God And Beza wrote a booke of this title Of the true and visible marks of the Catholike Church D. Whitaker in answere of the 3. reason of F. Campian That we iudge to be proper to the true Church that it increase and conserue Christs word that it vse the Sacraments entiâ—rly and purely These we defend to be the most true and essentiall properties of the Church Take these away and you will leaue nothing but the carcasse of the church Againe They containe the true nature of the church which if they be present they make the church and take it away if they be taken away And D. Feild in his 1. book of the church cap. 11 VVe say that that society wherein that outward profession of the truth of God is preserued is that true church of God c. Finally to omit the words of others the same teach Wigand in his method of doctrine cap. 19. Gesner in his 24. place of the Church The Magdeburgians in the Preface of their 6. CeÌ„tury Heshusius in cap. 1.1 ad Cor. Soterius in his method title of the church Pelargus in his Compend of diuinity loc 7. Sohnius in his Thesis of the Church Bullinger in his Catechisme fol. 44. Aretius in his places part 3. fol. 50. Theses of Geneua disput 74. SummeoiÌ„ Protest former CoÌ„sessioÌ„s Thus thou seest good reader that according to the manifold iudgement of Protestants a part of the definition of the essence the marke of the Church in this life of the Church militant of the Church which is belieued of the proper Church of the Church whereof the Scripture properly speaketh when it calleth her the spouse of Christ the body of Christ of the true Church of the Church properly so termed and finally of the Catholike Church that I say it is of the definition and essence a marke of this church to be a visible company professing the faith partaking the Sacraments mutually confirming themselues and that otherwise it is as they say but a carcasse of the Church Wherefore it implieth manifest contradiction that there should at any tyme haue byn a true Church and not a visible company because nothing can be without all its essentiall parts The Protestant Church therefore which as we head was before Luthers tyme altogeather inuisible was no true and proper Church but to vse their termes a Platonicall idaea or a carkasse of a Church If any reply that when Protestants affirme the foresayd definitions properties and marks of the true Church they meane not by the name of the true Church that which is simply and absolutely the true Church but that which is the true visible Church I aske why then do they simply call it the true Church if they do not so meane why are not their words conformable to their meaning Besides the Church wherof they giue the foresayd definitioÌ„s and marks they call not only the true Church but also the Church properly so termed the spouse and body of Christ the Catholike church and such like which cannot agree to any which is but a Church in appearance only and in the sight of men but only to that which is the Church in very deed and in the sight of God Further more according to the opinion of Protestants these two termes True and Visible in the nature of the Church do one destroy the other as these two True and Painted exclude each other in the nature of a man For they imagine that the true Church is a society in something that is inuisible to wit in iustification and predestination Wherupon they deny any ill or reprobate Christians to be of the true Church Wherefore as he should speake fondly who should say A true painted man so according to their owne opinion they speake as fondly when they say The true visible Church But as we can only say the true picture of a man attributing the word True to the picture not to the man so they should only The true appearance or shew of the Church gâ—uing the word True to the shew not to the Church it selfe But they are ashamed to speak so least when they inquire the marks of the true visible Church Why ProtestaÌ„ts somtyme call the visible visible Church the true Church it should appeare that they seeke not the marks of the true Church indeed but only of the shew shadow or shape of the Church And yet in very truth they seeke but the marks of the shadow of the church For the inuisible Church consisting only of the iust and elect which alone they will haue to be the true Church hath no certaine marks else we should know certainly who were the iust and elect And this themselues confesse for thus writeth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 8 ProtestaÌ„ts giue no marks of the true Catholike Church The question is not of the marks of the inuisible Church Againe VVe say the marks of the Catholike Church simply so called are knowne to God alone And D. Humfrey to 3. reason of F. Campian pa. 281. sayth that the marks do not reach vnto the nature of the true Church And the reason is manifest because as I sayd otherwise we should know who were the iust and elect 4. If any againe reply that when Protestants say The true visible Church they meane the visible Church true in doctrine in which speach there is no contradiction according to their owne opinion because they admit that the visible Church that is the society in true doctrine and right vse of Sacraments into which Church or society the wicked or reprobate may enter may be true in doctrine though they graunt not that such a Church or society be the true Church in nature or essence Which perhaps Vorstius meant in his Antibellarm pa. 180. when he sayd The outward Church is not without cause called the true church of Christ by reason of the prosession of true doctrine I answere if they so meant why did they not speak so were they ignorant that it is one thing to be true in doctrine or in speach and another to be true in nature as a lyer is a true man in nature of man but not true in his speach Or if they did know this why did they abuse the words and their hearers Moreouer though in this sense their words did not destroy themselues as they did in the former yet fondly should they as they vse to do assigne the truth of doctrine for the marke of the true Church in doctrine For this were to assigne a thing for a mark of it self as if to know a true man of his word one should giue this marke that it is such as speaketh truth Besides this were rather to define what is a true man then to giue the marke to know who is a true man And yet marks are giuen to know which is the true Church not what is the nature of the true Church 5. If yet any reply that the visible Church or
that it is one that it is the auncientest of all Churches that it is alwayes visible hath alwayes Pastors and the like And of another principle which may be tryed by our sense and experience as that the foresayd properties agree neither to the Protestants nor to the Anabaptists nor to any hereticall company And therfore these kind of demonstrations moue euen the most obstinate heretiques and are euident euen to the most ignorant and vnlearned persons 3. And hence ariseth a fift cause of handling rather questions of Fact then of doctrin because the fruit of debating those questions is reaped with more facility and of far more For wheras few but diuines do themselues perceaue the true meaning of the testimonyes of Scripture wherwith the questions of doctrin are debated as the true meaning of the law few but lawyers theÌ„selues do see all perceaue the meaning of those testimonyes wherwith the questions of fact are disputed Epist dedicat exercit cont Baron who will affoard an atteÌ„tiue eye to see or eare to heare And heer upoÌ„ Casaubon wrote that for to insinuate into the mind of the Reader any opinion now in controuersie Baronius historyes are of greater force D. Flauignie then Bellarmines disputes And sayd also sometyme as one most worthy of credit who heard him told me that whiles he read Bellarmines disputations he began to doubt of all Religion but whiles he perused Baronius Annales he felt himselfe by little little drawn towards Papistry which thing might wel haue befallen him and such others not because Cardinall Bellarmine proueth lesse soundly for the nature of the matter the truth of Catholik Religion in questions of doctrine then Cardinall Baronius doth the same in questions of Fact but because such is the nature of the testimonyes wherewith the truth of Catholike fayth in questions of doctrine is proued that they are lesse euident then the testimonyes wherewith the Catholike truth in matters of Fact is proued and also haue many thinges which seeme to be contrary and repugnant to them Whereupon it falleth out that some hearing or reading controuersies of doctrine disputed between Catholikes and Heretikes and not being able of theÌ„selues to discern betwixt truth shew of truth either follow neither party but become vncertaine or Atheistes or content with any shew of truth take that part to which any affection of their will doth draw them Whereas none by hearing or reading controuersies of Fact becommeth not more confirmed in the Catholik faith or more auerted from heresy And therefore Tertullian counsaileth vs Praescrip cap. 1â— not to dispute with Heretikes out of Scripture by which questions of doctrine are disputed but aduiseth vs to appeale to antiquity succession and such like which concerne questions of fact 4. Lastly though the fruit of disputing both those kind of questions were equall yet sith the Author by order of nature goeth before the thing whereof he is Authour according to the order of Nature we ought to intreate of the Author of Protestancy before we dispute of Protestancy it selfe For as well sayth Tertullian nothing but God alone is without beginning which how much it goeth before in the state of all thinges so much ought it to go before in the handling of them Lib 5. cont Mar. Lib 3 cont Mar. that the state may be knowne And other where Nothing is knowne before the beginning is knowne Wherfore I will begin my first dispute concerning the Protestant Religion of the Authour therâ—of Yet before I do that I must set downe and determine what a Protestant or the Protestant Church and Religion is and what is necessary for one to be a Protestant and discouer the vncertainty of Protestants And this much touching the matter which I haue made choice of to handle in this little worke and the causes thereof VVhy proued only out of Protestants 5. As for the manner wherwith I vndertake to discusse this question of Fact whether Luther was the first Author beginner of the Protestant Church and Religion I purpose to proue it only out of the confessions of Luther himselfe and of the three sorts of Protestants to wit Lutherans who professe to follow Luther in all points of doctrine Sacramentaries who notoriously dissent from him touching the reall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament and our English Protestants who differ from both the former at least in discipline gouerment of their Church because this kind of proofe out of their owne wordes I find to be both necessary and most effectuall with Protestants Necessary because of this question of Fact neither the Scripture Necessary or the Fathers say any thing as also because seeing Protestants deny part of the scripture and interprete the rest as they please and will not stand to the sentence of the Church Councels or Fathers account reason Sophistrie contem me the testimonies of Catholique writers they haue left nothing but their own coÌ„fessioÌ„s by which we may dispure with them And I pray God they do giue place to their own most frequent and most plaine confessions and not delude them by voluntary and friuolous interpretations for then hope may be that there wil be some end of these controuersies At least we shall reape this profit by this labour that by it shall be manifest to all that either Protestants will heare no testimony admit no iudgement no not their owne which is a most euident argument of a most desperat cause or that they shall be condemned by their owne verdict sentence or lastly that there can be no forme of speech so plaine no words so cleare no sentence so manifest which they with their faigned figures deuises will not wrest frustrate and delude which is in effect to disanull al kind of proofe which is taken out of words or testimonies whatsoeuer For I will bring so plaine testimonies of theirs as plaine can scarce or not at all be deuised I will bring so many as themselues will require no more I will bring so weighty as themselues will demaund none more weighty I wil bring them also most freely and often iterated and repeated lastly I will bring not only those which indirectly and by consequence proue that which I would but those also that especially oftenest which directly testify that which they are brought to confirme Wherfore either they will not delude these words of theirs or they wil delude all wordes whatsoeuer And either they will not refuse these their owne testimonies and confessions or they will reiect all testimonies and iudgements whatsoeuer which is in effect to confesse that their cause is most desperate and most worthy to be reiected and condemned of all Most effectuall 1. This maÌ„ner also of proofe is most effectuall for what can be of greater force to conuince a man then his owne iudgement and acknowledgement of the truth Surely vnlesse a man will professe himselfe to be en enemy
church we define to be a congregation of men amongst whome the word is truly preached and the Sacraments administred Such a church hath not alwayes byn neither can we be assured that it shall alwayes be sound vpon the earth There was a tyme when as the visible church failed vpon earth The visible church failed This inuisibility of the Protestant Church which I haue hitherto proued by their manifold Confessions I will also proue by sequels out of other their sayings First therefore D. Morton in his Apology part 1. book 1. cap. 31. disliketh not these words of Bellarmine Protestants when they say the church cannot faile or perish meane the inuisibible church And many of them in expresse words deny that the Promises of perpetuity Protestāts say the promises belong not to the visible Church which in the scripture are made vnto the church Math. 16. and other where be made to the visible church D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 468 It is most false that it is the visible church against which the gates of hell shall not preuaile And Daneus Cont. 4. lib. 3. cap. 13. pag. 717 There Math. 16. is not meant the visible church To whome assenteth D. Willet in his Synopsis cont 2. quest 2. M. Powell of Antichrist lib. 1. cap. 10. Beurlin in his Refutation of Sotus cap. 53. Moulins of the vocation of Ministers lib. 1. c. 4. in his Bucklet part 1. pag. 49. And D. Morton lib. cit cap. 13. addeth that those three places Math. 16. vlt. and psal 47. which promise the perpetuity of the Church Protestāts belieue not the visible church Are euery one of them vnderstood almost by euery Father of the only company of the elect which the Protestants call the inuisible Church Besides they all generally teach that by the Catholike Church which they professe to belieue in the Creed they meane not the visible Church but only the inuisible Luther in his booke of abrogating Masse tom 2. fol. 247 VVho shall shew vs the holy church seeing it is hidden in spirit and is only belieued according as I belieue the holy church Zuinglius in his explication of the 31. article The church which consisteth of those which are knowne to God alone in that which we professe in the articles of our creed Danaeus lib. cit pag. 713 The question is of the true church of God whereof it is sayd in the creed I belieue the holy church Bellarmine vvill haue it to be the visible vve deny it The like he sayth pag. 789. 717. 718. and 725. Vorstius in his Antibellarm pag. 144 VVe professe not in the creed to belieue the visible church but the inuisible D. Whitaker lib. 3. against Duraeus sect vlt You see vvhat Catholike church vve belieue not the visible multitude of Christians but the holy company of the elect The same he sayth Cont. 2. quest 2. cap. 2. Brentius in Prolegominis pag. 2. and others commonly Furthermore they say that the visible Church is not the true Church in the sight of God For Caluin in his 4. book of Institutions cap. 1. § 7. They say the visible Church is not the true Church before God and the rest graunt that both wicked and reprobate Christians may be of the visible Church but deny that they can be of the true Church in the sight of God Now surely if the visible Church be neither the true Church in the sight of God nor she to whome he hath promised perpetuity nor she which Protestants do belieue what reason can they haue to belieue that the visible Church shall alwayes remayne or which is all one that the Church shall be alwayes visible Againe their common doctrine is that preaching of true doctrine is the note of the visible Church for so teacheth the Confession of Auspurg cap. 7. the English Confession artic 19. and all the rest To which his Maiesty in his epist to Cardinall Peron D. Whitaker Contr. 2. q 5. c. 17. D. Morton part 1. Apol. l. 1. c. 6. M. Willet in his Synopsis Cont. 2. quest 3. pag. 102. Sadeel to Turtians Sophismes loc 5. Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 145. and others do adde that it is an essentiall note of the visible Church And it is manifest that they must say so because they vse to define the visible Church to be a company vvherein the pure vvord of God is preached the Sacraments rightly administred For so it is defined of the English Confession and of Sadeel lib. cit of Whitaker quest 5. cit cap. 20. of Melācthon tom 1. in cap. 15. Matth. and of others generally But before Luther there was no preaching of Protestantisme as we shall heare them confesse cap. 7. therefore there was then no visible Protestant Church Finally sometymes they say that not only preaching of the word but that also a lawfull ministery or that not only what true preaching soeuer but also such as is made by a lawfull Minister of the word is of the essence and substance of the visible Church For thus writeth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 5. cap. 19. pag. 550 Stapleton sayth that the preaching of the Ghospell by lavvfull Ministers is the proper note of the church and vve say no othervvise And pag. 551. That he confesseth true preaching by a lavvfull Ministery to be a note of the church is no other thing then that vve say and defend The like hath Sadeel in the place now cited and the Switzers Confession cap. 17. putteth lawfull preaching for the chiefest note of the church Caluin 4. Institut cap. 2. § 1. for a perpetuall note the conclusions defended at Geneua pag. 845. for an essentiall note thereof But before Luther there were no Protestant Ministers at all as we shall hereafter heare the Protestants confesse Therefore no visible Protestant Church 8. By that which hath byn rehearsed it is manifest Summe of the foresayd confessions that very many and very famous Protestants haue often and plainly confessed that when Luther came first as they speake to the Ghospell the Protestant Church and religion was not visible say hid lurked lay in the wildernes in lurking holes indarknesse in Trophonius his denne was buryed was vnknowne vnheard of appeared to none cold not be discerned Her image could not be seene no shew of besides a huge spoile did appeare no face no fashion no trace of her was extant and she was so hid that he who would iudge according to the outward shew would think her to be no where And that this is so manifest as that the experience of many ages beareth witnes thereof With what words I pray you could they say that their Church was altogeather inuisible if they haue not sayd it in these 9. Moreouer it is manifest that for to maintaine their inuisible Church they do teach that the Church may be vnknowne to the godly to those who are of it that it may be not visible not appeare not
no where but in the sight of God Hyperius in his Methode of diuinity lib. 3. pag. 349 VVas not the true Church at that tyme of Elias altogeather inuisible to men and knowne to God alone The Switzers Confession cap. 17 The Church hidden from our eyes and knowne to God only Knowne to God alone doth often fly the iudgement of men Besnage in his booke of the state of the visible and inuisible church cap. 4 The Church is eftsones knowne to God alone Son is in his answere to Sponde cap. 2. pag. 32 VVe say the state of the Church is such as is sometymes known to God alone And D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 478 VVe say that the externall state of the Church doth cease and that the faythfull and godly may be so scattered that they worship God only in heart and mind Worship God in heart only But who seeth not that it implieth manifest contradiction that a Church which is no where but in the sight God which is knowne to God alone which flyeth mans iudgement and which worshippeth God only in heart and mind should be visible or seene of man How long the Protestāts Church was inuisible 13. If any aske them how many ages their Church was thus inuisible Luther vpon the 1. cap. to the Galat. tom 5. fol. 214. sayth that she lay hid aboue 300. years To whome commeth neere Danaeus in his 3. book de Roman Pontif. cap. 8. saying the Church was in banishment 350. years But Luther better thinking on the matter in his booke of the Popery tom 7. maketh her to haue lurked 600. years And with him agreeth Hospinian in his epistle dedicatory of the 1. part of his History Melancthon in his oration for Luther tom 2. will haue this lurking to haue byn 400. yeares But Caluin his booke of Scandals Perkins and Bale in the places before cited will haue it to haue continued 900. years Parcus aboue cited will haue it to haue begon in Constantines tyme and Napper from the yeare of our Lord 316 With whome consenteth Brocard vpon the 11. Chap. Apocal. pag. 110. Fuccius in his Cronology fetcheth the beginning of this lurking a litle higher from the yeare 261. and finally Curio of the largenesse of Gods Kingdome pag. 33 Almost from the Apostles ages euen to our tym Which they also intimate who say that Popery began in the Apostles tyme. O Christ most patient Lord that I may cry out with Tertullian who so many years yea so many ages diddest suffer thy doctrine to be turned vpside downe till Luther came to helpe thee 14. Luther Author of the visible Protestāt Church Of all things which haue byn related in this Chapter it is most cleare that Luther was at least author of the Protestants visible Church and if not the first which founded it yet the first which after it was fallen in substance perished did rayse and restore it againe For when Luther began first to preach there was no visible Protestant Church at all and by his preaching there became such a visible Church Therefore vndoubtedly he was the author thereof And if any Protestant against so many and so open Confessions of his Fathers and brethren will say that there was a visible Protestant Church before Luther he shall first gainesay so many witnesses without all exception in this matter who hauing searched all corners and enquired of all men haue neuerthelesse confessed that at that tyme no such visible Church appeared Besides he shall say that without all either diuine or humane testimony which to do of tymes before his age is to play the Prophet or rather the mad man For it is not the part of a man in his wittes to affirme without all kind of testimony especially such a thing and so manifestly false as that so many and such kind of men as had most need to affirme it were neuerthelesse forced to deny it That it wanteth all sufficient humane testimony is euident because neither the foresayd Protestants nor any yet to this day could bring forth any sufficient witnesse who would depose that he had seene such a Church before Luthers reuolt That also it is destitute of diuine testimony is manifest by what hath byn before rehearsed For Protestants at we haue heard teach that the promises of perpetuity which in the scripture are made to the church Sup. num 7. are made only to the inuisible church that is to a society of men in election and Iustification out of which Church they exclude the reprobate and wicked and not to the visible Church that is to the society in Profession of true doctrine and lawfull vse of Sacraments And in truth they most needs say so sith they commonly teach that the inuisible Church whereof the elect and iust alone are members is the true Church before God and that the visible Church whereof the wicked reprobate may be members is but a Church in sight of men that is a shadow and outward shew of the Church And it is cleare that God promised perpetuity to that Church only which in his sight is the true Church and not to her which is no Church but only in sight of men When as I say they teach that God promised perpetuity and continuance only to the inuisible Church out of his promises they cannot inferre Lib. 2. cōt Maxim c. 3. l 3 c 176 that the visible Church hath or shall euer continue Of whome therefore that I may vse S. Augustins words hast thou heard this whence diddest thou learne it where hast thou read it for to belieue it whereupon hast thou presumed for to affirme it where there is neither any authority nor reason If Protestants cry out Whitak cont 2. q. 3 c. ◠that it is most absurd to say in Elias his tyme there was any Church visible amongst the Gentiles beside the Synagogue which now after so many thousands of years we cannot name how much more absurd ought they think it to say that before Luther arose there was a visible Protestant Church which yet none neither of that Church nor out of it neither at this tyme nor at that could euer name 15. It being thus manifest that Luther was the Author of the visible Protestant Church it followeth likewise that he was the author of all and Euery Protestant Church For as shall be shewed hereafter there can be no such inuisible Church as Protestants meane that is such as belieueth and worshippeth God only in hart and mind and no way professeth outwardly her fayth and religion Yet before we come to that we will first refute those who when they consider how absurd a thing it is to affirme such an inuisible Church especially for so many ages they begin to shufle and either send vs to others or themselues name vs such as only in part or in some sort held Protestantisme but imbraced not all the substantiall points thereof and
society in profession of true doctrine and right vse of Sacraments is termed of Protestants the true Church not because this Church or society is of it self the true church or the society instituted by God but because alwayes in or vnder it there is the true Church to wit the society in iustice and predestination by reason that in euery company of them that professe true doctrine and rightly vse the Sacraments there are some who are sociated and vnited in iustice and predestination Which D. Whitaker intimateth when Cont. 2. quest 4. cap. 1 pag. 485. he sayth The visible Church which holdeth and professeth true sayth is the true Church only of the part of the elect and predestinated I answere that this supposeth a thing doubtfull and perhaps false For what certainty can there be that in euery particuler company of them who professe the true fayth rightly vse the Sacraments there is alwayes a coÌ„pany of the iust and elect when as Christ sayth Many are called but few are chosen Matt. â—0 especially if as Protestants say one or two make a church Surely Danaeus Cont. 4. pag. 689. seemeth to deny this saying These visible companies are sometymes a part of that true Church sometymes none But admit that in euery company of true professors there be always a company of iust and elect what reason were this to terme the society in profession of true fayth the true Church if in deed the society in iustice predestination be the only true Church This would suffice to say that the apparent Church could neuer be separated from the true Church but not to call that society the true Church which indeed is only the outward appearance of the true Church And much lesse would it suffice to call it the church properly so termed the spouse and body of Christ the Catholike Church the Church which we professe to belieue as the Protestants haue termed the visible Church Neither can these epithets or names be giuen to any other society then to that which hath the true nature and substance of the Church indeed because they signify as properly and expresly that only Church as she can be expressed of vs by any words whatsoeuer And sith Protestants haue giuen them all to the visible church they must needs confesse that shee hath the nature and substance of the very true Church indeed and consequently that an inuisible Church is no true Church indeed 6. Fourthly I proue that the Church cannot be inuisible ProtestaÌ„ts somtyms say that the church cannot be inuisible because oftentymes Protestants do confesse it The Apology of the Confession of Ausburg chap. of the Church The Church is principally the society of fayth and of the holy Ghost in the hearts which yet hath her outward markes that she may be knowne Luther vpon the 4. chap. of Genesis tom 6. fol. 56 The Church was neuer so voyd of externall marks that it could not be not knowne where God was certainly to be sound And vpon 51. psalm tom 3. fol. 474 For Christ will not lye hid in the world but will be preached not between wals but vpon the house top Melancthon vpon the 11. of Daniel tom 2. pag. 511 It is necessary that the Church be a visible company Againe VVe seigne not an inuisible Church like to a Platonicall idea And in the Preface of his 3. tome he thinketh it so absurd to put an inuisible Church as he sayth To what tendeth that perdigious speach Monstruous to say the Church was inuible which denyeth that there is any visible Church We must needs confesse a visible Church And vpon the 3. chap. 1. Tim. tom 4. pag. 398 Others sayth he setting aside wholy the externall shew do speake of an inuisible Church as of a Platonicall idaea which is no where seene or heard Kemnice in his common places title of the Church cap. 3 God will haue vs to know where and which is the Church Therefore she must be knowne not to God only but also to vs and therupon is defined to be the visible company of them who imbrace the Ghospell of Christ and rightly vse the Sacraments Iames Andrews in his book against Hosius pag. 210 VVe are not ignorant that the church must be a visible company of teachers and hearers Againe The Church is and is called a company of men chosen of God in which the word of God soundeth incorrupt c. Hunnius in his treatise of Freewill pag. 91 God in all tymes hath placed his Church as in a high place and hath exalted it in the sight of all people and Nations Hutter in his Analysis of the Confession of Auspurg pag. 430 The elect are not the whole Church no if you speake only of the true church For the church consisteth not only of inward sayth in Christ but also of the outward administration of the word Sacraments Now as farre as this in outward rite is performed so farre the true Church truly is visible Beurlin in the Preface of his Refutation of Sotus I confesse the Church of Christ is alwayes to be acknowledged visible And he addeth that all confesse the same The same doctrine is taught by Gesner loc 24. by Adam Francis in his 11. place and by other Lutherans Amongst the Sacramentaries thus writeth Vrsin in Prolegomenis ad Catechcsin pag. 2 The Church must needs be seene in this world that the elect may know vnto what company they must adioyne themselues in this life Iunius Cont. 4. lib. 3. cap. 13. affirmeth that it is impious to say that the Church can wholy want a visible forme Keckerman in the 3. book of his Theologicall systeme writeth that the Church must always be sensible that other nations may know to what church they ought to adioyne themselues and that Confession of sincere doctrine can neuer faile wholy nor the visible church wholy erre Danaeus in his booke of the visible Church dareth to say that who denieth the true church of God and that visible to haue byn from the beginning of the world he without doubt sheweth himselfe to be ignorant in holy scripture Amongst our English Protestants M. Hooker in his 3. booke of Ecclesiasticall policy pag. 126 God hath had euer euer shall haue some Church visible vpon earth D. Feild in his 1. booke of the Church cap. 10 For seing the Church is the multitude of them that shall be saued and no man can be saued vnlesse he make Confession vnto saluation for fayth hid in the heart and concealed doth not suffice it cannot be but they that are of the true Church must by profession of the truth make themselues knowne in such sort that by their profession and practise they may be discerned from other men And D. White in defence of his Way cap. 4. pag. 390 I acknowledge the prouidence of God who hath left the records of history to confirme our fayth and freely graunt our religion to be false if the
pretended discipline cap 2. auoucheth that the Geneuian discipline began of Caluin because before him it was neuer seene or heard of And if they think that a discipline or an hereticall company could be and not be seene or heard of in the world how much more ought they to think the same of the Church of God 17. Lastly I proue that the Church of God could not be inuisible Absurdities follow of the inuisibility of the Church because thereupon would ensue many and great absurdities For first if the visible Church should faile it is manifest that it is not the Church of Christ against which he hath promised that the very gates of hell shall not preuaile And if it be graunted that the visible Church is not the Church instituted by Christ it must needs be but a humane society instituted by man How then shold it come to passe that one cannot be saued vnlesse he be in the visible Church if so he can be as commonly all Protestants do teach Who contemne all ordinances of men as vnnecessary to saluation why mak they such account of this humane institution At the last the Protestants haue felt this mischeife as ye may see in Caluin in his 3. homily in his Opuscles pag. 548. and Danaeus in his booke of the visible church where they bring many reasons to proue that it is necessary to be of the visible church But seing themselues do teach that the visible church is not the true Church in the sight of God and consequently a humane institution how can they proue that God hath commaunded or men can appoint so strictly to obserue this one humane Institution vnder paine of damnation Another inconuenience is that Christs promises touching the continuance of his church are exposed to the laughter and mockery of Iewes and Infidels For sith as the Law sayth and Protestants acknowledge among men there is no other account made of things that appeare not then of things that are not what man will reasonably perswade himselfe that Christs Church hath euer continued in the world if she for many ages appeared in no one corner of the world Surely this seemeth so incredible that I think not that any man well in his wittes belieueth it howsoeuer for to defend the Protestants Church he may say it But farewell rather such a Church which cannot be defended but by such improbable paradoxes 18. The 3. inconuenience is that the church of God should haue byn much more miserable then hath byn the Synagogue of the Iewes euen since it hath byn forsaken of God For the Synagogue hath euer since Christs tyme byn visible vnto the world and professed her fayth both before her owne and others Lib. 12. cōt Faust c. 11. The Iewish nation sayth S. Augustin whether vnder Pagan or Christian Kings hath not lost the signe of her law wherwith it is distinguished from other nations and people The same testifieth S. Hierome epist 129. ad Dardan And Peter Martyr in his Common places title of the Iewes § 47 The Hebrews albeit subdued of the Romans yet neuer tooke their lawes rites and customes they keep their own yet as well as they can And Sadeel in his Answere to Theses Posnan cap. 8. graunteth the same And the Magdeburgians in euery Century make speciall mention of the Iewes To this some Protestants say that it is no meruaile that the externall condition of the Church was more miserable thē of the Synagogue Iunius Daneus l. 4. de Eccl. c. 5. But whosoeuer shall read the Prophesies of the glory and amplitude of the Church will think this strange But besides not only the externall but also the internall state of the Church was more miserable then the Synagogue if the Synagogue durst in all ages euen before her enemies professe her faith and the Church of Christ for long tyme durst mutter nothing euen before her owne children yea as we shall hereafter heare the Protestants teach adored Antichrist and obserued Antichristian and idolatricall rites worships The 4. inconuenience is that if we say that the Church may be and yet not be seene of any we giue occasion to euery new start vp heretik to say that his church hath euer byn neither can we refute this his dotage vnlesse we do maintaine that the church must be euermore visible professe her faith which as we haue seene Protestants themselues do suppose when they proue that any Church or company hath not byn in former tymes 19. Out of all which hath byn sayd in this chapter it appeareth euidently that whither we put the forme of the Church in some visible thing or inuisible whether we say that the only elect and iust be of the church or not they alone of what kind soeuer I say the forme of the Church be and whosoeuer be of the Church of which matter I disput not now it is euident I say that the Church of God neuer is at any tyme but she professeth her sayth before her children and before the world and consequently that the Church her profession of fayth or which comes all to one that the Church according to her profession of fayth is euermore visible or sensible which sufficeth to my purpose because before Luther arose there was no Church visible in profession of Protestant fayth Wherefore I frame my 3. demonstration for to proue Luther to haue byn the Author of the Protestant Church in this sort VVhensoeuer the Church is she is visible in profession of her sayth whether this profession be an essentiall forme or a property or accident inseparable But the Protestant Church immediatly before Luther arose was not visible in profession of her sayth Therefore immediatly before Luther she was not at all And by his preaching became to be Therefore he was the Author thereof The Maior or first proposition of the Syllogisme is euident by all that hath byn layd in this chapter And the Minor or second proposition by all the verball Confessions which we haue reheased in the former chapter by reall confessions of all Protestants whatsoeuer who neither in Luthers tyme nor since could bring forth any man worthy of credit who had seene any company professing Protestancy before Luther began to preach it Then the which yet nothing had byn more easy to do especially in Luthers tyme if any such company had byn extant That Protestants confesse that before Luther their Church had no Protestant Pastors CHAP. VII 1. THE 4. demonstration for to proue that Luther was the Author of the Protestāt church and Religion we will take out of that Protestants acknowledge their Church before his tyme to haue wholy wanted Pastors First therefore they confesse that their Pastors in former tymes were vnknowne to the world Protestāts Pastors vnknown to the world and to Protestants themselues D. Fulk in his booke of Succession pag. 26 God hath raised vp Pastors in all ages howsoeuer they were vnknowne to the world And pag.
OF THE AVTHOR AND SVBSTANCE OF THE PROTESTANT CHVRCH AND RELIGION TWO BOOKES Written first in Latin by R. S. Doctour of Diuinity AND Now reuiewed by the Author and translated into English by VV. Bas Euery thing must be reduced to its beginning Tertull. Praescript cap. 20. Permissu Superiorum M.DC.XXI The Scope of this Worke. IF both Luther himselfe and the famousest Protestantâ— of all sorts haue many wayes most plainly and most freely confessed that Luther was the Author and Beginner of the Protestant Church and Religion as in this worke doth manifestly appeare then vndoubtedly he was so And if Luther were the Author and Beginner therof assuredly it is not the Church and Religion of Christ. Read therefore and iudge indifferently and thereby an end may be made of all Controuersies in Religion betwixt the Catholiks and Protestants THE PREFACE OF THE AVTHOR TO the Reader Wherein the manner and profit of this Worke is declared THERE are two kinds of questions gentle Reader which are in controuersy betwixt the Catholikes and Protestantes the one kind is of fact to wit Whether Luther was the Author and beginner of the Protestants Church and ReligioÌ„ whether before him it were visible and had Pastours whether he and the first Protestant Preachers were sent to preach Protestancy and the liâ—e The other kind of question is of Christs doctrine or law For example whether Christ taught good workes do iustify be necessary to saluation meritorious and such others Why a a question of Fact is handled rather theÌ„ of doctrin At this present I treate not of this second kind of question but only of the former and that for three causes First the questions of Doctrine are innumerable but the questions of Fact few And many haue handled them and that most exactly but these few haue touched and for ought that I know none of purpose hath hitherto written of the Authour of Protestancy and in that manner as I intend to write Secondly there are few questions of doctrine of that nature that all other controuersies of faith depend vpon them but the most questions of Fact are such as if they be well decided al other Controuersies of religion are at an end Such kind of question this especially is which now I handle VVhether Luther were Author and beginner of the Protestant church and Religion For if it be made manifest that he was the Author and Beginner of it euery one will straihgt see that it is not Christs Church Religion but Luthers deuise and inuention Thirdly in questions of doctrine or law Protestants want not some pretext of Scripture as neither any Heretikes wanted and therfore diuers tymes they are ready to debate these kind of Questions in which as Tertullian sayth they pretend Scriptures Prescrip c. 15. and with this their boldnes shake some and in the dispute weary the constant catch the weake send away the midalâ— sort with scruple and douâ—ts But in questions of Fact they are destitute not only of al pretence of Scripture vnles it be some most vaine but also of all testimony of men and help of reason and stand only vpon their owne sayinges are conuinced by the testimonies of the whol world and sometyme also by their owne confessions and therefore are brought to debate these kind of questions no more willingly then is a theefe to his tryall Neither do they in these disputs either weary the constant or catch the weake but shew their owne weaknes and wilfullnes vnto all kind of men And this is the cause why Ministers are so loath to dispute of the Church because the Church being a company of men includeth many questions of fact as of antiquity succession continuance visibility mission ordination of Pastours and such like in which points there is little colour or shew on their part 2. Fourthly Protestants exact more difficult poofes in questions of doctrine then they can demand in matters of Fact For in matters of Fact wherof the scripture speaketh nothing they must be content with testimonies of men against whome no iust exception can be made or they must refuse all triall of these kind of questions But in controuersies of doctrine they account those only to be lawfull proofes which are taken out of the scripture Neither doe these satisfie them vnlesse they be plaine (a) Melan. Brent in Hospin fol. 107. Colloq Ratisb sess 11. expresse and as they say word (b) Vorst respons ad Slad for word containe that which is in question or at least be so pregnant and strong that they (c) Luth. de seru arbitr fol. 440. Lib. 6. confess c. 4. stopp all mâ—ns mouths that they can gainsay nothing For it is the common fault of Protestants which S. Augustin saith himselfe was guilty of whiles he was an heretike that they will be as certaine of all things as that seauen and three make ten Nay they yield not alwayes to these kind of proofs For what can be sayd more expressy more plainly more literally then the scripture saith that man is iustified by workes and not only by faith that that which our Sauiour gaue with his hands to his Apostles after his last supper was his very body and bloud and such like yet the Protestants yield not to these kind of testimonies but deuise figures and shiftes to delude them Catholiques proofes in controuersies of doctrine are certainly Theological demonstrations because they are clearly drawne from the proper principles of Diuinity to wit from cleare words of God confirmed by the tradition of the Church and vnanimous exposition of the Fathers which kind of proofe is as great and strong as either Diuinity or law or any Science whatsoeuer which is founded in words either doth affoard or the nature of any law or science which is grounded in words as Diuinity is can beare or affoard And as the Philosopher saith well it were starck madnes to exact any other kind of proofes of any Profession then the nature therof can affoard 1. Eth. 1. But because heretiques expound what words soeuer as they list and litle set by the authority of the Church or Fathers and the vnlearned hardly perceaue what kind of proofe is a Theologicall demonstration such as Diuinity can affoard no greater or which is the true sense of Gods word or how great the authority of the Churh and Fathers ought to be therefore with them Catholiks proofs in points of doctrin albeit in truth they be Theological demonstrations take litle effect Wheras on the other side Catholique proofes in matter of Fact are not only Theologicall but also that I may so speake Mathematicall demonstrations because they consist of one principle which is grounded not only vpon the foundations of Diuinity to wit the word of God together with the expositioÌ„ of the Church and Fathers but also is manifest by the light of reason which kind of principles these are That Gods Church hath alwayes him
thought not that he was otherwise vnderstood None was yet troubled with such a question you not yet iangling he spake more securely But the ProtestaÌ„ts which we produce liued al after that protestancy was both bred and hatched after the Catholike fayth had for many ages shined through out the world and therfore could not be ignorant what wordes of theirs might make for the Catholike fayth Cassander Erasmus-Cornelius Agrippa Marsil of Padua and preiudice their owne cause Another difference is that none of the Catholikes whose testimonyes Protestants alleage against vs is accounted of vs for a man sent extraordinarily of God and much lesse for a Prophet Euangelist or Apostle Nay Beatus Rhenanus Faber Stapulensis Orthuinus Gratius many of them are obscure writers and of small or no reckoning among vs some of them are not held for Catholikes of vs and some of them euen by the iudgments of Protestants themselues are our open enemyes But the confessions of fayth which we cite against ProtestaÌ„ts containe their faith so that they cannot be reiected of them vnles they will renounce their fayth And of the men whose testimonyes we produce one is accounted of them a (e) Humf. ad Rat. 4. Camp God another a Prophet an (f) Colloq Aldebur Schusseâ—b Catal. 13. Hunius praefat de liber arbit Euangelist an Apostle a third Elias an Angell His writings are held for inspired from heauen for a rule of fayth and equall to the writinges of the Apostles Another is called a (g) â—â—anae lib. 4 de Eccles c. 9. Beza ep 6. great and admirable Prophet others are esteemed for lights lampes bright starres props founders parents renewers of the Protestants church and religion Others are men extraordinarily sent and diuinely raised to lighten the world most of them for very learned famous well deseruing of the Protestant religion finally all for sincere Protestants The holy Fathers were wont to refute both the (h) Iustin dial cum Tryphon August l. de ciuit Chrysost hom 26. in 2. Cor. Cyril l. 6. in Iulian. Pagans superstition and the (i) Hier. cont Vigilant Ambros serm 5. de Sanctis Hilar. l. 1. 6. de Trinit heretikes errours out of the Diuels confessions Of which kind of proof (k) Apol. cap. 22. Tertullian vsing it maketh this account What more manifest then this fact what more sure then this proofe Belieue them they speake true of themselues who vse to credit them when they lye No man lyeth to his owne disgrace And S. (l) Lib. ad Demetr Cyprian VVho so sayest that thou worshipest the Gods belieue euen them whom thou worshippest And likewise Minutius in Octauio Neither do they lye to their owne shame especially if some of you be by Belieue themselues witnessing that they are Diuels and confessing the truth of themselues But our proofe taken out of the Protestants confessions of faith out of Luther such like famous Protestants testimony against Protestancy is much more euident and stronger both because it is more likely that men will confesse the truth though against themselues then the Diuell the father of lyes and sworne enemy of truth as also because the confessions of the Diuel were extorted from him by force as the Fathers themselues doe acknowledge but these of Luther and his mates come most freely from them Belieue therefore O Protestants your chiefe leaders Note your founders Instructors Prophets EuaÌ„gelists Apostles in that which they freely of their own accord coÌ„fesse of themselues of their doctrine Euen by the testimony of your own Prophets teachers belieue that ProtestaÌ„cy is newly risen first founded by Luther before knowne to none No man willingly lyeth to his owne shame no man freely confesseth that which ouerthroweth his owne cause but which he cannot deny No man knew protestancy better then they no man fauoured it more then they VVho sayth Caluin is to be credited touching Popery more then the Pope himselfe De ver â— Eccles reform And whom shal we belieue touching the author and hatching of protestancy amongst the Lutherans rather then Luther himselfe Melancthon the Century-writers Kemnice Schusselburg and the like Or amongst the Sacramentaryes rather then Zuinglius Bullinger Bucer Peter Martyr Caluin Beza Plessie and such others or amongst English Protestants rather then Iewell Fox Whitaker Fulke Humfrey Perkins and the like whose frequent and plaine confessions we heerin produce A third difference between our and the Protestants manner of proceeding in this kind of proofe is that Protestantes oftentymes alleadge Catholikes testimonyes corrupted mangled and falsifyed and sometymes also the obiections which they make against theÌ„selues insteed of their answeres as Cardinall Peron not long since shewed Plessie to haue don before the French King conferenrence at fountaine Bel-caue euen by the iudgment of Protestant themselues And it were easy to demonstrate that D. (m) Apol. part 1. l. 1. c. 23. l. 2. c. 41. part 2. l. c. 35. l. 2. c. 41. Morton hath done the like in his Apology But I produce the testimonyes of Protestants certaine and entiere at least for that sense for which I alleadge them For I haue cited none in this worke which either I haue not seene with myne owne eyes and for the most part haue quoted not only the bookes and chapters but also the leaues and pages or if I haue wanted the booke I haue cited them out of some good Author The fourth difference that of great moment is that the Catholiques whose testimonyes Protestants alleadge against is if so be they were true Catholikes were alwayes ready to reuoke and recall whatsoeuer they had written contrary to the catholik fayth to submit all their wordes or writings to the censure of the catholike Church which to be the mind disposition of all Catholiks Protestants themselues confesse For thus writeth D. (n) Contr. 2. q. 5. c. 8. Whitaker This is the condition this the consent of the Popish Church that all hang their saluation vpon one man and submit themselues to one mans iudgment And D. (o) Apol. part 1. l. 2. cap. 31. Morton Is there any Papist that thinkes any decree of the Pope can be contemned or broken without cryme or heresy Which sith it is so in vaine do they obiect any Catholikes words against the Catholike fayth For either they are not contrary thereto or if they be they are already reuoked recalled and disanulled by himselfe But the mind and proceeding of ProtestaÌ„ts is far otherwise who subiect not their opinions to the iudgment of the Church but as they thinke that she may erre so will they hold their opinions notwithstanding her sentence to the contrary and therfore iustly may we produce their testimonies against their owne Church 9. The fift difference which is much to be noted is that Protestants alleadge Catholik witnesses in matters of doctrin in which some tymes by reason of
that Protestants as (u) Lib. 2. c. 9. Lactantius wrote of Cicero cannot be more sorely confuted then they are by Protestants themselues Faults escaped in the printing Page Line Fault Correction 8â— 11. himelf himselfe 82. 27. vnles he vnles he be 96. 6. numb 66. numb 96. 107. 19. The There 109. 23. light of dele of 120. 4. credible incredible 127. 7. the these 23â— 6. dele haue bin 237. 2. be be by 140. 6. fourth third 147. 33. waye waxe 154. 7. in is 168. 23. sonde sponge 169. 3. one our 170. 33. 1525. 1535. 181. 14. should only should only say 184. 27. predigious prodigious 205. 31. boasteth boasteth that â—19 vlt. Taye Faye 211. 33. of fayth faith of 222. 21. first fifth If any other faults haue escaped it is desired of the Gentle Reader to correct them of his courtesy the Author being far absent from the Print THE FIRST BOOKE Of the substance of the Protestants Church and Religion and of their vncertainty therein CHAP. I. BECAVSE as after Plato and Aristotle Tully sayth very truly VVhosoeuer will according to the order of reason treat of any thing Lib. 4. must first define or explicate the nature thereof that it may be knowne what it is whereof he speaketh and Protestants agree that the definition is the very ground of all disputation before I do shew Caluin 3. Institut cap. 4. §. 1. Sadeel in Refut Thes â—osnan cap. 2. who was the first author of the Protestant Church and Religion which I will do in the second booke I will in this first define and determine what is a Protestant and what is the Protestant Church and Religion And because Protestants in this matter as in all others are variable and inconstant sometymes requiring many things to the making and constitution of a Protestant sometymes being content with very few things sometyms stretching the bounds of their Church most largly otherwhiles drawing theÌ„ very strait according as it serueth to their present purpose I will first discouer this their vncertainty about so weighty a matter afterward out of their owne principles and confessions of fayth set downe what is indeed necessary to the very substance and being of a Protestant and of their Church and Religion And in this Chapter I will shew how few they sometymes do admit to be of the Church and how many things they require to the making of a Protestant and in some chapters following how many they at other tymes do graunt to be of their Church and how few things they account necessary for to be a member thereof That done I will make manifest what is indeed necessary thereto They exclude Papists 2. First of all therefore they sometymes exclude Catholiques whome they terme Papists out of the Church as is manifest by all their writings in so much that the French Protestants in the 28. article of their confession say VVe openly affirme that where the word of God is not receiued nor there is any profession of obedience due thereto nor any vse of Sacraments there properly speaking we cannot iudge to be any Church VVherfore we condemne the Popish Conuenticles And D. Whitaker in his second booke against Dureus 2. section is so earnest that he sayth I will not allow the very name of a lawfull Church vnto the Roman Church because it hath nothing which a true Church ought to haue And both he in his 2. Controuersy 6. question 3. Chapter D. Sutliue in his first booke of the Church 3. cap. and lib. 2. cap. 9. M. Perkins in his reformed Catholique towards the end Caluin in his book against the Chaunter of Lions Beza in his of the notes of the Church the Confession of Saxony in the Chapter of the Church and many others do reckon diuers articles or euery one whereof they pronounce Papists to be â—ut of the Church And because their opinion hereâ—n is well inough knowne and hereafter also we â—hall haue occasioÌ„ to shew how haynously they conâ—emne the Popedome or Papistry I will heere reâ—earse no more of their sayings touching this point The like sentence they sometymes pronounce of the â—nabaptists Anabaptists and Atians For thus speaketh the conâ—ession of Auspurg Cap. 9. They condemne the Anabapâ—â—sts who disallow the baptisme of infants and think them to â—â—e faned without baptisme And the Confession of Switâ—erland cap. 20. VVe condemne the Anabaptists who deny â—at infants ought to be baptized The same is manifest by â—he English Confession c. 38. by the Confession of â—asse c. 24. others Of Arians Arrians they giue this verâ—ct in the forsayd Confession of Auspurg in the first â—rticle They condemne all heresies risen against this article of the Trinity as the Manichees Arians Eunomians c. â—nd in like sort the French Confession art 6. the â—nglish art 1. the consent of Poland and others in 〈◊〉 much as in England the Protestants haue burnt me Arians 3. Sometymes also they thrust out all hereâ—ckes Heretiks For thus writeth Luther in his explication of â—e Creed Neither Gentile Iew Heretike LutheraÌ„s or any sinner is â—ued vnlesse he make attonement with the Church and in all â—ings thinke do and teach the same And the Magdeâ—â—rgians in the preface of their 6. Century Neither â—eretikes nor deuisers or patrons of sanaticall opinions are of â—â—rist but they are of Antichrist and of the diuell and apperâ—â—ne to Antichrist and the diuell they are the impostume and â—â—e plague of the people of God The ministers of the Prince Elector of Saxony in the Conference held at Aldburg in the 3. writ cast out of the Church all VVho say they wittingly and willingly defend such corruptions of doctrine as haue byn condemned by the lawfull iudgment and consent of the Catholike Church And the Ministers of the Duke of Saxony in the 4. writ of the sayd Conference pronounce this sentence VVhosoeuer they are that do cloak and defend corruptions of the word of God that is of the articles of fayth after they haue byn admonished we iudge not to be true members of Christ vnlesse they repent And Vrbanus Regius one of the first and cheifest scholers of Luther in his Catechisme sayth All Heretikes are out of the Church The same teacheth Schusselburg a principall superintendent amongst the Lutherans in his Catalogue of heresies and many others As for the Sacramentaries SacrameÌ„taries thus professeth the French Confession in the 6. article VVe detest all Sects and heresies which haue byn reiected by the holy Fathers as S. Hilary S. Athanasc S. Ambrose S. Cyrill Whereupon Sadeel in his preface of his answere to the abiured articles sayth Our Confession of fayth condemneth all Heretikes Likewise the Confession of Basle in 24. article writeth in thiâ— sort VVe driue away all whosoeuer dissenting from the society of the holy Church do either bring in or follow strange wicked doctrines And Peter Martyr in his Commoâ— places in the title
Heathens Pagans and infidells And in his Apology for the Switzers Churches he defineth Schisme to be a separation from the rest of the body of the Catholike Church Zanchius also in his treatise of the Church cap. 7. reacheth that Schismatikes are not in the Church And suâ—us in his 3. booke of the Church c. 5. approueth the fame of such Schismatikes as separate themselues from the whole Church The strangers in England writing to Beza in the 24 epistle haue these words in their 13. article VVhosoeuer is lawfully excommunicated of a particuler Church or cutteth himselfe of vpon vnlawfull causes and with scandall in that doth loose all priuiledge of the Catholike Church And Beza answereth them in the name of the Church of Geneua in this manner Your thirteenth article we wholy receiue at most orthodoxall Casaubon in his 15. exercitation against Baronius num 6. It is an vndoubted truth that how often soeuer a pious flock is ioyned to a true Bishop there is a Church of God in so much that if any forsake that Church it cannot be doubted but that he is out of the Church Finally Chamier in his epistle to Armand excludeth Schismatikes out of the Church because sayth he they want the sincerity of the Sacraments English ProtestaÌ„ts Amongst our English Protestants his Maiesty in his foresayd epistle to Cardinall Peron All those testimonies of Augustin proue only this that there is no hope of saluation for those who leaue the Communion of the Catholike Church which the King willingly graunteth D. Whitaker in his 2. controuer 5. quest 6. cap. sayth It is false that hereticall and Schismaticall Churches be true Churches Againe The Catholike Church consisteth not of diuided but of vnited members And cap. 2 The true and Catholike Church is that which consisteth of Catholiks D. Fulke in his booke of the succession of the Church VVhat auailed it them to eternall saluation to haue byn sound in Religion and doctrine seing they were cut of from the Communion of the true Church in which alone saluation is and from her true head VVhat skilleth it whether one being drawne by heresy or Schisme from the body of Christ be subiect to euerlasting damnation D. Humfrey in his answere to the 3. reason of F. Campian VVe confesse that he is vndone who is separated from the followship of the Church And D. Feild in his first booke of the Church cap. 7 The name of the Catholike Church is applyed to distinguish men holding the sayth in vnity from Schismatiks And in his 2. booke c. 2. he sayth that Schismatikes are not Catholike Christians Thus we see how Protestants sometymes do teach that the true Church consisteth of Catholiks of members vnited not deuided that it hath no Schismes or Sects That Schismatiks are not Catholiks that their vnity is not true nor Catholike that their Churches ought to be forsaken that they are not vniuocally Churches nor true Churches that they are not members of the true Church but out of the Church altogeather out of the Church and actually neither of the visible nor inuisible Church and that this is an vndoubted truth which coÌ„fession of theirs must be well noted and kept in mind for thereby is ouerthrowne as we shall see in the 2. booke their only argument wherwith they endeauour to proue that their Church was before Luther and also is defaced their only essentiall mark of finding the true Church by the truth of doctrine For Schismatikes as we shall heare them confesse in the 2. booke hold true doctrine and neuertheles as here they acknowledge are not of the true Church They exclude those that deny any fundameÌ„tal article 5. In like manner they do commonly debarre from their Church all such as deny any principall or fundamentall point of fayth Melancthon in his booke of common places in the title of the Church They are not members of the Church who pertinaciously maintaine errours opposite to the foundation And in his answere to the Bauarian articles Saints may haue errours but not such as ouerthrow the foundation In his examen of those that are to take orders Agreement in the foundation LutheraÌ„s is a thing necessary to the vnity of the Church And vpon the 3. cap. of the 1. epistle to Timothy The foundation is held in the Church otherwise there should be no Church at all And in his 79. proposition tom 4 It is most certaine that those companies are not the Church of God who either are altogeather ignorant of the Ghospell or impugne some article of the foundation that is some article of fayth or doctrine of the decalogue or maintaine open idols Chemnitius in his common places pa. 3. title of the Church Neither can these be acknowledged for the true Church who imbrace fundamentall errours And the Lutherans in the conference at Ratisbon Ses 14. Hutter in his Analysis of the Confession of Auspurg Gesner in his 24. place Adam Francis in his 11. place and other Lutherans commonly agree that the Church cannot erre Fundamentally or in the Foundation And the Confession of Saxony giueth this note to know who are in the Church SacrameÌ„taries Those who hold the Foundation As for Sacramentaries Caluin in his 4. booke of Institutions cap. 2. num 1 So soone as a lye hath broken into the castle of Religion the summe of necessary doctrine is inuerted the vse of Sacraments is fallen certainly the destruction of the Church ensueth euen as a mans life is lost when his throat is cut or his vitall parts deadly wounded And soone after It is certaine that there is no Church where lyes and errour haue gotten to the toppe And cap. 19. num 17 VVithout doubt the Church of the faythfull must agree in all the heads of our Religion Sadeel in his answere to the Theses held at Posna cap. 12 I thinke the matter is thus to be defined by the word of God that if any in what Church soeuer dissent in the foundation of sayth and be obstinate in their errours such appertaine not to the vnity of the Church The like he hath in his answere to Arthure cap. 12. Vesinuâ— in his Catechisme quest 54. cap. 4 The whole Church erreth not nor wholly nor in the foundation Polanus in his Thesis of the Church sayth The Church erreth not in the foundation The same teacheth Zanchius in his treatise of the Church c. 7. Lubbertus in his 2. booke of the Church c 3. Vorstius in his Anti-bellarmin pag. 139. Bucanus in his 41. place and other Sacramentaries commonly And with them herein agree our English Protestants English ProtestaÌ„ts For thus sayth his Maiesty in his epistle to Cardinall Peron The Churches are vnited in vnity of sayth and doctrine in those heads which are necessary to saluation And D. Whitaker in the preface of his Controuersies The foundations of sayth are of that nature that one being shaken nothing in all religion remaineth sound And Contr. 2. quest 4. cap.
5. affirmeth that he had reiected only the accidents of his Popish orders but retayned the substance still M. Mason in his 5. booke of the ordination of ministers cap. 12. sayth that Popish ordination consistes of two parts to wit of power to offer sacrifice of power to administer the word and Sacraments and albeit he reiecteth the former yet the later he approues as that wherein true ministery consisteth Sadeel respon ad artic abiurat 61. And Vorstius in Anti-bellarmin pag. 177. teach the same and so must all others do who hold the mission of Luther and their first ministers to haue byn ordinary and receiued from the Papists which opinion most Protestants do now follow retracting vpon better aduise their former assertion confessing that the mission of their new Reformers was not in substance extraordinary And their deeds and actions do no lesse declare their approbation and esteeme of the mission and Pastorall charge which is in the church of Rome For as Turrian reporteth lib. 2. de Eccles cap. 3. and Luther intimateth tom 2. epist ad Bohemos when the Catholike Bishops giue orders the Hussites of Bohemia steale in priuily among the rest The Lutherans also made sute to the estats of the Empire that their ministers might receiue orders from the bishops of Misnia and Numburg And in artic 10. Smalcald they professe thus If the bishops of the church of Rome would truly execute their office and looke carefully to the church and word of God it might be permitted them to giue orders vnto vs and our preachers You may adde hereunto that neither Luther nor any Reformer else euer sought other ordination then what they had receiued of Papists and that in the beginning of Queene Elizabeths raigne the supposed Prelates earnestly be sought a Catholike Bishop to consecrate them And euen to this day if any renegate Priest ioyne himselfe to the Protestants they order him not anew but deeme him fit for their ministeriall function by vertue of the orders he receiued of Papists Now if Papists haue true Mission true pastorall charge and true Pastors True mission and Pastors inseparable froÌ„ the Church surely they haue also the true church it being impossible that the church should be seuered froÌ„ the true Pastours or that the keyes of heauen which are in the true Pastours hands should be out of the church or that the power to remit sinnes the prerogatiue of true Pastours shold be where the church is not Nay the Protestants themselues confesse as much Luther tom 4. in cap. 4. Oseae fol. 295 True it is that the Ministery is only in the Church Melancthon tom 1. Lutheri disput de Eccles Polit. fol. 483 The ordination of Ministers is one of the peculiar giftes of the Church Caluin lib. de neces reform Eccles pag. 57 This one reason is as good as thousands that who so hath shewed himselfe an enemy to true doctrine hath lost all authority in the Church D. Whitaker ad demonstrat 18. Sanderi Out of the Church there is no other seate but the seat of errour of pestilence and euerlasting destruction The same teacheth Sadeel ad Sophism Turrian loc 10. D. Feild in his 1. booke of the church cap. 14. and others 5. Fiftly it is euident by the doctrine of the Sacramentaries who hold that the children of Papists are in the couenant of God and estate of saluation through the fayth of their parents Papistâ— children saued by the fayth of their parents and may therefore be baptised much more then must they teach that the parents themselues are for their owne fayth in the couenant of God and estate of saluation which could not be were they not in the Church The antecedent is manifest by the saying of many Protestants For thus writeth Luther lib. de capt Babylon tom 2. fol. 77 Here I say that which all say that infants are holpen by the fayth of them which offer them Caluin in his Catechâ—sme cap. de lege God extendeth his bounty so farre vnto the faythfull that for their sake he is good to their children not only blessing their affaires in this world but also sanctifying their soules that they may be accounted of his flock Contr. Seruetum pag. 601 VVe think that there will be no vse of Baptisme vntill this promise I will be thy God and of thy seed be apprehended by fayth but euery one apprehendeth it not only to himselfe but also to his issue Beza part 2. Respon ad acta Montisbel pag. 118 Parents through Gods grace do apâ—rehend grace by true fayth according to the forme of the Couenant as well to their posterity as to themselues Which he oftentymes repeateth And likewise in Confes cap. 4. sect 48. and cap. 5. sect 9. and pag. 126 M. Perkins de Sacramento Baptismi tom 1. col 846 Others say that the fayth of the Parents is also the fayth of their children all the tyme of their infancy or childhood and that because parents do by their fayth apprehend the promise both for themselues and for their children VVhich opinion seemeeh to me the fittest of all The like he sayth in cap. 3. Galat. The sequele likewise is vndoubted For if the fayth of Popish parents be of force to establish their very children in the Couenant of God and estate of saluation though it reside not in them nor be their act much more doth it establish the parents themselues who haue that fayth in them and whose act it is Nor do the instances D. Morton brings against it in his answere to the Protestants Apology lib. 4. cap. 6. make any thing to the purpose as that in case of necessity an hereticall Priest or Schismatike may absolue from sinnes and an Infidell administer Baptisme Againe That if such as were free of a citty and are araigned of treason should haue issue after their condemnation their children neuertheles shall enioy the title and right of cittizens whereof their parents were destitute These examples I say are not to the purpose because he who is eyther baptized by an Infidell or absolued by an hereticall Priest enters not into the couenant of God and estate of saluation for ought that is in the person which baptizeth or absolueth him but for the Sacrament of Baptisme or Pennance which he receiueth indeed by the others administration but hath it in himselfe And the sonne of a traytor is not made a Cittizen in regard of any thing that is in the father alone but for his owne birth which appertaines to himselfe though his Father be author thereof But the Sacramentaries teach that the child of a Papist is in the couenant of God and estate of saluation not for his owne fayth for they say he hath none but for the beliefe of his father which is no way possible if the same fayth be not of force to worke the like effect in the father himselfe seeing it belongs farre more to him then to his child and therefore must
sooner giue him interest in the couenant then the child that is descended of him For how can the fathers beliefe lay hold on the promises and couenant of God for his children and cannot do it for himselfe 6. These allegations demonstrate The suÌ„mâ— of Protestants ConfessioÌ„ touching Papists that by the Confession of the Protestants the starkest Papists such as are of beliefe that the masse the Popes primacy and all things else of his are good vpright and of God are soldiers vnder Christ may attaine to saluation may be Saints yea that there are among them both many and great Saints That there is in the Church of Rome what so is necessary to saluation the summe of fayth the ground-works the essentiall ground-works the principall grounds of fayth the cheife articles the fundamentall heads the necessary heads the cheife parts the Ghospell of saluation the kernell of Christianity and all Christian good Lastly that the Church of Rome Is a limme and member of the vniuersall Church of the Catholike Church a member of the true Church and is of the family of Iesus Christ that it is mother to the children of God that it is the Church of God the temple of God the body of Christ the Spouse of Christ that it abides yet in the couenant is not yet cast of or put away is not yet killed but is yet aliue Which words plainly import that the Roman or Popish Church is a true Church in the sight of God 7. But is it credible Note that such as make profession of Christian religion should mount to that height of impiety as dare to reiect diuorce themselues from that Church which they confesse remaynes yet in the couenant of God which Christ hath not yet reiected Is it credible that they feare not to impugne to make bitter inuectiues to disgorge curses and execrations against her whom they acknowledge to be their Mother which bore them to Christ to be the Church of God to be the body and Espouse of Christ What can be more lewd and impious then to rage and raile against their owne mother against the Church of God against the very body and Espouse of Christ What strang and monstrous blindnes is it not to perceiue that whiles they confesse the church of Rome to be the church of God Espouse of Christ they acknowledge their owne to be the Synagogue of Antichrist and strumpet of the Diuell For Christ cannot haue two Espouses repugnant each to other Now the Protestant church and church of Rome are parts so opposite as can neuer make one For they iarre and disagree mainely in diuers weighty points as namely touching the canon and exposition of the Scripture touching sacrifice and the Sacraments touching the worship of God his Saints touching the meanes to obtaine remission of sinnes and many the like Whereupon Beza in Confes cap. 7. pag. 56 VVe dissent sayth he from the Papist about they very summe of saluatioÌ„ And others say no lesse as shall be shewed hereafter in the 2. booke and 6. cap If ours be true Religion sayth S. Augustin to the Donatists which yet came nearer to Catholiks then Protestants do yours is superstition Lib. 2. coÌ„t Gaud. c. 11. Againe If our communion be the Church of Christ yours is not Christs Church Lib. 1. de Bapt. c. 11. for that is but one which so euer it be And in another place VVhen they approue that Church which as is manifest we communicate with all and they do not by that their testimony they acknowledge themsâ—lues conuinced Lib. ad Donat post codat and giue you plaine notice if you be wise what you ought to forgoe and what it behoues you to cleaue to and retaine And S. Cyprian epistle 76 If the Church were on Nouatus side it was not with Cornelius Num. 4. 8. The Protestants now and then perceiue as much when they acertaine vs as hath byn shewed in the first chapter that who so seuereth himselfe from any particuler congregation which is a true Church excludes himselfe wholy from the church Caluin saw it when 4. Insti c. 2. § 10. he wrote thus VVe cannot graunt them Papists that they are the church but the necessity of subiectioÌ„ obedieÌ„ce will befall vs. If they be churches the power of the keyes is in their possession If they be churches that promise of Christ VVhatsoeuer ye bind on earth shall be bouÌ„d in heauen takes effect in them M. Perkins perceiued it to when in his explicatioÌ„ of the Creed col 794. he sayd Zanchiuâ— lib. 1. de Eâ—cl c. 7. As long as any church forsakes not Christ we may not withdraw our selues from it The reason is apparant because in so doing we should depart from Christ or Christ shold be parted euen as we are rent and disioynted from the church wherein he is And in his Reformed Catholike tract 22. col 470. Whâ—re he sayth VVe ought not to deuide our selues from any nation or people which hath not before cut it selfe of from Christ D. Feild likewise saw it in his 3. booke of the Church c. 47. Where he makes this acknowledgement Surely if he can proue that we confesse it the Church of Rome to be the true Church he needeth not vse any other argument But we haue clearely prooued it by sundry plaine confessions of many famous Protestants And hitherto we haue discouered how they sometyme harbour and receiue Papists into their church now we will shew that they vse the like curtesy towards the rest CHAP. III. That Protestants acknowledge for members of their Church sometyme those that deny as well fundamentall as other articles of their fayth sometymes Heretiks Schismatiks yea their profest and sworne enemies THAT they esteeme all such to be members of their Church as swarue from the Christian fayth only in points not fundamentall themselues in the preface of the Switzers Confession declare in these words Mutuall consent and agreement in the principall points of doctrine in orthodoxe sense and brotherly charity was of religious antiquity thought abundantly sufficient And D. Whitaker cont 4. quest 1. c. 2. pag. 527 God forbid that they should be no longer of the number of the faythfull who are in some points of a contrary opinion so they assent in the cheife and principall and necessary matters And for as much as the Protestants opinion herein is well knowne for whâ—Ì„ it is obiected vnto them that their churches disagree in points of fayth this serues them for excuse I think it needlesse to alleage any more of their sayings He that will may looke the Confession of Saxony cap. de Eccles Luther tom 7. lib. de not Eccles fol. 149. Melancthon tom 4. in ca. 3. 1. Cor. Kemnitius 1. part Examinis tit de bonis operibus pag. 332. Zuinglius tom 1. in Prefat lib de Prouident Caluin 4. Institut cap. 1. § 12. and cap. 2. § 1. Beza epist 2. Zanchius in prefat lib.
by externall profession they are all whose marke of recogniscance hath in it those things which we haue mentioned yea although they be impious idolaters wicked heretikes persons excommunicable Againe Those whose knees were bowed vnto Baal euen they were also of the visible Church of God Boysseul in Confut. p. 822 answering to the place where Spondeus obiected that if the Church of Rome be an Idolatresse as Boysseul had auouched it is not the Church of Christ makes this reply And why not as well as Israel And D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 3. pag. 475. saith Although this errour Idolatry in adoring the calfe were most grieuous yet it destroyed not the whole nature of the Church 2. And Infidells That they sometymes comprize also Infidels in the Church is manifest first because they affirme that such may be saued For M. Fox in his Martyrologe pag. 495. reporteth that a certaine Protestant Martyr whole learning piety zeale he greatly commendeth taught that a Turke Saracen or any Mahamet an whatsoeuer may be saued if he trust in one God and keep his law M. Bale in his 6. Century pag. 464. bids vs beware that we condemne not rashly any Turke And Zuinglius tom 1. lib. de prouid fol. 370. sayth It is not vniuersally true that who so hath no fayth is damned Againe As for the damnation of vnbelieuers it is meant only of those who heard and did not belieue And tom 2. declarat de peccat orig fol. 118 This saying who so doth not belieue shall be condemned must in no wise be absolutely vnderstood but it is to be vnderstood of those See Homiâ—â— in Specim Contr. art 27. who hauing heard the ghospell would not belieue And ibidem in exposit fidei fol. 559. he sayth that in heauen Christians shall meet many heathens whose names he there sets downe and amongst the rest that cruel Theseus and Magician Numa the founder of heathenish superstitions amongst the Romans Which opinion of his those of Zurich in Apolog. Gualter in prefat tom 1. Zuinglij Simler in vita Bullengeri and others seeke to patronize and make good Now it were folly and madnes to auouch that these men were of the number of the faythfull They belieue then that infidels may be saued But S. Augustin was of a farre different beliefe lib. 4. cont Iul. cap. 3. where he writes thus VVhat one of those who would be accounted Christians will say an Infidell is iust be it euen Fabritius 3. Secondly their doctrine touching the predestinate carrieth with it a necessary acknowledgement of their Communion with Infidels For they teach that who so is predestinate is alwayes a member of the Church Hus his first article condemned by the Councel of Constance was this The predestinate remayneth euer a member of the Church And Luther tom 2. in Assert art 30 I say the opinions of Iohn Hus are all Euangelicall and Christian Againe I admit all the condemned articles of Iohn Hus. And tom 1. in disput Lypsic fol. 254. he maintaineth openly this article of Hus The Church is the whole multitude of the predestinate Vorstius in Anti-bellarmine page 125 VVe affirme that the Councell of Constance which condemned the doctrine of Hus that who so is predestinate is alwayes a meÌ„ber of the Church was surely in this respect Antichristian Danaeus in Resp ad Bellarm. Contr. 4. lib. 3. cap. 2. sayth The first opinion which was the opinion of Hus is true and is ours Againe our opinion is that the Church is the whole company of men whome God hath predestinated to saluation And cap. 7 It must be answered that Paul was alwayes but not alwayes apparently in regard of men of Gods true Church Againe Such Turkes and Iewes as God hath predestinated to saluation are of the Church euen now at this tyme in regard they are predestinate and in respect of God but they are not yet of Gods Church apparently and in respect of vs for as much as they lack yet those marks whereby God doth heere shew vs men who are of the church And Cont. 4. lib. 3. cap. 12 The true definition of the true church is this The company and multitude of those whome God hath chosen to saluation And Iunius lib. 3. de Eccles cap. 7 Paul was alwayes of the church according to predestination from which sayth he the church taketh her being or formal definition but not according to the outward forme of the church What can be more apparent then that these men teach that the predestinate are members of the church according to the true being therof and in the sight of God euen during the tyme of their infidelity 4. Thirdly this followeth necessarily vpon that which they teach concerning infants especially such as are descended from faythfull parents departing this life vnbaptized For they affirme that the children of the faythfull are actually in the Church as the French Confession article 35 Togeather with the parents God accounteth also their ofspring in the church And the Zuitzers cap. 20 VVhy should not they the children of the faythfull be ingrafted by sacred baptisme who are Gods proper possession and within his church Caluin in Instruct cont Anabap. art 1 Vnspotted infants are in the Communion of the church before they come forth of their Mothers wombe And Pareus lib. 3. de Iustificat cap. 4. pag. 884 Caluin on good reason determineth that the children of the church are borne cittizens of the church Their doctrine also hath the same issue who teach that infants at leastwise the children of the faythfull are saued without baptisme as the Protestants in the colloq Ratisbon And Zuinglius tom 2. Declarat de peccat orig fol. 119 Concerning Christians children we are assured that they are not damned for originall sinn of others we haue not the like assurance howbeit to confesse ingenuously the opinion we taught heretofore to wit that we ought not to iudge rashly of heathens children seemes to vs the more probable Voritius in Anti-bellarmine pag. 542 Zuinglius and some other ghospellers auouch that all children whatsoeuer are by the grace of Christ saued others for the most part hold that at leastwise all the elect whether extract from faythfull or other parents do euen vnbaptized attaine to saluation Whereof he sayth The opinion of these later is surely the safest and yet the first opinion is probable inough and ought not to be rashly condemned Now as D. Whitaker sayth Cont. 2. quest 1. cap. 5. 6 All that are saued are really and actually in the church And D. Morton part 1. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 4 To be of the church in possibility sufficeth not to saluation Lubbertus lib. 2. de Eccles cap. 2 Neither can any one be saued except he be actually and really in the church Whence Martyr in 1. Cor. 7. fol. 177. sayth Infants must of necessity appertaine vnto the church seing there is no saluation without it They teach moreouer that Infants haue
they should be vnderstood rather according to Saint Hieromes meaning then according to their owne most proper most plaine and most frequent words especially when as Luther sayth tom 1. fol. 414 Many thinges are borne withall in the Fathers who were knowne to be orthodoxe which we may not imitate 8. Wherefore out of all which hath byn rehearsed in this chapter I thus frame my second demonstration If so be that before Luther arose there were not one only Protestant in the whole world but that all euery man followed a different Religion Luther was the Author and beginner of the Protestant Church and Religion But that is true as manifestly appeareth by the manyfold and open confessions of Luther and many and most famous Protestants Therefore c. That Protestants confesse their Church and religion to haue byn altogeather inuisible before Luther appeared CHAP. IV. 1. THE fourth demonstration wherewith we will proue Luther to haue byn the Author of the Protestant church and religion we will draw out of that which they confesse of the inuisibility thereof before Luther brake out And by the way I must aduertise the Reader of two things The one is that by the name of the Church is not to be vnderstood only the men who are of the Church but their society in religioÌ„ wherby they make a church wherefore those Protestants speake not to the purpose who to excuse the absurdity of their doctrine touching the inuisibility of the Church say they meane not that the men whereof it consisted were inuisible men for it sufficeth that they confesse that they were inuisible worshippers of God according to the Protestant manner or that their society in this kind of worship of God was inuisible Note The other point is that in these kind of questions VVhether before Luther the Protestant Church were VVhether it were visible Colloq Batisban Ses 1.6 10.17 Iuel Def. Apol. par 5. c. 15. d. 1. VVhither it had Pastors and the like the Catholiks hold the negatiue part and Protestants the affirmatiue and that it belongeth to the affirmer to proue what he affirmeth wherein if he faile he is ouercome and it is not needfull for the denyer to proue his denyall but is sufficient reasonably to answere the proofes of the affirmer which if he performe he hath wonne the cause As if one like Anaxagoras would say that there were many worlds besides this or that such and such things haue byn done in tymes past he were bound to proue what he sayth he that should deny such matters were not bound to proue his denyall but only reasonably to answere his aduersaries arguments And the reason is manifest because for to affirme or belieue any thinge we must haue reason or proofe thereof bur for the not belieuing of it we need no other reason then to shew that there is no sufficient reason why it should be belieued Hereupon Luther in his booke against Henry 8. King of England tom 2. fol. 340 sayd He must be taught the principles of disputation who hauing to proue his affirmation vrgeth his aduersary to proue his denyall And Vorstins in his Antibellarm pag. 464 It is inough for the denyer probably to deny Wherefore in these kind of questions Protestants ought to be vrged to performe their part that is to proue what they affirme to wit that before Luthers tyme their Church was had Pastors and the like which if they cannot do they must needs confesse that in this debate they haue lost their cause And they ought not to presse vs to proue that before Luther their Church was not had not Pastors c. Because as I sayd herein we are only the defenders and denyers Tom. 1. fo 389. 473. and therefore it sufficeth for vs to shew that no reasons which the Protestants alledge conuince a reasonable man to belieue that there was any such Church before Luther appeared which if we do we haue wonne the cause That the ProtestaÌ„ts Church was inuisible to strangers Neuerthelesse that I may vse Luthers words in the booke before cited Albeit it belong not to vs to proue the negatiue let vs do it 2. First therefore touching the inuisibility of the Protestant Church before Luthers tyme Protestants confesse that it was inuisible to Papists to enemies to the world and to all that were not of it For thus sayth Sadcel in his Refutation of the 61. article pag. 538 VVe deny not that the Godly men lurcked vnder Popish darknesse and we giue God thanks that such persons families Inuisible to Papists and companies were for a tyme inuisible and vnknowne to the Pope and all his Catchpoles seing they were for a long tyme like sparckles couered with much ashes The same he sayth in his answere to Arthur cap. 8. and to the Sophismes of Turrian loco 10. and to the Repetition of them pag. 706. Danaeus in his booke of Antichrist cap. 38. writeth That there were very few Protestants and those dwelling in wildernesses and also vnknowne to others vnknown to others Iunius in his 4. booke of the Church cap. 5. speaketh thus of Protestants before Luther They professed their sayth amongst themselues but not before dogges wild beasts who would runne vpon them D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quaest 2. cap. 2. pag. 458. VVas it the Protestant Church manifest to all No but to those only who had eyes And pag. 468 There was no true Church on earth Knowne only to ProtestaÌ„ts which appeared to all And quest 6. cap. 2. pag 359 VVe care not for their obiecting solitude vnto vs. For we are not ashamed to haue recalled our Church out of this kind of solitude D. Fulke to the Cauillations of Stapleton The whole forme of the Church was for some ages vnknowne to the vngratefull world And in his booke of succession pag. 118 They confessed Christ but not alwayes before heretiks but before themâ—elues and the Church And in his notes vpon the 11. cap. of the Acts If by visible you vnderstand that which is seene and knowne to the whole world it is not true that the Church was alwayes visible D. Morton in the 1. part of his Apology booke 1. cap. 16. sayth They professed secretly not publikely D. White in his way to the Church pag. 95 That they professed among themselues Osiander in his Manuel pag. 59 In the visible Church of Rome there was the inuisible company of belieuers hidden to the eye of the world Caelius secundus Curio in his booke of the lardgnes of the Kingdome of God pag. 212 It came to passe that for many yeares the Church lay hid and that the Cittizen of this Kingdome could scarce or not at all be discerned from others And the Scots in their generall confession VVe say that this is the only true Christian sayth which is now reuealed to the world Thus they acknowledg that before Luthers tym Protestants were vnknown to the Pope and his officers to their
but euen to Infidels and of the opposite ignorance or inuisibility we speake in this matter and Protestants also as appeareth by their testimonies already rehearsed shall yet more by those which we shall repeat hereafter That they say their Church was simply inuisible 5. Further more therefore Protestants do not only teach that their Church may and hath byn inuisible respectiuely that is to this or that kind of men as we haue already heard but also they graunt that it may be simply and absolutely inuisible Luther vpon the 90. psalm tom 3. fol. 493 The Church was and abode in Popery but truly so hidden as to one that would iudge by the appearance the seemed to be no where at all Seemed to be no where And vpon the psalm 22. fol. 344 The Church is brought into the dust of death so that no where there appeareth any shew or trace of her And vpon the first chap. of Micheas tom 4. fol. 434 No trace of church appeared In the former ages there was no true forme of religion extant The Magdeburgians in the preface of their 10. Century It is very hard to find where which the Church was in this age No forme extant Likewise in the Preface of the 11. Century Euery where was darknes neither durst the Church mutter any thing Gerlachius in his 22. disput of the Church pag. 927. writeth that before Luther The true Church withdrew it selfe from the eyes sight of men into lurking holes and hid her selfe in darknesse Zuinglius in his supplication to the Bishop of Constance tom 1. fol. 120 The heauenly doctrine lay a long tyme hid Hospinian in the epistle dedicatory of the first part of his History From the yeare 1200. vntill the yeare 1515. the Church lay miserably ouerwhelmed as it were with a most deep and most strong deluge Caluin in the Preface of his Institutions God permitted that in former ages there should be no face of the true Church extant No face of the church extant And addeth of his owne doctrine It lay a long tyme vnknowne and buryed Againe For some ages all things were drowned in deep darknes And vpon the 23. chapter of the Acts vers 6. he sayth The Church was hidden from the eyes of men And in his Preface vpon Isaias Touching the oueward shew of the church nothing for many ages appeared but desolate and confused wast on all sides Beza in his book of the notes of the church pag. 99 The Church lurked in the wildernes Pareus in his 4. booke of grace and freewill cap. 6 In Constantines tyme the church began to waâ— sick to death notwithstanding the Catholike Church remayned But where In the desert as in the world withdrawne from the eyes of men Sadeel in his treatise of the vocarion of Ministers pag. 533 After the Church had a long tyme lurked the Lord called her at this tyme into light Could not be discerned Voyen in his Preface of Catalog Doct The true visible Church could not be discerned no tract of Gods grace appeared in his Church The Apology of the English Church part 4. cap. 4. diuis 2. sayth that 40. yeares agoe truth first began to spring vnknowne at that tyme and vnheard of Vnheard of D. Humfrey vnto the 3. reason of F. Campian pag. 286 VVhy the picture of the Church in these later tymes cannot be seene of our aduersaries or drawne of vs c. And pag. 288 If the only names of our Fathers were extant who eyther by teaching Not so much as their names extant or monishing or writing did help the Church of Christ we should see another ranck and progresse of the Church another succession of Bispops another picture of Protestants And pag. 291 And yet they will obiect that our Church was hidden which they no where suffered aliue D. Whitaker Controu 2. quest 3. pag. 479 VVhen they aske of vs where was our Church in tymes past for so many ages we answere that it was in a close wildernesse that is that it was hidden lay secret fled the sight of men And quest 5. c. 3. pag. 499 Luther brought the fayth out of darknesse wherein before it lay drowned And cap. 4. pag. 502 Our Church was then but you will say it was not visible Not visible VVhat then therefore was it not No. For it lay hid in the wildernesse M. Perkins in his exposition of the Creed colum 788 VVe say that many ages past before this our age that vniuersall defection ouerwhelmed almost all the world Not visible and that our Church was not visible at that tyme. M. Base in his 1. Century of the writers of Britanny cap. 4 From Phocas vntill the renewing of the Ghospell the doctrine of Christ lay so long in lurking holes M. Downham in his 2. booke of Antichrist cap. 2 The generall defection of the visible Church began to worke in the Apostles tyme. M. Powell in his 1. book of Antichrist c. 23 Our religion lay long tyme vnknowne and buryed vnknown buried And M. Cox Chancellour of Oxford in King Edward 6. tyme exhorting the vniuersity men to Protestantisme biddeth them pluck out truth lying long tyme lurking in Trophonius denne Thus clearely and thus many wayes they simply and absolutely graunt that their Church was inuisible vnknowne and buryed before Luther arose 6. The same also they intend They teach the Church may be simply inuisible when they say that the Church either was or can be inuisible For they would neuer say so vnlesse they knew that such was the condition of their Church before Luther began Luther vpon the 90. psalm tom 3. fol. 495 Sometymes the Church was most weake and so dispersed as it appeared no where Hutter in his Analysis of the Confession of Auspurg pag. 448 No where appeare It is certaine that it may fall out that the true Church may ly hidden and her visible forme not at all tymes appeare to the eyes Herbrand in his Compend of diuinity place of the Church pag. 502. writeth That the faythfull sometymes appeare not to the eyes euen of the Godly Not to the Godly Kemnitius in his common places tit the epistles of the Apostles pag. 78 Sometymes the true Church another bastard and company preuailing and ouertopping doth so as it werely hid that Elias may say I am leâ—t alone Gerlachius in his 22. dispute of the Church pag. 946 No surely if at some tyme the Church be not seene with corporall eyes therefore she is not Caluin in the Preface of his Institutions Sometyme God taketh away the outward knowledge of his Church from the sight of men Sometyme the Church hath no apparent forme And in his treatise of the true Reformation of the Church pag. 332 The Church sometyme lyeth hid and flieth the sight of men And in his Antidote of the 18. article of the Vniuersity of Paris VVe gather that the Church
that is to be iustifyed by good works For thus sayth Luther of them in his table-talkes chap. of Suermers The VValdenses are holy workmen and belieue not that sayth without works doth iustify and know nothing at all of imputatiue iustice Cocciuâ— 10.1 lib. 8. And Bennet Morgenstern in his treatise of the church p. 1â—4 speaketh thus vnto them Yee confirme the doctrine of Antichrist touching good works iustification c. And theÌ„selues in their Apology printed at Hanow togeather with the history of Bohemia pag. 256. plainly shew that they belieue a man to be iustified by fayth charity hope penance and works of mercy and do say That deuout prayer doth purge and pennance cleanse a man 4. Thirdly the Waldenses are condemned of Protestants both Lutherans and Sacramentaries Melancthon in his Counsailes part 2. pag. 152. writeth See Refut Orthod Consensus pag. 418. I reioyce that you agree with vs in the summe of doctrine I know the VValdenses are vnlike And in Carions Chronicle printed at Paris 1357. he sayth that they sowed errors denyed all oathes and all forme of prayer besides the Lords prayer Morgenstern in his fornamed booke pag. 79. giueth this verdict of them They haue proudly neglected the light of doctrine which is kindled from heauen in this age haue with tooth and naâ—le by writing among their own men secretly defended those most grosse erros which in the year 1523. were discouered by Luther Besides Selnecer as he reporteth affirmed that they had grosse errors and such as were not to be borne withall Leonicus Antisturmius also in Danaeus in his answere to his Sonde pag. 1516. pronounceth them to be impious and Schusselburg in his 3. tâ—me of the Catalogue of heretiks pag 188. reiecteth them as heretiks Camerarius in his booke of the Church in Bohemia Poland c. pag. 273. writeth thus VVe can say that the VValdenses were neuer one with our Churches nor our men would euer ioyne themselues to them Whereof he giueth these two reasons because the Waldenses would not haue extant any publike declaration of their fayth and for peace sake did vse the Popish masse For these two causes sayth he our men did not ioyne themselues to them neither did they think that they could so do with good conscience Caluin also epist 278. thus writeth to the Waldenses themselues VVe abide in one opinion that the forme of your Confession cannot be absoluâ—ely admitted without danger And M. Iewell also in defence of the Apology part pag. 48. sayth plainly of the Albigenses They are none of ours D. Humfrey to the third Reason of F. Campian pag. 371 They are not wholy ours And Osiander in his 13. Century lib. 1. cap. 4. Pantaleon in his Chronicle pag. 98. Melancthon in the foresayd Chronicle of Carion reckon them amongst heretiks But the Albigenses were all one for religion with the Waldenses as D. Fulke sayth in these words lib. de Success pag. 332 That epistle of the Arch-bishops doth proue that the Albigenses VValdenses were all one The same also confesseth Illyricus in his Catalogue in 4. to pag 536. Where also pag. 561. he speaketh in this sort The VValdenses or Albigenses Yea the Waldenses themselues in the Bohemian Confession if it be theirs do insinuate that they are condemned of the Sacramentaries wheras they say in the 13. article that they who deny the supper of the Lord to be the true flesh and bloud of Christ do call them Idolaters Antichrist and men branded with the marke of the beast Besides Illyricus in his forecited catalogue writeth that the Thaborites who indeed sayth he followed the opinions of the Waldenses were grieuously vexed and persecuted of Rokesana and other Hussites Wherefore sith Protestants commonly challenge the Hussites for their brethren they ought not to claime also the Waldenles whose doctrine the Hussites did persecute Certainly the Confession of Bohemia which is sayd to be theirs doth plainly distinguish them from Protestants especially from Sacramentaries For art 2. they say VVe must keep the commandements in hart deed Art 5. that those which repent must confesse their sinnes to a Priest and aske absolution of him Art 9. that Priests ought to be single Art 11. that Sacraments are necessary to saluation And art 13. that the Eucharist is the true body of Christ as say they Christ plainly sayth This is my body of which word we ought to belieue the plaine sense not decliming to the right or left Whereupon it is no meruayle that Caluin in his 249. epistle denieth it to be lawfull for a Christian man to imbrace the Waldenses Confession in these words Consider you whether it be lawfull for a Christian man to imbrace the forme of the Confession of the Waldenses who without any distinction bind vp all in one bundell of damnation who precisely confesse not the bread to be presently the body of Christ Surely we think not 5. Fourthly I proue the same because the Waldenses hold many errors which the Protestants condemne Illyricus in his foresayd Catalogue pag. 545. relateth out of an ancient writer aboue 300. years agoe that they taught that a Priest being in mortall sinne cold not consecrate the Eucharist that euery oath is a mortall sinne that they disallowed matrimony And likwise out of Aeneas Syluius that they sayd it was lawfull for euery one to preach that he who was guilty of mortall sinne was not not capable of any secular or ecclesiasticall dignity Neither auayleth it any thing that now in the CoÌ„fession of Bohemia which is sayd to be the Waldenses Confession there is found the article of iustification by only fayth because that Confession was presented in the yeare 1525. as the very title thereof declareth in the Preface mention is made of Charles 5. Emperour which was after Luther had preached some years As also because Hospinian part 2. Histor fol. 11. sayth SacrameÌ„taries haue corrupted the Waldenses CoÌ„fessioÌ„ that the Waldenses Confession was renewed or rather corrupted by the Sacramentaries as the Waldenses themselues say in the Preface of their Confession printed anno 1538. as witnesseth Schusselburg lib. 2. Theol. Caluin art 6. fol. 55. Moreouer Illyricus in his Catalogue in fol. col 1502. writeth that after Luther was knowne the VValdenses did greedily purchase greater knowledge Morgenstern in his foresayd booke pag. 79. sayth that they borrow the best part of their doctrine from the Lutherans And D. Fulke in his booke of Succession pag. 360. that they learnt of those of Basle to amend certaine errors which they had receiued from their ancestors Why then shall we not think they receiued the doctrine of iustification by only fayth from Luther especially sith as I befor sayd there is no mention of it amongst them in former tymes Againe Iurgenicius in the 2. chap. of his warre of the 5. ghospell affirmeth that the Authors of the Bohemian Confession do professe in the beginning thereof that they would neuer conioyne themselues to
continuall descent thereof from Christ cannot by such record be shewed Moreouer at sometyms they not only confesse that the Church is alwayes visible but also graunt that the scripture teacheth the same in those parables of the barne and the net For out of them Caluin 4. Protestāts confesse that the Scripture affirmeth that the Church is alwayes visible Institut cap. 1. § 13. inferreth that the Lord pronounceth that the church shall be vexed with this euill till the day of iudgemēt to be burdened with the mixture of the wicked Of the same opinion is D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 3. cap. 2. pag. 471. and others But that church which contayneth the wicked is the visible Church for the inuisible they will haue to hold only the good The Scripture therefore testifieth that the visible Church shall euer be Yea Protestants now and then take it so ill that it should be sayd that they teach that the visible Church perished for many ages that D. Sutliue in his answere to Exceptions cap. 7. sayth that Bellarmine lyeth in saying so And D. Whitaker loc cit pag 472. sayth we slaunder them when we affirme they put such a Church as at sometymes can be seene of none And sayth that in this matter there is no controuersy about the thing but about the manner to wit no question whither the Church be alwayes visible or no but in what manner it is visible because forsooth we will haue the Church to be at all tymes visible clearly and of all men and they will haue it to be at sometymes visible but obscurely and of few The like sayth Kemnice in his Common places title of the Church cap. 3. Reineccius in the 4. tome of his Armour cap. 8. and D. Morton in the 1. part of his Apology lib. 1. cap. 13. But yet that in this matter we neither bely nor sclaunder them is manifest by what we haue rehearsed in the 4. chapter before going in the 5. number and those that follow To which I add that Caluin in the Preface of his institutions setteth the state of this question betwixt vs Protestants in these words Vpon this hinge hangeth our controuersy that they Papists will haue the forme of the church to appeare and be visible at all tymes On the contrary we say that the church may consist of no apparent forme And I would to God that Protestants would constantly agree which vs in this matter of doctrine that the church of God is alwayes visible to some either of those that are in it or out of it that the debate might remaine only about the matter of fact VVhy Protestāts contradict thēselues about the inuisibility of the Church whither the Protestāt Church before Luther appeared were seene of any either Protestant or other But Protestants standing betwixt truth and lyes whiles they consider the nature of the Church of God especially as it is described in scripture confesse that it must needs be visible not only to her children but to others also But when they look back vpon the state and condition of their owne church before Luther began are compelled to deny the same as before we most euidently shewed which thing alone if it were well considered would discouer sufficiently that in their own consciences they acknowledge their Church not to be the true Church of God Inuisibility cōtrary to the ends of the Church 7. Fiftly I proue that the Church cannot be inuisible because that were contrary to the ends for which the Church was instituted of God whereof one was that men should worship him after that entier manner of worship which man is to giue which is to honour God not only with heart and mind but also with tongue and deed as it is euident and Caluin in his Confutation of a Hollander many wayes proueth that the Church must render to God not only inward but also outward worship But an inuisible Church worshippeth God only in heart and mind as Whitakers words are Another end of the Church is to feed her children with the word and Sacraments to correct and gouerne them by discipline and to defend them from enemies as also is manifest and scripture teacheth Which offices a Church which neither seeth her children nor is seene of them cannot performe Likewise another end is to conuert the world and those who are out of her to the fayth and worship of God which she can no way do if neither her doctrine nor example be seene of them And yet as Luther sayth vpon the sixt chapter of Isaias tom 4. fol. 234 The Church is in perpetuall practise of conuerting others to the fayth Inuisibility against the nature of human societies 8. Sixtly it is against the nature of a society of men amongst themselues for to be inuisible For as men consist of a body which is visible by the colours and of a soule which is seene by the actions thereof so it is necessary that the society in which they ioyne be visible either by it selfe or by some other thing Whereupon well sayd S. Augustin Li. 19. cōt Faust c. 11. Men cannot ioyne in any religion true or false vnlesse they be bound togeather by some fellowship of visible signes or Sacraments And the same confesseth Gerlachius in his 23. disput of the Church pag. 995. saying VVe willingly confesse graunt that the church cannot be except there be some outward and visible signes by common communion and participation whereof society amongst men may consist And seauently it is contrary to the example of all other societies amongst men whither religious or prophane whereof none consisteth in a thing which is altogeather inuisible and whereby the members of that society cannot be knowne the one to the other 9. Seauenthly Against the perpetuity of the Church it is contrary to the continuance and conseruation of the Church on earth to be visible For if the Church which was in the former age had not byn seene of that which is in this age how could the Church of this age haue receiued the fayth We aske therefore how the Protestant Church of our age learned the fayth of the Church of an other age if in the ages before Luther she were so inuisible as you haue heard them confesse Protestants scared with this question like men with a thunder clap leape a sunder and euery one answeareth not what he knoweth or can proue but what seemeth to him least absurd that hereby we may perceiue that all their talke of their Churches being before Luthers tyme is but as the scripture sayth fables and vaine speaches or fancies and fictions of men speaking without either testimony or reason Some of them say that before Luther their Church receiued the fayth immediatly from God alone During Popery sayth Boysseul in his Confutation of Spondé pag. 75 the holy Ghost taught fayth without a preacher Protestant Church taught miraculously The same also intimate Iunius Cont. 4. lib.
22 I deny sayth be this Succession of Pastors to be alwayes notorious to the world And in his answere to Stapletons Cauillat who will acknowledge that she alone it the true Church who can shew her Pastors in a continuall succession D. Humfrey to 3. Reason of F. Campian p. 288. confesseth that not so much as the names of the Pastors who taught their Church were extant D. Whitaker Cont. 2 quest 5. cap. 6. page 508. thus writeth VVhat then was the succession of our Pastors alwayes visible No. For this is not needfull Though therefore our Pastors were not in tymes past manifest neither can we name then yet c. D. Morton in the first part of his Apology lib. 1. cap. 21. sayth that the Catholike church cannot alwayes shew the ordination of Pastors D. White in his way to the church pag. 410 I haue shewed the teachers of our fayth do lawfully succeed and so alway haue done though not outwardly and visibly to the world The like he hath pag. 411. and 436. Sadel wrote his book de vocatione MinistroruÌ„ against such Protestants as thought that their ministers wanted all lawfull calling because sayd they they haue no perpetuall visible succession from the Apostles vnto these tymes And himselfe there pag. 560. confesseth that visible succession hath byn broken of for many years in the church Thou seest good reader how they plainly confesse that before Luther start vp their Pastors were vnknowne to the world not manifest their succession not always visible their names not extant nor they can be named of Protestants And indeed and effect they all confesse the same when as none of them can produce any one man worthy of credit who heard any Protestant preacher who before Luther arose preached iustification by only fayth and the other fundamentall points of Protestancy 2. Secondly Luther eyther complaineth or boasteth for sometyme he alone preached Protestancy In his Preface vpon his 1. tome At first I was alone Luther alone And in his booke of the captiuity of Babylon tom 2. fol. 63 At that tyme I alone did role this stone And against the King of England fol. 497 I alone stood in the battell I alone was compelled to cast my selfe vpon the weapons of the Emperour and the Pope I stood alone in danger forsaken of all helped of none And vpon the graduall psalmes tom 3. fol. 5â—5 In the beginning of my quarrell I took all the matter vpon my selfe and did think that by Gods help I alone should sustaine it And otherwhere as before is reported he sayth that without him others should not haue knowne one iot of the Ghospell Melancthon in the Preface of the Acts of Ratisbon tom 4. pag. 730 sayth Luther alone durst medle with the errors of the Popes schooles Zuinglius in his Exegesis to 2. termeth Luther Ionathas who alone durst set vpon the campe of the Philistians And Caluin in his Admonition to Westphalus pag. 787. saith Luther alone doubted not to set vpon all Popery Besides Luther as before we haue rehearsed writeth that the only scripture was left whereby men might recouer the fayth But if at that tyme there had byn other Protestant Pastors the scripture had not byn alone and without Luther men might haue learnt the gospell Neither had Luther byn left alone and forsaken of all The Protestant Ministery wholy perished but some of them would haue stept out and seconded him especially after they saw that the preached without all danger 3. Thirdly Protestants do sometyme plainly say that their ministery was wholy perished before Luther arose Taken away Luther in his booke of priuate Masse tom 2. fol. 249 Papists haue taken out of the Church the true Ministery of the word And of the Institution of Ministers fol. 372. Aboloshed he writeth that Protestant ordination was by Papists abolished and extinguished And vpon the graduall psalm tom 3. fol. 568 The Church had no true Ministry vnder Antichrist No true Ministery Vpon the 25. of Genesis tom 6. fol. 319 In our tyme after those Popish monsters the true knowledge of the word and of diuine ordination was extinguished And vpon the 49. chap. fol. 655 Extinguished VVe are not the church for any ordinary succession Caluin epist 290 Because the true ranck of ordination was broken of by the tyranny of the Pope now we need haue new help to raise againe the Church BrokeÌ„ of And in Answere to Sadolet pag. 132. he writeth that when the supremacy of the Pope was set vp the true order of the Church perished Perished And of true reformation p. 322 Not without cause do we auouch the Church of God for some ages to haue byn so ioâ—ne and scattered that is it was destitute of true Pastors Beza in his Catechisme Destitute of Pastors title of the Church cap. 5 sect 18 In our tyme it came to passe thinges being so fallen downe that there was left no place for ordinary vocation And epist 5. pag. 39 In our tyme ordinary vocation Ordinary vocation no where which no where was neither could nor ought to be expected And Epist 24 Ye know being taught by fresh examples how the publike ministry being as it were ouerwhelmed for a tyme yet the church of God remaineth And epist 81 The matter came to that passe Ouerthrown to the grouÌ„d that the Ecclesiasticall order was wholy ouerthrowne euen to the foundation the vaine names therof only remayning And lib. de Notis Eccles pag. 82 They who in our memory haue freed the church from the tyranny of Antichrist had none of whome they might lawfully aske or receiue imposition of hands And epist 86 It is maniâ—est that for some ages lawfull order was quite abolished in the Church Quite abolished none not so much as the slenderest shadow of the cheifest part of ecclesiasticall calling remayning The French Confession art 31 Sometymes as in our age the state of the Church being interrupted it was needfull that some Pastors should be extraordinarily raysed of God Sadeel also de Vocat Ministrorum p. 556. sayth that true Order of Pastors was interrupted D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 6. pag. 510 VVe say that our mens calling was not ordinary but extraordinary Wholy corrupted because ordinary calling was wholy corrupted Againe The state of the Church was fallen and wholy ouerturned And pag. 612 VVhen ordinary succession was corrupted God found an extraordinary way by which the Church might be restored For God would that this restauration should be made not in the old foundation that is in succession of Bishops but after a certaine new extraordinary manner And D. White in defence of his way cap 49. pag. 421 Finding no other kind of Pastors sayth that the Protestant Pastors were euen those who liued in communion of the Roman Greek Armenian and such like Churches and addeth that his aduersary doth deceiue the reader when he intimateth that Protestants goe
they knew not the Apostolicall doctrine And D. Whitaker de Scriptura lib. 2. cap. 8. sect vlt Howsoeuer they were enuironed with most grosse darknesse yet they told some sparckes of truth and shewed them to others And what other thing I pray you is this but to confesse that such were but Protestants in part and in some sort Yea they name some whome they confesse to haue reprehended only certaine abuses amongst the Papists as Melancthon in his Answere to the Bauarian articles tom 3. fol. 369. and Illyricus in his Catalogue lib. 15. confesse of Hilten It remayneth yet for the accomplishing of this demonstration that we also shew by the Confessions of Protestants that the true Church of God can neuer want Pastors as they haue confessed theirs to haue wanted for the space of some ages That the true Church cannot be without Pastors CHAP. VIII 1. THAT the Church can neuer be without Pastors I proue first out of the Confessions of the Protestant faith For thus professe they to belieue in the Confession of Saxony cap. 12 The Sonne of God hath giuen ministers of the Ghospell vnto the Church to the end it do not quite perish Againe He would haue alwayes a company in mankind in which the Sonne himselfe appointed and conserued the Ministery of keeping and spredding his doctrine The Confession of Suitzers cap. 18 God hath alwayes vsed ministers for to setle and gather him a Church and also for to gouerne and preserue it and vseth the same now and further will vse them whiles the Church shall be on earth The French Confession art 25 VVe belieue the Church cannot consist if it haue not Pastors who haue the office of teaching The Confession of the low Countries art 30 VVe belieue that the true Church ought to be gouerned and ruled by that spirituall policy which God hath taught in his word so that there be Pastors and ministers in it And the Confession of Strasburg Seing the â—hurch is the Kingdome of God it hath diuers functions of ministers 2. Secondly I proue it because for the church to be without Pastors is to want some part of the essence and definition giuen by the Protestants themselues For Luther Proposition 15. to 1. fol. 385. thus defineth a Church It is a number of baptized persons and belieuers vnder one Pastor And tom 2. fol. 366. he sayth The publike Ministery of the word whereby the Mysteries of God are dispensed must be instituted by holy ordination as the thing which in the Church is the cheifest and principallest of all Kemnice in his Common places title of the Church pag. 146 The Church consisteth of Pastors and learners Gerlachius in his 22. Disput pag. 966 The Church is not a company meeting by chance or disordered but called by the voice of the cryers of the word for to heare the doctrine of the Ghospell Caluin 4. Institut cap. 2. § 7 The Ministery is the cheifest sinew and soule of the Church Beza of the Notes of the Church pag. 9 By the name of the Church properly taken it is certaine that not only Pastors but also stocks are vnderstood Iunius Cont. 5. lib. 1. cap. 15 God instituted orders in the Church for the essentiall outward constitution therof D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 6. pag. 508 The Church cannot subsist without Pastors of whome it is taught For doctrine doth make and constitute the Church and is her soule and life And cap. 18. pag. 546 The Church is no other number then that which holdeth the pure preaching of the word and right vse of the Sacraments And cap. 17. dag 541 Syncere preaching of the word and lawfull administration of the Sacraments do make the church in so much as whersoeuer they be there the Church is and where they be not the Church is not D. Feild in his 2. booke of the Church cap. 6 The Ministery of Pastors and teachers is absolutely and essentially necessary to the being of the Church And lib. 1. cap. 10 Bellarmine laboureth in vaine in prouing that there is and alwayes hath byn a visible Church and that not consisting of some few scattered Christians without order of Ministry or vse of Sacraments for all this we do most willingly yield vnto Yea the Philosophers by the light of reason perceiued that it is impossible they should be a Common wealth without Magistrates This same also is manifest by many other definitions which Protestants haue made of the Church and we haue rehearsed them before in which they place true preaching and administration as essentiall parts of the true Church which yet cannot be without Pastors 3. Besides this were against the definitions of the Church giuen by the holy Fathers For thus writeth S. Cyprian epist 79 The Church is the people vnited to the Priest and the flock cleauing to the Pastor And this he proueth out of those words of our Sauiour Math. 16 Thou art Peter and vpon this rock will I build my Church S. Hierome also in his dialogues against the Luciferians It is no Church which hath no Priest S. Ignatius in his epist ad Trallianos VVithout these Priests the elect Church is not no congregation without these no meeting of Saints And whereas Danaeus lib. 4. de Eccl. cap. 8. sayth that these Fathers define only a visible church that auaileth nothing because indeed there is no Church on earth which is not visible in profession of faith Againe Pastors shall be at least of the essence of the visible Church and consequently the Protestant Church which before Luther wanted Pastors was no visible Church Furthermore S. Cyprian proueth his definition out of those words of Christ Matt. 16. which as is certaine and Protestants confesse are spoken of the true Church in the sight of God And S. Ignatius sayth that there is no elect church no congregation of Saints without Priests which he must needs meane of the true Church And Saint Hierome simply sayth it is no Church which hath no Priests which he could no wayes say if the true Church in the sight of God could be without Priests And hereby also is refuted Sadeel in Repetit Sophism Turriani pag. 652. when he sayth The definition of S. Cyprian is not essentiall nor properly teacheth what the Church is but what a one it ought to be For S. Cyprian inferreth out of his definition that if one be not with the Bishop he is not in the Church And Saint Hierome pronounceth one Hilaries sect to haue perished with him because he left no Pastor behind him And for this cause the Fathers do still obiect vnto heretiks the want of succession of Pastors as an euident marke that they are not the Church as euen Protestants themselues confesse For thus writeth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 6. pag. 509 The Fathers rebuked heretiks that they wanted succession of Bishops Sadeel of Vocation of Ministers pag. 546 S. Augustin oftentyms opposed this succession against the Manichees and
28. fol. 396 If the Pope must be worshipped Christ must be denyed And de Missa priuata tom 7. fol. 475 VVhosoeuer is vnder the Pope and obeyeth him cannot be saued Caluin against Seruer pag. 607 Is it not a profanation of the sacred vnity to professe one God and faith with an impious and prophane company And Respons ad Versip pag. 362 How wicked and soule treachery is it to abide in that sacrilegious company of Papists And D. Whitaker ad Rat. 3. Campiani None abide with the lambe in the mountaine who haue any commerce with Antichrist And Caluin in Confutat Hollandi lib. de vitandis superstitionibus bringeth many proofes to shew that the faithfull may not communicate with the false Church and therto citeth the letters of Melancthon Bucer Peter Martyr and those of Zurich and the same is commonly taught of Protestants How then did not those Protestants separate themselues from the body of Christ how were they saued who in tymes past communicated with papists How were they saued vnlesse God be an acceptour of persons and tyms that he will cut of some from his body and from hope of saluation who communicate with Antichrist and not others at these and not in former tymes Againe Protestants teach that the Church ought to professe her fayth as besides the testimonies before repeated the Preface of the Confession of Saxony sayth They that are demaunded must needs tell the doctrine And the CoÌ„fession of Bohemia art 2 They teach that they must vndoubtedly belieue all the articles of the Creed and confesse them with the mouth Luther in 1. Petri cap. 2. tom 5. fol. 464 If any now as the Emperour or other Prince should aske me my fayth I must plainly confesse it to him And de Scru. Arbit tom 2. fol 432 Truth and doctrine must alwayes be preached openly and neuer kept secret or crookt and turnd awry D. Feild lib. 1. de Eccl. cap. 10 For seeing the Church is the multitude of them that shall be saued vnlesse he mak coÌ„fession vnto saluation for fayth hid in the heart and concealed doth not suffice it cannot be but they that are of the true Church must by the profession of the truth make themselues knowne in such sort that c. And the Preface of the Syntagme of Confessions VVhen euery one ought according to the Apostles precept giue a reason of his hope how much more the Church And D. Whitaker Cont. 4. quest 6. cap. 2. pag 696 True sayth can no more be separated from confession with the mouth then fire from beat or the sunne from its brightnes and beames What fayth then had those protestants which as is sayd durst not professe their mind And Cont. 2. qoest 3. cap. 2. pag. 472 It is not lawfull for the godly to dissemble true Religion or make shew of false nor to conceale what they think of Religion if they be examined of them who haue authority to aske them of their fayth But it is not credible that in so many ages in no part of the Christian world no Catholike Magistrate should aske any protestant of his fayth especially if it be true that Luther writeth in psalm 22. tom 3. fol. 344. that Papists do so examine the body of the Church that all her bones may be counted that is none of them can by hid VVherefore we must not imagine that there are any hidden bones of Christ all are bewrayed and counted wheresoeuer they are either by the espials of secret confession or by the tortours or examiners Which sheweth that if there had byn any true protestants heretofore they would haue byn discouered 11. Finally they are brought to these straights that sometymes they say that the protestant church which they imagine was heretofore in popery did consist of those who were papists both in opinion and profession This Caluin intimateth in the words before cited when he sayth that his church was corrupted with pestilent doctrine And Luther de Missa priuata tom 7. fol. 231. saying The very elect were seduced in that great darknesse And in cap. 9. Isaiae tom 4. fol. 95 Behold sayth he the whole face of the Churches vnder Popery Did not they all who truly felt the burden of sinne imagine that they should by good works satisfy for their sinnes Which thing alone would suffice to blot them out of the role of protestants D. White in defence of his way cap. 36. pag. 350. sayth those imaginary protestants were corrupted some more some lesse with those errors which sayth he now we fly And cap. 40. pag. 394. graunteth that they were infected with damnable heresies D. Whitaker lib. 2. de Scriptura cap. 8. sect vlt. sayth They were beset with most thick darknes Nappâ—r in cap. 12. Apocal. pag. 195. that their visible Church in tymes past VVholy embraced the errors of merits and indulgences c. And Morgersterâ—â— tract de Eccl. pag. 41 These things were in tymes past to be forgiuen the godly that they belieued the Pope to be â—hrists vicar and head of the church Popery to be the church Saints to be prayed vnto Masse to be the Lords supper Are these men think you in their wits who call them godly and say they must be pardoned who belieued Antichrist to be Christs vicar Antichrists Synagogue to be the Church of Christ and horrible idolatry such as they account Masse prayer to Saints to be seruice of Christ The same also they meane when they challenge the simple ignorant Papists for theirs or confesse the vulgar Roman Church to be the true Church or as others of them speake graunt the Roman Church but deny Popery the Popish or Roman Popish Church For they imagine that the simple Catholike people neither doth now nor in former tyms did belieue those points of fayth which themselues deny But this they feigne of the simple Catholike people and cannot proue it Besides there is no Catholike â—o simple as doth not vertually belieue all points of Catholike fayth which Protestants deny sith he actually professeth to belieue whatsoeuer the Catholike Church teacheth Neither is there any at all who doth not belieue iustification by good works which point alone would suffice to make them no Protestants Besides Caluin 4. Institut cap. 8. sayth that we affirme him to be no Christian who doth not vndoubtedly agree to all points of doctrine as well affirmatiue as negatiue And the same sayth D. Whitaker Cont. 2. quest 5. cap. 8. pag. 519. D. Morton part 1. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 9. and D. Willet in the Preface of his Synopsis Yea as before we rehearsed Cap 2. they confesse that before Luthers reuolt all from head to foot were drowned in the pudles of Popery that none dreamed of that which is the cheifest point of Protestancy Wherfore Schusselburg tom 8. Catal. Haeret. pag. 440. seemeth to say That befor Luther arose Popery was the true church like as the Synagogue of the Iewes was before the comming
also in that name it cannot be sayd that they are called so in disgrace or contemp Fourthly it appeareth to be false that D. Morton lib. cit and D. Sutliue lib. de Eccles cap. 2. say It is rather to be attributed to a lye then to Luthers desert that Protestants call themselues Lutherans For as we see Luther himselfe called them so and therin they follow his example Neither skilleth it that Luther did once dislike this name because he did oftentimes vse it it was vsuall to Luther to allow and disallow the same thing Fiftly we see it to be false which D. Whitaker writeth cont 2 quest 5. cap. 2 pag. 494 None of vs euer called himselfe a Lutheran we acknowledge not these names nor are we delighted with them This name our aduersaries haue fastened vpon vs only vpon malice and enuie Neither are we called Lutherans but of the Papists False also is that which D. Fulke sayth de Success pag. 188. that they acknowledge no other name proper to their religion but the name of Christians and Catholiques These I say are false for Luther whome D. Whitaker accounteth his father and the Lutherans whome he termeth his brethren in Christ doe call themselues so and are well pleased with that name Besides they are so termed of the Sacramentaries and common people and therfore not of Papists only nor vpon malice and enuie but as Grauer sayd truly for distinction sake and that most iustly For as S. Athanase sayth VVho deriue the origen of their saith from other then Christ iustly carry the surnames of their Authors But Protestants as we haue shewed confesse that they deriue the origen of their faith from Luther Therfore iustly they beare his name 8. Out of all which hath bin rehearsed in this chapter I thus frame my ninth demonstration of this Matter If Luther and many other famous Protestants sometimes indeed some times in plaine words do confesse that Luther was the Author of their Church and religion he ought to be so taken and esteemed But they do soe confesse Ergo. The Minor is euident by all that is sayd in this Chapter And the Maior by what we sayd in the Preface For so many and such principall Protestants knew well the origen of their religion and willingly would not lye to the disgrace and ouerthrow therof That Protestants cannot proue their Church to haue bin before Luthers time by any probable argument or sufficent testimonie CHAP. XV. THE tenth and last demonstration for to proue that Luther was the first Author of the Protestants Church and religioÌ„ I will take from hence that albeit Protestants doe sometimes boldly affirme their Church and religioÌ„ to haue bin before Luthers time Yet they can neuer proue it by any reasonable argument or sufficent testimony Which thing alone would suffice to shew that as I sayd before it is a fable vainely feigned falsely affirmed and fondly beleiued It hath bin alwayes the fashion of heretiques boldly to auouch any thing but few things to proue euen in shew This S. Augustin doth often obserue in the Manichees and Donatists and some of his sayings we haue alleadged before Of Eunomius S. (a) Lib. 2. cont Eunom Basil noteth the same and S. (b) Serm. 6. in psal 118. Ambrose of all heretikes saying Heretiques are wolues they can howle but proue nothing And this doe Protestants confesse For thus D. Whitaker cont 2 quest 5. cap 18 Heretikes are wont to boast and promise truth In Diatrib but not to proue it Of Luther thus writeth Zuinglius tom 2. fol. 473. and 509 One argument he hath in all these matters He sayd it And fol. 447 Luther relyeth only vpon his â—oyes and deuises Fol. 395 Thou puttest forth whatsoeuer the motion of thy affections do appoint and when a reason of thy saying is exacted of thee thou standest naked vnarmed And of the Lutherans thus writeth Erasmus They say it and for that alone they will be belieued Of the Sacramentaryes in like manner Luther writeth in defens verb. Coenae tom 7. fol. 384. One word not easily ouerturneth all these thinges for if you deny them then as butter melteth in the sun so they quaile And the same is euident to all that read the bookes either of Lutherans or Sacramentaryes In the meane tyme they cry to vs that that Pythagoricall word He sayd it hath no other place but in (c) VVhit lib. 2. de script cap. 10. sect 5. Bullenger in comp l. 1. c. 3. Christ and the Scripture that in other it is the proper argument of (d) Vorstius Antibel p. 468. fooles that to affirme any thing beside scripture is to (e) Powel l. 1. de Antic c. 19. trifle that til we proue our affirmatiue they will stand in their (f) Luth. tom 2. fol. 437. negatiue and exact (g) Vorstius l. cit Fulke de success p. 74. demonstrations that is either expresse testimonies of scripture or forcible reason deduced from thence Now we say the same to them They affirme their Church to haue bin before Luthers time We deny it vntil they proue it Neither let them affirme it only which is the proofe of fooles wilfull men but if they cannot bring demonstrations therof at least let them produce some credible testimonie or some effectuall reason and argument Otherwise their beliefe in this matter Scorp c. 11. is as sayth Tertullian a peruerse beliefe which will not belieue thinges proued and belieueth thinges which cannot be proued 2. That in this matter they be destitute of all credible testimonie appeareth sufficently by what hath heretofore bin rehearsed of their owne confessions and now we will shew that they want also all probable reason or argument For all their arguments herein be reduced to this one Our doctrine is the doctrine of Christ Therfore our Church was alwayes since Christ For thus agreeth D. Whitaker cont 2. q. 5. c. 3. p. 498 I vse this argument VVhat Church soeuer keepeth the doctrine preaching of the Apostls she is the Apostolical Church But our Church doth so Therefore c. Of the Maior sayth he no controuersy can be made And cap. 5. p. 505 It was our Church which was in the tyme of the Apostles and afterward vnto the Apostasie But how doe we proue this By this reason that our Church keepeth the same faith and doctrine which the Church in the Apostles time and afterward kept And cont Dureum sect 1 If thou holdest Christs doctrine thou art a Catholike And sect 2 It must needs be the true Church of Christ which keepeth conserueth Christs doctrine deliuered in his word Dancus cont 3. pag. 388. VVith vs is the true Church of God because we restore the true doctrine of Christ Lubbertus lib. 5 de Eccles cap. 1 If the doctrine which our Church professeth be the same which Christ deliuered then our Church is that which Christ instituted D. Fulke lib. de Success pag. 27 Seeing we are
ready to proue out of the scripture that we professe the same doctrine of fayth and manners which Christ would haue to be perpetuall by euident reason our succession is manifest althogh all Historyes were silent of the names of the Persons and continuation of succession And the like he hath pag. 154. and 331. D. White in his way pag. 403. sayth he knoweth his Church was alwayes because it holdeth the fayth of the Scripture which cannot be extinguished The like he sayth pag. 320. 326. Likewise Luther de notis Eccles tom 7. fol. 149. Caluin in Matth. cap. 24. vers 28. and generally al of them whiles they make the truth of doctrin the infallible marke of the Church Lib. 2. contra Arian O proofe that I may cry out in S. Augustins words O errour o dotage And with S. Athanase A worthy heresy which wanteth probable reasons to vnder proppe it For this argument on which all their belief that their Church was before Luther doth rely is a most fond sophisme and most counterfait syllogisme as manifestly appeareth whether it be framed in that forme wherein D. Whitaker hath proposed it or whether it be reduced to this forme That Church which holdeth the true doctrine of Christ hath alwayes beene and consequently before Luther The Protestant Church holdeth the true doctrin holdeth the true doctrin of Christ as say they we will proue by scripture Therefore it hath bin alway 3. I answere that this argument is a manifest sophime for many causes For if the Maior be particuler so that the sense thereof be Some Church which holdeth the true doctrine of Christ hath alwayes beene it is true because the catholik church which holdeth Christs true doctrine hath alwayes been but then the Syllogisme is sophism for want of due forme inferring a conclusion out of particuler propositioÌ„s But if the Maior be vniuersall according as it is made of D. Whitaker then so farre is it from being out of controuersy as he affirmeth that it is manifestly false and no way true but only apparant and therefore vnfit to make a true syllogisme but only a counterfait and a sophisme ProtestaÌ„ts assume a manifest falsity That it is manifestly false is euident because that Church or company of ChristiaÌ„s which is strictly and properly termed schismatical holdeth the true doctrine of Christ as both the Fathers teach and the Protestants themselues doe also most plainely affirme yet it is not the true church of Christ Wherefore sith as the Philosopher teacheth those thinges are probable which seem true to all or to most or to wise men and those either al or most or most approued and such as are not probable serue only to make sophismes The foresayd Maior not seeming true to all or most or the wisest Christians yea not euen to the Protestants themselues it is manifest that it is no probable propositioÌ„ but only apparent and therefore not fit to make a true syllogisme but only an apparent and counterfait 4. That the Fathers teach that a Schismatical Church holdeth the true doctrine of Christ is manifest by S. Augustine who lib. quest Euang. pag. 28. tom 4. sayth It vseth to be enquired wherein Schismatickes differ from heretâ—kes That Schismatikes hold true doctrine and this found that no difference in faytht but breach of society in communion maketh Schismatikes And lib. de fide Symbolo cap. 10 Heretikes by belieuing wrong of God violate the fayth but Schismatickes by wicked diuisions leape from fraternall charity albeit they belieue aright those thinges which we belieue And lib. cont Gaud. cap. 9. refuteth him because he had sayd that Schismatikes and Heretikes are the same against which he sayth Thou art a Schismatike by sacrilegious diuision and an heretike by sacrilegious opinion And lib. 1. cont Cresc cap. 29. and de gest is cum Emerito affirmeth that the same fayth is had out of the Church S. Hierome in Tit. 3. VVe iudge this difference to be between heresy and schism that heresy holdeth a naughty opinion schisme separateth from the Church by dissention of Bishops S. Gregory lib. 18. Moral cap. 14. Some doe belieue false thinges of God others by Gods help belieue rightly of God but keep not vnity with their brethren these are diuided by schisme S. Isidor lib. 8. Origin cap 3. Schisme tooke its name of breach for it beleeueth the same religion and rites that others do only is pleased to keep company a part The same teach S. Ireneus lib. 4. cap. 62. S. Chrysost hom 3. in 1. Cor. S. Optat. lib. 1. 4. 5. cont Parmen and others And it is manifest by reason For if Schismatikes did erre also in Fayth they should not differ from heretikes And it is grauÌ„ted both of old and new Heretikes For thus sayth Faustus in S. Augustine lib. 20. cont Faustum cap. 3. Schisme if I be not deceaued is to belieue the same to worship God in the same manner that others do only to be delighted with diuision of assemblyes Caluin 4. Institut cap. 2. § 5. Austin putteth this difference betwixt heretikes and schismatiks that they corrupt the sincerity of the fayth with false doctrines these sometymes euen hauing the like saith breake asunder the band of society And in 1. Cor. cap. 11. vers 19. It is known in what sense the ancient vsed both these nams schisme heresy they put heresy in difference of doctrine but schisme rather in alienation of minds to wit when any either vpon enuy or hatred of the Pastours or of frowardnesse departed from the Church Beza libro de puniendis Haereticis pag. 89 Shism properly is the diuision of those who belieue the same things And pag. 150. Let them remember that we terme them not heretikes who are properly called Schismatiques The same he hath in 1. Cor. 1. v. 10. and other where Plessie lib. de Eccles cap. 1. pag. 16 VVe call erroneous Churches either heretikes or schismatikes according as they erre either in fayth or in charity And pag. 32. VVhat pertaineth to schismaticall Churches either they are simply schismaticall or when heresy also is adioyned as it vseth after schisme as an ague after a wound And cap. 10. pag. 340. True and pure Schismatiks are those who holding the same doctrine yet make meetinges a part Peter Martyr in locis tit de Schism pag. 618. I thinke it more plaine to define Schisme to be a cutting a sunder of the Ecclesiasticall peace vnity And pag. 619 There may be schisme in the Church without heresy Aretius also in locis part 2. fol. 10 Schisme sometymes in the same doctrin breaketh society Bucan in loc quest 33. de Eccl. affirmeth that shismatiks differ from heretiks because heresy properly is dissention in doctrine Polâ—n part 2. Thes de notis Eccl. Albeit schismatical Churches agree in the doctrine of truth c. Zanchius tract de Eccles cap. There may be breach in the symboles of Charity that is in
participation of Sacraments communication of publike prayer and such like other Ecclesiasticall exercises to wit when one thought he agree with the rest of the Church of Christ in the principall heades of Christian fayth yet I know not for what light causes withdraweth himselfe from the rest of the Church and communicateth not with her in the sacraments Such sayth he are properly called schismatikes M. Perkins in cap. 5. Galat. vers 21. Heresy is in doctrin Schisme in manners order and gouernement D. Fulke de Success pag. 165 There may be schisme in the Church where the same doctrine is held on both partyes the one wanteth lawfull succession D. Field lib. 1. of the Church cap. 7 Some professe the whole sauing fayth but not in vnity as schismatiks Dancus in August de haeres cap. 3. He is a schismatike who retayning the same doctrine of fayth and that entire yet without probable and better reason followeth not the decent rites of the Church The same he hath Apol. pro Heluet. Eccles pag. 1485. Bullinger tom 1. Decad. 5. serm 2. Vorstius in Antibellarm pag. 190. D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 5. cap. 10. D. Rainolds Praelect 1. col 2. Heshusius in 1. Cor. 1. and others 5. Now that proper Schismatikes to wit such as willfully separate themselues from the Communion of the Church be not members or parts of the Church is cleare by the testimony of the Fathers That Schismatikes are out of the Church the confessions of Protestants and manifest reason S. Augustin lib. de fide symbolo cap. 10. sayth Neither doth an heretike belong to the Catholike Church nor a schismatike Tract 3. in 1. Ioan. All heretikes all schismatikes are gone out of the Church Lib. 3. de Baptism cap. 19. All heretikes and schismatikes are false Christians And lib 2. cont Crescon cap. 29 I thinke not that any so doteth to belieue him to belong to the vnity of the Church who hath not charity The like he hath in many places S. Ambrose lib. 7. in Luc. cap. 11. Vnderstand that all heretikes and schismatikes are separated from the kingdome of God and from the Church S. Optatus lib. 2. The Church cannot be with any heretikes or schismatikes S. Fulgentius de fide ad Petrum cap. 38 Belieue most stedfastly and doubt nothing that not only all Pagans but also all Iewes Heretiks schismatiks which end this life out of the church are to go into euerlasting fire The same teach S. Hierome S. Chrysostome loc cit S. Ignatius Epist ad Smyrnens S. Iren. lib. 4. cap. 62. S. Cyprian lib. de vnit epist 42.51.55 S. Prosper de vocat Gentium cap. 4. and the rest The protestants confessions of this matter we related heeretofore amongst whome say Lib. 1. c. â— num â— that this is an vndoubted truth Reason also conuinceth the same for as Caluin confesseth 4. Institut loc cit The coÌ„munion of the Church is held with two bandes to wit consent of doctrine and fraternall charity But Schismatikes breake the band of fraternall charity therefore they are not within the Church Againe Danaeus lib. 3. de Eccl. c. 5. sayth This is the marke that thou art of the visible Church that outwardly thou professe the fayth communicate with the rest of the Church in the same SacrameÌ„ts but schismatikes doe not communicate in Sacramentes with the rest of the Church And D. Feild lib. 2. of the Church cap. 2. sayth Communion in Sacramentes vnder lawful Pastours is an essential note of the true Catholike Church but Shismatiks want this communion And Casaubon epist ad Card. Peron pag. 9. The true Churches of Christ are vnited in the vnity of fayth and doctrine and coniunction of minds and in true charity and offices of charity especially of mutuall prayer But Schismatikes are not vnited in charity and offices of mutuall prayer Finally only Catholikes are members of the Catholike Church as is euident and (a) VVhi. conc 2. q. 5. cap. 3. Protestants confesse But Schismatikes are not Catholiks as the very name doth declare the Fathers doc teach and (b) Gesner loc 24. Field l. de Eccles c. 7. Protestants acknowledge 6. By this it appeareth that the foresayd Maior which is the foundation of Protestants in this matter is not only false but also so manifestly false as out of this question it is commonly denyed of Protestants themselues Besides it is not only false but also so improbable that neither it is proued of Protestants nor can be any other wayes then by proofe of fooles or willfull men that is by their owne saying For D. Whitaker as we haue seene proueth it no other wayes then by saying it is out of controuersy D. Fulke that it is manifest But Luther more boastingly sayth l. de Missa priu tom 7. f. 247. This is our solid foundation and most stedfast rocke VVhersoeuer true doctrine of Christ or the Ghospell is preached there is necessarily the true holy Church of God And who doubteth of this sayth he may in like manner doubt whether the Ghospel be the word of God A notable proofe surely and fit for Pythagoras schoole and a sound foundation on which to fayned a Church should rely and a fit rock for them to build vpon who haue left the rocke vpon which Christ built his Church Wherefore that I may imitate S. Augustine in the like matter Lib. 1. cont Gaudent cap. 33. I aske whether God or man hath told them that wheresoeuer true doctrine is there is the true Church If God let them read it out of the Scripture where indeed we read that where the true Church is there true doctrine is but contrarywise that where true doctrine is there the true Church is there we neuer read If men haue told you this Behold a fiction of man behold what you belieue behold what ye serue behold for what ye rebell ye run mad ye burne Againe what kind of men were they surely no other then your selues And what is your authority I say not with vs but euen with your selues Is as one of your part sayd the iudgement of Lutherans or Sacramentaryes the square of truth Moreouer Pareus l 3. ce â—â—stifie cap. 13. seeing that three things are essential or substantial to the true church to wit true doctrine lawfull Pastours and people following their Pastours nor any thing can be vnles all the essentiall parts be it is sophistry and madnesse to inferre that that company is the true Church wherin one only of these parts is to be found If they say that by the true Church they meane not her which is true in nature or essence of the Church but only her which is true in doctrine of whose essence is only truth of doctrin First they deceaue the Reader For we speak only of the Church true in essence not of that which is only true in doctrinâ— as a schismaticall Church may be Besides if they meane such
a true Church and vnderstand their foresayd Maior vniuersally it is false for not euery true Church in that sense is Apostolicall or hath euer beene For a schismaticall Church is true in doctrine and yet is neither Apostolicall nor hath euer beene And if they vnderstand their Maior particulerly the conclusion followeth not because it is deduced out of pure particuler propositions And thus much of the Maior 7. Secondly the foresayd argument is a sophism because of the Minor by which one vnknown thing is proued by another one false thing by another not only false Protestāts proofe out of a thing more vnknowne but also impossible For it is more vncercertaine that the Protestant Church holdeth the doctrin of Christ then that she was before Luther For albeit she were not before notwithstanding it was not impossible that she should haue beene but that she holdeth the doctrine of Christ is both false and impossible also And as Luther sayth in defens verb. Coenae tom 7. fol. 385. It is a mad mans part to proue vncertaine things by others as vncertaine And D. Whitaker cont 2. quest 3. cap. 3. All proofe is by thinges that are more knowne Which also he hath cont 2. quest 5. cap. 18. Sadcel praefat lib. cont Traditiones Daneus l. 4. de Eccles cap. 2. D. Morton part 2. Apol. lib. 1. cap. 37. Pareus lib. 3. de Iustificat cap. 1. Wherupon Luther tom 2. Praefat. assert Antic fol. 95. writeth Aristotle and all sense of nature sheweth that vnknowne thinges must be proued by thinges more knowne and obscure thinges by manifest If therefore as Pareus sayth lib. 1. de Iustificat c. 20. when the Aduersarie is brought to that that eitheir he gainesayth himselfe or beggs that which he is to proue assuming that in his proofe which is in debate or trifleth by repeating now and then the same thing he is vanquished surely then Protestants are vanquished whom in this smal work we haue shewed oftentymes to gaine say themselues now including these within the Church now excluding them now affirming the Church to be inuisible now denying it now to haue alwayes Pastours now denying it and the like And in this argumment with which alone they proue the existēce of their Church before Luther they assume in the Minor that which most of all is in debate Caluin 4. Insticut c. 1. § 12. Narrat de Eccles Belg. p. 196. And the Maior they can proue no otherwise then by trifling by repeating it and saying that it is out of all doubt I add also that the sacramentaryes say that the Lutheran Church erreth euen in the fundamentall points and the like say the Lutherans of the Sacramentaries and scarce there is any Protestant who doth not thinke that the Church whereof he is doth erre in some points What reason then haue they out of the truenesse of the doctrin of their Churches to inferre their perpetuall existence 8. Thirdly I adde that the manner wherwith Protestants doe proue the Minor of their foresayd syllogisme is sophisticall and not such as they exact of vs for proofe of our doctrine For commonly they exact of vs to shew that our doctrine is contained in expresse words in Scripture or as Luther sayth lib. de seru arbit tom 2. fol. 440 inso manifest testimonies as are able so to stop all mēs mouths as they are not able to say any thing against it But manifest it is that such be not the proofes wher with Protestants proue their doctrine For to omit other points where is in expresse words in scripture that fundamentall point of their doctrin that we are iustified by only faith Say the contrary is so expresly in S. Iames epistle Tom. 6. in c. 12. Gen. as therfore Luther blasphemously sayth S. Iames doted And the Lutherans for that very cause deny his epistle to be canonicall Besides VVhitak cont 1. q. 4. cap. 3. Protestants doe now confesse that the scripture is not of it selfe sufficient to end all questions of faith and that Schismatikes cannot be conuinced by scripture How then can they sufficiently proue al the points of their doctrine by scripture VVhitak loc cit p. 490. Plessy l. de Eccles c. 9. Againe themselues acknowledge that they need certaine meanes to attaine to the right sense of the Scripture and that their meanes are humane and not infallible as knowledge of tongues conference of places and such like and with all that such as the meanes be such is the exposition of Scripture If therfore their meanes be not infallible how can their vnderstanding of the scripture be infallible Moreouer they scarce euer proue any thing by both principles out of scripture but almost euermore adioyne one human principles as easily will appeare if their proofs be brought to a syllogisticall forme as well obserue the most learned Bishop of Luçon in his defence of the Principall articles of faith cap. 3. 5. And how can they be infallibly certaine of the conclusion which they cannot know but by one human principle whereof they can haue no such certainty Furthermore because many of their proofes doe not only consist of one humane principle Protestats conclude against sense which is not at al in the scripture but also they inferre a conclusiō directly contradictory to that which the scripture in most expresse words teacheth of that matter As for example when they proue that the Eucharist is of not the very body and bloud of Christ alwayes one of their principles is humane and besides their conclusiō is flat contrary to expresse words of scripture which affirmeth that it is Christs very body and bloud And who is he in his wittes that will perswade himselfe either that the scripture meaneth that the Eucharist is not the body bloud of Christ which directly it neuer sayth rather then that it is his body and bloud which it as expresly sayth as euer it sayth any thing or that that proofe is not sophisticall which out of one humane principle at least inferreth the contrary of that which the scripture most expresly teacheth Lastly they neuer proued any one point of their doctrine any otherwise then euer Heretiks do that is in their own iudgmēt neuer before any iudge or general Councell which Luther himselfe confesseth in c. 27. Gen. tom 6. fol. 368. in the words In the affaire of the Gospell we haue decided the matter against al the impiety of the Pope without form of law VVe accused not the Pope neither could we for there was no iudge Yea their doctrin hath bin cōdemned according to all forme of law in the Generall Councel of Trent of the Patriarch of Constantinople to whō they appealed and of al other kinds of Christians 9. Fourthly I say that the foresayd argument is a sophisme in that in a sēsible matter as the Church is it concludeth against the sense of all men For nether did any see the Protestant Church before Luther
neither did any maÌ„ feele or perceiue himselfe to haue bin a member of such a Church before that time Wherfore as he should manifestly play the Sophister who would goe about to proue by scripture that the sunne appeareth at midnight so likewise doth he who out of scripture endeuoreth to proue that there was a protestant Church before Luther because all mens sense conuince the one as well as the other Besides Protestants write that though faith commaund vs to beleiue things which we see not yet it doth not commaund vs not to beleiue that which we see for otherwise faith should be contrary to sense and none should become faithfull but he should first be senselesse But surely wonderfull is the blindnes or wilfulnesse of Sacramentaries who in the matter of the Eucharist against the most expresse words of Scripture will endeuour to proue by sense that there is not the body of Christ when as the body of Christ there is not sensible And here in the matter of existence of their Church before Luther out of some apparent shew of scripture against the most manifest sense of all men will proue that it was before Luthers time When as a Church is a sensible thing and can be felt either of others or at least of them who are of it How much better and more reasonably should they proceed if in the Eucharist where Christs body is not sensible they would rather giue eare to the most expresse words of scripture then to the suspicions of their seÌ„ses which can iudge of nothing but of sensible accidents and in the matter of the Church whose being is seÌ„sible they would submit their vncertaine if not false expositions of scripture not only to the sense of all men but also the most certaine expositions of the Church and Fathers But this sheweth that in their beleife they are guided neither by seÌ„se nor scripture but out of them both borrow a shew of proofe for that which of their mere wilfulnes or fancy they choose to beleiue 10. Thus thou seest Christian Reader for how vaine a sophisme whose Maior is manifestly false so false as that out of this matter it is generally denyed of Protestants themselues and so improbable also as that it cannot be proued in no shew or colour and whose Minor is more doubtfull then the conclusioÌ„ it selfe and the manner of prouing sophisticall and no other then the proofes of al Heretikes be for how vaine a sophisme I say then the which scarce any can be more vaine Protestants beleiue or rather will seeme to beleiue a thing wholy incredible and in a thing sensible against the sense of al maÌ„kind to wit that before Luther there was a Church which held the whose substance or all the substantiall and fundamentall points of Protestancy nor in so weighty a matter respect either their oâ—â—e consciences or the iudgements of men or tribunal of God or danger of their eternall damnation Surely Homil. cont Sabel that I may end with S. Basils words I moane and bewayle them that for a meane sophisme and counterfait paralogisme they cast themselues into hel 11. Out of all which hath bin sayd in this chapter I thus frame my tenth and last demonstration If no sufficent testimonie nor any probable argument but only one sond sophisme can be brought to proue that the Protestant Church was before Luther this is not to be beleiued of any wise and prudent man But no other proofe can be brought Therfore c. And if it were not before Luther surely he is the Author of it The Maior is euident by it selfe and the Minor by what hath bin brought in this chapter Certainely if euery one of the demoÌ„strations which we haue brought doe not conuince that the Protestant Church and religion was not before Luther at least all of them together manifestly conuince it For by the first fiue demonstrations was shewed that before Luther it was not at all it was in no place was vnknowne of all the world was not seene of any nor had any Pastors And with the rest hath bin demonstrated that after Luther arose no ancienter Protestant did euer appeare and adioyne himselfe to Luther that all the first knowne Protestant had bin Papists afore times that the Protestant company and religion is new that Luther and other plainly confesse that he was autho of that religion and finally that no proofe besides one friuolous fallacie can be brought to shew that such a Church or religion had bin in former times And if yet any Protestant doubt hereof let him at least compare al the foresayd demoÌ„strations wherwith so many wayes out of the very testimonies of Protestants we haue shewed that no such Church was before Luther with their vaine sophisme wherewith they make shew to proue the contrary and he will easily perceiue on whose side this so important truth is like to stand And if he make any account of truth of Gods seruice of his owne reputation or eternall saluation he will forsake the Protestants Church put himselfe in the lappe of the Catholike Church Which as S. Augustine speaketh euen in the testimony of all mankind hath not only beene in all ages since Christ De vtil credendi cap. 17. but also hath had Pastors nor hath been visible only to her owne but to others also and to the whole world and hath most valiantly fought ouercome and triumphed ouer Iewes Pagans Heretikes Schismatiks and all the gates of hell To preferre before this most ancient most glorious church another newly start vp many ages lurking knowne to none not to her owne and destitute of Pastours flocke seat and appearance and in truth feigned and deuised and to omit all other proofes wounded deadly with so many confessions of her owne champions and proued by one only vaine fallacie what other thing were it then to preferre lyes before truth darcknesse before light death before life the synagogue of Satan before the Church of Christ and finally wilfully to cast himselfe headlong into hell VVhat he must obserue who will answere the foresayd demonstration CHAP. XVI SEEING I haue yielded so much to Protestants condescended to so vnequall conditions as that I haue vndertaken to proue that Luther was the author of their Church and religion by the only Confessions of Luther and other Protestants it is reason that if any one of them goe about to answeare my foresayd demoÌ„strations he hould obserue these most iust lawes which I will here set downe and which themselues haue prescribed to others 2. See Iuel defens Apol par 2. c. d. 5. Kemnice Exam. tit de script Epist Monit p. 145. Calu. cont Seruet p. 643. First therfore touching the words of Protestants which I haue alleadged let him either confesse that they are truely cited by me or if he denye that let him not say it only but let him shew that they are supposed falsifyed or so changed as that the sense which I
Chapter of Isaias tom 4. fol. 220. thus writeth There is no religion in the world which receiueth this opinion of iustification by only fayth and we our selues in priuate do scant belieue it though we publikely defend it By which words he sheweth that neither Hussytes nor Waldenses nor any Christians besides Protestants and scarce they also do belieue the principall and most fundamentall article of Protestancy howsoeuer openly they professe it That the Church cannot be so inuisible as Protestant confesse theirs to haue byn before Luthers tyme. CHAP. VI. 1. BY the name of the Church we vnderstand not as I sayd before only the men but men sociated or the society of men in the fayth worship of God Wherfore that a church be sayd visible not only the men but their worship of God must be visible Neither by this word visible do I vnderstand here that only which can be seene but whatsoeuer is sensible according both to the vulgar phrase of speach wherewith we say See how it soundeth as S. Augustine noteth and also after the phrase of scripture Lib. 10. Confess c. 35. wherein as the same holy Doctour obserueth All sensible things are called visible And Protestants as is before shewed do confesse that before Luthers rising their Church was simply inuisible Lib. 1. de mor. Manich c. 20. and vnseene of any either of those within or without her And necessarily they must say so because they can name none at all who before Luther arose did see a company of men who professed to belieue iustification by only fayth and the rest of the fundamentall principles of Protestancy yea they affirmed that it was so inuisible Ca. 4. n. 11. as it implyed contradiction to haue byn seene of any That the Church cannot be inuisible 2. Now that the Church Militant or liuing on earth cannot be so inuisible I proue first because it is against an article of fayth of diuers Protestants And if perhaps any hereupon imagine that either Protestants neuer graunted the contrary or that if they did graunt it their testimonies against themselues are not to be accepted let him read what hereafter I write touching that matter in the last chapter of this booke Wherefore in the Confession of Saxony cap. 15. they professe in this sort God will haue the Ministery of the ghospell to be publike he will not haue the voice of the ghospell to be shut vp only in corners but will haue it beard of all mankind Therefore he will haue publike and seemely meetings and in them he will haue the voice of the ghospell to sound He will also haue these same meetings to be witnesses of the Confession and separation of the Church from the sects and opinions of other Nations God will haue his Church to be seene and heard in the world and will haue her deuided by many publik marks from other people And the same they repeat in the Consent of Polony cap. de Coena And the same Confession of Saxony cap. of the Church VVe speake not of the Church as of a Platonicall idaea but we shew a Church which may be seene and heard The eternall Father will haue his Sonne to be heard in all mankind VVherefore we say that the Church is in this life a visible company c. SecoÌ„dly it is against their owne definitions of a militant Church ProtestaÌ„ts definitioÌ„s of the Church For the foresayd Confession of Saxony defineth the Church in this life to be a visible company The Magdeburgians in their 1. Century lib. 1. c. 4. col 170. do thus write The Church may be thus defined The Church in this life is a company of those The câ—urch in this life who imbrace the sincere doctrine of the Ghospell and rightly vse the Sacraments And the very same definition giueth Melancthon tom 4. in cap. 3.1 ad Tim. pag. 398. Hutterus in his Analysis of the confession of Auspurg pag. 444. saith This Church which is sayd to be and to be belieued The Church which we belieue is not a Platonicall idea but the visible company of those that are called Zanchius also in his treatise of the Church cap. 2 The militant Church is the company of the elect and truly saythfull Church militant professing the same sayth partaking the same Sacraments c. Hereof properly speake the scriptures when they call the Church the spouse of Christ the body of Christ redeemed with the bloud of Christ sounded vpon a rock Gerlachius tom 2. Disput 22 Defining the Church as it is on earth we say that it is a congregation of men Church on earth who called by the voice of the Ghospell heare the word of God and vse the Sacraments instituted of Christ. 3. Thirdly it is against the properties and markes of the true Church assigned by the Protestants themselues to be altogeather inuisible For thus their Confession of Auspurg cap. 7 The Church of Christ properly so called The proper Church hath her marks to wit pure doctrine c. The Confession of Saxony cap. 12 The true church is discerned from other nations by the voice of true doctrine and lawfull vse of Sacraments The true Church The French Confession art 27 VVe belieue that the true church ought to be discerned with great care VVherefore we affirme out of the word of God that the Church is the company of the faythfull who agree in following the word of God and imbracing true religion wherein also they daily profit growing and confirming themselues mutually in the feare of God The Confession of the Low Countries art 29 By these markes the true Church shall be discerned from the false if in her the pure preaching of the Ghospell be of force by these markes it is certaine that the true Church may be distinguished The Confession of Scotland art 18 It is necessary that the true Church be discerned from the false by euident marckes least being deceiued we imbrace the false for the true to our eternall damnation Againe VVe belieue the markes of the true Church to be true preaching of the word c. Melancthon in his answere to the Bauarian articles tom 3. fol. 362 It is euident that the true Church is a visible company And vpon the 16. to the Romans tom 1. pag. 486 She is the true Church who teacheth the Ghospell aright and rightly administreth the Sacraments Danaeus in his booke of Antichrist cap. 17 The proper definition of the Church This is the proper definition of the Church that the true Church is the company of the faythfull who serue God purely and keep the notes of adoption instituted by him such as are the heauenly word the Sacraments and discipline By these 3. marks the false Church is distinguished from the true Lubbert in his 4. booke of the Church cap. 2 VVe say that the Church doth shew her selfe to be the true Church by the sincere preaching of the word of