by externall profession they are all whose marke of recogniscance hath in it those things which we haue mentioned yea although they be impious idolaters wicked heretikes persons excommunicable Againe Those whose knees were bowed vnto Baal euen they were also of the visible Church of God Boysseul in Confut. p. 822 answering to the place where Spondeus obiected that if the Church of Rome be an Idolatresse as Boysseul had auouched it is not the Church of Christ makes this reply And why not as well as Israel And D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 475. saith Although this errour Idolatry in adoring the calfe were most grieuous yet it destroyed not the whole nature of the Church 2. And Infidells That they sometymes comprize also Infidels in the Church is manifest first because they affirme that such may be saued For M. Fox in his Martyrologe pag. 495. reporteth that a certaine Protestant Martyr whole learning piety zeale he greatly commendeth taught that a Turke Saracen or any Mahamet an whatsoeuer may be saued if he trust in one God and keep his law M. Bale in his 6. Century pag. 464. bids vs beware that we condemne not rashly any Turke And Zuinglius tom 1. lib. de prouid fol. 370. sayth It is not vniuersally true that who so hath no fayth is damned Againe As for the damnation of vnbelieuers it is meant only of those who heard and did not belieue And tom 2. declarat de peccat orig fol. 118 This saying who so doth not belieue shall be condemned must in no wise be absolutely vnderstood but it is to be vnderstood of those See Homiâ—â— in Specim Contr. art 27. who hauing heard the ghospell would not belieue And ibidem in exposit fidei fol. 559. he sayth that in heauen Christians shall meet many heathens whose names he there sets downe and amongst the rest that cruel Theseus and Magician Numa the founder of heathenish superstitions amongst the Romans Which opinion of his those of Zurich in Apolog. Gualter in prefat tom 1. Zuinglij Simler in vita Bullengeri and others seeke to patronize and make good Now it were folly and madnes to auouch that these men were of the number of the faythfull They belieue then that infidels may be saued But S. Augustin was of a farre different beliefe lib. 4. cont Iul. cap. 3. where he writes thus VVhat one of those who would be accounted Christians will say an Infidell is iust be it euen Fabritius 3. Secondly their doctrine touching the predestinate carrieth with it a necessary acknowledgement of their Communion with Infidels For they teach that who so is predestinate is alwayes a member of the Church Hus his first article condemned by the Councel of Constance was this The predestinate remayneth euer a member of the Church And Luther tom 2. in Assert art 30 I say the opinions of Iohn Hus are all Euangelicall and Christian Againe I admit all the condemned articles of Iohn Hus. And tom 1. in disput Lypsic fol. 254. he maintaineth openly this article of Hus The Church is the whole multitude of the predestinate Vorstius in Anti-bellarmine page 125 VVe affirme that the Councell of Constance which condemned the doctrine of Hus that who so is predestinate is alwayes a meÌ„ber of the Church was surely in this respect Antichristian Danaeus in Resp ad Bellarm. Contr. 4. lib. 3. cap. 2. sayth The first opinion which was the opinion of Hus is true and is ours Againe our opinion is that the Church is the whole company of men whome God hath predestinated to saluation And cap. 7 It must be answered that Paul was alwayes but not alwayes apparently in regard of men of Gods true Church Againe Such Turkes and Iewes as God hath predestinated to saluation are of the Church euen now at this tyme in regard they are predestinate and in respect of God but they are not yet of Gods Church apparently and in respect of vs for as much as they lack yet those marks whereby God doth heere shew vs men who are of the church And Cont. 4. lib. 3. cap. 12 The true definition of the true church is this The company and multitude of those whome God hath chosen to saluation And Iunius lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 7 Paul was alwayes of the church according to predestination from which sayth he the church taketh her being or formal definition but not according to the outward forme of the church What can be more apparent then that these men teach that the predestinate are members of the church according to the true being therof and in the sight of God euen during the tyme of their infidelity 4. Thirdly this followeth necessarily vpon that which they teach concerning infants especially such as are descended from faythfull parents departing this life vnbaptized For they affirme that the children of the faythfull are actually in the Church as the French Confession article 35 Togeather with the parents God accounteth also their ofspring in the church And the Zuitzers cap. 20 VVhy should not they the children of the faythfull be ingrafted by sacred baptisme who are Gods proper possession and within his church Caluin in Instruct cont Anabap. art 1 Vnspotted infants are in the Communion of the church before they come forth of their Mothers wombe And Pareus lib. 3. de Iustificat cap. 4. pag. 884 Caluin on good reason determineth that the children of the church are borne cittizens of the church Their doctrine also hath the same issue who teach that infants at leastwise the children of the faythfull are saued without baptisme as the Protestants in the colloq Ratisbon And Zuinglius tom 2. Declarat de peccat orig fol. 119 Concerning Christians children we are assured that they are not damned for originall sinn of others we haue not the like assurance howbeit to confesse ingenuously the opinion we taught heretofore to wit that we ought not to iudge rashly of heathens children seemes to vs the more probable Voritius in Anti-bellarmine pag. 542 Zuinglius and some other ghospellers auouch that all children whatsoeuer are by the grace of Christ saued others for the most part hold that at leastwise all the elect whether extract from faythfull or other parents do euen vnbaptized attaine to saluation Whereof he sayth The opinion of these later is surely the safest and yet the first opinion is probable inough and ought not to be rashly condemned Now as D. Whitaker sayth Cont. 2. quest 1. cap. 5. 6 All that are saued are really and actually in the church And D. Morton part 1. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 4 To be of the church in possibility sufficeth not to saluation Lubbertus lib. 2. de Eccles cap. 2 Neither can any one be saued except he be actually and really in the church Whence Martyr in 1. Cor. 7. fol. 177. sayth Infants must of necessity appertaine vnto the church seing there is no saluation without it They teach moreouer that Infants haue
thought not that he was otherwise vnderstood None was yet troubled with such a question you not yet iangling he spake more securely But the ProtestaÌ„ts which we produce liued al after that protestancy was both bred and hatched after the Catholike fayth had for many ages shined through out the world and therfore could not be ignorant what wordes of theirs might make for the Catholike fayth Cassander Erasmus-Cornelius Agrippa Marsil of Padua and preiudice their owne cause Another difference is that none of the Catholikes whose testimonyes Protestants alleage against vs is accounted of vs for a man sent extraordinarily of God and much lesse for a Prophet Euangelist or Apostle Nay Beatus Rhenanus Faber Stapulensis Orthuinus Gratius many of them are obscure writers and of small or no reckoning among vs some of them are not held for Catholikes of vs and some of them euen by the iudgments of Protestants themselues are our open enemyes But the confessions of fayth which we cite against ProtestaÌ„ts containe their faith so that they cannot be reiected of them vnles they will renounce their fayth And of the men whose testimonyes we produce one is accounted of them a (e) Humf. ad Rat. 4. Camp God another a Prophet an (f) Colloq Aldebur Schusseâ—b Catal. 13. Hunius praefat de liber arbit Euangelist an Apostle a third Elias an Angell His writings are held for inspired from heauen for a rule of fayth and equall to the writinges of the Apostles Another is called a (g) â—â—anae lib. 4 de Eccles c. 9. Beza ep 6. great and admirable Prophet others are esteemed for lights lampes bright starres props founders parents renewers of the Protestants church and religion Others are men extraordinarily sent and diuinely raised to lighten the world most of them for very learned famous well deseruing of the Protestant religion finally all for sincere Protestants The holy Fathers were wont to refute both the (h) Iustin dial cum Tryphon August l. de ciuit Chrysost hom 26. in 2. Cor. Cyril l. 6. in Iulian. Pagans superstition and the (i) Hier. cont Vigilant Ambros serm 5. de Sanctis Hilar. l. 1. 6. de Trinit heretikes errours out of the Diuels confessions Of which kind of proof (k) Apol. cap. 22. Tertullian vsing it maketh this account What more manifest then this fact what more sure then this proofe Belieue them they speake true of themselues who vse to credit them when they lye No man lyeth to his owne disgrace And S. (l) Lib. ad Demetr Cyprian VVho so sayest that thou worshipest the Gods belieue euen them whom thou worshippest And likewise Minutius in Octauio Neither do they lye to their owne shame especially if some of you be by Belieue themselues witnessing that they are Diuels and confessing the truth of themselues But our proofe taken out of the Protestants confessions of faith out of Luther such like famous Protestants testimony against Protestancy is much more euident and stronger both because it is more likely that men will confesse the truth though against themselues then the Diuell the father of lyes and sworne enemy of truth as also because the confessions of the Diuel were extorted from him by force as the Fathers themselues doe acknowledge but these of Luther and his mates come most freely from them Belieue therefore O Protestants your chiefe leaders Note your founders Instructors Prophets EuaÌ„gelists Apostles in that which they freely of their own accord coÌ„fesse of themselues of their doctrine Euen by the testimony of your own Prophets teachers belieue that ProtestaÌ„cy is newly risen first founded by Luther before knowne to none No man willingly lyeth to his owne shame no man freely confesseth that which ouerthroweth his owne cause but which he cannot deny No man knew protestancy better then they no man fauoured it more then they VVho sayth Caluin is to be credited touching Popery more then the Pope himselfe De ver â— Eccles reform And whom shal we belieue touching the author and hatching of protestancy amongst the Lutherans rather then Luther himselfe Melancthon the Century-writers Kemnice Schusselburg and the like Or amongst the Sacramentaryes rather then Zuinglius Bullinger Bucer Peter Martyr Caluin Beza Plessie and such others or amongst English Protestants rather then Iewell Fox Whitaker Fulke Humfrey Perkins and the like whose frequent and plaine confessions we heerin produce A third difference between our and the Protestants manner of proceeding in this kind of proofe is that Protestantes oftentymes alleadge Catholikes testimonyes corrupted mangled and falsifyed and sometymes also the obiections which they make against theÌ„selues insteed of their answeres as Cardinall Peron not long since shewed Plessie to haue don before the French King conferenrence at fountaine Bel-caue euen by the iudgment of Protestant themselues And it were easy to demonstrate that D. (m) Apol. part 1. l. 1. c. 23. l. 2. c. 41. part 2. l. c. 35. l. 2. c. 41. Morton hath done the like in his Apology But I produce the testimonyes of Protestants certaine and entiere at least for that sense for which I alleadge them For I haue cited none in this worke which either I haue not seene with myne owne eyes and for the most part haue quoted not only the bookes and chapters but also the leaues and pages or if I haue wanted the booke I haue cited them out of some good Author The fourth difference that of great moment is that the Catholiques whose testimonyes Protestants alleadge against is if so be they were true Catholikes were alwayes ready to reuoke and recall whatsoeuer they had written contrary to the catholik fayth to submit all their wordes or writings to the censure of the catholike Church which to be the mind disposition of all Catholiks Protestants themselues confesse For thus writeth D. (n) Contr. 2. q. 5. c. 8. Whitaker This is the condition this the consent of the Popish Church that all hang their saluation vpon one man and submit themselues to one mans iudgment And D. (o) Apol. part 1. l. 2. cap. 31. Morton Is there any Papist that thinkes any decree of the Pope can be contemned or broken without cryme or heresy Which sith it is so in vaine do they obiect any Catholikes words against the Catholike fayth For either they are not contrary thereto or if they be they are already reuoked recalled and disanulled by himselfe But the mind and proceeding of ProtestaÌ„ts is far otherwise who subiect not their opinions to the iudgment of the Church but as they thinke that she may erre so will they hold their opinions notwithstanding her sentence to the contrary and therfore iustly may we produce their testimonies against their owne Church 9. The fift difference which is much to be noted is that Protestants alleadge Catholik witnesses in matters of doctrin in which some tymes by reason of
that Protestants as (u) Lib. 2. c. 9. Lactantius wrote of Cicero cannot be more sorely confuted then they are by Protestants themselues Faults escaped in the printing Page Line Fault Correction 8â— 11. himelf himselfe 82. 27. vnles he vnles he be 96. 6. numb 66. numb 96. 107. 19. The There 109. 23. light of dele of 120. 4. credible incredible 127. 7. the these 23â— 6. dele haue bin 237. 2. be be by 140. 6. fourth third 147. 33. waye waxe 154. 7. in is 168. 23. sonde sponge 169. 3. one our 170. 33. 1525. 1535. 181. 14. should only should only say 184. 27. predigious prodigious 205. 31. boasteth boasteth that â—19 vlt. Taye Faye 211. 33. of fayth faith of 222. 21. first fifth If any other faults haue escaped it is desired of the Gentle Reader to correct them of his courtesy the Author being far absent from the Print THE FIRST BOOKE Of the substance of the Protestants Church and Religion and of their vncertainty therein CHAP. I. BECAVSE as after Plato and Aristotle Tully sayth very truly VVhosoeuer will according to the order of reason treat of any thing Lib. 4. must first define or explicate the nature thereof that it may be knowne what it is whereof he speaketh and Protestants agree that the definition is the very ground of all disputation before I do shew Caluin 3. Institut cap. 4. §. 1. Sadeel in Refut Thes â—osnan cap. 2. who was the first author of the Protestant Church and Religion which I will do in the second booke I will in this first define and determine what is a Protestant and what is the Protestant Church and Religion And because Protestants in this matter as in all others are variable and inconstant sometymes requiring many things to the making and constitution of a Protestant sometymes being content with very few things sometyms stretching the bounds of their Church most largly otherwhiles drawing theÌ„ very strait according as it serueth to their present purpose I will first discouer this their vncertainty about so weighty a matter afterward out of their owne principles and confessions of fayth set downe what is indeed necessary to the very substance and being of a Protestant and of their Church and Religion And in this Chapter I will shew how few they sometymes do admit to be of the Church and how many things they require to the making of a Protestant and in some chapters following how many they at other tymes do graunt to be of their Church and how few things they account necessary for to be a member thereof That done I will make manifest what is indeed necessary thereto They exclude Papists 2. First of all therefore they sometymes exclude Catholiques whome they terme Papists out of the Church as is manifest by all their writings in so much that the French Protestants in the 28. article of their confession say VVe openly affirme that where the word of God is not receiued nor there is any profession of obedience due thereto nor any vse of Sacraments there properly speaking we cannot iudge to be any Church VVherfore we condemne the Popish Conuenticles And D. Whitaker in his second booke against Dureus 2. section is so earnest that he sayth I will not allow the very name of a lawfull Church vnto the Roman Church because it hath nothing which a true Church ought to haue And both he in his 2. Controuersy 6. question 3. Chapter D. Sutliue in his first booke of the Church 3. cap. and lib. 2. cap. 9. M. Perkins in his reformed Catholique towards the end Caluin in his book against the Chaunter of Lions Beza in his of the notes of the Church the Confession of Saxony in the Chapter of the Church and many others do reckon diuers articles or euery one whereof they pronounce Papists to be â—ut of the Church And because their opinion hereâ—n is well inough knowne and hereafter also we â—hall haue occasioÌ„ to shew how haynously they conâ—emne the Popedome or Papistry I will heere reâ—earse no more of their sayings touching this point The like sentence they sometymes pronounce of the â—nabaptists Anabaptists and Atians For thus speaketh the conâ—ession of Auspurg Cap. 9. They condemne the Anabapâ—â—sts who disallow the baptisme of infants and think them to â—â—e faned without baptisme And the Confession of Switâ—erland cap. 20. VVe condemne the Anabaptists who deny â—at infants ought to be baptized The same is manifest by â—he English Confession c. 38. by the Confession of â—asse c. 24. others Of Arians Arrians they giue this verâ—ct in the forsayd Confession of Auspurg in the first â—rticle They condemne all heresies risen against this article of the Trinity as the Manichees Arians Eunomians c. â—nd in like sort the French Confession art 6. the â—nglish art 1. the consent of Poland and others in 〈◊〉 much as in England the Protestants haue burnt me Arians 3. Sometymes also they thrust out all hereâ—ckes Heretiks For thus writeth Luther in his explication of â—e Creed Neither Gentile Iew Heretike LutheraÌ„s or any sinner is â—ued vnlesse he make attonement with the Church and in all â—ings thinke do and teach the same And the Magdeâ—â—rgians in the preface of their 6. Century Neither â—eretikes nor deuisers or patrons of sanaticall opinions are of â—â—rist but they are of Antichrist and of the diuell and apperâ—â—ne to Antichrist and the diuell they are the impostume and â—â—e plague of the people of God The ministers of the Prince Elector of Saxony in the Conference held at Aldburg in the 3. writ cast out of the Church all VVho say they wittingly and willingly defend such corruptions of doctrine as haue byn condemned by the lawfull iudgment and consent of the Catholike Church And the Ministers of the Duke of Saxony in the 4. writ of the sayd Conference pronounce this sentence VVhosoeuer they are that do cloak and defend corruptions of the word of God that is of the articles of fayth after they haue byn admonished we iudge not to be true members of Christ vnlesse they repent And Vrbanus Regius one of the first and cheifest scholers of Luther in his Catechisme sayth All Heretikes are out of the Church The same teacheth Schusselburg a principall superintendent amongst the Lutherans in his Catalogue of heresies and many others As for the Sacramentaries SacrameÌ„taries thus professeth the French Confession in the 6. article VVe detest all Sects and heresies which haue byn reiected by the holy Fathers as S. Hilary S. Athanasc S. Ambrose S. Cyrill Whereupon Sadeel in his preface of his answere to the abiured articles sayth Our Confession of fayth condemneth all Heretikes Likewise the Confession of Basle in 24. article writeth in thiâ— sort VVe driue away all whosoeuer dissenting from the society of the holy Church do either bring in or follow strange wicked doctrines And Peter Martyr in his Commoâ— places in the title
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
1 We say that the Church cannot erre in things simply necessary Which he often repeateth in the 2. cap. And quest 5. cap. 17 If any fundamentall doctrine be taken away the Church straight way falleth And cap. 18 The fundamentall articles are those on which our fayth relyeth as the house vpon the foundation Againe If any fundamentall and essentiall principle of fayth be ouerturned or shaken it cannot be truly called a Church And quest 6. cap. 3 That is no true Church which taketh away one only foundation The same he teacheth in his 1. booke of the scripture cap. 7. sect 8. and cap. 12. sect 3. M. Perkins in his explication of the Creed If any man or Church retaine or defend obstinatly or of willfull ignorance a fundamentall errour we must not account them anymore Christians or Churches D. Sutliue in his first booke of the Church cap. 1 Those blemishes take away the name of the true Church which are against the grounds of fayth D. Feild in his 2. booke of the Church cap. 3 Purity free from fundamentall and essentiall errour is necessarily required in the Church D. Morton in the 1. part o◠his Apology booke 2. cap 38 Purity of doctrine in fundamentall principles of fayth is required to the being and constitution of the Church And in his answere to the Protestants Apology l. 4. c. 3. Sect. 5 The deniall of fundamentall doctrines doth exclude men from saluation and disannulleth the name of the Church in the gainsayers D. White in his way to the Church pag. 110 VVe do not thinke euery company to be the true Church that holdeth only some points of the true fayth but it is requisite that the foundation be holden And in his defence of the way cap. 17 A fundamentall point is that which belongs to the substance of fayth and is so necessary that there can be no saluation without the knowledge and explicite fayth thereof And surely they all and at all tymes ought to affirme this seeing they deliuer truth of doctrine as an essentiall marke of the Church which they must needs vnderstand and so Vorstius in his Anti-bellarmin pag. 148. expresseth it of true doctrine in fundamentall points And this their doctrine touching this matter I earnestly commend to the memory of the Reader because it is necessary to find out what a Protestant is and also is one of the grounds whereby it may appeare that there was no Protestant Church before Luther because before him there was no company which held all the same fundamentall points of doctrine which Protestants do hold 6. Finally They exclude all that deny any article of fayth they sometyms shut out of their Church all those who deny any one point of fayth be it fundamentall or other For thus writeth the Apology of the Confession of Auspurge The Church of Christ is not among them who defend naughty opinions contrary to the Ghospell And Luther in his epistle to Count Albert It is not inough if in other things he confesse Christ and his Ghospell For who denieth Christ in one article or word denieth him who is denied in all because there is but one Christ Lutherās the same in all his words And vpon the 17. cap. of Deuteronomy Faith suffereth nothing and the word tolerateth nothing but the word must be perfectly pure and the doctrine alwayes sound throughout And vpon the 17. cap. of S. Matthew Fayth must be round that is belieuing all articles though small ones For who belieueth not one article rightly belieueth nothing righly as Iames sayth VVho offendeth in one is guilty of all and so who in one article doubteth or belieueth not at least obstinatly dissolueth the roundnes of the graine and so can do no good And vpon the 5. cap. to the Galathians In diuinity a small errour ouerthroweth all the doctrine Doctrine is like to a Mathematicall point it cannot be deuided that is it cannot suffer either addition or detraction And when Zuinglius and his followers desired of the Lutherans to be esteemed as their brethren Melancthon as Hospinian reporteth in his Sacramentarian history fol. 81. roughly sayd vnto them VVe meruaile with what conscience they can account vs for brethren whome they iudge to erre in doctrine And againe fol. 82. Luther grauely spake vnto them saying he greatly merueiled how they could hold him for a brother if they thought his doctrine to be vntrue And the same Melancthon togeather with Brentius writeth thus to the Lantgraue Perhaps Christians who are entangled in some errour which they do not obstinatly defend may be tolerated as brethren but they which not only bring false doctrine into the Church but also maintaine it are not to be acknowledged for brethren And againe Melancthon in his examen of those who are to take orders tom 3. There are in that company of the Church many who are not Saints but yet agreeing in doctrine The Deuines of Wittemberg in their refutation of the orthodoxall consent pag. 73 Like as he who keepeth the whole law and offendeth in one as Iames the Apostle witnesseth is guilty of all so who belieueth not one word of Christ albeit he seeme to beliue the other articles of the Creed yet belieueth nothing and is to be damned as incredulous For euery heretike did not impugne euery article of fayth but commonly each of them of purpose impugned some one or other whome neuertheles the Church iustly condemned as heretikes if they pertinaciously stood in their errours Schusselburg also in his 3. tom of the Catalogue of Heretiks pag. 85. Christian fayth is one copulatiue and who denieth one article of fayth calleth in doubt the whole body of the heauenly doctrine Which he repeateth againe in the next pag. And tome 8. pag. 361 The Lutherans do fly him who depraueth the doctrine of truth in any article whatsoeuer And in his 2. booke of Caluinisticall diuinity article 1 VVe are certaine by the testimony of Gods word that an errour in one false doctrine obstinatly defended maketh an heretike For S. Chrysostome vpon the epistle to the Galathians sayd most truly that he corrupteth the whole doctrine who ouerthroweth it in the least article And Ambrose wrote rightly to the Virgin Demetrias That he is out of the number of the faythfull and hath no part in the inheritance of Saints who disagreeth in any thing from the Catholike truth Sacramētaries Thus the Lutherans Peter Martyr in his epistle to the straungers in England tom 2. loc col 136 VVe answere all the words of God as farre forth as they proceeded from him are of equall waight and authority and therefore none may receiue this and reiect that as false Iames sayth boldly who sinneth in one becommeth guilty of all That if it haue place in keeping of the commandements is also true in points of fayth Sadeel in his index of Turriās Repetitions pag. 806 I sayd that it was no true Church which teacheth doctrine repugnant to the
written word of God And his Maiesty in his Monitory epistle pag. 97. English ProtestaÌ„tâ— in Latin I call God to witnes that I hold him not for a Christian who in this learned age belieueth that to wit that Enoch and Elias are to come And D. Morton in his answere to the Protestants Apology lib. 4. c. 2. sect 3. after he had sayd that in a Church albeit corrupted with errour and superstition yet if it do not ruinate the foundation the erroneous superstitious professors may be saued adddeth VVhich notwithstanding we must so vnderstand as that the errour and superstition do not proceed from knowledge but from ignorance which ignorance is not affected but simple Thus we see that Protestants somtymes confesse that true fayth is like a graine or Mathematicall point which cannot be parted that the articles of fayth are one copulatiue and cannot be deuided that who so obstinatly denieth one article belieueth truly none that the obstinate deniall of any one poynt of fayth is sufficient to damne or to make an heretik and no brother of the faythfull or member of the Church And finally that she is no true Church who willfully maintaineth any one thing repugnant to the Ghospell or word of God Which indeed is most true and is the doctrine of the holy Fathers and Catholiks and I would to God Protestants would constantly stand vnto it 7. By all which hath byn rehearsed in this chapter out of Protestants it appeareth how many sortes of Christians Protestants do sometymes exclude out of the Church namely Papists Anabaptists Arians al Heretiks all Schismatiks all those who deny any fundamentall point of fayth and finally al who obstinatly deny any point whatsoeuer of fayth or of the word of God And how many things they sometymes require to the making and being of a Protestant to wit that he belieue all and euery point of their fayth and obstinatly dissent in none To which their doctrine if they would as I haue sayd alwayes constantly stand it would easily appeare first how small a company the Protestants Church is and how little it is spread through the world and much lesse Catholike or vniuersal seeing there is no Prouince nor scarse any citty in which all Protestants agree amongst themselues in al points of their doctrine Secondly it would easily appeare that the Protestant Church was neuer before Luther seeing there is no apparence that before him there was any company of Christians who in all points of doctrine agreed with Protestants But ProtestaÌ„ts as I sayd in the Preface accommodate their doctrine and opinions to tymes and occasions And the tymes when they deny Papists to be of the Church are when they exhort them to leaue the Roman Church or excuse their owne reuolting from her or when they dehort others from returning to her For at all these tymes it serueth to their purpose to deny that Papists are of the Church or in the way of saluation which at other tymes as we shall see in the next chapter they are content to graunt And the tymes when they exclude Anabaptists Arians Heretiks Schismatiks and all that deny either fundamentall or other articles of fayth out of the Church are when either the euidence of truth enforceth them thereto or when they are ashamed to acknowledge such vgly monsters for brethren and members of their Church or would exhort such as haue left their company to returne vnto them and keep others from forsaking them or finally would brag of the agreement and purity in doctrine of their company For at those tymes it serueth their turne to renouÌ„ce all the foresayd kind of men whom at other tymes especially when we demaund of them who were of their Church before Luther they are most willing to receiue as their kind brethren diligently scraping gathering such shreeds and clouts when they perceiue their owne nakednes and beggary which themselues when they thought they were rich and had no need thereof most disdainfully cast on the dunghills as shall appeare in the chapters following CHAP. II. That Protestants sometymes account Papists for members of their Church IN the former chapter we haue seene how sparing Protestants sometyms be in admitting others into their Church now we shall see how liberall they be at other tymes in so much that they graunt not only all those whome in the former chapter they reiected but also their professed enemies idolaters Infidells Atheists Antichrist himselfe and all whosoeuer vnder the name of Christians impugne the deeds or doctrine of the Pope to be their brethren their fellowes and members of their Church This we will shew concerning the Papists in this chapter and of the others afterward 1. That Protestants sometymes do acknowledge Papists to be in the Church is manifest First by their open confession thereof LutheraÌ„s For in the preface of their Confession of Auspurg speaking of themselues and Papists Papists serue vnder christ they say VVe are all soldiers vnder one Christ And Luther in his epistle against the Anabaptists as Caluin in his booke against the Chaunter of Lions and D. Whitaker in the place hereafter cited do confesse writeth The kernel of Christianity in Popery That in Popery is true Christianity yea the kernell of Christianity and many pious and great Saints Againe If Christianity be vnder the Pope then it must be the body and member of Christ And vpon the 28. chapter of Genesis VVe confesse that there is a Church among the Papists because they haue Baptisme absolution the text of the Ghospell and many godly men are among them Caluin in his 140. epistle to Soziâ— I think I haue sufficiently proued that in Popery there remayneth some Church albeit halfe destroyed and if you will broken and deformed And vpon the 2. câ—ap of the 2 epistle to the Thessalonians The Body of Christ I confesse it is the temple of God in which the Pope ruleth and he calleth it the very sanctuary of God And de vera reform pag. 332. SacrameÌ„taries â—ayth that S Paul affirmeth that Antichrist whom he will haue to be the Pope shall sit in the temple of God And lib. de scandalis pag. 103 In the midest of Gods temple And lib. cont Precentorem pag. 372 In the very sanctuary of God And Respons ad Sadolet In the midest of Gods sanctuary Surely this is to graunt that the Romane Church in which the Pope sitteth is the very temple and very sanctuary of God And in his answeare to Sadolet VVe deny not those to be Churches of Christ which you gouerne In his 4. booke of Institutions chap. 2. num 11. he sayth that among Papists Gods couenant remayned inuiolable Not yet killed And num 12 VVe deny not that there are Churches among them Neither deny we but there remaine Churches vnder his the Pope he meaneth tyranny but which he hath almost killed Iunius in his book of the Church cap. 17. writeth that the Popish
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
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
that the Church may for a tyme swarue from the truth euen in some fundamentall points and be notwithstanding safe And Zanchius lib. 1. epist pag. 221. will not haue vs forsake any coÌ„pany on occasion of false opinions which swarue from the groundwork of fayth D. Hall likewise in sua Roma irreconc sect 1. sayth that the true Church may foster such errours As by deduction and consequence destroy the foundations of beliefe D. Fulke in his serm vpoÌ„ the Apocalips hauing made this obiection to himselfe that seing the Church is the Espouse of Christ it cannot be that he suffered it to be possessed so many ages with damnable errors answeares it in this manner VVhat Christ himselfe hath sayd that the errors of false Prophets should be exceeding great in as much as the very elect if it might be should be led into errour And lib. de Succes Eccles pag. 122. he sayth It seemes not fitting to take from the Grecians the name of a Church whome notwithstanding he confesseth to be ensnared with grieuous errors Now a grieuous errour according to D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 4 cap. 1. dissolues the foundation and may therfore be termed fundamentall M. Perkins in his exposition of the Creed col 790 VVhen an errour is repugnant to the foundation either directly or by necessary consequence if it proceed of weaknes he in whome it is ought to be reputed a member of the vniuersall Church And vpon 1. Galat. v. 2 If a Church through frailty fall into errour although it concerne the foundation notwithstanding it remaynes yet a Church as is certaine by the example of the Galathians And vpon the epistle of Iude v. 19 The Church of Gaelatia through weaknesse remoued it selfe vnto another Ghospell and erred in the foundation yet Paul writeth to it as to the Church of God D. Willet affirmeth the same in his Synopsis cont 2. q. 3. pag. 104. And Melancthon tom 2. lib. de Eccl. pag. 123. toucheth the same string when he sayth The true Church it selfe may haue errours which obscure and darken the articles of fayth And tom 4. in cap. 9. Rom God gathereth alwayes some company in which the foundation is kept sometymes lesse pure sometymes more D. White in his way pag. 111 Some articles lying in the very foundation may be belieued not so clearly Nay sometymes they dare auouch that those very Corinthians that denyed the resurrection and those Galatians also that changed the Ghospell of Christ into another Ghospell were of the Church Luther in 1. cap. Galat fol 215. Perkins loc cit For thus the Switzers Confession c. 17 VVe are not ignorant what manner of Churches those of the Corinthians and Galathians were in the Apostles tyme which the Apostle accuseth of many and grieuous crimes and yet termeth them the holy Churches of Christ And Caluin 4. Institut cap. 1. § 27 Most greiuous sinnes possesse sometymes whole Churches The Apostasy of the Galathians was no small offence the Corinthians were lesse excusable then they howbeit neither of them are excluded from the Lords mercy Sadeel in his answere ad Thes Posnan cap. 12. pag. 866 The Galathians and Corinthians though corrupted with errour and disagreeing each from other about the cheife groundwork of beliefe and that not concerning the manner but touching the matter it selfe retained notwithstanding the name of a true â—hurch And hence he gathereth that the debate and disagrement betweene the Lutherans and Caluinists concerning the Eucharist doth not let either of them from being of the true Church 5. The deeds of the Lutherans and Sacramentaries yeld vs a second kind of proofe For the Electorall or milde Lutherans in colloq Aldeburg scripto 8. call themselues LutheraÌ„s professe that theÌ„selues differ fundamentally Fellowes and companions of the same Ministery fellow-cittizens and fellow-soldiers of those of Saxony or rigorous Lutherans of whome notwithstanding scripto 6. pag. 111. they giue this censure They haue shewed themselues to dissent from our Churches in the foundation Againe VVe will make it euident that they impugne the fundamentall doctrine And scripto 4. pag. 4 Our opinion is that we disagree not about impertiment matters only or things of no consequence but about the maine and cheifest matters And scripto 7 This one thing they ayme at and bend all their endeauours to vndermine and ouerturne the groundwork of sauing doctrine And pag. 374. they complaine that those of Saxony do often cry out of them that they are worse then any idolaters And the Sacramentaries in Praefat. Apologet. Orthodoxi consensus write thus of the Lutherans They haue hitherto suffered among them such as call in question the doctrine of iustification of originall sinne of free will of the Ghospell of the law and vse thereof of Christs descent into hell of his person of the election of Gods children and many other articles of no small moment which things they easily put vp because all these go vnder the name of Lutherans Now that the Sacramentaries likewise acknowledg the Lutherans for their brethren is apparent by the Apology of the Church of England by the consent of Poland by the preface of the Syntagme of Confessions SacrameÌ„â—taries challenge LutheraÌ„s by the Conferences of Marspurg and Montbelgard and other publike writings and registred acts and yet they see and openly exclaime against their errours in fundamental points of fayth Of Luther thus writeth Zuinglius tom 2. Resp ad Luther fol. 401 And yet say they differ fundameÌ„tally from theÌ„ VVe iudge thee a worse seductour impostour and denyer of Christ then was Marcion himselfe And fol. 430. Luther as yet is entangled and sticks fast in two errours exceeding grieuous and in most foule ignorance Of Melancthon thus sayth Caluin epist 183 Either he openly impugneth true doctrine in the cheifest heads or else hideth his meaning craftily or not very honestly And epist 179. he complaineth that Melancthon endeauoureth to ouerthrow his doctrine of predestination VVithout which sayth he the knowledge of Gods free and vndeserued mercy is vtterly lost The like he sayth epist 141. Sturmius lib. de Ratione incundae Concordiae sayth plainly that the Lutherans do pluck vp the foundation of Christian Religion And Bullinger in fundamento firmo writeth that the very infidelity of the Iewes and Gentils is by the Lutherans brought into the Churches Cureus in Exegesi Sacramentaria pag. 91 Surely the controuesy between the Lutherans and Sacramentaries is concerning the foundation The Sacramentaries in the Preface of the Conference at Mulbrun say that the Lutherans Teare in preces and adulterate the articles of the incarnation of the true humane nature c. VVhich articles say they no Christian man can doubt but are the groundwork of saluation And in the foresayd preface They are at variance not about the Lords supper only but touching the person of â—hrist touching the vnion of his diuine and humane nature touching the vbiquity of his body and corporall manducation thereof
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
at least virtually and implicitly all their articles and wittingly deny none of them because as we see they are fundamentall articles of Protestancy without which one cannot haue the whole essence or substance of a Protestant nor be an entire and absolute Protestant We speak of any who are ProtestaÌ„ts only in part but only in part and in some sort And we as hath byn often sayd treat here only of an entire and absolute Protestant such as at least hath all the substantiall parts of a Protestant and endeauour to proue that Luther was the author of such a company and of such a faith and religion and regard not whither that before his tyme there were any who were Protestants only in part and in some sort and held only some part of Protestant religion but not the whole substance thereof And hereupon we frame an inuincible argument to proue that there was no true Protestant or Protestant church before Luther The definition of a true ProtestaÌ„t Euery true Protestant belieueth Iustification by only speciall faith and at least virtually and implicitly belieueth the articles of the Confession of Auspurg or of Saxony Scotland Strasburg or Bohemia But there was no man no Church before Luther who thus belieued Therefore no true Protestant or Protestant church The Maior is the very definition of a true Protestant gathered partly out of the common doctrine of all Protestants partly out of the foresayd Confessions of their fayth The Minor being negatiue is sufficiently manifest by that neither Luther nor any in his tyme or to this day could produce any one man or company who before Luthers preaching had belieued in that sort This foundation therefore touching the essence and substance of a Protestant and Protestant Church being layd to wit that he only is a true absolute Protestant who belieueth Iustification by only speciall fayth and the foresayd other fundamentall points of Protestancy and that the Protestant Church is a company of such belieuers and the Protestant religion such a beliefe and worship of God I will endeauour in this next book out of Protestants testimonies and Confessions to proue that Luther was the first beginner of their Church and Religion The end of the first Booke THE SECOND BOOKE Of the Author or Beginner of the Protestant Church and Religion CHAP. I. That Protestants confesse that the substance of their Church and Religion was perished when Luther began THE first demonstration wherewith we will proue that Luther was the author and first beginner of the Protestant Church and religion we will take out of Protestants Confessions of the substantiall destruction of their Church ProtestaÌ„ts confesse their religion was perished religion principall article of Iustification by only fayth before Luther arose For of the destruction of their fayth and religion thus writeth Luther himself tom 1. Proposit 62. fol. 375 Certaine it is that our Apostaticall Bishops raigning Gods fayth perished Perished And lib. de Captiu Babylon tom 2. fol. 77 The Popes tyranny hath many ages agone extinguished the fayth Extinguished And lib. de abâ—og Mist fol. 249. he sayth to the Catholikes Ye haue extinguished the Ghospell And lib. de pijs ceremon is fol. 387 alià s 393 Destroyed The doctrine of the ghospell lay destroyed by humane traditions Tom. 3. in psalm 1. fol. 126 VVhat thinkest thou was in the Church but a whirle wind of Gods wrath by which we were thrust into so many so different so inconstant so vncertaine and those infinite glosses of Lawyers Christ altogeather vnknown and opinions of Deuines in the meane tyme Christ being altogeather vnknowne stumbling into many quicke sands gulfes and snares of conscience were knockt together And in psalm 22. fol. 345 Christ together with fayth is now extinguished Christ and fayth extinguished And fol. 348 Fayth lyeth extinct And in psalm 51. fol. 460 The former age could neither vnderstand nor soundly teach the greatest and weightiest points Praefat. in psalm Grad fol. 509 God punisheth contempt so as he plainly taketh away his word whereof Popery is a notable example Al knowlâ—dge of Christ wholy extinct in which we see it hath so fallen out And fol. 568 Fayth it selfe was plainly extinct Tom. 4. Praefat. Eccl. fol. 1 The schooles of Deuines haue wholy extinguished most assured fayth in Christ togeather with all the knowledge of Christ Tom. 5. in cap. 2. Galat. fol. 306 The Papists with their impious and blasphemous doctrine haue not only obscured but simply haue taken away Not only obserued but simply taken away the Ghospell and ouerwhelmed Christ And fol 322 Christs ghospell being obscured yea truly ouerwhelmed the Pope c. In c. 4. fol. 376 This most common and most receiued opinion of the vncertainty of the remission of sinnes was surely an article of fayth in all Popery Christ shut out of the Church wherewith truly they ouerwhelmed the doctrine of fayth destroyed fayth and shut Christ out of the Church Fol. 400 The Pope hath vtterly extinguished Christian liberty In cap. 1. Petri The sincere knowledge of fayth was extinct In cap. 15.1 Cor. fol. 134. VVithout our helpe they had neuer learnt one word of the Ghospell Without Luther not one word or iot of the Ghospell And fol. 141 They had not knowne one iote of the Gospell vnlesse by our labour and study it had byn brought forth into the world â—om 6. in cap. 3. Genes fol. 43 Holesome doctrine was by little and litle extinct In cap. 4. fol. 57 The light of the word was extinguished by wicked Popes In cap. 17. fol. 199 That I may say all in one word the Pope hath truly buryed Christ In cap. 48. fol. 643 The Pope hath obscured nay destroyed the doctrine of sayth In cap. 49. fol. 660 The Pope hath truly obscured the doctrine and taken away the Promises Christ truly buried that we knew not what Christ was Fol. 666 He hath extinguished the Gospell Tom. 7. lib. de Missa fol. 230 The knowledge of Christ was truly abolished and destroyed This ye Papists ye cannot deny the matter it selfe proclaimeth it And fol. 231 All true VVorship of God being extinct from the bottom c. Epist ad Fredericum Electorem fol. 506 Knowledge of Christ truly destroyed The Pope of Rome hath most plainly rooted out the Ghospell truly oppressed and ouerthrowne lib. cont Papatum fol. 469 Fayth was weakened choaked and extinguished and Christian liberty lost Thus plainly speaketh Luther almost in all his Latin comes of the substantiall destruction of his fayth and Ghospell before that as he sayth he brought it againe into the world Ghospell most plainly rooted out To which he addeth in his 7. Dutch tome in his admonition to the Germans This abomination was increased so that they blotted out and supprest the words of this Sacrament and fayth so that neither a letter nor point of them remayned in all Popery in all
masses and bookes Thus Luther 2. In like manner the Protestants in Sleidan lib. 1. fol. 258 The Pope made lawes by which true knowledg was vtterly oppressed Melancthon tom 2. Lutheri fol. 192 Scholasticall diuinity being receiued fayth was destroyed the doctrine of works being admitted The Magdeburgians Praefat. Centur. 5 Extreme abolitioÌ„ of religion There was an extreme abolition of true Religion and the word of God vnder Popery Caluin Praefat. Institut In former ages men had extinguished the light of God And 1. Institut cap. 11. § 9 Many ages since true religion was drowned and ouerthrowne 4. Institut cap. 2. § 2 The substance of Christianity buried Vnder Popery that doctrine without which Christianity cannot consist was all buryed and shut out Respons ad Sadolet pag. 128. he sayth that the necessity to leaue the Roman Church was That the light of diuine truth was extinct the word of God buryed c. And p. 130. Cheifest points of doctrine ouerthrowne from the root maketh this speach vnto God in defence of his forsaking the Roman Church There were not a few profane opinions which euen by the ground ouerthrow the cheifest points of that doctrine which thou diddest deliuer vnto vs by word Lib. de necess Refor pa. 49 VVhen the word of God was choaked with these so many so thick darknesses Luther stept forth c. pag. 62 None prayed to God with assured sayth that is in earnest neither could they for Christ being buryed in that manner as he was c. Word of God ended Respons ad Versipell pag. 358 They haue extinguished the doctrine of saluation In Psycopan pag. 388 The word of God being ended by peruerse vse and sloth now returneth to light In Rom. 11. vers 22 The truth was taken away The light put out S. deel de vocat Minist pag. 552 God suffered that light to be put out which should perpetually haue lightned vs in gouerning our life Pure worships banished Crispin Praeâ—at operum Occolampadij Both the doctrine of saluation and piety were taken away they banished out of the Church all pure worship of God Celius secundus Cario de amplitudine regni Dei lib. 1. pag. 33 True Christ taken out of the world And so by litle and litle true Christ was taken out of the world and Antichrist put in his steed And Hospin part 1. Histor lib. 4. pag. 291. writeth that after 800. yeares after Christ the light of the holesome and true doctrine began to be darkned till it was vtterly put out The light cleane put out Thus forraine Protestants both Lutherans and Sacramentaries 3. Amongst English Protestants thus writeth M. Bale Cent. 4. c. 6 Holesome truth perished from the earth Cent. 1. pag. 69 From this tyme anno 607 purity of heauenly doctrine vanished out of the Church The truth perished froÌ„ earth In his Apology against Priesthood and vowes fol. 3 Two things haue cheifly byn the cause of the vtter decay and full destruction of Christian religion c. Vanished out of the Church M. Powell in â—tinerarium Cambrâ—ae lib. 2 cap. 7. sayth that about the yeare 1189 There was the cheife raigne of darknesse in so much that not only preaching of the true word but also the true religion was banished and scarce the name of Christianity remayned Vtter decay full destructioÌ„ of religioÌ„ M. Fox in the Protestation before his Acts affirmeth that about the yeare 1215. and 1080 Christian sayth was extinguished And pag. 840. that Christian Religion was wholy changed into Idolatry D. Fulke ad Cauillat Sâ—apletoni Scarse name of Christianity remayned Scarce could he fiue hundred yeares after banish the true doctrine of saluation out of the Churches of Europe And finally the Apology of the English Church part 5. cap. 13. diuis 1. sayth that Papists haue broken in peeces all the pipes and conduicts haue stopped vp all the springs and choaked the fountaine of liuing waters and by damning vp all the fountains of Gods word haue brought the people into a pittifull thirst Item Not a sparck of diuine light found VVith great distresse went they scattering about seeking some sparck of heauenly light to refresh their consciences withall but that light was already throughly quenched out so that they could find none This was a rusull state this was a lamentable forme of Gods Church It was a misery to liue therein without the Ghospell ProtestaÌ„ts light thoroughly quenched out without light without all comfort Thus write these learned Protestants both English and strangers of the destruction of their doctrine their fayth their religion and Ghospell before Luther arose which do so plainly testify the substantiall destruction therof as I may well vse S. Augustins words in the like occasion If I should speake thus they would resist and cry Lib. 1. de pec mer. c. 9. that I speake not truly thought not truly For in these words if they were spoken by others they would imagin no other meaning then that which in the foresayd Protestants they will not vnderstand 4. ProtestaÌ„ts confesse their lundam art perished Neither write they otherwise of the destruction of their principall and most fundamentall article of Iustification by only fayth For thus the Confession of Anspurg cap. 20 VVhen the doctrine of fayth which ought to be principall in the Church lay so long vnknowne Sole faith vnknown as all must needs confesse that there was a most profound silence of the iustice of fayth that in sermons only the iustice of works was spoken of in Churches c. And tit de bonis operibus pag. 25 Horribly ouerwhelmed In tymes past certaine absurd opinions horribly ouerwhelmed this doctrine in which the vnlearned faigned that men did satisfy the law of God In the meane tyme there was great silence how Christ is to be apprehended by fayth And pag. 27 The was no word of fayth which is necessary for remission of sinnes And pag. 19 In tymes past there was great silence in Churches of the exercises of sayth And Praefat. Apol. Confess August in Melancthon tom 3. fol. 27 All Churches Monasteries schooles briefly all bookes of late diuines No man taught c All Prot. coÌ„fort vnknown were before mute of the iustice of fayth No man taught sinnes to be forgiuen by fayth in Christ Sacraments were impiously profaned after that opinion that they iustify by the work wrought was receiued And this opinion did wholy oppresse the doctrine of saith Praefat. Conf. Saxoniae All this comfort which is necessary to euery one how a man conuerted to God is iustified was vnknown The Protestant Princes and Cities in Sleidan lib. 21. fol. 240 The contention is about the doctrine of sayth and of the true knowledge of God which is the cheifest head of Christian life and of pure religion Vtterly extinct And it cannot say they be denyed that this doctrine was vtterly extinct and
608 findeth fault with Cardinall Bellarmine when he sayth that there is alwayes a visible Church by the name of the Church he vnderstandeth not one or two but a multitude Neither also do they by the name of the Church when then say it cannot perish vnderstand any true particuler Church consisting of a Pastour and flock as is euident both because they say the Church may be reduced to one or two as also because as shall hereafter appeare they thinke that all Pastors may perish Cap. 7. and lastly because D. Whitaker loc cit reprehendeth Bellarmine for that by the name of the Church which cannot faile he vnderstandeth a multitude gathered together in which are Prelates and subiects They are therefore of opinion that both the Catholike Church spred through out the world and euery particuler church consisting of Prelates and subiects may faile and perish and when they say the Church cannot faile by the name of the Church they vnderstand fayth and meane that there shall alwayes be fayth in some one or other as clearly appeareth by their former words and also by these of D. Whitaker loc cit pag. 469 What Protestāts meane by the church whē they say it cannot perish Hence he gathereth not as our aduersaries do that the visible Church shall neuer saile but that sayth shall neuer saile in the whole but that to the end of the world Christian religion shal remayne in some This sayth he is the very thing which we say maintaine Ye see plainly that when they say the church cannot faile they only meane that fayth cannotvtterly faile but that it shall be alwayes in some Wherein there is no contradiction to that which otherwise they teach that the Church can faile because fayth and the Church are different things neither doth fayth in whome soeuer and in how few soeuer make the Church Wherefore if they be mad men and no Christians who say that the Catholike Church may faile or that the Church is not to dure for euer as D. Whitaker himselfe sayth cap. 1. 2. cit certainly these Protestants are such For whiles they say that the Church may be brought to one or two and that all Pastors may perish they manifestly say indeed and effect that both the Catholike and all kind of true Churches may faile Moreouer I proue that they meane that the true Church was perished because they think that she is made by inward fayth but this they affirme to haue perished as euen now appeared Besides the very name of the Church properly signifieth the true Church and only improperly that which is not the true Church And therefore when it is simply and absolutely put it ought to be taken for the true Church which thing also themselues do teach For thus writeth Sadeel in Refutat Thes Posnan cap. 4. pag. 827 VVhen the Church is simply put or when it is sayd the Church of Christ it properly signifieth only the elect Hereupon also Kemnice in loc tit de Eccles cap. 3. defineth the Church to be the Catholike company But the Catholike company is the true Church as is euident by the Creed where we professe to belieue the Catholike Church and is confessed by D. Whitaker Contr. 2. quest 1. cap. 2. 5. by D. Morton Apol. part 1. l. 1. cap. 13. by Lubbert lib. 1. de Eccl. cap. 4. by the French Catechisme Domin 15. and others And therefore most rightly saith S. Augustin that it is a wicked impudent detestable De vni◠Bapt. c. 14. Conc. 2. in Psal 101. and abominable speach to say the Church hath perished which yet would not be vnlesse by the name of the Church were vnderstood the true Church For what offence were it to say that the false Church had perished Furthermore when heretikes as the Donatists Calu. cont Seruet pa. 657. Whitak Cont. 2. q. 3. c. 2. 3. Seruetus and the like do say that the Church was perished or banished the Protestants themselues vnderstand thē of the true Church why then ought not Protestants to be vnderstood in the same manner when they vse the same words Againe because sometymes they say that the Kingdome of Christ the temple of God hath perished Cap. 1. n. 7. But what can be the Kingdome of Christ and temple of God but the true Church for the false is rather the Kingdome and temple of Satan Whereupon D. Whitaker Controuers 2. quest 3. cap. 1. pag. 466. sayth The scriptures most plainly teach that there will be no end of the Kingdome of Christ And ad Demonstrat 17. Sanderi VVhat other thing is the temple of God but the Church of Christ which is built with liuely stones And M. Powell lib. 1. de Antichristo cap. 3 The Church is defined 1. Tim. 3. to be the temple of God Hereto we may add that Ochim sayth that that Church which Christ founded washed with his bloud enriched with his holy spirit which vndoubtedly is the true Church was vtterly destroyed Num. 8. Finally because they say that Elias thought that there was not remayning one pious man besides himselfe that he was the only Christian the only true worshipper of God which was left aliue and actuall member of the true Church Seing therfore they will make Elias to thinke so of the true church of the same also ought themselues to be vnderstood who vse to draw arguments out of Elias his words especially when as they say that it sufficeth if there be one or two faythfull men in the most forlorne tymes of the Church which they must needs meane of the true Church which they will haue to consist only of the faythfull seruants of God That they meane of the vniuersall Church 4. Their third shift may be that when they speake of the destruction of the Church they meane not of the vniuersall or whole Church but of some particuler or part of the Church But this is easily refuted First because as we haue rehearsed they say there was a slaughter of the whole Church that all the Church was corrupted all became idolatrous that scarce the name of Christianity was left that none belieued that not one iot of the ghospell had byn knowne without Luther that the whole knowledge of Christ all pure worship all true religion was abolished Secōdly because vnder the name of Elias they plainly say that the whole Church was extinct the whole Church failed he alone was a faythfull man Num. 8. and actuall member of the true Church Wherefore either they thinke it not blasphemy to say the whole Church hath perished or this horrible blasphemy which calleth in question all religion they most impiously attribute to that holy Prophet Thirdly because they say that their Church was brought to one or two and that it is inough to the Church if there be one or two faythfull persons But what man well in his wittes will say that one or two are inough to make the
Chapter of Isaias tom 4. fol. 220. thus writeth There is no religion in the world which receiueth this opinion of iustification by only fayth and we our selues in priuate do scant belieue it though we publikely defend it By which words he sheweth that neither Hussytes nor Waldenses nor any Christians besides Protestants and scarce they also do belieue the principall and most fundamentall article of Protestancy howsoeuer openly they professe it That the Church cannot be so inuisible as Protestant confesse theirs to haue byn before Luthers tyme. CHAP. VI. 1. BY the name of the Church we vnderstand not as I sayd before only the men but men sociated or the society of men in the fayth worship of God Wherfore that a church be sayd visible not only the men but their worship of God must be visible Neither by this word visible do I vnderstand here that only which can be seene but whatsoeuer is sensible according both to the vulgar phrase of speach wherewith we say See how it soundeth as S. Augustine noteth and also after the phrase of scripture Lib. 10. Confess c. 35. wherein as the same holy Doctour obserueth All sensible things are called visible And Protestants as is before shewed do confesse that before Luthers rising their Church was simply inuisible Lib. 1. de mor. Manich c. 20. and vnseene of any either of those within or without her And necessarily they must say so because they can name none at all who before Luther arose did see a company of men who professed to belieue iustification by only fayth and the rest of the fundamentall principles of Protestancy yea they affirmed that it was so inuisible Ca. 4. n. 11. as it implyed contradiction to haue byn seene of any That the Church cannot be inuisible 2. Now that the Church Militant or liuing on earth cannot be so inuisible I proue first because it is against an article of fayth of diuers Protestants And if perhaps any hereupon imagine that either Protestants neuer graunted the contrary or that if they did graunt it their testimonies against themselues are not to be accepted let him read what hereafter I write touching that matter in the last chapter of this booke Wherefore in the Confession of Saxony cap. 15. they professe in this sort God will haue the Ministery of the ghospell to be publike he will not haue the voice of the ghospell to be shut vp only in corners but will haue it beard of all mankind Therefore he will haue publike and seemely meetings and in them he will haue the voice of the ghospell to sound He will also haue these same meetings to be witnesses of the Confession and separation of the Church from the sects and opinions of other Nations God will haue his Church to be seene and heard in the world and will haue her deuided by many publik marks from other people And the same they repeat in the Consent of Polony cap. de Coena And the same Confession of Saxony cap. of the Church VVe speake not of the Church as of a Platonicall idaea but we shew a Church which may be seene and heard The eternall Father will haue his Sonne to be heard in all mankind VVherefore we say that the Church is in this life a visible company c. SecoÌ„dly it is against their owne definitions of a militant Church ProtestaÌ„ts definitioÌ„s of the Church For the foresayd Confession of Saxony defineth the Church in this life to be a visible company The Magdeburgians in their 1. Century lib. 1. c. 4. col 170. do thus write The Church may be thus defined The Church in this life is a company of those The câ—urch in this life who imbrace the sincere doctrine of the Ghospell and rightly vse the Sacraments And the very same definition giueth Melancthon tom 4. in cap. 3.1 ad Tim. pag. 398. Hutterus in his Analysis of the confession of Auspurg pag. 444. saith This Church which is sayd to be and to be belieued The Church which we belieue is not a Platonicall idea but the visible company of those that are called Zanchius also in his treatise of the Church cap. 2 The militant Church is the company of the elect and truly saythfull Church militant professing the same sayth partaking the same Sacraments c. Hereof properly speake the scriptures when they call the Church the spouse of Christ the body of Christ redeemed with the bloud of Christ sounded vpon a rock Gerlachius tom 2. Disput 22 Defining the Church as it is on earth we say that it is a congregation of men Church on earth who called by the voice of the Ghospell heare the word of God and vse the Sacraments instituted of Christ. 3. Thirdly it is against the properties and markes of the true Church assigned by the Protestants themselues to be altogeather inuisible For thus their Confession of Auspurg cap. 7 The Church of Christ properly so called The proper Church hath her marks to wit pure doctrine c. The Confession of Saxony cap. 12 The true church is discerned from other nations by the voice of true doctrine and lawfull vse of Sacraments The true Church The French Confession art 27 VVe belieue that the true church ought to be discerned with great care VVherefore we affirme out of the word of God that the Church is the company of the faythfull who agree in following the word of God and imbracing true religion wherein also they daily profit growing and confirming themselues mutually in the feare of God The Confession of the Low Countries art 29 By these markes the true Church shall be discerned from the false if in her the pure preaching of the Ghospell be of force by these markes it is certaine that the true Church may be distinguished The Confession of Scotland art 18 It is necessary that the true Church be discerned from the false by euident marckes least being deceiued we imbrace the false for the true to our eternall damnation Againe VVe belieue the markes of the true Church to be true preaching of the word c. Melancthon in his answere to the Bauarian articles tom 3. fol. 362 It is euident that the true Church is a visible company And vpon the 16. to the Romans tom 1. pag. 486 She is the true Church who teacheth the Ghospell aright and rightly administreth the Sacraments Danaeus in his booke of Antichrist cap. 17 The proper definition of the Church This is the proper definition of the Church that the true Church is the company of the faythfull who serue God purely and keep the notes of adoption instituted by him such as are the heauenly word the Sacraments and discipline By these 3. marks the false Church is distinguished from the true Lubbert in his 4. booke of the Church cap. 2 VVe say that the Church doth shew her selfe to be the true Church by the sincere preaching of the word of
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
continuall descent thereof from Christ cannot by such record be shewed Moreouer at sometyms they not only confesse that the Church is alwayes visible but also graunt that the scripture teacheth the same in those parables of the barne and the net For out of them Caluin 4. Protestāts confesse that the Scripture affirmeth that the Church is alwayes visible Institut cap. 1. § 13. inferreth that the Lord pronounceth that the church shall be vexed with this euill till the day of iudgemēt to be burdened with the mixture of the wicked Of the same opinion is D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 2. pag. 471. and others But that church which contayneth the wicked is the visible Church for the inuisible they will haue to hold only the good The Scripture therefore testifieth that the visible Church shall euer be Yea Protestants now and then take it so ill that it should be sayd that they teach that the visible Church perished for many ages that D. Sutliue in his answere to Exceptions cap. 7. sayth that Bellarmine lyeth in saying so And D. Whitaker loc cit pag 472. sayth we slaunder them when we affirme they put such a Church as at sometymes can be seene of none And sayth that in this matter there is no controuersy about the thing but about the manner to wit no question whither the Church be alwayes visible or no but in what manner it is visible because forsooth we will haue the Church to be at all tymes visible clearly and of all men and they will haue it to be at sometymes visible but obscurely and of few The like sayth Kemnice in his Common places title of the Church cap. 3. Reineccius in the 4. tome of his Armour cap. 8. and D. Morton in the 1. part of his Apology lib. 1. cap. 13. But yet that in this matter we neither bely nor sclaunder them is manifest by what we haue rehearsed in the 4. chapter before going in the 5. number and those that follow To which I add that Caluin in the Preface of his institutions setteth the state of this question betwixt vs Protestants in these words Vpon this hinge hangeth our controuersy that they Papists will haue the forme of the church to appeare and be visible at all tymes On the contrary we say that the church may consist of no apparent forme And I would to God that Protestants would constantly agree which vs in this matter of doctrine that the church of God is alwayes visible to some either of those that are in it or out of it that the debate might remaine only about the matter of fact VVhy Protestāts contradict thēselues about the inuisibility of the Church whither the Protestāt Church before Luther appeared were seene of any either Protestant or other But Protestants standing betwixt truth and lyes whiles they consider the nature of the Church of God especially as it is described in scripture confesse that it must needs be visible not only to her children but to others also But when they look back vpon the state and condition of their owne church before Luther began are compelled to deny the same as before we most euidently shewed which thing alone if it were well considered would discouer sufficiently that in their own consciences they acknowledge their Church not to be the true Church of God Inuisibility cōtrary to the ends of the Church 7. Fiftly I proue that the Church cannot be inuisible because that were contrary to the ends for which the Church was instituted of God whereof one was that men should worship him after that entier manner of worship which man is to giue which is to honour God not only with heart and mind but also with tongue and deed as it is euident and Caluin in his Confutation of a Hollander many wayes proueth that the Church must render to God not only inward but also outward worship But an inuisible Church worshippeth God only in heart and mind as Whitakers words are Another end of the Church is to feed her children with the word and Sacraments to correct and gouerne them by discipline and to defend them from enemies as also is manifest and scripture teacheth Which offices a Church which neither seeth her children nor is seene of them cannot performe Likewise another end is to conuert the world and those who are out of her to the fayth and worship of God which she can no way do if neither her doctrine nor example be seene of them And yet as Luther sayth vpon the sixt chapter of Isaias tom 4. fol. 234 The Church is in perpetuall practise of conuerting others to the fayth Inuisibility against the nature of human societies 8. Sixtly it is against the nature of a society of men amongst themselues for to be inuisible For as men consist of a body which is visible by the colours and of a soule which is seene by the actions thereof so it is necessary that the society in which they ioyne be visible either by it selfe or by some other thing Whereupon well sayd S. Augustin Li. 19. cōt Faust c. 11. Men cannot ioyne in any religion true or false vnlesse they be bound togeather by some fellowship of visible signes or Sacraments And the same confesseth Gerlachius in his 23. disput of the Church pag. 995. saying VVe willingly confesse graunt that the church cannot be except there be some outward and visible signes by common communion and participation whereof society amongst men may consist And seauently it is contrary to the example of all other societies amongst men whither religious or prophane whereof none consisteth in a thing which is altogeather inuisible and whereby the members of that society cannot be knowne the one to the other 9. Seauenthly Against the perpetuity of the Church it is contrary to the continuance and conseruation of the Church on earth to be visible For if the Church which was in the former age had not byn seene of that which is in this age how could the Church of this age haue receiued the fayth We aske therefore how the Protestant Church of our age learned the fayth of the Church of an other age if in the ages before Luther she were so inuisible as you haue heard them confesse Protestants scared with this question like men with a thunder clap leape a sunder and euery one answeareth not what he knoweth or can proue but what seemeth to him least absurd that hereby we may perceiue that all their talke of their Churches being before Luthers tyme is but as the scripture sayth fables and vaine speaches or fancies and fictions of men speaking without either testimony or reason Some of them say that before Luther their Church receiued the fayth immediatly from God alone During Popery sayth Boysseul in his Confutation of Spondé pag. 75 the holy Ghost taught fayth without a preacher Protestant Church taught miraculously The same also intimate Iunius Cont. 4. lib.
14. Ninthly Nothing can make the church inuisible I proue that the Church could not be inuisible because there is nothing which can make that the Church professe not her fayth For if any thing most of all persecution But as the waters did lift vp the Arck of Nöe which was a figure of the church so do persecutions raise vp the church and make her more knowne And as the heauen in day tyme all shineth but at might glittereth in the starres so the church in tyme of peace flourisheth in all her members but in tyme of persecution is most glorious in her constant soldiers And there are many and most excellent testimonies of the holy Fathers how that the Church is by persecution made more pure more famous and more plentifull which one may read in SS Iustin Irenaeus Tertullian Gregory Nazianzen Hilary Ambrose Hierome Augustin Leo Theodorete Gregory the great others I according to my purpose will alleage only the testimonies of Protestants Luther vpon the 1. psalme tom 3. fol. 125 The faythfull whiles they are killed do encrease while they are diminished do multiply And vpon the 9. of Isaias tom 4. fol. 84 The Church is made fruithfull with the bloud of the Godly and increaseth Caluin against Seruet pag. 595 The true and proper church rising vnder persecution flourished vnder the same The like he hath vpon the 2. Tim. cap. 2. and Philip 1. Lubberia lib. 5. de Eccles cap. 3 The true Church grew vnder suffering persecutions And the Apology of the English Church in the end This flame the more it is kept downe so much the more with greater sorce and strength doth it breake out and fly abroad D. Fulke of Succession pag. 255 I acknowledge that the Church is so farre from being extinguished by the persecution of the materiall sword that I graunt it giueth her occasion to delate and extend her bounds For so as Tertullian sayth well the bloud of Mâ—rtyrs is the seed of the Church This all that are not starck blind do see to haue happened to our Church For how much the more Antichrist raged with fire and sword so much the more famous she became And D. Whitaker Cont. 2 quest 5. cap. 4. pag. 501 Persecutions destroy not the Kingdome of Christ but make it more famous And Cont. 4. quest 5. cap. 2. pag. 669 VVhen tyrants raâ—ed against the church religion suffered no losse yea then most of all flourished How then could the Protestant church if it were the true church of God become inuisible before Luther arose by persecution 15. If any reply that this is true of violent persecution of the heathens but not of persecutions by fraud deceit as is the persecution of Antichrist which made the Protestant Church in former tyms to become inuisible I answere that first he speaketh voluntary without all proofe Againe that the English Apology and D. Fulke speake namely of Antichrists persecution meaning the Pope which they say hath since Luthers tyme made their church more famous How then could it before his tyme make it inuisible Moreouer the scripture and holy Fathers teach that Antichrist shall rage most cruelly against the Church and Protestants affirme that the Pope whome they will haue to be Antichrist hath byn so cruell against Protestants as any Herode Nero Domitian may seeme to haue byn mild if they be compared to him Finally heretikes do by fraud persecute the Church and neuerthelesse the Apostle saith There must be heresies 1. Cor. 10. that those who be tryed may be made manifest So farre is fraudulent persecution from making the Church inuisible as it maketh the tried faythfull to be manifest And both S. Augustin oftentymes others obserue that heresies haue byn occasion of great increase of knowledge vnto the Church 16. Tenthly I proue ProtestaÌ„ts inferre an inuisible Church to be no Church that the Church cannot become inuisible because Protestants do often inferre such and such a Church or company not to haue byn because it was not seene as in the Preface of the Protocoll of Frankentall they proue the Anabaptists were not before the year 1525. Because say they if you read all stories you shall find no people from the beginning of the world who had a Confession of fayth like vnto yours But by the same manner it were easy to proue that Protestants were not before Luther For as Spalatinus in his relation of their CoÌ„fession of Auspurg boasteth One shall not find such a Confession neither in any history neither in any ancient Father or Doctor In Luther tom 9. German And Fox in his Protestation before his Acts sayth that of their Church there is no mention made in Histories Luther also vpon the 3. chap. ad Galat. tom 5. fol. 358. writeth that of his principall opinion nothing is read in books of Monks of Canonists of Scholmen yea nor in the books of ancient Fathers There was a wonderfull silence of it for many ages in all schooles and Churches Likewise when one sayd that the Roman Church was a member of the Catholike Church Caluin in his Answere ad Versipellem pag. 359. sayd I do not gainsay that the Roman Church is a member of the Catholike if he could shew a Church at Rome Which supposeth that no Church is where it cannot be shewed When Bellarmine sayd that beside the Synagogue of the Iewes there were in Elias tyme Churches amongst the Gentils D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 475. thus answered If they say that God had other Churches let them shew them and tell which they were and where they were And D. Rainolds in his 12. Prefection vpon the scripture col 106. inferreth that none of the Synagogue did belieue those bookes of Scripture which they deny to be canonicall because we cannot name any When D. Harding sayd that there was such an heresy M. Iewel art 2. diuis 8. pag. 75. denying it sayth It must needs be a very straung heresy that neuer had neither beginning nor ending nor defender nor reprouer nor mouth to speake it nor eare to heare it nor pen to write nor tym to last in nor place to rest in And if an heresy must be heard of certainly much more the Church of God When Beza impugned the Arians thus he discourseth epist 18. pag 98 If their opinion be true we bid them shew where there Church hath byn sith from the propagation of the ghospell it is easy to demonstrate that neuer any one held any such thing who was not condemned by the perpetuall consent of the Church And he addeth epist 81 Certainly there hath byn no true Church if these men teach truth When the Bohemians would proue that they had borrowed nothing of the Anabaptists thus they write in the Preface of their Confession Our Congregation was long tyme before any thing was heard of the Anabaptists or their name knowne in the world Finally M. Bancroft in his Suruey of the
about to shew any other kind of Pastors Finally all those who affirme that the vocation or Mission of Luther and their first Ministers was extraordinary must needs say that there were no former Protestant Pastours of whome they could haue byn sent or approued ProtestaÌ„ts say the Church may be without Pastors 4. The same also they insinuate when they teach that the Church may be without Pastors which they affirme that thereby they may defend the being of their own Church before Luther when it had no Pastors Luther in cap. 4. Oseae tom 4. fol 295 As if the Church were tyed to any certaine order of Ministery The Confession of Saxony cap. 12 God estsoones restoreth the Ministery Caluin of true Reform pag. 332 I graunt indeed that it can neuer fall out that the Church perish but when they referre that to Pastors which is promised of the perpetuall continuance of the church in that they are much deceiued For the Church doth not perish streight if Pastors he wanting Beza of the notes of the Church pag. 55 Ordinary succession and vocation of Pastors was not always needfull or perpetuall Sadeel in Answere to the abiured articles pag. 533 It is false that the outward Ministery must be perpetuall The same he hath in Repetit Sophism Turriani pag. 763. Iunius and Danaeus lib. 4. de Eccles cap. 8. Bucan in his 41. place de Eccles quest 19 Sometyme the outward and vsuall ministry of the church being interrupted the Church is extraordinarily nourished of God as it were in the desert Keckerman in his Theologicall Systeme lib. 3. pag. 397 The Church is often pressed so that the order of succession of Pastors must be somewhat interrupted And Vorstius in his Antibellarm pag. 158 The ordinary succession vseth oftentymes to be interrupted for some tyme. Luâ—bert in his 5. booke of the church cap. 5 VVe say that the church may for a short space be depriued of Pastors D. Whitaker c. 6. before cited pag. 510 I gather that true and lawfull succession may be broken of and that it is not a true but only an accidentall note of the Church because it pertaineth not to the essence of the Church but only to her externall state And pag. 512 VVe say that ordinary succession hath oftentymes byn interrupted and cut of in the true Church D. Morton lib. cit cap. 17. writeth thus The matter of the proposition to wit where there is no succession there is no Church ye know to be weake And cap. 18. he affirmeth this saying to be false Succession of doctrine cannot be deuided from succession of persons And cap. 23. sayth Succession of fayth may be without succession of doctrine and succession of doctrine without succession of persons D. Fulke lib. de Succes pag. 319 Yea euen the very publike preaching of the word may be silent for a tyme and the Church being depriued for a tyme of this ordinary meanes of her saluation may be preserued so long of God And D. VVhite in his way to the Church pag. 87 All the externall gouernment of the Church may come to decay in that the locall and personall Succession of the Pastors may be interrupted And pag. 403 For the externall Succession we care not it is sufficient that in doctrine they succeded the Apostles and primitiue Churches and those faythfull witnesses which in all ages since imbraced the same 5. By the foresayd Confessions of Protestants it is most cleare that when Luther began to play the Pastor there was no Protestant preacher at all For they acknowledge that they are no Church for any ordinary succession that the true order of the church perished that the true Ministery was taken out of the Church true knowledge of diuine ordination was extinguished and ordination abolished and decayed That the Church had no true Ministery and that she was destitute of true Pastors And that they meane these words both of a substantiall vniuersall destruction of true Ministry is manifest both by the selfe same words and others also For they adde withall that the state of the church was quite ouerthrowne ordinary vocation wholy corrupted that ordinary vocation was no where no place left for ordinary vocation and there were none of whome those who freed their Church from Popery might receiue imposition of hands that the state of the Church was so interrupted that God must raise vp Pastors extraordinarily that the true ranck of ordination was so cut of as that their needed a new succour and a new foundation lastly that the Ecclesiastical order the vaine names therof only remayning was ouerthrowne from the foundation and lawfull order quit abolished that there was not left so much as the slenderest shadow of the cheifest parts of ecclesiasticall vocation In which words either they say that there was neuer a Protestant Pastor at all or that can be sayd by no words whatsoeuer And such was the state and condition of the Protestant church not for a small tyme but as themselues say for some ages And for this cause vsually they call Luther his first partners their (a) Plessie l. 1. de Eccl. c. 11. Napp in 14. Apocal. first ministers first (b) Sadeel de Vocat pag. 556. teachers first (c) Gâ—alt Praefat. in ep ad Rom restorers of the ghospell first (d) Perk. in â— Galat. cap. 11. preachers of the ghospell first restorers of the house of God Apostles and Euangelists 6. Finally I proue that there was no true Protestant preacher before Luther out of the reall coÌ„fession of all Protestants For none of them all can by any sufficient testimony or argument proue that there was any such Pastor Wherefore this is rashly affirmed and fondly belieued 〈◊〉 Marc. â— Either proue sayth Tertullian that which thou belieuest or if thou prouest it not how doest thou belieue it And that common argument of theirs wherewith they vse to proue that they had a Church and Pastors at all tymes because they bring the Scripture to proue their doctrine to be true we shall hereafter shew to be a most vaine Sophisme And besides themselues do ouerthrow it in teaching as we haue seene that the Church may be without Pastors wherby it would not follow that they had Pastors albeit they could by the Scripture proue that before Luther they had a Church Moreouer then those who endeauour to name some Protestant preachers or Pastors before Luthers tyme do plainly shew that there was no true and absolute Protestant Pastor to wit such as taught iustification by only faith and the rest of the fundamentall opinions of Protestancy For the Apology of the Church of England pag. 103. sayth That they gaue not so cleare a light but lightned as it were some sparck The Confession of Saxony cap. 12 That they ioyned stable vnto the foundation Cruciger and Rorarius in Luther tom 1. fol. 202 That they had some litle light D. Fulke of Success pag. 131 That perhaps in all points
4. quest 5. cap. 3. pag. 682. writeth that those feigned Protestants Perhaps vsed Popish ceremonies for customes sake And pag. 689 Antichrist deceiued the elect and seduced them The very elect erred And Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 474 In Popery there were many Protestants who communicated with Papists Gerlachius tom 2. disp 22 They were driuen into the common opinions with an vniuersall and fatall ouerflow of superstitions And Casaubon epist ad Peron pag. 10. writeth that the godly communicated with Babylon D. Feild lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 13 The authors of those Popish errours and those that were free from them were of the same Communion D. White in his way pag. 171 The children of God abode in the communion of the Roman Church And in the defence cap. 44. pag. 394 VVe do not hold a definite number of persons distinct from the members of the Church of Rome and liuing apart in another society by themselues in secret as it were the 7. sleepers lying hid in a mountaine but we affirme this company liued in the middest of the Church of Rome it selfe and were the visible Prosessors therof This also is that which Caluin would when 4. Institut cap. 2. § 12. he sayth that his Churches in Popery were prophaned with sacrilegious impiety corrupted and almost killed with pernicious doctrines in which lay halfe buryed the ghospell ouerwhelmed godlines banished and all things so out of order as there seemed rather the face of Babylon then of the citty of God And vpon the 23. of the Acts VVe complaine that the Church was corrupted of them Papists the temple of God prophaned Li. 2. cont Cresc c. 17. that it differed litle from a swinescot See sayth S. Augustine to what a precipic◠the difficulty to find where to get out hath brought these men They sayd their Church was in Popery and afterward found not how to creep out but by this most steep craggy precipice For what steeper precipice what greater absurdity can there be then to say that the church of God which the Protestants will haue theirs to be for many ages denyed her fayth professed infidelity forsook Christ worshipped Antichrist or to vse their owne words Did vse very Babylonicall and Antichristian rites was corrupted with pernicious doctrine prophaned with sacrilegious impiety Epist 40. Epist 27. and out of which godlines was banished God forbid sayth S. Cyprian that a company of fallen persons should be called the Church Againe God forbid his mercy and inuincible power neuer permit Epist 1. that a company of fallen persons be called the Church And Beza himselfe The Church is a community of Saints not a company of excommunicated or sacrilegious persons And shall we think that before Luther arose the Church of God for many ages was nothing else but a company of fallen sacrilegious hypocrites denyers of Christ and worshippers of Antichrist Is such a company the holy Church Is the Communion of such the Communion of Saints which we belieue in our Creed Is such a society the spouse and mysticall body of Christ the wife of the lambe the Kingdom of God Surely a fit Church for protestants and a fit company to which the forsakers of the Catholike Church may adioyne themselues and most worthy to be eschewed detested of all that loue Christs or their owne honour For who is he either pious or well in his wits who will make himselfe of that company which for many ages consisted all of lapsed Hypocrites denyers of Christ and worshippers of Antichrist The whole Scriptures and Fathers say that the spouse of Christ is honest and chast and cannot be deflowed But this protestant harlot did for many ages prostitute her selfe to Antichrist 10. Moreouer this kind of company which thus communicated with Antichrist and professed his doctrine could not be the visible Protestant Church Conf. Anglic art 19 For her they define to be a company which professeth Christs true doctrine and rightly vseth his Sacraments But this foresayd company as themselues write Durst not prosesse their opinion had no Ministery did obserue Babylonicall and heathenish rites Nor were they their inuisible Church which alone they will haue to be the true Catholike and proper Church because she according to all their opinions is the company of Saints elect only The Confession of Auspurg art 7 The Church properly so called is the congregation of Saints who truly belieue and obey Christ. And D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 1. cap. 3 Thus we define the Catholike Church It is a company of holy men whome God hath chosen in Christ to euerlasting life This definition sayth he excludeth all hypocrites But those who worshipped Antichrist were no Saints obeyed not Christ were hypocrites Therefore they were no Catholike or true church Againe it is the common doctrine of Protestants that naughty great sinners are no mē ers of the true church For thus the Confession of the Low-countries art 29 Hypocrites belong not properly to the Church Caluin 4. Ill mē not the true church by Protestā◠Institut cap. 1. § 7 Into that Church which is indeed before God none are admitted but such as both by grace of adoption are the sonnes of God and by sanctification of the spirit true members of Christ Peter Martyr in his places tit de Eccles col 1368 VVe affirme that such wicked men are not indeed before God members of the Church Arctius in locis part 3. fol. 50 The Church properly so called consisteth only of the true members of Christ Bucer lib. de vi vsu Ministerij pag. 558 The true Church consisteth only of those that are borne a new D. Whitaker cap. 3. cit VVe all belieue that Catholike Church which we professe in our Creed to consist of no euill or reprobate persons but only of the elect iust and holy And c. 7 VVe deny ill men to belong to the Church which is the body of Christ M. Perkins in his exposition of the Creed col 795 An ill man cannot be a member of the Church Adā Francis loc 11. de Eccl Ill men are only in name members of the Church And finally Musculus in locis tit de Eccl. pag. 299 Not so much as the name of the Church ought to be giuen to the wicked But they who were such as the Protestants before described were no Saints were not iust were not sanctified but ill wicked hypocrites if euer there were any therefore they could not be the true Catholike and proper Church before God Furthermore Protestants vse to teach that those who communicate with Papists do cut themselues from the true Church The French Confession art 28 VVe think all those who adioyne themselues to these Popish actions and communicate with them do separat themselues from the body of Christ Luther in cap. 13. Genes tom 6. fol. 163 VVho acknowledgeth the Pope for master he hath no part with Christ And in cap.
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
be euery wher Caluin pronounceth Admonit vlt. ad Westphalum pag. 829. that it was not borne long since And Alcsius apud Hospiâ— part 2. fol. 201. sayth I know both the tyme when this opinion was first broached to the Church and who was Author thereof Authores Admonit de lib. concord cap. 3. pag 95. No man taught this their opinion before Luther Do they not bring forth new deuises and not heard of before in the Church Beza also lib. de Omnipraesentia carnis Christi pag. 509. calleth it a doctrine vnheard of in the Church Finally Clenuitius apud Heshus lib. cit calleth the very Confession of Auspurg A new and fifth Ghospell Thus Protestants testify the newnesse of each other doctrine 9. Eightly I proue the newnesse of Protestancy by the new and before vnheard of nams The names of Protestats are new which Protestants giue to themselues and to their Church and religion For they call themselues Protestants or Ghospellers and their Church and Religion Euangelicall and reformed D. Andrewes respons ad Apol. Bellarm. c. 1. Protestants is our name D. Willet in the Preface of his Synopsis VVe refuse not the name of Protestants This name agreeth fitly to our profession Praefat. consensus Poloniae VVe are termed Ghospellers Iezler lib. de bello Euchar. fol. 31. VVe will be called Gospellers and woe be to them who call vs otherwise His maiesty in his declaration against Vorstius pag. 49 The men of our Religion doe estsoones take to them the name of Gospellers D. Morton part 1. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 7 If ye aske where is the Euangelicall and reformed Church all will straight point their finger to the ProtestaÌ„ts assembly But surely all these names are new and neuer heard of before Luther neither can there be any name designed which before Luthers time was proper to the Protestant company But it is incredible that there should haue bin such a company and yet that it neuer had any proper or peculiar name giuen either by those of that company or of any others 10. Lastly I proue the nouelty of the Protestant Church by that that Protestants knowing well the newnesse therof deny that the greatest antiquity among Christian Churches is a marck of the true Church of Christ as doth Iunius lib. de Eccles cap. 16. yea some of them are so offended at this marck of Antiquity as they bid vs (a) Luth. tom 2 fol. 367. shut our eyes at it and say that it is a (b) Raino Confer c. 5. diuiss 2. bastardly marke and rather a mark of the (c) Ples l. de Eccles c. 3. Synagogue of Antichrist theÌ„ of the church of Christ Neuertheles seeing it ought to be vndoubted amongst Christians that since Christs Church was founded by him it neuer failed or perished and that it is manifest that he founded his true Church before any false Christian in imitation of him began a false Christian Church it ought also to be certain that she which amongst all Christian Churches is the most ancient is the very true Church of Christ Neither would euer Protestants deny this if they did not too wel know that their Church is far yonger then the Roman as being according to their saying her daughter 11. Out of all which hath beene recited in this chapter I make my eight demonstration in this sort If the Protestant Church and Religion were in Luthers tyme new or builded or begun a new he was the Authour and beginner thereof But so it was as hath beene made manifest by the aforesayd confessions of Protestants Therefore Luther was the Author thereof That Protestants do plainly confesse that Luther was the Author and Beginner of their Church and Religion CHAP. XIIII THE ninth demonstration that Luther was the Author of the Protestant Church and religion shall be taken out of Protestants open confessions thereof First therefore they say that he was the first who openly preached Protestancy Luther Praefat. in tom 1 The Duch men did looke what would be the euent of so great a matter which before none either Bishop or Deuine durst touch Ibi. fol. 159. It is said Luther first of all in our age did taxe the Popes abominations and illustrate the ancient and pure doctrine of the Church And Praefat. disput fol. 370. Luther the first that preached his Ghospell I first allowed the marriage of Bishops In cap. 3. Galat. tom 5. fol. 333 Many gaue God thankes that by the Ghospell which by Gods grace we then first of all preached c. In cap. 4. fol. 387. God in this later tyme hath againe reuealed the truth of the Ghospell by vs vnto the vngratefull world Epist ad Argentinenses tom 7. VVe dare boast First published Christ that Christ was first published by vs. Melancthon Praefat. in tom 3 VVith what ioy did men receaue the first sparckle of light discouered by Luther praef in tom 2. Lutheri God by him restored the Ghospell to vs. Againe He recalled the minds of men to the Sonne of God First spark of Protestancy and as the Baptist shewed the lambe that taketh away the sinnes of the world And praefat in tom 3 VVhen there was great darcknes in the Charch and the light of the Ghospell was oppressed Luther layd open the iustice of fayth The vniuersity of VVittemberg in Hospin part 2. histor fol. 250 Out of this Church and schoole did shine the first light of pure doctrine touching God and Crist The first light which our new aduersaryes are forced to graunt though they burst with enuy Amsdorfe Alber and others write that Luther was the first vnder heauen who impugned externall sacrifice Priesthood in the new testament Schusselburg lib. 2. Theol. Caluin fol. 130. sayth that Vtenhonius a Caluinist was impudent when he wrote that he heard Conrad Pellican say that many learned men in Germany held the doctrine of the â—hospell before Luther appeared and that Pellican himselfe had reiected Purgatory before Luthers name was heard of This lye sayth Schusselburg the later Caluinists haue refuted And fol. 228. he affirmeth that Luther began the refining of the doctrine of the Ghospell This praise sayth he we truly and with good right giue to Luther though the Caluinists take it in very ill part Morgerstern tract 145. sayth It is ridiculous to thinke that before Luther any held the pure doctrine and that Luther receaued it of them and not rather they of him Milius in explicat confess August art 17. If Luther had had orthodoxall forerunners in his office Had no predecessours there had beene no need of a Lutheran reformation The Author of the booke entituled Prognostica or Finis mundi pag. 12. Luther as is confessed first brought in the ghospell at the end of the world The first that brought in the Ghospell Brentius lib. de Coena in fine God raised vp Luther to carry before vs the torch of the knowledg of Christ. And Smedensted apud Hospin
93. 238. 488. 493. 493. tom 3. fol. 555 tom 5. fol. 290. tom 6. fol. 79. and other where often Secondly it ariseth that true Protestancie is called Lutherans doctrine the Lutheran cause the Lutheran religion ProtestaÌ„ts terme themselue LutheraÌ„s the Lutheran businesse and Lutheranisme Of Luther himselfe tom 2. fol. 37. and 497. Of Frederick the Electour tom 1 Lutheri fol. 237. Of his Counsailers tom 2. fol. 116. Of the deuines of Mansfeld in Schusselburg tom 8. pag. 270. Of Schusselburg himselfe Epist dedicat tom 4. Of Melancthon tom 2. Lutheri fol. 193. 197. Of Kemmice Epist dedicat lib. de duabus naturis Of Hutter in Analysi Confess August pag. 595. Of Brunsfelse Respons ad Spongiam Erasmi Or Lobeenâ—us in Epist dedicat Disput Oâ— George Fabritius l b. 1 8. Orig. Saxon. and of other Lutherans And in like manner of Sacramenttaries also as of Bucer in Matth. 26. lib. de Cura animorum pag. 261. Of Hospin Prefat part 2 Histor Of Scultere Con. saecular Of D. Morton 1. part Apol. lib. 1. cap. 45. and others Thirdly therof proceedeth that the true and proper Protestants are called Lutherans both of themselues and of others For thus speaketh Luther in psalm 118. tom 7. fol. 551 I graunt my selfe to be a Lutheran And in like manner speaketh he ibidem fol. 79. 242. 233. 361. 400. And tom 2. fol. 473. and in Hospin part 2. fol. 134. So also speaketh Melancthon in dominicam 8. Trinit tom 1. and in Hospin lib. cit fol. 72. and Brentius also ibid. fol. 107. So speaketh the Confession of Saxonie in the Preface and the Saxon Ministers in the Conference of Aldburg pag. 60. Vrban Regius in Iudicio de Conuentu Norimberg pag. 9. Amsdorse in Bucer in Scriptis Anglicis p. 635. Matheus Index in Edicto aeterni Dei Iames Andrewes in Colloq Montisbel pag. 179. Yea Grauer in the Preface of his Caluinisticall absurdities dedicateth his booke Vnto the proper Lutherans and pag. 61. affirmeth that their men are called Lutherans that they may be distinguished from Papists and Caluinists Scusselburg tom 17. Catal. pag. 866. sayth The Deuines of our part call themselues and the Defenders of their opinion Lutherans Which also affirmeth Reineccius tom 1. Armat cap. vlt. Hutten in Expostulat cum Erasm sayth I acknowledge the name of Lutheran And Hailbruner VVe are not ashamed of the name And Andrew Schafman in Prodromo bringeth many reasons to proue that they did well in calling themselues Lutherans And those of Berga as Hospin reporteth in Concord Discord c. 20. say that All the sincere doctours of the Church call themselues Lutherans of Luther The same also testifie the Sacramentaries For those of New stade against the booke of Concord cap 6. pag. 213. say they account none a sincere disciple of Christ vnlesse he wil be called as well a Lutheran as a Christian The author of the orthodoxe Consent in Prefat Apologet. They take to themselues factions names vpon a preposterous and too great esteme of their masters Parcus in cap 2. Galat. sect 24 They doe not only call themselues Lutherans of Luther but also will be so called of all Beza in Conspicil pag. 8 Ye all will be named and called LutheraÌ„s And pag. 56 Not content with the name of Christians they call themselues Lutherans and reioyce to be so called Danaeus Apol. cont Iac. Andrâ—ae saith that He glorieth in Luther as in another Christ of whome euery where be thundereth calleth himselfe a Lutheran a Lutheran c. And Resp ad Selnecer he saith that Selnecer Freely confesseth that the Ducth Churches terme themselues Lutherans Vrsin in Catechism pag 494. saith This is the opinion of them who call themselues Lutherans Zauchius Epist dedicat Miscellan Many are not ashamed euen in printed bookes to all themselues Lutherans And Iezler de bello Euchar. fol. 115 Some haue no shame euen in pulpit to say VVe wil be Lutherans constantly And at some times euen the sacrameÌ„taries seeme to be desirous of the surname of Lutherans For those of Newstade in Admonit de lib Concordiae pag. 106. compliane that some would seeme to be the only disciples of Luther Musculus in locis tit de haeresi pag 604. saith No man condemneth true Lutherans vnlesse he be ignorant of the truth or very naughty And the Protestant Princes of Germanie in Thuan. lib. 79. Histor pag. 595. relate that the King of Nauarre wrote to them that if the French Protestants were to be termed of any man they ouâ—ht most of all to be called Lutherans Because when this name was odious in France for almost therscore years many by fire by rack be death sealed with their bloud the testimonie of that doctrin which they receiued first of Luther Scultete also in Concionâ— saeculari coÌ„pareth Luther with the Apostolicall men Besides the Sacramentaries call Luthers true follwers LutheraÌ„s as Zuinglius tom 1. fol. 420. 436. 470. Oecolampadius ibidem fol. 479. and in Hospin part 2. fol. 84. 112. 126. Tigurini ibidem fol 88. Bucer in cap Rom. in Scriptis Angl. pag. 669. Martyr tom 2. loc Epist ad Caluin Hospin lib. cit fol. 91. Caluin in Zancius lib. 2. Epist pag. 78. Daneus ibidem pag. 401. Zanchius himselfe pag. 394. Pareus lib. 5. de Amiss grat cap. 1. 2. lib 4. cap. 17 lib. 6 cap. 1. Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 561. D. Whitaker cont 1. quest 2. cap. 3. and quest 5. c. 8. and quest 6. cap. 9. cont 4. quest 5. cap. 3. lib. 3. de Concupisc cap. 9. lib. 3. de Scrip. cap. 2 sect 3. D. Fulke de Success pag. 321. M. Perkins in Explicat Symboly col 781. 790. Yea Iezler loc cit fol. 39. Vorstius in Collat. cum Piscatore write that properly and vulgarly they are called LutheraÌ„s Wherupon D. Humfrey ad Rat. 2. Campian pag. 128. sayth Lutherans vulgarly called 7. Hereby we see first that the Lutherans glory of the name of Luther as the Donatists which S. Augustin reporteth did of the name of Donatus Secondly that they glory of a schismaticall name for such is the name of Lutherans as Luther himselfe confesseth in D. Morton part 1. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 8. And Hospin Praefat. part 2. Histor Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 149 Yea D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 5. cap. 2. sayth that to take the name of any man at all is Hereticall and schismaticall and that heretikes carry the names of their masters and willingly acknowledge such names Thirdly it appeareth that the English Apologie vntruly sayd that Luthers disciples are called Lutherans in disgtace or derision For Grauer lib. cit sayth they are termed so for distinction sake Lauatherus and Hospin Praefat. Histor say they call them so for doctrine sake that it may be knowne whome they meaÌ„e And Scul eie so termeth them for honours sake And surely sith both Sacramentaries the common people and themselues also terme them Lutherans and glory
ready to proue out of the scripture that we professe the same doctrine of fayth and manners which Christ would haue to be perpetuall by euident reason our succession is manifest althogh all Historyes were silent of the names of the Persons and continuation of succession And the like he hath pag. 154. and 331. D. White in his way pag. 403. sayth he knoweth his Church was alwayes because it holdeth the fayth of the Scripture which cannot be extinguished The like he sayth pag. 320. 326. Likewise Luther de notis Eccles tom 7. fol. 149. Caluin in Matth. cap. 24. vers 28. and generally al of them whiles they make the truth of doctrin the infallible marke of the Church Lib. 2. contra Arian O proofe that I may cry out in S. Augustins words O errour o dotage And with S. Athanase A worthy heresy which wanteth probable reasons to vnder proppe it For this argument on which all their belief that their Church was before Luther doth rely is a most fond sophisme and most counterfait syllogisme as manifestly appeareth whether it be framed in that forme wherein D. Whitaker hath proposed it or whether it be reduced to this forme That Church which holdeth the true doctrine of Christ hath alwayes beene and consequently before Luther The Protestant Church holdeth the true doctrin holdeth the true doctrin of Christ as say they we will proue by scripture Therefore it hath bin alway 3. I answere that this argument is a manifest sophime for many causes For if the Maior be particuler so that the sense thereof be Some Church which holdeth the true doctrine of Christ hath alwayes beene it is true because the catholik church which holdeth Christs true doctrine hath alwayes been but then the Syllogisme is sophism for want of due forme inferring a conclusion out of particuler propositioÌ„s But if the Maior be vniuersall according as it is made of D. Whitaker then so farre is it from being out of controuersy as he affirmeth that it is manifestly false and no way true but only apparant and therefore vnfit to make a true syllogisme but only a counterfait and a sophisme ProtestaÌ„ts assume a manifest falsity That it is manifestly false is euident because that Church or company of ChristiaÌ„s which is strictly and properly termed schismatical holdeth the true doctrine of Christ as both the Fathers teach and the Protestants themselues doe also most plainely affirme yet it is not the true church of Christ Wherefore sith as the Philosopher teacheth those thinges are probable which seem true to all or to most or to wise men and those either al or most or most approued and such as are not probable serue only to make sophismes The foresayd Maior not seeming true to all or most or the wisest Christians yea not euen to the Protestants themselues it is manifest that it is no probable propositioÌ„ but only apparent and therefore not fit to make a true syllogisme but only an apparent and counterfait 4. That the Fathers teach that a Schismatical Church holdeth the true doctrine of Christ is manifest by S. Augustine who lib. quest Euang. pag. 28. tom 4. sayth It vseth to be enquired wherein Schismatickes differ from heretâ—kes That Schismatikes hold true doctrine and this found that no difference in faytht but breach of society in communion maketh Schismatikes And lib. de fide Symbolo cap. 10 Heretikes by belieuing wrong of God violate the fayth but Schismatickes by wicked diuisions leape from fraternall charity albeit they belieue aright those thinges which we belieue And lib. cont Gaud. cap. 9. refuteth him because he had sayd that Schismatikes and Heretikes are the same against which he sayth Thou art a Schismatike by sacrilegious diuision and an heretike by sacrilegious opinion And lib. 1. cont Cresc cap. 29. and de gest is cum Emerito affirmeth that the same fayth is had out of the Church S. Hierome in Tit. 3. VVe iudge this difference to be between heresy and schism that heresy holdeth a naughty opinion schisme separateth from the Church by dissention of Bishops S. Gregory lib. 18. Moral cap. 14. Some doe belieue false thinges of God others by Gods help belieue rightly of God but keep not vnity with their brethren these are diuided by schisme S. Isidor lib. 8. Origin cap 3. Schisme tooke its name of breach for it beleeueth the same religion and rites that others do only is pleased to keep company a part The same teach S. Ireneus lib. 4. cap. 62. S. Chrysost hom 3. in 1. Cor. S. Optat. lib. 1. 4. 5. cont Parmen and others And it is manifest by reason For if Schismatikes did erre also in Fayth they should not differ from heretikes And it is grauÌ„ted both of old and new Heretikes For thus sayth Faustus in S. Augustine lib. 20. cont Faustum cap. 3. Schisme if I be not deceaued is to belieue the same to worship God in the same manner that others do only to be delighted with diuision of assemblyes Caluin 4. Institut cap. 2. § 5. Austin putteth this difference betwixt heretikes and schismatiks that they corrupt the sincerity of the fayth with false doctrines these sometymes euen hauing the like saith breake asunder the band of society And in 1. Cor. cap. 11. vers 19. It is known in what sense the ancient vsed both these nams schisme heresy they put heresy in difference of doctrine but schisme rather in alienation of minds to wit when any either vpon enuy or hatred of the Pastours or of frowardnesse departed from the Church Beza libro de puniendis Haereticis pag. 89 Shism properly is the diuision of those who belieue the same things And pag. 150. Let them remember that we terme them not heretikes who are properly called Schismatiques The same he hath in 1. Cor. 1. v. 10. and other where Plessie lib. de Eccles cap. 1. pag. 16 VVe call erroneous Churches either heretikes or schismatikes according as they erre either in fayth or in charity And pag. 32. VVhat pertaineth to schismaticall Churches either they are simply schismaticall or when heresy also is adioyned as it vseth after schisme as an ague after a wound And cap. 10. pag. 340. True and pure Schismatiks are those who holding the same doctrine yet make meetinges a part Peter Martyr in locis tit de Schism pag. 618. I thinke it more plaine to define Schisme to be a cutting a sunder of the Ecclesiasticall peace vnity And pag. 619 There may be schisme in the Church without heresy Aretius also in locis part 2. fol. 10 Schisme sometymes in the same doctrin breaketh society Bucan in loc quest 33. de Eccl. affirmeth that shismatiks differ from heretiks because heresy properly is dissention in doctrine Polâ—n part 2. Thes de notis Eccl. Albeit schismatical Churches agree in the doctrine of truth c. Zanchius tract de Eccles cap. There may be breach in the symboles of Charity that is in
Heretiks rashly deuise figures And (u) Cont. Hermog c. 27. Tertullian These are the subtilties sleights of Heretiks to call in question the simplicity of common wordes And this namely he noteth of the (x) Praesc Valentinians as (y) l. de Haeres S. Austin doth of the Priscillianists And the same condemneth Luther in the Sacramentaries and the Sacramentaries in the Anabaptists Finally ProtestaÌ„ts themselues condemne this wresting of wordes from their proper signification without iust cause Luther li cont Ecchium tom 1. fol. 354 If words do serue thee as another Mercury at thy pleasure And fol. 55 To say that Augustin speaketh excessiuely against Heretiks is to say that Augustin almost euery where lyed And Praefat. in Artic. Smalcald he bitterly inueigheth against some who expouÌ„ded his words against his meaning The Ministers of Saxony in Colloq Aldeburg pag. 343. greatly complaine of the Electorall Ministers that they miserably crucify Luther with their glosses and pag. 337. say It is vnciuill to feigne a sense which the wordes beare not And pag. 304 VVhosoeuer goeth about to cloak opinions which by themselues as the words sound are false he is guilty of them especially if he be a Doctour of the Church and Minister of the word of God And in like sort the Ministers of the Electour say to those of Saxony pag. 252. that they auoyd Luthers words by sophisticall interpretation and by opposing other places And pag. 447 Let power be giuen to expound wrest Luthers writings according to pleasure and fancy like the Sybills oracles or Sphinx his ridles Besoldus also Praefat. in Comment Luther in Genes tom 6. fol. 497. thus writeth of some If they fall vpon any such places in Luthers interpretations by the clearnesse of which they may be refuted they feigne that they are figuratiuely spoken they deuise tropes and figures And wheÌ„ the Sacramentaries expounded the words of the Confession of Auspurge commodiously and dextrously as they speake according to their opinion Lobechius Disput 1. the Lutherans sayd May not any in this manner subscribe to the Turkish Alcaron and make the canons of Trent or other sentences howsoeuer contrary Suruey ca. 17. to be orthodoxall M. Baâ—croft thus writeth of Puritans You must bring strang discords of which these men will not make some harmony Againe To their profit they can make Quodlibet ex Quolibet Pareus lib. 2. de Iustificat cap. 13. sayth that it riseth of a naughty cause to depraue the nature of words And lib. 4. cap. 1. calleth it a haynous slaunder in Bellarmine when he sayd that many protestants speak one thing meane another The Ministers also of Zurich in Hosp part 2. fol. 161. affirme That he may iustly be condemned of madnesse of all who giueth credit not to sound and cleare words but to some explication not of him whose the words are but of some other whose they are not Yee see how mad they are to be accounted who should belieue not the plaine and euident testimonies of Protestants rehearsed of vs but some other mans exposition of them Luther to 2. Colloq Aldeb fol. 303. Schuss to 4. Catal. To which I add that Luther and other Protestants do command that according to the ciuill law words be expounded against him who could speake more clearly and did not Seing therefore Protestants could haue vttered their meaning more clearly if they had meant otherwise then in the forsayd testimonies their words do signify iustly we may interprete their wordes against them Lastly Luther according to his own other mens verdicts did vtter his mind plainly and did condemne all doubtfull manner of speach in matters of religion For thus writeth D. Whitaker of him He was an open and plaine man D. White Praefat. ad Demonstr Sanderi DefeÌ„s c. 33. Tom. 2 fol 114 215. Epist ad Amsdorf They speake not alwayes so plainly as Luther doth And Luther himselfe I will be plaine Againe I had neuer this dissimulation to pretend to dispute that which I meant to determine And in another place I will not abide to be suspected of such hypocrisy to think otherwise then I write And yet more To what is this double-tongued and hatefull kind of speach but vnder words and letters to sow the seed of all heresies The Confession of Saxony cap. 3 In the Church we must auoyd ambiguities And Caluin de vera Eccl. reform pag. 335 VVhen in all matters plainesse is to be vsed especially when religion is handled it is not lawfull to vse craft and dissimulations And the Sacramentaries in Admonit de lib. Concordiae cap. 3. pag. 62 VVe endeuour nothing lesse then to seeme to be of one opinion with them with whome we are not To conclude howsoeuer it may be that one or other Protestant in some one kind of writing had written hyberbolically or figuratiuely when he declared it not yet that so many and so princâ—pâ—ll Protestants so often and in so many kind of writings as we haue cited in a matter of so great moment should speake hyperbolically or figuratiuely and yet not declare that they meant so is altogeather incredible Wherefore vnlesse Protestants will ouerthrow the very rule of vnderstanding mens speaches or words Note and make the fancy of the hearer or reader the rule of vnderstanding them take a way al force of proofes out of any words what soeuer imitate both old and new heretikes follow that manner of expounding words which themselues haue condemned expound Luther contrary to his owne protestation and confesse that Protestants in so great a matter spak one thing and thought another and finally affirme a thing so incredible as oneâ— now we shewed this to be they cannot interprete the foresayd testimonies of Protestants hyperbolically or figuratiuely vnlesse they yield a sufficient reason or proofe thereof Besides if in this question of fact they not only reiect the testimonies of Catholikes and of all other men besides their owne but also expound their owne mens testimonies as they list they manifestly shew that in this matter they will heare no testimony nor abide any iudgement whatsoeuer which is the most euident argument that can be of a naughty cause For to admit testimonies not according to the proper sense of the wordes but to your owne liking is only to admit the sound or figures of the words and to reiect the sense or signification which is the soule and forme of them and in which alone the force of the testimony or iudgement doth consist 6. Fiftly touching the reason or argument wherewith he will proue that Protestants in their testimonies by me alleadged meant hyperbolically or figuratiuely let him not account it sufficient to shew that the same Protestants in other places haue sayd the contrary First because this will not shew that they sayd not that which in the places which I cite they most plainly and euidently did say but only that according to the manner of Heretikes and
the Waldenses and therefore the Bohemian Confession is not the Waldenses Confession Nor albeit therein be mention of iustification by only fayth can it be inferred that therefore the Waldenses did belieue it Finally as I haue often sayd and it must be alwayes inculcated I regard not whome any one sayth to haue byn Protestants but whom he proueth to haue byn such Neither whome he can proue to haue byn Protestants in part and in some sort but whome he can proue to haue byn absolutely and wholy Protestants at least for the substance of Protestancy Neither will it auaile any whit to complaine that we haue burnt the writings of the Waldenses by which they might proue that they were true Protestants For if they haue nor wherwithall to proue they were true Protestants they in vaine do feigne it Besides we asked of Luther his followers to produce one man Waldensian or other who had byn a true Protestant before Luthers preaching for which end there was no need of writings but of liuing men Wiclif was no true Protestant 6. In like sort I proue that Wicliffe and his followers were not true and absolute Protestants First because the Wiclifists are by name condemned togeather with other heretiks of Protestants in their Apology of the Confession of Auspurg chap. of the Church in these words VVe haue plainly inough sayd in our Confession that we disalow the Donatists and VViclifists Secondly because neither in Wiclifs booke nor of any of his schollers is there any signe of sole iustifying fayth neither did euer any Catholike writer contend with them there about Thirdly because as Melancthon writeth in his epistle to Myconius in his 1. tom printed at Bâ—sle pag. 416 VViclif neither vnderstood nor held the iustice of fayth Yea Husse his principall follower as we shall anon rehearse belieued that works did iustify And Wiclif himselfe in Thomas Walden tom 3. tit 1. cap. 7. bid euery one hope in the proper iustice of his life and men to trust in their merits which thing alone doth separate him farre inough from the Protestants campe Fourthly because the Wiclifists are reckoned amongst Heretiks of many Protestants as of Schusselburg tom 3. Catal pag. 190. of Kemnice in fundament is Coenae pag. 114. of Pantalcon in his Chronicle and of Matthias Hoe disput 27. they are termed most monstrous monsters And D. Cay in his 2. booke of the antiquity of Cambridge obiecteth Wicliffe to the Oxford men as a flaine of their vniuersity Fiftly wiclif taught diuers things which Protestants dislike And to omit these things which Catholikes obiect vnto him Canisius to 3 antiq lectionum Rokesana Prince of the Hussites in his dispute with Catholiks before the King of Bohemia hath these words These are the articles of VViclif That tithes are meere almes That the Clergy ought to haue no ciuill gouernment If a King be in mortall sinne that he is no more a King Which last article Osiander in his 15. Century repeateth thus There is no temporall Lord no Prelate no Bishop whiles he is in mortall sinne And Melancthon in his foresayd epistle VViclif doth plainly sophistically and seditiously wrangle vpon ciuill dominion And in his dispute of the right of Magistrats VViclif is mad who thinketh the wicked to haue no Dominion And in his Commentaries vpon Aristotles Politiques VViclif would haue those who haue not the holy ghost to loose their Dominion So that I meruaile how D. Andrews in his answere to the Apology of Bellarmine could say that it is a sclaunder that Wiclif taught so when as not only Catholiks but euen Hussites and Protestants do affirme it Moreouer Wiclif as Osiander reporteth in the place aforecited did condemne lawfull oathes and taught that all things fell out according to absolute necessity And Melancthon in his sayd epistle giueth this sentence of him I haue looked into VViclif but I haue found in him many other errors Wiclife held not iustice of sole faith by which one may iudge of his spirit He at all vnderstood not nor held the iustice of sayth He fondly confoundeth the ghospell and politique affaires would haue Priests to haue nothing proper c. And in his common places chap. of Ecclesiasticall power That superstition of VViclif is pernicious and seditious which driueth the ministers of the Church to beggery and denyeth that it is lawfull for them to hold any thing proper M. Stow also in his Cronicle anno 1376. writeth that he taught that Neither King nor lay man could giue any thing to the church for perpetuity Finally Vadianus in his fiâ—t book of the Eucharist pag. 168. confesseth that in many things he fouly erred Hussites no Protestants 7. Husse likewise and his partners we proue not to haue byn true and absolute Protestants First because it cannot be proued that they held the foresayd article of iustification by only fayth and the other fundamentall points of Protestancy Secondly because Husse is by name reiected of Luther who in the defence of his 30. article tom 2. thus writeth of him He agreeth not with me He gaue not a litle to the idol of Rome He seemeth not to repugne against the Popes Monarchy And vpon the 2. psal tom 3. fol 395 Husse did not condemne the sacrifice of Masse as we do And vpon the 9. chapter of Isaias tom 4. fol. 108. he sayth that Husse held a doctrine most pestilent most pernicious horrible and wholy impious yea very diuelish And in his Lypsicall dispute tom 1. fol. 260 I know and that very well that an euill Prelate is not to be reiected and therefore I damne the article of Husse And both there and other where Tom. 1. fo 30. 291. 292. 251. oftentymes denieth himselfe to be a Bohemian by which he meant an Hussite And in his table-talkes chapter of Sâ—ermers sayth Husse belieued that works with fayth do iustify which point alone excludeth him from the number of Protestants Husse belieue not sole faith And in the chapter of Antichrist Husse departed not one iot from the Papists but only reproued vices and naughty life Which also affirmeth Hierome of Prage Husse his fellow in M. Fox vpon the 11. chapter of the Apocal. Where also M. Fox himselfe writeth that Husse agreed with the Papists touching transubstantiation Masse Vowes Predestination Free will formed fayth cause of iustification and merits of works which plainly declare how litle he held of Protestancy Lastly when Bellarmine wrote that there was not in the world when Luther began any religion but Paganisme Iudaisme Mahometisme Grecisme Nestorianisme Hussites heresy and the Romane fayth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 3. pag. 502. denyeth these to haue byn all For sayth he our Church was then In which words he professeth the Protestants to be a different church from the Hussites Iunius also lib. 4. de Eccles cap. 6. acknowledgeth that some Protestant deny Hussites to be of their Church And Luther vpon the 53.