seemes full gorged against the Pope as presumed by you to be Antichrist But let that for the tyme passe Do all you Protestants M. Doctour agree together touching the tyme of Antichrists first comming and consequently touching the supposed change in Fayth wrought by Antichrist his comming D. VVHITAKERS No. For I hould with our reuerent Man Beza who teacheth that Leo who was Pope anno Domi. 440. did clearely breath forth the arrogancy of the Antichristian Sea And therfore my constant Tenet is that Leo was a greate Architect of the Antichristian kingdome But some few other Protestants hould seuerall wayes herof CARD BELLARM. Some few M. Doctour not so but very many of them maintaine different and contrary Opinions touching the tyme of Antichrist his first coÌ„ming And first MelaÌ„cthon Bucer free the Pope from being Antichrist and do teach that the Turke is as Bucer speaketh ipsissimus Antichristus with whom in iudgment herin conspireth M. Fox Iunius that remarkable Protestant teacheth that Hildebrand who was Pope anno 1074. was the first Antichrist with whom D. Downham seemeth to agree in these words Gregory the seauenth alias Hildeb and was the first of the Popes who was openly acknowledged to be Antichrist Bullinger affirmeth he came in anno 763. he therfore tearming that yeare the fa all yeare D. Fulke and D. Williâ— place his comming in Anno 607. And make Boniface the third to be the first Antichrist with whome in iudgment herein your selfe M. Doctour forgetting as it should seeme what elsewhere you haue taught touching Leo conspire in these wordes Gregory the Great was the last true and holy Bishop of that Church c. And therfore because our Aduersaries demand of vs the tyme when Antichrist first came in we designe and set downe to them the very time of his comming But M. Napper ascendeth higher affirming Antichrist to haue first comme in Anno Domini 313. He teathing that Siluester the Pope was the first Antichrist Yet the Reformed Churches of Transiluania giue a greater antiquity of Antichrists first coÌ„ming placing it in the yeare 200. But Sebastianus Francus no obscure Protestant out-strippeth all his former Brethren for he ascribes Antichrists comming to the times immediatly following the Apostles thus writing for certaine through the worke of Antichrist the externall Church together with the Faith and Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure See how this high swelling riuer of Heresie for I do hold this sentence that the Pope is Antichrist to be no lesse then Hereticall is fed with the smale streames of eich mans particuler and different opinions which opinions though mainly dissenting in themselues yet most of them proceede from one generall source of the Protestants malice and hatred against the Pope and Church of Rome and therefore their iudgments herein must be more imperfect and deceaueable for as the eye seeth not aâ—ight except the species and formes of the thing seene do fall vpon the eye ad angulos rectos as the Optists do speake So here mans vnderstanding cannot apprehend any thing truly as long as is wanteth it owne naturall rectitude straightnes which is euer free from all obliquity of preiudice and Passion MICHEAS The variety of doctrin touching the comming of Antichrist is most wounderfull and far greater by many degrees then the diuersity of opinions amonge vs Iewes who was husband to Esther or at what tyme Iudith did liue And indeede I euer promised to my selfe before this time to haue found a far greater concordance of iudgment in this point amonge the Protestants then now I do finde D. WHITTAKERS I am not to defend eich Mans different opinions herein and I grant if any of these be true all the rest are false But it is sufficient to prooue that antichrist is come and that by his comming this great change in Faith and Religion was first then wrought in the Church of Rome and as touching the difficulty of proouing the circumstances of his first comming it importeth little seing here we are to remember to speake by allusion that it is easy to prooue that we see but hard to prooue how we see CARD BELLARM. I do not looke M. Doctour that you should make good all the former contraric opinions for it is impossible to iustify but any one of them Neuerthelesse it is a weake kynd of proofe to say only in grosse that Antichrist is already come and with his comming this so great a presumed chang in Faith was first brought in where you haue no more reason to allow of the particuler tyme of his comming by your selfe designed then your former Brethren haue for the fortifying of eich ones seuerall iudgment therin Only the disparity which I finde betweene them and you is this That euery one of them do set downe one only particuler tyme of Antichrist his comming and content themselues therwith wheras you M. Doctour imitating herin the skilfull Pilot who constantly changeth his sayles with the vnconstant winds for your best aduantage as it most fittingly sorts to your purpose in hand sometimes will haue his comming to be in Pope Leo to wit in the yeare 440. at other tymes in Boniface the third which is in anno 607. So you making a great Parenthesis as I may say of a hundred and fifty yeares at least betweene your two different sentences of Antichrist his comming But to returne to the force of this my argument drawne from the Protestants different and contrary Opinions touching the first reigne of Antichrist Here then I say seeing ther are among the Protestants so many contrary and irrecoÌ„cileable sentences of Antichrist his first entrance at what tyme this supposed chang of Fayth in the Church of Rome is sayd to haue bin effected And seeing that not any one of these different iudgments haue more warrant and authority for its supporting then any other of theÌ„ hath Therfore by force of all reason we may conclude that all there sentences herin are false and that Antichrist is not yet come and thus out of falsehood we may extract truth so consequently we may deduce that no chang of Fayth hath bin yet wrought in the Church of Rome by the said Antichrist Therfore I will coÌ„clude this argument with the more retired dispassionate and warie iudgments of some other of your learned Protestants to wit of that eminent Protestant Zanchius of Franciscus Lambertus no ordinary Man among you and of some others who Peremptorily affirme against all their former Brethren that Antichrist is not yet come MICHEAS For my part I must needs confesse that I do beleiue that Antichrist is not yet come For besides diuers other reasons vrged by vs Iewes in proofe therof those words of Daniell concerniug Antichrist his continuance to wit tempus tempora dimidium temporis were euer by all learned Iewish Rabbins interpreted literally and plainly to
signify three yeares and a halfe which short compasse of tyme cannot in any sort be applyed to the Bishop of Reme as Antichrist teaching the present Roman Religion seeing he hath coÌ„tinued preaching the sayd Doctrine Religion euen by the Protestants confessions as now I see many hundred of yeares But good my Lord Cardinall if there be any other reasons behinde to impugne this sayd change I would intreate your Lordship to descend to them for in matters of great importance variety seldome breedeth satiety CARD BELLARM. I am willing therto And for the further prosecution therof I am to put you in mind M. Doctour partly according to my former Method set downe in the beginning that wheras the Professours of the Church of Rome were in the Apostles dayes the true Church of Christ as is aboue on all sides confessed and consequently the most ancient Church since truth is euer more ancient then falsehoode and Errours It therfore followeth that all Hereticks whatsoeuer who make choyse of any new doctrine in Fayth do make a reuolt and seperation from that Church of the Apostles according to those words of S. Iohn exierunt a nobis they went out of vs and answerably to that other text certaine that went forth from vs which very words do contayne a Brande or Note vpon the Authour of euery Heresy Since the Apostle and the Euangelist do meane hereby that euer first Hereticke goeth out from a more aucient society of Christians then by him is chosen So as to go out of a precedent Church or society of Christians is not only an infallible note of Heresy in the iudgment of Vincentius Lyrinensis quis vnquam Haereses instituit nisi qui priùs ab Ecclesiae Câ—â—boli ae Vniuer sitatis antiqnitatis consensione discreâ—â—it but euen by your owne Brethren for we finde Osiander among others thus to write Nota Haeretici ex Ecclesia progrediuntur Thus do Hereticks euer forsake the generall most ancient company of Christians as smale Brooks do often leaue the common channell of the mayne Riuer Now here I demaÌ„d of you M. Doctour to shew from what company or society of Christians more ancient did we Catholicks in those former tymes when first you say this chaÌ„ge of Faith was made depart or from what Church afore in being went we out The euidency of this Note is manifested in Caluin Luther the Waldenses the Wicliffians and all other ancient acknowledged Sectaries of whom it is confessed that all of them were originally Members of our Catholicke Church and by their making choise of particuler Doctrines so Iudas the Apostle who departing from the company of the Apostls after became Iudas the Traitour did go and depart out of the present Roman Church and therby became Hereticks The like M. Doctour I do here expect that you should prooue by authority of Ecclesiasticall Histories of the present Catholicke and Romane Church which if you cannot then is the inference most strong that the present Church of Rome neuer made any such reuolt from or departing out of that Church which was established by the Apostles at Rome and consequently that the present Church of Rome neuer suffered any change in Fayth since it first being a Church D. WHITAKERS Your Church hath departed from that Fayth which the Apostles first preached in Rome and I hope this departure and going out without other proofs is sufficient enough And here I answere with M. Newstubâ— one of our learned Brethren That when you require who were they that did note your going out c. This question I say is vnvecessary c. we haue taken you with the manner that is to say with the Doctrine diuerse from the Aposties and therfore neither Law nor Conficience can force vs to examen them who were witnesses of you first departing Thus my Brother M. Newstubs And my Lord as it is far better for one to haue a cleare sight then to enioy the best helps for curing a bad sight so we here prefer the truth of the Doctrine first preached at Rome by the Apostles and manifested vnto vs by the perspicuity of the scripture before all humane reasons and arguments directed to the discouerie of Romes after embraced Innouation CARD BELLARM. What strang Logicke is this and how poore a Circulation do you make The mayne question betweene vs is whether the present Church of Rome hath changed it Fayth or no since the Apostles dayes To prooue that it hath not Iverge that the professours therof did neuer go out of any more ancieÌ„t Church and consequently euer retayned without change it former Fayth Now you in answere hereto as not being able to instance the persons by whom or the tymes when any such departing or going out was made by the Professours of our Religion reply that it Doctrine is different from the Doctrine of the Apostles and therfore the Church of Rome hath changed it Religion since the Apostles tymes and this sophism you know is but Petitio Principij or a beginning of the matter in question and is nothing els but without answering to any of my premisses the denyall of my Conclusion which kynd of answenng I am sure impugneth all Logicke and therfore all Reason since Logicke is but Reason sublimated and refined But to proceed further In euery introduction of a new Religion or broaching of any innouation in Doctryne the Professours therof receaue a new denomination or name for the most part from the first authour of the new doctryne and sometymes from the Doctrine its selfe like vnto a running riuer which commonly taketh the name of that riuer into which it falleth Thus the Arians the Valentinians Marcionists Manicheans from Arius Valentinus Marcian and Manicheus c. or from the doctrine it selfe as the Hereticks Monothelites Agnoitae Theopaschitae c. though this more seldome This Note or Marke of imposing a new name of the Professours of euery arrising Heresy may be exemplified in all Heresies without exception ingendred since the Apostles tymes euen to this day a poynt so exempt from all doubt as that your learned Man M. Doctour Feild thus writeth Surely it is not to be denyed but that the naming after the names of Men was in the time of the Primatiue Church peculiar and proper to Hereticks and Schismaticks with whom agreeth M. Parks both of them borrowing it from the ancieÌ„t Fathers and particulerly from Chrysostome who thus saith Prout Haeresiarchae nomen it a Secta vocatur Well then this being thus acknowledged on all sides If the present Church of Rome hath made a change from her first Primatiue Fayth then the Professours therof by introducing of new Heresies and Opinions became Heretickes and consequently they haue taken according to our former grounde some name either from the first broachers of these new Doctrines or from the doctrines themselues But you cannot M. Doctour shew any such name to be imposed vpon vs
Lyons And did professe as D. Humfrey affirmeth a kind of Monasticall life And finally labored to Pope Innocentius the third to haue their Order confirmed but could not preuayle as Vspergensis witnesseth in his Chronicle Secondly The Heresyes mantayned by VValdo and his followers are such as that you M. D. in regard of their defence of them cannot challenge them for Protestants For first they taught that maryed Persons mortally sinned in hauing the Act of Matrimony without hope of Procreation as testifyeth Illyricus the Protestant They also did hould all embracements marke this gotishe doctrine and things donne aboue the girdle as touching kissing words compression of the papps c. to be done in charity They further taught that neither Priests nor ciuill Magistrats being guilty of mortall sinne did enioy their dignity or were to be obeyed That Laymen and VVomen might consecrate and preach That Clergy Men ought to haue no possessions That men ought not to sweare in any case They went to the Catholicke Churches dissemblingly confessed communicated dissemblingly Finally to omit some others they condemned all Princes and Iudges And thus far M. D. and you two learned Men to proue that VValdo and his followers were no Protestants though it is not denyed but that some one poynt or other of protestancy they might mantaine and consequently that the example of them is defectiue to proue the Visibility of the Protestant Church in their dayes NEVSERVS But what say you Michaeas of the Albigenses and the rest aboue mentioned by M. Doctour Were not all they Protestants MICHAEAS I grant they are marshalled among Protestants by D. Fulke and D. Abbots But here M. D. you are either deceaued or which I thinke not intend to deceaue For here the Albigenses are brought for shew only of greater variety of dishes the better to furnish the table of Protestancy Whereas indeede they were of the same Sect with the Waldenses or rather the same Men according to the iudgments of D. Abbots and D. Fulke For D. Abbots thus writeth These Leonists or poore Men of Lyons and waldenses and Albigenses were the same Men but diuersly and vpon diuers occasions tearmed by the Romish Sinagogue And D. Fulke sayth the same in these words They are called the VValdenses by the vulgar Papists as also by others they are named the poore Men of Lyons Leonists Albigenses or by what other name it pleased the Sycophants of Antichrist Now these Albigenses be who they will eyther the same with the Waldenses or not as they mantayned some points of Protestancy so with all euen by the testimony of Osiander the Protestant they taught diuers execrable Heresyes The words of Osiander are these Albigensibus dogmata haec attribuuntur Duo esse principia Deum videlicet bonum Deum malum hoc est Diabolum c. These opinions are ascribed to the Albigenses That there are two Principles to wit a good God and a bad God which is the Deuill and who created all bodyes as the good God did all soules c. They do reiect Baptisme and they say to go to Churches and to pray in them is not profitable c. They condemne Mariage do allow as holy promiscuous concubitus al promiscuous lying togeather how wicked soeuer c. Thy deny the resurrectiō of the body that Christ was true Man Thus far Osander who also sayth The opinions of the Albigenses are absurd wicked hereticall finally tearmeth their spirits an Anabaptisticall furye And D. Cowper of Winchester maketh like mention of their absurd Heresyes A point so acknowledged that D. Iewell wholy disclaymeth from the Albigenses as Protestants saying thus plainly They be none of ours Touching the Apostolici or Henricians they are so far from beinge Protestants as that they are acknowledged for Heretyks by D Fulke D. Iewel and Osiander who reports their Heresyes But to proceed forward to other of your Examples Peter Bruis is censured for an Hereticke by Osiander and Hospinian who relates his Heresyes Almaricus his Heresies are reported by Osiander himselfe reiected for an Hereticke and not acknowledged for a Protestant by the said Osiander neyther by D. Iewell who speaking of the Albigenses the Apostolici and Almaricus saith as before they be none of ours And thus far Gentlemen touching the VValdenses the Albigenses the Apostolici or Henricians Peter Bruis and Almaricus D. REYNOLDS I see no reason but that we may be iustly distrustfull in giuing ouer much credit to the wryting of former tymes which charge the Waldenses Albigenses and the rest with the Heresyes by you recited And if such wrytings were eyther false in himselfs o◠but forged only through deceate and confederacy of their Enemyes then may the said Men well be reputed for true and perfect Protestants MICHAEAS If you M. D. be so diffident as that contrary to the iudgment of Osiander Hospinian and other Prtestants you will not beleiue the writings of former tymes charging Waldo and the rest in this passage or discourse mentioned with the Heresyes afore alleadged then what colour can you pretend why you should giue Credit to those Writings of the same tyme which affirme that the foresaid Men beleiued certaine Opinions of Protestancy And therefore it followeth by force of all Reason that such Writings affirming both the one and the other are eyther ioyntly to be beleiued and credited or ioyntly to be reiected as false and forged And the rather seing the Reporters of those tymes did impartially and indifferently recite and condemne all those opinions wherein the foresaid Hereticks dissented from the Church of Rome without any foreknowledge which of the said Opinions would eyther be approued or reiected by Men of this age So weake you see M. D. is this your Replye OCHINVS I am of iudgment that the VValdenses and the rest can 〈…〉 truly be reputed for Protestants in regard of the reasons alledged by you Michaas And I do hould that your last reply M. D. touching the vncertainty of the credit of those wrytings charging the VValdenses and all the other with Heresyes is most firmely auoyded by Michaas NEVSERVS I am of the same iudgement with Ocbinus herein And the truth is we do much wrong the honour of our Church by pretending such vnworthy Men for members thereof But proceede M. D. to higher tymes D. REYNOLDS In the precedent ages to these former if credit may be giuen to authenticall Historyes there were not only many Protestants but euen seuerall Bookes then written in defence of the Protestant Religion As the Authour of the Booke written against Images in the name of Carolus Magnus Bertram Vlrick Berengarius c. All or any of which to denye to haue bene Protestants were to infringe all authority of Ecclesiasticall History MICHAEAS There are not any of these you haue named as much I may
proceedeth out of his owne partiality Now this disparity M. Doctour you may well apply in my conceipt to the afore alleadged consessions and testimonies of your owne Protestants But if I haue not here answeared directly I submit my selfe to both your censures and will leaue it to my L. Cardinall to giue fuller satisfaction and answere thereto CARD BELLARM. Learned Rabby Your answere is most sufficient and warrantable and indeed a solid iudgment would easily dispell this smoake of wit and if you had not preuented me I should but haue giuen the same answere though perhaps not haue instanced it in your example of the Iewish Law But enough of this argument by which we are instructed that the present Fayth of Rome was neuer changed since the Apostles daies for it is S. Augustines rule That that Fayth which hath bin beleiued by the whole visible Church of God and whereof no first beginning can be knowne since the Apostles is presumed to haue bin first taught by Christ and his Apostles But M. Doctour if it please you we will insist in another Medium from whence we will deduce our former affertion to wit that during the first six huudred yeares after Christ and indeed during all the tyme since the Apostles the Church of Rome neuer made any change or alteration in any one materiall poynt at all And therefore I do here aske your iudgment whether there must be at all tymes in Christs Church Pastours and Doctours which must teach the People and be ready to withstand all innouations and false doctrines at theire first appearance D. WHITTAKERS Yes we all do teach that there must euer be and without interruption true Pastours in the church who shall be ready to impugne all emergent and late arrising Errours Heresyes So true it is that the church is the sâ—and from whence we strike an Hereticke And this we prooue from the predictioÌ„ of the Apostle who foretelleth vs that Pastours Doctours are to be in the Church to the consummation of Saynts till we all meete in the vnity of Fayth that is as our owne Doctour Fulke interpreteth for euer Which Doctours as our sayde D. Fulke further auerreth shall alwayes resist all false Opinions with open reprehension Which poynt is so true and euident as that I haue already taught in my bookes that the preaching of the worde of God within which is necessarely included the impugning of all false doctrines first their arrising is among the Essetiall Notes of the Church As also that the preaching of the Word doth constitute a Church the want of it doth subuerte it From whence it necessarely followeth that these Doctours and Preachers are not to be silent at the rising of any false Opinion but are obliged with all sedulity and diligence what soeuer openly to resist and beate downe all innouations new arrising doctrines in Fayth and Religion And these Doctours Pastours thus defending the Church of Christ by impugning of false doctrines are those Watchmen and Sentinels of whom Esay so loÌ„g since prophesied Vpon thy Walles ô Hierusalem I haue appoynted watchmen all the day and all the night for euer they shall not hould their peace And indeed to speake sincerely the Nature of the Church requireth no lesse for how can it continue the true Church if her Pasâ—outs do suffer false erroneous doctrine to inuade her children without any coÌ„troule or resistance And are not such negligent Pastouâ—s to be reputed as Paralyticke and dead Members of the Church since they performe not that office and function for which they were ordayned CARD BELLARM. Your Iudgment is to be emdraced herein But now M. Doctour I take your sword out of your owne hand and do turne the poynt of it into your owne breast For whereas their are many weighty doctrines as touching the Premacy of Peter the number of the Sacraments and their efficacy Free-will Merit of workes Praying for the dead Praying to Saincts Worshipping of Images Vnmaried liues of Priests the Reall Presence the Sacrifice of the Masse and to omit diuers others the adoration of Christin the Sacrament which are beleiued by the present Church of Rome and which as you Protestants do teach were introduced into the Church as Nouelties and Innouations since the Faith of Christ was first planted in the Church of Rome by the Apostles Now here M. Doctour I prouoke you and all the Protestants liuing according to your owne former doctrine of Pastours euer resisting new and false doctrines to name any one Pastour Doctour or Father of the Church who euer resisted any of the former Catholicke doctrines as new doctrines or did once charge the Church of Rome with chang and innouation in any one poynt from their former receaued Fayth by the Apostles Reade ouer all the ancient Fathers and Doctours of the Primatiue Church and later times Peruse the first approoued Generall Councells Go ouer all the ancient Catalogues of Condemned Heresies and euen study all Ecclesiasticall Historyes of those former times and finde in all these but only any one of the former Catholicke and now Romane doctrines or any other poynt coÌ„trouerted at this day betweene you and vs to be condemned for a Nouelty and as dissenting from the generall receaued Fayth of those tymes and I promise you I will cast off my Cardinalls Hat and turne Protestant Can any reasonable Man then thinke that whereas you teach the Papists Religion came in by degrees and at seuerall tymes that all the Pastours and Fathers of those seuerall tymes were a sleepe when the sayd doctrines were first braoched or that they obseruing their entrance yet not any of them would vouchsafe to make resistance or at least some mention of any such innouation in doctrine doth not this mainly crosse the fore-alleadged Prophesy of the Apostle Or can this stand with any possibility especially if we consider the nature of our former Catholicke doctrines auerred by you to be introduced as Nouelisms since they are as aboue is intimated many in number diuers of them of the greatest consequence that may be as the vertue of the Sacraments the Manner of our Iustification to wit whether by workes or by Fayth only others of them most repugnant to mans sence and common reason as the Reall Presence Some aduerse to Mans naturall Propension as the doctrine of Virginity Pouerty and Obedience most of them consisting not only in an internall beleife but euen in an externall action and operation And therfore the first OrigeÌ„ and entrance of theÌ„ are therby become most discernable Such are our doctrines of Praying to Saints Praying for the deade Pilgrimages Single life in the Cleargy to omitt diuers others all Monachisme And lastly some supposing theire doctrine to be false subiect to externall Idolatry as the worshiping of Christ with supreame honour in the Eucharist Therfore if any of our graue and learned Aduersaries should affirme for there are some curious witts
owne death Neither lastly if not any historiographer of the Iewish tymes did in their workes and writings giue the least touch therof But pardon me both of you for this my interrupting and I would intreat you to proceede further in this your learned discourse CARD BELLARM. I will satisfie your request but before I descend to any other argument I will annex to my former demonstration for I can tearme it no lesse drawne from the silence of Doctours in contradicting and Historiographers in relating any presumed innouations in the Church of Rome these ensuing Considerations 1 First we finde that the lesse iustifiable liues conuersatioÌ„ in manners of some few Popes were precisely regestred and recorded to all Posterity with intention perhaps to disgrace all Popes as if all Popes were to be represented in some one or other lesse vertuous Pope as all men are in Adam Now then this being most true can we probably thinke that the Historians of those ages being euer ready prepared to taxe the Personall vices of the Popes themselues who as you see were forced by this meanes to passe the Red sea of shame disgrace and obloquy all of them would be wholy silent in relating the greatest change in Religion that euer happened if any such chang had truly really bin effected 2 Secondly we all knowe that the Greeke Church hath bin for many ages emulous of the Church of Rome and therfore if the present Church of Rome had anciently made any Diuision or Scissure from the true Church of Christ the Grecians no doubt who then stood euer vpon the hight of Enâ—â—y the better presently to espy any arising aduantage against the church of Rome would haue bene most apt to recommend the memory of such a change in our church to all after ages in their Histories But no such records we finde in any of their writings Yea the Grecians are so far from that as that on the contrary side the present Church of Rome is able to specifie and note out of most ancient and approoued Authours the very times when the Grecians first introduced those particuler Opinions wherin at this day they dessint from our Roman and catholicke church I will insist for breuity in some few cheife examples First their deniall of Obedience to the Sea of Rome was begun by Iohn of Constantinople and was noted and writen against by Gregory the Great and Pelagius Their denial of the proceedings of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Sonne tooke it beginning and at it first rysing was gainsaid and contradicted about the yeare 764. Their deniall of prayer for the dead was begun by Arius and impugned by Epiphanius l and Augustine Their bringing in of leauened bread by the Grecians in the celeberation of the Eucharist was first begun about the yeare 1053. as appeareth out of the writings of Leo the nynth and the Centurists Now can it be imagined that those being few in number could so precisely be contradicted writen against and left regestâ—ed to all posterity and yet this supposed change of the church of Rome consisteth in bringing in of far more Articles in number and of as great consequence should neuer be noted nor impunged by any one Doctour or Father nor recorded nor obserued by any one Historiographer the said Doctours Fathers Historiographers liuing in the very same ages wherin this supposed alteration is sayd to haue hapned By the same ground might Pythâ—goras well maintayne as in his books he attempted to do that the earth being in speciall motion of 24 houres our selues because we are carryed together with this reuolution cannot obserue that any such motion of the earth is 3 Thirdy we may call to mind that wheras the Ceremonies in the celeberation of the Masse were successiuely and at seuerall tymes added and first brought in by seuerall Popes So we finde accordingly that the Aduersaries of the present Church of Rome as willing to discouer our innouations though in the smalest matters for Malice is glade to take hould of the least aduantage and but in points of indifferency haue most diligently and painfully recorded them in their seuerall bookes written of this very subiect with all due circumstances both of the Popes introducing them and the tymes when they were introduced Here now I vrge If the Enemyes of the present Church of Rome being thus diligent and sollicitous in noting the beginning of eich Ceremony of the Masse all such Ceremonies being meerely accidentall to the Masse and without which the Masse may as truly and effectually be celebrated as with them If they I say could haue discouered any innouation in the maine Doctrine it selfe of the Masse as in the Doctrine of the Reall Presence the Sacrifice of Christs body there offered vp our Adoration of the Sacrament the Priests enioyned chastity for such his celebration would they haue bin silent therin or rather would they not haue loaded their books with the relation of all such innouations they consisting not in smale ceremonies but in most sublime and high dogmaticall points of Christian Religion If otherwise then belike our Aduersaries would haue vs to thinke that herin they resemble the Sunne which reuealeth the Terrestriall Globe being but of a litte quantity but concealeth the Celestiall which is of a far more spatious greatnes But to proceed and to conclude the force of this argument drawne from the impugning and recording of innouations in doctrine if this precise course by our Aduersaryes acknowledgments hath euer bin kept during all precedent ages without intermission in all matters confessed and out of controuersy betweene vs and the Protestants shall we dreame that it was so wholy neglected and forgotteÌ„ touching the supposed innouation of our Catholicke Doctrines as that such our cheife doctrines though first really brought in in those former tymes were neither at there first beginning impugned by any Doctours or Fathers of those ages nor recorded or mentioned by any one Ecclesiasticall Historiographer among so many of the same or later tymes But now to vndertake according to your desire Micheas an other argument You Protestants M. Doctour do affirme that this our present Roman Religion is Antichristian for so commonly most of you in your charitable language do stile it and that the Pope is the true Antichrist deciphered by the Apostle for his first introducing and defending of the sayd Religion and vpon this ground you teach that Papistry first came in when Antichrist first came in D. WHITAKERS We do so teach indeed For seing our mayne assertioÌ„ is that your Religion is Antichristian we cannot euen by the nature of Relatiues seuer and deuide so indissoluble companions they are the one from the other I meane Papistrie from Antichrist he being the Man who first did disseminate it and now the heade who cheifly principally and with all wicked molitions and machinations whatsoeuer maintayns it CARD BELLARM. You are M. Doctour it
they alleadge any one Orthodoxall Father of the Primitiue Church a circumstance much to be considered and insisted vpon interpreting such your testimonies in your construction And thus farre of this point where for greater expedition I do but skimme the matter ouer D. WHITAKERS I do not much prize the authorities of the ancient Fathers in interpreting the Scripture And furthermore you are to conceiue that seing the scripture hath not viâ—am vocem which we may heare Therefore we are to vse certaine meanes by the which we may finde out which is the sence and construction of the scripture For to seeke it without meanes is meerely ' enthysiasticòn et Anabaptisticum Now the meanes according to my iudgment and M. Doctour Reinolds are these following The reading of the scriptures the conference of places the weighing of the circumstances of the Text Skill in tongues diligence prayer and the like And who hath these and accordingly practiseth them is assured of finding the true and vndoubted meaning of the most difficult passages of the scripture and thereby is able to determine any controuersies in Religion CARD BELLARM. I do grant that these are good humane meanes for the searching out of the intended sence of the scripture But I will neuer yeild them to be infallible as here you intimate theÌ„ to be since this is not only impugned by experience of Luther and Caluin who would no doubt equally vaunt of their enioying these meanes and yet irreconcileably differ in the construction of the words of our Sauiour touching the Sacrament of the Eucharist but also it is most contrary to your owne assertion deliuered in one of your bookes euen against my selfe where you write of the vncertainty and perhaps falshood of these Meanes in this manner obserue what the meanes are such of necessity must the interprteation be but the meanes of interpreting obscure places of scripture are vncertaine doubtfull and ambiguous therefore it cannot otherwise fall out but that the interpretation must be vncertayne and if vncertaine then may it be false Thus you M. Doctonr and if I haue in any sort depraued your words then here challenge me for the same Now what say you to this Can it possible be that your selfe should thus crosse your selfe Or may it be imagined that your penne at vnawares did drop downe so fowle a blot of contradictioÌ„ O God forbid The ouersight were too greate Therefore we will charitably reconcile all and say that D. Whitakers Bellarmines aduersary in writing hath only contradicted the learned D. Whitakers cheife ornament of Cambridge But enough of this point from whence the weakenesse of this your last refuge to only scripture is sufficiently layd open MICHEAS I grant I am not conuersant in the authorities of the New Testament as they haue reference to the controuerted points of these dayes since my cheife labour hath beene employed in diligently reading the Law and the Prophets neuerthelesse I am acertayned M. Doctour that seuerall passages of the said Law and Prophets in a plaine and ingenuous construction do greatly fortify some Opinions defended by the Church of Rome I will insist for greater compendiousnes in two opinions taught as I am informed by the sayd Church within which two many other controuersies if not all are implicitl infolded The first is touching the euer Visibility of the Church in the time of the Messiâ—s Now what can be more irrefragably prooued then this article out of those words of the Psalmist He placed his Tabernacle in the Sunne As also out of that passage of Daniell Akingdome which shall not be dissipated for euer and his kingdome shall not be deliuered to an other people Agayne out of the Prophet Esay A Mountaine prepared in the top of Mountaines and exalted aboue Hills And finally more out of Esay Her Sunne shall not be set nor her Moone hid In all which predictions by the words Tabernacle a Kingdome a Mountaine her Sunne is vnderstood the Church in the time of the Messias according to the expositions of all our learned Iewes and Rabbins interpreting and commenting the sayd Prophesies The second article may be the Controuersie touching Free-will which I heare is mainteined by the Church of Rome but denyed by the Protestants within which question diuers others to wit of Predestination Reprobation the keeping of the Commandements Works c. are potentially included Now how euidently is Free-will prooued out of the writings of the Old Testament And first may occurre that of Ecclesiasticus He hath set Water and fire before thee stretch forth thy hand to whether thou wilt Before man is life death good and euill what liketh him shal be giuen him what more conuincing D. WHITAKERS Micheas I make smale accoumpt of that place of Ecclesiasticus neither will I beleeue the freedome of Mans will although he should affirme it a hundred times ouer that before man were life and death MICHEAS I did not expect M. Doctour that you should expunge out of the Canon of Scripture any part of the Old Testament but since you discanon this booke I will alleadge other places which were euer acknowledged for the sacred word of God by vs Iewes and to pretermit that text in Genefis of Caine hauing liberty ouer sinne as a place strangely detorted by some and diuers other texts in the old Testament proouing the same What say you of the like passage in Deuteronomy I call heauen and earth in record this day against you that I haue set before you life and death c. choose therefore life Where you see the very point of which you are so diffideÌ„t is ingeminated and reinforced Thus M. Doctour you see how much these sacred Testimonies do wound you herein as also do diuers other passages by me here omitted euicting Mans Free-Will though all of them haue bene accordingly interpreted by all ancient Iews and Rabbins as more fully you may see in Galatinus D. VVHITAKERS Touching your testimonies produced out of the old Testament and interpreted in the Papists sence by your owne Iewish Rabbins as witnesseth Galatinus take this for my answere I do not regard or neede your Galatinns neither do I rely vpon the testimonies of the Hebrewes And further knowe you both that it is as cleare that the scripture maketh for vs who are the Professours of the Ghosple as it is cleare that the Sunne shineth in his brightest Meridian Since we Protestants are d the little flocke we haue the vnction from the Holy one and can cry Abba Pater from all which the Papists are wholy excluded And this is sufficient to ouerthrow the proudest Romanist breathing CARD BELLARM. Sweete Iesus that thinges sacred should be thus prophaned and that the words of the scripture should be thus detorted from the intended sence of the scripture when all proofes whatsoeuer from the vninterrupted practise of Gods Church from the ioynt and most frequent
and Samaria And agayne there They were receaued of the Church and the Apostles Act. 18. Paule went vp and saluted the Church Now how can these texts be possibly applyed to any Inuisible congregation or company of men Furthermore S. Paul speaketh of himselfe that he persecuted the Church of God as in 1. Cor. 15. Galat. 1. Philipp 3. In all which places the word Church is vsed But it is well knowne whom S. Paul did persecute And in 1. Timoth. 3. It is sayd how to conuerse indomo Dei quae est Ecclesia Dei in the house of the liuing God which is the Church of God But how could Timothee know how to conuerse in the house of God except he did know which was this house To all which former texts of Scripture I annex this one note a point much to be considered that not any one place of Scripture can be produced wherein the word Church is named but that a Visible and externall coÌ„pany of men is necessarily vnderstood thereby To the former Scriptures may be added certayne descriptions of the Church in other passages thereof as in Esay 2. Daniel 3. Michaeas 4. the Church is compared to a conspicuous mountayne which cannot be vnseene according to the expositions of Ierom Austin and the Protestants In like sort in Psalm 18. those words He placed his tabernacle in the Sunne are thus paraphrazed by S. Austin In manifesto posuit Ecclesiam suam c. He placed his tabernacle in an open place his tabernacle is his Church which is placed in the Sunne not in the night but in the day Thus Austin Another most illustrious conuincing passag of the Scripture for the Churches Visibility is that in the Epistle to the Ephesians c. 4. where it is sayd of Christ He gaue Pastours Doctours to the consummation of Saints vnto the worke of the Ministery till we all meete in the Vnity of Fayth that is as D. Fulke interpreteth for euer These words necessarily import that the Church of Christ must at all tymes and seasons and this without any interruption haue Pastours to administer the Sacraments and preach the word Which exposition being granted implyeth necessarily an euer Visibility of the Church For how can those Doctours and Pastours preach at all tymes and vpon all occasions the word of God administer the Sacraments if they be concealed and lye in secret Or how can the persons to whom the Word is preached the Sacraments dispensed become vnknowne or Inuisible That this is the true interpretation of the former text of the Ephesians is generally taught by our owne learned men For according hereto D. Whitakers teacheth the preaching of the Word and the administration of the Sacraments to be so necessary to the Church that he thus saith Si adsunt Ecclesiam constituunt tollunt si aufer antur With whom conspireth D. Willet thus saying of the administratioÌ„ of the Word Sacraments These marks cannot be absent from the Church and it is no longer a true Church then it hath these Markes And heÌ„ce it is that D. Whitakers further sayth that the preaching of the word and the administration of the SacrameÌ„ts are Ecclesiae proprietates essentiales essentiall proprâ—etyes of the Church And that D. Fulke thus affirmeth Christ will suffer no particuler Church to continue without a seruaÌ„t to ouersee it And that Pastours Doctours must be in the Church till the end of the World euen froÌ„ Christs time to Luthers age yea our sayd D. Fulke further affirmeth that these b Pastours Doctours must resist all false opinions with open reprehension Vnto our former brethren accord other Protestant Deuines thus wryting The ministery is an ossentiall Marke of the true Church Finally Caluin comparteth with vs all herein saying the Church can neuer want Pastours and Doctours So truly do we Protestants interpret the words of Esay Vpon thy walls ô Ierusalem I haue set watchmen all the day and all the night for euer they shall not be silent Now from these premisses we demonstraciuely proue the euer and vninterrupted visibility of the Church a point so euident that our owne learned Protestants do according to the former doctrine defyne a visible Church in these words A visible Church is a congregation of the faithfull people where the word is preached and the Sacraments ministred Which definition is also allowed by Doctour Willet and which euen in reason it selfe is warrantable since the Church as enioying the administration of the Word and Sacraments must euen in that respect become visible as we said aboue And thus farre of this prophecy of the Apostle in the explication whereof I haue stayed the longer in that it irrefragably conuinceth the poynt now handled And here I end touching the necessary Visibility of Gods Church prooued out of the sacred Scriptures NEVSERVS You might haue added Ochinus to the former Propheeyes that it is in another place foretould of the Church of the new Testament that it Pastours shal be daily multiplyed to minister vnto God And this not with any interruption herein but euen from month to month and from Sabaoth to Sabaoth That all this is to be vnderstood of the Church of the Messias appeareth from the Annotations of the English Bibles vpon the Chapters here cited printed 1576. You also might further haue insisted in that other Prophecy that the Kingdome of Christ shall not be giuen ouer to an other People but shall stand for euer And that it shal be an eternall glory and ioy from generation to generation All which passages to be meant of the Church is acknowledged by all learned Protestants Now how vntowardly and vnaptâ—y these passages with the former by you alledged sort to a company of Professours shut vp in so secret a manner as that no man can take notice of them I referre to any mans iudgement not wholy blinded with partiality and preiudice But I feare Ochinus I haue wronged you in vndertaking part of your assumed taske therefore I will cease and descend as afore I promised to answere such chiefe places of the Scripture as are by some vrged in their sily wrytings the impostumous swelling of their froathy penne for the supporting of the Churches imaginary Inuisibility D. REYNOLDS I pray you Neuserus proceed therein since obscure passages in any kind of learning not explayned do often suggest tacit obiections perplexing and intricating the iudgments of the weake and ignorant NEVSERVS I will And first for example are vsually obiected those of Elias when he sayd relictus sum solus I am left alone As also that sentence of the Prophet deficiet hostia sacrificium the Oast and sacrifice spall cease And agayne that of the Apostle Nisi venerit discessio primum c. Except there come first a departure c. And finally that of the Apocalyps The woman must flye
brightnesse our Lord euen foreseeing so much saith A Citye that is built vpon a hill cannot be hidd And further S. Augustin thus enlargeth himselfe Ecclesia vera nemiem latet the true Church is hidd or concealed from no man And yet more numquid digito c. Do we not point our fingar to the Church it doth she not lye open to all And lastly he exaggerateth this point further in these words Quid amplius diccturus sum c. What may I more say then account them blynd who cannot see so greate a mountaine who do shult their eyes against a candel placed in a candelstich Thus S. Austin And thus farre of the Fathers from whence we may easely coniecture how muche different ware the iudgements of the auncient and primatiue Fathers from their conceipts who labour by their speeches to turne the faire streame of the Churches Resplendency into the shallow current of her supposed Obscurity 1. In this next place I will descend to arguments drawne from analogy of reason And first from the comparison made betwene the old Testament and the New Testament Certaine it is that the Iewes euer since Ghrists dayes retained and kept a knowne profession of their Religion though vnder some restraint and their Synagogues haue euer since bene extarnally visible though disperced as in Greece Spayne Italy Germany France England c. And this point Peter Martyr and others do acknowledg and your selfe Michaeas can well iustify the same Now then if the Church of the new Testament should want a continuall Visibility then should it be inferiour in honour and dignity to the Iewish Synagogue euen then when the Gospell is prophesied to be most florishing and the Synagogue to be in it greatest decay and ruyne a reasonable to ouerbalance all reasons brought to the contrary 2. The foresaid Conclusion of the Churches Visibility is also proued from the beginning and progresse of the Church For first durnig the old Testament the Church was then so Visible as that the Professours thereof did beare euen in their flesh the Visible and markable signe of Circumcision as a badg of the Church Againe in the new Testament the whole Church of Christ was in it infancy and beginning in Christs Apostles and Disciples Who were so Visible as that the Holy Ghost did Visibly descend vpon them vpon the feast of Penticost Furthermore We reade in the Acts. c 2. 3. 4. that on one day three thousands on an other fyue thousands were adioyned to the former by their confession of fayth and Baptisme And so after they and only they were reputed as membrs of Christs Church who did adioyne themselue to the former Christians by their externall confession of fayth and by Baptisme 3. An other argument may be taken from the greate necessity imposed vpon Christians who are obliged vnder paine of eternall damnation to range themselues vnto the true Church of Christ and to perseuer in the same as appareth not only from the testimonies of Cyprian Ierome and Austin but euen from reason it selfe Since no man can raigne with Christ who is not a member of Christ But how can this be performed if the Church of Christ be Inuisible Or how can God be excused from cruelty by threatning to vs eternal perdition for our not performing such conditions the which supposing the Church not to be Visible is not in our power to accomplish 4. Furthermore the Inuisibility of the Church impugneth the marks of the Church giuen by vs Protestants which are the true preaching of the Word and the administration of the Sacraments seeing there matters cannot be put in practice but among a Visible Society of men and such a Society as that one of it is knowne to an other 5. Againe the Inuisibillity of the Church mainly crosseth the ende for which the Church of God was instituted Which end was to prosecute God with that entier and perfect worship which man can giue to him that is worship him not only with his Soule but also externally with his body and works or deeds seeing Man consisteth of soule and body But an Inuisible Church performeth it worship to God only in hart and minde And with this I end referring the last point to you Michaeas who is next to enter as I may say vpon the stage MICHAEAS Most willingly I come For if we peruse the writings and especially of such who haue bene of the chiëfest note in the Protestant Church it is a world to see how riotous as it were and abounding they haue bene in their works for proofe of the Churches Visibility at all times and in respect of all men and this euen in the Conclusion it selfe without any borowed sequels though neuer so necessary And first we find Caluin the halfe Arche of the Protestant Church thus to say Nunc de Visibili Ecclesia c. Now we determine to dispute of the Visible Church c. extracuius gremium nulla est speranda peccatorum remissio out of whose bosome we cannot expect any remission of sinns Neither is Melancton lesse full herein who thus acknowledgeth Necesse est fateri esse Visibilem Ecclesiam c. it is necessary to confesse the Church to be Visible Whither tendeth then haec portentosa oratio this monstrous opinion which denyeth the Church to be Visible Melancthon Further thus saith Whensoeuer we thinke of the Church let vs behould the company of such men as are gathered together which is the Visible Church Neither let vs dreame that the Elect of God are to be found in any other place then in this Visible Society c. neither let vs imagine of any other Inuisible Church Briefly the said Melancthon vrging diuers texts of Scripture in proofe of the Churches Visibility thus coÌ„cludeth Hi similes loci c. These and such lyke places of Scripture non de Ideä Platonica sed de Ecclesia visibili loquuntur do not speake of Plato his Ideä but of the Visible Church this Melancthon The Learned Hunnius giueth his sentence in these words God in all times hath placed his Church in a high place and hath exalted it in the sight of all Prople and Nations Iacobus Andreas that famous Protestant thus â—umpeth with his brethreÌ„ herein We are not ignorant that the Church must be a Visible company of teachers and hearers The eminet Danâ—usâ—oth â—oth thus second the rest Who denyeth the true Church of God and that Visible to haue bene from the beginning of the world he without doubt sheweth himselfe to be ignorant in holy Schripture M. Hooker your Countriman thus writeth of this point God hath had euer shall haue some Church Visible vpon earth Peter Martyr once your Companion Ochinus confesseth the trueth herein in these words We do not appoint an Innisible Church but do define the Church to be a Congregation vnto which the faithfull may know that
they may safely adioyne themselues D. Field conspireth with al the former Protestants thus saying The persons of them of whom the Church consisteth are Visible their profession knowne euen to the prophane and wiched of the world And in this sort the Church cannot be Inuisible Thus this Doctour preuenteth the answere of those who say the Church is Visible but to the Elect only The said D. Field thus reprehendeth Cardinal Bellarmine touching this point saying It is true that Bellarmine laboreth in vaine in proouing that there is and alwayes hath bene a Visible Church and that not consisting of some few scattered Christians without Order of Ministry or vse of Sacraments for all this wee do most willingly yeeld vnto how soeuer perhaps some few haue bene otherwise of Opinion But for great breuity and ommitting the like confessions herein of other remarkable Protestants D. Humfrey shall close vp this scene who enthereth into heate and passion with his Aduersaries for needelesly prouing the Churches euer Visibility For thus he writeth Cur ergo anxiè curiosè probant quod est a nobis numquam negatum Why do they meaning the Catholicks so painfully and curiously proue that which we neuer denyed And then after the said Doctour Non enim clancularij secessus conuocationes sunt Christianae the society of Christians are not secret meetings And then there againe speaking of the Church militant Oportet Ecclesiam esse conspicuam Conclusio est clarissima It is a manifest Conclusion that the Church is to be conspicuous and Visible And thus farre Gentlemen of your owne Brethren confessing with vs Catholicks the euer Visibility of the Church of God And this in so full a manner as that the wicked as D. Fyeld aboue speaketh shall take full notice and sight of it by force of which cleare testimonies those few and ignorant Protestants who confesse the Church to be Visible but not in so full a maner are preuented of their poore refuge saying The Church is Visible but not at all tymes as if the Church like the Sea enioyed a flux and reflux of it Visibility knowne but knowne only to the Elect and faythfull phantastically spoken without al colour of proofe and mainly crossing not only their owne more learned Brethren but also most repugnant to the formery mentioned Propheces of Gods sacred word and other passages thereof to the graue authority of the Primatiue Fathers and finally to al force of reason it selfe D. REYNOLDS Wee see Michaeas you are very conuersant in our owne Writers And now I hope this first point is perfected Whereupon the force of the future discourse is to relye And though thē be some difficulty to crye downe an errour or false opinion in doctrine once aduanced Neuerthelesse I trust no learned iudicious Man perusing the former authorities at large will euer dreame of an Inuisible Church being in it selfe a meere intentional Notion and hauing no subsistence or being MICHAEAS M. Doctour you say truly But now seeing it is in this next place properly incumbent vpon you and these two graue men to instance in Protestants for all ages since Christ for the Church of Christ by your owne former doctrine necessarily exacteth such a Visibility I hould it conuenient to put you al in minde of two or three points the due consideration of which may much induce to the discouery of the weaknes of such Instances which as my thoughts presage wil be hereafter insisteth vpon by you NEVSERVS You do well Michaeas to set downe those premonitions for we desire that if there shal be any defect in the future examples it may be fully displayed Therefore proceed in your Method MICHAEAS The first then of these any maduersions may be to obserue the wounderful reluctation and backwardnesse in some Protestants a manifest signe of their owne guilty defectiuenesse herein when this Catholicks presse them to giue instances of Protestancy and of the administration of the word and Sacrements For seing they wil beare men in hand that their Church hath euer continued Visible they are therefore in reasons it selfe bound as mantayning the affirmatiue part to vndertake the proose thereof Now answearably to my former Assertion I finde D Wutton speaking to his Catholicke Aduersary thus to write you wilt say shew vs where the fayth and Religion you professe where held Nay proue you that they were held no where c. And what if it could not beshewed yet we know by the articles of our Creede that there hath bene alwayes a Church in which we say this religion we professe must of necessity be held c. This stands vpon you to disproue which when you do by particular Records you shall haue particular answere Then which what can be spoken first more absurdly as expecting records of things which neuer were in being He furthermore transferring the part of prouing vpon Catholicks to which himselfe and his fellowes only stand obliged Secondly what can discouer more their vnablenessein guing examples of Protestancy during the former ages The like dispairing Answere D Fulke vseth vpon the same point saying to his Aduersary Proferre me iubes teto orbe latitantes vah quam iniquum postulas Thou willest me to produce and name those which did lye secret through out the World how iniust a thing dost thou here demand The second Obseruation Seing the Church of God is at al times and seasons without the least discontinuance thereof to be Visibile and to enioy a publike administration of the Word and Sacraments as aboue we al haue proued That therefore such Instances of Protestancy which may be giuen by you hereafter supposing them to be true do but iustify Visibility of your Church only for so long no longer as the said Protestants did liue And therefore except you be able to produce examples of Protestancy for al ages since Christ if you do fayle herein but for any one only age it necessarily followeth that Church of the Protestants as wanting this vninterrupted Visibility is not the Church of Christ described in the old Testament and their prophecyed of in so many different places The third and last Obseruation That one may truly and iustly be called a Protestant two things among others must necessatily concurre The one that he do mantayne al the chiefest points of Protestancy Thus he is not to hould only some few points of Protestancy and in the rest being more in number and of greater importance to pertake with the Catholicks seeing such a Man is rather as beleiuing more Articles of Catholicke Religion then of Protestancy to be reputed a Catholicke then a Protestant for his denomination is to be giuen him rather according to the greater and weightier number of Articles beleeued by him ther otherwise though to speake the truth such a Man so beleeuing is formally neither Catholicke not Protestant The second thing necessary to the being of a Protestant is that he doth not hould pertinaciously any
Ghost to illuminate the world with the Trueth of the Ghospell and to discipate the clowds of the former Romish Errours And I am assured Michaeas you wil acknowledg Luther for a perfect Protestant in all points and consequently that the Protestant Church was in Luther his followers most conspicuous and Visible MICHAEAS I know most of our new Ghospellers trauayle with you M. D. on this child to wit that Luther did erect a perfect forme of Protestancy By the which we may learne that Affection is not only blind but also deafe so loath you Protestants are either to see or heare any thing against Luther herein Neuerthelesse I here auerre it is impossible to iustify Luther for a true Protestant I know also that himselfe thus vaunteth Christum a nobis primò vulgatum audemus gloriari where we may see it is an accustomed blemish of most Innouatours to become their owne Parasites NEVSERVS Strange Luther not a Protestant doth the Sunne shine Is the fier hot Doth the Sea ebb and flow As certaine as any of these so certaine Luther was a perfect and true Protestant He was the Sunne that did dispel in those dayes the mists of Antichristian darkenesse From his preaching and writings a â—ier of Christian zeale was inkindled in thousands of mens soules for the embrasing of the Ghospell of Christ And neuer did the torrent and inundation of superstition and Idolatry suffer a greater reflux a greater reflux and Ebb then in his life time MICHAEAS Rhetorically amplifyed Neuserus But it is the weight of Reason not a froath of empty words which sway the iudicious I grant that Luther did derogatize more articles of Innouation and Nouelisme now taught by Protestants then any one Man afore him did since the first plantation of Christianity yet that Luther was a perfect and articulate Protestant and such as the present Protestant Church with relation to the doctrine now taught by that Church may iustly truely acknowledg for a member thereof I eternally denye and do iustify my deniall out of his owne bookes so shall Luther prooue that Luther was no Protestant Now this I euict according to my former premonitions and cautions first because Luther did euer hould euen after his reuolt from the Church of Rome diuers Catholicke opinions or doctrines then and still now taught by the said Church Secondly in that Luther after his departure from the Church of Rome did mantayne diuers grosse errours or rather Heresies or rather blasphemies and for such at this day condemned both by Catholicks and Protestants So euident it will appeare that Luther was too weake a bulke to giue nurrishment to all those different plants which now do stile themselues Protestants And first touching seuerall Catholicke points euer beleiued defended by Luther euen to his last day these following may serue as Instances 1. First he euer maintayned the Reall Presence in the Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist as the world knoweth And his followers for their peculiar defence of this doctrine are styled Lutherans by Swinglins Caluin their party impugning the foresaid doctrine 2. Luther also defended Prayer to Saints of which point he thus wryteth De intercessione diuorum cum tota Ecclesia Christiana sentio iudico sanctos a nobis honorandos esse atque inuocandos 3. He also taught the doctrine of Euangelicall Counsells to wit that a man might do more then he is commanded as appeareth out of his Booke de assertionibus 4. The Doctrine of Purgatory he taught of which see tom 〈◊〉 Wittenberg in resolut de Indulgentijs And answerably to this ground he is confessed by Vrbanus Regius a Protestant to defend prayer for the Dead 5. Luther further taught and approued the vse of Images as Beza witnesseth 6. The indifferency of communion vnder one or both kindes contrary to the doctrine of the Protestants who place a necessity in both is allowed by Luther in these words quamuis pulcrum sit c. Although it were very seemely to vse both the species or formes in the blessed Eucharist though Christ commanded nothing herein as necessary yet it were better to follow peace c. then to contende about the formes 7. Touching the making of the signe of the Crosse vpon our foreheads Iohannes Creuelius a Lutheran thus witnesseth Cum imus cubitum â—iue surgimus electo cruce nos iuxta Lutheri aliorum piorumâ—â— institutionem signamus When we go to bedd or rise from thence we do signe our selues with the signe of the Crosse according to the aduice of Luther and other pious men And Iohannes Maulius Luthers scholler thus writeth of Luther respondet Lutherus signo crucis facto Deus me tuetitur Luther answereth at the making of the signe of the Crosse God defend me 8. Finally to omit diuers other points wherein Luther neuer dissented from the Church of Rome Luther euer mantained that the gouerment of the Church is Monarchical neither Aristocratical nor Popular of which point Luther thus writeth Cum Deus voluerit c. Seing God would haue one Catholicke Church throughout the whole World it was needful that one people imo vnum aliquem patrem istius vnius populi elegi yea some one father of this one people should be choosen ad quem suos posteros spectant totus orbis to whose care and his successours the whole World should belong And thus farre Gentlemen touching some tast to shew that Luther euen after his forsaking of the Catholicke and Roman Church did neuerthelesse still retaine and belieue diuers Catholicke doctrines and consequently was no no entire and perfect Protestant D. REYNOLDS I confesse indeede that Luther as appeareth by his owne writings did not reueale to the new World as I may tearme it all the Euangelical Trueth the fuller discouery of some parts thereof being reserued for our later dayes And though his owne Religion was not through want of beliefe of some Trueths perfectly good yet I am assured It is not by his pesitiuely mantayning of any one errour then in what he was nuzled by the Church of Rome in any sort euill MICHAEAS This your reply is impertinent for here the Question is only whether Luther in respest of his faith was such an absolute Protestant as at this day our Gospellers repute for a good sound Protestant Yet that you may see your owne errour otherwise in ouer highly preiudging of Luthers Religion I wil here particularize out of his owne writings and other Protestants relations certaine Heresies and blasphemies neuer by him after recaled and incompatible with saluation for modicum firmentum totam massam corrumpit which he did egurgitate out of his impure stomak From whence we may inferre that with lesse reason he may be vrged for a Protestant 1. And First I wil here alleadg his impious doctrine wherin he labored to cut and wound Christian Religion euen in it maister-veine touching the
a Protestant Church preaching the Word and administring the Sacraments vpon the face of the earth to be seene or heard of But hereat I meruayle not since Philosophy reacheth vs to speake by all â—sion that where the Obiect is wanting there the sense suspendeth it operation DOCTOVR REYNOLDS Admitting all that you say to be true touching the first twenty yeares before Luther yet it is most euâ—cent that Iohn Hus who liued anno 1400. and not very many yeares before those 20. yeares was a good and true Protestant for him I fynd registred for a most holy Martyr by M. Fox and D. Downeham MICHAEAS Iohn Hus did liue in the yeare 1400. Who first was a Catholicke Priest The cause of his death was in that he taught the Necessity of Communion vnder both kinds and the seditious doctrine touching Princes Bishops and Priests being in mortall sinne But to make a more particular dissection of this Instance The Articles wherein his followers the Bohemians dissented from the Church of Rome were these following which M. Fox thus relateth The Bohemians being demanded in what poynts they did differ from the Church of Rome the only Propositions which they propounded were these foure Articles first Communion vnder both kinds The second that al Ciuil dominiou was forbidden to the Clergy The third that the preaching of the Word was free for all Men and in al places The fourth that open crymes are in no wyse to be suffered for auoyding of greater euill Thus M. Fox of the Hussite who we see as comparting with the Church of Rome in all other points cannot possibly be alledged for visible members of the Protestant Church D. REYNOLDS But what do you say of Iohn Hus himselfe was not he a Protestant and dyed in defence of the Protestant fayth MICHAEAS M. D The testimonies of Luther and M. Fox shall decide this point betweene vs. And first M. Fox thus saith of him Quid vnquam docuit aut in concilio defendit Hussius c. What did Hus defend at any tyme or taught in the councel wherein he might not seeme euen superstitiously to agree with the Papists What doth the Popish fayth teach concerning Transubstantiation which he did not in like sort confirme with the Papists Who did celebrate Masses more religiously then he Or who more chastly did keep the vowes of Priestly single life Add hereto that touching freeâ—â—l fayth predeâ—â—nation the cause of iustification merit of Works what other thing taught he then was taught at Rome What Image of any saint did he cast out at Bethleem therefore what can we say for which he deserued death touching the which he is not a like to be condemned with the Sea of Rome or with it to be freed and absolued Thus far M. Fox with whom agreeth Luther thus writing of Hus The papists burned Hus when as he departed not a fingars breadth from the papacy for he taught the same which the papists do only he did find fault with their vices and wicked life agaynst the Pope he did nothing Thus Luther Besides all the Catholicke doctrines mantained by Hus he taught as aboue is touched the Heresy of Wiclef to wit that there are no Princes Priests or Bishopps whyle they are in mortall sinne as M. Fox recordeth with whom agreeth the Protestant Osiander thus wryting Nullus est Dominus ciuilis nullus est Praelatus nullus est Episcopus dum est in mortali peccato Haec propositio approhart non potest sed passus est Ioannes Hus hac in parte aliquid humani There is no Ciuill Prince no Prelate or Bishop whiles he is in mortall sinne This proposition cannot be approued but Iohn Hus suffered herein the infirmity of Man Now I cannot but admire the incredible boldnes of M. Fox who acknowledging the former Heresy mantayned by Hus but especially granting as shewed out of his owne words that Hus did hould all the cheise points and frame of the present Roman Religion was neuerthelesse not ashamed to pronounce Iohn Hus for a most holy Martyr as aboue is expressed meaning a martyr of his owne Protestant Church So gladly you Protestants for the supporting of the continuance and visibility of your Church do make clayme to any Catholicke or hereticke whosoeuer who in one only point of Religion though dissenting in all others may seeme to compart and interleague with you Thus far of Hus whom to legitimate for a Protestant you see it is impossible OCHINVS I must here agree in iudgment with Michaeas And this Instance had far better bene forborne then obtruded And indeed it is no small blemish to our Church to insist in such weake and insufficient examples But M. Doctour Let vs entreate you to rise vp to Higher tymes in your discourse D. REYNOLDS I will satisfy your desire The next then in whom I will instance shal be our owne Contryman Wicklef Whom all the world I hope will euen dispose that he was a perfect Protestant and that himselfe and his followers enioyed the administration of the Word and Sacraments the practize of which is acknowledged to be an essentiall note of the Churches Visibility This my opinion touching Wicklef being a Protestant is not myne alone but it is warranted with the authorityes of M. Fox and the learned Crispinus MICHAEAS Indeede M D. M. Fox Crispinus I grant do so teach but how truly Obserue what followeth and then geue vp your eauen and impartiall iudgment And yet before I come to the tuche of this point I must put you in mind what thy two former Protestants grant in the places by you cited that at Wickleffs reuolt supposing him to be a Protestant the Protestant Church was wholy inuisible for thus M. Fox writeth In the tyme of horrible darknes when there seemed in a manner to be no one so little sparke of pure doctrine left or remayning Wicklef by Gods prouidence rosevp through whom the Lord would first awaken raize vp againe the World Thus he This Wicklef being an Englishman as you know M. D. was a Catholicke Priest and Person of Lutterworth in Leicestershirs and as Stow relateth He first inueighed against the Church of Rome because he had bene depriued by the Archbishop of Canterbury from a certaine benefice He liued anno 1370. Now that Wicklef cannot be truly claymed for a Protestant I proue in that besides he was a Catholicke Priest and no Church of the Protestants then knowne to him he still retayned many Catholicke Opinions and withall taught diuers notorious Heresyes Touching his Catholicke Opinions still beleiued by him I will alledge diuers out of his owne Wrytings First he beleiued seauen Sacraments thus writing of them Quaedam sacramentaper se promulgauit Christus c. Certaine sacraments Christ did promulgate by himself as Baptisme the Eucharist the sacrament of Orders and of Penance certaine also by his Apostles as the sacraments of Confirmation and of Extreme
sheepfould but clymeth another way is a theife I now demand M. Doctour who did call Luther Hus Wicklefe c. to preach the word and administer the Sacraments Or by whom were they sent D. REYNOLDS I here answere with Caluin Beza and D. Fulke that they had extraordinary calling immediatly from God in reguard of the Popes tiranny in those dayes and the ouerflowing of superstition of those tymes MICHAEAS This is but extrauagantly spoken and merely forged by you Protestants M. D. as hauing no other colour to warrant your calling But to refute this phantasy Extraordinary calling is euer accompanyed as it was in the Apostles with working of miracles euen by the iudgment of the Protestants theÌ„selfe Among whom Luther thus expostulateth others of their extraordinary calling saying Vnde venis quis te 〈…〉 isâ—◠〈…〉 isunt 〈…〉 que is a Deo missum esse testantur See how by Gods prouidence Luthers penne turneth vpon himselfe And therefore D. Bilsâ—n as wholy reiecting all extraordinary Calling not warranted with Miracles thus confesseth They can haue no part of Apostolicall Commission who haue no shew of Apostolicall succession Thus then Luther Huâ— Wicklefe and the rest are exempted from all extraordinary Calling immediatly by God himselfe since their Calling was neuer confirmed with the working of any one miracle euen in the iudgment of D. Fulke whose words are these It is knowne that Caluin and the rest whom Papists call Archhereticks do worke no Miracles D. REYNOLDS Some learned Protestants to wit D. Whitakers D. Bridges and others do auerre that it is not improbable to affirme that Wicklefe Hus Luther c. receaued their calling from the Church of Rome Which calling was conferred vpon them before their departure out of that Church Which opinion of theirs admitting it for true taketh away the supposed difficulty of this your Argument MICHAEAS Neuer M. D. doth the poore and fearefull hayre vse before the hounds more windings and turnings to saue her life then you Protestants do here to salue your Vocation for you being here stabled to get your selfe out of the myre sometymes affirme your calling to be extraordinary and immediate from God warranted by him with certaine Euthusiasms forsooth and illuminations But when the vanity of that pretext is layd open then you fly to the Catholicke Roman Church making it your Sanctuary But see with what an absurdity this your later Answere is accompanyed For besides that Walde as being a Layman neuer receaued any calling from thence Why do you and others most contumeliously call the Roman Church Antichristian seing it seemes you confesse that it is able to conferre true Calling to Luther Hus and the rest and to their successours or descendents which ability and power is peculiar only to the true Church For if the Pope be Antichrist and his Church Antichristian as your Brethren in their pulpitts do vociferate then how can you pretend their Calliâ—g to be sufficient and warrantable seing your owne men teach that in Babylon meaning thereby the Church of Rome there is no holy Order or Ministery indeed but a mere vsurpation And most certaine it is and confessed by all learned Men that Antichrist cannot auaylably confer commission for the Preaching of the Word of Christ and admitting the Sacraments of Christ Now if Luther Hus Wicklefe and the rest do want true calling then they cannot be any true visible Pastours of Christs Church and consequently they cannot iustify in themselfs their Churches visibility So plunged we see you Protestants are when you are demanded to iustify the calling of Luther Hus Wicklefe and their successours And thus far now Learned Men to demonstrate that supposing Waldo Wicklefe Hus Luther and the rest instanced in your precedent passages had bene in all points of beliefe Protestants that they had otherwise neyther comparted with the Catholicks in any Catholicke doctrines nor had defended any grosse and acknowledged Heresyes yet it is most euident in reguard of the Reasons and arguments here alledged that the examples of them are defectiue and insufficient to proue the visibility of the Protestant Church in that manner as the visibility of Christs Church is taught both by Catholicke and Protestant and peculiarly by our selfs according to the beginning of this our disputation OCHINVS With M. Doctour good leaue who hath showed great reeding in his former examples though they be not so conuincing and pregnant as I did hope to find them Neuserus and I will vndertake to iustify the visibility of our Protestant Church in all precedent ages And you are heare Learned Michaeas to know I am of opinion that supposing no instances at all of Protestancy could be giuen for all these former tymes by you mentioned yet followeth it not that therefore there were no Protestants in those tymes which is only the Question betweene vs for many Reasons may be giuen why the names of such Professours are not now knowne to vs of these dayes And one Reason may be this you know well the Popes for many ages haue borne more then a serpentine malice to the Protestant Religion euer endeuouring by all meanes possible to extirpate it out Therefore my iudgment is that their rage and fury was so precipitate and violent agaynst the Protestants of formes ages as they labored by all courses to extinguish all remembrance of them as by burning the books written in those tymes by Protestants by purposely making away of all other Records of Protestancy and by an absolute concealing the names of all Protestants thus hoping that the Memory of them might be interred with their Bodyes This is my opinion I meane that there neuer was an vtter disparition and vanishing away of the Protestant Church in auncient tymes but only that the names and Professours of that Church were most diligently concealed from all after tymes through the Popes affected malignity MICHAEAS It is strange to obserue the exhorbitant proceeding of Protestants in matters of Religion For sometimes you Protestants do diuulge in your wrytings that there can be named Protestants liuing in euery Century since Christ as you M. D. in the frontispice of this discourse with great venâ—itation did vndertake to performe Now you retyre backe Ochiâ—â—s from M. D. assertion and say doubtlesly there were Protestants in all ages though their names and memoryes by some indirect course or other were concealed from Posterity So distracted you are in your owne iudgements passed vpon one and the same point at seuerall tymes Which certainly must be reputed as a Moale in the face of a learned man since now zealously to affect an opinion at another tyme to let the same saulle by entertayning the contrary opinion is but the Ague of an irresolute and inconstant iudgement But to come to the point First I say that this euasion of Ochinus mainly ouerthwarteth M. Dâ—â—tours former Instances For if the names of all Protestants were buried in forgetfulnes by the Popes
Agens as here you say how then can we know that Berengarius Waldo Wicklefe c. were Protestants And if these and others were Protestants then was not Protestancy and the Mantayners of it wholy extinguished by the former Popes sedulity and diligence How do you extricate your selfe Ochinus out of this Labyrinth Agayne I say this your sentence is but a meere Imagination wrought in the forge of your owne brayne For you haue neyther proofe nor colour of proofe that either the names of Protestants in former ages should be concealed or their bookes or any other Records touching them should by the labored confederacy of the Popes and their followers be suppressed and made away And why then should here your bare asseueration be credited Secondly I vrge that such proceedings as here are pretended to be as the extinguishing the light and splendour of Christs Church for so many ages togeather do mainly impugne the Prophecyes of holy Scripture deliuered of it for we reade that it is sayd of Christs Church Her Sunne shal not be set nor her Moone hid That she shall not be giuen to another People but shall stand for euer That she shal be an eternall glory and ioy from Generation to generation All which Prophecyes besydes diuers others recited by your selfe afore tending to the exaltation and glory of Christs Church how dissortingly and disproportionably can they be auerâ—ed of the Protestant Church of former tymes If so the Annals Records and all other Monuments of it former being be wholy obliterated and extinguished Thirdly this Euasion contradicteth the more ingenious and playne acknowledgments of others of your owne Brethren who do teach that your Church for sundry ages hath remayned wholy inuisible or rather vtterly extinct I will here produce the authority only of D. Parkins His words are these For many hundred yeares past an vniuersall Apostasy hath ouerspred the whole face of the Earth And our Church hath not bene visible to the world Lastly and principally this your surmise impugneth all experience touching the cheife Occurrents of the same ages and times For first we find that the personall defects and blemishes of certaine Popes are registred in those tymes and the relation of them are at this present extant Neyther could the Popes preuent the same And from such relations do the Protestants and particularly you M. D. in some of your writings vpbraid vs with the lesse warrantable life of some Popes Now then these things standing thus how could the Popes hinder the registring of any Professours of fayth aduerse contrary to themselfs in those dayes It is absurd therefore to thinke that the Popes were well contented that their owne scarts should remayne to be seene by all posterity supposing it were their powers to preuent the same and yet should affectedly labour that all testimonyes of different professours in fayth from them but especially of Protestant Professours should be buryed in eternall silence and obliuion Themselfs not being able to forsee that protestancy should sweigh more in these dayes then any other erroneous fayth and Religion Againe the Examples of the Wrytings of Hus Wicklefe the pretended booke of Carolus Magnus the supposed booke of Bertram the connterfeyted Epistle of Vlrick and all other writings of the foresaid Hereticks or any others at this day yet extant not suppressed fight mainly with this your Opinion For were it not that the said Wrytings and bookes were yet remayning to the world the Protestants of these tymes could not haue knowne what articles of protestancy the said Heretickes did mantayne in those dayes Furthermore the very subiect of the Decrees and Canons of Catholicke Councels celebrated in all former ages is chiefly the condemning and anathematizing of particular Heresyes there verbatim set downe and expressed as they did rise in the same ages with commemoration and recitall of the Hereticall doctrine inuented and the person inuenting with all other due circumstances Ad hereto that your owne Brethren confesse what we here endeauour to proue Among whom D. Whitakers shall serue for all at this tyme who being glad to make clayme for Protestants of all such as in any sort resisted the Pope thus writeth to his Catholicke Aduersary Vestris historijs nostrae Ecclesiae memoria viget Et qui Pontificij regni res narrare conati sunt ij nostrae Ecclesiae sunt testis The memory of our Church florisheth euen in your Historyes And those who labored to relate the proceedings of the Popes Kingdome are become Witnesses of our Church Thus D. Whitakers Lastly we will adioyne to all the former experiences the historyes and Cronicles euen of the Protestants whose subiect taske designed labour is to relate and make mention of such strange new doctrines as did rise in euery age shewing how the said doctrines were not proued ouer in silence by the Church of Rome but how and when and in what Popes reigne they were openly gainsaid crossed and condemned by the said Church And all this the Protestant Historiographers do borrow from the Catholicks auncient Records for but for those Catholicke Records they could not tell how in these dayes to write of those matters This we see is performed very diligently by the Century writers in their seuerall Centuryes by Pantaleon in his Chronographia by Osiander in his Epitome Eccles And by Illyricus in his booke stiled Catalogus testium Veritatis qui ante nostram aetatem reclamarunt Papae And which is here to be noted as making more in our behalfe herein diuers of these opinions and doctrines thus related by these Protestants to haue bene condemned in former ages are such as are at this present mantayned for true doctryne by the Protestants Now from all these premisses we may fully gather how far those former ages or the Popes then liuing were from laboring and affecting to keepe in silence or suppresse any doctrine whatsoeuer or persons mantayning the same which did appeare to be repugnant to the faith and Religion of the Roman Church at those tymes But gentlemen I feare I haue bene ouer longe OCHINVS Learned Michaeas I do confesse I haue seldome seene the weaknes of an opinion more fully and irreplicably displayed then this of myne is by you at large euen by direct of seuerall reasons And therfore for euer after I am resolued wholy to disauthorize and depose it For indeed I see It is but a meere aery and vasperous Conceate instantly dissipated before the least beame of a cleare Iudgment NEVSERVS I do with you Ochinus acknowledge the transparency of it since an impartiall eye is at the first able to see through it But Michaeas I see no reason but that we may auer that the Protestant Church and the administration of the Word Sacraments were in all ages though the particular professours of it were latent and indeed inuisible through the raging tyranny and persecution wherewith the Popes of former times did afflict all those
may challenge the Scripture for the fortifying of his Heresyes as fully as we Protestants can do And therefore I do allow that former sentence of Vincentius alledged by you Neuserus D. REYNOLDS I haue found some of our owne learned brethren to teach though aforehand I tell you Michaeas that I dissent in opinion from them that the Church of Rome and the Protestant Church are but one and the same Church from which position they inferre that seeing the predictions of the continuall Visibility of the Church of God and an vninterrupted administration of the Word and Sacraments haue bene performed at least as you Romanists do auerâ—e in the Church of Rome that consequently ours and yours being but one Church they are performed in the Protestant Church And according hereto we find M. Hooker thus to teach We gladly acknowledg them of Rome to be of the family of Iesus Christ c. And agayne we say that they of Rome c. are to be held a part of the house of God a limme of the visible Church of Christ with whome conspireth D. Some thus graunting The learneder Wryters acknowledge the Church of Rome to be the Church of God But this Opinion I haue to the liberty of euery one eyther to retayne it or reiect it MICHAEAS Here now you Protestants are retyred to your last refuge and hould And thus is Errour glad to be shrowded vnder the Wings of Truth For whereas the most dispassionate sober learned Protestants among you do grant that for many ages before Luthers reuolt they cannot truly and really iustify the visibility of their Church in particular much lesse the administration of the word and Sacraments And yet during all the sayd ages they see that all this is actually accomplished in our Catholicke Roman Church They are therefore forced to giue back and to retyre in all their former answeres And at length are driuen for the supporting of their owne Church to say that the Protestant Church the Roman Catholicke Church are identically but one and the same Church And thereupon they inferre as you M. Doctour say that seing our Catholicke Church be generall acknowledgment hath euer continued visible during all the former ages that therefore your Protestant Church both being but one and the same by their curteous yeelding hath also enioyed the same priuiledge of a perpetuall Visibility and the like administration of the Word and Sacraments So ready you Protestants are for the preseruing only of your owne imaginary Church in former tymes to ioyne hands with they Catholicks if so they would agree therto you granting that your owne Succession calling and Ministery is and hath bene for former ages continued and preserued only in the Succession calling Ministery of our Catholicke Roman Church And according to this our meaning M. Bunny a Protestant of good esteeme here in England dealeth plainly ingeniously herein for he not only teacheth as the former Protestants do but giueth sincerely the true reason of such their doctrine to wip that otherwise they cannot proue the being of the Protestant Church during so many former ages for thus he writeth Of the departing from the Church there ought to be no question amang vs. We are no seuerall Church front them meaning from vs Catholicks nor they from vs And therefore there is no departing at all out of the Church Nor any do deparâ— from them to vs nor from vs to them c. And yet more fully It was euill done of them who vrged first such a separation c. For that it is great probability for them meaning vs Catholicks that so we make our selfâ— answerable to find out a distinct and seuer all Church from them which hath continued from the Apostles age to this present Or els that needs we must acknowledge that our Church is sprung vp but of late or since theirs And finally M. Bunny thus concludeth Our Aduersaryes see themselues to haue aduantage if they can ioynt vs to this separation Thus M. Bunny But touching my particular iudgment herein I vtterly with all Catholicks disclayme from mantayning that our Church and the Protestant Church is all one And I confidently auerre that this strange Paradox is inuented by Protestants for the reasons aboue expressed OCHINVS What is the matter brought to this Issue that we must grant the Papists Church and our Church to be one and the same Church Is this M. Doctour the euent of our disputation I will here imprecate with the Poet against myselfe Sed mihi vel tellus optem priùs ima debiscat Vel Pater Omnipotens adigat â—â—fulâ—ine ad vmbraâ— Pallâ—â—ies vmbras Erebi â—octeâ—que profundam Before I acknowledge the Synagogue of Rome to be the Church of God NEVSERVS I giue you free leaue Ochinâ—s to include me within this your imprecation For I will dye the death of a sinner before I grant that the Popish Church is the same with the Protestant Church What shall Superstition and Idolatry by our owne consents be aduanced and set vp side by side with the Gospell in the throwne of Gods Tabernacle It is a thing insufferable and the thought thereof is not so much as once to be entertayned MICHAEAS Gentlemen good words God grant your owne Prayers agaynst your selfs be not heard And though I be of your mynd that the Catholicke Church and your Church is not all one Church yet if before your deaths you do not acknowledge the Church of Rome for the true Church doublesly your prayer wil be heard when your selfs though too late shall with vnutterable but improfitable remoâ—se condemne your selfs of your owne grosse consideration in so weighty a matter But M. Doctour and you two Hitherto we see our discourse hath bene cheifly spent in your obiecting Arguments for your Churches visibility and my answering of them Now I do expect that our Scenes be altered And that I may insist in obiecting what I haue red confessed euen by the most learned Protestants touching this subiect For these alternatiue variations of parts in dispute are in all Reason and by custome of all Schooles most warrantable D. REYNOLDS We giue you good leaue For it argueth a great distrust diffidence in a Mans cause to tye his aduersary only to answere and neuer to suffer him to oppose And it is as vnreasonable as if in a Duelisme the one party should be indented with only toward and neuer to sryke Therefore proceed Michâ—â—s at your pleasure MICHAEAS Truth sayth S. Augustin iâ— mâ—re foroible to wrâ—ng 〈◊〉 Confession then any rackâ— or tormâ—nt Which sentence we fyâ—d to be iustifyed in this Question of the Protestant Churches Inuisibility For diuers learned Protestants there are who as being more ingenuous and vpright in their wrytings and in their managing of matters of Religion then others of their party as well discerning the insufficiency of all pretended Instances and other colorable euasions and answeares which
contrary to the necessary Visibility of Gods true Church proued out of the Scriptures acknowledged by their owne learned Brethren their owne Church to haue beene wholy latent and inuisible or rather wholy extinct and annihilated for so many ages together But this we must asâ—rybe O God to thy holy permission who as thou suffered in the tyme of the Old TestameÌ„t thyne Enemyes to sheath their swords in their brethrens sydes so heare thoâ— permiteest for the greater honour of thy Church so many learned Protestants euen with wounderfull admiration sweete Iesus deadly to wounde their owne Church fayth and Religion with their owne penns D. REYNOLDS Forbeare Michaeas these woundering Interiections the accustomed Dialect of an vngouerned Passion I grant these learned Protestants aboue alledged were of this opinion Notwithstanding to confront their authorityes there may be found many others as learned and iudicious Protestants as these are who absolutly mantayne the Visibility of their Church for all ages And I see no reason but that the sentences and iudgemeÌ„ts of these other should preponderate and weighe equally with the iudgements of the former Protestants by you alledged MICHAEAS You must pardon me M. Doctour if I wounder at things so strangly and vnexpectedly fauling out But to your solution I say it is most defectiue for seuerall reasons First because it mainly crosseth the method agreed vpon amonge vs in the beginninge of our discourse where you tyed your selfe irrephâ—ably to stand to the iudgments and confession of your owne learned Men. Againe though you can bringe other Protestants of as greate eminency for learninge as these by me obiected yet except you and the said Protestants will insist in true and confessed Instances of Protestancy for euery seuerall age which is impossible for you to performe your and their asseuerations are to be reputed but naked verball and inauayleable Lastly and principally your Replye is insufficient Becaus I heare alledge Protestants confessinge the Inuisibility of their owne Church to their owne mighty preiudice and the Catholycks greate aduantage And therefore it must needs be that the racke of Truth forced them being otherwyse ingenuous learned and iudicious to all such Confessions Whereas such Protestants as may be brought to gainsay and contradict the former Confession as being men of more spatious and large Consciences do spake in their owne cause and behalf and therefore as being ready pressed to auere any thinge how false soeuer for the safery of their Church are deseruedly to be reputed in their wrytings more partiall So as in this case the Words of Tertullian may iustly take place Magis fides prouâ— est in aduersus sometâ—psos confitentâ—â— quam pro 〈◊〉 â—egantes NEVSERVS I lyke well Michaeas the reason of your disparity geuen touching some Protestants confessing against themselfs and others affirming the contrary to their owne aduantage OCHINVS The difference set downe by you is most foreible for no doubte the open Confession of one learned Aduersary is to ouerballance twenty denying the same euen for that peculiar reason aboue mentioned D. REYNOLDS Michaeas Suppose for the tyme that we could not proue our Churches perpetuali Visibility yet seinge you are not able if you were pressed thereto to iustify and make good the Visibility of your owne Roman Church during all the ages since the Apostles dayes Therefore looke into what danger through our confessed Inuisibility we may be presumed to tune within the same we may justly includ you And thus you owne argument rebucts vpon your selfe MICHAEAS Heare I see M. D. that for meare want of positiue arguments to support your owne Church you are lastly fled to picke quarrells at our Church as if it were a iustification of yourselfs that wee Catholycks did labour with your infirmities lyke men who reioyce to haue compartuers in misery But to your point vrged say it is impertinent to the whole drift of our dispute which was only touching the want of Visibility in the Protestant Church which alone to proue was by me vndertaken the visibilitye of the Catholycke Church comminge in incidently lyke as a discours of vice doth often in the End biget some specches of Vertue our Contrary being thus brought to our remembrance by meanes of the other Contrary But because M. D. you shall discouer no tergiuersation in vs herein and that here to entreate of the continuall Visibility of our Catholycke Church violateth our former imposed method Therefore I will pawne my credit that there shal be left with you certaine prouffs conâ—ayninge the expresse and confessed Visibility of our Roman Church from the Apostles to these dayes And this by the acknowledgment of sundry learned Protestants though heare by the way I must tell you that the confessed Inuisibility of the Protestant Church during so many former Ages doth potentially and vertually include the proufe of the Visibility of our Roman Church during the said ages Seing the Inuisibility of your Church for so longe a tyme is ascribed by you Protestants as appeareth by many of the former Protestants testimonyes to be the worke of Antichtist you meaninge thereby the Pope and the Church of Rome therefore it ineuitably followeth from your owne Primisses that Popes and the Church of Rome haue euer beene visible during all the said former Ages and Centuryes OCHINVS Newserus I would haue a word or two with you in priuate therefore if it please you let vs walke a little a part NEVSERVS I am willingthereto go into the next roome and I will follow you OCHINVS You see here Neuserus how this Question of the Protestant Churches visibility hath bene discussed and argued And I must consesse that Michaeas hath euen in replicably demonstrated that the Protestant Church hath at least for many ages bene inuisible or rather extinct you see also how royatous and abounding the old Testamentâ—s in prophecyes and other testimonies that the Church in the daye of the true Messias shal be at all cyâ—res most conspicuous and visible Therefore what resteth but that eyther we must reiect the old Testament which I neuer will do for falsly prophetying of the state of the Church Or els we must denye that these tymes of the new Testament are the tymes of Grace that the Church erected by Christ and his Apostles as wanting the accomplishment of the foresayd predictions is the true Church which later poynt I hould to be more probable NEVSERVS You haue preuented me Ochinus in tyme of speaking but not in iudgment For to confesse the truth after I had obserued the weaknes of the Instances alledged though alledged by the Doctour with as much Scholarlike Art and aduantage as might be my houering thoughts transported my iudgment to this your Center Which though it be enuironed with difficultyes yet I hould it the more safe way with you since the one must necessarily be reiected as false and erroneous they so diametrically crossing one the other to retayne our former reuerence to
we shall losse you so soone Only I would entreate you to haue in your discourses wheresoeuer you shall hereafter come a tender and gentill touch of the Protestant Church of all the true and constant members thereof And herewith Worthy Michaeas I take my last farewell MICHAEAS M. Doctour of your selfe I will euer speake answerably to your desarts Nobly and with great respect Since you are a Man whose barke is richly fraught with learning Morality And what defects haue bene committed by you in this dispute I do wholy ascribe them to your want of a good cause not to your want of good parts And if there haue bene any words misplaced by vs on eyther syde sâ—t the thought of them vanish away since they were spoken Antagonisticeâ— and in heaâ—e of disputation And so in all kindnes Christian charity I leaue you with this my aduise that you will not aduenture your saluation vpon your owne priuate conscience preferring it before the Iudgement and conscience of the vniuersall visible Catholicke Church As for you two fagotts of Hell-fire I grant my eyes euen sparkle forthâ—râ—ge in behoulding of you And I account contrary to the place of the burning bush the place wherin you stand to be cursed ground â—or since your Sunne is so fâ—rie of you I meane your excepted false Messias what can you looke but for a winter of could dispayre and damnation Therefore I will take leaue with you in the phraze of the Apostle to Elymas the Magitian and what greater Magicke then for one to be enchaâ—ted to beleiue that Christ is a seâ—ucer O you full of all subtilty and mischeife the Sonns of the Deuill enemyes of all iustice who cease not to peruert the right wayes of our Lord Adieu OCHINVS You enioy Michaeas the liberty of your Tongue but â—age you well NEVSERVS Let him go I will nor take leaue with him such opprobrious speeches he vseth against vs. OCHINVS Now M. Doctour Michaeas is gonne And now we haue the more freedome of speech among our selfs without feare of being ouerheard I know that not only yonder black-mouthd Michaeas but your selfe also rest much disedisyed at our abâ—enunciation of Christianity But M. Doctour come to the point We see the Prophecyes of the old Testament which must euer remayne sacred permanent and 〈…〉 uiolable do shew that the Church of God in the dayes of the Messias must euer be visible knowne and conspicuous and must in all ages without any intermission enioye a publicke and externall administration of the Word and Sacraments And this is abundantly confessed not only by vs all in the front of this our disputation but by all learned men whosoeuer We now notwithstanding such necessity therof cannot but confesse that the accomplishment of the sayd Prophecyes hath not bene effected in the Church of Christ at leâ—st in the Protestant Church how then can the Church of Christ be that true Church of the Messias which is so gloriously deliueaâ—ed with the penalls of the Prophets Now what other resultancy can be out of the premises then that the Church of Christ as wanting the fulfilling of the former diuine Oracles is not the true Church of God and consequently that Christ is the true Messias Sauiour of the World except we will grant which I neuer will the Papists Church as hauing by relation of Michaeas the Prophecies performed in it to be the sole Church of God Therefore so farre as toucheth my selfe I do renounce my former Christian fayth and will embrace the auncient Law of Moyses and as intending to be seruiceable to that Religion I will teach the doctrine of Circumcision and will instantly write a booke of the lawfulnes of Polygamie or plurality of Wyues aunciently practized by the â—ewes in the old Testament though now by Christians houlden as vnlawfull and altogether proâ—â—ibited NEVSERVS By the Lord of Heauen I cannot see how this difficulty can otherwyse be salued then either by denyinge the Gospell of the New Testament or by granting the Church of Rome to be the true Church which my Soule abhorrs to do For as concerning the perpetuall Visibility of the Protestant Church It cannot be made good notwistanding our great ventitation thereof afore in our Words And therefore it were honesty in vs now in the end to pull of our Visards through which wee spooke to Michaeas and plainly confese the truth herein And here M. D. to take a short view of all the discours passed and to examine it impartially a monge our selfs We cannot but obserue that the Exemples produced by you were most insufficient first because they were no Protestants at all Secondly in that admitting them for Protestants they but only serue as Michaeas well noted to iustify the Visibility of Protestants only for those tymes neither you nor wee being able to produce but only for for me sake any one confessed Example of Protestancy for the space of six hundred yeers at the least Againe when Ochinus and my selfe perceaued that no true instances of Protestancy could be giuen I grant we vsed diuers euasions and inflexious to and froe and all for the sauing of our Churches honour As first to pretend though God knowes a silly pretence that all Relations and testimonyes of Protestants in former ages were by the Popes industry and tyranny vtterly extinct That fayling then we made show for in our priuat iudgments we could not really thinke it That the Protestants in former tymes were forced to lye secret and latent in regard of the supposed then raging Persecution That playne answere not seruinge then we thought good to inuolue and roule our said euasion touchinge Persecution in a certaine obscure and darke sentence to wit That the Church was in the Papacy the Papacy in the Church and yet the Church was not the Papacy a forme of words as Michâ—as truly â—â—id forged by vs Protestants only to cast a â—yst in the eyes of the vnlearned The next we fled for our surest but indeed sham full refuge vnto the Scripture pretending our Church to be consonant to it and therefore euer visible a cours which indifferently lyeth open to euery Heretyke After all which if you remember M. D. your selfe did politikly touch vpoÌ„ that opinion though not with any greate approbation of it which for sauing our Church from it vtter ruine teacheth that the Papists Church and Ours are all one But did you marke how Michaeas neuer ceased till he had ferretted vs out of all our former Connyhoales be in the end irrephably and choakingly prouing from our owne learned Mens penns the mayne question now controuerted among vs Now M. D. seeing I am irrefragably resolued not to admit the Papists Church for the true Church though perhapps it hath enioyed the fulfilling of the forementioned Prophecyes I do therefore conspyre in iudgment herein with Ochinus and ame determined to haue this Country from whence I will retyre myselfe into the Palatinate where
this Authours fraud and imposturous cariadge who tearmeth all such Articles wherein S. Bernard did agree with vs as the Sacrifice of the Masse Purgatory merit of Works free will praying to saincts and indeed all other Catholicke Articles whatsoeuer only his boldnes of wryting to Pope Eugenius excepted to whom afore he had bene Mayster and therevpon presumed to wryte more freely Slips Lapses as they were beleiued by him which in vs Catholicks he exagerateth by the name of Superstition Idolatry c. And thus we may see how one and the same Cause being exemplified in different Persons is by this Pamphleters deceate diuersly censured Leaning S. Bernard the Authour generally but with out any prouf at all wisheth his Reader to thinke that the Protestant Church was in all Countries in Christendome and did lie hid as those Iewes did in the tyme of Elias for feare of Persecution But this he only saith but proueth not and it is therefore reiected with the same facilitie with which it was spoken Now touching those Men who conceales their fayth for feare of persecution I refer the Reader to the former dialogue wherein the weaknes of this pretext of Persecution is particularly displayed That done the Pamphleter sayth that India Armenia Asia the lâ—ssar and Egypt had in former tymes Christians in them for he giueth them no other name then Christians And then he inferrs without any proofe at all or instances in the points of their Religion that they were Protestants Poore man that thus most insensibly reasoneth Seing we find the Christians of all those Countreyes to agree in all the cheife points with the present Roman Churrch Only some of them do not acknowledge the primacy of the Bishop of Rome aboue all other Bishopps In the last place of all he much insisteth in the Greeke Church within which are included the Russes and Muscouits he thus saying thereof The Greeke Church was neuer so much as in show extinguished And from whome the Russians and Muscouâ—ts had their fayth And then a little after he thus enlargeth himselfe We should do wrong to Almighty God c. to pull from him so many ample Churches meaning the Greeke Church the others aboue specifyed inferring from thence that the Protestant Church did in former ages rest visible euen in the Greeke Church Now this his shamelesse alleadging of the Greeke Church for Protestants shal be confronted with the testimony of Syr Edwin Sands a man of his owne Religion who plainly affirmeth that the Greeke Church doth concurre with Rome in opinion of Transubstantiation generally in the sacrifice and whole Body of the Masse in praying to Saints in auâ—â—cular Confession in offering Sacrifice and prayer for the dead Purgatory worshipping of pictures Yea the Protestant Deuines of Magdeburg do record that the Greeke Church doth not only beleiue all the former Articles recited by Syr Edwin Sands but also that it beleiueth and teacheth the signifying Ceremonyes of the Masse Confirmation with Crisme Extreme Vâ—ction all the seauen Sacraments Almes for the dead freewill Monachisme vowes of Chastity the fast of Lent and other prescribed fasts that Priests may not mary after Orders taken and finally that the tradition doctrine of the Fathers is to be kept Now heere I refeâ—re to any one not blinded with preiudice whether the professours of the Greeke Church are to be accounted for Catholicks or Protestants And from hence we may discâ—uer the idle and ridiculous vaunting of this Pamphleter who in the close of this point touching the Greeke Churches being protestant and a continuall Visâ—â—iliâ—y of Protestancy in the said Churches thus insulteth Looke to these places you Papists and Imagine that if there had beene none but these yet the words of the Scripture which in generality speake of a spouse had beene true And Christ had there had his Body vpon earth and the Church had not beene vtterly extinguished if neither We nor the Synagoâ—ue of Rome had beene extant Thus he His former examples being ended he entertayneth his Reader with great store of frothy and needlesse matter touching former differences betweene the Popes and Emperours the Kings of England and France And then all such persons as did bandy themselues either by wryting or otherwise with the said Emperour or Kings agaynst the Popes of those tymes the Pamphleter vrgeth for Protestants though the cheife cause of such differences betweene the Popes and the sayd Princes was touching Distribution of Ecclesiasticall Liuings within their owne Realmes That done the Treatiser extraâ—agantly discourseth in his deâ—lamatory rayling veyne that the Pope is Antichrist But how rouing and wandring all this is to the title of his Pamphlet and prouing of his owne Churches visibility the which he obliged himselfe to performe may appeare by what is already set downe After all this for a Close of all he obiecteth for forme-sake as if his taking notize of what we can truly obiect against his wryting were a sufficient answere to it certaine exceptions vrged by the Catholicks agaynst his former Instances of protestancy Which Obiections of ours being set downe he shapeth no true Answere vnto them And first he thus obiecteth in our behalfe l The Papists will beginne and say that we rake together as the Auncestours and forerunners of our fayth such as were notorious Hereticks as Wicklefe Hus or the Waldenses c. To which after much securtility of words he finally thus answereth We do not beleiue that all those are Hereticks whom you Papists will so call or account But we reply hereto and say That not only the Catholicks but the Protestants themselues do particularly charge Wicklefe Hus the Waldenses as also Almaricus Peter Bruus c. with many grosse and absurd Heresyes acknowledged for such euen by our Aduersaryes as may abundantly appeare by recurring to the seuerall passages of this former Dialogue The defence of which heresyes doth necessarily make their defendours absolute Heroticks seing they were mantayned by Waldo Wicklefe Hus c. with a froward and open contempt of the authority of Gods Church publikly teaching the contrary far differently from S. Austin S. Cyprtan and Lactantius their beleiuing certayne errours the which this Pamphleter for the more lesning of the Heresyes of Waldo Wicklefe Hus c. in p. 112. suttely repeateth seing these Fathers taught them only as their owne probable opinions euer submitting with all Obedience their Iudgments therein to the supreme Iudgments of Christ his Church Ad hereto that seing those Books written by Catholicks of those tymes do indifferently charge Wicklefe Hus Waldo and their followers with mantayning of some one point or other of protestancy and with diuers absurd Heresyes The authority therefore of those Writers are eyther equally to be beleiued in all their accusations or equally to be reiected in them all And the rather seing they could not foretell a consideration much to be obserued or presage what
Word and vse of the Sacraments as Notes And thus they reiecting all former Catholicke Notes do reduce as aboue is said the determining of which is the true Church to the inappealable and last Resort of their owne priuate opinions passed vpon the true preaching of the Word and the due administration of the Sacraments But now to come to the Question it selfe touching these Protestant Notes Where the â—eader for the more cleare setting downe of the state of the Question and his owne better instruction is to conceaue first that these Protestant Notes supposing them to be Notes of the Church prooue only the place where the Church is but not which is the Church Which here is only the Question Secondly the Reader is to call to mind that whereas a Note may be of two sorts The one in respect of Nature the other in respect of vs according to the doctrine of the learned Protestants themselues thus teaching Nottus est duplex Vnum Naturae vlterum nobis that here the Question is only of such Notes as are Notes in respect of vs for our better informing which is the true Church since here we are instructed à postartori and according to the measure of that knowledg which God vouchsafes to affoard to vs. And not as they are Notes in respect of Nature Which Notes in regard of Nature are euer 〈…〉 sicall secret and often essentiall to the thing of which they are Notes Now in reference hereto we freeâ—y grant that the true preaching of the Word and administration of the Sacraments may be tearmed Notes of the Church but not Notes to vs which is the only point now isluable for though they be Notes in Nature of the true Church yet what anayleth it vs since they are not Notes to vs for our direction to find which is the true Church And here we are to remember that the Question is not what kind of Notes or what kind of knowledge is better for it is granted that scire per Causas is most perfect and noble but the Question is what kind of knowledge God is content to imparte to vs in this life for the attayning of the Mysteryes of our fâ—â—th and particularly for the knowing searching out which is his Church Now that the true preaching of the Word and vse of the Sacraments cannot be erected as notes of Christs Church I euer meane in respect of vs is seuerall wayes demonstrated And first this I prooue from the Nature of a Note which is euer to be of a greater perspicuity and clearnes and better knowne to vs then the thing is of which it is a Note Since otherwise it should follow an inference both in reason and Art most absurd that that which is vnknowne should be prooued by an other thing which is lesse knowne anâ— more obscure That the true preaching of the Word and administration of the Sacraments which is but a necessary 〈◊〉 to the true preaching of the Scripture are more obscure and vnknowne to vs then is the Church I prooue first from the Scripture which teacheth that true sayth which is the effect of true preaching the Word proceedeth only from the Ministery of the Church according to that how shall they beleiue whom they haue not heard and ho 〈…〉 sh aâ— they heare without a Preacher Thus Gods sacred Word we see doth presuppose that the Minister who is the member of the Church and consequently it followeth hereby that the Church must be afore knowne doth reueale vnto vs the true sense of the Scripture And therefore Caluin thus well sayth of this point Deus potest memo 〈…〉 sues perficere nolit tamen eos adolâ—scere in 〈…〉 ilem â—tatem nisi educatione Ecclesiae God can peâ—fect and instruct vs in a moment meaning touching fayth yet he will not bring vs to any manlike as it were and perfect strength therein but by the help and labâ—ur of the Church And hence it is that in all Controuersyes touching fayth we are alwayes for the determining of them botâ— in the iudgments of the auncient Fathers and learned Protestants referred to the Church Among whom I cannot here pretermit the sentence of D. Field thus wryting Seeing tâ—e Controuersies in our tyme are growne in number so many and in nature so intricate c. What remayneth for meâ— dâ—sirous of satisfaction in things of such consequence but deligeâ—tly to search out which among all the societyes of Men in the World is that blessed Company of Holy Ones that house-hould of fayth that spouse of Christ and Church of the living God which is the pillar and ground of truth that so they m 〈…〉 follow her directions and reâ—i in her 〈◊〉 Thus we are instructed by this learned Protestant to know which is the true fayth in all Controuersyes and sincere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word from the Church and not to know which is the Church from the sincere preaching of the Word Secondly that the true prea 〈…〉 of the Word and the vse of the Sacrements â—re more ob 〈…〉 and difficult to vs to be knowne then to know 〈◊〉 is the true Church appeareth from the voluntâ—â—y acknowledgments of our most iudicious Aduersaries For greater 〈◊〉 heareiâ— I will insist only in oâ—e or two And to omit the answearable iudgment hearto of D. Fyeld potentially included in his 〈…〉 met words We do fynd Iustus Molitor a learned Protestant and Aduersary in his 〈…〉 gs to Cardinal Beâ—lâ—rmyâ—e thus to confes Nobis Quo ad iud 〈…〉 s â—o fâ—sâ— alâ— qua notitià prius vera Eccles 〈…〉 quam 〈◊〉 praedicatio 〈…〉 oâ—escit c. The true Church by a cert 〈…〉 co 〈…〉 〈◊〉 so 〈…〉 kâ—oâ—ne to vs according to the iudgment of reâ—son then the preaching of the true word is knowne With whom c 〈…〉 pireth in exprâ—s Words the foresaid mentioned 〈…〉 testart Lubbertus thus wryting Sacramenta in v 〈…〉 nt nobis m 〈…〉 quam â—psa Ecclesia The true vse of the 〈…〉 ments iâ— lesse knowne â—o vs 〈◊〉 the Church And 〈◊〉 geueth his â—eason hereof in these Words Nobis notioâ—a su 〈…〉 externa signaâ—per quae remâ— quâ—â—doque cogn 〈…〉 The external signes are more man 〈…〉 st 〈◊〉 vâ— by which we know a thiâ—g 〈◊〉 heareby impâ—ying that the true administration of the word Sacraments is internal and inward in respect of the true externall Notes of the Church For although eich preaching of the Word and vse of Sacraments be externall and subâ—ect to the outward Sense yet which is the true preaching of the word and true administration of the Sacraments for as they are purely preached and sincerely administred so and no otherwise are they appoynted by the Protestants for the Marks of the Church is internal since truth in doctryne is internal and inuisible We may ad hearto that in the note of true preaching the word the beliuing receauing it so preached this with perseuerance is included
by our Aduersaries doctrine as a part of the same Note But how can it be known whether the Word though truly preached be truly heard and beleiued with a final perseuerance So far distant is this pretended Note from being for our direction a true Note of the Church An other Argument for the impugning of the Protestants former Notes may be this The Scripture it selfe cannot be made knowne to vs to be Scripture but by the attestation of the Church for as for that sentence which teacheth that the Maiesty and voyce of God which appeareth in the Scripture or the Priuate Spirit iudging of it assâ—eth vs which is true Scripture it is an exploded Errour Seing one Man is persuaded he fyndeth in those books which himselfe admitteth for scripture that Maiesty and voyce of God the which very books for want of the said supposed voyce or Maiesty an other Man vtterly reiecteth as Apocryphil And in lyke sort the priuat Spirit of this Man embraceth such books as Canonical the which bookes the Priuat Spirit of an other absolutely discanoneth Now this being granted it from hence ineuitably resulteth that first we must know which is the true Church to giue this approbation of the Scripture before we can know which is the Scripture and much more then before we can be assured which is the true preaching of the word and sincere construction or Sense of the Scripture Now that our knowing which is Scripture proceedeth from the authoritie of the Church I first proue not only from S. Austin who saith n Actibus Apostolorum necesse est me credere si câ—edo Euangelio quoniam vtramque Scripturam similiter mihi Catholiea commendat Ecclesia But also from the acknowledgement of our learned Aduersaries whose words in their wrytings to this purpose are most plentifull I will content myselfe referring the Reader to the references of others at this tyme with Peeter Martyr and M. Hooker Peter Martyr thus wryteth We acknow ledge it to be the function of the Church seing it is endued with the Holy Ghost that it should discerne the true and proper books of Scripture M. Hooker more fully 〈…〉 th heare of saying Of thing necessary the very cheifest is to know what bookes we are to 〈◊〉 â—â—ly Which poynt is confessed impossible for the Scripture it selfe to teach c. For of any Booke of Scripture did geus testimony to â—ll et stiâ— that Scripture which geneth credit to the rest world require â—n other Scripture to gâ—ue credit vnto it Neither could we come to any paâ—se whe reon to rest vnles besids Scripture theare were something which might assurs vs. Which thiâ—g M. Hockeâ—man other place articulatly â—earmeth The authority of Gods Church thus saying We all know the 〈◊〉 outward Motyue leading Men to esteeme of the Scripture is the authority of the Church Now if by these learned Mens conâ—ession the Church hath authority to propownd to vs which bookes presented for Scripture are true Scriptures and which are Apocryâ— hall and spurious then followeth it that the Church hath in lyke sort authority to propownd to vs which is the true and pure sense of the Scripture since the one is as necessarye to vs as the other for it aduantageth vs litle to know which are the vndoubted bookes of Scripture if so we know not which is the true sense of the Scripture Now out of the Premisses I demonstratiuely conclude that seing by the authority of the Church and not otherwise we are tought which â—ookes of Scripture are Canonicall and consequently which is the true sense of the said Scripture that therefore the Church being fâ—ster in odeâ— of knowledg to vs then either the Scripture or the true preaching of the word of Scripture the true preaching of the word is not nor can be apprehended to be a Note to vs to find thearby which is the true Church Since then it would follow an absurdity incompatible with all true discours of Reason that a thing which to vs is later knowne should be a Note to vs of that which by vs is first knowne An other argument may be drawne from the Nature of euery true Note which ought to be so peculiar to that of which it is a Note as that it cannot be applyed in the iudgment of others to it meare Contrary But we see different sectaryes teaching contrary doctrynes and professing themselfs to be members of different Churches do all neuertheles promiscuously challenge the true preaching of the Words and the vse of the Sacrements to be the Notes of their so much discording Churches or Conuenticles And therefore the afore named Lubbertus thus truly pronounceth of this poynt Praedicatio Sacramentorum communicatio similia Ecclesiae essentiam non attingunt sunt enim Haereticorum conuerticulis veris Christianorum Ecclesiâ—s communia The preaching of the word the distribution of the Sacraments and such like do not belong to the essence of the Church since these things are common both to the Conuenticles of Hereticks and to the true Churches of Christians And according hearto we find by experience that Lutherans Protestants and PuritaÌ„s theaching most repugnante doctrines do wartant these their doctrines by the former Notes of preaching the Word And therefore it from hence followeth that it is no lesse a madnes in our aduersaries to prescrybe the preaching of the word and the vse of the Sacraments for the notes of the Church which are common to all Hereticall Conuenticles at least in their owne Opinion then for one who would discouer and note out one particular Man from all others to distinguish him from them by saying It is he who hath two eyes one nose one mouth two armes c. Since these Notes or description are common to all men in generall Againe I thus dispute A true Note of any thing ought to be at all tymes without discontinuance a Note theareof and not sometymes only since otherwise it is but a temporary Note But theare hath bene a Church of God euen then when there was no Scripture at all much lesse any preaching or interpretation of the Word Therefore the preaching of the word cannot be erected as a true Note of the Church The Assumption of this argument is manifest For it is acknowledged that the Church of God continued two thousand yeres before Moyses his tyme without any Scripture and therefore D. Parkins truly thus saith Morses was the first pennman of Holy Scripture With whom agree Zanchius D. Whitakers and all other learned Men whosoeuer Againe after Moyses had pened the Scripture it remayned only in the custody of the Iewes and was among them for many yeres lost as it is granted euen by the marginall annotations of the English Bibles of the yere 1576. where it is said That it was either by the negligence of the Priests lost or by the wickednes of idolatreus Kings And yet euen in those tymes Iob and