Catholick Doctrine is inconsistant with the Sovereignty and safety of Kings and with civil Society between Catholicks and Protestants Pag. 443 Bishop Mortons Falsifications about the Lawfulness of killing a Tyrant Pag. 444 Bishop Mortons Falsification of Catholicks against the Sovereignty of Princes and how he excuses himself by saying he received it from the Archbishop of Canterbury Pag. 445 Mortons Answer in which see an Imposture continu'd against Catholicks by the whole Convocation of the Protestant Clergy in their Synod held Anno 1603. Pag. 546 The Protestant Falsification to perswade that the Canon-Law doth warrant deposition of Kings by the Pope Pag. 447 A Protestant Falsification to perswade that Catholicks may cheat any Excommunicated Persons of their Lawful Debts Pag. 449 Bishop Mortons Falsification to perswade that Catholicks hold it Lawful to Murther and Massacre Protestants Pag. 451 Bishop Morton's Falsification to Assert the Kings Supremacy Pag. 453 Ten Falsifications set down together by Bishop Morton to prove that we hold that Popes cannot be deposed nor be Hereticks Pag. 457 Primate Bramhalls Falsification to prove that Popes may and have Decreed Heretical Doctrines Pag. 458 It is prov'd by Reasons and Examples that no Religion is so little dangerous to the Sovereignty and safety of Kings or so Advantagious to the Peace and Prosperity of Subjects as the Roman Catholicks notwithstanding the Doctrin of the Pope's Supremacy Pag. 459 Protestants cannot clear their Religion from their Doctrin and danger of Deposing Sovereigns and Disposing of their Kingdoms Pag. 470 That Protestants could never prove any of the wilful falsifications wherewith they charge Roman Catholick Writers but themselves are convicted of that Crime wheresoever they Attempted to make good their charge against us Pag. 473 Bellarmin accused by Sutcliff of Falsifying the General Council of Chalcedon in favour of the Popes Supremacy Pag. 474 How Protestants are Convicted by Bellarmin of holding twenty ancient condemned Heresies and how Sutcliff and Bishop Morton to clear them of six only fourteen seems they confess do falsifie the Fathers and Catholick Authors about worshipping of Images Pag. 476 Two Pelagian Heresies imputed to Protestants and how they falsify to clear themselves of the One and say nothing of the other Pag. 477 Two Novatian Heresies Imputed to Protestants the one answered with Silence the other with Falsifying Pag. 478. The Manichean Heresie against Freewill Imputed to Protestants and how pittifully Answered by Bishop Morton Pag. 479. How Bishop Morton Answers to Bellarmin's Imputation of Arianisme unto Protestants Pag. 479. How Morton Falsifies and Abuses Bellarmine who Imputes the denyal of Christs Real Presence in the Sacrament to Protestants Pag. 480. Falsifications Objected against Cardinal Baronius by Mr. Sutcliff Pag. 483. Calumnies and Falsifications of Luther Calvin Archbishop Laud and Primate Usher to Discredit Catholick Religion against their own Knowledge and Conscience Pag. 487. Of Calvins Calumnies against Catholicks and their Doctrine Pag. 488 Frauds Falsifications and Calumnies of Primate Usher against the Real Presence and Transubstantiation Pag. 491. Usher's Falsifications against Confession Pag. 492. His Falsifications against Absolution of Sins Pag. 493. Against Purgatory Pag. 494 Against Worshiping Saints and their Reliques Pag. 496 Against Prayer to Saints Pag. 499 Of Archbishop Laud's Frauds and Falsifications HOw unsincerely Bishop Laud would fain Excuse the Modern Greek Heresie concerning the Procession of the Holy Ghost Pag. 502 How Bishop Laud Abuses St. Augustine to make Protestants believe that General Councils may Err against Scripture and evident Reason Pag. 504 Vicentius Lirinensis abus'd by Laud to prove the Fallibility of the Church c. Pag. 507 How Bishop Laud falsifies Occham to infringe St. Augustin's Authority concerning the Infallibility of the Church in succeeding Ages as well as in that of the Apostles And is forc'd by his Error to resolve the Prelatick Faith into the Light of Scripture and the private Spirit of Phanaticks which he Paliats under the Name of Grace and thereby Warrants all Rebellions against Church and State Pag. 509 Divers Frauds and Falsifications of Bishop Laud to defend that Protestants are not Schismaticks Pag. 512 Whether it be Piety or Policy to permit the Protestant Clergy of these three Kingdoms to enjoy the Church Revenues for maintaining by such Frauds and Falsifications as hitherto have been alledged the Doctrine of the Church of England which also they acknowledge to be fallible and by consequence for all they know false And hâ—re the said Revenues may be Conscientiously apply'd to the Vse and Ease of the People without any danger of Sacriledge or any Disturbance to the Government if a publick Tryal of both Clergies Sincâ—rity be allowed and Liberty of Conscience granted Pag. 521 The same further demonstrated and how by Liberty of Conscience or by Tolerating the Roman Catholick Religion by Act of Parliament the British Monarchy will become the most considerable of all Christendom Peaceable at Home and recover its Right Abroad How evidently it is the mutual Interest of Spain and England to be in a perpetual League against France and how Advantageous it is for Spain to put Flanders into English Hands Pag. 534 The King 's Right to France Pag. 544 My Lord of Clarendin's Policy Censur'd by all Wise Men. Pag. 548. Part 4. The Roman Catholick Religion in every particular wherein it differs from the Protestant confirmed by undenyable Miracles THat such Miracles as are approved by the Roman Catholick Church in the Canonization of Saints are true Miracles and the Doctrine which they Confirm cannot be rejected without denying or doubting of Gods Veracity and how every Protestant doth see true Miracles though he does not reflect upon them in Confirmation of the Roman Catholick Faith Pag. 553 The Miracle of St. Januarius of Naples Pag. 555 The Famous and undenyable Miracle of St. Francis Xaverius wrought on the Person of Marcello Mastrillo Pag. 556 Antichrist's Miracles are not Credible if compar'd with Ours Pag. 561 Of Visible Miracles seen though not observ'd by every Protestant in Confirmation of the Roman Catholick Faith The difference between true and false Miracles Pag. 562 Of True Miracles related in the Ecclesiastical History by men of greatest Authority in every Age to confirm the particular Mysteries of our Catholick Faith and that sense of Scripture wherein Roman Catholicks differ from Protestants Pag. 566 Of Miracles related by St. Chrysostom St. Gregory Nazianzen c. in Confirmation of Transubstantiation Adoration of Christ in the Sacrament the Sacrifice of the Mass Communion under one Kind and Purgatory Pag. 567 Primate Usher's Falsification to discredit two Miracles Pag. 569 How Protestants falsify and corrupt the very Statutes and Law-Books Pag. 572 Miracles for the Mass. Pag. 573. Miracles for Purgatory Pag. 573 Miracles to Confirm the Worship and Virtue of the Sign of the Cross. Pag. 576 Miracles in confirmation of the Catholick Worship of Images Pag. 581 The Protestant Distinction of Civil and Religious Worship misapply'd by Ministers to delude
only more â—ound in point of Christiatity but more safe in order to the government then any others And though it be a common and true saying that the greatest Clerks are not the wisest men and by consequence not so fit to prescribe rules for governing as wordlings that are not Divines or as wranglers that are Lawyers yet I humbly conceive that when the misfortunes of a government proceed not from want of judgment or resolution in the Councel but from want of faith or which is the same from an acknowledged vncertainty of faith in the Church Catholick Divines seing we are unanimous in matters of Christian belief and do persuade the best part of Christendom that our Church is infallible in the same and if heard we doubt not to prevail with these British Nations also to credit vs in that important point however improbable it may seem to them at first sight I hope this supposed we Catholick Divines may without offence pretend to be better able to shew and salve the spiritual sore of this state then any Protestant Statists or schoolmen who want sufficient unity and assurance of faith in themselves to make their cure and care credible to others Seing therfore the foundation not only of Christian Religion but of a peaceable government doth consist in a firm persuasion of the people governed that the doctrin professed and established by Law is infallible and of Divine inspiration not of human invention and by consequence that the decrees and determinations of the State which in all Governments ought to be proportioned to the doctrin of its Church are lawfull and intended for the common good not designs or devices to fool the multitude feed the ministery or favor the soveraign and that not only evidence of falshood but vncertainty of truth in matters of Christianity must needs render the Church and State that profess such an vncertainty so weak and contemptible that the subjection to either cannot be otherwise secured then by the force and fear of a standing Army and that such a subjection doth savor more of a Turkish slavery then fâ—â—a Christian Society or of a civil subordination to publick authority and therfore is the cause of continual discontents and frequent rebellions and that no Church but the Roman Catholick doth as much as pretend or can persuade it s own infallibility in matters of Religion seing I say all this is manifest by reason and our wofull late experiences I question not but that the Parliament will be pleased to take in good part this humble proposal of saving our souls and of setling this state by the doctrin of the Roman Catholick Church and by the Revenues of the Protestant Prelatick Clergy especially if the corruptions of Scripture and falsifications of Councells and Fathers wherwith I do charge that Clergy and wherby alone they maintain their Protestancy be cleerly demonstrated in this Treatise and patiently heard in a publick Trial. It 's now above a Century of years since the great Statsmen of England have employed their wit and industry in devising how to setle Monarchy vpon Protestancy but vnder favor we Catholick Divines do shew and all Protestants may suspect by the success that in so great an affair they have proceeded like vnskillfull Architects that busy themselves altogether in proportioning and adorning the superstructures without inquiring into the strength and solidity of the foundation They mistook sand for stone fals translations for true Scripture a lay ministery for a lawful Clergy a temporal soveraignty for a spiritual supremacy They layd for the first stone of their New fabrik a sworn spiritual rebellion the oath of supremacy against the chief Prelat and common Father of all Christendom S. Peters Successor No marvail then if this fundation yeelded and the whole fabrik fell to the ground in our late distempers for by an evident parity of reason it must be concluded that it is as lawful for Protestants to depose Kings as Popes by vertue of their privat and arbitrary interpretations of scripture If notwithstanding the legal and long possession or prescription of a suprem spiritual superiority the Bishop of Rome may by the principles and prerogative of Protestancy be reformed and reduced to be only Patriarck of the West or a privat Bishop what temporal soveraignity can be absolute or secure among Protestants The same arguments the same texts of Scripture the same spirit the same interpretations of God's Word that Luther Calvin Cranmer and all other Protestants objected against the Popes supreme spiritual authority did the Presbyterians and other Protestants press by an vnanswerable paralel against the late King 's temporal Soveraignty Wherfore it is much to be feared that notwithstanding the extraordinary prudence of our government we shall be frequently involved in as great troubles and dangers as formerly and that the privat spirit and English Scripture interpreted by Protestants will prevail against lawfull Monarchy whensoever the like circumstances do concurr viz. a Zealous Parliament a mild King a covetous Clergy a stubborn people and resolute Rogues to lead them and declare to the Multitude their own strength as wel as the fundamental principles and priviledges of all Protestant Reformations In Catholick Commonwealths all these circumstances do meet the principles of Protestancy only excepted and yet the Catholick subjects remain immoveable in their obedience in regard of the credit and authority of their Church and Clergy which in privat confessions and publick exhortations continualy inculcat how inconsistant any privat or arbitrary interpretation of Scripture and by consequence any pretext of superiority over the Soveraign is with the Christianity and obsequiousnes of Catholick faith and how principal a part it is of that â—aith to believe not only that the Church is infallible in its doctrin but also that temporal Soveraigns are Gods Vice-regents and absolut in their government and therfore as such ought to be revered and obeyed And when by reason of heavy taxes or other such accidents the fire of sedition somtimes breaks forth among Catholicks it is generally speaking suddenly quencht by the authority and severity of the Clergies Censures against the Authors or by the devotion and reverence which even the most Irreverent of our profession exhibit to the Blessed Sacrament of the Altar that is shewn vpon such emergencies to the mutinous people which notwithstanding their fury and madness immediatly fall down to adore their God and Redeemer and for respect of him whom they beleeve to be realy present are appeased or at least give ear to their Pastors reasons and exhortations with more patience and better success then any Protestant people in the like occasions Wherfore though we Catholicks should grant as we neither do nor can that the Protestant or Prelatick reformation is as safe a way to Heaven as the Roman Religion yet methinks such Protestants as desire to live peaceably or govern prosperously ought to preferr Popery before Protestancy That K. Henry 8. in the heat
thou lyest in thy throat foolish and sacrilegious King And other so immodestly base expressions against his Majesty and all other Papists that we ar ashamed to English them By Luthers Language and way of defending his Protestant doctrin we might guess at his Master though him self had not told us his name was Sathan SUBSECT I. How weakly Protestants excuse Luthers Conference with the Devill and the embracing of Sathans doctrin THERE is not any one thing troubleth so much the learned Protestants as their Apostle Luthers acknowledged instruction in Protestancy received from the Devill and therfore some of them endeavor to maintain that this Disputation was only a spirituall fight in mind and no bodily conference but with the same probability of truth they may affirm that all other real apparitions and the effects therof were only spirituall conflicts Luther tells so many corporeal circumstances that it could not be a meere spiritual fight first he says that the Devill spoke to him voce forti gravi in a strong and grave voice 2. That then he learnt how men were found dead in their beds in the morning True it is that these words and circumstances are fraudulently omitted by the Divines of Wittenberg in their later editions of Luthers works and perhaps Mr. Chark and Mr. Fulk did never peruse the more ancient and sincere edition tom 6. Germ. Ien. fol. 28. where all these things are set down Yet grant this were no bodily conference and but only a spiritual conflict what matters it whether Luther was instructed and persuaded this or that way by sensible conference or inward suggestion into Protestancy if therin the Devill was his Master Other learned Protestants excuse Luthers conference saying it was only a dream to mistake which for a reality he was subject as being a German Monk giuing to understand that good drinck doth frequently turn German dreams into reall persuasions But vnless they prove that Luther was in a dream or in drink when he writ this conference they wil never persuade any man that reads it that this Disputation was not real Him self says he was awake tells the tyme of the night that it happened describs the Devills voice his owne feare learnt how people were slain by the Devill in their beds these reflections and impressions are far from dreams especialy when the party delivers them as real truths many years after and maks them the ground of his chang in so important a matter as Religion But suppose German Monks were as much given to drink and after drink as apt to mistake their dreams for real truths as Mr. Sutcliff insinuats and to maintain even when they are sober that their dreams ar not dreams as Luther doth his Conference of what credit can such an evasion or excuse be to Protestants for what difference is ther between a dreaming drunken and Diabolical Religion These answers not being any way probable other learned Protestants grant the Devill did realy conferr with Luther so Hospinian B. p Morton Joannes Regius Baldwin c. This last in a Book of this subject printed at Jsleb 1605. pag. 76.75.83 saith let none wonder that I confess the disputation to be real and not written in iest or hyperbolicaly but seriously and historicaly for Luther writ that history so consideratly and prolixly that I still acknowledg be writ it seriously and according to the truth of the histor But then he adds that Luther had bin a protestant before that Conference and that the Deuills drift was to make Luther despair for hauing said Mass prayed to saints c. But this is impertinent and fals impertinent because our dispute is not of the Deuills intention but of his instruction and whether Luther did well in embracing either before or after his revolt from vs the Devills doctrin fals because vntil that Disputation Luther sayd Mass almost every day as sathan objects to him speaking somtyms in the present and was then no protestant for the only point wherin he differed then from Catholiks was about Indulgences and euen that he maintained more out of a pick and pride then Judgment as appears by what hath bin sayd in the beginning of this section Wherfore Joannes Regius in his Apology against Belarmin saith that the Devills instruction is no argument to confute Luthers doctrin because though it was the Devill that instructed him he instructed him according to the word of God and the Devills speak truth somtyms especialy when they speak that which the Scripture witnesseth This in my opinion is the worst of all other evasions 1. Because the Devill seldom or never applies the words of Scripture to the right sence when he tempted our Savior though he quoted Scripture yet he was no true Interpreter therof Now what ground Protestants can have to believe that the Devill hath altered his ould custom or why they should prefer the Devills Scriptural interpretation before that of the visible Church Councells and Fathers is not intelligible 2. It is not credible that if all the visible Church of Christians did err in professing Popery and committed Idolatry by hearing Mass and adoring the Sacrament that the Devills would dissuade them from that Idolatrous Religion his design and desire is to seduce men not to reduce them to the way of saluation 3. It is not likely that God would compel the Devill to be chief instrument of reforming the Catholik Religion and Church in the ould law he never committed so great a charg unto him he employd holy men and Prophets to convert the Iews and Pagans 't is strang that in the law of grace the Devil should become an Apostle When Dives who was but the Devills Camerade desired leave to come into the world and preach to his Brethren God did not judg him a fit Messenger or Missioner it was answered that his brethren ought to believe Moyses and the Prophets that is the Church and the Ministers therof And though this be a parable it contains real doctrin wherby we are instructed that Gods Church would never be so low brought as to stand in need of Preachers from Hell Seing therfore we have so many reasons to conclude that God would not make the Devill an Apostle or a Reviver and Reformer of the Ghospell Protestants can have none to believe that the doctrin and Reformation which Luther received from him is true or agreable to Scripture Doctor Morton late Bishop of Duresme to proue ad hominem against us that the Deuill doth persuade men somtyms to piety and by consequence that Luthers reformation might be pious though the Deuill instructed him therin objected Delrius a Iesuit affirming that the Deuill appeared to an Abbot in the forme of an Angel and persuaded him to say Mass. Therfore if the Mass be good as Catholiks say the Deuill may and doth exhort men to vertuous actions To this I answer 1. That our question is not whether the Deuill may somtyms persuade men to
and are as yet far short of that substantial and fundamental Reformation whervnto the principles of Protestancy and the Protestant rule of faith or an arbitrary interpretation of Scripture doth direct and incline all Churches of the Reformation As for our English Presbiterians and Fanaticks they agree with the Polonian Hungarian and Transilvanian protestant Arrians and Anti-Trinitarians in believing the Protestant Reformations can not be pious and perfect so long as they retain any on point of Popery and indeed there is as much reason and ground in Scripture to reject all as any on and the Protestant principles warant the deniall of the Trinity and Incarnation as well as of the Mass and Transubstantiation The prelaticks perceive this to be true and therfore in the 39. Articles to avoyd scandal and discredit profess the belief of many mysteries that according to the very foundation of their Reformation they ought to deny and though they seem not to be guilty of impiety in their resolution of retaining some yet are they convicted of incoherency in not rejecting all as we shall now manifestly prove SECT XI How the indifferency or rather inclination of Protestancy to all kind of infidelity is further demonstrated by the Prelatick doctrin and distinction of fundamental and not fundamental articles of faith The design of their fundamental distinction layd open The Roman Catholick the sole Catholick Church and how it hath the authority of iudging all controversies of Religion VNity of doctrin being a confessed mark of the true Church which is called One in relation to one and the same faith and Protestants perceiving they want this vnity and the means to bring them to it every particular Church and person challenging a right to interpret Scripture after his own manner as well as Luther and Calvin c. who could not assume to them-selves that liberty without granting it to others and that not only their sundry Churches and confessions differ extreamly in doctrin but even the members of one and the same Congregation agree not among them-selves in the explanation of their Articles nor in the Authority of their Church to command and determin what articles ought to be believed this I say considered by Protestants some of their chief writers and particularly the English Prelaticks have invented a distinction wherby they hope to foole their flocks and make them believe that there is not only an vnity but an vniversality of faith amongst all dissenting Protestants and by consequence that they are true Catholicks They divide therfore the articles of Christian Religion into fundamentall and not fundamentall Fundamentall they call those wherin all Christians do agree not fundamentall they make every article wherof them-selves or any other Christians doubt how ever so fundamentall it may be held by the rest By which doctrin they make Arians Nâ—â—torians and all ancient Hereticks good Catholicks and their errors not fundamentall or destructive to salvation because forsooth they are Christians though deny the consubstantiality of Christ. This is no wrested consequence of ours but their own confessed Tenet The great prelatick writer Doctor Morton late Bishop of Duresme in his approved and applauded book of the Kingdom of Jsrael and of the Church dedicated to Queen Elizabeth pag. 94 sayth The Churches of Arians are to be accounted the Church of God because they do hould the foundation of the Ghospell which is faith in JESUS Christ the son of God and Saviour of the world And pag. 91. He giveth this general rule Whersoever a company of men do joyntly and publickly by worshipping the true God in Christ profess the substance of Christian Religion which is faith in JESUS Christ the Son of God and Saviour of the world ther is a true Church notwithstanding any corruption what soever c. Thus they plead for the Arrians declaring in their favour that consubstantiality of the son or his being the natural son of God is not the substance of Christian belief A man would think that the real presence of Christ in the Sacrament is a substantial point of faith seing ther of dependeth the reality of our Sacrifice the feeding or famishing of our soules and the verifying or falsifying of Christ's plain and express words and yet Bishop Iewel the greatest piller of the Church of England in his Apology for the same pag. 101. edit 1600. obâ—erving that Protestants were divided in the belief of that mystery tells vs it is but a matter of indifferency The Lutherans and Zuinglians saith he are both sides Christians good friends and Brethren they vary not between them-selves vpon the principles and foundations of our Religions c. But vpon one only question the real presence neither weighty nor great Doctor Reynolds in his 5. Conclusion annexed to his conference pag 722. affirmeth the real presence to be but as it were the grudging of a litle ague if otherwise the party hould the Christian faith And all Protestants conspire in this heretical shift because their change and choyce of articles of faith can not be maintained by any other way but by denying that therby they touch the foundation of Christian Religion So Luther defended his Consubstantiation as may be seen in Amandus Polanus in his Synop. pag. 446. And Iacobus Acontius lib. 3. Stratagematum Sathanae pag. 135. saith It 's evident concerning as well those who hould the real presence of Christ's Body in the bread as those others which deny it that although of necessity one part do err yet both are in way of saluation if in other things they be obedient to God Jn this Protestant distinction we must distinguish two things 1. The design 2. The doctrin wherupon Protestants ground their design In this Section J will discover the design and declare the weakness therof In the next I will demonstrat the falshood of the doctrin wherby they intended to carry on their design Protestants proceed in this affair as weak Ministers of state when they find by experience they have bin mistaken in taking their measures and in the management of publick concerns they would fain be reconciled and make strict leagues with such Potentats as formerly they had disobliged and them-selves now stand in need of their friendship and fancy they can effect all by inculcating vnto them general notions of a common danger grounded vpon the power and pride of some neighbouring and emulous Prince So Prelaticks reflecting vpon the weackness of their cause occasion'd through the dissentions of the Reformed Religions and vpon the incoherency of their own 39. Articles with the foundation and liberty of Protestancy would fain by a generall notion of Christianity vnite all heretical Churches to them-selves against the Roman Catholicks pretended pride and power In which proceedings they commit two great indiscretions 1. They do not consider how they have disobliged the Greek and most of the Eastern Churches by declaring in their 39. Articles the doctrin of the Holy Ghost's procession from the Father and
Catholicks were but few and in the later days they will not be many in respect of Heretiks but still it was and will be the Catholick Church Therfore it can not be an argument that a Church in not Catholick or Universal because ther ar more Pagans and Professors of Heresies then of the true Religion Their being more hereticks in number is consistent with the being of many faithfull houlding the Apostolick faith and no more is requisit for a Catholick or Universal Church But sure Protestants forget the invisibility of their own when they except against the Universality of ours If theirs was Catholick or Universal when they were so few that for the space at least of 1000. years not one Protestant could be found in the whole world they have no reason to deny the denomination of Catholick to the Roman which always hath bin so conspicuous and numerous If they will proceed coherently and say that for those 1000. years before Luther ther was no Catholick Church then they must not only reform but alter and cut short the Apostles Creed and blot out at least for those 1000. years that article J believe in the Catholick Church And as Protestants have no reason to believe that the vniversality or Catholicism of the Church consists not so much in the number of persons as in the antiquity and identity of faith of the Professors with that of the Apostles so have they not any reason to object partiality and illegality against the testimony and judicature of the Roman Church and Councells when they censure Protestant opinions Not partiality because when a Iudg or wittness giveth sentence or evidence against his own natural inclination and interest there can be no suspition of partiality nor lawfull exception against his sentence or testimony as too much favoring himself or his relations And truly if Roman Catholicks did judge of controversies of faith according to their own natural inclination and interest and had not in their definitions and testimonies a greater regard to conscience then conveniency they would never witness or define that Priests ought not to marry or that Kings and Bishops ought to be subject to the Pope in spirituall affaires or that men ought to abstain from flesh so many days in the week or that ther is no bread or wine in the Sacrament notwithstanding the appearance of both neither would they part with their lands and mony vpon the score of Purgatory or maintain that privat men or Churches must not take the liberty to themselves of deciding controversies of Religion but on the contrary beleeve that generall Councells are infallible even when they define matters contrary to our sense and inclinations Roman Catholicks are made of flesh and bloud they are naturally as averse from these thoughts and submissions and find as great difficulty in conforming their judgments and testimonies thervnto as Protestants Therfore they cannot be partial in condemning Protestants for not believing these things vnless they be also partial against themselves and nothing but the evidence of their own obligation â—o believe these things strengthned by the grace of God could prevaile with so many learned and sober men as have bin and are known to be among Roman Catholicks to be partial against themselves or to judg and wittness contrary to their own natural inclinations and temporal interest for Popery against Protestancy SVBSECT II. Of the Iustice and legality of our Roman Censures against Protestancy NOw as to the legality of the proceedings and censures of the Roman Catholick Church against Protestancy it is as manifest as lawfull witnesses and cleer evidences can make any judgment either in law or equity In all controversieâ— both of law and Religion the Courts and Church must ground their sentences vpon matter of fact All disputes of faith must be reduced vnto and decided by this matter of fact Whether Christ our Saviour and his Apostles taught such doctrin Whether he revealed the reformed not the Roman sense of Scripture This being a thing don 1600. years since neither party can produce new eyes or eare witnesses pretending to an immediat knowledg of what then Christ and his Apostles preach't That immediat evidence ended with the begining of the second age and we must begin our proof with this last and proceed to examin our witnesses by a retrogradation from this present age to the first because the only proof of things which are beyond the reach of our knowledg and memory is the Tradition and testimonies of others vpon which we must rely or resolve not to believe any thing even of our-selves as our names families Countries or of this world and much less of the next Let us begin therfore with the Reformed Protestant Churches and ask them what witnesses have they in this 16. Century to prove that Christ and his Apostles were Protestants or taught their reformed sense of Scripture They will answer they have as many witnesses as ther are Protestants We demand their cause of knowledge such of them as in matters of Religion make any use of reason will not pretend that they know it by privat revelation or by their own proper interpretation of God's Law those are neither Court nor Church evidences but will answer that their Parents and Pastors tould them Christ and his Apostles were Protestants and these were tould so by others their Parents and Pastors vntill passing some few descents they come to Luther or Calvin or Cranmer c. There they must stop for Luther Calvin and Cranmer did not pretend that their Parents or Pastors testifyed to them that Protestancy was the true Religion them-selves having bin the first Inventors or Revivers therof after that it had bin by their own confessions at least 1000. years buried and their Church had bin invisible or enchanted Jt is a remarkable thing that never any ancient Heretick or modern Reformer of the Catholick doctrin could name an inmmediaâ— Preâ—â—cessor much less any Church from which he received his Religion and reformed interpretation of Scripture Optiâ—â—s that ancient Father â— 2. contra â—armeâ— says That Donatus was a son without a Father a Successor without a Predecessor filius sine Patre sequens sine Antecedenâ—e the same we may say of Luther Calvin Cranmer c. And seing ther must be a Succession of faith as well as of meâ— and that as one who can not prove his Father or family to be noble by the testimonies and tradition of others can not pretend to nobility of descent or to right of inheritance so can not Luther Calvin or Cranmer and their followers pretend to antiquity of faith or to be of the Catholick family of Christ without a legal testimony and tradition of their spiritual descent which tradition or testimony they confess to be wanting Mr. Napper in his Treatise vpon the Revelations pag. 43. The Pop's Kingdome hath had power over all Christians from the time of Pope Silvester and the Emperour Constantine for these
counterfeited must needs be the effect of prejudice and passion proceeding from want of christianity especialy when they see that others as learned cautious and conscientious as them-selves after weighing all objections and circumstances submit their judgments to the sufficiency of these signs for making the Roman Catholick authority authentickly Divine and that we believe what is proposed with out the least suspition or feare either of fraud or frailty in the Roman Catholick Councells which are the Proposers and Ministers of God's word Besids if Protestants did consider the nature of Veracity and God's Providence they would never doubt of the application of his power to preserve the Roman Catholick Church from error seing it hath so many signs of his truth and Ministery as the conversion of Nations succession and Sanctity of doctrin and Doctors miracles vnity of faith c. For Veracity as Aristotle and all Philosophers define it is a Virtue inclining to speak truth And he is not inclined to speak truth that countenanceth falshood in so particular a manner as God doth the doctrin and jurisdiction of the Roman Catholick Church A King that might if he would and yet doth not hinder his Ambassadors and Ministers or any other persons from abusing other Princes or his own Subjects by their speaking or commanding in his Majesties name or at least in speaking other-wise then he really intended they should and had prescribed by his commission or instructions such a King I say is not inclined to speak truth because he willingly permits his officers or others that pretend to speak in his name or really do speak by his Orders to vtter falshood and misinterpret his words and meaning notwithstanding that he may easily prevent that fraud and frailty and reapeth no benefit by either an evident argument that he is not avers to such false practises No Protestant doubts but that my Lord Chancellor speaks truly the King's mind and sense when he pursues his Majesties speech in Parliament in his Royal presence and hearing and to think other-wise would be not only to tax my Lord Chancellor with folly but the King with an inclination to falshood and a fault unbeseeming the dignity of a Prince the care and charge of the Country's Father as also the sincerity and veracity of an honest man Seing therfore God is as much inclined to speak truth as any thing can be to love it self for God is truth by essence if it be against the dignity of a Prince and against the nature of human veracity and honesty which is but a shadow of the Divine to permit falshood in Ministers of state or in servants sent but of ordinary errands when their Masters can easily prevent it how much more repugnant must it be to the nature of God and to his Divine veracity to permit the Roman Church in his own presence name and hearing tell lyes and disguise them and it self with so probable and plausible signes of his Divine truth and Commission as to seale it's doctrin with marks and miracles so vndeniably supernatural that the most learned Protestants acknowledg they are and can only bewrought by God's power light can as litle concurre to produce darkness as truth to favor falshood Even men that love truth hate to heare others tell lyes and do contradict vntruths if them-selves be present and quoted for Authors of the stories They will not entertain servants given to that vice nor permit them weare their livery much less employ them in matters of concern wherin they may abuse their Master's word and prejudice his friends or Tenants Can Protestants then imagin that God doth not only permit the Roman Catholick Church to weare his livery and his authority but that he doth promote the stories and lies of that Church in case it's doctrin be fals for the space of so many ages with so great signes and testimonies of his Divine approbation that the wisest and wairiest men of the world after much study and examination did and do still preferr it before all other Religions Do they think that God is not as much concern'd in preventing frauds faults and frailties in his Ministers and Messengers as temporal Princes are concern'd in the credit and truth of theirs Wherfore if Protestants judg it a breach of faith or want of truth and worth in a temporal Prince not to endeavor to the vtmost of his power that his Ministers and messengers deceive not his subjects and Allies by mistaking or misapplying his Commands or demands they can not but see the absurdity of believing that God doth permit Ministers and Messengers so supernaturaly qualified as those of the Roman Church are to err in proposing his revelations vnto all man kind his Veracity being as highly concern'd in the infallibility of the Proposers as his power makes him capable of preventing their human mistakes and of confounding the Devill 's malice But Protestants have found out a new device and defence of their distinction They grant it is against God's Veracity to permit the Roman Catholick Church to err in proposing the Fundamental articles of faith that is such articles as Protestants fancy absolutly necessary for saluation which are say they that Scripture is the word of God and JESUS Christ the son of God and Redeemer of the world some add the Mystery of the Trinity hitherto we could never obtain from them a more exact Cathalogue of their Protestant Fundamentals As for the other doctrines of the Roman Catholick Church 〈◊〉 and proposed as Divine Protestants think they may be denyed and questioned without any offence to God denyal or doubt of his veracity I could never heare any other reason or dispâ—rity for this their distinction but that the measure of the infallibility of the Church ought to be our salvation because it was the end proposed by God in the institution and constitution of his Church In such articles therfore say they as are absolutly necessary for salvation the Church cannot but be infallible in the proposal otherwise we could not believe them and consequently not be saved because we can not be sure that God revealed them But this their Fundamental distinction still destroys the foundation of Christian belief which is God's veracity They make their own conveniency and not God's veracity the motive of crediting the Mysteries of faith as if truth it self or God's inclination to speak truth could be greater in on matter then other or that the belief of any article could be more Fundamental or of greater importance and necessity for salvation then to believe that God is as much concerned and as necessarily inclined to speak truth as well by the mouth of his Church as if him-self spoke immediatly as well also in the least matter as in the greatest and by consequence he is as much engaged to preserve the Church from error in on as in the other So that to believe the testimony or proposal of the Church in a matter
Church he hath fallen into the Fundamental error and foundation of Protestancy but yet with this difference that albeit he agreeth with Protestants in making cleer evidence of the revelation the ground or rule of faith and by consequence in destroying all Christian belief yet he takes a contrary way from them Protestants by reducing their evidence to very few points reject most of the articles of the Roman Catholick Church as incredible but the Author of the sure footing by amplifying and applying his evidence to every article of our faith makes them all more then credible that is self evident He and Protestants agree in the rule but differr in the application Neither of them will believe any thing but what they fancy evident but on party fancies all is evident the other fancies litle or nothing is evident Jf they vnderstand on another they may soon come to an accord and the sequell of their principle will be to take away all Christian belief for Christian belief must of necessity involue some obscurity in that Act or at least formality wherby we assent vnto the mystery believed Otherwise if the essence or nature of Christian faith were consistent with cleer evidence and with the want of all obscurity why may it not be sayd that the blessed have faith in heaven nay why may it not be sayd that the second person of the Trinity hath â—aith ab 〈◊〉 if it be sufficient for faith that on assentâ— to truth for 〈…〉 and speaking of an other though 〈◊〉 evidently 〈…〉 and sees also that the other speaks The sure footing therfore doth faile and 〈…〉 â—eason of the Author 's confounding the evidence of our obligation to belieue the articles proposed by the Church with the evidenâ—e of God's revealing them by the 〈◊〉 proposal of the Church The testimony of the Church confirmed by so many supernatural signes makes it cleerly euident to vs that we are bound to believe God revealed all the doctrin delivered as his by the tradition and testimony of the Church but the tradition or signes of the Church do not make 〈◊〉 or self 〈◊〉 that God hath de facto revealed 〈…〉 which the Church proposeth as Divine It is moraly evident that God revealed it but not Metaphysicaly evident according to Schoolmens expression This moral evidence of God's revealing what the Church proposeth induceth a clâ—â—r and evident obligation vpon the will and soul of man to adheare as vnalterably to the doctrin of the Church as if we had metaphysical or cleer evidence that God revealed the same and the motiue of our faith and of this adhesion is God's veracity because it is manifest by the very light of Nature that we ought to believe God would not permit such a miraculous and moral evidence of his own revealing or speaking the mysteries of christianity by the mouth of our Church vnless he did realy speake by the same Church For want of this doctrin and distinction many vnderstand not how a man can possibly or at least prudently adheare or assent to an object with greater assurance then he sees cleer reason for If by cleer reason for an assent of Divine faith be meant that the truth of the mystery assented vnto must of necessity be cleer to the Assenter either in it self or in it's necessaire connection with the Revelation it is a gross mystake for that the difference between an assent grounded vpon cleer evidence of the truth or of reason and an assent grounded vpon Divine authority is that the first is a cleer intellectual sight of the truth itself the second is not so but a cleer sight of our own obligation of assenting to the truth revealed or related because wee see cleer and convincing signs of the sincerity and veracity of the Author or relator Now our obligation of believing God to be the Author of the doctrin of the Church being evident to ourselves we are bound to assent to the same Doctrin according to the evidence of our obligation that is with greather assurance then appearance of the truth The evidence of our obligation to assent is a sufficient ground for our assurance of the truth assented vnto Wherfore albeit some Catholick Divines have pretended to maintain in their schoole disputations that God by the infinitness of his supernatural power may concurr to an Act of faith though the existence of the revelation itself were evident to the believer yet besides that most of them speak irresolutly and incoherently in that point they all grant that our Christian faith must always involve obscurity in it's assent and that that faith which would have evidence both of the existence of the revelation and of the revealers veracity would be an other kind of faith much differring from our Christian and Catholick Besides we ought to consider that it is one thing to dispute in schooles of what God may do and an other thing to believe in the Church what he hath don In the schooles they dispute even of impossibilities because they make it their business to exercise witt in speculations but in the Catholick Church our chief business consists in believing and practising The reason why Faith doth require a mixture of obscurity or want of cleer evidence is because to believe is to trust him whom you believe for the truth signified by his words and if you did see the truth in it self or know that it cannot be separated from the words spoken you can no more trust the speaker for the truth so connected with his words then trust him for the money you know to be contained in a purse which he delivers vnto your hands for though you do not see the money you see the purse wherin you have cleer evidence the money is contained To believe therfore is to take on 's word for the truth as you do his bond or bill for money for which you have no other security but his worth and veracity and the greater on s worth and veracity is the more you ought to rely vpon it and doubt the less of his performance and therfore if you require any greater assurance or evidence of the truth then his supposed inclination to the same or his veracity you do him a great injury and resolve not to trust or believe him Wherfore God's worth veracity or inclination to truth being infinit we ought not to exact a cleer sight of the truth it self nor of any things evidently connected therwith if we do we neither trust nor believe him his inclination therfore to truth being infinit we ought not to retain the least suspition or feare of being deceived either by himself or by the Church whervnto he gives the charge and signes of declaring and proposing his word to vs because he who is infinitly inclined to speak truth is inclined to do it not only when himself speaks but every way that truth can be spoken or by every person and Organ that may be prudently taken to speak by his
would follow the greater the authority is the more slow we ought to be in submitting therunto or which is the same the more inclined God is to truth and the more powerfull he is to practise the same and to keep the Church stedy to truth the more slow we ought to be in believing the Church or God's known Ministers and Messengers SECT XIV Reasons for liberty of Conscience and how much both Piety and Policy is mistaken in making Prelatick Protestancy the Religion of the state by continuing and pressing the sanguinary and penal statutes against the Roman Catholick faith and the Act of vniformity against sectaries THere is not any thing more damnable to soules or more dangerous to states then to make the laws of the land the rule of faith and temporal statuts the ground of spiritual jurisdiction It is endeed Christian piety to fence and favour Religion with Imperial edicts and Royal Decrees and therfore it was prophecied of the Church Kings shall be thy nursing Fathers and Queens thy Mothers but to found the belief of eternal verities and of Christian Religion vpon temporal statuts and to frame the doctrin of the Church and the Caracter of the Clergy according to Acts of Parliament and to the interest of the Prince is neither piety nor policy in lawfull and vndoubted Soveraigns What Queen Elizabeth did to salue the sore of her illegitimacy was as great a prejudice and ought as litle be made a president to the royall family of the Stewards as Oliver Cromwel's Tyrany the laws and Religion of both equaly tending to it's total ruin and exclusion from the Crown with this only difference that Queen Elizabeth destroy'd the Stewards by reforming the Old Religion whervpon their right was grounded but Cromwell destroy'd them by reforming the New Religion whervnto they had conformed and wherby they endeavored to setle their Throne And indeed Souveraigns can expect no greater security or better success then the Royal family of the Stewards hath had whilst the Religion which their Subjects profess hath no other certainty or setlement but what is received from an arbitrary interpretation of Scripture confirmed by temporal statuts That the Protestant prelatick Religion hath no other rule but this and the laws of the Lands is manifest by so many changes of it's articles liturgy caracter and Translations of Scripture by publick and Parliamentory authority That it hath no certainty from it's own principleâ— is manifest by the acknowledged fallibility of that Church and by the liberty of interpreting God's word and by the prerogative of judging controversies of faith which the Tenets of all the Reformations and example of the first Reformers allow to any particular person that will claim the privilege of a reformed Christian or the spirit of a godly or guifted Protestant This liberty of professing and the vncertainty of protestancy having proved in all places and persons wherunto it had access a seed of rebellion destructive not only of the substance of Religion but of the tye of alleigance it was thought necessary for the preservation of Princes and the peace of their subjects to reduce the variety and regulat the extravagancy of the dissenting reformed doctrines into publick professions of protestancy as sutable to the interest of the souveraigns and inclinations of the subjects and customs of their Countries as could be devised And because the government of England continued Monarchical and that Episcopacy doth favor Monarchy and is essential to Parliaments the protestancy of the Church of England was made prelatick notwithstanding the incoherency of Episcopacy with the very foundation of the first and pure pretended reformations And seing ther is such antipathy between the caracter of Episcopacy and the principles of protestancy that the Church of England in the beginning of Q. Elizabeths reign durst not claim that caracter or any spiritual jurisdiction by succession from the Apostles and their successors the ensuing Catholick Bishops it was content to receive both as also the confirmation of it's prelatick doctrin from an vnheard-of spiritual supremacy of a lay Prince and from Acts of Parliament and so was it made the legal Religion of the state contrary to the principles both of the ancient Catholick faith and of the new protestant reformations How contrary this setlement of prelatick protestancy by a persecution of Popery is to Christian piety may easily appeare to them who will remember what hath bin sayd hertofore of the sanctity antiquity and continuall succession of the Roman Catholick Religion from the Apostles to this present and reflect vpon the principles begining and progress of protestancy in general and of the prelatick in particular How inconsistent with policy it is to press by the severity of laws a profession so generally dislik't as the prelatick it being contrary to the ancient Religion and not agreeing with the new Reformations experience hath demonstrated when not only all foreign Roman Catholick Princes and people stood neuters not much concerned whether Protestant Prelacy or Presbytery should prevaile in England they pittied indeed the Royal family and wish'd them good success against their rebellious subjects but this they wish'd to them as Princes not as Prelatiks not only Isay foreign Catholicks were neuters but all the Protestant Churches abroad were more inclined to favor the Presbiterian and fanatick English and Scotch Congregations then the King's Religion for that they come neerer to them and to the primitive and fundamental principles of Protestancy The reason why the Prelatick persuasion is so odious to the reformed Churches abroad and so opposed by Presbiterians and other Protestant Congregations at home is because the formality of it's ceremonies and the legality of it's discipline are incompatible with the primitive spirit liberty and principles of protestancy The protestant Bishops would fain Lord it over their brethren not content with the name and power of Protestant superintendents they strive to imitat the authory and severity of the Catholick Episcopal jurisdiction in their Courts and do what they can to retain a ceremonious decency in there Churches but neither is agreable with the nature and spirit of the Protestant Reformations which consist in an independency and exemption from all spiritual superiority and ceremonie of a particular person being supreme Judge and Interpreter of Scripture This spiritual judicature is the spiritual birth-right of every Protestant and the ground wherupon Luther and his followers raised their reformations and their new sense of the Ghospel Wherfore the resâ—raiâ— of this Protestant evangelical liberty and birth-right by the rigor of our lawes in favor of the prelatick jurisdiction and disciplin must needs make the law-makers and their religion as odious to all zealous Protestants as liberty of opinion and fancied Scripture are deere to a stubborn and humorâ—om peopâ—â— Let it then be maturely considered whether any thing can be more daungerous to the safety of the Soveraign or to the tranquillity of the state then to enact lawes
protestant principles to the discovery of the frauds and â—â—â—â—â—fications wherwith the prâ—â—atick Clergy doth disguise them and divert their flocks from reflecting vpon those sad effects which they have wrought and must work wheresoever they are 〈◊〉 the Religion of the staâ—e A TREATISE OF RELIGION AND GOVERNMENT THE THIRD PART Containing a plain discovery of the Protestant Clergies frauds and falsifications wherby alone their doctrin is supported and made credible The conscience and conveniency of restoring or tolerating the Roman Catholick Religion demonstrated SECT I. That either the learned Protestant or Roman Catholick Clergy are Cheats and how every illiterat protestant may easily discern by wich of the two Clergieâ— he is cheated and therfore is obliged vnder pain of damnation to examin so neer a concern and to renounce the doctrin and communion of that Church wherin he is cheated of the true Church being so conspicuous and manifest by such eminent and visible marks Christ might well forbid the faithfull to communicat with Hereticks and Schismaticks for that their conventicles 〈◊〉 never be mistaken for the whole or even a part of the Catholick Church vnless men â—ill be so simple as to take their â—are word when they say Hic est Christus aut illic wheras if it were possible for learned men to be innocently mistaken Christ's command had not bin obligatory for in such â— case we were not bound to believe that Christ is rather in one Church then other seing each Church had reason sufficient to excuse learned parties from schism and â—â—resy But it being impossible that God should command vs to believe on Congregation of Christians and not believe others that pretend also to be the true Church of Christ without confirming the testimony and doctrin of that one Congregation which he bids vs believe and preferr before the rest with such cleer signes of the truth and so evident marks of Divine authority that the others compared therwith can have no probability two things must be granted 1. that the Catholiâ—â— Church of Christ cannot be composed of all or any dissenting Congregations 2. That the one only Congregation which is the true and Catholick Church can never be so eclipsed but that it must appeare much more eminent in sanctity miracles conversion of Nations and much more credible in it's testimonies then any other Wherfore we conclude that either the learned protestant clergy or the catholick must be cheats seing that notwithstanding the evident and eminent signes and marks of God's Church can not be found in both or in any two Congregations dissenting in their doctrin and rule of faith yet each of them make their illiterat flocks believe that their own is the true Church of God whervpon the signes and seales of his authority and veracity do cleerly shine No human art or industry if not born-out with more then ordinary and notorious impudencie can pretend to discredit or darken the spendor of true Miracles Sanctity Successiâ—â— become Masters of the Comerce as shall be proved I hope these considerations will invite and incite them to examin which of both the Clergies the Roman Catholick that petitions for â—r the Prelatick Protestant that opposeth liberty of conscience are the cheats And that they may find it out withouâ— much trouble I have thought sit to lett them know there is not any one controversy between them and vs which hath not bin handled in English and argued to the full on both sides now the summe of our disputes being this whether the primitive Church was Roman Catholick or rather Protestant in the controverted points as Praying to Saints Transsubstantiation Purgatory worship of Images the Canonicall letter and sense of Scripturâ— c. To decide the Controversy each side quotes the words of Scripture Councells and Fathers because the true doctrine hath bin preserved and recorded in these writings Let him therfore that doubts of the sense of the Text and of the sincerity of him that quotes it compare the Authors words with the 〈…〉 he will infallibly find out who is the Cheat. For he that doth corrupt the words or change the sense of Scripâ—â—re Councells and Fathers doth not stick to the doctrin of the primitive Church And because I have spent some time both before and after my conversion to the Catholick faith in examining the falsifications and frauds of Protestants and their objections against Papists in the same kind I may speak with more assurance then others who have not so much experience and do protest that I never thought it possible before I found it was so de facto that men pretending not only to the name of reformed Christianity but to the Reality and Sanctity of an Episcopal caracter and charge of soules could be so vnconsiderable vnworthy and vncharitable in matters of eternity as I have â—ound the Protestant writers and in particular the prelaticks of the Church of England Let any who desires to satisfie his conscience or curiosity pervse and compare either the books of Jevel and Harding or of Bishop Morton and Father Pesons the nature or essence of a body Or whether quantity be a thing distinct from that which we call a corporeal substance SVBSECT I. VVith what impudency and hipocrisy Bishop Ievell and other prelatick writers began to maintain the Protestancy of the Church of England And how they were blamed for appealing to antiquity by some of their own Brethren TO manifest the impudency and hypocrisy wherwith Prelatick Protestancy was broach't and imposed vpon the layty in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths reign I will begin with Bishop Jevell's famous challenge and his Seconds that offered to maintain the primitive antiquity of Protestancy and the novelty of Popery His words are As I sayd before I say again I am content to yeeld and subscribe if any of our learned Adversaries or if all the learned men that be alive be able to bring one sufficient sentence out of any one Catholick Doctor or Father or out of any old Generall Councell c. for the space of 600. years after Christ c Protesting also that he affirmeth thus much not as carried away with the heat of zeale but as moved with the simple truth least any of you should happily be deceived and think there is more weight on the other side then in conclusion will be found c. And then he brake into this vehement Apostrophe O mercifull God! who could think that there could be so much wilfulness in the heart of man Then exclaimes O Gregory O Austin O Hierom O Chrysostom O Leo O Dionise O Anaclâ—tus O Calixtus O Paul O Christ Jf we be 〈◊〉 acknowledged the impossibility of defending the Protestant Religion by Tradition or by any monuments oâ— examples from antiquity or by the sayings of Fathers and Councells Insomuch that Archbishop Whitgift in his defence against the reply of Cartwright pag. 472. 473. doth not stick to say that almost all the Bishops and learned Writers of
the King as chief head in Q. Elizabeth who affected not the title of head of the Church as having preemiâ—â—â—â— because King Iames insisted much vpon a spiritual supremacy they translated to the King as supreme To maintain this error that Priests may have wives they translate 1. Cor. 9. v. 5. for woman wife as if St. Paul had bin married wheras it is evident in the 7. chapter of this same Epistle v. 8. that he was not married I say therfore to the vnmarried and widdows it is good for them if they abide even as I. And the same word which here they translate wife in cap. 7. v. 1. they translate woman because St. Paul saith there it is good for a man not to touch a woman but here to translate wife was not for their purpose In the same Epistle cap. 11. v. 2. contrary to both Greek and Latin they translate for Keep the Traditions as I have delivered them to you Keep ordinances c. 1. Cor. 15. v. 10. they add to this text I have laboured more abundantly then all they yet not I but the grace of God with me they add I say the grace of God which is with me 〈◊〉 that where the Apostle rather sayd the grace of God laborred whiâ—h him and consequently he with the grace of God which proveth 〈…〉 they by adding which is to the Text 〈◊〉 have it seeme that the Apostle did nothing at all but was moved like a thing without liâ—e or will and thus they prove by Scripture the Protestant errors Ephesians 1. v. 6. For he hath gratified vs 〈◊〉 â—â—lde vs gratious or conduct us with graâ—e they translate 〈◊〉 hath made vs accepted in the beloved against inherent grace in favour of the Protestant error of imputative justice Epist. Philip. cap. 4. v. 3. For sincere Companion help those women c. They translate true yoke-fellow help those woman tâ— make men believe that St. Paul had recommended those persons to his wife who indeed had none 1. Cor. 7. v. 8. Nothwithstanding the discipline of the Church of England is contrary to that of the Calvinists because reason oâ— state and the constitution of Parliaments requireth Bishops yet the doctrin therof is Zuinglian and Calvinian in most points and Doctor Abbots Archbishop of Canterbury who had the greatest hand in correcting the Bible by King Iames his order was Calvin's great admirer as may be seen in his books One of Calvin's blasphemies against Christ is that he feared and suffered the paines of hell nay and despaired vpon the Cross and in that sense doth explain his descent into hell admitting of no other That this blasphemy might be authorised by Scripture Cranmer and the whole Clergy and Church of England after him in their edition of Tyndal and Coverdales Bible an 1562. in the epistle to the Hebrews chap. 5. vers 7. corrupt St. Paul's words speaking of Christ praying vpon the cross He was heard for his reverence thus he was heard in that he feared to maintain their blasphemous paradox that our Saviour should have feared and felt the paines of hell vpon the Cross. To confirm also this wicked doctrin and confute Lynâ—◠〈◊〉 jâ—â—trum and Purgatory Dr. Abbots Archbishop of Cant. and the other Translators of the Bible corrupt 1. Pet. 3. v. 〈…〉 for wheras the words of Scripture are quickened or alive 〈…〉 or soule in the which spirit comming he preached 〈…〉 also that were in prison They translate quickned by the spirit by which also he went and preached vnto the spirits 〈…〉 This Translation was so gross that Doctor Montaguâ— â—ishop of Chichester and Noâ—wich reprehended for it Sir Henâ—â— will to whose care the translating of St. Peter's epistle committed but Sir Henry Savill told him plainly that Doctor Abbots and Dr. Smith Bishop of Glocester corrupted and altered the Translation of this place which himself had sincerly performed In pursuance of this their Calvinian heâ—â—sy and corruption they pervert the Text of Gen. 37. v. 35. translating graue for hell Protestants denying more places for soules after this life then heaven for the just and hell for the wicked and being ashamed to say that the holy Patriarch 〈◊〉 was damned or that he despared of his saluation when he sayd I will go down to my son into hell mourning Gen. 37. 〈◊〉 35. They translate I will go down into the grave vnto my 〈◊〉 mourning and rather then confess a third place and by consequence Purgatory after this life they father non-sence vpon Iacob and the Holy Ghost as though Iacob thought that his son Iosâ—ph had bin buried in a grave whereas Iacob thâ—ught and sayd immediatly before vers 33. an evill beast hath devoured him And therfore he must necessarily have meâ—â—â— that he would dye and go where he thought the soule of his son Joseph to be which was neither in heaven for then he would rather have ascended thither Ioyfull then descended to any place mourning neither did he mean the hell of the damned for that had bin desperation but to a low place where the lust soules then remained which was called Lyâ—nâ—â—â— Patrum or Abraham's Bosom the way of the holies as Saint Paul speaketh being not yet made open because our Saviour Christ was to dedicat and begin the entrance in his own person and by his passion to open heaven Tertullian lib. â—â— advers Marcâ—â—â— saith I know the bosom of Abraham was 〈◊〉 heavenly place but only the higher Hell or the higher part of hell from which speech of the Fâ—ther◠〈…〉 afterward that other â—ame Lymbas Patrâ—â—â— that is the very 〈◊〉 or vppermost and outmost part of hell where the Fathers of the Old Testament rested The words of St. Peter 2. 〈◊〉 1. v. â—5 And I will do my diligeâ—â—â—â— to have you often after my decease also that you may keep a memory of these things seemed to Protestants so plain in favour of his praying for the Christians after his decease that King Iames his Translators change them into these Moreover I will endeavor that you may be able after my decease to have these things alwayes to remembrance We ask Protestants why do they wrest this place of the Psalme and corrupt Scripture against the honour which ought to be given to Saints Psalme 138. Thy friends O God are bâ—â—ome exceeding honorable their prinâ—edoâ— is exceedingly strengthned which is Saint Hierom's translation from the Hebrew confirmed by the great Rabbin R. Salomon and the Greek Textâ— and never excepted against by any learned Father of the Church vntill the Protestant Translators were pleased to alter it thus How pretious are thy thoughts 〈◊〉 O God how great is the summe of them as if multiplicity of thoughts were an admirable excellency in God wheras his 〈◊〉 admitâ—s not many but rather one comprehensive knowledge without composition and therfore the Holy Ghost would not have sayd of them in the next verse that they are more in number then the Sands which expression may
can divert the Layty from entertaining any thoughts of curiosity or scruples of conscience in order to the examination of this matter of so great importance and can make them believe that K. Henry 8. passion to Ann Bullen was a just cause to introduce the Reformation and to assume the Supremacy or that the Earle of Hartfords ambition of being absolutly Protector of England quite contrary to K. Henry 8. Testament and to his own Oath of not assuming any power above his Collegues and Tutors of K. Edward 6. was a divin inspiration to bring in Zuinglius his Sacramentarian Religion into the Realm or that the Duke of Northumberlands poysoning the yong King and excluding the next and lawfull heirs from the Crown to conferr it vpon his own own son and the Lady Iane Grey pretending therby to promote his new Zuinglian Ghospell was the work of the holy Ghost Or that Q. Elizabeths murther of the Q. of Scots and her Parliaments Decrees and endeavors to preferr any natural issue of her body to this Empire before the legitimat and immediat Heirs the Stevards and therby to continue her prelatick Protestancy were things lawfull according to the principles of Christianity and Catholick faith If the Protestant Clergy I say can persuade the layty that all this was lawfull and agreable to the doctrin which Christ and his Apostles did preach either they have an abundance of wit or they that believe them very litle judgment A great wit maintained that they may as well make Mahomets Alcoran a plausible Religion in England and gain therby as great revenues as they do by their Reformation and Protestant Scripture wherof neither the Canon letter or sense is that which God delivered to his Church as heretofore hath bin proved I do not speak in rallery sayd the gentlemen but seriously when I say that men who believe the Protestant Religion to be true may be induced by the same persons and the like reasons to believe that Mahometisme is the true Religion This hath also bin solidly proved by Doctor Reynolds in his Calvino-Turcismus and by others also when they demonstrat that Calvinism and Turcism agree in the principall points and every one knows that the doctrin of the 39. articles of the Church of England is the quintessence of Calvins doctrin and was by him applauded though he said that as to Point of disciplin there were many tolerable fooleries in in that Church and Lyturgy But let us pursue the Gentlemans parallel of Mahomet and his doctrin with our English Reformers and their doctrin and we shall plainly see that there is as much reason to believe Mahometism as prelatick Protestancy and that both these Religious were planted and propagated by the same means nay that it is more to be admired how our Countreymen became Protestants then the Arabians or Armenians became Turcks When Mahomet began to preach his doctrin in the East Christianity there was so discredited by being divided into sects and into so many heresies of Arians Manichees Nestorians c. that men were disposed by that diversity of opinions to follow any new Religion especialy that of Mahomet becaus he borrowed something from every Sect and as the 39. Articles of the Church of England agree in some fundamental points with Catholicks and also with hereticks so Mahomet agreeth in the worship of one God with Iews and Chriâ—tians and in the doctrin and worship of Christ he comes at â—eer to Christianity as most Arians and Nestorians or the Antitrinitarian Protestants of Hungary Poland c. nay as Bp. Morton and some other Prelaticks But when Luther in Germany and Cranmer in England began Protestancy all the west and Latin Church agreed in the Roman Catholick faith no other Religion was regarded and the â—emnants of Wickleff and Hus were hissed out of the world at least were nothing so considerable any where as the above mentioned heresies had bin in the East when Mahomet began there to preach his Alcoran So that if heresy or apostacy can have any excuse Mahometism in its begining was more excusable then Protestancy by reason of the more considerable divisions that then were among Christians in matters of doctrin then when Luther began his Reformation Now let us come to particular reflexions vpon both Mahomet retained some parts of Scripture as well as Protestants and had as good grounds to reject what he did not fancy of the letter and sense therof as Protestants have to be choosers of their own Canon and interpretation Mahomet gives as many rules of Morality as Protestants and though he allows of many wives Protestants do the same with this only difference that Mahomet says t is lawfull to keep many at once Protestants say you must keep but one at a time and that you cannot have the variety of wives men so much desire without the formality of a divorce how litle is requisit for the validity and legality of Protestant divorces we have proved heretofore by the authority and principles of the first Reformers and the dayly practises of their Successors In all other things Mahomets sect is more austere in fasting praying abstaining from wine c. then Protestancy And becaus both agree in the incoherency and absurdity of their principles both also agree in planting propagating and defending their doctrin not by miracles or rational arguments but by force and sanguinary statuts And this is the reason why Catholicks are as litle permitted to dispute or reason for the Roman Religion in these Kingdoms as Christians in Turky and Priests are as much perseeuted for writing books of Controversies as Printers and Stationers and severely punished Thus much as to the paralell of both doctrins But If we compare their persons or vertues we shall find that Mahomet was an honester man and deserved more credit then Luther Calvin Cranmer or any of the first Protestant Reformers He never was baptized at least never professed any Religion vntill he composed his own with the help of an Arian Monk but all the first Reformers had first professed the Catholick faith which afterwards they renounced pretending that God had forsaken his Church for many ages and presumed to say that he had authorised and inspired them to reform without shewing any warrant that doctrin vnto which their betters in learning vertue and judgment actualy submitted as vnto the true Catholick and themselves also had embraced as such vntill their pride and lust prevailed against their conscience Mahomet married a Widdow and had made no vows not to marry the first Reformers married Nuns and themselves also were votaries Calvin only excepted but his incontinency was no less scandalous and notorious then theirs having lived in adultery with a Gentlewoman of Mongis that left her husband at Lansanâ—â— to enjoy Calvins Company at Geneva who attempted also to commit the like sin with the Lady â—ollande of Bredrode wise to a sickly Nobleman called Iames Borgongue Lord of
Faith to a doubtfull authority therfore vnless they who pretend to be the Clergy can evidence by vndeniable miracles either wrought by themselves or by their knowen spiritual predecessours that professed the same Faith their iurisdiction and doctrin they can not rationaly pretend to have the charge of soules or any divine authority for determining controversies of Religion Because seeing the principal part of Religion doth consist in a perfect submission of the vnderstanding to diviâ—e authority even against the appearence of sense and the probability of reason vnless the Church or Clergy wherupon we rely doth make it evidently credible by supernatural signs that their authority and doctrin is divine their religion is not rational and therfore no rational person is bound without that supernatural evidence to acknowledg in them a spiritual jurisdiction or to follow their dictamens and forsake his own privat dictamens and principles of probability or the seeming evidence of his senses Some men do require more then this and are of opinion that a Religion can not be rational vnless the truth therof be cleerly discerned or demonstrated by the light of natural reason and judg it a great folly in men to believe what they do not comprehend But this maxim is destructiue to Religion and reason it doth ouerthrow the very foundation of both which consists in acknowlegding an incomprehensible Deity whose perfections are infinit his thoughts and revelations and by consequence the mysteries of Religion inscrutable and therfore to be revered not examined by so limited and imperfect creatures as we are that can hardly diue into the bottom of ordinary difficulties and discern the immortality of our own soules or the nature and composition of any visible body And albeit an excellent wit of our age in a late Treatise hath endeavored to cleere by natural reason the mysteries of Christian Faith and in order to facilitat the beliefe of Transubstantiation doth teach that one body can not be in many places at one tyme nor be penetrated with another body and therfore is for'ct to say that Christ hath as many bodys as there are consecrated pieces of bread yet I think it more agreable not only to Catholik Religion but to natural reason to believe that the very same body of Christ that was born of the blessed Uirgin and is in heaven is also under every consecrated species otherwise it must be sayd that Christ our Sauiour is a monster that hath not only as many heads but as many bodies as there are Consecrations But if this argument be thought more popular then philosophical I hope schollars themselves will judg it unreaâ—â—nable that Divines or Philosophers be too positive in defining the immutable essences of things or which is the same in determining what is possible or impossible for God to do and in deducing conclusions from such notions as they call natures If we consider that we owe all our human knowledg to the evidence of sence which is often fallacious and to reflections of the mind which are alwayes fallible we must grant that we may be frequently mistaken in the ground of our demonstrations and do sometimes take our own fancies and false conceits for true objects which haue no real existance in themselues nor any other immutability in order to Gods power besides that tenacity or obstinacy wherwith men stick to their own opinions This is sufficiently proved by the great discord and diuersity of opinion that is in the schooles euen concerning the essence or nature almost of euery thing and particularly of a body or quantity Wherfore it is more probable that M. r Bonart is as much mistaken in placing the nature or essence of a Body in actual extention as he takes others to be in their contrary opinions concerning the same subject otherwise Christ hath non only as many Bodys as there are consecrated species but also it followeth if his Body can not be penetrated or in the same place with another that he united to his Diuine person a nature which he cannot command to be whersoeuer himselfe as God is pleased to be I am no Vbiquist and therfore I grant that the hypostatical vnion doth not make Christs body to be every where or whersoeuer the Diuinity is but I think all Christians ought to belieue that it is possible for Christ as man to be in any particular place and penetrated with any Body whatsoeuer where his person and Diuinity is And as for Mr. Bonart his way of defending how Christs Body did and may penetrat other Bodys I see no difference between it and that of the heretiks which himselfe derides and condemns Pag 257. but that the Heretiks say he did shew his body to the assembled Disciples through some chinck of the wall or through the Key-hole of the doore and M. r Bonart says Christ shot or thrust his Body in through the indiscernable pores which are in euery body and how the whole or the parts of a human body such as that of Christ then was and now is can be conueyed entire through one or many such litle and distant pores without loosing all human shape if a perfect penetration be not allowed I do not understand And I belieue M. r Bonart will hardly be able to declare how the substance of Christs Body is not lost as well as the shape by Christs passing through the pores for that according to his principles pag. 243. the substance of euery Body consists in such a greatness and figure of the parts as compose that body and upon this ground he proceeds when he sayes ibid. that the substance of bread and wine is changed into the Flesh and â—loud of Christ because the greatness and figure of the parts of bread and wine are changed though al the rest doth remain If therfore the greatness figure and by consequence the shape of Christs Body and its parts be changed or proportioned to the pores of the penetrated body as they must of necessity be before they can pass or be shot through them Christs Body and the parts therof do loose the substance as well as the shape of a human body according to M. r Bonartes doctrin Hence we conclude that actual extension doth not so cleerly nor so catholickly declare the essence of a Body but that it must leaue or breed some doubts of Christs humanity of Gods omnipotency and of his Mothers virginity Besides if the least particles or Atoms of a Body are of the same nature with the whole and haue real extension by the addition wherof they make a body greater as this Author holds it can not be well comprehended how the Atoms can be so litle as not to be capable of being lessend by Gods power especially seeing M. r Bonart doth grant one side of an Atom may be toucht and the other side not toucht For if so How can any that believes Gods omnipotency imagin that God can not separat or divide sides
and reformations They began in Luthers owne days and still continue to increase and multiply having no rule of faith but an obscure text of Scripture nor no Church or Court of judging the controversies therof with an obligation to submit there-unto but every ons privat opinion which must needs breed diuision add confusion And so it happened in the very beginning to Luther For his Disciples observing that every one of them-selves might pretend to be sent by God by an extraordinary vocation as well as Luthers seing he proved not his Mission by Miracles or by any supernatural sign to reforme the Church divers of them separated from him and set up for them-selves as Zuinglius who invented the Sacramentarian Religion against Christs real presence in the Sacrament and Bernard Rotman Father of Anabaptists c. It were tedious to relate all their divisions and almost impossible We will only assure the Reader that in the space of 30. years after Luther began his Reformation it was divided and subdivided in Germany alone into 130. Sects For first his Disciples divided them-selves into four principal Reformations of plain Lutherans halfe Lutherans Antilutherans or Sacramentarians and Anabaptists These plain Lutherans into eleuen Sects and these againe into soft rigid and extravagant Lutherans the semilutherans or half Lutherans also into eleven Sects The Sacramentarians or Antilutherans into 56. and one of these into 9. The Anabaptists into 13. Sebastianus Traneus a Protestant numbreth 70. How all these have bin subdivided since we may guess at by the variety we see in England of Protestant Religions not with standing the severity of the Laws in favor of the Prelatik Not one of these Sects have subordination to another and agree only in some generall Notions of Christianity and in impugning the Roman Catholick Religion one of the marks wherby the Holy Fathers discerned Heresies Each of them pretend to be a true Church and condemn the rest as Schismatical and Heretical Congregations perpetualy quoting Scripture one against the other but understood according to every on s conveniency fancying or feigning that the Spirit of God inspires him to reform not only the Roman Doctrin but the Protestant reformations But when we call to them for their comission which must be signed by Miracles and desire to know by what authority they presume to take vpon them so high an employment they tell vs that Miracles are ceased in the Church and all ours either counterfeit or Diabolicall wrought by the Devill to confirm us in the Idolatry of the Mass Invocation of Saints c. But because our Miracles exceed the Devills power and can be wrought only by God rather then Protestants will embrace the truth by Miracles testified they teach a blasphemy saying that God doth give power of working true Miracles unto false teachers not to confirm their false and Popish opinions but to tempt those the Indians Iaponeses and Chineses unto whom they be sent By which Paradox they call in question Christianity it self for why might not God tempt the Iews and primitive Christians by Christs Miracles as well as the Indians and Iaponians by others of the same nature and as prodigious If the Indians be not bound to belieue the doctrin preach't to them though confirmed by our true miracles why should the Jews or any others be obliged in conscience to belieue Christ For if God may work true Miracles to make a falshood so plausibly credible as to oblige prudent men to belieue it no prudent man is bound to belieue the truth when it is euidently confirmed with true Miracles and by consequence none was or is bound to belieue in Christ which doctrin is impious and contrary to our Sauiours own words Ioan. 5.36 and against 2. Cor. 12. Hebr. 2.4 and Marc. 16.20 and Joan 15.24 Where our Sauiour declares that the reason why the incredulous Jews did sin in not believing his Diuinity was because he confirmed his doctrin with Miracles Jf I had not don among them the works which no other man did they had not sinned As for their authority of reforming the Roman Catholick faith they answered that they needed no other warrant but Scripture which did cleerly condemn the Popish Tenets Being desired to shew what parts or words of Scripture were Contrary to the Popish Tenets for that after comparing all places and Texts very godly and learned men could find no such opposition between Gods word and the Roman doctrin they replied that the reason why the Popish Diuins and Prelats did not see their own errors afterall their search and study was because they had not the spirit of God which had reuealed to Protestants the true meaning of holy writ though they could not deny but that their own interpretation was new and contrary to that which the visible Church of the 15. â—n age had receiued from the 14 th and the 14 th from the 13 th and so forth Therfore they all conspired in maintaining that the visible Church had erred in doctrin and that the mystery of iniquity began euen with the Apostles or immediatly after But because some parts of Scripture are so cleere against their new doctrin that they could not be wrested against the Roman Catholicks nor reach the Protestant thy framed a new Canon of Scripture and excluded as Apocryphall many Books and Chapters which spook cleerly against them and in their translations of the ould and new Testament into vulgar languages they added to and substracted from Gods word what they thought fit to make the illiterat people belieue that their new inuentions were agreable to Scripture and that Popery was quite contrary to the same And because none of the first Reformers was a Bishop and they knew Bishops only could consecrat other Bishops and Priests and that no Congregation could be esteemed a Church with out that caracter and calling according to the receiued maxim of S. Hieron Ecclesia non est quae non habet Sacerdotem Luther And the rest who pretended a Reformation judged it necessary to alter this doctrin and declare that all Christians both men and women are Priests by baptism yet that only such as are chosen by the Congregation or Magistrat ought to exercise the function for the auoyding of confusion Luther endeauors to proue it at large thus The first office of a Priest is to preach the word c. But this is common to all next is to baptyze and this also may do euen women c. The third is to consecrat bread and wyn but this also is common to all no less then Priests and this I avouch by the authority of Christ him-self saying Do this in remembrance of me this Christ spook to all there present and to come afterwards whosoever should eat of that bread and drink of that wine c. This also is wittnessed by S. Paul who 1. Cor. 11. repeating this applyeth it to all the Corinthians making them all as
commission The Roman Church therfore being prudently taken for the Organ of God's voice it is as impossible we should be misledd by it's doctrin as it is that God should go against his infinit inclination to truth or should violat his own veracity Had God's veracity bin limited to his own personal or immediat speech and not extended to what-soever he delivers by the mouth and ministery of others and of his Church it had not bin infinit his credit would have ended with Christ's preaching to the Apostles and though they were bound to believe their Master non could be obliged to believe them But seing God's veracity is infinit and his words must continue for ever they can be as little confined to the persons or Pastors of any on certain age as infinit veracity to on particular truth or infinit excellency and goodness to any one degree of perfection Now seing that God's worth and veracity or his infinit inclination to speak truth cannot be greatet in on matter nor in on age then in an other and that according to on 's inclination to any thing must be the application of his power to effect it we must conclude that God is as much engaged by his worth and goodness and as much inclined by his veracity and as much applied by his omnipotency to speak truth by the mouth of the Church as by his own and in the least matter as much as in the greatest and in every succeeding age as in that of the Apostles and that vnless his worth wisdom veracity goodness and omnipotency faile that Church which beareth the miraculous marks of his authority and exerciseth his ministery must be infallible in proposing and declaring his will and word in all Controversies whatsoever So that they who grant the Church 〈◊〉 infallible only in fundamental articles of faith deny Godâ—â—oodness worth veracity and omnipotency and they who believe not the doctrin of the Roman Catholick Church as the word of God because forsooth they have not cleer evidence that it is the word of God do no more believe nor trust God in the other they assent vnto then he who says he believes and trusts a man whose word or writing he will not take for 100. pounds vnless he delivers to him at the same time that summe of money not only sealed but seen in a bag The reason of this last assertion is cleer because one of the differences between the word of God and the word of men is that you mistrust men for the truth though you heare their own voice and have evidence that they speak the imperfection of their nature making their speech subject to falshood and themselves to frailty therfore we may mistrust their veracity and doubt they be mistaken or deceive vs though they pretend and profess to speak nothing but truth It is not so with God whose nature being infinitly perfect and truth it self it is manifest by natural reason that he can neither be mistaken nor deceive vs by his words and by consequence if we knew evidently that him-self speaks or that the words or doctrin vttered by the Church are his we can no more mistrust or not believe him then mistrust his Deity or feare a flaw in his perfections and fraud in his proceedings So that Protestants resolving not to believe the doctrin of the Church of Rome made sufficiently credible by supernatural signes to be Divine vntill it be made cleerly evident to them that it is the word of God resolve their faith into heretical obstinacy because they resolve not to believe or trust God that evidence which they exact not being compatible with the merit trust obscurity and obsequiousness of Christian belief nor with the duty of rationall Creatures They may be compared to some Irish or Scotch Rebells refusing to obey the King's Lieu-tenant and Commissioners because for-sooth they have not clear evidence that the commissions and commands are signed by the King though they see his Majesty's hand and seale for the authority set over them which also is obeyd and acknowledged by the better sort and greater part of both Nations yet the Rebells will not submit to any Orders vnless the King leave England go in person to rule them and satisfie every particular fellow that he hath named such a Lieu-tenant or Commissioner or vnless his Majesty will immediatly by him-self exercise his royal Jurisdiction signe and seale his commissions in their sight c. Some will think there is a great disparity in the comparison for that God may without trouble or prejudice to him-self reveale his will and pleasure to every particular person which Kings can no more do then be in many places at one time Therfore what inconveniency can it be that God make evident to every particular person either by a clear signe of his presence or by an evident proof of his spirit which doctrin is Divine which not without obliging men to believe that the Roman Catholick or any other Church is infallible and can not propose falshood for God's word To this we answer that God might not only reveale his mysteries to every person but save us also without subordination to any Church or Pastors or dependency of Sacraments but all Christians agree that he hath bin pleased not to do so so that the question is not what he could have don but what he hath don But it appears by the light of reason that ther is a certain distance and decorum due to Majesty and superiority by virtue wherof God or even a Creature that is supreme in any government may command his inferiors and subjects by subordinat officers and warant these officer's authority by some outward signes and seales of his Soveraignty which signes though they may be possibly counterfeited yet oblige the People so governed to obey Ministers so qualified as submissively as if him-self had immediatly delivered his own commands Wherfore though it were possible that a King might without trouble write and deliver all his oâ—ders immediatly or without the assistance of Secretaries Ministers and Messengers yet it were not fit And why the Protestant Doctors that write of this subject should think fit that God ought to deprive him-self of a decency and decorum due even to human Majesty to humor their curiosity or to comply with their obstinacy J can not comprehended nor attribute to any other thing but to want of humility and excess of heresy the malice wherof consists in contemning God's authority and denying his veracity when sufficiently appearing in the Church and though not self evidently yet so convincingly as to make our obligation of submitting thervnto evident Jt is therfore agross absurdity to think or say that the reverence due to the Divine authority obligeth vs not to submit or not assent therunto vnless it be more then moraly evident and by consequence more them sufficiently evident vnto us that we can not be mistaken in our submission or assent For hence
his soule how that being a zealous Protestant and very familiar to the Earle of Leicester in the beginning of this Queenes dayes when M. r Iewell 's Book was newly come forth and being also learned himself in the latin tongue took paines to examin several leaves therof and finding many falshoods therin which were inexcusable as they seemed to him he conferred the same with the Earle who willed him that the next time M. r Iewell dined at his table he should take occasion after dinner to propose the same which he did soon after and receiving certain trifling answers from M. r Iewell he waxed more hot and urged the matter more earnestly which Iewell perceiving told him in effect that Papists were Papists and so they were to be dealt with all and other answer he could not get which thing made the good Gentleman make a new resolution with himself and to take that happy course which he did to leave his Countrey and many great Commodities which he enioyed therin to enjoy the liberty of conscience for salvation of his soule The second example which I remember of my own knowledge is M. r Doctor Stevens a learned man yet alive who being Secretary or Chaplyn to M. r Iewell for I remember not well whether and a forward man in Protestant Religion at that tyme espied certain false allegations in his Master's Book whilst it was yet vnder the print in London wherof advertising him by letters for that he supposed it might be by oversight the other commanded notwithstanding the print to go forward and passed it over as it was which this man seeing that had a conscience and sought the truth indeed resolved to take another way of finding it out and having found it in the Catholick Church where only it is to be found he resolved also to follow it and so he did and went voluntarily into banishment for the same where yet he liveth vnto this day in Finance with good reputation both of learning and godliness The third example that I call to mind is the worthy man before named M. r William Reynolds who being first an earnest Professor and Preacher of Protestant Religion in England he fell in the end to read over M. r Iewell 's book and did translate some part therof into latin but before he had passed half over he found such stuff as made him greatly mislike of the whole Religion and so he leaving his hopes and commodities in England went over the sea into these parts and the last yeare of Iubily to wit 1575. he came to Rome and brought that book with him and presented both himself and it to the Tribunal of Inquisition of his own free motion and accord c. And himself after absolution received from his former errors which he with great humility and zeale required and myself also at that time did speak with him in that place he returned into France and Flanders and there lived many years with singular edification for his rare virtue and learning and how heartily indeed he was converted may well appeare by his zealous writings both in Latin and English in defence of Catholick Religion Thus much the Author of the three Conversions I am credibly informed by a person then present that Primat Bramhall and some of his Majesties Chaplains who now are Bishops persuaded or endeavored to persuade our most gratious Soveraign Charles 2. who was then at Bruges that this Doctor Reynolds was made a Papist by disputing with an other Doctor Reynolds whom he intended to make a Protestant And that the Roman Catholick Doctor Reynolds at the same time turned Protestant Some think this story was feigned to make the King believe that there is as much to say for the Protestant religion as for the Catholick And to the end his Majesty might not reflect vpon the falshood of a Religion forsaken out of meere conscience by it's greatest Doctors when they were most applauded and when they had reason to expect the richest Benefites and greatest honours From the Apology of the Church of England we will pass to John Fox his Acts and Monuments a Book no less commended by the Protestant Clergy then the former because by frauds and lyes it serves their turn to foole the well meaning Layty who take it to be a true Ecclesiasticall History of the persecuted Church of Christ. SECT V. Frauds follies and falsifications of Iohn Fox his Acts and Monuments and of his Magdeburgian Masters in their Centuries the litle sincerity of the English Church and Clergy in countenancing such falls dealing AFter that Luther and Calvin's desperat shift of the invisibility of Christ's Church for more then a thousand years before their pretended reformations had bin evidently confuted as not only impossible but as repugnant also to Scripture which compares the Church to a Citty placed vpon a mountain and a shining Sun c. Their schollers vndertook to shew a succession of the Protestant Church and to that purpose some drunken Germans as any sober man must judge them to have bin by their writings whose names were Flaccus Illyricus Joannes Vigandus Matheus Judex and Basilius Faber met togeather in some warme stoue of Magdeburg and there tipling took vpon them to Iudge of the writings doctrin and miracles of all the ancient Fathers from the first Century to the last Of the very next Century to the Apostles these merry Companions were pleased to give this Censure in the very title of the Chapter Inclinatio Doctrinae complectens peculiares incommodas opiniones stipulas errores Doctorum quae palam quidem hoc est scriptis tradita sunt The declining of Christ and his Apostles doctrin conteining the peculiar and incommodious opinions of Doctors their errors straw and stubble which were left publickly by them that is to say in their writings And thus they Censure St. Iraeneus Tertullian Clemens Alexandrinus Origen Methodius c. saying they abuse and wrest the Scriptures intolerably and grossly to favor popish opinions These foure merry saxons reprehend Ignatius St. Iohn's scholler for vsing the phrase offerre sacrificium imâ—olare St. Cyprian for saying sacerdotem vice Christi fungi Deo patri sacrificium offerre St. Martial scholler of the Apostles saying sacrificium Deo Creatori offertur in Ara. Martial in Ep. ad Burdegal and so all other points wherin Protestants and Catholicks do disagree calling the antient Fathers stubble Doctors the same they say of St. Basil Lactantius Gregory Nissen Hilary Nazianzen Ambrose Ephrem and Hierom c. and pretend their doctrin to be against Scripture and the Miracles they relate to be either forged or Diabolicall or at least wrought by God to punish the credulity of Christians But the errors of ancient condemned Hereticks to be the true and sincere primitive faith and produce no other proof for this their drunken foolery but their own presumption and privat interpretation of Scripture Wherfore Valentia a learned Jesuit
so frequently objected they were for meer shame corrected in the new Translation seâ— forth by order of King James And then appeared the forged Register of Mason to supply the 〈◊〉 of that falsification and to make the world believe that the first Protestant Bishops Parker Jewell Horn 〈◊〉 had bin consecrated by imposition of Episcopal hands with great solemnity and all due formalities at Lambeth wheras for the space of above â—0 years before that time as hath 〈◊〉 said â—â—â—tofore no man could tell or hear where or by whom these men had bin made Bishops for at the Nags-head they were rejected by Lâ—â—daf and Sâ—ories consecrating form in the same place was ridiculous notwithstanding that it had bin the greatest controversy between Catholicks and Protestants and the name of the place and 〈◊〉 continually demanded in print If an authentick Register 〈◊〉 my credible witness had bin produced when some such 〈◊〉 was called for by D. r Harding and 〈…〉 50. yeâ—rs before Mason appeared in print the dispute had bin ended 〈…〉 great honour of the Prelaticks and Confusion of the 〈◊〉 but they were answered only with an Act of Parliament 8. Eliz. 1. declaring that whatsoever had bin don in virtue of the great soule of England and the Queens supremacy was well don and should stand legal and valid The falsification of Images for Idols was corrected t' is true in the new Testament but in the ould exod 20.4 and in the ten Commandments and Catechisms for Children they 〈…〉 corruptions translating graven Images for graven thing against all Texts Hebrew Greek and Laâ—â—n for that the hebrew word pesel is the very same that sculpâ—â—â— in latin that is a graven or carved thing and the Greek 〈◊〉 eidâ—â—lon an Jdol So that by this fals and wicked practise 〈◊〉 Protestant Clergy doth still endeavor to discredit the Roâ—â—n Catholick Religion and therby continue their own auâ—â—ority and Beneficies making the layty believe contrary to their own consciences and corrections in the new Testaâ—â—â—â— that popery is Idolatry for admitting worship of Images 〈◊〉 if Image and Idol were the same thing and equally forbidden by Scripture and God's Commandements To confirm their flocks in this persuasion they tell them the reason why Catholicks leave out some repetitions of the first Commandement in their Catechismes is because they know that to worship Images is against Scripture wheras in our Latin and many vulgar Roman Catechismes nothing is omitted and in such short ones wherin all the words are not expresly mentioned it 's don only not to charge Childrens memories with more then with the substance of every Commandement and the substance of the first consists in the first â—ords therof In the last Commandement also we put in brief only these words Thou shalt not covet an other man's goods Omitting Oxes and Asses c. If our design had bin to corrupt 〈◊〉 conceale the words and sense of Scripture in the first comâ—â—â—dement in favor of Images we would not have set down the Text so cleerly in any of our larger Catechismes and much less in our Latin and vulgar Translations of the Bible Hence it followeth that we do not take away the second Commandement as Protestants object who begin the second precept from these words Thou shalt not make to thee a graven thing c. which we make part of the first and with S. Austin q. 71. in Exodum we divide the first table into three precepts directing vs to God the second into seaven belonging to our selves vpon this reason among others because to make or have any graven thing or similitude of any creature to the end to adore it as God were indeed to have a strange God which is forbid in the first words of the first Commandment and so all that followeth to the commination and promise forbiddeth false Gods and appeareth to be but one precept in substance But the desire and internal consent to adultery and theft differ altogeather as much as the external acts of the same sins and therfore seing adultery and theft are forbidden by two distinct precepts the prohibition of the internal desire doth also require two precepts To maintain their heresies against the single life of Priests as also against the excellency of Virginity vowes of Chastity free will and the possibility of Keeping God's Commandments they corrupt the Text of Math. 19.11 translating contrary to all Copies both Hebrew Greek and Latin All men can not receive this saying in steed of all men do not receive this saying for we may have the gift of continency if we will S. Austin lib. de gratia lib. arbit c. 4. faith whosoever have not this gift given them it is either for that they will not have it or that they fulfill not that which they will and they that have this gift or attain to this word have it of God and their own freewill And Origen explaining this very text tract 7. in Math. saith this gift is given to all that ask for it To authorise the Protestant error of Iustification and Salvation by faith only set down as an article of saith in the 39. of the Church of England they translate Luc. 18 4â— Receive thy sight thy faith hath saved thee insteed of Receive thy sight thy faith hath made thee whole it being cleere that the blind man who answered Christ's question desired corporal sight and that our Saviour accordingly granted what he asked in the same manner and with the same words he did to others that he cured of the same disease Mark 10.52 Luke 8.48 50. which places are corrected and rightly translated but as they did in the translation of Images for Idols leave some places vncorrected so they thought fit to do in this particular to the end some places or other of their Scripture might remain still â—â—â—tore against Popery as Rom. 11.4 they translate for Bâ—al the Jmage of Baal c. Acts 19.24 they translate for Temples of Diana Shrines 〈◊〉 make shrines of saints Bodies and of other Reliques odious â—nd vers 35. they add Image to the Text which is not in any Copy Greek or Latin to condemn the worship of Images And Chap. 20. v. 28. to attribute the rule and Government of the Church to the King principaly and more properly then to Bishops Insteed of rule the Church of God they translate take heed therfore vnto your selves and to all the flock over the which the holy Ghost hath made you overseers to feed the Church of God And with the same fraud and flattery they translate 1. Pet. 2.13 Be subject to every human Creature for God thus Submit your selves to every ordinance of man for the Lords sake as though it were all one to be subject and obey every temporal Prince in things lawfull and to obey every ordinance and by consequence in spiritual as well as in temporal maters In the same place also wheras in K. Edward 6. dayes the English Bible had To
confess a fault in the maintenance wherof their fortunes are concerned and by consequence how accomptable the protestant layty is to God for not mistrusting and examining the truth and sincerity of their own Clergy being so indigent and so interessed persons and so confidently charged and so frequently caught with falshoods what fraud can be more visible then to make men believe that so infamous and dissolute persons as Luther Zuinglius Calvin Cranmer and Beza c. were Saints sent by God to restore his Church vnto it's primitive doctrin and spirit or that they and all protestants do agree in all matters of faith against Papists Their dissentions vices and wickedness are so manifest that they can not be denyed without impudency and without giving the lye to the whole world and contradicting their own writings And yet the Arch-bishop of Canterbury and his Junta of Divines would face down Mr. Walsingham that there was no such matter and because the poore man humbly petitioned to have the matter decided by comparing their own books which were in the next roome with his notes he was censured and called a foolish bold Knave impudent fellow sâ—â—cy Companion c. and threatned with prison and pillary And for that they durst not betray the weakness of their cause by so publick and violent proceedings against a known protestant who desired to continue one of themselves if protestancy did not prove to be a mistake of Christianity the Arch-bishop to be shut of him sent him to the Commissary of St. Albans to be resolved forsooth whether Luther acknowledged in his Books that he began the protestant Reformation and impugned the Mass adoration of the Sacrament Invocation of Saints c. moved therunto by the devill 's arguments in a real conference between himself and sathan as if this passage and others of Luther's and Calvin's works were not to be found in London or in his Graces Library at Lambeth as well as at St. Albans And after that by his own importunity Mr. Walsingham had obtained of Doctor Covell to shew him Luther's book wherin he acknowledged this conference and conviction of the Devill 's arguments that the Doctor should interrupt him and divert the whole discourse with a rush you see I have this book and many such like 3. Reflexion By what particular indirect means cavills and Calumnies the Arch-bishop himself endeavored to maintain the protestant Religion and discredit the Catholick delivering to Mr. Walsingham Mr. Bell's libell against the Iesuits as an invincible fortress against the Roman faith and his other book full of corruptions and falsifications as a very sincere and solid piece which falsifications being shewed to them all sitting in their Junta and Iudgment about that affaire the Arch-bishop durst not send into his study for the Fathers works that were affirmed by Mr. Walsingham to have bin corrupted by Bell and Calvin c. His Lordship 's confessed practise also of burning Catholick Books argues the weaknes of the protestant cause and proves how much they are afraid their own false dealing and the impiety of their principles should be discovered 4. Reflexion That Mr. Walsingham's case hath bin and is revived and practised now every day when any conscientious protestant begins to doubt of the safety and sincerity of his Religion The protestant Clergy tells him that he is in a sure way of salvation and yet this assertion is against one of their articles of faith to wit that which acknowledgeth their Church is fallible in proposing Christ's doctrin and the true sense of Scripture and by consequence for all they know themselves may be in damnable errors Then they tell him the Papists are Jdolaters worship Anti-Christ c. that our Books of Controversyes are full of lyes and fables and to make good these their impostures they not only corrupt our Authors but translate into English all infamous libells though they treat not of controversies as the Jansenists Letters Palafox his relations and for the renegat Fr. Paulo his history of the Councell of Trent they swear it is the most exact and sincere work of this age wheras Cardinal Palavicino in his answer to the same and in the very begining hath set down 300. of Fr Paulo's vntruths in matter of fact so palpable that they seem inexcusable in him and render others guilty of vnpardonable rashness and obstinacy who credit so mistaken or malicious an Author and preferr his bare word before the vnanimous Testimony of all Christendom that hath accepted the definitions of the Councell as Catholick truths which they would never have don had they bin such as Fr Paulâ— describes Js it likely that the Bishops Embassadors and Prelats of so different nations and subjects to Princes of so contrary Interests who were present at the Councill and recommended to their flocks and friends the decrees of Trent as sacred would conspire to cheat and damne their Souveraigns relations and neighbors Or that they knew not better how matters went in the Councill or were not more impartial in relating them then one Apostâ—ta Friar or those persons from whom he pretends to have received his papers and intelligence with such pittifull frauds and fashoods are many poor protestant soules deluded and seduced into eternal damnation which they deserve for believing their own Clergy without any further examination of the scruples and doubts which common sense and natural reason doth raise in every one of them that converseth with Roman Catholicks or observeth the incoherency and inconstancy of protestancy together with it's singularity and pride of Spirit contemning the primitive true sense of Scripture declared by vniversal Tradition and the vnanimous consent of all orthodox Fathers and Councills Perditio tua ex te Jsrael 5. Reflexion One of my Lord of Canterburyes reasons to Mr. Walsingham against crediting the Popish book was do you not know when two men go to law together one will speak the worst he can by the other And though this ought not to be practised in law suites much less in controversies of Religion yet seeing my Lord would have protestants read our books with that prejudice reason doth dictat that theirs ought not to be read without caution especially Seeing every protestant â—eader makes himself supreme Judge of Controversies of Religion and no Judge ought to give sentence before both sides be heard Suppose therfore that the protestant and Catholick Clergy are engaged not only in a dispute of Religion but in a suit of Law to wit whether the revenues of the Church of the three Kingdoms belong of right rather to the present possessors then to the ancient proprietors neither party say you ought to be Iudge in his own cause who then must decide the business The Layty Content let my Lord Chancellor of England notwithstanding his known Jnclination to favor and promote protesâ—â—â—cy be named head of a Committee for examining and deciding the question Let it be tryed in publik Court which
these are his words and concealed by the Bishop who also striks out of Vincentius Lirin other words wherby it did appear what a kind of keeper the Church is of the truths deposited with her and how litle danger there is of corrupting the old or admitting of new doctrin The Bishop pag. 38. sets down the sentence thus Ecclesia depositorum apud se dogmatum Custos c. Denique quid vnquam Conciliorum Decretis enisa est nisi vt quod antea simpliciter credebatur hoc idem postea diligentius crederetur c. But in Vincentius Lirinensis It is thus Christi vero Eoclesia sedula cauta depositorum apud se dogmatum Custos here first he skips over these two words sedula cauta diligent and wary because they spoiled his plot of persuading us that the Church might by negligence of its Pastors be insensibly changed and corrupted To the same intent he conceales with an c. the rest that followes which would have cleered all and left no room for the Bishops fraud for Vincentius Lirin his words are But the Church of Christ is a diligent Depositary or Keeper of the truths committed to her never changes any thing at all in them lessens nothing adds nothing nether cuts away things necessary nor adjoyns things superfluous neither looseth what is hers nor vsurpes what belongs to others Let any Christian or honest Pagan Iudge whether these words be not Diametrically contrary to what the Bishop pretends vnto in this passage viz. suspition and possibility of the Churches adding novitia veteribus novelties to the old doctrin of making a change of that faith she first received from Christ and his Apostles and of becoming Lupanar errorum which this good man and holy Martyr sayes he is loath to english and yet leaves out cuts and corrupts the Latin text of set purpose to fix vpon Christs Espouse the greatest infamy How Bp. Laud falsifies Occham to infringe St. Austins authority concerning the infallibility of the Church in succeeding ages as well as in that of the Apostles and is forced by his error to resolve his prelatick faith into the light of Scripture and the privat Spirit of Fanaticks which he palliates vnder the name of grace and therby warrants all rebellions against Church and state AN act of divine faith must be prudent that is men are not bound to believe any article therof v. g. that Scripture is the word of God vnless there evidently appear prudent and sufficient motives to exclude all moral possibility that any but God is the Author of the doctrin proposed to be believed These motives of credibility we call the signs of the Church and are the miracles of Christ and his Disciples sanctity and succession of his doctrin and Doctors Conversion of Kings and nations to christianity c. These signs or motives of credibility though they do not evidence demonstratively that our faith is true or that the Church or Congregation of men wherin they be found is the Catholick yet they demonstrat an obligation in us of believing it as we have proved elsewhere in so much that if no such signs or motives of credibility had bin none would be bound to believe any point of Christian Religion with certainty of faith and therfore St. Austin sayd he would not believe the Scripture had he not bin moved therunto by the authority of the Church because Scripture of it self hath no sufficient arguments and signs to ground a prudent and undoubted belief of its being the word of God but the signs and motives of credibility invest the Church with sufficient authority to declare both that and all other mysteries of faith and to make our Ecclesiastical Ministery and Mission more authentikly divin then any Regal Commissions or human Badges can set forth the truth and dignity of Ministers of state and officers of war Therfore as not to believe or to contemn men so qualified when they command in the Kings name is by the light of reason and consent of all nations judged obstinacy and rebellion not to be excused by pretending ignorance or want of greater evidence then those vsual signs of their employments afford so must it be obstinat heresy not to believe that what is proposed by the Church qualified with the aforesaid signs is revealed by God This supposed the main Controversy between Protestants and Catholicks is about the resolution of Christian faith for though both parties pretend that they believe because God revealed to the Prophets and Apostles the Mysteries of faith yet we say that Protestants can not shew how it may be prudently believed that Christ preached or revealed any such doctrin as is pretended vnless it be acknowledged that the Church of every succeeding age was and this present is as truly and realy though perhaps not so highly quoad modum infallible in delivering the Apostles doctrin as the Apostles were in delivering that of Christ. We do not say that Tradition or the Testimony of the Church confirmed by the foresaid signs is the prime motive and last resolution of faith but that the Tradition and Testimony of the present Church is infallible to the end it may infallibly apply the prime motive which is Gods veracity to vs and we prudently assent thervnto But the Bishop denying this is driven with Presbyterians and Fanaticks to an inbredâ—light of Scripture and to the privat Fanatick spirit with this only difference that where they say they are infallibly resolved that Scripture is the word of God by the Testimony of the Spirit within them his Lordship pag. 83.84 averrs he hath the same assurance by grace And because we object and admire that no Catholick could ever perceive this inward and inbred light of Scripture wherby all Protestants pretend they are assured it is the word of God he concurrs pag. 86 with Fanatitks in telling vs that blind eyes can not and pervers eyes will not see it It s strange his Lordship did not foresee the sad effects which this Protestant principle and presumption wrought against himself and his Prelatick Church within a very short time after he writ this doctrin and applyed the same against the Roman Catholicks He might be sure it would be retorted against the Church of England for why may not every Protestant Sectary pretend that the Prelatick Church of England is as blind and pervers in not seing the light of Scripture as Luther and Laud pretend the Roman Catholick is It is but every particular mans fancy and word no other proof is required by Protestants nor indeed can any better be produced to make good that so many honest and learned searchers of Scripture as have bin and are in the Roman Catholick Church can not or will not see the pretended light of Scripture so largely diffused among Protestants and distributed to every Fanatick Presbyterian and Prelatick whose faith can not be maintained without this rash judgment and most dangerous
Sidon they had long since don pennance in sackcloth and ashes The works which I have don in my Fathers name beare witness of me And though you believe not me believe my works And again We know that thou art a Teacher come from God for no man could do these miracles thou dost except God were with him And the reason why miracles oblige vs in conscience to believe the doctrin by them confirmed is because they are a sufficient and moral evidence of Gods authority and as it were the great Seal wherwith he warrants his Ministers and the Church to preach and propose his doctrin and Commands Now if he could put this seal to any fals doctrin or therby authorize an erroneous Church men might prudently doubt whether he doth not do so now de facto and in every particular but with such a prudent doubt none is bound to obey any Church authority and by consequence there could be no obstinacy heresy or infidelity against Gods revelations and veracity how ever so authentickly and sufficiently proposed by miracles which are the signs and badges of divin authority and the most authentick marks of the true Church To that ordinary objection of Anti-Christs miracles which though fals and feigned yet will seem so true to many that most of the world will be seduced we answer 1. That there will be an apparent difference between Anti-christian and our Catholick miracles though for want of due reflexion prudence and piety men will not consider the difference nor compare his miracles with ours 2. Christs words and warning of Anti-Christs feigned miracles is a sufficient evidence of their falshood becaus we must not credit our selves or any outward appearances against the express words of Christ. This is the reason why in the Sacrament of the Altar we are not deceived by the Species or appearance of bread and wine Though there were no other argument that Anti-Christs miracles are fals but this that the miracles of the Church both in the old and new Testament are first and that we have a Caveat to beware of such miracles and miraculists as shall come afterwards to confirm contrary doctrin whosoever is moved by Anti-Christ or his fore-runners to forsake the ancient faith and signs of the Church for novelties how ever so plausibly or prodigiously confirmed deserve damnation For there are two qualities that oblige men in reason and conscience to preferr one thing before another how ever equall they both may seem to be in other respects 1. priority of time 2. present possession We see what priviledges and prerogatives are given by the law of nature and Nations to such as are antienter by birth or nobility then others and how possession is sayd to be eleven points of the law These qualities are most properly found in our Roman Catholick doctrin it is most antient and always hath had the precedency of all pretended Reformations both in time and in the possession of the hearts of the faithful The same we say of our Catholick miracles Therfore we ought to preferr them before any others that shall appear afterwards in opposition to them Besides those miracle so credibly reported that no man can deny them without being guilty of obstinacy and rashness and besides those others continualy visible as that of St. Januarius there is an other kind of true miracles seen but not observed by every Protestant vpon which if they did reflect as many of them as mean well would become Roman Catholicks The difference between true and fals miracles is that true miracles are works besides or against the order of nature and of secundary causes and therfore may be don only by the divin power as to receive the dead to cure diseases of the body and distempers of the mind without the application of any natural means or remedys And becaus the Devil hath less power over souls then over bodys the cure of a distemper of the mind wherof no natural cause appeareth is a greater and more authentick miracle then any cure of the body how ever so prodidious Fals miracles are only such as may be don by the application of natural causes and remedies as that of Vespasianus of whom Suetonius recounts that he restored sight to a blind man and the vse of his feet to a lame man But Cornelius Tacitus doth acknowledge lib. 4. Hist. that the Physitians being consulted did answer those diseases were not incurable and Tertullian in Apologetico cap. 22. saith that both the disease and the cure was a work of the Devil Anti-Christs miracles also will be such as as may be don by the cours and concurrence of natural causes That miracles don vpon mens minds are greater then any â—â—res or changes wrought vpon the body is granted by our Adversaries and St. Bernard recounts as one of the greatest miracles of St. Malacâ—ius that he converted an obstinat soul to recant his opinion against the real presence of Christs Body in the Sacrament And for the most remarkable miracle of St. Bernard himself it is recorded how with the blessed Sacrament in his hand he did so terrify William the prowd Duke of Aquitain that he fell prostrate at his feet and he whom the most powerfâ—ll Monarchs of Christendom could not rule submitted himself to the disposal of a poor Monk becaus he threatned him with that which in appearance seemed to be and Protestants hold to â—e no more in reality or in substance then a wafer cake These things supposed as vndeniable in Philosophy and Divinity it may be easily proved that every Protestant doth or at least may see true miracles in confirmation of our Roman Catholick â—aith For without question it is either a miracle of God or of the Devil that all the Roman Catholicks not only now but for so many ages past should contrary 〈◊〉 the evidence of sense and to our natural inclination of judging according to that evidence adore for our Savior JESUS Christ that which in appearance is but a wafer cake or a Cup of wine We are either abused and seduced by Sathan or inspired and enabled by the Holy Ghost to contradict our senses which contradiction being in a matter so long and so much controverted in publick schools and general Councells and a thing wherupon depends our Salvation we can not â—e presumed if we err that we err for want of examining and comparing the reasons of both sides Catholick and Protestant especialy if we consider the number learning and integrity of the Roman Catholick Examiners and the great difficulty which they as well as all other men find in believing or judging against the evidence of sense and in denying that to be bread or wine which doth smell look tast feel and feed like bread and wine Now if we prove that this marvellous and vnanimous contradiction of our senses can not be a miracle of the Devil protestants must grant it is a miracle of God and from thence may
Law of England our Kings may minister all ecclesiastical functions consecrat Bishops and their letters patents are sufficient to give any lay person man or woman power to consecrat Bishops and Priests Ten wilfull falsifications set down together by Bish Morton for proving that Catholicks hold the Pope cannot be deposed nor become an heretick Primat Bramhalls falsification to prove that Popes may and have decreed heretical doctrin SECT IX PRoved by reasons and examples that no Religion is so little dangerous to the soveraignty and safety of Kings or so advantagious to the peace and prosperity of subjects as the Roman Catholick notwithstanding the Popes spiritual supremacy Bellarmin the Author most excepted against in the opinion of deposing of Kings sayes that a King cannot be deposed for being an heretick vnlesse he forceth his subjects to heresy The Author of this Treatise doth not intend to promote Bellarmīs doctrin but only sheweth there can be no danger in it though it were allowed as true Not any thing more contrary to sound policy then to lay for the foundation of loyalty an Oath or engagement against opinions plausible popular and practised The best way to suppress them is to silence the Authors not censure their doctrin How litle the Popes power is feared by protestants though they make it the pretext of persecuting Catholicks How little his censures can disturb the government in regard of the notoriousness of the fact and the solemnity of his sentences required for their validity How Arch Laud and other protestants contradict them selves in this matter A fancied possibility without probability can bring no danger to the government How vnreasonable it is to exact a more strict profession of allegiance from catholick subjects to a protestant Soveraign then is given by any other Catholicks to their Catholick Soveraign That the french Kings exacts such engagements or Remonstrances from their subjects against the Popes authority as is required in England and Ireland from Catholiks against the same is a gross mistake All such disputes are prohibited in France as tending to sedition and no way profitable The Censure of the Parliament of Paris and some Doctors of the Sorbon against the Popes authority disanulled by the King and privy Councell in France Protestants cannot cleare their own principles in this particular from the aspersions they lay on the Catholick Tenets One of the fundamental principles of Protestancy is a power in the people to depose Soveraigns and dispose of their Kingdoms for the use of the Ghospel Proved by the examples of all Kingdoms and States that received the Reformation even the Prelatick of England SECT X. THat Protestants could never prove any of the wilfull falsifications wherwith they charged Roman Catholick writers but on the contrary themselves are convicted of that crime whensoever they attempted to make good their charge against us Of the Index Expurgatorius Bp. Taylors objections in the Dissuasive as also Bp. Mortons Bp. Jewells c. retorted vpon themselves Item Sutcliffs accusations against Bellarmin The Councell of Calcedon confirmed by Act of Parliament of Q. Elizabeth and by consequence the Popes spiritual supremacy which that Councell asserts SUBSECT I. PRotestants convicted by Belarmin of holding 20. ancient condemned heresies and how fourteen are admitted by them or at least vnanswered and the other six wherof they endeavor to cleere themselves are excused only by falsifying Fathers and Catholick Authors among which are two Pelagian heresies two Novatian one Manichean and one of the Arians Besides these Protestants maintain Iustification by only faith with the Simonians and Eunomians That God is the author of sin with the Florinians That women may be and are Priests with the Peputians That Concupiscency is a sin with Proclus That the true Church was invisible for many ages with the Donatists That men ought not to fast the Lent pray nor offer Sacrifice for the dead with the Aerians That Saints ought not to be prayed vnto nor their reliques or images worshipt with Vigilantius SVBSECT II. FAlsifications objected against Baronius by Dr. Sutcliff How ridiculous The difference between the falsifications objected by Catholicks and those that are objected by Protestants SECT XI CAlumnies and falsifications of Luther Clavin Arch-bishop Laud and Primat Vsher to discredit the Roman Catholick Religion and vphold Protestancy against their own conscience and knowledge What impudent impostors were Luther and Calvin Proved in many particulars Frauds and falsifications and calumnies of Primat Vsher called the Irish Saint by Protestants against the real presence and Transsubstantiation Against sacramental Confession Against absolution of sins by a Priest His cheat concerning Duli◠nd Latria No new invention of Jesuits but the ancient doctrin and distinction of the Fathers Against prayer to Saints His imposture of the Breviary of the Premonstratensian Order SVBSECT I◠OF Bp. Laud the English Protestant Martyr How fraudulently he would fain excuse the modern Greeks from being hereticks notwithstanding his 39. Prelatick articles condemn their doctrin of the holy Ghost as heresy He abuseth S. Austin to make Protestants believe that general Councells may err against scripture and evident reason He abuseth Vincentius Lyrinensis laying to that ancient Fathers charge his Graces own blasphemy and commits therin many frauds He falsifies Orcam and resolves the Prelatick Faith into the imaginary light of Scripture and the priva◠spirit and therin agrees with Presbiterians and Fanatiks And pretends that Prelaticks are not Schismaticks and Sectaries But to excuse them commits divers frauds His pretence of the lawfulness for privat Churches to reforme themselves confuted His doctrin doth justify all the sectaries proceeding against himself and the Church of England His vanity in pretending that the Church of Britain is independent of the Pope as also that the Pope can not be judge in his own cause His fraudulent and absurd explanation of S. Ireneus against the primacy of Rome item of the gallican libertys His abusing and corrupting S. Greg. Nazian because that Saint asserteth the infallibility of the Roman Church His falsifying of Gerson vpon the like accompt A faire offer to Protestants for the trial of falsifications SECT XII Whether it be piety or policy to give the Protestant Clergy of these 3. Kingdoms a million sterl per an for maintaining by such frauds and falsifications as hitherto have bin alledged the doctrin of the church of England which also they acknowledge to be fallible and by consequence for all they know fals And how the sayd million per an may be conscientiously applyed to the vse of the people without any dangerous disturbance to the Government It was policy in Q. Elizabeth to make such a clergy and Religion but not piety The case being now altered neither piety nor policy to preserve either No seditious or interessed persons can disturb the Government by pretending zeal for preserving a Religion and Clergy so prejudicial to the soul and state if liberty be granted to discover the cheat wherby the