. 4. pag. 300. Wherby may be argued and convinced what books be Canonical and what be not M. r Fulk in his answer to a counterfeit Catholick pag. 5. saith the Church of Christ hath judgment to discern true writings from counterfeit and the word of God from the writings of men and this judgment she hath of the holy Ghost M r Jewel in his defence of the Apology pag. 201. And afther the edition of 1571. pa. 242. saith the Church of God hath the spirit of wisdom wherby to discern true Scripture from false [*] See Pomeran in Epist. ad Rom. cap. 4. Vitus Theodorus in annot Test. pag. vl The Century writers of Magdeburg cent 1. lib. 2. cap. 4. cent 2. lib. 3. cap. 4. Hafferoferus in loc Theol. lib. 3. stat 3. loc 7. pag. 222. Adamus Fancisci in Margarita Theol. pag. 448. giveth this testimony of the Protestant Church wherof him-self was a member The Apocriphal books of the new Testament are the Epistle to the Hebrews the Epistle of Iams the second and third of Iohn the second of Peter the Epistle of Iude and the Apocalyps And all the Authors heer mentioned give the like testimony in behalf of their Protestant Churches wherfor we can not but admire Doctor Cossins confidence in affirming a matter so notoriously contradicted and much more the carelesness of them who ground their faith and Canon of Scripture vpon it s not being ever questioned See Cozins in the 17 chap. per toâ— [a] Salvus Conductus datus Protestantibus sess 13. 14. Concil Trident. Vt Protestantes de iis rebus quae in ipsa Synodo tractari debent omni libertate conferre proponere tractare c. ac articulos quot illis videbitur tam scripto quam verbo afferre proponere cum Patribus c. conferre absque ullis convitiis concontumeliis disputare nec non quando illis placuerit recedere possint Placuit praeterea Sanctae Synodo vt si pro majori libertate ac securitate eorum certos tam pro commissis quam pro committendis per eos delictis Iudices eis de putari cupiant illos sibi benevolos nominent etiamsi delicta ipsa quantumcunque enormia ac hoeresim sapientia fuerint New definitions are not new articles of faith See this largly proued in 3. part of this Treatise pag. 101. seq (a) S. Hierom in lib. de 〈◊〉 illustr extremo in Praefat librorum quos latinâ—s â—ecit (b) Hierom. epist. 89. ad Aug. quaest 11. inter ep August S. Hierom. in his Preface before the new Testament dedicated to Pope Damasus Novum opus c. [c] Luther being admonished of his corruption would not correct his error but saith tom 5. Germ. fol. 141. 144. sic volo sic jubeo sit pro ratione voluntas c. Lutherus ita vult And concludeth Therfore the word alone ought to continue in my New Testament although all Papists run mad yet they shal not take it from thence It grieves me that I did not add those two other words Omnibus omnium The Church of England in Edward 6. time Translated some times This signifieth my Body other times this is my Body other times neither is nor signifieth but insteed therof a blanck as not yet resolved vpon which was true See Knot in his Protestancy condemned Edit 1654. pag. 87. Bible 1562 Bible 1562. Cor. 7. v. 1. Bible 1577. 1579. Chemnit in examin part 2. fol. 74. Saravia in defens tra diversis mini â—r gradibus pag 3. Jewel in his defence of the Apology 157. pa. 35. Tertullian in lib de praescr Qui estis vos vnde quaÌ„do venistis vbi tam diu latuistis S. Hilarius l. 6 de Trinit ante med Tarde mihi hos piissimos doctâ—res aetas nunc â—ujus â—â—culi protulit c. S. Hierom in epist ad Pamaâ—â— â—ce an 〈◊〉 pâ—st quadring 〈◊〉 now 1600 annos docere nos 〈◊〉 quâ—d anâ—â—a neseivimus Vsque in haÌ„c diem sine isra doctrina mundus christianus fuit Luther in â—p ad Irgentineneses auâ— 1525. Christiana nolaâ— primo vulga tun audemu gloriari [a] Georgius Milius in August Confes. explic art 7. de ecclesia pag. 137. [b] Dr. Feeld in his Treatise of the Church lib. 3 cap. 46 Mr. Abr Hartwell in his report of the Kingdom of Congo printed 1597. in his epistle to the reader Symon Lythus in respons altera ad alteram Gretseri Apol pag. 331
Institutions l. 4. c. 13. § 12. talking of Monastical life and Evangelical Councells he writeth in this resolute manner Nulli vnquam veterum hoc in mentem 〈◊〉 c. It never came into the cogitations of any of the ancient Fathers to affirmâ— that Christ did councell any thing but rather they do all cry with one voyce that there was never any one least word vttered by Christ that is not of necessity to be obeyed c. out of which words he inferreth that there is no state of perfection to be aspired vnto more one then other nor any thing left us by way of Councell but that all is commanded by way of precept And yet St. Paul saith and by consequence with him all the ancient Church and Fathers talking of virginity I have no precept of our Lord but I give Councell c. In the sayd institutions lib. 4. cap. 19. § 11. Calvin saith of the Papists praeterita aqua nullo numero habita vnum oleum in Baptismo magni faciunt They letting pass and esteeming nothing at all the water of Baptism do only magnify their oyle of Chrism And yet he knew well that the Roman Catholicks hold the vse of water to be most absolutely necessary to the Substance of Baptism and not the holy oyle I hope Protestants will reflect vpon these things and consider whether it be probable or possible that God would send such men as these two Impostors to reform his Church men without conscience 〈◊〉 sincerity or christianity SVBSECT III. Frauds falsifications and calumnies of Primat Vsher against the real presence and Transubstantiation THe Popes name saith Mâ— Vsher in whose dayes this gross opinion of the oral eating and drinking of Christ in the Sacrament drew it's first breath was Gregory the 〈◊〉 In a man of less erudition and learning then Mr. Vsher 〈◊〉 assertion might be called a simple mistake but in him it 〈◊〉 be a notorious fraud and wilfull falsification of as many 〈◊〉 Fathers as he had perused and to his knowledge delivered the doctrin of the real presence and Transubstantiation In particular he doth corrupt Justin the Martyr his words to Antoninus the Emperor as Cranmer had don formerly wherof 〈◊〉 have treated part 3. and remit the Reader thereunto as also to Malones reply against Vsher's answer pag. 236. St. Cyprian 〈◊〉 before Gregory 2. many hundred years and yet Mr. Vsher 〈◊〉 not be ignorant how he declared the belief of the Catholick Church in these words This bread which our Lord gave 〈◊〉 his Disciples being by the almighty power of the word changed 〈◊〉 in outward shape but in nature is made flesh St. Austin also was a long time before Gregory 2. and he cleers all doubts both of the Mass and Transubstantiation thus This is that which we say c. to wit that the Sacrifice of the Church doth consist of two things that is to say the visible form or species of the elements and the invisible flesh and bloud of our Lord JESVS Christ the Sacrament and the thing of the Sacrament Knowing and believing saith St. Cyril Hierosol most assuredly that what appeareth bread is not bread though it seem so to the tast but it is the body of Christ and what appeareth 〈…〉 the tast doth Judge it to be but the bloud of Christ. Mr. Vsher's Falsifications against Confession ST Basil saith Mr. Vsher maketh the groans of the heart to be a sufficient Confession so doth St. Ambrose the tears of the penitent Tears saith he doth wash the sin which the voyce is ashamed to confess Weeping doth provide both for pardâ—â— and for shamefactness And St. Austin what have J to 〈◊〉 with men that they should hear my confessions as though they should heale all my diseases Mr. Vsher not content to impose this sentence vpon the mistaken Protestants as if it had declared the superfluity and novelty of Sacramental Confession wheras St. Basil speaketh of David and St. Ambrose of St. Peter who by tears obtained pardon for his denying Christ before the 〈◊〉 of Confession not content I say to misinterpret their meaning he corrupts the words by a fals translation to make good his own fals Interpretation adding the word our twice to the 〈◊〉 for our shamefactness and for 〈…〉 endeavoring therby to draw the meaning of the Fathers from David and St. Peter vnto all others even after the Institution and precept of Sacramental Confession And as for St. Austin he speaketh of that publick Confession which in his Book he made of such sins as had bin forgiven him in Baptism and therfore needed not to be confessed to a Priest It is a strange thing how learned Protestants well versed in the Fathers date impose such wrested Texts vpon men who are resolved to examin them and to let the world see what the Fathers have cleerly delivered Mr. Vsher could not be so ignorant as now his partners would have him seem to be 〈…〉 positive doctrin of these three Fathers concerning Conâ—â—ssion St. Basil declares his own belief and of the whole Church 〈…〉 words Sins must necessarily be opened vnto them vnto whom 〈…〉 of God's Mysteries is committed St. Ambrose If 〈…〉 to the justified confess thy sin For a shamefast confession 〈…〉 dissolueth the knot of iniquity St. Austin exhorting to confession saith Is it therfore sayd without cause whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven are the Keyes therof without cause given to the Church of God c. who so doth repent let him repent throughly let him shew his greif by tears let him present his life to God by the Priest let him prevent God's Iudgment by Confession c. And therfore he that will confess his sins for the obtaining of Grace let him seek out a Priest who hath skill to bind and loose c. let him consider the quality of the crime in place in time in continuance in variety of persons and with what temptation he fell into sin and how often c. All this variety must be confessed And is it not very strange that Mr. Vsher should quote these holy Doctors against themselves and his own conscience But the Protestant Religion cannot 〈◊〉 otherwise maintained nor the prelatick Clergy enjoy two millions sterling of yearly revenue All the other Fathers speak after the same manner as for example St. Gregory of Nyssa 〈◊〉 the Priest for a partner and Companion of thine affliction as 〈◊〉 Father shew vnto him boldly the things that are hidden 〈◊〉 the secrets of thy soul as shewing thy secret wounds vnto thy physitian He will have a care both of thy credit and of thy 〈◊〉 Against Absolution of sins MR. Vsher pag. 138. of his answer to the Jesuits Challenge is not ashamed to accuse the Roman Catholick Church with this notorious calumny holding if you believe him that the sinner is immediatly acquitted before God by the Priest's absolution how soever that sound conversion of
heart be wanting in him 〈◊〉 otherwise would be requisit And grounds vpon this imposture his bringing many ancient Fathers to prove against Papists that it is not in the power of the Priest to absolve a sinner who hath not true faith and repentance in his soul as if this were not the express doctrin of all Roman Catholicks And vpon this same imposture he groundeth also his foolish expression that our High Priest fitteth in the Temple of God as God and all his Creatures as so many Demy-gods vnder him If what he layeth to our charge were true he might have raised us a degree higher for that God himself doth not absolve men from their sins if they do not repent or if sound conversion of heart be wanting Pag. 125. seq he would fain persuade that loosing of men by the Iudgment of the Priest is by the Fathers generaly accounted nothing els but a restoring of men to the peace of the Church and an admitting of them to the Lord's table again And that in the dayes not only of St. Cyprian but of Alcuinus Deacons in the Priest's absence were allowed to reconcile penitents But this fraud is discovered I can not presume him ignorant for that neither St. Cyprian nor Alcuinus do speak of reconciling penitents in the Sacrament of pennance but only of releasing them from Censures and temporal penitences or punishments wherwith they had bin bound by the positive and publick Decree of the Church which might be performed not only by a Deacon but by a letter to the penitent though never so far of and absent And therfore can not be an absolution from sins which requireth the penitent's presence and appertaineth to the office of Priesthood inseparably Jus enim hoc solis sacerdotibus permissum est saith St. Ambrose Against Purgatory MR. Vsher having seen how plainly the doctrin of Purgatory that is a third place for purging of venial sins 〈◊〉 satisfying for mortal sins wherof the guilt but not the whole 〈◊〉 punishment is pardoned is delivered by the primiâ—â—ve Church and Fathers and that the examples and histories 〈◊〉 so great and holy a Doctor as St. Gregory to that purpose 〈…〉 be well denyed doth fraudulently change the state of 〈◊〉 â—uestion to make his Readers believe that the dispute 〈◊〉 the Popish Purgatory is not whether sins and souls 〈◊〉 be temporaly punished in the other life but whether 〈◊〉 are punished by material fier or whether the place of 〈◊〉 punishment be a part of Hell Wheras all the world 〈◊〉 we leave these things to be disputed in schooles and 〈◊〉 not determined by the Church Whereas pag. 176. of his Answer Mr. Vsher saith neither 〈◊〉 it to be passed over that in those apparitions and revelaâ—â—ons related by Gregory there is no mention made of any 〈◊〉 Lodge in Hell appointed for Purgatory of the 〈◊〉 which is that which the Church of Rome now striveth 〈◊〉 c. And by this imposture of his that in the time of Otto 〈◊〉 Frisingensis and other modern Authors who dispute whether 〈◊〉 â—â—rgatory was a place or part of hell would fain make Proâ—â—stants believe that the Roman Catholick doctrin of Purgatory 〈◊〉 not ancient wheras he could not be ignorant that St. Bernaâ—â— who lived before Otto Frisingensis rehearsing and refuâ—â—ng the heresies of the petrobusians saith They do not believe that there remaineth any Purgatory fier after death but will have the soul as soon as it is out of the body to pass either to rest or els to damnation but let them inquire of him who sayd that there is a kind of sin which shall not be forgiven in this world nor the world to come to what end did he say this if there be no remission nor cleansing of sin in the other world But others much ancienter spoke cleerly of Purgatory St. Gregory of Nyssa The Divine providence hath ordained that man after sin should return to his ancient felicity either purified in this life by prayer c. or after his death cleansed in the furnace of Purgatory fire St. Basil. in cap. 9. Esay St. Cyril Alexandr in Ioan. 15. v. 2. St. Gregory Nazian St. Ambrose St. Austin St. Hierom Origines Tertullian St. Hilary and most of the Fathers whose sayings Mr. Vsher did see in Belarmin and yet without mentioning any particular tells vs that the Testimonies which the Cardinal bringeth belong to the point of praying for the dead only as if praying for the ease and relief of the dead did not necessarily conclude Purgatory or vnto the fire of affliction in this world or vnto that of the last day or to the fire of Hell or mark the 〈◊〉 absolute and rational answâ—â— to some other fier then that which 〈…〉 Mr. Vsher concludes his controversy of 〈◊〉 with these words and so vnto this day the Romish Purgatory is rejected as well by the Gracious as by the 〈◊〉 and Russians the Cophites and Abassins the 〈◊〉 and Armenians together with the Syrians and 〈…〉 subject to the Patriarchs of Antioch and 〈…〉 and Palestianâ— vnto the East Indies This is strange 〈◊〉 in maintaining a falshood contradicted both by the Protestant relations of the Eastern Religions and by the Declarationâ— of the Patriarchs and other learned Writers of the 〈◊〉 Provinces Against VVorshipping of Saints and their Reliques THe Iesuits saith Mr. Vsher pag. 420. were wont indeed 〈…〉 men commonly with an idle 〈…〉 and lâ—â—ria but now they confess it to be the 〈◊〉 of the most and wisest that it is one and the self same vertue that containeth both latria and Dulia Heere Mr. Vsher is convicted of two notorious frauds 1. To make his illiterat Reader believe that no act appertaining to the vertue of Religion can any way relate vnto Creatures though it have the Creator for it's prime motive he seems to suppose that the Iesuits now recant and grant that the honor which Catholicks give to Saints as they are God's 〈◊〉 can not be an act of Religion wheras there is no 〈◊〉 difficulty nor dispute in that a man should honor God 〈◊〉 his Saints by two distinct acts of the same vertue of 〈◊〉 then in that the love of God and of our neighbour 〈…〉 two acts of one vertue called Charity The second 〈…〉 he would fain persuade that latria and Dulia is a 〈◊〉 distinction and delusion of the Jesuits and that no 〈◊〉 worship however so inferior can be communicated 〈…〉 without committing of Idolatry But the Church 〈◊〉 England by the pen of it's defender Bishop Jewell tells 〈…〉 we only adore Christ as very Godâ— but we 〈…〉 the Sacrament we worship the word of 〈…〉 all other like things in such religious wise to Christ 〈◊〉 〈…〉 Church and Fathers not only the Jesuits 〈…〉 distinction of Latria and Dalia that is suprem and 〈◊〉 religious worship the suprem that is Latria is due 〈…〉 as the suprem civil worship to the Kingâ— the 〈◊〉 which is Dulia is