iure diuino Yea M. Mason himself acknowledgeth and that from M. Fox that amongst (54) Consecration of the Bishops in England p. 264 And see Fox Act. Mon. Vol. 2. p. 1295. The Articles sent by Queen Marie to Bishop Bonner one was this Item Touching such persons as were heretofore promoted to anie Orders after the new sort and fashion of Orders Considering they were not ordered in verie deed the Bishop of the Diocesse finding otherwise sufficiencie and abilitie in these men may supply that thing which wanted in them before and then according to his discretion admit them to Minister Here though M. Mason would gladly inforce a different Glosse yet the words are most plaine that Queen Marie and the Church in her time censured such as were promoted to anie Orders after the new sort and fashion of Protestant Orders in K Edwards time were not ordered in verie deed So that stil it deserueth further search whence our present English Clergie as also other forraine Ministers haue obtayned true power and authoritie to preach administer Sacraments And as for Forainers as the Ministers in Germanie Denmark Holland the rest they are so cleerely and confessedly destitute of al true Ordination that M. Mason acknowledgeth that (55) Consec of Engl. Bish. Ep. Dedic wheras other Reformed Churches were constrained by necessitie to admit extraordinarie Fathers that is to receaue ordination from Presbiters or Ministers rather then to suffer the fabrick of the Lord Iesus to be dissolued The Church of England had alwayes Bishops to conferre Sacred Orders according to the ordinarie and most warrantable Custome of the Church of Christ So that no Protestant Ministers in the world haue anie ordinarie Calling or Ordination by Bishops but only the Ministers of England who yet beg and deriue al that which they haue from their imagined Antichrist himself as now shal be shewed Some Protestants therfore teach that they haue their Calling Ordination from the Church of Rome so D. Bridges (56) Defence of the GouernmeÌ„t p. 1276. speaking of our Catholick Bishops and their Calling vrgeth thus in our behalf If our Protestant Brethren wil make them but meer Lay-men then are neither they nor we anie Ministers at al but meer Lay-men also for who ordayned vs Ministers but such Ministers as were either themselues of their Ministerie or at least were made Ministers of those Ministers Except they wil say the people can make Ministers c. yea some (57) SileÌ„ced Ministers supplication of Anno 1609. p. 9. 10. 17. Puritans do reproue their Protestant Brethren for deriuing their Ministerie from the Church of Rome But (58) Cont. Dur. l. 9. p. 820. D. Whitaker exemplifyeth the same saying Luther was a Priest and Doctour according to your Rite or ordination c. And it is manifest that so also was Zuinglius Bucer Oecolampadius and innumerable others c. M. Parkins (59) Vol. 1. p. 737. speaking of the Calling of the first Preachers of the Protestant Ghospel argueth thus If they had no Calling neither haue we that are their followers But They had their Callings c. from the Romish Church itself for they were either Priests or Schoole-Doctours as in England Wiccliffe in Germanie Luther in Bohemia Iohn Husse and Hierom of Prage at Basil Oecolampadius in Italie Peter Martyr others And therefore these with manie others were ordayned either in Popish Churches or in Schooles c. And agayne We say the first restorers of the Ghospel in our times had their first Callings of them to wit the Papists M. Mason discoursing at large of this verie poynt of Ordination and in particular of the Ordination of our English Protestant Clergie confesseth first that the Roman Church hath euer had true power of Ordination (60) Consecration of the Bishops of England Ep. Dedic Such was the goodnes of God saith he that euen in the darknes of Poperie as Baptisme so the Ministerial function c. was wonderfully preserued for the Church of Rome by Gods special prouidence in her ordination of Priests retayned such Euangelical words as in their true and natiue sense include a Ghostlie Ministerial power to forgiue sinnes c. Thus the Church of Rome gaue power to her Priests to teach the truth c. which (61) Ibid. p. 262. Power saith he is a Rose which is found in the Romish wildernes but the plants therof were deriued from the garden of God It is a Riuer which runneth in Aegipt but the fountaine and Spring of it is in Paradise It is a Beame which is seen in Babilon but the original of it is from the Sphere of the Heauen Wherefore when your Priests returne to vs our Church paring away their Pollutions suffereth them to exercise their Ministerial function according to the true meaning of Christs word And agayne (62) Ibid. p. 262. we being content with their calling and commission of their function already committed vnto them do not reiterate their ordination and Imposition of hands And as Catholick Priâ—sts Apostated only through vice are here allowed for sufficient Ministers without al new ordination from anie Protestant SuperinteÌ„dent so doth M. Mason most seriously labour throughout his whole Booke to proue the ordination of the Protestant English Clergie to haue been certainly deriued from our Catholick Roman Church To which end acknowledging that (63) Ibid. p. 64. 65. 66. The whole Clergie of England at this day deriueth their Consecration from Cranmer he painfully laboureth to proue that Cranmer was appoynted by Pope Clement to be Archbishop of Canterburie and that he was Consecrated by three Catholick Bishops which Consecration was performed with wonted Ceremonies according to the vsual forme of the Romane Church which saith he continued al the dayes of King Henrie the Eighth euen when the Pope was banished yea he expresly concludeth his book thus (64) p. 267. Thus it appeareth that although we receaued our Orders from such as were Popish Priests yet our Calling is lawful So cleer it is that M. Mason would be glad to wring his Ministers Ordering from our Roman Church And the like is acknowledged taught by (è) Cath. Trad. p. 183. Buca loc com p. 509. Bernard in his Diswasion from Brownisme p. 144. Whyte in his way to the Church p. 404. Fotherby his Answer annexed to his 4. Sermons p. 81. Sutcliffe against D. Kellison p. 5. Sarauia of diuers Degrees of Ministers p. 9. sundrie other Protestants But here I can not but obserue by the way how strange it is that Protestants should thus much delight and please themselues in their Ordination from Cranmer a man so vicious inconstant and treacherous both to God and man Doth not D Godwin relate that (65) In Cranmsr p. 123. Being yet verie young he â—aryed and so lost his fellowship in Iesus Colledge in Cambridge Doth not Fox report that being Archbishop in his returne from Rome he brought with him a Dutch
woman (67) Act. Mon. p 1037 to whom saith Fox it is supposed he was maryed yet certaine it is that no shew therof was made in K. Henries time when he carryed her vp and downe in a trunck marying her afterwards in K. Edwards time He was also most treacherous to his Prince for albeit he had been so greatly exalted by K. Henrie and by him appoynted one of the Executours of his Wil yet presently after his death he assented to the breaking thereof And after K. Edwards death endeauoured al he could to the aduancing of Q. Iane and vtter excluding from the Crowne of K. Henries lawful daughter Queene Marie To whose dis-inheriting he first subscribed as also to that rebellious letter which he and his complices sent to Queen Marie and which to his euerlasting infamie and confusion (68) Act. Mon. p. 1299 Fox himself hath recorded And although from his cradle he was a Roman Catholick vntil his being Archbishop which honour he receaued from the Pope taking the vsual oath of fidelitie vnto him Yet in the next yeare after K. Henrie by Parlament procuring himself to be tearmed Head of the Church he also forsook the Pope and forswore himself in that poynt agreing yet as also the King in al other with him and both by words and deeds persecuting Protestants as is euident in the death of Lambert and others written by M. Fox Yea in K. Edwards time as Stow (69) Chron. p. 594. reporteth The French King being deceased c. also the Church of S. Paul in London being hanged with black and a sumptuous Herse set vp in the Quire a Dirge was there song and on the next morrow the Archbishop of Canterburie Cranmer assisted of 8. Bishops al in rich Miters and other their Pontificals did sing a Masse of Requiem c. yet after this he fel to Lutheranisme publishing a Catechisme wherin with Luther he taught the Real Presence which not long after impugning he turned with the Duke of Somerset to Zuinglianisme setting forth another Catechisme against the Real Presence And yet after al this vnder (70) Act. Mon p. 1710 Q. Marie he recanted for hope of life al his Protestantisme both by tongue pen professed the Roman Catholick Faith But perceiuing that he must dye choosing rather to dye in the opinion of vulgar Protestants a Martyr then in the true iudgement both of ProtestaÌ„ts and Catholicks as a Malefactor and Traytour he finally dyed in Zuinglianisme being both condemned for Heresy against God and for Rebellion against his Prince as M. Fox (71) Act. Mon p. 1698 confesseth So infamous was the life and death of the first Protestant Bishop that euer England had and from whom al our English Ecclesiastical frie do deriue their Ordination and other good conditions not vnlike vnto his But to returne from whence we haue digressed al this begging by M. Mason and the rest forenamed of Protestant Orders from the Church of Rome is directly contradicted and loathed by others of their Brethren as thinking the Bishop of Rome to be Antichrist himself and the Roman Church to be the whore of Babylon M. Powel (72) De Antich p. 6. 310. tearmeth our Catholick Orders the Mark of the Beast D. Downham (73) Of Antichrist l. 2. p. 108. spareth not to say I say their Priesthood is Antichristian The Diuines of Geneua (74) Propositions Disputed c. p. 245. affirme that There is in Babylon thereby meaning the Roman Church no holie Order or Ministrie indeed no lawful Calling but a meer vsurpation M. Penrie writing against the Protestant Calling disputeth thus From whence haue they their calling had they it not from those which sit in the Chaire of Antichrist (75) Vpon the 122. Ps fol. D. 8. yea how manie are in al Christendome c. but their ordination haue come from Popish Prelacie within three or foure generations at the most c. Can an vnlawful calling bring forth a lawful though it descend from one to another a hundred or thousand times Therefore vnles they can approue the lawfulnes of their calling vnder some other title then that which they now haue by the Clergie it wil fal out there shal hardly be found a Minister duly called in al the world c. In like sort D. Fulk (76) Answ to a Counterf Cath. p. 50. answereth to vs Catholicks you are highly deceaued if you think we esteeme your offices of Bishops Priests and Deacons anie better then Lay-men and you presume to much to think that we receiue your ordering to be lawful And agayne (77) Retentiue p. 67. with al our hart we defy abhorre detest and spit at your stinking greasie Antichristian Orders c. In like modest sort saith Beza (78) Apud Sarauiam in Defens Tract c. p. 56. Popish Orders are nothing els then the impurest buying and selling of the Roman Stewes And (79) Consideration of the Papistes Reasons p. 71. M. Gabriel Powel auoucheth that The Popish ordination is nothing els but mere prophanation c. there is no true Ecclesiastical Vocation in the Papacie We iudge no otherwise saith D. Whitaker (80) Cont. Dur p 635. of your Priests then of Christs Aduersaries and enemies of his Priesthood (81) Ibid. p. 662. You haue neither lawful Bishops nor Priests nor Deacons And according to D. Sutcliffe 82) Answ to Eyâ—â—pt p. 82 The Pope himself is neither true Bishop nor Priest for he was ordayned Priest but to offer Sacrifice and to say Masse for the quick and the Dead But this Ordination sayth he doth not make a Priest nor had true Priests and Elders euer anie such Ordination Therefore (83 Ib p. 87 And see his Chaâ—leng p. 35 The Romish Church is not the true Church hauing no Bishops nor Priests at al but only in name Now if the Protestant Clergie wil not deriue their Vocation and Ordination from the Church of Rome as the former Protestants do refuse and in reason they cannot supposing their absurd Doctrine of the Pope being Antichrist for what more ridiculous then that Christs Ministers should receaue their spiritual power and Commission from Antichrist Then stil we are to demand from whence the Protestant Clergie hath their Calling and Commission seing according to the former Scriptures the true Churches Past ours must be lawfully called sent and ordayned In these so extreme straytes some Protestants acknowledge and defend their Ordination and calling to be from the Laitie itself as from the temporal Magistrate and their hearers followers (84) His two Letters conâ—erning the Earl of Lauale Eng. fol. c. 3. D. Tilanus teacheth that Farel had his sending of the people sf Geneua who had right had authoritie saith he to institute and depose Ministers And The reformed Churches and their calling partly from God and partly from the people as by lawful instruments M Dilingam (85) p. 78. writing against M. Hil
that Pelagius Celestius Iulianus al of them Hereticks do see and Hilarie Gregorie Ambrose c. are blind This so worthie a Saying of S. Austin being alleaged against the Puritans by D. Bancroft he therupon inferreth (32) Suruey p. 352. 353. 351. Surely I do not perceiue why I may not without offence apply the same wordes to those men in those dayes c. Were there neuer learned men before you were taught the Principles of the Geneua Discipline c. Do you know what was in the Apostles times better then they who succeded the Apostles c. Is the light that shewed it self so manie wayes in the Ancient Fathers become such darknes that Carthwright Trauerse Fenner to whom I might as truly adde Luther Zuinglius Caluin Beza c. and such like should be thought so clearlie-sighted And shal Ireneus Tertulian Cyprian Ambrose Hierom Chrysostom Austin Gregorie Hilarie and al the rest of those whorthie men be reckned blind So cleerly doth D. Bancroft the Protestant late Primate of England acknowledge the shining light and glorie of the ancient Fathers and defend their authoritie from the imputations of Nouelists D. Morton ioyfully acknowledgeth (33) Prot. Appeal p. 33. That the ancient Fathers c. did obtayne in the Church of Christ honourable Titles as Augustin the great Mall or hammer against Hereticks Basil the light of the world Chrysostome The Doctour of the whole world Athanasius the Pillar as it were of the Church Nazianzene by a phrase of excellencie the Diuine Origen the Maister of the churches Cyprian the President of the whole world And lastly Ambrose A man called by God vnto an Apostolical Presidencie Now as for the Confidence which Catholicks place in the ancient Fathers D. Morton testifyeth for vs that (34) Ib. p 348 Neuer did the ancient Iewes more boast of their original and descent from father Abraham then do the Romanists glory in their pretended consent of ancient Fathers And though it be true that the ancient Fathers were men yet (35) Eccl. Pol. p. 115. The strength of mans Authoritie in M. Hookers iudgement is affirmatiuely such that the weightiest affaires in the world depend therupon Yea (36) Ib. p. 116. whatsoeuer we beleeue concerning saluation by Christ although the Scripture be therin the ground of our beleef yet is mans Authoritie sayth he the key that openeth the doore c. The Scripture could not teach vs these things vnles we beleeued men And wheras the sacred Scriptures do foretel sundrie things to be performed by the Church of Christ in succeeding Ages the answerable accomplishment therof in particular being matter of fact can be to vs at this day no otherwise made knowne then vpon the Credit of humane Testimonie commended to vs by Ecclesiastical Histories In which respect D. Whitaker truly teacheth that (37) Cont. Duraeum l. 7. p. 472. Historie plainly testifyeth al that to be accomplished which the ancient Prophets haue foretold concerning the Propagation amplitude and glorie of the Church So that there is no doubt sayth he but that Ecclesiastical Historie doth strengthen the Predictions of the Prophets Now from the Premisses we may briefly remember that not only al Catholicks but euen the Primest ProtestaÌ„ts that euer were do thus willingly appeale for the decision of Controuersies in Faith and Religion to the Censure and Determination of the Church of Christ which for the first six hundred yeares was confessedly sincere holie and religious Acknowledging withal the integritie and puritie of the Roman Church during the sayd time and professing to beleeue and teach no other Faith and religion then that which was taught and beleeued by the ancient Fathers of the same Church This then supposed I wil now descend in particular to the chiefest articles of Faith disputed at this day between Catholicks and Protestants And wil only examine whether the Roman or Protestant Church is now more agreable with the confessed Faith and Religion of the Fathers of the Primitiue Church in the foresayd poynts And for the cleerest preuenting of the manifold shiftes and euasions vsed by ProtestaÌ„ts when they are vrged in this kind I wil only produce such proofe from the Primitiue Church and Fathers as is recorded and confessed by Protestants and by them disliked and reiected as agreeing with our Roman Faith and condemning Protestancie THAT THE FATHERS AND DOCTOVRS OF the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught that S. Peter was ordayned by Christ the Head of the Apostles and of the whole Church and that the Church was founded vpon S. Peter it is Confessed by Protestants themselues CHAPTER III. BEcause the deciding of this present Controuersie of the Churches Primacie is indeed the speediest and most certaine meanes for the final dissoluing of al doubts in Religion either already begun or hereafter to arise I wil therfore more particularly and at large set downe the manifest and confessed Doctrine and practice of the Primitiue Church concerning the same And first as al gouernment whether Politick or Ecclesiastical the more it reseÌ„bleth the gouernment of this world by the Creatour therof ONE GOD or the gouernment of the Church during our Sauiours aboad vpon earth by ONE CHRIST the more it is to be approued coÌ„mended and followed so nothing is holden more Soueraigne or more needful for the procuring or preseruing of vnitie and concord in anie Bodie or Communitie then the vnitie of one Head or gouernment Monarchical Herevpon the (1) Bel. de Rom. Pont l. 1. c. 10. l. 2. c 12. Catholick Church doth beleeue and teach That S. Peter was ordayned by Christ the Supreme Ecclesiastical Head not only ouer the rest of the Apostles but euen ouer the whole Church And that the Bishop of Rome succeedeth him in the same Power and Authoritie The direct (2) Luther l de Potestate Papae in assertione Art 25. Calu. l. 4 Instit c 6. Morton in his Appeale l. 2. c. 5. Sect. 11. Negatiue wherof is not only taught by the Protestant-Church but withal it further beleeueth maintayneth that the Bâ—shop of Rome in steed of being the true Successour of S. Peter and the Vicar of Christ is the true Antichrist or Man of Sinne wherof so much is foretold in the sacred Scriptures To discouer now the Faith and practise of the Primitiue Church and to begin with the confessed Primacie of S. Peter And first that for the preseruing of vnitie and preuenting of Schismes he was appoynted by Christ the Supreme Head of that slender Bodie or litle Church of the twelue Apostles Wheras S. Hierom l. 1. cont Iouinianum teacheth that Amongst the Twelue one is chosen that a Head appoynted the occasion of Schisme should be taken away From hence (3) In his Examination c. against the Plea of the Innocent p. 106. 107. D. Couel hauing spoken of the necessitie of One aboue the rest to suppresse the seed of dissention thus argueth most strongly If this were the Principal
conscience and true knowledge would also dedicate your further labours I doubt not but you would become a dutiful Child to your Mother-Church and a paineful labourer in Christ's Vinyeard for which I wil not cease to entreate his Infinit Goodnes and wil euer rest Yours in him N. N. THE FIRST BOOKE WHERIN IS PROVED BY THE CONFESSION OF PROTESTANTS THAT THE CATHOLICK ROMAN CHVRCH hath continued Euer most Knowne and Vniuersal euen from Christs verie Time vntil the Date hereof THE ANTIQVITIE OF THE TRVE Church and the force of the Argument drawne from the Authoritie thereof As also of the great necessitie of finding-out this true Church CHAP. I. AS we may not doubt but that the Church of God speaking in general is equal in Ancestrie with our first Parents in Paradise so in regard of her Birth-right prime Antiquitie long precedent and preferred before the Scriptures themselues so euen of the Church of Christians it may not be denyed but that as in the same instant with Christ her Head and Spouse she receaued her first being life and birth in this world according to that of (1) Ad c. 3. Lucae S. Ambrose God built his Church in the chief Corner-stone CHRIST IESVS so was this her greatest nobilitie of birth not only to cōtinue for some few generatiōs but euer to remayne for al posteritie Agreable to which the Prophet Daniel foretold of the Church (2) cap. 2.4 that it is A kingdome that shal neuer be destroyed but shal stand for euer And so shal be according to Esay as (3) cap 60.15 An eternal glorie and ioy from generation to generation So that in steed of further discussing the Ancientest Birth-right and not-interrupted continuance of Christ his Church I wil now only treat of the force of that Argumēt which is drawne from the Authoritie Determinatiō of the sayd so Noble Anciēt a Church Wherein for greater expeditiō I wil pretermit most plentiful proofes both from sacred Scriptures and learnedst Fathers in steed therof wil for the present rest satisfyed with the freest Grants and ample Acknowledgements of the learnedst Protestants who first as they euer pretend to build their whole Faith Religion vpon the Written Word so do they further aknowledge the same to be only knowne and discerned from forged and adulterat Scriptures by the sacred Authoritie and Testimonie of the Church of Christ In which respect (4) Ans to a Counterf catho pag. 5. D. Fulk auoucheth that The Church of Christ hath Iudgemēt to discerne true writings from counterfait and the Word of God from the writings of men and this Iudgemēt she hath of the Holie-Ghost With whom accordeth (5) Def. of the Apolog. p. 201. D. Iewel affirming that The Church of God hath the Spirit of wisdome whereby to discerne true Scriptures from false In like sort M. (6) Ecc. Pol. pag. 86. Hooker teacheth that of things necessarie the verie chiefest is to know what books we are bound to esteeme holie which point is confessed impossible for the Scripture itself to teach Whereof he further sayth (7) Ib pa. 102. It is not the Word of God which doth or possibly can assure vs that we do wel to think it is his word for if anie one Book of Scripture did giue testimonie of al yet stil that Scripture which giueth credit to the rest would require another Scripture to giue credit vnto it Neither could we come vnto anie pause whereon to rest vnles besides Scripture there were something which might assure vs c. which something afterwards he acknowledgeth (8) Ib. pa. 146. 116. And see Aretius his examen p. 24. And Bachmanus his Centuriae tres c. p. 267. To be the authoritie of Gods Church Agreably hereunto D. whitaker doth confesse that this weightiest controuersie concerning Canonical Scriptures is to vs determined not by (9) Cōt Staplet p. 370. 357. HooK Eccl. Pol. p. 147. Testimonie of the Spirit the which sayth he being priuat and secret is vnfit to teach and refel others but as he further teacheth (10) Ibi. p. 300. 298. 24. 25. And against Raynolds p. 44. by the Ecclestical Tradition An argument whereby may be argued and conuinced what books be Canonical and what not And another Protestant Writer (11) Auth. of the scripture and the church f. 71 72. 73. 74 75. much commended by (12) Ibid. in the Preface Bullinger affirmeth that The church is endued with the Spirit of God and that The diligence authoritie of the Church is to be acknowledged herein which hath partly giuen forth her Testimonie of the assured writings and hath partly by her Spiritual Iudgement refused the writings which are vnworthie Yea he further assureth vs with (13) Tom 6. cōt ep fund cap. 5. Tert. lib. 1 de Praescrip cap. 6. S. Augustin and Tertullian that (14) Scrip. and the church p. 72 74. 75. And see Melancthon in epist ad Rom cap. 14. pa 358 359. we could not beleeue the Ghospel were it not that the Church taught vs and witnessed that this doctrine was deliuered by the Apostles So that the authoritie of Gods true Church is so great as that by her warrāt we are only assured of the Written Word of God itself and for such by her wisedome giuen by the Holie-Ghost discerned to vs from al forged Apocryphal and counterfait writings A power and authoritie then which none stronger seing the certain knowledge of the true word of God is the chiefest foundation of our Christian Faith Now if in this question so important we may securely follow and beleeue the Sentence and Determination of the Church how much more then in other doubts of smaller respect Adde further hereunto in surest confirmation of the Churches authoritie that it is likewise granted and taught by the learnedst Protestants that the true visible Church can not wholy erre in matters of Faith Insomuch as they expresly confesse of this verie point that (15) Bertr de Loque in his discourse of the church p. 198. Phil. Act. mon. p. 1401. Bilney ibid. p. 464. Ridley 16. pag. 1361. 1286. Baynhā ib. p 493. Fox ib. pag. 999. Bancroft in his sermon preached 8. Febr. 1588. pag. 42. 43. The Diuines of Geneua in their Propositions and Principles disputed c. p. 142. Zanchius de Relig pa. 157. Rhegius in Discus The. p. 213. Hunnius in Act. Colloq Ratisb fol. 205. KecKermannus in System Theol. pag. 387. Povvel of things indifferent p. 7 The controuersie c. is not of the Catholick or vniuersall Church for we al agree say they herein that she cannot orre touching Faith c. wherefore this question is touching only a particular church Now if the true Church can not erre in matters of Faith Religion then is her Authoritie sacred her Decrees infallible her Children secured and al difficulties arising easily composed Yea from hence also may we iustly collect amongst al
ancient Fathers almost in euerie Age before that in which Gregorie liued saying The Religion cleerly taught in the Word of God brought hither first by Simon Zelotes Niceph. l. 2. c. 4. Ioseph of Arimathia Gildâ—s S. Paul the Apostle Theodoret de Curand Graec. affect l. 9. al or some of them was watred stil on in the dayes of Tertullian l. cont Iudaeos Origen in Ezech. hom 4. Athanasius Apol. 2. Hilarie l. de Synod cont Arian Chysostom hom quod Christus sit Deus Theodoret Hist l. 1. c. 10. l. 4. c. 3. Al which Ancient Fathers speak honourably of the Church Religion and Prelates of Brittanie So exceeding far were the Brittans from being changed in their Religion before the time when S. Augustin came into England Therfore to come to the second and mayne point which is the true harmonie and agreement between the Apostolick Faith of the Brittans and the Catholick Roman Faith of S. Augustin D. Morton labouring purposely to shew (51) Prot. Appeal p. 75. what and of how great importance the differences were between the Brittan Bishops and the Church of Rome at Austins comming can only instance in the difference of Ceremonies or ministring of Baptisme in keeping of Easter and in denial of Subiection vnto Austin which though he much endeauour to proue to be matters of great importance yet if they be considered in themselues and without pertinacie in the Defenders they may with M. Brierlie most truly be sayd to be few and smal points And the more if they should once be compared with our other Roman Articles of Real Presence Adoration of the Sacrament Masse Confession Freewil Merit c. In anie one wherof D. Morton was not able to giue the least Instance of difference between the foresayd Brittans and S. Austin Wherfore to proceed in this same poynt It is reported by Hollinshead out of S. Bede hist. l. 2. c. 2 that S. Austin by the help of King Edilbert obtayned a meeting with the Brittish Bishops and Doctours where he sayd vnto them (52) Beda hist l. 2. c. 2. Hollinsh vol. 1. p. 103. Godwine in his Catalogue of Bish. p. 6. If you wil obey me in these three things That you wil celebrate Easter at the due time That you wil minister Baptisme wherwith wee are borne againe to God according to the custome of the Roman and Apostolick Church That you wil preach with vs the Word of God to the Nation of the English Al other things which you doe though they be contrarie to our customes we wil peaceably suffer In like sort sayth the (53) l. 3. c. 13. p. 133. Authour of the Historie of Great Brittanie The Brittan Bishops conformed themselues to the doctrine and Ceremonies of the Church of Rome without difference in anie thing specially remembred saue only in the Celebration of the Feast of Easter c. (54) Ibid p. 219. And See CaÌ„bdens BritaÌ„ in English p. 578. And agayne when they perceaued the Saxons in some measure to approue it they began to make open Profession of it as seeming therin to agree euen with their Enemies the Saxons howsoeuer otherwise in respect of language situation or Law of Nations they were diuided Yea the (55) Beda hist l. 2. c. 2. Hollinsh vol. 1. p. 102. Brittan Bishops after conference had with S. Austin confessed that they vnderstood that it was the true way of iustice which Austin preached Wherupon as (56) Confut. of Purgat p. 335. D. Fulk acknowledgeth Saint Austin did at the last obtayne the ayde of the Brittish Bishops to the Conuersion of the Saxons (57) Catalogue of Bishops p. 11. Lastly D. Godwin writing of Theodore who was Archbishop of Canterburie some Fiftie or Sixtie yeares after S. Augustin auoucheth that vnto him al the Brittish Bishops and generally al Britanie yealded obedience and vnder him conformed themselues in al things vnto the Rites and discipline of the Church of Rome So euidently doth that Primitiue Faith of the Brittans in al most substantial poynts wholy agree with that Faith which S. Austin taught vs and which the Protestants haue fully acknowledged to be Catholick Roman or Popish And yet is the sayd Faith taught vs by S. Gregorie and S. Austin tearmed by (58) Chron. f. 161. D. Cowper the right beleefe And by (59) Act. Mon. p. 112. M. Fox the perfect Faith of Christ (60) Ibid. p. 124. and the true Faith of Christ And thus from the premisses it necessarily followeth that our present Roman Religion being so consonant or rather the same with that first Faith which the Indians Armenians Graecians and Brittans receiued from the Apostles themselues that therfore no lesse ancient or continuing is our Roman Religion then the Religion of the Apostles M. Brierly hauing produced diuers testimonies of Protestants in proof that the Indians Graecians and Armenians were conuerted to the Faith of Christ in the Apostles times as also that the remnant of Christian Religion which they yet preserue is Roman Catholick not Protestant M. Morton directing a large Reply hereto doth not so much as answer to any one of the foresayd testimonies of his Brethren Osiander excepted of whom he sayth (61) Prop. Appeal p. 79. We approue not Osianders censure c. concerning the Christians in Mount Libanus tearming them Popish for some flying speach But he may now aswel say we do not only not approue Osianders censure but neither the Censures and opinions of D. Philip Nicolai Gomarus Willamont Crispinus the Diuines of Wittemberg Cambden Harison Hollinshead Hal Clapham Fulk Marbeck Symondes Sandes Bale Foxe Midleton Godwine and Cowper al of them Protestants and yet al of them thus affording their helping hands for the proof of our agreement in Faith and Religion with the Doctrine deliuered by the Apostles themselues THE SECOND BOOKE WHERIN IS PROVED THROVGH AL THE CHIEF ARTICLES OF RELIGION AND THAT BY THE Confessions of Protestants that the same Faith Which is now taught by the Roman Church vvas anciently taught by the Primitiue Church of Christ THAT GENERAL COVNCELS DO TRVLY represent the Church of Christ And of the Credit and Authoritie giuen by Protestants to the sayd Councels CHAPTER I. AS in Politick gouernement our Parlament consisting of Prince Peeres Knights and Burgesses doth truly represent the whole Bodie of the Common-wealth and withal is endowed with ful power and authoritie to enact and establish Lawes which euerie particular Subiect is bound to obey and obserue So in gouernement Ecclesiastical a General Councel consisting of the Head of the Church the Bishops and Pastours doth truly represent vnto vs the whole Bodie of the Church itself and in like sort is enriched with plenarie power and vertue to create Decrees and Statutes which may bind the soules and consciences of euery particular member of the sayd Church To which purpose D. Whitaker confesseth expresly that (1) De Conciliis p. 1. 10. The Church is represented in a General
to haue been built or founded vpon Peter and in this regard Peters Sea to haue been preferred before the Seas of al other Patriarcks do herein but symbolize with the ancient Fathers Gregorie Leo Optatus Hierom Hilarie Origen Cyprian Tertullian Dionysius Areopagita and the other Fathers in general who are here produced and reproued in these respects by the Protestant Writers the Centurists Caluin Danaeus Brightman Fulk Field Couel and Raynolds IT IS CONFESSED BY PROTESTANTS that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught the Bishop of Rome to Succeed S. Peter in the Primacie of the whole Church CHAPTER IV. HAuing hitherto proued the Primacie of S. Peter ouer the whole Church the next point to be considered is whether the sayd Primacie not being personally tyed to him as to dye with him but rather being to suruiue and continue in his Successours to the Churches good euen to the end of the world whether I say the sayd Primacie is deriued to the Bishop of Rome as the Successour of S. Peter And herein D. Bilson (1) In his true difference c. part 1. p. 147. confesseth most playnly and in general that The Ancient and Learned Fathers cal the Roman Bishop Peters Successour The Centurists (2) Cent. 5. col 1262. charge S. Leo that He painfully goeth about to proue that singular preheminence was giuen to Peter aboue the other Apostles and that thence rose the Primacie of the Roman Church And the like is confessed of S. Leo by D. Raynolds (3) In his conference p. 42. 43. who further granteth that (4) Conference p. 218. 219. The Fathers say Peter was Bishop of Rome naming Hierom Eusebius Ireneus And (5) Chron. D. Cowper calleth Linus first Bishop of Rome after Peter Osiander (6) Cent. 4. p. 294. speaking of the ancient Councel of Sardis decreing Appeales to Rome professeth to deliuer the then common opinion and reason therof saying It was the ancient common and receaued errour that Peter was the first Bishop of Rome therefore this honour was thought due to the Successour of Peter according to the common opinion c. Bucer (7) In Praeparatorijs ad Concilium sayth We plainly confesse that among the ancient Fathers the Roman Church obtayned Primacie aboue others as that which hath the Chaire of S. Peter and whose Bishops haue almost alwayes been accounted the Successours of Peter Yea the ancient Fathers were so confident herein that they taught the Primacie of the Roman Bishop to be the ordinance of Christ himself and not anie Humane or Ecclesiastical Institution So Gelasius In Decretis cum 70. Episcopis teaching that The Roman Church is preferred before the other Churches not by anie Synodical Constitutions but hath obtayned the Primacie by the Euangelical voyce of our Lord saying Thou art Peter and vpon this Rock I wil build my Church The (8) Cent. 5. col 1274. Centurists hereupon inferre and confesse that Gelasius contended that the Roman Church by the law of God was the First or Chief of al Churches In like sort (9) De Regno Christi l. 2. p. 149. Philippus Nicolai granteth that Pope Iulius who liued Anno. 370. as Socrates and Sozomene relate sent Letters to the Eastern Churches in which as the Letters witnesse he often declareth the right of calling General Councels to belong to him alone who by singular Priuiledge euen by Gods ordinance is the Prelate of the first Sea c. to wit the Roman This Diuine ordinance was so beleeued reuerenced and obeyed by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church as that nothing is more manifest in al their writings or other histories and Records of Antiquitie nor more fully acknowledged and disliked by the greatest Enemies therof the Protestant Writers And to begin with S. Gregorie whom M. Bale (10) In Act. Rom. Pont. p. 44. styleth Gregorie the Great of al the Roman Patriarks the most excellent in life and learning This so excellent a Patriark is charged out of his owne writings by the Centurists (11) Cent. 6. col 425. 426. 427. 428. 429. 430 431. 432. c. with clayme and exercise of Iurisdiction and Primacie ouer al Churches Carion (12) Chron. l. 4. p 567 568. affirmeth that Though he tragically declaymeth himself to abhorre the name of Vniuersal Bishop yet indeed he sheweth himself earnestly to desire that which the Title importeth And Peter (13) In Cap. 8. Iudicum And see the liKe in Philippus Nicolai De Regno Christi l. 2. p. 66. Martyr in this scoffing manner reprehendeth him saying This litle Saint Gregorie would haue the thing it self of Vniuersal Bishop although he streightned the name and Title For as the Histories of those times teach and his owne Epistles witnesse he did not abstayne from gouerning other Churches M. Bale (14) In his Image of both Churches fol. 11. See Bullinger in 2. Thess 2. p. 531. And Melancton in Ep. Ad Rom. p. 405. q. 2. p. 17. acknowledgeth that Iohn of Constantinople contended with Gregorie of Rome for the Supremacie in which contention Gregorie layd for himself S. Peters keyes with manie other sore arguments and reasons The Protestant Authour 15 of Catholick Traditions reporteth that Maurice the Emperour would haue taken away the Primacie from Gregorie Bishop of Rome and giuen it to Iohn Bishop of Constātinople c. Gregorie did oppose himselfe against him least he should loose his place vrging how insolent that Title was The Centurists (16) Cent. 6. col 425 confesse that Gregorie vpon the fourth Penitential Psalme greatly inueigheth against the Emperour who challenged to himself the Roman Church being the Head of al Churches and would make her a seruant being the Mistresse of Nations Christ also saying I wil giue to thee the Keyes And (17) Cent. 6. col 425. Gregorie glorieth that the Emperour and Eusebius his fellow-Bishop of Constantinople do both of them acknowledge that the Church of Constantinople is subiect to the Apostolick Sea Yet the Magdeburgians do further charge S. Gregorie and by collection out of his owne writings by them particularly alleadged that (18) Cent. 6. col 426. He challenged to himself power to command Archbishops to ordayne or depose Bishops at his pleasure And (19) Cent. 6. col 427. tooke vpon him right to cite Archbishops to declare their cause before him when they were accused And also (20) col 427. to Excommunicate and Depose them Giuing (21) col 428 Commission to theyr Neighbour Bishops to proceed against them That (22) col 428. 401 In theyr Prouinces he placed his Legats to know and end the causes of such as appealed to the Roman sea That (23) col 428. He vsurped power of appoynting Synods in theyr Prouinces (24) col 429. And see more col 430. 432. 433. 434. 435. 436. 437. 438. And required other Archbishops that if anie cause of greater importance fel out they should referre the
col 778. And Symondes vpon the Reuel p. 57. likewise charge Pope Sixtus that In his 3. Epistle to the Eastern Bishops and 5. chapter he decreeth that against a Bishop appealing to the Sea Apostolick nothing shal be determined but what the Roman Bishop iudgeth But to omit sundrie other particular Popes (79) In his Tryal of the Popes Title p. 117. M. Bunnie confesseth that Innocentius telleth the Bishops of Macedonia that they should haue regard to the Church of Rome as to their Head and that it is wronged because they did not at first yeald to his Iudgement c. The Bishops of Rome gaue also out Decrees which they would bind al to obserue as appeareth in Siricius and Innocentius It sauoureth of too great arrogancie that Sozimus threatneth seueritie if anie despise the Apostolick authoritie So did Leo what should I seek to speak of euerie one their owne Decretals do sufficiently beare witnes Yea it is acknowledged in general (80) Cent. 5. col 778. that the Popes of this fift Age ordayned and required that in the causes of Bishops it might be lawful to appeale to them as is manifest by the Acts of the 6. Carthage Councel And (81) In his Def. p. 342. D. Whitguift auoucheth that It is certaine that then Viz. in the time of the Carthage and African Councels the Bishops of Rome began at least to clayme Superioritie ouer al Churches Now the Councel of Carthage was assembled about Anno 419. and the African Anno 423. Yea it is granted by (82) In his second Reply part 1. p. 510. VVhitguift in his Def. p 344 Sarauia de diuersis gradibus c. p. 493. M. Carthwright and other Protestant Writers that the Councel of Chalcedon whose authoritie is established to our Aduersaries by Act of Parlament Anno 1. Elisabeth c. 1. did offer the name of vniuersal Bishop to the Bishop of Rome And hence it is that the Centurists (83) Cent. 5. col 774. affirme of these ancient Roman Bishops that They had flatterers who affirmed that without permission of the Roman Bishop none might vndertake the person of a Iudge (84) Cent. 5. col 775. Who then likewise auerred that Antiquitie had attributed the Principalitie of Priesthood to the Roman Bishop aboue al. And accordingly that Turbius Asturiensis flattered Pope Leo and acknowledged his superioritie And wheras Theodoret speaking of the Roman Sea sayth That holy Sea hath the Gouernment of al the Churches of the world M. Iewel findeth no better answer hereto then to say (85) Art 4. Diu. 21. That man naturally aduanceth his power at whose hands he seeketh help As though Theodoret would giue an Antichristian Title for so Protestants account it for auarice or S. Leo would accept it for flatterie Thus much as touching those Fathers and Bishops who liued in the Fift Age after Christ and their confessed testimonies of the Iurisdiction really executed by the Popes of those times not only ouer their Neighbour Churches and Bishops in Italie but ouer remote Countries and the other greatest Archbishops and Patriarcks of the world as of Antioch Hierusalem Alexandria and Constantinople and by them then accordingly acknowledged and obeyed To come now to the Fathers that liued in the Age precedent which is the time wherin Constantin the Great liued although the Church began as then but as it were to take breath from her former long endured persecutions whereby neither her Writers were so manie nor her face of outward Gouernment so knowne as in the times succeeding Yet is there not wanting euen for that time sufficient confessed testimonie in this kind In this Age liued Pope Damasus a man for vertue and learning so highly deseruing as that (86) Decades in English on the page next before the first Decade Bullinger not only calleth him Blessed Damasus Bishop of Rome c. but withal setteth downe the Imperial Decree of the Emperours Gratian Valentinian and Theodosius for the embracing of the Religion taught by Damasus and Peter of Alexandria (87) In his Def. c. p 345 M. Whiteguift confesseth that Damasus was a Vertuous Learned and Godlie Bishop (88) The Estate of the Church p. 137. And Crispinus reporteth how much he was esteemed of by Hierom Athanasius and Nazianzen This so much esteemed a Pope for learning and vertue is charged by M. Cartwright (89) In his Reply part 1. p. 502. to speak in the Dragons voice when he shameth not to write that the Bishop of Romes Sentence was aboue al other to be attended for in a synod Crispinus (90) The Estate of the Church p 137. chargeth Damasus that he was too much giuen to eleuate the Dignitie of his Sea For sayth he he begimeth his sayd Epistle to them of Constantinople In the Reuerence deare children which you owe to the Apostolick Sea you do much for your selues c. (91) Vpon the Reuel c. 5. p. 54. and See Cent. 4. col 550 M. Symondes acknowledgeth that Damasus wrote to the Councels of Africk that the Iudgement of the causes of Bishops and al other Matters of great importance may not be determined but by the authoritie of the Apostolick Sea And wheras Socrates l. 4. c. 30. reporteth that Peter Patriarch of Alexandria being thence expulsed by the Arians was vpon his iourney and request to Damasus Bishop of Rome and returne from thence which Damasus his letters restored and confirmed thereby in his Sea of Alexandria This same Historie is acknowledged by the (92) Cent. 4. col 1367. col 532. Centurists And M. Bunnie (93) In his Tryal of the Popes Title p. 117. acknowledgeth that Damasus in his 4. Epistle to Prosper and other Bishops of Numidia commandeth them that in al doubtful matters they referre themselues to him as to the Head c. Siricius taketh vpon him to threaten to pronounce Sentence against such as wil do otherwise then he would haue them So firme was Damasus in defence and execution of the Popes Primacie In this same Age liued also Pope Iulius of whō (94) In his 2. Reply par 1. p. 510. M. Carthwright writeth Iulius Bishop of Rome sayth it was decreed by the Lawes of the Church and immediatly after the Nicen Councel that the Bishop of Rome must be called to the Sinod and that that was voyd which was done there besides his Sentence (95) De Conciliis quest 2. p. 42. 43. 44. D. Whitaker relating the Ecclesiastical Canon of those times wherby it was decreed That no Councel should be celebrated without the sentence of the Bishop of Rome confesseth further that Iulius challenged to himself the like authoritie And wheras Bellarmin doth obiect this example of Iulius and other Bishops of Rome alleaging this Canon (96) Resp ad Bellarm. part 1. p. 595. Danaeus his onlie answear is that this obiection is of no moment because it is produced from the testimonie of a Roman Bishop that is
doctrine practise of the Popes Primacie Now as cōcerning the Age next ensuing the 20. yeares after Christ in which persecution so raged as the Churches gouernment was thereby much the more obscured yet it is confessed (127) Cent 3. col 168. that Pope Stephen in this Age did threaten Excōmunicatiō to Helenus Firmilianus al others throughout Cilicia Cappadocia for rebaptizing Hereticks (128) Apocalypsis c. c. 7. p. 193 yea M. Brightman is of opinion that scarcely would anie beleeue those proud brags of the Roman Sea wherwith the Decretal Epistles abound not to haue been forged by succeding Popes and so falsely ascribed to the more ancient they are so impudent and vayne but that Firmilianus assureth they were theyr owne at least a great part of them whose names they beare for speaking of Stephen then Bishop of Rome who sayth he so braggeth of the place of his Bishoprick and contendeth himself to hold the Succession of Peter vpon whom the foundations of the Church were placed and he declareth abundantly how boasting the Bishops then were amongst the Epistles of Cyprian ep 75. The (129) Cent. 3. c. 7. col 168. Centurists confesse that Dionysius Bishop of Rome through the false accusation of some excommunicated Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria but Dionysius of Alexandria made his Apologie and refuted the errours falsely obiected vnto him as Athanasius reporteth Hereby appeareth not only the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome in excommunicating but also the obsequiousnes of the Bishop of Alexandria in not contemning but making his Apologie vnto him They (130) Cent. 3. col 84. likewise reproue S. Cyprian for teaching that There ought to be one Bishop in the Catholick Church And for his calling (131) Ibid. Peters Chayre the principal Church from whence Priestly vnitie ariseth (132) Vpon Iude p. 285. M. Trig reprehendeth S. Cyprian saying Cyprian giueth more priuiledges to the Roman Church he calleth it the chief Church from whence Priestlie vnitie began c. And to which infidelitie cannot haue accesse Wherupon M. Trig thus inferreth Here we may note what certaintie it is to build our Faith on the Fathers c And the (133) Cent. 3. col 84. And See Brightman in his Apocalypsis in c. 13. p. 343. Centurists charge him for teaching say they without anie foundation of Scripture that the Roman Church ought to be acknowledged of al other for the Mother and root of the Catholick Church Yea D. Morton (134) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 294. 295. professing willingly to admit S. Cyprians Iudgement as Vmpier in this controuersie is yet inforced to say Although the next sentences of S. Cyprian may seem at their first view vnto the vnexpert Reader to obserue in the Church of Rome both a grace of Impossibilitie of Erring and also a Prerogatiue of the Mother Church of al others and are therefore censured by our Centurists for speeches inconuenient Yet no man exercised and conuersant in his writings and other Fathers can be ignorant that such like speeches are but the languages of Rhetorical Amplification which commonly they vse by way of persuasion rather then by asseueration But what testimonie though neuer so cleer in anie matter whatsoeuer may not easily be euaded if it wil suffice to answer that it was but the language of Rhetorical Amplification or demy-lying Or for what cause should S. Cyprian and other Fathers vtter the foresayd Sayings by way of Persuasion in behalf of the Roman Churches Prerogatiues if they had thought in their owne Iudgements and Consciences that the sayd Prerogatiues had not been due vnto her So vndoubted it is that S. Cyprian and the other Fathers of his Age beleeued and acknowledged the Primacie of the Roman Church But as touching the Age next after the Apostles themselues wherof as M. Hutton (135) In his ansvver to the 2. par of the Reasons of Refusal to Subscription p. 105. obserueth but few Monuments are now remayning As then liued Pope Victor who in D. Whiteguifts (136) In his Defence c. p. 510. opinion was a godlie Bishop and Martyr and the Church at that time in great puritie And yet of him sayth D. Whitaker (137) Cont. Duraeum l. 7. p. 480. FulK in his Ansvv to a counterf Cath. p. 36. with D. Fulk The first that exercised Iurisdiction vpon forraine Bishops was Victor Insomuch as he excommunicating the Bishops of Asia for not obseruing the Feast of Easter-day according to the vse of the Latin Church D. Fulk (138) Ibid. chargeth him that He passed the bounds of his authoritie Amandus Polanus )139) In Sillog Thes Theol. p. 165 accuseth him to haue shewed a Papal mind and arrogancie And M. Spark (140) Against Iohn de Albines in his Answer to the Preface And see Osiander cent 2. p. 87. 96. affirmeth that somewhat Pope-like he exceeded his bounds when he took vpon him to excommunicate the Bishops of the East Beza (141) Pref. ad Princip Condensem before his Translation of the New Testament tearmeth Victor the most foolish and most ambitious Bishop of Rome And (142) Of the state of the Church p. 47 Crispinus speaking of this Age auoucheth that The Roman Bishops now became more audacious to forge new Ceremonies yea and to force vpon other Churches c. Victor in his 2. Decretal calleth himself Archbishop of the Roman and vniuersal Church D Fulk (143) Against the Rhem. Test in 2. Thess 2. sec 9. p. 659. maketh the Mysterie of iniquitie to work in Peters Sea in the times of Anicetus Victor and Cornelius In like sort D. Morton iustifyeth such Protestant Authors as (144) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 300. reprehend Victor for arrogancie and transgressing the bounds of his Iurisdiction in excommunicating the Churches of Asia c. The Centurists record that (145) Cent. 2. c. 7. col 159. Anacletus in the Epistles which heare his name in the general regiment of Churches so loyneth them togeather that to the Roman Church he attributeth Primacie and excellencie of power ouer al Churches and ouer the whole flock of the Christian People and that by the authoritie of Christ saying to Peter Thou art Peter and vpon this Rock wil I build my Church c. The Bishop of Rome is placed first as the supreame Head of the Church who though he erre yet wil he not haue him to be iudged of others c. He sayth also that certaine Citties receaued Primates from the Blessed Apostles and from S. Clement c. He prescribeth that If greater difficulties arise or causes fal out among the Bishops and Primates themselues let them be brought to the Sea Apostolick if such Appeale be made for so the Apostles ordayned by the appoyntment of our Sauiour that the greater and harder questiōs should alwayes be brought to the Apostolick Sea vpon which Christ built his vniuersal Church Math. 16. In like sort they say of Xistus that In
others do report And that The manner was to send it by the Deacons to them that by sicknes or other necessarie impediment were forced to be absent to strangers Yea for this purpose they did in such places where they communicated not euerie day reserue some part of the sanctifyed Elements to be sent to the Sick such as were in danger of death Yea as then was vsual the Pixe for the reseruing or carrying therof in so much that (59) Assert Theol. part 2 sec 47. Marbachius confesseth that S. Basile reserued the Eucharist in a golden Doue And wheras D. Harding obiecteth for the Pixe the plaine testimonies of Symmachus Gregorius Romanus Gregorius Turonensis Theodorus the same are acknowledged by M. Iewel (60) In his Reply Art 9 p. 420. Fulk against Staplet p. 150 151. D. Fulk Lastly the Roman Church doth so directly follow the Doctrine and practise of the Primitiue Church in this so waightie a matter of the Eucharist as that she obserueth the external forme or figure therof vsed in the ancient Church D. Bilson (61) In his true Differ p. 4. p. 566. acknowledgeth from S. Epiphanius in Ancorato that the Eucharist was round in figure And M. Carthwright (62) In Whytguift Def. p. 593 And see Proet de Sacram p 287. 281. confesseth that it was a round wafer-cake brought in by Pope Alexander which Pope liued as Osiander (63) Cent. 2. p 10. Whitgift in his Def. p. 594. and D. Whiteguift confesse Anno Christ 111. which is now aboue 500. yeares Hospinian (64) Hist Sacram. l. 4. p. 370. auoucheth that It can not certainly be knowne when Christians first began either at home or in the Churcheâ— to prepare of floure or bread litle round Hostes morcels like peeces of siluer c. Epiphanius maketh mention of round bread in the Supper c. The ancient Iew s also did most plainly foretel the Real presence of Christs Bodie in the Eucharist and the Sacrifice therof for wheras Duraeus vrgeth from Galatinus the Hebrewes most plaine and plentiful Sayings iâ— behalf therof D. Whitaker answering thereto neither confesseth nor yet denyeth but only shufleth them off saying (65) Cont. Dur. l. 9. p. â—18 In this matter we do not desire thy Peter Galatin neither do we need those testimonies of the Hebrewes so not denying but rather supposing the truth of the forsayd testimonies euidently foreshewing and affirming the Real presence and Sacrifice of Christs blessed Bodie in the Sacrament And thus we see the Fathers and Doctours of the Primitiue Church to haue symbolized with vs Catholicks in the doctrine of the Eucharist teaching expresly First Transubstantiation itself Secondly and prescribing a most diligent care that no part therof do fal vpon the ground Thirdly yea and adoring it with special reuerence Fourthly and in that regard vsing Eleuation therof at Masse time as we stil continue Fiftly for which case they receaue fasting Sixtly the Marryed Laytie also forbearing the Companie of their wiues for some tyme before Receiuing Seauenthly Besides they not only kept and reserued the same for the sick and other such necessities But also vsed the verie forme figure of a round wafer-Cake obserued at this day Now the Fathers produced and reproued by Protestant Writers for the forsayd poynts are S. Gregorie Chrysostom Eusebius Emissenus Cyril Ambrose Hilarie Austine Nazianzene Basile Hierom Siricius Innocentius Calixtus Vrbanus Symmachus Gregorius Turonensis Epiphanius Cyprian Origen Tertulian Ignatius the Fathers in general The Protestants citing and confessing the foresayd Fathers are the Centurists Musculus Oecolampadius Vadian Anthonie de Adamo Peter Martyr Caluin Melancthon Bucer Osiander Vrsinus Hamelmanus Adamus Francisci Hâ—spinian Bucanus Chemnitius Chytreus Crispinus Marbachius Pelargus Altkircherus Zepperus Humfrey Whitaker Fulk Parker Parkins Carthwright Willet Iewel Field and Beard And now I appeale to al indifferent Readers whether Protestants themselues haue not sufficiently confessed that by the Sentence or Doome of the Senate of Antiquitie D. Morton and his Brethren are chargeable with Heresie as also the Romanists acquitted of Idolatrie Protestants confesse that the Primitiue Church of Christ beleeued taught and practised the Sacrifice of the Masse as also that it is a Sacrifice according to the order of Melchisedech and truly Propitiary for the liuing and the dead CHAPTER IX IT is the general (1) Conâ— Trident. sess 22. c. 9. and certaine Decree of the Catholick Church that Christ our Sauiour at his last Supper instituted a true and proper Sacrifice of his owne Bodie Bloud and that he gaue power and authoritie to his Apostles and to Priests their Successours to offer the same aswel for the Liuing as the Dead Protestants (2) Luth. de Capt Babyl c. de Eucha Chemnit Exam part 2. Caluin Instit l. 4. c. 18. §. 1. 2 deny al true proper and external Sacrifice to be ordained by Christ or to be vsed in the time of the Ghospel but only the spiritual Sacrifices of Prayse thankes-giuing and the like Now because D. Morton wisheth that (3) Prot. Appeale l. 2. p. 169. These two questions whether the Eucharist be a true essential Sacrifice whether it be properly Propitiatorie auaylable in itself for remission of Sinnes or no might be decided amongst other meanes by the verdict of ancient Fathers I wil therfore ioyne with him therein and that only from the verdict giuen by his owne Brethren S. Gregorie the Great is much reproued by manie Protestant Writers for his Doctrine and practise of the Sacrifice of the Masse M. Beacon (4) The Reliques of Rome p 344 affirmeth that the Masse was fully finished by Pope Gregory the first about Anno Domini 600. Melancthon (5) l. 4 Chr. in Henri i. 4 fol. 186. 187 confesseth that He allowed by publick Authoritie the Sacrifice of Christs Bodie Bloud not only for the liuing but also for the dead D. Humfrey (6) In Iesuit part 2. rat 5 p. 5 627. acknowledgeth that S. Gregorie S. Austin brought into England the Archbishops Palle for Solemne Masses Carion (7) Chr. l 4. p 567. 568. auoucheth that Gregorie c. approued the oblation of the Bodie Bloud for the dead M. Bale (8) Cent. 1. p. 68. granteth that Gregorie ordered the verie Ceremonies of the Masse made vp the Canon therof And that He commanded (9) Act. Rom. Pontif. p. 44. 45. 46. 47. Masses to be celebrated vpon the dead Bodies of the Apostles And the (10) Cent. 6 col 369. 370 69â— 694. Centurists charge him with Celebration of Masse Szegedine writeth that Gregorie is sayd to be the first Authour of this propitiatorie Sacrifice about the yeare Six hundred for he appoynted certain dayes in which Sacrifice should be offred with Solemnitie in the Church (11) Graues aliquot Quaestiones printed with Brunlerus fol. 161. 162. promised ardon of sinnes to such as came
ridiculously that reason truth compelleth vs to dissent from them And agayne (55) In omnes Pauli Epist in Hebr. 7. p. 924. How much the more do I admire so manie old Doctours of the Church to be possessed with this opinion that they wil persist in the oblation of Bread wine for thus they say Christ is a Priest according to the order of Melchisedech but Melchisedech offred bread wine therefore the Sacrifice of Bread and wine agreeth to the Sacrifice of Christ D. Fulk (56) Against Hoskins c. p 100. admitteth that It is granted that Cyprian thought the bread wine brought forth by Melchisedech to be a figure of the Sacrament that herein also Melchisedech resembled the Priesthood of Christ And agayne (57) Against Heskins c. p. 99. And see against Rhem. Tâ—st in Hebr. c. 7. sec 8. f. 405. Whitak cont Dur. p. 818. 819. more in general I confesse that diuers of the old Fathers were of opinion that the bread wine which Melchisedech brought forth was sacrificed by him that it was a figure of the Sacrament which they improperly cal a Sacrifice (58) De opificio Missae l. 1. p 28. It is not lawful sayth Chrastouius for Christian Pastours to cast away the consent harmonie of Interpretation that both for the neernes of the Apostolical Age as also for the singular agreement of al which is had in al places c. Al as it were conspiring that the Sacred oblation of Melchisedech is proposed that not only it may be thought to be offred to the Souldiers of Abraham but also an vnbloudy Sacrifice to God The ancient Iewes also were so agreable with vs herein that the Protestant Bibliander doubteth not to affirme that (59) De S. Trinitate l. 2. p. 89. with the Ancient Iewes it was a most receiued opinion that at the câ—ming of the blessed Messias al Legal Sacrifices were to cease only the Sacrifice Thoda of thankes-giuing to be celebrated c. and that to be done with bread wine (60) In his Defence c. p 473. See Parker against Symbolizing part 1. c. 2. p. 103. euen as Melchisedech King of Salem Priest c. brought forth bread and wine The Fathers also likewise much vrge the necessitie of mingling water with wine in the Chalice before oblation and consecration D. Whitguift affirmeth that Cyprian was greatly ouerseen in making it a matter so necessarie in Celebration of the Lords Supper to haue water mingled with wine which was at that time no doubt Common â—o more then to him Carthwright (61) In Whitguift Def. p. 525. acknowledgeth that In the mingling of water with wine a necessitie great mysterie was placed as may appeare both by Iustin Martyr Cyprian And M Iewel (62) In his Reply p. 34. See Schultetus in Med. Theo. p. â—70 also confesseth that Indeed S. Cyprian certain old Fathers spake of it force it much wheras not one new Protestant doth either allow or practise the same But D. Morton (63) Prot. Appeal l. 2. p. 142. is content to refer this new Romish Custome vnto Pope Alexander the supposed Authour thereof sayth he But may not D. Morton blush to cal it New Romish Custome and yet referre it to Pope Alexander who liued almost within a Hundred yeares after Christ Here then we may conclude that our Sacrifice of the Masse was not only allowed and vsed by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church but withal acknowledged by them to be truly a Sacrifice Propitiatorie for the remission of sinnes As also that the same was truly represented by the Sacrifice of Melchisedech offring bread and wine Now the Fathers confessed and reproued by Protestants for our forsayd doctrine of Masse are S. Gregorie Gregorie Turonensis Pelagius Symmachus Leo Austin Ambrose Nyssene Cyril Arnobius Athanasius Cyprian Origen Tertulian Ireneus Alexander Clemens Anacletus Ignatius As also the Councels of Ephesus Antioch the Second and Fourth of Carthage of Constantinople of Arles the Fathers in general The Protestants acknowledging and reprouing the forsayd Fathers are the Centurists Caluin Melancthon Carion Szegedine Hospinian Chitraeus Musculus Marcus Pelargus Osiander Chrastouius Chemnitius Sebastianus Francus Zepperus Schultetus Fox Whitaker Symonides Ascham Fulk Field Whiteguift Iewel Morton It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church taught and beleeued the Power of Priests to Remission of Sinnes The necessitie of Auricular Confession The Imposition of Pennance and satisfaction to God thereby As also our Roman Doctrine of Pardons or Indulgences CHAPTER X. COncerning the Sacrament of Pennance the (1) Bellarm. de Paenitent l. 1. c. 10. l. 3. c. 2. l. 4. c. 5. Catholick Church teacheth First That God hath giuen truly and properly to Bishops and Priests as his instruments Power and Authoritie to forgiue sinne Secondly That sinners are bound to confesse their Sinnes in particular to Priests Thirdly That the sayd Priests are to impose Pennance or punishment vpon the Penitent after Confession of his Sinnes and that the Penitent in satisfaction is to performe the same by Prayer Fasting Almes-deeds and the like Now the Protestant Church hauing no true Subsistence but being a mere Negation or denial of true Religion directly (2) Instit l. 4 c. 19 §. 15 B za in CoÌ„f. fiâ—â—ci 7. art 11. denyeth al the foresayd Poynts taught and practised by the Roman Church What the Primitiue Church beleeued and practised herein I wholy referre to the plentiful Confe sions and testimonies euen of Protestant Writers And to begin with S. Gregorie Osiander (3) Cent. 6. p. 288. chargeth him that he teacheth vntruly of Pennance And the Centurists (4) Cent. 6. c. 10 p. 748. reprehend him for his opinion of Confession c. Pennance Satisfaction D. Morton acknowledgeth that S. Gregorie (5) Prot Appeale l. 1 sec 23. p. 26. indeed requireth that after man hath confessed his sinnes he should take reuenge of himself by penitential exercises c. S. Hierome tearming Pennance The second Table after Shipwrack Caluin (6) Inst l 4. c. 19. §. 17. reproueth him saying But it is the Saying of Hierome whose soeuer it is it can not be denyed but that it is plainly impious if it be expounded in their sense And as concerning the Power and Authoritie of Priests to remit sinne the denyal therof was reprehended in Acesius by the Emperour Constantin for the Centurists (7) Cent. â— col 653. report that Acesius his opinion was that al men should be exhorted to Pennance but the hope of remission of sinnes should be expected not from Priests but from God But when Acesius had sayd these things the Emperour added â— Acesius set a Ladder and clime alone to heauen This Historie is likewise confessed by Osiander (8) Cent. 4. p. 119. Chemnitius (9) Exam. part â— p. 188 part 2. p.
and euen the whole Chaos of Popish Superstition be builded vp But to cleare S. Gregorie of al Innouation in this point of Doctrine The Centurists acknowledge that (33) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 692. S. Chrysostom mentioneth dayes of Indulgence and Pardon And D. Field (34) Of the Church l. 1. c. 17. p. 33. confesseth that The Ancient Bishops were wont to cut off great partes of enioyned Pennance which remission was called an Indulgence Now to conclude Confession being made and Pennance inioyned the Priest as the Centurists confesse for the practise of the Third Age did afterwards absolue the Penitent euen with the now-like vsed ceremonie of imposing his hand So that the Primitiue and our present Roman Church do confessedly agree in the doctrine of Pennance First As that Priests haue truly Power to remit Sinnes Secondly that Auricular Confession is necessarie Thirdly that after Confession Pennance is to be imposed Fourthly (35) Cent. 3 col 127. that the same is truly Satisfactorie Fiftly after Pennance Absolution is giuen with Imposition of hands Sixtly yea Pardons and Indulgences are acknowledged to be granted and vsed in those purest times of the Church Primitiue Now the Fathers cited and reproued by Protestants for our foresayd doctrines are S. Gregorie Leo Chrysostom the Doctours in the Age of Constantin Ambrose Augustin Cyprian Tertulian the Carthage Councel the 1. Councel of Neece and the Fathers in general The Protestants accusing them are the Centurie-writers Caluin Chemnitius Melancthon Hamelmanus Osiander Hieronimus Marius Pantaleon Valera Symonides Bale Humfrey Field Morton and Whitaker It is granted by Protestants that the Catholick Doctrine of Purgatorie and of Prayer and Sacrifice for the dead was beleeued taught and practised by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church CHAPTER XI WHAT more generally disliked by Protestants then our Catholick doctrine of Purgatorie and our charitable pracise of Praying Sacrificing for the dead And yet what more generally confessed by Protestants to haue been the beleef and custome of the Primitiue Church then Purgatorie Prayer and Sacrifice for the dead Concerning S. Gregorie D. Humfrey (1) In Iesuit part 2. rat 5 p. 5. 627. acknowledgeth that he taught vs Englishmen by the preaching of S. Austin the doctrine of Purgatorie c. the oblation of the healthful Sacrifice Prayers for the dead (2) In Chro. l. 4. p. 567. 568. Carion confesseth that he approued the opinion of the oblation of Christs Bodie Bloud to be made for the dead Iohn Bale (3) In Act. Rom. Pontif. p. 44. 45. 46. 47. is of opinion that he made his foure books of Dialogues for the vpholding of Purgatorie c. and admitted euen Masses for the dead The Magdeburgians (4) In the Index of the 6. Centurie at the word Gregorie charge him out of his owne writings with the Doctrine of Purgatorie c. (5) Cent. 6. col 373. and with oblation of Sacrifice for the dead D. Fulk (6) Ag. Rhem. Test in 1 Cor. 3. sayth In the dayes of Gregorie c. the opinion of Purgatorie had gotten some ground in the Latin Church c. yet in the place by the Rhemistes quoted he granteth it but for very smal offences D. Sutcliffe auoucheth that Gregorie (7) Subuersion c. 4. vsed Litanies allowed Purgatorie c. And wheras D. Whitakers confidently auoucheth that (8) Contra Duraeum l. 7. p. 480. He that first deliuered Purgatorie for a certaine Doctrine was Gregorie the Great Yet M. Symonides (9) Vpon the Reuel p 83. only chargeth him not with beginning but with increasing two pernitious things in the Church Inuocation of the Dead and Prayer for the dead yea D. Morton confesseth that S. Gregory (10) Prot. Appeale l 1. Sec. 17. p. 19. â—0 frameth thus his conclusions Because such Soules departed appearing after desire the help of the liuing the Sacrifice of the Altar is profitahle for them Wherupon our Doctour concludeth saying This doth giue vs cause to obserue in him a deep plunge into Superstition And againe S. Augustin spake with a Peraduenture but S. Gregorie kindled the fire with a Credo c. And now of late the Romanists haue blowâ—e the flame with an Anathema So hotly do Roman Catholicks follow the Sent giuen by S Gregorie and S. Augustin But to clear S. Gregorie of al Innouation in this poynt (11) Ibid. p. 498. I wil ascend to his predecessours and Ancients And to begin with S. Augustin whom though D. Morton pretendeth to speak hereof only with a Paraduenture or doubtfully yet Bullinger hauing perused diuers places of S. Augustins writings concerning this poynt auoucheth (12) De origâ—â— Erroriâ— f. 223. That not in one but in manie places Augustin maketh mention of Sacrifice for the dead c. in Enchirid. c. 109. for it is not to be denyed sayth he but that the Soules of the dead are releeued by the pietie of their liuing friends when the Sacrifice of the Mediatour is offered for them c. And in his 32. sermon de Verbis Apostoli This sayth he deliuered from the Fathers the whole Church obserueth that prayer be made for them who dyed in the Communion of the Bodie and Bloud of Christ when in their place they are remembred in the Sacrifice and the Sacrifice also is offered for them This therfore sayth Bullinger I set downe more at large that thou mayst vnderstand this custome of Sacrificing for the dead to be ordayned not by the Apostles but by the holie Fathers D. Willet affirmeth That diuers of the ancient Fathers (13) Tetrastylon part 3. p. 97. did incline too much to maintayne and commend prayer for the dead with which errour sayth he S. Austin seemeth somewhat to be infected Augustine sayrh Caluin (14) Instâ—t l. 3. c. 5. § 10 in his books of Confessions telleth that his mother Monica earnestly desired that Memorie of her might be made at the Altar in performing the mysteries An old womans desire sayth Caluin which her Sonne squared not by the rule of Scripture but through affection of Nature would haue it approued to others D. Fulk confesseth that (15) In his Confut of Purgat p. 1â—0 Austin de Ciuitate Dei l. 21. c. 13. concludeth verie clearly that some suffer temporal paynes after this life this may not be denyed Yea he boldly auoucheth that Austin (16) Ibid. p 313. blindly defended prayer for the dead D. Morton affirmeth that Protestant Authours (17) Prot. Appeal p. 495. haue obserued S. Augustin to haue been the first who opened the window vnto the doctrine of Purgatorie by whose owne direction sayth he we haue a good warrant to dissent from him c. So admitting S. Austin for Purgatorie but most disgraciously insinuating that therin he is contrarie to himself which as most palpably vntrue I forbeare to confute and only proceed cleerly to shew that neither S. Austin was first nor the sole man that opened
Relicks is so great as that (29) Exam. part 4. p. 7. Chemnitius confesseth that Hierom writeth that the Hereticks Caiani were condemned by Tertullian for that they would not honour the Relicks of Martyrs From al which it appeareth that most special Reuerence was giuen to the holie Relicks of Saincts by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church of Christ who celebrated Masses ouer them Dedicated Churches in their honour Translated them carryed them in Processions made Pilgrimages vnto them and frequently make mention of the manie and strange Miracles wrought by them The Fathers cited and reproued by Protestants for the foresayd poynts are S. Gregorie Hierom the Emperours Constantin and Arcadius Augustin Ambrose Chrysostom Theodoret and Tertullian The Protestants their Accusers are the Centurists Carion Bullinger Chemnitius Crispinus Hospinian Osiander Zepperus Marius Bale Humfrey Brightman Parker Fulk Fox Beard and Whitaker IT IS CONFESSED BY PROTESTANTS THAT THE HOLIE Doctours of the Primitiue Church not only vsed the signe of the Crosse but likewise worshiped the same attributing great efficacie power and vertue thereto CHAP. XVI ALthough the CROSSE OF CHRIST by reason of that dignitie which it obtayned by touching the Bodie and Bloud of Christ may truly be esteemed amongst â—he most precious Relicks As also in that it representeth the figure of our Lord Crucifyed it may rightly be numbred amongst the honest Images Yet because withal it is indeed the high Altar of the chiefest Sacrifice wherby the wrath and Iustice of God was satisfyed the ladder wherby Christ himself ascended into heauen the worthiest Instrument of mans Redemption and Satans foyle and as now is the fairest Marke wherat our Modern Hereticks do leuel and direct their poynsoned arrowes of foulest Contumelies Iniuries and Disgraces I wil therefore seuerally treat thereof and that from the confessed testimonies practise and beleef of the most holie learned and ancient Fathers of the Primitiue Church Luke (1) Cent. 6. p. 289. 290 Osiander discoursing of the seueral articles of the Catholick Roman Religion taught by S. Gregorie and S. Austin amongst the rest doth number the allowance and vse of holie Crosses (2) In Act. Rom. Pontif p. 44 45.4â— M. Bale acknowledgeth that he admitted worshipping or adoration of the Crosse But M. Symondes chargeth him (3) Vpon the Reuel p. 83.84 85 86. that He instituted the worship of the Crosse barefoote on Good Fryday And Peter Martyr (4) In his common places in Englih part 2. c. 5. sec 14. p. 343. yet further affirmeth that Gregorie of Rome the Patron sayth he of Superstitions sayth in his prayers Grant vnto vs Lord that they which come to the Adoring of thy Holie Crosse may be deliuered from the bonds of their sinnes For which poynt of Adoration or worship of the Crosse Conwal King of Scotland who liued within the first six hundred yeares is reproued by (5) In the later Edition p 107. Hollinshead in his Cronicle of Scotland But to arise M. Parkins (6) In his Problem p. 83. confesseth that About the foure hundreth yeare after Christ the Crosse began by litle and litle to be adored For which time he there alledgeth the direct testimonies of Prudentius Hierom and Euagrius And he also granteth else where (7) In volume 1. p. 681. that sundrie priuat men and particular Churches after Foure hundred yeares began religiously or ra her sayth he Superstitiously to adore the wood of the Crosse and the peeces therof c. Caluin relating that S. Augustin tract 50 in Ioan. affirmeth that the faithful haue Christ by the signe of the Crosse by the Sacrament of Baptisme and by the meat and drink of the Aultar he presently affirmeth that Augustin (8) Inst l. 4. c. 17. § 28. numbred that Superstitious Rite amongst the Symbols of the Presence of Christ. d. Abbots (9) In his Answer to D. Bishop p. 168. aknowledgeth and translateth those words of Eusebius in his 3. book of the lyfe of Constantin Atque interdum vultum salutari illa Passionis signauit nota in this sort He signed his face with the signe of the Crosse (10) In his coÌ„mon places part 2 c. 5. sec 20. p 349. Peter Martyr writeth that Constantin made the signe of the Crosse in gold I allow not c. And wheras (11) De vita Constant l. 1. c. 22. Eusebius relateth and that from the mouth of Constantin himselfe who confirmed the same with oath that The Signe of the Crosse appeared to him in the afternoone in great light aboue the Sunne and a writing therin with those words In hoc vinces In this signe thou shalt ouercome The same Historie is reported out of Eusebius (12) Cent. 4 l. 1. c. 30. by Osiander (13) In Apocal c. 16. p 604. M. Fox (14) In M. Trigs true CatholicK p. 295 M. Gualter and M. Trigge al Protestant Writers And agayne (15) Hist l. 1. c. 8. Zozomene and Eusebius (16) De vita Constant l. 2. c. 7. relating that In what part of the Armie the Standard of the Crosse was seen there the Enemies fled and the Conquerours pursued which the Emperour vnderstanding when he saw anie part of his Armie languishing there he commanded the Standard to be placed as a certayne helpe for the obtayning of victorie and by the help wherof the victorie was forthwith obtayned by a certayn diuine power the strength of his Souldiers being much confirmed Al this is acknowledged by (17) In Apoc. in c 12 p. 326.327 M. Brightman (18) De Templis p. 165. and Hospinianus D. Fulk (19) Agaist HesKins c. p. 657. affirmeth that by Report of Paulinus the Crosse was by the Bishop of Hierusalem brought forth at Easter yearely to be worshiped of the people Yea sayth (20) Vol. 2. p. 596. M. Parkins The Bishop himself was the chief of the worshippers c. This Paulinus liued in the fourth Age and was as Osiander confesseth (21) Cent. 5. l. 3. c. 20 p. 386. verie familiar with Hierome Ambrose and Augustin Danaeus (22) In 1 partis altera parte ad Bellarm. p. 1415. auoucheth that Cyril and sundrie other Fathers were plainly Superstitious and blinded with this inchantment of the Crosses Adoration For which poynt of Adoration M. Parker (23) Against Symbolizing part 1. p 14 part 2. c. 6. p. 61. alledgeth the Saying of Photius Sedulius Chrisostom Propertius Paulinus Hierom and Euagrius al whom he reprehendeth for the same The (24) Cent. 4. col 302. Centurists say of Ephrem that he attributeth ouer much to the signe of the Crosse And D. Fulk (25) Against HesKins c. p. 657. affirmeth that Ruffinus and Cyril had a Superstitious estimation of the signe of the Crosse And the (26) Cent. 4. col 459. Centurists charge them for that At euerie foot they signed their forhead with the signe of the Crosse which signing was so ordinarie in those times as
but they droue it out So cleer it is that the true Churches Pastours are neuer so sleepie as to suffer anie errours to be published or practised without their resistance But D. White M. Woton and other Protestants obseruing that this pretence of sleeping would nothing auayle them do therefore acknowledge that such was the nicenes of our imagined Inuentions that they could not be seene or discerned so faith M. Wooton 66) Trial of the RomaÌ„ clergy p. 383. You presse vs that if there had been anie alteration of Religion it would haue been recorded but how should it haue been recorded when it was not seen The alteration grew so nicely that few or none could discerne it D. White exemplifyeth this saying 67) Way to the true Churhc p. 370. The Romish Faith came into the true Church as sickenes doth in to the bodie and ruin to a house which appeareth not by and by at the first but then when it is ripened D. Whitaker instanceth in the haires of a 68) Cont. Camp Rat. 7. p. 101. 102. mans head which waxe not white suddainly and in slifters entring into a building at first not to be perceiued But to omit that as Peter Martyr confesseth 69) Epist anex to his com plac in Engl. p. 131. vnles a man do diligently examine similitudes he shal easily be deceaued by them This argument being taken froÌ„ excrements diseases and ruines is no lesse vnworthie infirme and ruinous itself for first in none of these is the change made instantly and at the first but by degrees and in successe of time whereas in Doctrine euerie opinion is at the first either true or false Secondly the first whitnes of haires or the first decay in health or building cannot at the first he discerned though they were most precisely regarded which is euidently otherwise in change of Doctrine and practise thereof Thirdly none are specially appointed neither is there anye such vrging necessitie to marke the first change of the haires and the like whereas it is the special charge and command not of few but of al the Churches Pastours not only to obserue but also publickly to withstand the other with the vttermost of their power and learning But admitting for the time that the foresaid similitudes were pertinent and that we were not to vrge Protestants to shew the first begining of our so great a change as is by them imagined Yet we are in al reason to expect that as though the first white haire or slifter or degree of disease be not discerned yet the further degrees and encrease of them being most markable to be seen that therefore they are to discouer describe to vs some sensible proceedings encrease of this our supposed change And if they wil say it was not made al at once but by litle litle sometimes in on point of Faith sometimes in an other then stil must we vrge them to shew those seueral litle changes as what points of doctrine were so by degrees changed Who were the Authours of the change What Popes begun or first allowed them by what Doctours and Pastours were they first contradicted Or els they in al these being most silent we may most strongly conclude that our Roman Church being thus free from al knowne change or Innouation since the Apostles times that therefore she is not anie Heretical sect Going out or departing from a former Church nor her doctrine Heretical no one Article thereof being lyable to that foulest stayne of Innouation Whereas to the contrarie the verie first beginings changes and Apostasies made by Waldo Wicclif Husse Luther Suinglius Caluin or anie other pretended Protestant in anie Age whatsoeuer were euer so obserued contradicted and condemned by the watchful Pastours of the Roman Church as that euerie particular both of Person time place and opinion are euerie where to be seene in sundrie Writers both Catholick and Protestant But to reach M. D. Morton yet an other scantling of an Heretick we must obserue that this name Christian giuen at first to al beleeuers was especially taken to distinguish them from the Iewes and Gentils which beleeued not at al in Christ But when Hereticks began to arise from among the Christians who professed stil Christs name and sundrie Articles of Faith the name Christian was too general to seuer Hereticks from true beleeuers And therefore the Apostles imposed the name Catholick vpon al such as in al points were obedient to the Churches Doctrine Hereof saith expresly M. Wotton 70) Trial of the Romish clergy p. 285. 286. The reason of the name Catholick was at first that there might be a title to distinguish sound Christians and true churches from Hereticks And of the contrarie in al Ages it was euer vsual that euerie Sect or Companie embracing new Doctrine though but in some one or other point contrarie to the Catholicke fayth receiued thervpon the like answerable alteration of name sometimes from the Doctrines so newly embraced sometimes and that more vsually from the first Authour and Inuentour himself And it was thought meet saith M. Woton 71) Ib. p. 286. That Hereticks should be called by some special name either of their Authour or of some points of errour which they held In like sort D. Field doubteth not to say 72) Of the Church l. 2. c. 9. p. 57. Surely it is not to be denyed but the naming after the names of men was in the time of the Primitiue Church peculiar and proper to Hereticks and Schismaticks only Neither 73) Apologie c. p. 30. 31. do I see saith M. Parker anie sufficient reason why those among vs whom singularitie in affection and noueltie in faction haue denomitated Puritans should not be distinguished by that name c. for in truth such new names haue in al former Ages for distinction sake been attributed vnto al such who defended new opinions either deuised by themselues or others contrarie to the receiued doctrine of the whole Church Thus from the erroneous Doctrines which they broached defended were named the Heretical Monothelites Aquarians Agnoites Theopaschites Catabaptists c. And according to Hospinian 74) Concord dâ—scord f. 131. the Enthusiastes Anabaptistes Antimonians and Sacramentaries And from that Authours themselues were named the Nicolaites the Manichees the Arians the Pelagians the Donatists the Nestorians the Eutichians the Waldenses the Wiccliuists the Hussites the Lutherans the Caluinists the Suinglians To examine now both Catholicks and Protestants about this point The name Catholick we haue seen was imposed to distinguish sound Christians and true Churches from Hereticks and was for the same cause inserted into the Creed by the Apostles themselues and so accordingly it hath been vsed and vnderstood by al Fathers 75) Cyril Catech. 18. Aug. Cont. Ep. fundam c. 4. de vera Rel. c. 7. Patianur Ep. ad Sympron and Writers in former Ages And as for the name Papist as it was neuer heard of
Socinus (14) Lib. de Christi Nat. p. 21. the Arian answering his Protestant Aduersarie Volanus demandeth To what purpose should I answer that which thou borrowest from the Papists c. especially where thou opposest to vs the perpetual Consent of the Church Very excellently doubtles in this behalf hath Hosius the Papist discoursed against you wounding you with your owne sword And therfore you are no lesse deceaued in vrging against vs the Churches perpetual Consent then are the Papists in their vrging therof both against you vs. And againe (15) Ibid. p. 222. Euen Volanus himself disputing against the Iesuits is enforced to reiect the Examples Sayings and Deeds of Athanasius Hierom Austin Theodoret and other Fathers whose authoritie he now opposeth against vs as sacred Thus much haue I thought good to remember that Volanus may receiue answer from himself when he so often inforceth against vs the authoritie of learned men and consent of the Church In like sort sayd (16) In Bancrofts Suruey p. 219. Beza before If anie shal oppose against my Exposition the authoritie of certaine of the ancient Fathers I do appeale to the word of God With whom agreed (17) Cont. Duraum l. 7. p. 478. D. Whitaker teaching that It is sufficient for Protestants by comparing the Popish Doctrine and Scriptures togeather to know their difference we leaue it free for Historiographers to write what they list And yet the same (18) Ibid. p. 472. D. Whitaker in the self same book affordeth this credit authoritie to Histories that sayth he Whatsoeuer the old Prophets haue foretold of the propagation largenes and glorie of the Church that to be performed Historie most cleerly testifieth So that there is no Controuersie but that Ecclesiastical Historie doth giue testimonie to the predictions of the Prophets Yea this foule flight from Histories Fathers and Councels thus practised by al sortes of Protestants is an Argument most conuincing that the said Histories Fathers and Councels make directly against them insomuch as one (19) The Author of A brief answer to certaine obiections against the Descension of Christ into Hel. p. 1. of our English Protestant Writers being ashamed of this course reproueth herein his other Protestant Brother saying Where you say we must build our Faith on the Word of Faith tying vs to Scripture only you giue iust occasion to think that you neither haue the ancient Fathers of Christs Church nor their Sonnes succeeding them agreing with you in this point which implyeth a defence of some strange Paradox By al which we may see this miserable shift of al kind of Hereticks in refusing al proofes but only Scripture to be no lesse in itself then a strongest argument that al Hereticks are deuoyd of al other proofes THAT EVEN THE SACRED SCRIPTVRES themselues do most plentifully testify our Romane Church to be the Church of Christ And the Congregation or Church of Protestants to be no true Church but a Sect Heretical and most contrarie to the said Scriptures And that first by the Churches necessarie continuance and vniuersalitie CHAPTER II. AS it hath been euer most frequent so to me stil it is most strange why al Hereticks both ancient and moderne for their last Refuge do euer betake themselues to the sacred Scriptures Seing as nothing is of greater power and authoritie in itself to iudge condemne so nothing more strongly confuteth Heresies then the forsayd Scriptures if either they be taken in their literal sense or according to the exposition of the Primitiue Church The Sacred Scriptures do plainly teach that the true Church of Christ is euer to continue euen from Christs time vntil the end of the world and that not in one particular Nation or Countrey but that most vniuersally with plentiful increase In which respect the Church of Christ is foretold to be 1] Dan. 21.44 A Kingdome that shal neuer be destroyed but shal stand for euer 2) Esay 60.15 As an eternal glorie and ioy from generation to generation 3) Act. 5.52 That so being of God it shal not to be dissolued Yea further it is sayd of the Church that 4) Es 6.20 A litle one shal become as a thousand and a smal one as a strong Nation that 5) Es 2.2 Al Nations shal flow to it which place is expounded by Protestants 6) In the Marginal Notes of the English Bib. of An. 1370 in Es 2 2. of the Church of Christ to be enlarged 7) Ps 2.8 This is vnderstood of Christes Church by the Marg. Notes of the Engl. Bib. of 3576. And the Prophet Dauid foretelleth that It shal haue the end of the earth for it possession 8) Ps 72 8. from Sea to Sea And Christ himself sayth of his Church 9) Math. 13 51. Mat 4 3◠And see the Marg. notes of Dan. 2.45 The Kingdome of Heauen is like to a Mustard-seed the least of al seedes but when it is growne it is the greatest amongst hearbes and is made a tree so as the fowles of the aire may come and dwel vnder the shadow therof And concerning 10) In the Engl. Bib. the Contents of the 60. ch of Esay the Gentils coming to the Church in abundance it is sayd 11) Es 60.5 Thou shalt see and shine thy hart shal be astonyed and enlarged because the multitude of the Sea shal be conuerted to thee 12) Es 60.9 The Iles shal waite for thee 13) Esa 60.11 And see Psal 102.15.22 Esay 62.2 Their Kings shal minister to thee and thy Gates shal be continually open neither day nor night shal they be shut that men may bring to thee the riches of the Gentils And in the person of the Church it is sayd 14) Esay 49 20. The place is streight for me giue roome that I may inhabit And againe to the Church 15) Esa 54.2.3 And see there the Contents of the Engl. Bib. Enlarge the place of thy Tents spread out the Curtaines of thy habitation for thou shalt encrease on the right hand and on the left thy seed shal possesse the Gentils and inhabit the desolate Citties From these and sundrie other such places Protestants themselues collect inferre most truly that the Church of Christ is to cōtinue for euer 16) Against Raynolds in his Answ to the Pref. p. 33. D. Whitaker sayth We beleeue to the comfort of our soules that Christs Church hath continued neuer shal faile so long as the world endureth And We account it a prophane Heresie to teach that Christs Catholick Church hath perished from the earth at anie time for this assertion shaketh the foundation of al faith The Diuines of Wittemberg do firmely beleeue the Church to haue continued vpon earth without interruption and with perpetual Succession from the Ascension of Christ to these times 18) Ibid. p. 1065. as also that The true Church is to continue vpon earth
al faith Into such miserable streights manifest coÌ„tradictions are the learnedst Protestants driuen through want of their Churches continuance and vniuersalitie Yea vpon the self same ground of the Protestant Churches not fulfilling the predictions of the Churches continuance (35) In his Preface of the great Latine Bible dedicated to K. Edward the Sixt. Castalio bursteth out into these words Verily we must confesse either that those things shal be performed hereafter or haue been already or that God is to be accused of lying If any man answer that they haue been performed I wil demand of him when If he say in the Apostles time I wil demand how it chanceth that neither then the knowledge of God was altogeather perfect and often in so â—bort space vanished away which was promised to be eternal and more abundant then the flouds of the Sea And agayne The more I do peruse the Scriptures the lesse do I find the same performed howsoeuer you vnderstand the sayd Prophecies But (36) Apcalypsis insignium aliquot Haerâ—siarcharum fol. 4. nu 8. Dauid George a Protestant at Basile proceeded much further vpon the self same cause as is recorded by one of his brethren who introduceth him disputing thus If the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles had been most true and most powerful to Saluation the Church by their Doctrine they had framed and confirmed should not haue been torne asunder for against the Church the Gates of Hel Christ himself witnessing can not preuayle But now it is euident that the building of Christ and his Apostles is vtterly ouerthrowne by Antichrist as is abundantly seen in the Papacye From whence he necessarily concludeth the Doctrine of the Apostles to haue been torne and discontinued c. To the same effect it is reported in his Historie (37) Historia Georgij Dauidis published by the Diuines of Basile that he thus disputed If the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles had been true and perfect the Church which they planted c. should haue continued c. But now it is manifest that Antichrist hath subuerted the Doctrine of the Apostles and the Church by them begun as is euident in the Papacie therefore the Doctrine of the Apostles was false and imperfect Not much lesse dangerously writeth (38) In praef suorum Dialogorum Bernardine Ockin When I did consider how Christ by his power wisdome and goodnes had founded and established his Church washed it with his bloud and enriched it with his Spirit And againe discerned how the same was vtterly ouer-throwne I could not but wonder and being desirous to know the cause I found there had been Popes So playne it is that the Church of Protestants which themselues suppose to be the Church of Christ directly contrarie to the forsayd Scriptures hath not continued but hath been vtterly ouerthrowne A truth so certaine and plaine that therfore Christ his Apostles and Doctrine are al of them accused of lying through want of accomplishment of the forsayd Prophecies in the Protestant Churches continuance and vniuersalitie And heer I can not but admire the follie and impudencie of D. White (39) The way to the Church p. 85. who directly contrarie to his other brethrens coÌ„fessions to al Histories writeth thus audaciously We confesse the Church neuer ceaseth to be but continueth alwayes without Interruption to the worlds end and against al Papists we make it good that this verie Faith we now professe hath successiuely continued in al Ages since Christ and was neuer interrupted so much as one yeare moneth or day and to confesse the contrarie were sufficient to proue vs no part of the Church of God c. And yet the Contrarie is plainly confessed by D. Whitaker before affirming the mysterie of Iniquitie to haue possessed the whole Church by Cannerus confessing Apostacie to haue auerted the whole bodie of the Church from Christ by M. Paâ—kins confessing for manie hundred yeares an vniuersal Apostacie by D. Willet defending that the Church in which the Word is truly preached and Sacraments administred hath not alwayes been by Castalio confessing that the Prophecies of the Churches Continuance he cannot find performed in the Protestant Church by Dauid George confessing that the Protestant Church hath been vtterly ouerthrowne not continued and by Bernardine Ockin teaching the very same So cleer it is that the Church of Protestants is not the Church of Christ which according to the Shriptures is euer to continue euen from Christs time vnto the end of the world But now to examine whether in our Roman Catholick Church the forsayd Scriptures are truly verifyed by her perpetual Continuance euen from Christs time to these our dayes I hold it superfluous seing I haue proued the same at large heretofore through euery Centurie or Age and that by no weaker proofes then the plainest acknowledgements of manie and the learnedst Protestants as namely (40) See before l. 1. c. 2. for these last 1000. yeares by M. Parkins Powel Wotton Tindal Iohnson Doue Beacon Fulk Downham Whitakers Luther Caluin the Centurists Osiander Hospinian Danaeus and sundrie others And for the like Continuance of our Roman Church for the first 600. yeares (41) See before l. 1. c. 5. by Zanchius Zuinglius Caluin Beza Danaeus Francus Rhegius Broccard Brightman Napper Fulk Powel Leigh Morton Midleton Parkins Bunnie Iewel and manie others Now whereas the Apostles in their Creed do giue to the Church the Surname of Catholick and that for this verie reason according to (42) The Harmonie of Confess p. 307. Clapham in his Soueraigne Remedy p. 23. Protestants themselues because it is vniuersal spread abroad through al parts and quarters of the world and reacheth vnto al times c. This name Catholick is so peculiar and appropriat to the Roman Church and her Professours as that it is applyed only vnto them by their greatest Enemies (43) Act. Mon. p. 613. M. Fâ—x tearmeth our aduersaries Protestants and vs Catholicks (44] l. 7. fol. 96. l. 10. fol 127. Sleydan recordeth that Luther and others differed only in opinion touching the Lords Supper which the Catholicks reioyced at and the rest much lamented And the same name is applyed to vs by M. (45) Reâ—soÌ„s taken out of Gods word p. 5. 23. 24. 73. 74. Willet in his Obedience c. p. 29. Humfrey vita Iuelli p. 202. Iacob D. Willet D. Humfrey and others Yea the sayd name is so dissorting from the Prot. Church so agreable to the Roman that therefore it is hateful and disliked by Protestans Insomuch as Luther translating the Apostles Creed into Dutch thrust out the word Catholick and in steed therof put-in Christian And of the like course obserued by Lutherans (46) Against Rhem. Test in Act. 11. fâ—l 377. D. Fulk himself acknowledgeth and saith It is not to be allowed Yea in the Synod holden at Altemberg betweene the Diuines of the Palsgraue of Rhene and the Duke of
p. 350. saying We were determined to be altogeather silent to those your demands neither to giue you anie answer who so plainly alter according to your wil both the Scriptures and interpretations of holie Doctours seing we haue Paul thus exhorting vs Eschiew an Heretical man after one or two admonitions c. we are fully assured by your writings that you can neuer agree with vs or rather with the truth c And therefore (42) Ibid. p. 370. we desire you hereafter not to be troublesome vnto vs c. for the Diuines which were the Lights of the Church you diuersly handle in words you honour them and extol them but in deeds you reiect them c. wherefore forasmuch as concerneth you you haue freed vs from cares So litle successe had our Germane Protestants and so disgraciously were they repulsed euen by the Schismatical Grecians But such is the knowne want of al successe in this behalf in the ProtestaÌ„t Church that Beza (43) In Sarauia his Def. Tract De diuersis grad Minist p. 309. specially disclaymeth from labouring the conuersion of remote Nations leauing that expresly to the Iesuits Wherefore hauing thus fully discouered the manifest and confessed want in the Protestant Church in fulfilling the foresayd predictions from the Scriptures of the true Church of Christ her conuerting of Heathen Kings and Countries to the true Faith It resteth now to proue that the foresayd Prophecies haue been fully performed in the Catholick Roman Church and consequently that the sayd Church is the Church of Christ described in the Scriptures And to begin with the Conuersion of the most famous Emperour or King that euer was Constantin the Great who liued about Anno Domini 311. First it is confessed by our Protestant Aduersaries that Constantin was the first King that euer professed the Christian Faith so M. Bunny (44) Suruey of the Popes Supremacy p. 121. tearmeth him Constantin the first Emperour that publickly allowed of Christian Profession And M Brightman (45) Apoc. p. 323. auoucheth that Constantin was he who first of the Roman Emperours vndertook the open Patronage of the truth and that a Male-child was not borne before Constantin Bibliander (46) fidelis Relatio p 22 teacheth that Constantin first of the Roman Emperours embraced Christian Religion with true Faith And the like is taught by Simlerus (47) De filio Dei in Pref. and others Secondly it is most agreably reported by al Historiographers that this our first Christian Emperour was Baptised by Pope Siluester then Bishop of Rome And thirdly it is before (48) See before l. 1. c. 5. proued at large that the Religion deliuered to Constantin by Pope Siluester and which they both beleeued and publickly professed was the present Roman Religion now taught by Pope Vrbane the Eighth So cleer it is that the Roman Church fulfilled the former predictions of the Scriptures in the Conuersion of K. Constantin As for the other Christian Emperours succeeding Constantin as ConstaÌ„tius Constans Constantin Iulian Iouinian Valentinian Gratian Valentinian the Second Theodosius c. they were so certainly conuerted or rather borne brought vp in the Roman Church that they are greatly disliked and condemned by (49) Brightmans Apoc. p 344 477. Fulkes Reioynder c. p. 2. Protestant Writers as special Patrons and maintainers of the pretended Antichrist the Pope of Rome But to descend to the manifold Conuersions of Kings and Countries made by the Roman Church in these last 1000. yeares It is confessed and reported by the Centurie-writers that our Catholick Roman Church conuerted Germanie (50) Cent. 8 col 20. the Vandals (51) Cent. 9. col 15. the Bulgarians (52) Cent. 9. col 18. Sclauonians Polonians the Dâ—nes and Mâ—rauâ—ans and (53) Cent 10 col 18. 19. sundrie Kings and Kingdomes and a great (54) Cent. 11 col 27. part of Hungarie as also the Noruegians (55) Cent 12 Osiander likewise mentioneth our conuerting of the Danes 56) Ep. hist p. 16. 94. Mâ—rauians (57) Ibid. p. 16. Polonians (58) p. 36. Sclauonians (59) p. 36. 16. the Bulgares (60) p. 36. the Hunnes (61) p. 37. the Normans (62) p. 72. the Bohemians (63) p. 77. the Suecians (64) p. 21. 9 the Noruegians (65) p 86. Liuonians and Saxons the Vagarians (66) p. 104. the Rugij (67) p. 99. Thuscans them of (68) p. 111. Scandia Matorica (69) p. 341. of Tunes in Africa [70) p. 377. and of sundrie other Nations (71) p. 342. M. Brightman (72) Apoc. p 100. likewise reporteth that famous Conuersions are read of at this time of the Polonians Saxons Danes Suecians Noruegians c. And though those Conuersions were done by the paines of Superstitious men the Papists yet was it the Seale of God and profitable to his elect Now al these Countries being summed vp togeather may wel be thought to make a ful accomplishmeÌ„t of the foresayd prophecies in their sayd Conuersions by our Roman Church from Heathnish Infidelitie to the Faith of Christ But I wil yet further descend to particulars and first begin with Germanie wherin Protestancie with Luther first appeared It was so certainly conuerted at first from Infidelitie to Christian Religion by the Rom. Church that the Centurie-writers (73) Cent. 8. Ep. Dedic writing therof do affirme that Antichrist hath his notable Postes or Runners c. Such a Poste was that Boniface called the Apostle of the Germans who with greatest studie art and power applyed himself to this only that he might reduce al Germanie to the Power of the Pope of Rome but although he is reported to haue abolished in some places Heathnish Idolatrie yet he sowed not Christian Religion pure and incorrupt for he ouerthrew and cast downe that hinge of al pietie of free Iustification by only Faith in Christ c. wherfore he often mentioneth the blemishes of Antichrist that is the corruptions of the articles of Faith c. with such insolencie was that false Apostle puffed vp So cleer it is that Germanie was conuerted by S. Boniface from Idolatrie to the Roman Faith Yea ProtestaÌ„t Religion was so vnknowne to the Christian Germans before the Apostacie of Luther that Luther (74) In Deutâ—ron in pref fol 3. himself saith I am of opinion that the Protestant Ghospel was neuer reuealed to Germanie before this Age. As also )75) Enar rationes seu Postillae fol. 271. I am ignorant whether Germanie euer heard the Word of God indeed we haue heard the Word of the Pope which no man can deny So plainly in Germany had our Roman Faith her being and precedence before al Protestancie But now to come to the late Conuersion of the remotest Indians it was so certainly performed by Friars Iesuits and other knowne Members of the Roman Church that D Philip Nicolai writing a special book of this verie argument and
say besides this her only open refrayning or Recusancie whereto she is euen by the iudgement of Protestants (24) Willet Synop. p. 612 613 614 Act. Mon. p. 1283. 1150. 1151. Melancth in Consil Theol. p. 628 Pet. Mart. ib. p. 634. 635. Buâ—er 16. p. 632. 633 634. Caluin ib p. 635. And Caluin Tract Th. p 584. The Deuines of Germany in Sleydans Comment Engl. f. 87. no lesse in dutie bound lyeth euermore most open easie to be discerned yea by how much the persecution is more grieuous so much the lesse can this Recusancie be kept secret or vnespyed as appeareth most plainly in the example only of our owne times Nations for if during but these last 20. yeares we of this one Nation in coÌ„parison but few could not so escape the search of ProtestaÌ„t Magistrats but that by our only Recusancie we were dayly discerned presented indited coÌ„uicted sundrie wayes persecuted some Martyred Could then a ProtestaÌ„ts pretended to be dispersed throughout so manie Nations of the world escape for so manie hundred yeares togeather that Inquisition of the Roman Church which Protestants affirme to haue been vniuersal and far more grieuous Wherefore to end this inexplicable contradictorie poynt of the ProtestaÌ„t Churches Being or continuance but yet vnknowne inuisible for many hundred yeares togeather that through the greatest persecutions therof by the Pope of Rome I wil only demand with D. Field (25) Of the Church l. 1. p. 19. How possibly there should be a Church in the world the perpetuitie wherof al most constantly defend and none found seene or knowne to professe the Sauing truth of God Or as M. Iewel 26 saith of Heresie so in his words wil I say of his Church It must needes be a very strange Church that had neither beginning nor ending nor defender nor reprouer nor mouth to vtter it nor eare to heare it nor pen to write it nor time to last in nor place to rest in of which straÌ„ge kind of Church was our preteÌ„ded ProtestaÌ„t Church for manie hundred yeares togeather no knowne beginning being assigned of her Inuisibilitie no man defending or reprouing her during the sayd latencie no Pastour of hers preaching or sheep hearing her doctrine no pen writing her MonumeÌ„ts or her pretended pressures suffrings no one houre knowne wherin she had being or corner or cottage in the world wherin she râ—sided Wherefore the absurditie and insufficiencie of this former answer being in so manie respects so easily discouered other Protestants disclayming from this do auouch that their Church according to the Scriptures hath euer continued and that visible and knowne in al former Ages but now sithence through the late violence of the Pope and his Clergie al testimonie MonumeÌ„t Record therof is vtterly suppressed and made away But the idle vanitie of this naked conceipt is manie wayes appearing for first this is but a mere Imagination destitute of al testimonie or proofe in confirmation therof Secondly al proofe experience is directly to the contrarie seing the very books of Husse and Wiccliffe are yet extant to our aduersaries as also the Epistle of Vlrick in defence of Priests marriage the pretended books of Charlemaine against Images Bertram concerning the Eucharist the like And yet in none of these is the least mention afforded of anie ProtestaÌ„t Congregation though neuer so slender to haue been formerly residing in anie caue or corner of the earth though neuer so streight And yet these are the ancientest Records wherin they can insist either in defence of themselues or impugning of vs. Thirdly our General and Prouincial Councels holden in most seueral Nations did euer recite and condemne al new arising Sects Heresies coÌ„trarie to the Roman Faith and yet in none of these is there the least mention or Record to be found of the Church of Protestants Fourthly our Catholick Writers in euerie Age haue plentifully recited and at large coÌ„futed al appearing doctrines contrarie to the Roman Church yet as for anie ProtestaÌ„t Religion knowne before Luther they are wholy sileÌ„t Fiftly from hence do sundrie Protestant Writers take notice and in their owne writings (27) The Cent. Pant. in Chron. OsiaÌ„d Epit. Eccl. Hist Illiricus Catalogus Testam c. Whitak cont Dur. p. 276. 469. make meÌ„tion of the daily opinioÌ„s not passed ouer in sileÌ„ce or wholy suppressed from the view of Posteritie but directly to the contrarie most expresly mentioned recorded and condemned in euerie Age by the Church of Rome Of which opinions certaine also which maketh this point most euident were oftentimes euen some one or other special Doctrine now sithence taught by Protestants and heretofore seuerally professed by some one or other particular condemned person of those times And yet was neuer Protestant hitherto euer able to nominate or assigne a Protestant Church before the dayes of Luther truly agreing in matters of Faith and Religion with our now reformed Church of England Sixtly this confessed general suppression of the Protestant Church and al her Records for so manie hundred yeares doth euidently conuince the sayd Church not to be the Church of Christ but some Heretical Conuenticle for the Scriptures testify of the true Church that her (28) Esa 60.20 Sunne should not be set nor her Moone hid that she (29) Dan. 2 44. should not be giuen ouer to another people but should stand for euer as an (30) Esa 60.15.16 eternal glorie and ioy from generation to generation Lastly euerie vprising Sect though neuer so grosse may as easily and with as much probabilitie pretend for itself the continuance visibilitie of their Church for al former Ages only adding with our Protestants the Imagiginarie suppression and ruine of al testimonies proofes and Records of the same through the power and malice of the Church of Rome then which nothing more dangerous to affirme or more absurd to maintayne The falshood of the two former Answers being thus easily displayed and seene to be most palpable and sensible euen to the meanest iudgements a third remayneth in matter and substance of no greater force then the former but through affected obscuritie of words more difficult and perplexed to an ignorant Hearer As namely that during al those confessed manie Ages wherin no knowledge is had of the Protestant Church her Pastours or administration of Word or anie one Sacrament (*) Whitak de Ecelesia p. 165. Perkins in his Reformed Cathol p. 328. 329. OsiaÌ„d Cent. 16. part alt p. 1072. Calu. l. epist ep 104. p. 222. Rhegius lib. Apolog. p. 95. Beza in ep Theol. ep 1. p. 15. The Protestant Church was in the Papacie and the Papacie was in the Church and yet the Papacie was not the Church An answer not much vnlike to that Censure giuen vpon D. Playford his strange diuiding the Text of his Sermon to wit that it was as A Pye A Pudding A Pudding and a Pye A Pye pudding And a
stileth the Canons of the sayd Councel of Nyce 66) Luther l. de Cōcilijs part 1. p. 92. hay straw wood stubble and demandeth whether the the Holie-Ghost hath nothing els to do in Councels but to bind and burden his Ministers with impossible dangerous and vnnecessarie lawes So absurd was the Councel of Nyce in Luther's iudgement affirming further That more light is brought to a Christian by that Catechisme which children do learne then by al the Councels Caluin calleth the Fathers of the sayd Councel of Nyce 67) Lib. de vera Eccl. reformat opuscul p. 486. And Inst l. 4. c. 9. 3. 10. Phanaticos that is men Phanatical or deluded by the Diuel and withal giueth leaue to euerie priuate man to examin the decrees of Councels by the Scriptures saying 68) Inst l. 4. c. 9. §. 8. 9 11. Let no names or authorities of Councels Pastours Bishops hinder vs but that we may examin al Spirits of al men by the rule of the Word of God And againe 69 Ib. 3. 14. I deny that Interpretation of Scripture to be alwayes true and certain which is receaued by the consent of a Councel But I cannot heer but obserue the strange giddines of this primest protestant Caluin who directly contrarie to his former Assertions writeth thus 70) Inst l. 4. c. 9. §. 8. Those ancient Synods as Nyce Constantinople the first of Ephesus of Chalcedon and the like which were assembled for the confuting of errours we do willingly embrace and reuerence as Sacred for as much as concerneth doctrines of Faith For they containe nothing but the pure and natiue Interpretation of Scripture which the holie Fathers with spiritual wisdome applyed to the vanquishing of the Enemies of Religion which then appeared But to leaue him thus fighting with himself and to come to the Ministers of the Church of Scotland 71) In the end of the Harmonie of Coafes p. 19. And see the sayd Harmonie sect 1. p. 14. Without iust examination we do not receaue say they whatsoeuer is obtruded vnto men vnder the name of a General Councel for plaine it is that as the men assembled were men so haue some of them manifestly erred and that in matters of great weight and importance So far then as the Councel proueth the determination and commandment that it giueth by the plaine word of God so soone do we reuerence and embrace the same Heervnto also do accord our English Protestants teaching that 72) Articles of faith agreed vpon in the Conuocations of A. 1562. 1604. art 21. General Councels c. may erre and sometimes haue erred euen in things pertaining vnto God Wherefore things ordained by them as necessarie to saluation haue neither strength nor authoritie vnles it may be declared that they be taken out of holie Scriptures So vnwilling or rather truly fearful are Protestants to appeale vnto General Councels for the decision of Controuersies But D. Luther proceedeth further seriously expecting exacting that al Councels shal be subiect to his Censure determination 73) Tom. 2. wittenberg f. 375. The Rectours of Churches saith he the Pastours of Christ's sheep haue indeed power to teach but the sheep ought to iudge whether they propose the voice of Christ or of strangers c. Wherefore let the Pope Bishops Councels c. decree appoynt and ordaine what they wil we wil not hinder them but we who are the sheep of Christ and heare his voice wil haue it in our power to iudge whether they propose things true and agreable to the voice of our Pastour or no and they are to yeald subscribe and obey our Censure and Sentence Now if Councels be subiect to the Censure of Luther or anie other such rotten sheep then lesse is the authoritie of Councels then of Luther himself then the which nothing can be spoken more absurd or ridiculous In like sort saith Peter Martyr in general 74) De votis p. 476. As long as we rest in Councels Fathers we shal be euer conuersant in the same errours Yea saith M. Carthwright 75) In whiteg Tract 2. p. 95. If this be a sufficient proof to say such a Councel decreed such a Doctour sayd so there is almost nothing so true but I can impugne nothing so false but I can make true And wel assured I am that by their meanes the principal grounds of our Protestant Faith may beshabken But to conclude 76) De Concil contr Bellar. 9. 6. Fulk Answ to a Counterf Cath p. 89. 90. Will. Syno 92. D Whitaker D. Fulk D. Willet and most other Protestants teaching that General Councels may erre in Faith and manners it is no wonder though they reiect their authoritie but yet it euidently conuinceth that in matters of Faith and Religion Protestants dare not relye and submit themselues to the decrees and definitions either of ancient or moderne General Councels So that though Ministers in their Pulpits where none wil gainsay them do florish and flaunt forth the ancient Fathers prayses approue their authoritie applaud them as Protestants and appeale to those primitiue Doctours as Maisters and Patrons of their errours yet when they are pressed by Catholicks with cleerest euidence of their particular writings sayings and practise and with the answerable acknowledgements of the learned Protestants then their tone is changed bitterly exclaming that The argument drawne from Antiquitie is a Popish argument that To appeale to the Primitiue Church is to iniurie the Protestant Congregation That for Protestants to fil their books with the authorities of Fathers is dangerous and to be eschued That in al Councels Fathers and Stories since the Apostles the print of the Popes feet is to be found That the Papists strongest towers are in the testimonies of the Doctours That the Fathers were blind and ignorant in the Scriptures That they were certainly damned for their Papistical opinions vnles they repented That their interpretations of Scripture were aduantagious to Papists and preiudicial to Protestants That their books and Commentaries were contrarie to Scripture Yea that the Fathers did contradict one another and often one and the same himself That Luther and sundrie other Protestants are much to be preferred for learning before S. Austin S. Ambrose and al the other Fathers That the Doctrine now taught by the Bishops of England is much more sound then euer was taught by any Bishops since the Apostles and therefore that our Bishops are in manie degrees to be preferred before them that euen in the best times Sathan was president in Councels And lastly that al decrees of Popes Bishops and Councels are to yeeld and obey the Censure of Luther Dot not al this most strongly confirme that in the verie harts and consciences of Protestants themselues the ancient Fathers were Roman Catholicks and most aduerse to Protestants and that therefore and only therefore they are thus reiected contemned disgraced and wronged by them euen by Luther Caluin Beza
Apostles withal and the Euangelists themselues euen after their receauing of the Holie-Ghost did write teach and defend seueral errours how can anie Christian build an infaillible sauing Faith vpon the Ghospels or other Apostolical writings How then can they be acerteyned of anie one true sentence of God's Word if the writers and deliuerers therof were not infallibly guided by the Holie-Ghost into al truth and so freed from al errour ignorance misprision or falshood And if some peraduenture except that these so Atheistical and Sacrilegious reproaches imposed vpon the sacred Scriptures and the Blessed Euangelists and Apostles be not the ordinarie opinions or practise of Protestants but peraduenture only of some few either ignorant or not endowed with the spirit the falshood and vanitie of this euasion is most apparent for who of forraine Protestants were euer reputed more learned or more enlightned with the spirit then Luther Caluin Beza Chemnitius Islebius Illiricus with the other Centurie-writers Castalio Zuinglius Musculus Brentius Andreas Friccius Adamus Francisci Bullinger and sundrie such others al of them highly esteemed of by their other Protestant Brethren Or who at home more honoured then Tyndal Iewel Goad Fotherbie Fulk Whitaker c. and yet al of those being indeed the primest men that euer they had do ioyntly conspire in this greatest impietie of censuring controuling correcting or reiecting some one part or other of the forenamed Canonical Scriptures or els of condemning the Euangelists and Apostles of seueral errours infirmities and sliding in matters of faith and Religion Which foule proceeding of so manie and so learned Protestants doth euidently according to D. Fulk's Rule conuince them to be perfect Hereticks For (88) Confut. of Purgatorie p. 214. whosoeuer sayth he denieth the authoritie of the Holy Scriptures thereby bewrayeth himself to be an Heretick Laus Deo B. V. Mariae FINIS A TABLE OF THE BOOKES AND CHAPTERS THE FIRST BOOKE WHERIN IS PROVED BY THE Confession of Protestants that the Catholick Roman Church hath continued Euer most Knowne and Vniuersal euen from Christs verie Time vntil the Date hereof THE antiquitie of the true Church and the force of the Argument drawne from the Authoritie thereof As also of these great necessitie of finding-out this true Church chap. 1. fol. 1. That the present Roman Church and Religion for the last thousand yeares after Christ haue stil continued most Knowne and Vniuersal throughout the Christian world chap. 2. fol. 4. A further confirmation of the vniuersal continuance of our Roman Church Religiō for these last thousand yeares is taken from the Confessed belief and profession of such Persons as liuing within the foresayd time were most Famous and Notorious in one respect or other chap. 3. fol. 8. That the faith of S. Gregorie S. Augustin and whereto England was by them conuerted was our Roman Catholick and not Protestant chap. 4. fol. 10. That the present Roman Church and Religion continued and flourished during the whole time of the Primitiue Church contayning the first six hundred yeares after Christ chap. 5. fol. 20. A further proof of the present Roman Religions Continuance from the Apostles time to these dayes is taken from the Christian belief of the Indians Armenians Grecians and Brittans al of them Conuerted in the dayes of the Apostles chap. 6. fol. 27. THE SECOND BOOKE Wherin is proued through al the chief Articles of Religion and that by the Confessions of Protestants that the same Faith which is now taught by the Roman Church was anciently taught by the Primitiue Church of Christ THat General Councels do truly represent the Church of Christ And of the Credit and Authoritie giuen by Protestants to the sayd Councels chap. 1. fol. 1. That the argument drawne from the Authoritie of the Primitiue Church of Christ and of her Doctours and Pastours is an Argument of force And for such approued by sundrie learned Protestants chap. 2. fol. 3. That the Fathers and Doctours of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught that S. Peter was ordayned by Christ the Head of the Apostles and of the whole Church and that the Church was founded vpon S. Peter it is Confessed by Protestants themselues chap. 3. fol. 8. It is Confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued taught the Bishop of Rome to succeed S. Peter in the Primacie of the whole Church chap. 4. fol. 11. It is confessed by Protestants that the Primitiue Church of Christ beleeued the Bookes of Tobie Iudith Ester Sapientia Ecclesiasticus and two first of Machabees to be truly Canonical Scripture chap. 5. fol. 25. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued taught our now Catholick Doctrine concerning Traditions chap. 6. fol. 30. It is Confessed by Protestants that according to the Fathers of the Primitiue Church the Sacraments do truly conferre Grace and Remission of sinnes And that they are in number seauen chap. 7. fol. 32. It is Confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught the Real Presence of Christs true Bodie and Bloud in the Eucharist As also our further Catholick Doctrines of Transubstantiation Adoration Reseruation and the like chap. 8. fol. 35. Protestants confesse that the Primitiue Church of Christ beleeued taught practised the Sacrifice of the Masse as also that it is a Sacrifice according to the order of Melchisedech and truly Propitiatory for the liuing the dead chap. 9. fol. 41. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church taught and beleeued the Power of Priests to Remission of Sinnes The necessitie of Auricular Confession The Imposition of Pennance and satisfaction to God thereby As also our Roman Doctrine of Pardons or Indulgences chap. 10. fol. 46. It is granted by Protestants that the Catholick Doctrine of Purgatorie of Prayer and Sacrifice for the dead was beleeued taught and practised by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church chap. 11. fol. 50. It is confessed by Protestants that the. Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught our Catholick Doctrine of Christs Descending into Hel. chap. 12. fol. 55. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and practised our Catholick Doctrine of praying to Angels and Saints chap. 13. fol. 57. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed the vse of Christs Image and his Saincts placing them euen in churches and Reuerencing them chap. 14. fol. 60. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church did specially honour reuerence the holie Relicks of Martyrs and other Saints carrying them in Processions and making Pilgrimages vnto them at which also manie Miracles were wrought chap. 15. fol. 63. It is confessed by Protestants that the holie Doctours of the Primitiue Church not only vsed the signe of the Crosse but likewise worshiped the same attributing great efficacie power and vertue thervnto chap.
Confess Mansfelden Ministror tit de Antinomis f. 89. 90. that the Law of God is not worthie to be called the Word of God If thou beest a where a whore-mungar if an adulterer or otherwise a sinner beleeue and thou walkest in the way of saluation When thou art drowned in sinne euen to the bottom if thou beleeuest thou art in the midst of happines Al that busie themselues about Moyses that is the Ten Commandments belong to the Diuel to the gallowes with Moyses In like sort Illiricus the chief of the Centurie-writers and whom M. Bel termeth 16) Regim of the Chur. p. 28. a very famous Writer and most worthie defender of the Christian truth this so famous defender of Protestancie is accused of these Antinomian errours by his owne Brethren saying 17) Act. Colloq Aldeburg p. 94. After the death of Luther when Flaccus Illiricus and manie other factious Companions of his had begun againe those Antinomian filthinesses c. And with no litle applause of the multitude c. had dispersed them abroad c. Yea D. Hutter publick Professour at Wittenberg addeth yet further saying 18) Concord explicat Art 5. c. 1. p. 478. And see Art 6. p. 535. 536. c. But neither did that errour rest in a narrow compasse but presently getting strength crept abroad c. In so much that Melancthon in the last Edition of his CoÌ„mon Places hath plainly renewed the same errour c. And An. 59. the later Antinomians who named themselues the Schole-men of Wittemberg publikly and before the whole Church vndertook the Defence of that errour Yea that Antinomian furie encreased so much that also An. 70. in this our Wittemberg some Diuines for the obtaining of the highest degree in Diuinitie c. propounded publickly that errour and endeauoured to defend it as it appeareth by the 38 and 39. Theses of that Disputation Some Protestants also teach that 19) Act. Mon. p. 1335. And see the Parable of the wicked Mammon wherof Tindal is sayd to be Authour p. 573. 486. the Commandments were giuen vs not to do them but to know our damnation and to cal for mercie to God And D. Whitaker sayth accordingly 20) Cont. Camp par 8. p. 153. Christ proposeth to vs another more easie condition Beleeue and thou shalt be saued By this new league the old one is taken away that whosoeuer beleeueth the Ghospel is freed from the condition of the Law For those who beleeue are not vnder the Law but vnder Grace what need I say more Christians are freed from the curse of the Law not from the obedience But if Christians be deliuered from the condition curse of the Law how can they be bound to the obedience of it Or what can the breach therof be preiudicial vnto them So that if Catholicks do at anie time vrge against Protestants the authoritie of Moyses or of his Law or the Ten Commandments sundrie of the chiefest Protestants haue alreadie answered I wil not heare Moyses he is Christ's enemie he is the maister of hangmen Away with Moyses therefore to the gallowes His Law is a fable leading to Acheron or the pit of Hel. The Ten Commondments do not pertaine to Christians they are the fountain of al Heresies and are not to be taught in Churches The Law of God is not worthie to be called the Word of God Yea if thou be an adulterer or drowned in the depth of sinne do but beleeue and thou art in the midst of felicitie And so al Arguments drawne from Moyses or his writings are of no force or esteeme in the iudgement of Protestants But to proceed to other Scriptures Luther further affirmeth that 21) In Ser. Conuin tit de Patriar Prophet he doth not beleeue al things to be so done as they are related in the booke of Iob. And againe 22) Tit. de libr. Vet. Nou. Testa the booke of Iob is as it were the argument of a fable to propose the example of Patience And when Luther had read ouer the booke of Ecclesiastes his graue censure was 23) Pet. Robenstock lib. 2. Colloq Lat. Luâ—her c. de Vet. Test This Booke is not perfect manie things are taken away it wanteth bootes and spurres that is it hath no perfect sentence It rideth vpon a long reed as I when I was a Monk was wont to do in the Monasterie And as for the Canticles which our English Protestants terme the Ballet of Ballets of Salomon 24) Bible of An. 1595. Luther was of opinion that they imported no further but only a familiar 25) In Exordio fuarum Annot. in Cant. conference between Salomon and the Common-wealth of the Iewes inuiting Salomon to raigne ouer her But Castalio proceedeth further iudging this Book to be only 26) In his Laâ— Transl of the Bib. Praef. in Cant. the first Edit And see Beza in Praef. ante Comment Calu. in Iosue a loue-communication betweene Salomon and his Mistris Sulamitha for which he citeth those words Returne Sulamitha returne and let vs looke vpon thee adding also in the Margent Sulamitha the Mistris and spouse of Salomon And Beza testifyeth of Castalio that 27) In Vita Caluini And see Vvhitak poorest euasion hereof cont Dur. l. 1. p. 121. he commanded the Canticles of Salomon to be thrust out of the Canon as an impure and obscene Song reuiling with bitter reproches such Ministers as resisted him therin Yea this so impious reiecting this parcel of Canonical Scripture was so grosse in Castalio a Caluinist that now since in the later Editions of his Bible at Basil the Protestant publishers therof haue for verie shame altered it But now to passe from the Old Testament to the New and to omit that Caluin 28) Instit l. 2. c. 16. §. 18. resteth doubtful whether the Creed commonly called the Apostles Creed was made and published by the Apostles or no and consequently whether it be of infallible authoritie and beleef He further chargeth S. Mathew's Ghospel with errour saying 29) In Matth. 27. vers 9. Surely the name of Hieremie to be erroneously put for Zacharie the thing itself sheweth because no such thing is read in Hieremie but that other place vnlesse it be dexterously applyed may seeme to be drawne into a contrarie sense c. And wheras Math. 20.16 Christ sayth Manie are called but few are chosen Caluin reiecteth it saying 30) Harm in Math. 20.16 Minimè quadrat quae à quibusdam inseritur sententia Multi vocati pauci electi That sentence Manie are called few are chosen which by some is inserted doth not agree Which words doth not agree he expoundeth in French is nothing to the purpose M. Iewel likewise affirmeth 31) Def. of the Apol. p. 361. that S. Mark alleadgeth Abiathar for Abimelech and S. Mathew Hieremias for Zacharius 32) Bible of An. 1592. Our English Church Math. 6. receaues as Canonical scripture these
words for thine is the kingdome the power and the glorie which they adde at the end of our Lord's Prayer And yet Bullenger heerin reproueth them saying 33) Decad. 5. serm 5. Their rashnes was to be reproued who durst presume to peece on their owne to the Lord's Prayer Clebitius a Caluinist impugneth S. Luke's report in the Historie of our Sauiour's Passion saying 34) Victoria Veritatis Ruina Papatus Saxon. arg 5. Mark and Mathew deliuer the contrarie therefore to Mathew and Mark being two witnesses more credit is to be giuen then to one Luke who was not present at the last super as Mathew was Beza 35) Beza in his Trans And the Engl. Bib. of An. 1595. and our English Protestants seeme to confesse that S. Luke c. 3.36 in his Ghospel erred in making Arphaxad the father of Cainan and Cainan of Sale wheras in the Book of Genesis Arphaxad is sayd to haue been the Father of Sale for if S. Luke did not erre why do they notwithstanding that al Copies both Latin and Greek in this agree thrust out of the Text these words who was of Cainan and so make S. Luke to say that Arphaxad was the father of Sale And wheras Christ sayd Luke 6.40 The disciple is not aboue his maister Caluin affirmeth 36) Harm in Luc. 6.40 that Luke in the 6. Chapter relateth this sentence without connexion vttered amongst other speaches as it were of the sudden Concerning some part of S. Iohn's Ghospel Beza sayth 37) Ad c. 8. Ioan. As concerning myself I do not dissemble that to me it seemeth iustly to be suspected that which the Ancients with such consent haue either reiected or been ignorant of Besides in that he telleth Iesus to haue been left alone in the Temple with the woman I know not how probable it is And that he writeth Iesus to haue written with his fingar vpon the earth it seemeth to me a new and vnusual thing neither can I imagin how it may be fitly declared Beza further 38) See the New Test Trans by Beza of An. 1556. and 1565. And in English of An. 1580. in one Edition of his New Testament in the end of the eigth Chapter of S. Iohn's Ghospel putteth in these words Iesus passing through the midst of them c. which in another Edition with great vehemencie he reiecteth Wherefore although Beza in his Edition of the yeare 1556. leaue the sayd words out yet in Beza's Englished Testament of An. 1580. they are admitted such freedome by the Spirit hath this Caluinist in admitting and expunging of Scripture But Luther is so slenderly affected to the three Ghospels of S. Mathew S. Mark and S. Luke because they write much of the good works done by Christ our Sauiour as that he spareth not to write 39) In 2. Praef. Nou. Test primae Editionis Because Ihon writeth verie few works of Christ but manie things of his preaching of the contrarie the other three Euangelists set downe manie things of his works but few of his words the Ghospel of Ihon is the only delicate true and chiefest Ghospel and far to be preferred before the other three and more loudly to be preached So neer were those three Ghospels to be banished by Luther for recording good works though done by Christ himself But not to rest only in the Ghospel Luther in plaine tearmes accuseth S. Stephen of errour 40) In cap. 46. Genes in following the 70. Interpreters who as he saith erred concerning the number of those that went downe into Aegypt To come now to S. Paul and his Epistles Zuinglius saith 41) Tom. 2. Elench f. 10. This is your ignorance that you think the Commentaries of the Euangelists and the Epistles of the Apostles to haue been then in Authoritie when Paul did write those things as though Paul then did attribute so much to his Epistles that whatsoeuer was contained in them was sacred c. Which thing saith Zuinglius were to impute immoderate arrogancie to the Apostle In like sort saith D. Fotherbie 42) In his 4 sermons ser 2. p. 50. The Apostle twice in one Chapter professed that this he speaketh and not the Lord he is very wel content that where he lackes the warrant of the expresse Word of God that part of his writings should be esteemed but as the word of man So supposing some parcels of S. Paul's Epistles not to be sacred and diuine The Centurists likewise feare not to say 43) Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 10. col 580. Paul doth turne to Iames the Apostle and a Synode of al the Presbyters being called togeather he is perswaded by Iames and the rest that for the offended Iewes he should purify himself in the temple whervnto Paul yeeldeth which certainly was no smal sliding in so great a Doctour 44) In Act. 21. Mr. Gualter also reproueth S. Paul for shauing his head Luther telleth vs that 45) In Isay c. 64. S. Paul 1. Cor. 2.9 doth finely writh or wrest a certaine sentence of the Prophet Isay But Peter Martyr auoucheth that 46) In 1. Cor. 2. f. 46. he mistooke the Hebrew word And as for S. Paul's Epistle to the Hebrewes Luther thought that 47) In 1. Nou. Test Ger. Editione This Epistle was not written by Paul or anie of the Apostles but composed by a certain learned man out of manie Fathers And though it lay not the foundation of true faith yet it fitly buildeth vp gold siluer and pretious stones Therefore it ought not to trouble vs that wood hay straw are mingled therewith This was so certainly the iudgement of Luther herin that Oecolampadius obseruing the same saith 48) In Ep. ad Heb. in Praef. f. 4. Luther in his Preface saith thus This Epistle seemeth to me to be patched togeather of manie and not to handle the same thing in order He addeth also that it layeth not downe the foundation of faith c. The Magdeburgians also do follow their Maister Luther heerin writing 49) Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 4. It is easie to obserue that the Epistle to the Hebrewes doth not beare Paul's phrase c. It was not hard to iudge those things which in the 7. and 10. chapter are plainly to that end produced that such who are once conuerted to Christ if they fal againe cannot be recouered by serious repentance not to be the Doctrine of Paul nor of the other Apostles nor of Christ Through those and such like reasons prudent Antiquitie seemeth deseruedly to haue doubted of the Epistle to the Hebrewes 50) In Heb. c. 10 p. 963. Caluin likewise saith The Grecians haue deliuered that which the Apostle heer mentioneth which partly agreeth with the mind of the Prophet and partly impugneth the same So making the Prophet and Apostle to varie amongst themselues But indeed at some time of the Moone S. Paul is in so slender esteeme with Protestants that one of them confidently