28. fol. 396 If the Pope must be worshipped Christ must be denyed And de Missa priuata tom 7. fol. 475 VVhosoeuer is vnder the Pope and obeyeth him cannot be saued Caluin against Seruer pag. 607 Is it not a profanation of the sacred vnity to professe one God and faith with an impious and prophane company And Respons ad Versip pag. 362 How wicked and soule treachery is it to abide in that sacrilegious company of Papists And D. Whitaker ad Rat. 3. Campiani None abide with the lambe in the mountaine who haue any commerce with Antichrist And Caluin in Confutat Hollandi lib. de vitandis superstitionibus bringeth many proofes to shew that the faithfull may not communicate with the false Church and therto citeth the letters of Melancthon Bucer Peter Martyr and those of Zurich and the same is commonly taught of Protestants How then did not those Protestants separate themselues from the body of Christ how were they saued who in tymes past communicated with papists How were they saued vnlesse God be an acceptour of persons and tyms that he will cut of some from his body and from hope of saluation who communicate with Antichrist and not others at these and not in former tymes Againe Protestants teach that the Church ought to professe her fayth as besides the testimonies before repeated the Preface of the Confession of Saxony sayth They that are demaunded must needs tell the doctrine And the CoÌ„fession of Bohemia art 2 They teach that they must vndoubtedly belieue all the articles of the Creed and confesse them with the mouth Luther in 1. Petri cap. 2. tom 5. fol. 464 If any now as the Emperour or other Prince should aske me my fayth I must plainly confesse it to him And de Scru. Arbit tom 2. fol 432 Truth and doctrine must alwayes be preached openly and neuer kept secret or crookt and turnd awry D. Feild lib. 1. de Eccl. cap. 10 For seeing the Church is the multitude of them that shall be saued vnlesse he mak coÌ„fession vnto saluation for fayth hid in the heart and concealed doth not suffice it cannot be but they that are of the true Church must by the profession of the truth make themselues knowne in such sort that c. And the Preface of the Syntagme of Confessions VVhen euery one ought according to the Apostles precept giue a reason of his hope how much more the Church And D. Whitaker Cont. 4. quest 6. cap. 2. pag 696 True sayth can no more be separated from confession with the mouth then fire from beat or the sunne from its brightnes and beames What fayth then had those protestants which as is sayd durst not professe their mind And Cont. 2. qoest 3. cap. 2. pag. 472 It is not lawfull for the godly to dissemble true Religion or make shew of false nor to conceale what they think of Religion if they be examined of them who haue authority to aske them of their fayth But it is not credible that in so many ages in no part of the Christian world no Catholike Magistrate should aske any protestant of his fayth especially if it be true that Luther writeth in psalm 22. tom 3. fol. 344. that Papists do so examine the body of the Church that all her bones may be counted that is none of them can by hid VVherefore we must not imagine that there are any hidden bones of Christ all are bewrayed and counted wheresoeuer they are either by the espials of secret confession or by the tortours or examiners Which sheweth that if there had byn any true protestants heretofore they would haue byn discouered 11. Finally they are brought to these straights that sometymes they say that the protestant church which they imagine was heretofore in popery did consist of those who were papists both in opinion and profession This Caluin intimateth in the words before cited when he sayth that his church was corrupted with pestilent doctrine And Luther de Missa priuata tom 7. fol. 231. saying The very elect were seduced in that great darknesse And in cap. 9. Isaiae tom 4. fol. 95 Behold sayth he the whole face of the Churches vnder Popery Did not they all who truly felt the burden of sinne imagine that they should by good works satisfy for their sinnes Which thing alone would suffice to blot them out of the role of protestants D. White in defence of his way cap. 36. pag. 350. sayth those imaginary protestants were corrupted some more some lesse with those errors which sayth he now we fly And cap. 40. pag. 394. graunteth that they were infected with damnable heresies D. Whitaker lib. 2. de Scriptura cap. 8. sect vlt. sayth They were beset with most thick darknes Nappâ—r in cap. 12. Apocal. pag. 195. that their visible Church in tymes past VVholy embraced the errors of merits and indulgences c. And Morgersterâ—â— tract de Eccl. pag. 41 These things were in tymes past to be forgiuen the godly that they belieued the Pope to be â—hrists vicar and head of the church Popery to be the church Saints to be prayed vnto Masse to be the Lords supper Are these men think you in their wits who call them godly and say they must be pardoned who belieued Antichrist to be Christs vicar Antichrists Synagogue to be the Church of Christ and horrible idolatry such as they account Masse prayer to Saints to be seruice of Christ The same also they meane when they challenge the simple ignorant Papists for theirs or confesse the vulgar Roman Church to be the true Church or as others of them speake graunt the Roman Church but deny Popery the Popish or Roman Popish Church For they imagine that the simple Catholike people neither doth now nor in former tyms did belieue those points of fayth which themselues deny But this they feigne of the simple Catholike people and cannot proue it Besides there is no Catholike â—o simple as doth not vertually belieue all points of Catholike fayth which Protestants deny sith he actually professeth to belieue whatsoeuer the Catholike Church teacheth Neither is there any at all who doth not belieue iustification by good works which point alone would suffice to make them no Protestants Besides Caluin 4. Institut cap. 8. sayth that we affirme him to be no Christian who doth not vndoubtedly agree to all points of doctrine as well affirmatiue as negatiue And the same sayth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 8. pag. 519. D. Morton part 1. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 9. and D. Willet in the Preface of his Synopsis Yea as before we rehearsed Cap 2. they confesse that before Luthers reuolt all from head to foot were drowned in the pudles of Popery that none dreamed of that which is the cheifest point of Protestancy Wherfore Schusselburg tom 8. Catal. Haeret. pag. 440. seemeth to say That befor Luther arose Popery was the true church like as the Synagogue of the Iewes was before the comming
euident argument of true religion and oppose their consent therin as a sufficient cloake to couer all their dissentions in other matters Zuinglius Prefat Ecclesiast tom 1. fol. 39 It is an euident argument of true Religion among you that you cast out all the filth of Popish idolatry and bridle the sloathfull company of Priests and put them from the Church And when Cardinall Hosius obiected to Protestants their disagreement about the Eucharist Iames Andrews in his answere pag. 367 sayth In what ProtestaÌ„ts especially agree VVhat is this dissention to you Papists Be it we truly disagree in this point yet in that we especially agree that with one mind we impugne your Popery as true Antichristianisme And Drentius in the Preface of the same booke Otherwise with one consent they fight against Popery And to the same obiection Caluin in Confutat Holland pag. 576 sayth thus True yet with one consent we all teach that Popish idolatry is to be detested In like manner Beza in Hospin part 2. Hist fol. 300 I confesse yet in this we all agree with vnited minds to impugne your transubstantiation Sadeel also Respons ad Sophism Turriani pag. 562 Yet neuerthelesse this my litle booke will be witnesse with how conioyned strength all our Churches do set vpon the Popish errors And in in dice Repet pag. 808 It is well that all they who conioyned themselues to the reformed Church with one consent reiect the Popes Primacy And D. Whitaker Contr. 2. quest 5. cap. 8. pag. 521 Yet in the meane tyme we all agree against the Pope And in this vnity of theirs to be against the Pope they greatly triumph His maiesty in his monitory epistle p. 174 Almost the halfe part of the Christian world is gon out of Babylon And D. Andrews respons ad Apol. Bellarm. cap. 14 Almost False of the Christian world is so farre vnited in one profession as that they are gon out of Babylon And when Becanus had found fault with him because he sayd The King of great Britany and the Kings of Denmarck and Sweden with the Princes of Germany who are of one beliefe with him are a part of the Lords flock because the Kings of Denmarck and Sweden be Lutherans and therefore are not of one beliefe with the King of great Britany Burhill in defence of him cap. 15. answereth That who are of one beliefe with King Iames is put in steed of who with him refuse to be vnder the Pope They meane then that all those are of one beliefe with them and be part of the Lords flock who refuse to be vnder the Pope Which kind of vnity is that which his Maiesty in his declaration against Vorstius noted Heretiques to keep saying pag. 49 There are in Hungary and Bohemia innumerable Heretiks who agree together only in hatred of the Pope But not only Heretiks but also Iewes Turcks and Infidells agree with Protestants in this point An excellent vnity surely worthy of Christians wherein they shall haue such partners and fellowes Seauenthly I proue it because when they be asked who were Protestants before Luther they produce no other then such as were aduersaries to the Pope Illyricus being to make a role of witnesses dares not call them Protestants or witnesses of the Protestant truth Editio Lugdun but simply witnesses of the truth or witnesses who reclaymed against the Pope and Popish errors And in the Preface professeth that he gathereth as farre as he cold all those who in any sort did before Luther giue testimony to the truth of Christ against the errors and furies of Antichrist And l. 20. col 1951. after he had brought forth all his witnesses he sayth of them thus They desired a fuller manifestation of the truth which at last sayth he we in this sixteenth age haue obtained That is his witnesses attayned not to the knowledge of Protestant truth which was reuealed but in the sixteenth age Neuerthelesse they seemed witnesses good inough for Illyricus because in some sort they were opposite to the doctrine and deeds of the Pope Beza also lib. de notis Eccles pag. 80. when he had obiected to himself that in former tymes their Church was not visible answereth I say that from the Apostles tyme there was scarce any age in which as soone as this Antichrist the Pope began to put out his head God did not raise some who opposed themselues against his tyranny And to the same question thus answeaâ—eth Sadeel in Refutat art 6â— Posnan pag. 851 VVe are ready to shew that there was no age in which there were not some who reproued your false Church Surely these men imagine Protestancy to consist in opposition to the Pope and Popery or they say nothing to the question proposed Likewise D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 2. pag. 474. proueth that the Protestant Church hath alwayes byn in Popery because therein haue byn some who though they communicated with Papists yet before death reiected their opinions which kind of proofe supposeth that it sufficeth to a Protestant to reiect Popish opinions 5. You see then that the cheife ring leaders of the Protestants confesse that theirs and their followers end was to abate the authority of the Pope that they deeme the forsaking of the Pope to be the foundation a good part and summe of the Protestant building that they account the leauing of Popery an euident argument of true religion that they define describe paint and name a Protestant by opposition to the Pope that they say their faith differeth not from ours but in denyall of some of our articles that they deny dissemble and extenuate whatsoeuer they dislike in those who are aduersaries to the Pope that they oppose their consent in opposition against the Pope as a buckler against all obiections about their dissentions in other articles finally that being bidden to produce Protestants before Luther they name such as any way opposed themselues against the Pope What do all these things declare but that which some of them say in plaine words that the Protestant Church is a rable of all sects which are not Papists 6. But out of all things which haue byn sayd in this and the former chapters First we see what great power Protestants take to themselues What followeth of all hitherto sayd that according as they please they include or exclude the same men out of the Church VVho will not to vse S. Augustins words feare these men who haue receiued such wonderfull power ouer men Secondly we see that they imitate the old heretiks lib. 3. cont Crescon c. 20. Praescript c. 41.42 L. 18. de Ciuit. c. 50. who as Tertullian sayth make peace generally with all and with whome diuision is their very vnity For as S. Augustin noteth the diuell hath stirred vp heretikes as if they might be indifferently permitted in the citty of God without amendment as the citty of confusion indifferently had Philosophers of different yea of
of heretiks This in summe I will say heretikes are not otherwise to be dealt with all then Infidells 〈◊〉 Iewes Caluin also in his 2. booke of Institution cap. 15. number 1. Rightly Augustin denyeth Heretikes haue the same foundation with the godly albeit they preach tâ—â— name of Christ And in his instruction against the Libertines That we may speake properly Heretikes are not oâ—ly like to wolues or theeues but much worse Beza in his booâ— of punishing Heretiks If one terme Heretikes saithleâ— apostatas he shall giue them their due title And againe Heretikes affirme Christ in word and deny him indeed Danaeus in his 5. Controuersy and 691. pag. An heretike condemned by lawfull iudgement and actually cast out of the Church is not of the visible Church nor of the inuisible neither actually or apparently so long as he remaineth in that state Polanus in his 7. booke which he termeth Syntagma cap. 5. Heretikes whiles they remayne such are not members of the Catholique Church And Vorstius in his Anti-bellarmin pag. 79. The Ghospellers do esteem Antichrist in common to be euery heretike who opposeth himselfe eyther openly and plainly or closely and indirectly to Christ and his doctrine And in the 121. pag. There is no controuersy betweene vs and our aduersaries touching heretikes Schismatikes and Apostatas properly and truly so called that they are altogeather out of the Church of Christ Thus forraine Protestants In England English Protestants his Maiesty in his epistle to Cardinal Peron written by Casaubon The King damneth and detesteth those who either haue departed from the sayth of the Catholike Church and are become heretikes or from the Communion and are become Schismatikes The Apology of the Church of England part 3. diuis 3. VVe condemne all sortes of the old heretiks as the Arians the Eutichians c. and shortly all them that haue a wicked opinion either of God the Father or of Christ or of the holy Ghost or of any other point of Christian Religion for so much as they be confuted by the Ghospell of Christ we plainly pronounce them for damnable and detestable persons and defy them euen to the diuell D. Whitaker in the preface of his Controuersies If we be heretikes it is reason they should warne all theirs to fly from vs. And Controuer 2. question 1. cap. 4. That he proueth heretikes and Apostatas and Schismatikes not to be members of the true Church maketh nothing against vs. None of our men euer taught that The like he hath question 5. cap. 1. and 18. D. Sutliue in his first booke of the Church cap. 1. Heretikes are not of the Church D. Morton in his Apology 1. part 1. booke cap. 3 affirmeth that Heretikes are not to be accounted of the â—hurch in truth but in name not indeed but equiuocally Finally D. White in his way to the Church pag 110. All hereticks teach the truth in some things and yet we deny them to be the Church of God And in the defence of the same way cap. 8. sect 1. There is little or no difference betweene the Diuell and an Apostata or Heretike 4. The same censure they sometymes giue of Schismatikes They exclude Schismatiks as appeareth by the words of his Maiesty D. Whitaker and Vorstius already rehearsed Besides Luther in his great Catechisme tom 5. pag. 628. affirmeth the sense of that article The Communion of Saints to be this I belieue that there is on earth a litle Congregation of Saints agreeing in all things without sectes or Schismes And Melancthon in his book against Swenfeild tom 2. LutheraÌ„s pag. 201. Neither is there more then one Church the Spouse of Christ neither doth this company consist of diuers Sectes Salomon Gesnerus in his Common places the 24. place of the Church Catholiks are opposite to Schismatikes heretiks The same teacheth Schusselburg in his 8. tome of the Catalogue of heretikes pag. 726. 727. Amongst the Sacramentaries the Switzers in their Confession SacrameÌ„taries article 17. do thus professe VVe so much esteeme the Communion with the true Church of Christ as that we teach that those cannot liue before God who communicate not with his true Church And the French Protestants in theirs article 26. VVe belieue that none can lawfully withdraw themselues from the assemblies Bullinger in his Epitome or Compendium of fayth 6. booke 11. cap They be out of this Church whâ— vpon enuy or contention separate themselues from her withouâ— cause will haue some thing peculiar to themselues Musculus also in his common places in the title of the church The vnity of Heretiks and Schismatikes is bastard and diuided True entier and Catholike vnity is not among Schismatikes And in the title of Schismatikes A Schismatike putteth himselfe in daunger of losse of his saluation in departing from the Communion of the flock of the Lord. For by that departure he is not only separated and diuided from that Ecclesiasticall and externall society of the faythfull but also from participation of the bloud and spirit of Christ Caluin likewise in his treatise of the necessity of reforming the Church VVe do professe the vnity of the Church such as is described by S. Paul to be most deare vnto vs and we accurse all them that shall any way violate it And in his fourth booke of Institutions chap. 1. numb 2 Vnlesse vnder Christ our head we be vnited to all the rest of his members there is no hope for vs of the euerlasting inheritance For we cannot haue two or three Churches vnlesse Christ be torne in pieces And num 4. Out of the lap the Church there is no saluation departure from thence is alwayes pernicious Againe num 10 God maketh so great account of the Communion with his Church as he holdeth him for a renagate and fugitiue whosoeuer obstinatly separateth himselfe from any Christian society which retaineth the true vse of the word and Sacraments And he addeth that the forsaking of the Church Is the deniall of God and Christ The like doctrine he deliuereth in his Catechisme vpon the 1. Cor. cap. 1. and other where Polanus in his Theses part 2. sayth Schismaticall Churches are to be forsaken And Bucanus in his places loc 41. of the Church quest 33. auoucheth Schismatiks to be out of the Church and quest 5. that they are not vniuocally a Church that is they haue not the true nature of a Church The same sayth Danaeus in his treatise of Antichrist cap. 17. And in his 3. booke of the Church cap. 5. writeth thus Schismaâ—ikes actually excommunicated and cast out of the Church by lawfull sentence are no more of the visible Church For sayth he the marke that you be of the visible Church is this that you outwardly professe the fayth and communicate in Sacraments with the rest of the Church And he addeth that such are neither actually of the inuisible Church but only in possibility and that the holy Fathers liken sucâ— to
Heathens Pagans and infidells And in his Apology for the Switzers Churches he defineth Schisme to be a separation from the rest of the body of the Catholike Church Zanchius also in his treatise of the Church cap. 7. reacheth that Schismatikes are not in the Church And suâ—us in his 3. booke of the Church c. 5. approueth the fame of such Schismatikes as separate themselues from the whole Church The strangers in England writing to Beza in the 24 epistle haue these words in their 13. article VVhosoeuer is lawfully excommunicated of a particuler Church or cutteth himselfe of vpon vnlawfull causes and with scandall in that doth loose all priuiledge of the Catholike Church And Beza answereth them in the name of the Church of Geneua in this manner Your thirteenth article we wholy receiue at most orthodoxall Casaubon in his 15. exercitation against Baronius num 6. It is an vndoubted truth that how often soeuer a pious flock is ioyned to a true Bishop there is a Church of God in so much that if any forsake that Church it cannot be doubted but that he is out of the Church Finally Chamier in his epistle to Armand excludeth Schismatikes out of the Church because sayth he they want the sincerity of the Sacraments English ProtestaÌ„ts Amongst our English Protestants his Maiesty in his foresayd epistle to Cardinall Peron All those testimonies of Augustin proue only this that there is no hope of saluation for those who leaue the Communion of the Catholike Church which the King willingly graunteth D. Whitaker in his 2. controuer 5. quest 6. cap. sayth It is false that hereticall and Schismaticall Churches be true Churches Againe The Catholike Church consisteth not of diuided but of vnited members And cap. 2 The true and Catholike Church is that which consisteth of Catholiks D. Fulke in his booke of the succession of the Church VVhat auailed it them to eternall saluation to haue byn sound in Religion and doctrine seing they were cut of from the Communion of the true Church in which alone saluation is and from her true head VVhat skilleth it whether one being drawne by heresy or Schisme from the body of Christ be subiect to euerlasting damnation D. Humfrey in his answere to the 3. reason of F. Campian VVe confesse that he is vndone who is separated from the followship of the Church And D. Feild in his first booke of the Church cap. 7 The name of the Catholike Church is applyed to distinguish men holding the sayth in vnity from Schismatiks And in his 2. booke c. 2. he sayth that Schismatikes are not Catholike Christians Thus we see how Protestants sometymes do teach that the true Church consisteth of Catholiks of members vnited not deuided that it hath no Schismes or Sects That Schismatiks are not Catholiks that their vnity is not true nor Catholike that their Churches ought to be forsaken that they are not vniuocally Churches nor true Churches that they are not members of the true Church but out of the Church altogeather out of the Church and actually neither of the visible nor inuisible Church and that this is an vndoubted truth which coÌ„fession of theirs must be well noted and kept in mind for thereby is ouerthrowne as we shall see in the 2. booke their only argument wherwith they endeauour to proue that their Church was before Luther and also is defaced their only essentiall mark of finding the true Church by the truth of doctrine For Schismatikes as we shall heare them confesse in the 2. booke hold true doctrine and neuertheles as here they acknowledge are not of the true Church They exclude those that deny any fundameÌ„tal article 5. In like manner they do commonly debarre from their Church all such as deny any principall or fundamentall point of fayth Melancthon in his booke of common places in the title of the Church They are not members of the Church who pertinaciously maintaine errours opposite to the foundation And in his answere to the Bauarian articles Saints may haue errours but not such as ouerthrow the foundation In his examen of those that are to take orders Agreement in the foundation LutheraÌ„s is a thing necessary to the vnity of the Church And vpon the 3. cap. of the 1. epistle to Timothy The foundation is held in the Church otherwise there should be no Church at all And in his 79. proposition tom 4 It is most certaine that those companies are not the Church of God who either are altogeather ignorant of the Ghospell or impugne some article of the foundation that is some article of fayth or doctrine of the decalogue or maintaine open idols Chemnitius in his common places pa. 3. title of the Church Neither can these be acknowledged for the true Church who imbrace fundamentall errours And the Lutherans in the conference at Ratisbon Ses 14. Hutter in his Analysis of the Confession of Auspurg Gesner in his 24. place Adam Francis in his 11. place and other Lutherans commonly agree that the Church cannot erre Fundamentally or in the Foundation And the Confession of Saxony giueth this note to know who are in the Church SacrameÌ„taries Those who hold the Foundation As for Sacramentaries Caluin in his 4. booke of Institutions cap. 2. num 1 So soone as a lye hath broken into the castle of Religion the summe of necessary doctrine is inuerted the vse of Sacraments is fallen certainly the destruction of the Church ensueth euen as a mans life is lost when his throat is cut or his vitall parts deadly wounded And soone after It is certaine that there is no Church where lyes and errour haue gotten to the toppe And cap. 19. num 17 VVithout doubt the Church of the faythfull must agree in all the heads of our Religion Sadeel in his answere to the Theses held at Posna cap. 12 I thinke the matter is thus to be defined by the word of God that if any in what Church soeuer dissent in the foundation of sayth and be obstinate in their errours such appertaine not to the vnity of the Church The like he hath in his answere to Arthure cap. 12. Vesinuâ— in his Catechisme quest 54. cap. 4 The whole Church erreth not nor wholly nor in the foundation Polanus in his Thesis of the Church sayth The Church erreth not in the foundation The same teacheth Zanchius in his treatise of the Church c. 7. Lubbertus in his 2. booke of the Church c 3. Vorstius in his Anti-bellarmin pag. 139. Bucanus in his 41. place and other Sacramentaries commonly And with them herein agree our English Protestants English ProtestaÌ„ts For thus sayth his Maiesty in his epistle to Cardinall Peron The Churches are vnited in vnity of sayth and doctrine in those heads which are necessary to saluation And D. Whitaker in the preface of his Controuersies The foundations of sayth are of that nature that one being shaken nothing in all religion remaineth sound And Contr. 2. quest 4. cap.
that before Luthers tyme they seeke their Church in Popery and amongst the Papists 2. Secondly I prooue this same out of that which diuers tymes they graunt that the Roman Church holdeth all the fundamentall articles of fayth That Papists hold the foundation of fayth which themselues commonly teach as hereafter shall be shewed to suffice to make a Church Their Confession of Auspurg in the 21. chapter hath these wodrs This is almost the summe of doctrine among vs in which as it may seeme there is nothing which differeth from scripture or from the Catholike Church or from the Roman Church LutheraÌ„s so farre as it appeareth by writers All the dissention is about some few abuses which haue crept into Churches without certaine authority Whereby we see that the first and auncientest Protestants The suÌ„me of faith in Popeâ—y publikly professed that they differed not from the Roman Church in the summe of doctrine but that all their disagreement was about some few abuses And albeit the wordes be somewhat altered in the printed copies yet that they were in the originall copie which was presented to Charles 5. Emperour is manifest by Fabritius who repeateth them so out of that copie by Pappus in his 3 defence against Sturmius who so also reporteth them by Zanchius in his dispute between two Deuines where he repeateth these wordes out of the said Confession There is nothing in our doctrine which differeth from the church of Rome as far as it is knowne by writers and finally by Hieremias Patriarch of Constantinople in his censure vpon the said Confession it being sent vnto him by the Protestants where he thus writeth to them Yee say yee agree in all things with the Latins Cocleus anno 1â—28 VseÌ„berg causa 17. and that the difference betwixt you and them is only touching some abuses likwise Luther in his foresaid epist cont Anabap VVe confesse that in Popery is much good belonging to Christians yea all Christian good All ChristiaÌ„ good to wit that in Popery is the true Scripture true baptisme the true Sacrament of the altar the true keyes for remission of sinnes the true office of preaching the true Catechisme as the Lords prayer the ten commaundements and the articles of faith Whereupon Schusselburg in his 8. tome of the Catalogue of heretikes pag. 439. saith VVe deny not but that Luther sayd that all Christian goods are in Popery What was needfull to saluation and came from thence vnto vs Iohn Regius in his consideration of the censure c Albeit the Ministery of Papists be corrupted with many traditions and inuentions of men yet it had that which was necessary to saluation to wit the Canonicall scripture the Creed c. Leonard Crenâ—zen The bishop of Rome holdeth the same foundation of the Catholike faith 1. Cor. 3. The fouÌ„dation of Fayth which I and the Catholik Apostolik Church do acknowledge although there be some difference of opinions in certaine circumstances Thus the Lutherans Of the Sacramentaries SacrameÌ„taries Iunius in his 5. controuersy lib. 3. cap. 19. writeth thus of Papists Lutherans and Caluinists VVe agree in the essentiall foundation Essentiall foundation Zanchius in his foresayd preface In despite of the Diuell that Church of Rome hath kept the principall grounds of fayth Principall grounds of fayth Boysseul also in his forenamed confutation pag. 79 VVe acknowledge that it is pure in the cheife articles of Christian Religion And Vorstius in his Anti-bellarmin pag. 188. It is manifest that there are many in that company of Papists who rightly hold the fundamentall points The fundamentall points of our Religion And of the English Protestants his Maiesty in his monitory epistle pag. 148. plainly intimateth that Papists do stick vnto the auncient foundations of the old true Catholike and Apostolike fayth M. Hooker in his 3. booke of Ecclesiasticall policy pag. 128. sayth Touching those maine points of Christian truth wherein they constantly still persist English ProtestaÌ„ts we gladly acknowledge them to be of the family of Iesus Christ D. Whitaker in his 2. cont quest 5. cap. 14 Papists haue the Scripture Baptisme Catechisme the articles of fayth the ten commandments the Lords prayer The main points and those things came to vs from them D. Whitgift in his answere to the admonition pag. 40 Papistry confesseth the same articles of fayth that we do although not sincerely And pag. 62 Papists belieue the same articles of fayth that we do M. Perkins in the preface of his reformed Catholike By a reformed Catholike I vnderstand any one that holds the same necessary heads of Religion with the Roman Church The necessary heads yet so as he pares of and reiects all errours in doctrine whereby the sayd religion is corrupted D. Morton in his answere to the Protestants Apology lib. 3. cap. 18. sect 1 VVe may graunt that God may cooperate with them to the conuersion of Infidels The ghospell of saluation so far as the Ghospell of Christ which is the power of God to saluation is preached by them D. White in defence of his way cap. 38 In the substantiall articles of fayth we agree with them Lastly D. Hall in his foresayd booke sayth The substantiall articles that the Romane Church is one touching the common principles of fayth Those things which she holdeth together with vs make a Church As farre as she holdeth the foundation she is a church 3. Thirdly the same point is proued The articles which make a Church by that they graunt some to be saints whom they acknowledge also to haue liued and died Papists For of S. Bernards holines thus writeth Luther vpon the 4. cap. to the Galathians Bernard a man so holy pious chast c. The Apology of the Confession of Auspurg in the chapter of answere to the ArgumeÌ„ts Antony Bernard That they say some Papists be saints Francis Dominicke and other holy Fathers Brentius in his Apology for the Confession of Wirtenberg pag. 297 I iudge Bernard to haue byn a man indued with great piety and to liue now happily with Christ Caluin in his 4. booke of institutions c. 7. num 22 Gregory and Bernard holy men Vorstius in Anti-bellarmin pag. 181 VVe graunt Bernard indeed to haue byn pious Lubbert in his 6. booke of the church c. 7 VVe think Bernard to haue byn truly holy D. Whitaker cont 3. quest 5. c. 14 I take Bernard to haue byn holy indeed And D. Morton in his Apology part 2. lib. 2. c. 23 I confesse Bernard was a Saint And as plainly do they confesse that he was a Papist For thus Luther in the place now cited Let vs imagine that Religion and discipline of the ancient Popery to flourish now and to be obserued with that rigour with which the Eremits Hierome Augustin Bernard Francis and many others obserued it And in his booke of abrogating Masse Bernard Bonauenture Francis Dominicke with their
sooner giue him interest in the couenant then the child that is descended of him For how can the fathers beliefe lay hold on the promises and couenant of God for his children and cannot do it for himselfe 6. These allegations demonstrate The suÌ„mâ— of Protestants ConfessioÌ„ touching Papists that by the Confession of the Protestants the starkest Papists such as are of beliefe that the masse the Popes primacy and all things else of his are good vpright and of God are soldiers vnder Christ may attaine to saluation may be Saints yea that there are among them both many and great Saints That there is in the Church of Rome what so is necessary to saluation the summe of fayth the ground-works the essentiall ground-works the principall grounds of fayth the cheife articles the fundamentall heads the necessary heads the cheife parts the Ghospell of saluation the kernell of Christianity and all Christian good Lastly that the Church of Rome Is a limme and member of the vniuersall Church of the Catholike Church a member of the true Church and is of the family of Iesus Christ that it is mother to the children of God that it is the Church of God the temple of God the body of Christ the Spouse of Christ that it abides yet in the couenant is not yet cast of or put away is not yet killed but is yet aliue Which words plainly import that the Roman or Popish Church is a true Church in the sight of God 7. But is it credible Note that such as make profession of Christian religion should mount to that height of impiety as dare to reiect diuorce themselues from that Church which they confesse remaynes yet in the couenant of God which Christ hath not yet reiected Is it credible that they feare not to impugne to make bitter inuectiues to disgorge curses and execrations against her whom they acknowledge to be their Mother which bore them to Christ to be the Church of God to be the body and Espouse of Christ What can be more lewd and impious then to rage and raile against their owne mother against the Church of God against the very body and Espouse of Christ What strang and monstrous blindnes is it not to perceiue that whiles they confesse the church of Rome to be the church of God Espouse of Christ they acknowledge their owne to be the Synagogue of Antichrist and strumpet of the Diuell For Christ cannot haue two Espouses repugnant each to other Now the Protestant church and church of Rome are parts so opposite as can neuer make one For they iarre and disagree mainely in diuers weighty points as namely touching the canon and exposition of the Scripture touching sacrifice and the Sacraments touching the worship of God his Saints touching the meanes to obtaine remission of sinnes and many the like Whereupon Beza in Confes cap. 7. pag. 56 VVe dissent sayth he from the Papist about they very summe of saluatioÌ„ And others say no lesse as shall be shewed hereafter in the 2. booke and 6. cap If ours be true Religion sayth S. Augustin to the Donatists which yet came nearer to Catholiks then Protestants do yours is superstition Lib. 2. coÌ„t Gaud. c. 11. Againe If our communion be the Church of Christ yours is not Christs Church Lib. 1. de Bapt. c. 11. for that is but one which so euer it be And in another place VVhen they approue that Church which as is manifest we communicate with all and they do not by that their testimony they acknowledge themsâ—lues conuinced Lib. ad Donat post codat and giue you plaine notice if you be wise what you ought to forgoe and what it behoues you to cleaue to and retaine And S. Cyprian epistle 76 If the Church were on Nouatus side it was not with Cornelius Num. 4. 8. The Protestants now and then perceiue as much when they acertaine vs as hath byn shewed in the first chapter that who so seuereth himselfe from any particuler congregation which is a true Church excludes himselfe wholy from the church Caluin saw it when 4. Insti c. 2. § 10. he wrote thus VVe cannot graunt them Papists that they are the church but the necessity of subiectioÌ„ obedieÌ„ce will befall vs. If they be churches the power of the keyes is in their possession If they be churches that promise of Christ VVhatsoeuer ye bind on earth shall be bouÌ„d in heauen takes effect in them M. Perkins perceiued it to when in his explicatioÌ„ of the Creed col 794. he sayd Zanchiuâ— lib. 1. de Eâ—cl c. 7. As long as any church forsakes not Christ we may not withdraw our selues from it The reason is apparant because in so doing we should depart from Christ or Christ shold be parted euen as we are rent and disioynted from the church wherein he is And in his Reformed Catholike tract 22. col 470. Whâ—re he sayth VVe ought not to deuide our selues from any nation or people which hath not before cut it selfe of from Christ D. Feild likewise saw it in his 3. booke of the Church c. 47. Where he makes this acknowledgement Surely if he can proue that we confesse it the Church of Rome to be the true Church he needeth not vse any other argument But we haue clearely prooued it by sundry plaine confessions of many famous Protestants And hitherto we haue discouered how they sometyme harbour and receiue Papists into their church now we will shew that they vse the like curtesy towards the rest CHAP. III. That Protestants acknowledge for members of their Church sometyme those that deny as well fundamentall as other articles of their fayth sometymes Heretiks Schismatiks yea their profest and sworne enemies THAT they esteeme all such to be members of their Church as swarue from the Christian fayth only in points not fundamentall themselues in the preface of the Switzers Confession declare in these words Mutuall consent and agreement in the principall points of doctrine in orthodoxe sense and brotherly charity was of religious antiquity thought abundantly sufficient And D. Whitaker cont 4. quest 1. c. 2. pag. 527 God forbid that they should be no longer of the number of the faythfull who are in some points of a contrary opinion so they assent in the cheife and principall and necessary matters And for as much as the Protestants opinion herein is well knowne for whâ—Ì„ it is obiected vnto them that their churches disagree in points of fayth this serues them for excuse I think it needlesse to alleage any more of their sayings He that will may looke the Confession of Saxony cap. de Eccles Luther tom 7. lib. de not Eccles fol. 149. Melancthon tom 4. in ca. 3. 1. Cor. Kemnitius 1. part Examinis tit de bonis operibus pag. 332. Zuinglius tom 1. in Prefat lib de Prouident Caluin 4. Institut cap. 1. § 12. and cap. 2. § 1. Beza epist 2. Zanchius in prefat lib.
de natura Dei Hospin part 1. Histor lib. 1. cap. 2. Vorstius in Anti-bellarmin pag. 116. and others moe And as their iudgements are different touching the fundamentall articles of fayth so in determining who are to be accounted members of their Church their opinions are vnlike Some of theÌ„ say that the summe the cheife and principall heads of fayth and all things necessary to be belieued are comprized in the Apostles Creed The Apostles Creed The principall heads of fayth sayth Caluin 2. Institut c. 16. § 8 are set downe in the Creed And it is as D. Whitaker sayth lib. 3. de Scriptura cap. 3. sect 1. a list of the cheife heads of fayth It containes sayth M. Perkins in his Reformed Catholik col 476. all points of Religion which we are necessarily to belieue Hemingius in Syntagmate pag. 196 It containes the ground-work of the whole frame of Religion Vrsinus in Cathechesi The summe of those things which the Ghospell proposeth vnto vs to belieue that we may be partakers of Gods couenant is comprehended in the Apostles Creed Pareus lib. 1. de Iustificat cap. 9. hath these words In the Creed is layd open the summe of that doctrine which we must belieue to saluation The same teacheth Luther tom 7. in 3. symbol fol. 138. Confessio Pasatina in initio prefat Syntagmat Confes the French Catechisme Brentius in Prolegomenis pag. 244. The Catechisme of Heidleberg part 2. Bullinger in compendio fidei lib. 6. cap. 2. and tom 1. decad 5. serm 2. Polanus in Analysi Catechismi Basse Boysseul in confutat Spondei p. 10. Raynolds in Apol. Thes pag. 241. Carleton in Consensu tract de Eccles c. 9. The same is intimated by Zanchius lib. 1. epist pag. 219. and by Musculus in locis tit de Eccles pag. 309. These men then if the sequele of their doctrine be correspondent to the premises must needs acknowledge that the profession of the Apostles Creed though ioyned with the denyall of whatsoeuer other articles of fayth sufficeth to make a Protestant and a limme of their Church And some of them there be who confesse it For Bullinger lib. cit cap. 11. fol. 83. sayth All that we comprise in the 12. Beliefe of the Apostles Câ—eâ—d sufficient to saluation articles is the true and Christian fayth vnto which whosoeuer cleauech he beliueth right is approued of God is iustified and made partner of euerlasting life Caluin cont Gentil pag. 659 The confession of fayth contayned in the Apostles Creed ought to be inough for all modest Christians And Musculus in the place last quoted They are wonderfull vnreasonable and vnaduised who not content with this beliefe exact of the faythfull that they belieue yet other things which are neither mentioned in the Apostles Creed nor in baptisme Aretius in locis part 3. fol. 67 The articles necessary to saluation are those which the Creed hath set vs downe As for the rest since the matter cannot be decided variety of iudgements must be borne with all Polanus also in the place before cited These articles of the Creed if they be vnfaynedly belieued suffice to purchase saluation nor is it required we should belieue ought besides And Hall in â—ua Roma irreconcil sect 1 VVe are all one and the same Church as many as in any part of the earth worship Iesus Christ the only Sonne of God and Sauiour of the world and professe the same common beliefe comprised in the Creed The Creeds 2. Some of them will haue the grounds of fayth to be contained in the Creed as Plessy lib. de Eccles c. 5. Hereupon Marke Antony de Dominis in consil suae profect pag. 18. 20. sayth Restore peace and charity to all Christian Churches which professe Christ by the essentiall cognisances of beliefe Others ad to the Creeds the 4. generall Councels or at least one of them as D. Andrews in Respons ad Apol. Bellarmin cap. 1. pag. 52 That which is set downe in the Creeds and 4. generall councells The Creeds the 4. generall â—ouncels is to vs a sufficient obiect of fayth And in Tortura Torti pag. 127 Nor do we lightly discerne and try heresy by other touch-stone then by examining whether it be repugnant tâ— any of the three ancient Creeds or 4. ancient generall councells And Melancthon tom 3. l. de iudicijs Synodorum fol. 389. sayth of himself that he is not without the Church because he faythfully imbraceth all the articles of the Apostles and Nycen Creed Musculus also in the place aboue quoted puts downe this conclusion As many as belieue the Apostles and Athanasius Creed hold all the Catholike fayth and are not heretkes but Catholiks Some of them are of opinion that al the fundamental points of beliefe are contayned in the Creed and decalogue The Creed and Decalogue as Melancthon tom 1. in cap. 7. Matth. pag. 402. tom 3. in respons ad artic Bauar fol. 363. Vrsinus in Miscellaneis Thes 8. pag. 1â—4 M. Perkins in his exposition of the Creed col 789. Some of them say they are in the Creed the decalogue and Lords prayer The creed Decalogue and Lords prayer as Luther tom 7. in Enchirid. fol. 118. Beza lib. de notis Eccles pag. 52. Keckerman lib. 1. System Theol. 201. D. White in the preface of his way and in his defence of the same cap. 8. pag. 54. Others reckon the 10. commandements the Creed the Lords prayer the Sacraments as D. Whitaker cont 1. quest 4. cap. 4. The creed Decalogue Lords prayer Sacraments And the Ministry pag. 342. howbeit quest 5. cap. 9. pag. 362. he omitteth Sacraments putteth in Catechisme in exchaunge Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 24. vnto which Ieslerus lib. de bello Euchar. pag. 40. adioyneth the ministry And these men according to their seuerall decisions concerning the fundamentall points of beliefe must with like diuersity require in a limme of the Protestant Church either the beliefe of the Creed alone and decalogue or must adde besides as each think it needfull the Lords prayer the Sacraments Baptisme and worship of Christ the Catechisme and the Ministery 3. But sometymes they giue larger scope demaund farre lesse to wit Baptisme only or faith in Christ Let him let Chrâ—sâ—ianity staÌ„d saitâ— D. Andrews in respons cit cap. 5. pag. 126 in baptisme and worship of Christ. M. Morton in his booke of the Kingdome of Israel and the Church pag. 91 In what place soeuer any society of men adore true God in Christ they professe the substance of Christian Religion Baptisme alone Ierlach us disput 22. de Eccles pag. 662 VVheresoeuer baptisme remaines curier in regard of its substance thither reacheth the territory of the Catholike Church Luther de Notis Eccl fol. 150. Againe If they acknowledge true baptisme both in oâ—rs and in other congregations they must yeld that in the same there is likewise the Catholike Church And Hurterus in his
of the building is set vp And Zuinglius Respons ad Billi tom 2. fol. 261. When one obiected vnto him the dissention amongst the Sacramentaries in expouÌ„ding Christs words of the supper answereth No man ought to be offended with this diuersity more then with the difference among many captaines Tertull. praes c. 41. Athanas orat 1. coÌ„t Arian Hieron ad Cresiphont August in Psal 80. Beda l. 1. in Iob. c. 7. who go about to conquer a castle whiles one would haue it battered another vndermined and a third would haue it scaled For all agree to destroy the castle the difference is only about the way not about the summe of the matter And so concludeth that if any SacrameÌ„taries haue erred They erred sayth he in the letter not in spirit in the summe they agree all The summe therefore wherein all Protestants agree is to ouerthrow the Popish castle and Catholike fayth in which also the ancient heretikes agreed amongst themselues as the holy Fathers do testify and who attempteth that by what meanes soeuer erreth not in spirit but in letter only not in the summe but in some circumstance only of ProtestaÌ„cy But with what spirit they are led herein let them heare of their owne Prophet Luther defens verb. coenae tom 7. l. 411 VVhat a kind of spirit is that sayth he which hath no other end but to weaken the aduerse party without all doubt it is no other spirit then the Diuell 3. Fourthly because they describe paint name a Protestant by departure from the Pope and Popish doctrine The Confession of Wittenberg in Prefat describeth Protestants to be such as haue changed in their Churches a kind of Popish doctrine which had byn vsed for many yeares and some other ancient ceremonies M. Perkins in the Preface of his Reformed Catholik sayth By a Reformed Catholike so he termeth a Protestant I vnderstand any one that holds the same necessary heads of Religion with the Roman Church yet so as he pares of and reiects all errors in doctrine whereby the sayd religion is corrupted D. Willet in the Preface of his Synopsis A Protestant is he that professeth the ghospell of Iesus Christ and hath renounced the iurisdiction of the Sea of Rome and the forced and vnnaturall obedience to the Pope Schusselburg tom 13. Catal. Haeret. pag. 23 A Lutheran or true Christian is he who hath seuered himselfe from Papists c. And tom 8. pag. 363 True Lutherans are they who imbrace the doctrine of the ghospell amending Popish abuses You see how in all these descriptions of a Protestant the denyall of the Pope and Popish doctrine is put as a certaine difference which concurreth to the making and distinguishing of a Protestant from all others Hereupon D. Audrews Apol. Cont. Bellarm. cap. 1. sayth Sauing this Protestation that they will not suffer certaine Popish errors and abuses our fayth is no other then yours is or ought to be And he addeth that they call their religion reformed only because it is purged from certaine deuises and corruptions which had crept into it And sayth that Bucer and Peter Martyr did only pluck vp certaine cockle which Papists had sowed In like sort Boysseul in his Confutation of Sponde pag. 724. sayth Take away your Popery that which dependeth thereof and you and we shall be but one church because we shall haue but one Confession of fayth Moreouer Plessy in the forefront of his mystery of iniquity painteth a Protestant with a torch in his hand setting fire to the tower of Babylon by which he vnderstandeth the Popedome And finally Luther in exempl Theol. Papist tom 2. fol. 401. calleth himselfe an Anti-papist as of his principall end or office and sayth that he was called by diuine reuelation to destroy the Popes Kingdom D. Humfrey also termeth Ochinus a stout Anti-papist as if to be a Protestant and an Anti-papist were all one 4. Fiftly because the same opinions which in Papists they detest in other who are opposite to the Pope they dissemble or extenuate Lubbert lib. 1. Replicat cap. 4. sayth The Lutherans dispute not with vs about the Canon of Scriptures nor we with them And lib. 4. de Concil cap. vlt VVe contend not with the Churches of Saxony which keep images in the Churches And yet they dispute most eagerly against Catholiks about the Canon of scriptures and images The Scots in their general Confession professe to detest Popery for maintayning the reall presence of Christs body in the Eucharist for making the signe of the Crosse for denying infants without baptisme to be saued And in their other Confession c. 22. they say they shunne the Communion of the Popish Church Conf. Augustus â—visit â—axon Liturgia Augliaâ— Conference at Hampt Court because her ministers are not Ministers of Christ because the permitteth women to christen in case of necessity and yet dissemble that the Lutheran Protestants allow all these points and that the English Protestants admit Popish Priests for sufficient ministers command the making of the crosse in baptisme allow womens baptisme in case of necessity but because they are against the Pope as well as the Scots their opposition to the Pope like sole fayth couereth all and maketh that the Scots impute not these matters to them And if at any tyme the Catholiks do set before their eyes the errors or dissentions amongst them either they impudently (a) Laâ—ko Erastus in Schussel l. 4. Theol. Caluin p. 310. Feild l. 3. of the Church cap. 24. deny them or greatly extenuate them saying that they are not about the (b) Apol. Anglis foundation not of (c) Whit. CoÌ„t 2 q. 5. cap. 8. weighty matters of light matters not of the (d) Bucer in Schussel lib cit Caluin de rat concord p. 862. matter but of the manner of (e) Epist Monitor things indifferent of I know not what titles and finally only of (f) Mart. in loc tit de Euchar. §. 65. Hosp part 2 fol. 134. 163. 109. BruÌ„sfeld resp ad Erasm words Surely I imagine as they say that all sinnes in the elect faythfull are veniall but in others all are mortall so they deeme that all errors in those that are opposite to the Pope are veniall and light but in Papists all are haynous and mortall So much the alteration of the person changeth the case with them Hereupon Q. Elizabeth enacted not that it should be treason for any one to dissuade froÌ„ that religion which she had established vnlesse it were done with intention to induce him who was dissuaded to the obedience of the Bishop of Rome And hereupon also some of them openly professe that they more esteeme Turks then Papists forsooth because the Turke agreeth with them in hatred of the Pope and Popery in respect whereof they little regard the consent in the mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation and Passion and other articles of Christian fayth Sixtly they make the forsaking of Popery an
saluation wholy ouerturned And lib. de Necess Reform fol. 47. that the safety of the Church dependeth vpon this doctrine no lesse then mans life dependeth of his soule Pareus in Prooem lib. de Iustificat On this alone the hinges of our comfort and saluation do hang. And lib. 2. cap. 2. affirmeth that it was the cheifest cause of the separation of the Protestant Church from Popery And lib. 4. cap. 2. sayth The only doctrine of obtayning iustice and saluation by only sayth and of loosing them by incredulity is the sincere and proper ghospell all other doctrine in the scripture belongeth to the law And those of Geneua Prefat Syntag. Confess auouch that this article is the groundworke forme and soule of Christian religion The soule the summe of Euangelicall doctrine of which men are called faythfull and true Christians without which the knowledge of other articles hath no holesome fruit For it is the substantiall inward and formall cause of saluation of which all Sacraments instituted by God are and were pledges and seales vnto which article all the other do tend as to their center and in which mans felicity consisteth 5. Neither do our English Protestants make lesse account of this their article of iustification by only fayth For D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 6. cap. 3. pag. 562. sayth It seemes to be the cheifest of all and most fundamentall The Prore Puppe as in which the Prore and puppe of our saluation consisteth and who faine any other meanes of Iustification do ouerthrow the foundation and most necessary heads of Christian religion and are fallen from saluation and euerlasting life And Respons ad Rat. r. Camp he writeth thus of their doctrine of Iustification by only fayth If Iames or a heauenly Angell disallow it he is impure wicked and to be detested to hell D. Humfrey in his oration de vitando fermen to calleth this article The cheifest point and hinges of fayth D. Fulke de Success pag. 4. The principall head of the ghospell M. Fox in his acts pag. 440 The foundation of all Christianity And pag. 770 The fouÌ„dation The only principall origen of our saluation And finally M. Powell lib. 2. de Antichristo cap. 5 The summe of the doctrine of sayth Neither is it to be merueiled that Protestants so highly esteeme this their article both because it is the cheifest bait wherwith they draw men vnto them as also because as Luther confessed it is their cheife defence without which they had long since perished and finally because Iustification being one principall end of religion if speciall fayth be the only meanes to attaine to iustification vndoubtedly it ought highly to be esteemed of that religion which belieueth it to be such a meanes ProtestaÌ„ts esteeme of only faith Thus we see that according to the common opinion of Protestants to belieue himselfe to be iustified by only fayth is the cheifest article the foundation the stay the head the fountaine the summe the last end the prore and puppe the hinges the proppe the castle the bulwarck the essentiall difference the definition the soule the forme the formall cause the only rocke the only safegard of Protestancy the only way to heauen which falling the church yea God himselfe falleth But none can be a Protestant without the foundation head soule forme summe definition c. of a Protestant Therefore none can he held for a Protestant vnlesse he professe to belieue to be iustified by only speciall fayth Whomesoeuer therefore Protestants cannot proue to haue held this article they cannot with any reason and coulour challenge for Protestants And because as it shall hereafter appeare they cannot proue that any one before Luther held this article nay on the contrary we will proue that Luther first deuised it they cannot with any appearance of truth auouch that there was any Protestant before him And in like sort whome we can proue not to haue belieued this article we may euidently conclude that they were no Protestants That it is necessary for a Protestant to belieue all the fundamentall articles of Protestancy CHAP. VII â— BESIDE the foresayd article of Iustification by only fayth it is also necessary to the making of a Protestant of a member of the Protestant Church Vâ—â—â—d l. 3. de Eccles c. 2. that he belieue at least all the fundamentall points of Protestancy either explicitly or implicitly so that he obstinatly deny no one of them This is manifest First because as I shewed before cap. 1. it is the common opinion of Protestants that all those are out of the Church whosoeuer deny one fundamentall article Num. 3. Againe because themselues say that the name of a fundamentall article doth insinuate that it sustaineth the Church as the foundation sustaineth the house Besides all Protestants assigne truth or purity in doctrine for the mark of the Church As the Confession of Ausparg cap. 7. The English Confession cap. 19. The Suiâ—zers cap. de Eccles and other Protestants commonly and their meaning is Truth essentiall to the Church that it is the essentiall marck Wherupon D Whitaker Controuers 2. quest 5. cap. 17. pag. 541. sayth that it is absolutely necessary and the essentiall marck And at Rat. 3. Campiani that it is the substantiall note His Maiesty in his epistle to Cardinall Peron that in is the substantiall forme of the Church Caluin epist 190. The purity of doctrine is the soule of the Church And the same say Sadeel ad Sophism Turriani loc 1. Author de Eccles in Danaeo pag. 1029. Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 145. D. Willet cont 2. quest 3. pag. 102. Yea D. Morton part 1. Apos lib. 1. cap. 6. affirmeth that Protestants account the truth of Euangelicall doctrin the cheifest and almost only essentiall inseparable and perpetuall marck of the Church And hence it proceedeth that they put the truth of purity of doctrine in their definition of the Church as an essentiall part thereof as the French Confession cap. 27. The Magdeburgians Cent. 1. lib. 1. cap. 4 col 140. Melancthon tom 1 in cap. 16. Matthaeâ— D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 20. pag. 552. Sadeel ad Sophism surriani loc 21. and others commonly But this purity of doctrine if it must be in any articles especially it must be in those which are fundamentall as is manifest and the Protestants do graunt For thus writeth D. Morton part 1. Purity in fundameÌ„tal points essential to the Church Apol. lib. 2. cap. 38. Purity in the fundamentall principles of fayth is necessary to the being and making of the Church And D. Feild lib. 2. de Eccles cap. 3 Purity from fundamentall errour is necessarily required to a Church And the like hath Vorstius lib. cit pag. 148. Nay the English Confession art 19. defineth the visible Church of Christ to be a congregation of faythfull men in which the pure word of God is preached and the Sacraments duely ministred according to Christs
ordinance in al those things that of necessity are requisite to the same And his maiesty ep cit Whitâ—k Cont. 2. q. â— c. 18. Sutla l. 1. de Eccl. c. 1. Mort. Apol. l. 2. cap. 3â— It is needfull that the churches be vnited amoÌ„g themselues in vnity of saith and doctrine in those points which are necessary to saluation And hereupon diuers Protestants deny those Corinthians who denyed the Resurrection and those Galathians who ouerturned the Ghospell of Christ to haue byn members of the Church because they denyed a fundamentall point point of Christian fayth Wherefore vnlesse Protestants will deny their common doctrine in this matter reiect their owne definition of the Church cast away their only marke of the Church and leaue no marke of her at all they cannot auouch any one to haue byn a Protestant who dissented from them in any fundamentall point of doctrine 2. If any one say that although he who denyeth any fundamentall point of Protestancy cannot be of the visible Protestant Church yet may he be of their inuisible Church I answeare that as shall be shewed hereafter there can be no Church which is inuisible in profession of fayth howsoeuer it be inuisible in iustice and predestination and therefore none can be of the inuisible Church who is not also of the visible Againe Protestants will haue none to be of the inuisible Church but such as are iust But how is he iust who denieth Gods faith and maketh him a lyer and that in a principall point of religion Besides Protestants say that none can be a member of the inuisible Church vnlesse he be also a member of the visible Church if so conueniently he may 3. Moreouer the holy Fathers most frequently Leo. Ierm 4. de Nat. Hier. lib. 3 â—oÌ„t Ruffi Aug. l. de haer q. 11. in Mat. 18. de ciuit c. 51. Basilius in Theodor. lib. 4. c. 19. and sometymes also Protestants themselues do teach that it is necessary to a faythful and belieuing man that he deny no one article of fayth and much lesse a fundamentall or principall article Finally Protestants are wont to laugh at Catholiks if they proue any Father to haue byn a Papist because he held some fundamentall point of Papistry For thus writeth Pareus lib. 1. de amiss gratiae cap. 1 It is ridiculous for him to conclude S. Augustin to haue byn a Papist because in this errour he agreed with them no lesse them if you inferre that we are Papists because we agree with Papists in some truth And D. White in defence of his Way cap. 45. pag. 432 His holding of some things superstitiously which the Church of Rome hath entertayned proues not that he professed the same fayth the Church of Rome now doth because the fayth of the sayd Church comprehends much more then he held and what he held is now otherwise expounded and applyed then by him it was And in his Way pag. 298 If he would deale faythfully and to the point he should not say Bernard professed the Roman fayth and was a monke but he should haue shewed that be professed the present Roman fayth as the Councell of Trent and the Iesuits haue set it downe at least in the fundamentall points thereof Let them then abide the law which themselues haue made and let not them conclude any one to haue byn a Protestant because he agreed with them in one or more points vnlesse he agreed with them at least in all fundameÌ„tall points of their doctrine I adde also that against Protestants we do rightly conclude that the holy Fathers were Papists if we do shew that they dissented from Protestants in one or more fundamentall points For they will not deny but that the Fathers were either Papists or Protestants But Protestants they were not if they denyed their doctrine in any fundamentall point thereof therfore they must needs be Papists And the like is not of others whome Protestants cannot coÌ„clude to haue byn theirs if they can proue that they were none of ours Because neither we wil graunt nor they can auouch that such were either ours or theirs as they graunt of the holy Fathers What is necessarily required to a ProtestaÌ„ts Be it therefore certaine and assured that to a Protestant is necessarily required that either explicitly or at least implicitly and vertually he belieue all the fundamentall points of Protestancy and willfully deny no one of them And that therefore Protestants can no way challenge any who reiected any one of their fundamentall and principall articles It remayneth that we set downe the fundamentall articles of Protestancy lib. de vnie baptism c. â—â— because Protestants themselues agree not herein but as S. Augustin sayd that the Donatists did concerning sinnes which they would haue to exclude men out of the Church so Protestants in a strange fashion distinguish the fundamentall points of their fayth deuising rules of distinction amongst them not out of the scriptures but out of their owne heads Which be the fundamentall heads of Protestancy CHAP. VIII 1. THAT we may determine which be the fundamentall articles of Protestant religion we must first shew How much ProtestaÌ„ts esteeme the Conf. of Ausp that all Protestants professe to receiue the Confession of Auspurge at least in the principall and fundamentall articles thereof Of the Lutheran Protestants this is manifest For in their conference at Aldeburg both parties of them agreed to admit it for a rule of their disputation And ibidem pag. 404. those of the Electors side do say VVe referre our selues and do looke vnto the Confession of Auspurg as to the foundation of religion next after the word of God And other Lutherans in Zanchius in Supplicat ad Senat. Argentinens pag. 70. The fouÌ„dation of Religion do appoint that it be taught according to the Confession of Auspurge presented to Charles the 5. anno 1530 and the Apology thereof subscribed at Numberg and that it be the square and rule of all religion in all articles The square of religion Heshusius lib. de present corp Christi in caelo affirmeth that amongst the Lutherans all that are promoted to degrees and cure of soules do sweare to the Confession of Auspurg and the Apology thereof They sweare to it The same testifyeth Lobechius disp 1. pag. 12. and as Lauatherus addeth anno 1530 The lawes of the vniuersity of VVittemberg do streightly forbid to defend any opinions which are contrary to this Confession Heâ—â—â—sius also lib. cit writeth The authority thereof most holy that the authority thereof ought to be most holy amongst all godly men Westphalus cont Laskum affimeth that it containeth the summe of doctrine founded in the word of God Ernestus Regius in vita Vrbani that it is the square and rule of controuersies in the Church Lobechius lib. cit that it is the rule of sayth and doctrine distinguishing the orthodoxall Church from the heterodoxall Reineccius in armatura tom
1. cap. 28. CoÌ„taineth the suÌ„me of doctrine affirmeth that it was inspired from heauen and written by instinct of the holy ghost Nay some Lutherans as testifieth Laskus epist ad Regem Poloniae sayd that they would rather doubt of the doctrine of Paul The Rule of fayth then of the Confession of Auspurg And with the Lutherans herein conspire the Sacramentaries For as Bucer confessed in the Conference of Ratisbon The Protestants condemne all writings Inspired froÌ„ heaueÌ„ which are repugnant to the Confession of Auspurge and the Apology thereof Caluin admonit vlt. ad Westphalum pag. 797. sayth Surius anno 154â— Touching the Confession of Auspurg I answere thus that as it was published at Ratisbon there is not one word in it contrary to our doctrine And epist 236. sayth that be wittingly and willingly subscribed to it Beza epist 1. writeth in this sort I define those to be our Churches which hold the Confession of Auspurg the French Confession c. And Apol. 1. cont Saintem pag. 297 Neither is the Confession of Auspurg such as any pious man may reiect it Zanchius loc cit receiued the Confession of Auspurge as the square and rule of all doctrine And as Vorstius writeth Respons ad epist Parci pag. 91 In the vniuersity of Heddelberg they vsed to sweare to no Confession but to that of Auspurg Or as D. Whitaker affirmeth Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 5. pag. 505 The Confession of Auspurg is receiued of all Protestants vnlesse perhapps it be in one word or two rather then in any opinion And in truth seing all Sacramentaries professe to hold the Lutherans who follow the Confession of Auspurg for their brethren in Christ and besides when we obiect vnto them their dissention in matters of fayth they appeale vnto their harmony or syntagme of Confessions amongst which the Confession of Auspurg is placed as do those of Geneua Prefat Syntagmatis the Switzers Prefat suae Confess Beza epist 1. Sadeel Indice Repetit Turrian pag. 808. and respons ad Theses Posnan c. 11. Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 168. D. Feild lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 12. 42. D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 8. pag. 521. D. Andrews Respons ad Apol. Bellarm. c. 1. D. Fulke de Success pag. 287. 304. D. White in his way to the Church pag. 138. and others commonly When as I say the SacrameÌ„taries do thus they must needs approue the Confession of Auspurg at least in all the principall and fundamentall points thereof For I hope they will not hold theÌ„ for brethren in Christ whome they see to dissent from them in fundamentall points of Christian fayth nor say that those Confessions agree which are repugnant in the very foundation of beliefe VVhich the coÌ„fess of Ausp accouÌ„teth fundameÌ„tal articles 2. But this Confession of Auspurg so generally receiued and of so high account with Protestants as we haue rehearsed hath set downe and declared which be the fundamentall points of Protestancy For in the beginning thereof is set this title The principall articles and after that many Protestanticall opinions are rehearsed thus it sayth of them cap. 21. The suÌ„me of Protest doctrine This is the summe of the doctrine which is deliuered in our Churches And â—fterward naming certaine controuersies of Indulgences Pilgrimages the like it sayth of them These kind of matters we haue let passe that those things which are the cheifest in this cause might be easierly knowne Againe Cheifest points those things only are rehearsed which were necessary to be told And finally VVe would present these articles before written in which our Confession might be extant Only necessary and the summe of their doctrine who teach vs might be seene And in another edition of this Confession in Melancthon tom 3. thus is written in the end thereof VVe haue comprised the summe of Euangelicall doctrine necessary to Churches SuÌ„me of doctrine necessary Wherefore vnlesse Protestants will reiect their first and most maiesticall Confession of Auspurg they must needs confesse that the articles thereof are the summe of Protestant doctrine the principal articles of their fayth are they only which are necessary to be told and the summe of Euangelicall doctrine necessary to Churches But surely such are fundamentall articles 3. Neither doth the sayd Confession alone but also many other great Protestants acknowledge the articles of it to be fundamentall For thus hath the Apology of that Confession in Melancthon tom 3. fol. 91 Truth necessary to the Church VVe haue comprised in the Confession of Auspurg almost the summe of all Christian doctrine And Melancthon himselfe in the preface of that Apology writeth that that Confession is truth necessary to the Church And likewise in the preface of his 3. to me I gathered together the heads of confession comprising almost the summe of the doctrine of our Churches The whole forme of the Confession was after sent to Luther who wrote back that he had read and allowed this Confession And tom 4. Respons ad Staphylum pag. 817. sayth that the Confession of Auspurg contayneth the whole body of doctrine And in Prefat 2. tom Luther 11 The summe of doctrine which our Church preached is publikely comprehended in the Confession of Auspurg The whole body of doctrine Likewise the D. of Wittemberg in the preface of his Confession speaking of the Confession of Auspurg sayth thus VVe commanded our preachers to write the summe of their doctrine And the Ministers of the Elector in colloq Aldeburg scrip 3. pag. 21. say VVe doubt not but the summe of doctrine reuealed from heauen is dextrously plainly and most sweetly contayned in the Confession of Auspurg And pag. seq VVâ—â—â— the Confession of Auspurg we comprehended the summe of doctrine Kemnice Praefat. lib. de coena The summe of holesome doctrine is comprehended in the Confession of Auspurg out of the word of God Westphalus defens altera cont Laskum sayth It containeth in briefe the summe of Christian doctrine Iames Andrews lib. cont Hosium pag. 22 The summe of pious doctrine is contained in the Confession of Auspurg Finally the Lutherans as the Sacramentaries of Newstad write in Admonit de lib. Concord cap. 4. Note pag. 116 do place in the role of heretiks as erring in the foundation of sayth and saluation all those who find any sault with the Confession of Auspurg or dissent from it in any article And as touching the Sacramentaries themselues the Palatin Confession pag. 198. sayth thus That Confession of fayth which was presented at Auspurg and the Apology annexed thereto was taken out of the doctrine of the Apostles Prophets and the foresayd Creed as a certaine litle summe Caluin lib. 1. de Lib. arbit pag. 142 VVhen at Auspurg there was to be exhibited a forme of Confession Melancthon the Author thereof would not make any stay but only in that doctrine Doctrine necessary to saluation which alone is proper to the
say the Church can be destroyed 8. If any reply that S. Augustin vpon the 128. psalme sayth that the Church was once in Abel alone and Tertullian lib. de poenit cap. 10. the Church is in one or two I answere that S. Augustin there by the Church vnderstandeth those only whome the scripture by name hath canonized as it hath Abel for otherwise it is manifest that in Abels tyme there were others that were of the Church besides himselfe to wit Adam and Eue. And Tertullian by the Church vnderstandeth not the Catholike or vniuersall Church as we do but any number of Christians such as were those domesticall Churches which S. Paul sometymes saluted 9. The last refuge may be that what Protestants haue sayd of the destruction of the Church and fayth they meant not of their owne Church and fayth but of some others But this is a fond shift For first as I haue shewed they meane the destruction of the true Church and fayth Eyther therefore their Church and fayth is not the true but false or else they meane of their owne For the true Church and fayth is but one as the Apostle sayth Ephes 4 One God one fayth And the Nycen Creed I belieue one church S. Cyprian lib. de vnit One God one Christ one Church and one sayth S. Hilary ad Constant VVhatsoeuer is besides one fayth is not fayth but treachery And S. Leo serm 4. de Natiuit Vnlesse it be one it is no fayth Nay Luther lib. cont Papaâ—um tom 7. fol. 461 Christ knoweth not two kinds of vnlike Churches but one only Church Caluin 4. Inst cap. 1. § 2 VVe cannot find two or three churches vnlesse Christ be pluckt in peeces And in his Catechisme As there is one head of the faythfull so they must all be vnited in one body that there be not many Churches but one only And hereupon inferreth Sadeel in Refutat Thes Posnan art 61. that what is sayd of the true Church is sayd of theirs Seeing sayth he the true Church is one and not many as often as the truth of doctrine shineth openly so often we say the true Church and therfore our Church was visible Secondly because as we haue seene they speake of the destruction of their most principall article of iustificatioÌ„ by only faith which they affirme to be the life soule and summe of their Church Thirdly because they estsoones speake of the destruction of the Ghospell but by the name of the Ghospell they meane their owne doctrine as by the name of Gospellers they vnderstand themselues as hereafter shall appeare Finally because they professe that by the name of a Protestant Lutheran or Caluinist they vnderstand a true Christian Sadeel lib. de peccat remiss cap. 1 Ours that is the true Christian Catholikes opinion D. Fulke lib. de Succest pag. 186 I will neuer deny that Iewell was a noble Protestant that is a Christian And ad Cauillat Staplet The community of Christians whome ye call Protestants Hutten in Expostul cum Erasmo Against Lutherans that is maintayners of the truth Schusselburg tom 7. Catal. haeret Pap. 73 A Lutheran or true Christian is c. And lib. 2. Theol. Caluin fol. 131 Lutherans that is true seruants of Christ Beza cont Illyricum pag. 168 VVe perceiue no difference betweene Sacramentaries and Christians Hospinian part 2. Histor fol. 384 The Sacramentaries that is the orthodoxall And Danaeus cont Bellarm. pag. 311 The Caluinists that is Christians pag. 169 A Caluinist that is a godly man 10. Wherefore out of all whâ—ch hath byn sayd in this and the former Chapter I thus make my first demonstration to proue that Luther was the Author and first beginner of the Protestant Church and religion If the Protestant Church were not at all when Luther began he was the author thereof But it was not at all Therefore he was the author of it The Maior or first proposition is euident For if it were not at all when Luther began he was the beginner of it The minor is manifest by the foresayd CoÌ„fessions of Protestants wherein they plainly say that it was substantially perished That euery man followed a Church and religion different from the Protestant before Luther arose CHAP. III. 1. THE second demonstration wherewith we will proue Luther to haue byn haue byn the Author of the Protestant Church and religion we will take from the Protestants confessions that wheÌ„ Luther first began all the world and euery man imbraced a different religion Luther in the Preface of his first come Here see euen by my case The whole world how hard it is to yet out of errours which are confirmed by the example of the whole world and by long custome as it were changed into nature And to 2. this is written in his Epitaph O Christ Long custome he shewed thâ—e when all the world was ouerwhelmed with darkenesse And lib. 1. de captiuit Babylon fol. 72. being to write against Masse he sayth Neither let it moue thee that the whole world hath the contrary opinion and custome And fol. 68 There is almost this day nothing more receiued or more seâ—led in the Church then that Masse is a sacrifice Againâ— So many ages I set vpon a thing which being approued by the custome of so many ages and consent of all is so ingrafted as it is needfull to change almost the whole face of the Church Consent of all And lib. de â—â—râ—g Miss fol. 244 How often did my trembling hart quake and reprehending me obiected that their strongest and only argument Art thou only wise what did all erre Only Luther wise were so many ages ignorant Behold how Luthers heart or conscience did tell him that he alone knew Protestancy and that for many ages all were ignorant of it And in hiâ— table talkes fol. 10 These cogitations were very troublesome to me Thou only hast the pure word of God all others want it And lib. cit de Missa â—ol 247 The common people without doubt are most fully persuaded that all men are holpen by Masses for it seemeth incredible that all the world should be so forsaken of God And fol. 256 It seemes incredible to them that Luther alone should be wise Contra Cochlaeum fol. 408 The Sophisters and Monks haue seduced the whole world to trust in works The whole world vnder the Pope Tom. 3. in psal 82. fol. 481 In tymes past the whole world was vnder the Popes Dominion Tom. 5. â—n 4. Galat. fol. 388 In former ages Paul was vnknown to the whole world Tom. 6. in cap. 11. Genes fol. 130 The wicked impostour so he termeth the Pope hath deceiued all the word in c. 37. fol. 506 The whole world was horribly brought into madnes and solly by Papists In cap. 19 fol. 238 In the former age all things lay in darknesse Tom. 7. epist ad D. Sabaudiae fol. 483 VVe confesse that the world was by the Pope most miserably seduced
God And Beza wrote a booke of this title Of the true and visible marks of the Catholike Church D. Whitaker in answere of the 3. reason of F. Campian That we iudge to be proper to the true Church that it increase and conserue Christs word that it vse the Sacraments entiâ—rly and purely These we defend to be the most true and essentiall properties of the Church Take these away and you will leaue nothing but the carcasse of the church Againe They containe the true nature of the church which if they be present they make the church and take it away if they be taken away And D. Feild in his 1. book of the church cap. 11 VVe say that that society wherein that outward profession of the truth of God is preserued is that true church of God c. Finally to omit the words of others the same teach Wigand in his method of doctrine cap. 19. Gesner in his 24. place of the Church The Magdeburgians in the Preface of their 6. CeÌ„tury Heshusius in cap. 1.1 ad Cor. Soterius in his method title of the church Pelargus in his Compend of diuinity loc 7. Sohnius in his Thesis of the Church Bullinger in his Catechisme fol. 44. Aretius in his places part 3. fol. 50. Theses of Geneua disput 74. SummeoiÌ„ Protest former CoÌ„sessioÌ„s Thus thou seest good reader that according to the manifold iudgement of Protestants a part of the definition of the essence the marke of the Church in this life of the Church militant of the Church which is belieued of the proper Church of the Church whereof the Scripture properly speaketh when it calleth her the spouse of Christ the body of Christ of the true Church of the Church properly so termed and finally of the Catholike Church that I say it is of the definition and essence a marke of this church to be a visible company professing the faith partaking the Sacraments mutually confirming themselues and that otherwise it is as they say but a carcasse of the Church Wherefore it implieth manifest contradiction that there should at any tyme haue byn a true Church and not a visible company because nothing can be without all its essentiall parts The Protestant Church therefore which as we head was before Luthers tyme altogeather inuisible was no true and proper Church but to vse their termes a Platonicall idaea or a carkasse of a Church If any reply that when Protestants affirme the foresayd definitions properties and marks of the true Church they meane not by the name of the true Church that which is simply and absolutely the true Church but that which is the true visible Church I aske why then do they simply call it the true Church if they do not so meane why are not their words conformable to their meaning Besides the Church wherof they giue the foresayd definitioÌ„s and marks they call not only the true Church but also the Church properly so termed the spouse and body of Christ the Catholike church and such like which cannot agree to any which is but a Church in appearance only and in the sight of men but only to that which is the Church in very deed and in the sight of God Further more according to the opinion of Protestants these two termes True and Visible in the nature of the Church do one destroy the other as these two True and Painted exclude each other in the nature of a man For they imagine that the true Church is a society in something that is inuisible to wit in iustification and predestination Wherupon they deny any ill or reprobate Christians to be of the true Church Wherefore as he should speake fondly who should say A true painted man so according to their owne opinion they speake as fondly when they say The true visible Church But as we can only say the true picture of a man attributing the word True to the picture not to the man so they should only The true appearance or shew of the Church gâ—uing the word True to the shew not to the Church it selfe But they are ashamed to speak so least when they inquire the marks of the true visible Church Why ProtestaÌ„ts somtyme call the visible visible Church the true Church it should appeare that they seeke not the marks of the true Church indeed but only of the shew shadow or shape of the Church And yet in very truth they seeke but the marks of the shadow of the church For the inuisible Church consisting only of the iust and elect which alone they will haue to be the true Church hath no certaine marks else we should know certainly who were the iust and elect And this themselues confesse for thus writeth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 8 ProtestaÌ„ts giue no marks of the true Catholike Church The question is not of the marks of the inuisible Church Againe VVe say the marks of the Catholike Church simply so called are knowne to God alone And D. Humfrey to 3. reason of F. Campian pa. 281. sayth that the marks do not reach vnto the nature of the true Church And the reason is manifest because as I sayd otherwise we should know who were the iust and elect 4. If any againe reply that when Protestants say The true visible Church they meane the visible Church true in doctrine in which speach there is no contradiction according to their owne opinion because they admit that the visible Church that is the society in true doctrine and right vse of Sacraments into which Church or society the wicked or reprobate may enter may be true in doctrine though they graunt not that such a Church or society be the true Church in nature or essence Which perhaps Vorstius meant in his Antibellarm pa. 180. when he sayd The outward Church is not without cause called the true church of Christ by reason of the prosession of true doctrine I answere if they so meant why did they not speak so were they ignorant that it is one thing to be true in doctrine or in speach and another to be true in nature as a lyer is a true man in nature of man but not true in his speach Or if they did know this why did they abuse the words and their hearers Moreouer though in this sense their words did not destroy themselues as they did in the former yet fondly should they as they vse to do assigne the truth of doctrine for the marke of the true Church in doctrine For this were to assigne a thing for a mark of it self as if to know a true man of his word one should giue this marke that it is such as speaketh truth Besides this were rather to define what is a true man then to giue the marke to know who is a true man And yet marks are giuen to know which is the true Church not what is the nature of the true Church 5. If yet any reply that the visible Church or
participation of Sacraments communication of publike prayer and such like other Ecclesiasticall exercises to wit when one thought he agree with the rest of the Church of Christ in the principall heades of Christian fayth yet I know not for what light causes withdraweth himselfe from the rest of the Church and communicateth not with her in the sacraments Such sayth he are properly called schismatikes M. Perkins in cap. 5. Galat. vers 21. Heresy is in doctrin Schisme in manners order and gouernement D. Fulke de Success pag. 165 There may be schisme in the Church where the same doctrine is held on both partyes the one wanteth lawfull succession D. Field lib. 1. of the Church cap. 7 Some professe the whole sauing fayth but not in vnity as schismatiks Dancus in August de haeres cap. 3. He is a schismatike who retayning the same doctrine of fayth and that entire yet without probable and better reason followeth not the decent rites of the Church The same he hath Apol. pro Heluet. Eccles pag. 1485. Bullinger tom 1. Decad. 5. serm 2. Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 190. D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 5. cap. 10. D. Rainolds Praelect 1. col 2. Heshusius in 1. Cor. 1. and others 5. Now that proper Schismatikes to wit such as willfully separate themselues from the Communion of the Church be not members or parts of the Church is cleare by the testimony of the Fathers That Schismatikes are out of the Church the confessions of Protestants and manifest reason S. Augustin lib. de fide symbolo cap. 10. sayth Neither doth an heretike belong to the Catholike Church nor a schismatike Tract 3. in 1. Ioan. All heretikes all schismatikes are gone out of the Church Lib. 3. de Baptism cap. 19. All heretikes and schismatikes are false Christians And lib 2. cont Crescon cap. 29 I thinke not that any so doteth to belieue him to belong to the vnity of the Church who hath not charity The like he hath in many places S. Ambrose lib. 7. in Luc. cap. 11. Vnderstand that all heretikes and schismatikes are separated from the kingdome of God and from the Church S. Optatus lib. 2. The Church cannot be with any heretikes or schismatikes S. Fulgentius de fide ad Petrum cap. 38 Belieue most stedfastly and doubt nothing that not only all Pagans but also all Iewes Heretiks schismatiks which end this life out of the church are to go into euerlasting fire The same teach S. Hierome S. Chrysostome loc cit S. Ignatius Epist ad Smyrnens S. Iren. lib. 4. cap. 62. S. Cyprian lib. de vnit epist 42.51.55 S. Prosper de vocat Gentium cap. 4. and the rest The protestants confessions of this matter we related heeretofore amongst whome say Lib. 1. c. â— num â— that this is an vndoubted truth Reason also conuinceth the same for as Caluin confesseth 4. Institut loc cit The coÌ„munion of the Church is held with two bandes to wit consent of doctrine and fraternall charity But Schismatikes breake the band of fraternall charity therefore they are not within the Church Againe Danaeus lib. 3. de Eccl. c. 5. sayth This is the marke that thou art of the visible Church that outwardly thou professe the fayth communicate with the rest of the Church in the same SacrameÌ„ts but schismatikes doe not communicate in Sacramentes with the rest of the Church And D. Feild lib. 2. of the Church cap. 2. sayth Communion in Sacramentes vnder lawful Pastours is an essential note of the true Catholike Church but Shismatiks want this communion And Casaubon epist ad Card. Peron pag. 9. The true Churches of Christ are vnited in the vnity of fayth and doctrine and coniunction of minds and in true charity and offices of charity especially of mutuall prayer But Schismatikes are not vnited in charity and offices of mutuall prayer Finally only Catholikes are members of the Catholike Church as is euident and (a) VVhi. conc 2. q. 5. cap. 3. Protestants confesse But Schismatikes are not Catholiks as the very name doth declare the Fathers doc teach and (b) Gesner loc 24. Field l. de Eccles c. 7. Protestants acknowledge 6. By this it appeareth that the foresayd Maior which is the foundation of Protestants in this matter is not only false but also so manifestly false as out of this question it is commonly denyed of Protestants themselues Besides it is not only false but also so improbable that neither it is proued of Protestants nor can be any other wayes then by proofe of fooles or willfull men that is by their owne saying For D. Whitaker as we haue seene proueth it no other wayes then by saying it is out of controuersy D. Fulke that it is manifest But Luther more boastingly sayth l. de Missa priu tom 7. f. 247. This is our solid foundation and most stedfast rocke VVhersoeuer true doctrine of Christ or the Ghospell is preached there is necessarily the true holy Church of God And who doubteth of this sayth he may in like manner doubt whether the Ghospel be the word of God A notable proofe surely and fit for Pythagoras schoole and a sound foundation on which to fayned a Church should rely and a fit rock for them to build vpon who haue left the rocke vpon which Christ built his Church Wherefore that I may imitate S. Augustine in the like matter Lib. 1. cont Gaudent cap. 33. I aske whether God or man hath told them that wheresoeuer true doctrine is there is the true Church If God let them read it out of the Scripture where indeed we read that where the true Church is there true doctrine is but contrarywise that where true doctrine is there the true Church is there we neuer read If men haue told you this Behold a fiction of man behold what you belieue behold what ye serue behold for what ye rebell ye run mad ye burne Againe what kind of men were they surely no other then your selues And what is your authority I say not with vs but euen with your selues Is as one of your part sayd the iudgement of Lutherans or Sacramentaryes the square of truth Moreouer Pareus l 3. ce â—â—stifie cap. 13. seeing that three things are essential or substantial to the true church to wit true doctrine lawfull Pastours and people following their Pastours nor any thing can be vnles all the essentiall parts be it is sophistry and madnesse to inferre that that company is the true Church wherin one only of these parts is to be found If they say that by the true Church they meane not her which is true in nature or essence of the Church but only her which is true in doctrine of whose essence is only truth of doctrin First they deceaue the Reader For we speak only of the Church true in essence not of that which is only true in doctrinâ— as a schismaticall Church may be Besides if they meane such