him selfe c. Lastly Sebastianus Francus concludeth for certaine that (z) Ep. de abrogandis stat Eccles Presently after the Apostles times al thinges were turned vpside downe c. And that for certaine through the worke of Antichrist the external Church together with the faith and Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure that for these 1400. years the Church haith beene no where external and visible c. So peremptorily do they charge the auncient and holy Fathers of the Primitiue Church with Antichristian Apostacy from the faith of Christ Yea they do not forbeare to publish to the world their special booke of that argument entituled (a) His Maiesty in his declaratiâ—n concerning his proceedinges with the states in case of Voâ—stius p. 15. 19. 35. De Apostasia Sanctorum and to send the same to the Arch-bishop of Canterbury and to mantaine further by letter vnto the said Archbishop that the doctrine contained in that booke de Apostasia Sanctorum was agreeable to the doctrine of the Church of England The miserable deceiued author therof and other his complices Napier Brightman Brocard Leigh and sundry other Protestant writers not discerning that by such their pretended Apostacy them selues do in very deed as precursors prepare and make way to that fearful Apostacy which is in their opinion foretould by the (b) 2. Thes 2.3 and see Caluin vpon the same place as also Piscator Apostle to happen before the end of the world for what els is this pretended Apostacy of the Primitiue Church other then a plaine preparation and earnest perswasion to make Apostacy or departure from the doctrine of the Primitiue church and so consequently from the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles So cleare it is that not onely the ages subsequent but also precedent to S. Austin vp to the Apostles are al of them disliked and condemned by Protestants as wholly papistical and Antichristian The conclusion of the whole booke HItherto gentle Reader haue I intertained thy paines and patience in making proofe to thee of S. Austines professed religion from his owne alledged sayinges reported miracles with solution also to the contrary obiections vsually pretended from S. Austin only now in conclusion of al I offer to thy consideration how vnlike it is that I should be able to alledge to thee so many plaine and pregnant sayinges of S. Austin in behalfe of so many seueral pointes of religion and al or most of them for such by the learned aduersary confessed and yet further confirmed with like confessed consenting doctrine of the other auncient Fathers that liued next before in and after his age and al this notwithstanding no such matter as some aduersaries pretend to be by S. Austin therin intended or meant Could he not in some onely one or other but in al the cheife pointes of controuersy speake so plainly with vs and against Protestancy and so likewise acknowledged by Protestants them selues and yet himselfe in those very pointes ioyne in religion with Protestants and against vs Al which being so abundantly hertofore in this treatise examined and proued euen from the sparing and wary confession of the learned aduersaries who acknowledge no more then the racke of truth enforceth them vnto may suffice to satisfy thee studious Reader that hereby is deliuered to thee but as it were the bare out side or naked apparance of thinges in comparison of that far greater proofe and euidence which is in very deede at large abouÌ„ding in the writings of S. Austin the other auncient Fathers If therefore any shal without al forehead seeke to abuse thee with denyal of so euident premises I do therein boldly appeale to the equity of thine owne indifferent iudgement And as for those other who with more plaine dealing but no lesse offence in do ingeniously confesse and acknowledge S. Austines foresaid doctrine to make with vs yet withal contemne and reiect the same for Popish if any I say supercilious forehead of that ranke who (c) Math. 13.13.14 hauing eares to heare and wil not heare eyes to see and wil not see shal oppose against vs his owne late aduerse nouel doctrine as pretended from the Scriptures in the vnderstanding wherof he doubteth not to prefer his owne priuate interpretation before S. Austin and the other Fathers I can but yet not without commiseration pronounce of such a one (d) Apoc. 22.11 Qui sordidus est sordescat adhuc And I must needes apply vnto him those wordes of our Kinges most excellent Maiesty which he worthily deliuered against Vorstius a principal pretender of this Christian liberty As for (e) In his foresaid declaration p. 63. 64. this Christian liberty saith he which Vorstius doth vrge so much certainly he doth it with no other intention but onely vnder this faire pretext c. to abuse the world c. To abuse Christian liberty in presuming to propound a new doctrine to the world in point of the highest and holiest mysteries of God is a most audacious rashnes and impudent arrogancy And againe (f) Ibid. p. 61. 62. If one particular man may take vpon him such singularity as this how shal he be subiect to general national and synodical Councels c. Wherefore he is plainly discouered to be resolued not to be subiect in any sort to the iudgement of the Church c. for he knowes to wel that the auncient Church c. is against him And this is the reason why he wil not in these pointes submit him selfe to the iudgement of any mortal man but vpon this occasion mantaines his Christian liberty Thus far his Maiesty against Vorstius and indeede against al Protestants who being pressed with the aucthority of S. Austin the other Fathers of the Primitiue Church either for the interpretation of the Scriptures or for our knowledge of the practise of those purest times in matters of faith and religion do finally betake them selues to this desperate refuge of contemning S. Austin and al Fathers vpon pretence of this Christian liberty that al controuersies are to be decyded onely by the priuate spirit interpreting the Scriptures Now lastly as to al Catholicke Readers I conclude that seeing the faith which at this day we beleeue and professe is confessedly the same with that of S. Austines and the other holy Bishops and Doctors of the Primitiue Church that therfore amongst the other greatest blessinges of God bestowed vpon vs we euer esteeme this with highest respect of our happy vocation In due requital and gratitude wherto let vs with al exultation of minde accept and embrace what pressures punishmeÌ„ts and torments so euer inflicted vpon vs for our defence therof yea if death it selfe be vrged let vs rather make choice to dye in our Lord with S. Austin S. Ambrose S. Hierome S. Gregory and the other holy Prelates Martyrs Confessors Virgins of those purest times then to dye the death of the wicked with Aerius Iouinian Vigilantius
likewise taught that the B. Virgin vowed perpetual chastity for thus he writeth (r) Tom. 6. de sancta virginitate c. 4. prope initium How saith she shal this be done hecause I know not man which truly she would not haue said if she had not before vowed her selfe a virgin to God c. Verily she would not haue asked how a woman should hring forth a sonne promised vnto her if she had married to haue lyen with a man This is so clearly S. Austines religion that D. Fulke confessing the same chargeth S. Austin with a non sequitur saying (s) Against Rhem. Test in Luke c. 1. v. 34. sec 13. although S. Austin gather she vowed virginity yet it followeth not c. And Chemnitius to vse his owne words attributeth (t) Examen part 3. p. 39. And sec p. 56. to Austin this fained vow of Mary which directly saith he impugneth the Scriptures Yea saith Peter (u) De Eucharist et votis col 1609. Martir Austin in his booke of holy virginity beleeueth that B. Mary vowed virginity c. which saith this hereticke al easily know how absurd it is Lastly whereas (w) Instit l. 1. c. 14. parag 5. 6. Hiperius in method Theol. p. 387. 288. and the ministers of Lincolne Diocese in their abridgement p. 74. Caluin other Protestants do vtterly deny the diuers orders of Angels other Prot. them selues translate S. Austin to say (x) In their English translation of the bookes de ciuitate Dei l. 22. c. 30. p. 919. ante med No inferior shal in heauen enuy his superior euen as now the other Angels do not enuy the Archangels Yea Cheâ—â—itiâ—â— alledgeth S. Austin as affirming the diuers degrees of (y) Loc. com part 1. fol. 2. Thrones Dominations Principalities c. Saying further how they differ amongst them selues c. In the next life we shal see face to face Concerning the sacred Scriptures CHAPTER 3. S. Austin teacheth the sacred Sciptures to be discerned for such by the authority of the Church SECTION 1. VVHereas Protestants ordinarily teach that the sacred Scriptures are infallibly discerned by vs from al Apocriphal writinges either by the Scriptures them selues or the priuate spirit S. Austin agreeably with the now Roman Church referreth our certaine knowledge therof to the authority and determination of the Church of Christ saying (b) Tom. 6. contra ep fundamenti c. 5. ante med I would not beleeue the Gospel vnlesse the authority of the Catholicke Church moued me therto c. If thou houldest me to the Gospel I may hould my selfe to them by whose commaundement I beleeued the Gospel and these commaunding I wil not credit thee c. The Authority of Catholickes weakned I can not then beleeue the Gospel c. It is necessary that I beleeue the Actes of the Apostles if I beleeue the Gospel because Catholicke authority doth commend a like both Scriptures vnto me And though sundry (c) In whitakers duplicatio aduersus Stapletonum l. 2. c. 8. p. 387. Protestants labour to euade this by affirming that S. Austin spoke of the time past when he was a Manichee and not as then being Catholicke al the wordes cyted do clearly contest the contrary and accordingly are vnderstoode by the Protestant (d) Centuriae tres cent 2. q. 3. p. 267. Bachmannus in this very sense which we now vrge And Suinglius hauing recyted this former saying of S. Austin in steede of better answeare is not ashamed to geue this vndeserued censure saying (e) Tom. 1. fol. 135. here I intreat your indifferent iudgementâ— that you freely speake whether this saying of Austin may not be thaught more audacious then meete or to haue beene vttered imprudently S. Austin teacheth the bookes of Tobie Iudith Hester Machabees c. to be diuine and canonical Scriptures SECTION 2. SAinct Austin professedly dissented from the Canon of the Hebrewes saying (f) Tom. 5. de ciuit Dei l. 18. c. 36. fine not the Iewes but the Church houldeth the bookes of Machabees for Canonical which saying is so plaine that the Protest (g) In his defence englished art 5. p. 151. Pierre du Moulin affirmeth these wordes of the Church houlding theÌ„ for Canonical to be an added falsification alledging yet not any proofe or testimony thereof whereas al copies are consenting against him In so much as our (h) P. 725. aduersaries english translation of this booke not daring to deny these wordes doth of fraudulent purpose and to make them lesse apparent onely omit this other parcel quos non Iudaei sed because that this but appearing it argueth the said bookes to be Canonical in the same sense wherein they were by the Iewes reiected and therefore properly Canonical But concerning al the bookes now in question S. Austin comprehendeth them at once with the other vndoubted Scriptures vnder one and the same word Canonical saying (i) Tom. 3. de doctrina Christiana l. 2. c. 8. ante med The whole Canon of the Scriptures is contained in these bookes following and then next immediatly numbring them vp he placeth in ranke with Genesis Exodus c. the other now controuerted of Tobie Iudith Hester c. which Protestants generally reiect for Apocriphal And whereas S. Austin was present and (k) Council Carthag 3. fine subscribed to the Carthage Councel in the same it was vniuersally decreed (l) Concil Carthag 3. can 47. That besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing should be read in the Church vnder the name of diuine Scriptures now the Canonical Scriptures are Genesis Exodus c. wherwith it in order reckneth the other bookes now in question most euidently so placing and ranking them vnder the foresaid title of Canonicas Scripturas and of such as are to be read in the Church sub nomine diuinarum Scripturarum And though M. Moulins obiecteth that S. Austin saith (m) His defence p. 152. and see Aug. tom 7. contra Epist Gaudentii l. 1. c. 31. circa med The booke of Machabees is receiued not vnprofitably of the Church if men read it soberly yet M. Moulin in the same place geueth the answeare him selfe which in substance is that S. Austin said this as in respect of Razes killing himselfe whose example the Donatistes of indifferent zeale followed in reguard whereof S. Austin requireth this sobriety And he further explaineth this which M. Moulin omitteth saying (n) Ibidem tom 2. ep 61. post med The Scripture of the Machabees touching Raze his death haith tould how it was done but not commended it as though it were to be done Euen as the booke of (o) Cap. 16.30 Iudges reporteth the like of Sampson whom yet the (p) Hebr. c. 11.32 And see Aug. de ciuit Dei l. 1. c. 21. Apostle commendeth Againe to that other often answeared cauil of our aduersaries that the foresaid Councel of Carthage here mencioneth fiue bookes of Salamon whereas we haue but
which be besides Scripture are in no case receiued of vs seeing our Lord doth admonish vs saying In vaine they worship me teaching the commaundements of men And elswhere he affirmeth as common vnto al (r) Tom. 3. de Trinitate l. 1. c. 3. prope n. Hereticks to endeuor to defeÌ„d their false deceiptufl opinioÌ„s out of the Script As it is in part confessed and obserued of him and others by the Protestant (s) Symphonia c. 1. p. 96. Polanus Yea he further auoucheth that (t) Tom. 3. de Gen. ad lit l. 7. c. 9. propc fin Not for any other cause they become heretickes but for not vnderstanding the Scriptures aright they obstinatly defend their false opinions against the truth of the Scriptures And that (u) Tom. 9. in Ioan. tract 18. prope init Heresies do not rise c. but when good Scriptures are not wel vnderstood In which respect he saith truly of heretickes (w) Tom. 7. de Bap. contra Don. l. 3. c. 19. post med Scripturas tenent ad speciem non ad salutem they haue the Scriptures for a shew but not to their saluation And agreeably with S. Austin saith S. (x) Orat 2. contra Constantium l. ad Constantium cyted by Polanus in Symphonia p. 95. Hillary remember that there is no hereticke which doth not faigne the blasphemies which he teacheth to be according to Scriptures Yea saith S. (y) Disput contra Arianos Athanasius cyted by (z) In Symphonia p. 95. Polanus euery heresy is masked with the doctrines of Scriptures whereupon (a) Lib. de praescript see S. Hierome ep ad Paulinum Tertulian premonisheth against the vncertaine encounter with the heretickes by Scripture Concerning the Church of Christ CHAPTER 4. S. Austin teacheth that the Church of Christ is freed from error SECTION 1. DIrectly contrary to the general doctrine of Protestants impugning that special priuiledge of the Church of Christ being freed from error S. Austin agreeably with vs Catholickes is so plaine and ful herein to the opposite as that he doubteth not to refer vs to her final determination in al questions of doubt and difficulty for speaking of the Rebaptising of hereticks he saith (c) Tom. 7. contra Crescon l. 1. c. 33. init Although example of this be not brought out of the Canonical Scriptures â—ot the truth of the same Scriptures is houlden of vs in this matter when we do that which now pleaseth the vniuersal Church which the authority of those Scriptures commendeth that so because the holy Scripture connot deceiue whosoeuer feareth to be deceiued with the obscurity of this question let him take councel therein of the same Church which without al ambiguity the holy Scripture demonstrateth Yea he fur-auoucheth that (d) Tom. 2. ep 118. c. 5. circa med It is a point of most insolent madnes to dispute against that which the vniuersal Church thinketh In so much as he faith (e) Tom. 7. de Bapt. cont Don. l. 7. c. 53. cir med Of the Churches vniuersal consent in any point of doctrine Id autem sit securae voâ—is asserere it is secure to affirme it And lastly he affirmeth the decree of a general CouÌ„cel to be (f) Tom. 7. cont duas ep Pelag l. 4. c. 12. prope fin competens sufficiensque Iudicium a competent and sufficient iugdement S. Austin teacheth that the Church of Christ is Catholicke or vniuersal SECTION 2. THough the very name of Catholicke be so vngratful and odious to the auncienter heretickes that the (g) Aug. tom 7. l. 1. cont Gaudent c. 33. prope init et post med Donatists termed the sam an humane fiction which yet saith S. Austin are wordes of blasphemie as also to the more nouel sectaries D. (h) Against Rhem. Test in Act. 11.26 sec 4. Fulke confessing that some Lutherans haue altered the word of the Creed and for Catholicke put Christian And (i) Praefat. Noui Testamenti Anno. 1605. And see the Lutherans in colloq Altemberg in Respons ad accus corrupt fol. 154. 353. Beza styling it The most vaine tearme Catholicke yet S. Austin so highly esteemed thereof that he said (k) Tom. 1. de vera religione c. 7. paul ante med We must hould the communion of that Church which is named Catholicke not onely of her owne but also of her enemies for wil they nil they Heretickes and Schismatickes when they speake not with their owne fellowes but with strangers cal the Catholicke Church nothing els but the Catholicke Church for they could not be vnderstood vnles they discerne it by this name wherewith she is called by the whol world And though it be common to Protestants with former heretickes in wordes to style them selues Catholickes yet saith S. (l) Tom. 6. l. cont epist fundam c. 4. circ med Austin whereas al heretickes would be called Catholickes yet if a stranger aske the way to the Catholicke Church no hereticke dare shew his owne Church or house And the like saying is to be seene in S. (m) Catech. 18. Ciril And euen so at this day the name Catholicke is ordinarily appropriated to vs Roman Catholickes by M. (n) Act. mon. p. 613. Sleid. in the english history l. 7. fol. 96. et l. 10. fol. 127. Iac. in his reasons taken out of Gods word p. 23. 73. 74. 24. Wilkes in his obedience pag. 39. Dres in Millenar 6. p. 214. Humf. in vita Iuelli p. 102. 100. Fox Sleiden Iacob Wilkes Dresserus Humfrey and al other writers Yea this name Catholicke was so powerful with S. Austin as that he made it one special motiue as now the like it should be to vs for to preserue and keepe him in the Churches bosome saying hereof (o) Tom. 6. cont epist fundam c. 4. circa med Lastly the very name Catholicke houldeth me c. which wordes are so vndenyable that D. (p) Against Rhem. test in Act. Apost c. 11. v. 26. see 4. Fulke granteth that Among many other thinges which kept S. Austin in the Church the name of Catholicke was one But to passe from the name to the thing it selfe or reason of the name that the true Church should be called Catholicke not as D. (q) Ibidem Fulke with old hereticks pretendeth only in reguard of it obseruing al the commaundements of God which very assertion S. (r) Tom. 2. ep 48. ad Vincentium paulo ante med Austin confuteth saying to the hereticke thou seemest to haue said somewhat wittily when thou expoundest the name Catholicke not by the communion of the whole world but by the keeping of al the commaundements c. But in reguard of it becomming and continuing after it first encrease Catholicke dispersed ouer the world In proofe whereof S. Austin as the very (s) Cent. 5. c. 4. col 410. col 414. Centuristes do obserue alledgedgeth many testimonies from the sacred Scriptures saying
Waldo Wicliue Husse Luther Caluin and other damned Heretickes whose very inconstancy and ciuil dissentions amongst them selues may serue vs for a strongest argument that their singular doctrines first proceeding from the spirit of error and ignorance were after mantained by the spirit of pride and obstinacy shortly wil be ended by the spirit of discord and contradiction God saue the KING THE CONTENTES of the preface to the kinges Maiesty THat the sacred Scriptures alone are not sufficient to determine controuersies p. 5. That controuersies in Religion are to be decyded by the Church p. 9. That long education in any profession or Religion is not sufficient security for the truth therof p. 10. That Protestants haue reuoulted from their former professed doctrines And of their great inconstancy and incertanty therein p. 12. The contentes of the Preface to the learned aduersaries Certaine writinges of S. Austin charged by Protestants for counterfeate are defended and other their euasions preuented p. 25. Chapter 1. The Author beginneth his booke to his Catholicke frend p. 1. Chapter 2. CoÌ„cerning God the humanity of Christ the B. Virgin Mary and the holy Angels Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that the sonne of God is God of God and not of him selfe p. 8. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that God doth not reprobate any to sinne or damnation or commaund any thing impossible p. 10. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that Christ suffered not according to his diuine nature nor according to the same was Preist or offered sacrifice or was mediator and that from his natiuity he was free from ignorance and after his death descended into hel and that his body by Gods omnipotency may be without circumscription p. 16. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that the B. Virgin Mary was freed from original sinne That her body was assumpted into heauen and that she vowed chastity He also teacheth the different degrees of Angels and Archangels p. 22. Chapter 3. Concerning the sacred Scriptures Section 1. S. Austin teacheth the sacred Scriptures to be discerned for such by the authority of the Church p. â—26 Section 2. S. Austin teacheth the bookes of Tobie Iudith Hester Machabees c. to be diuine and Canonical Scriptures p. 28. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that one text of Scripture may haue diuerse true senses p. 33. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that besides the sacred Scriptures the Traditions of the Church are to be receiued beleeued As also that al heretickes do insist onely vpon the Scriptures p. 35. Chapter 4. Concerning the Church of Christ Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that the Church of Christ is freed from error p. 39. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that the Church of Christ is Catholicke or vniuersal p. 41. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that the militant Church must euer continue and that visibly p. 46. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that the Church was built vpon Peter And that Peter was the head of the whole Church p. 50. Section 5. S. Austin teacheth the Primacy of the Roman Church p. 53. Section 6. S. Austin denyeth Ecclesiastical Primacy to Emperours Kinges p. 57. Chapter 5. Concerning the Sacramentes Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that the Sacraments do not onely signify but truly confer grace to the worthy receiuer p. 60. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that certaine of the Sacraments do imprint a Character or marke in the soule of the receiuer p. 62. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that there are seauen Sacramentes p. 64. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that the Sacraments are to be administred with the signe of the Crosse p. 66. Chapter 6. Concerning Baptisme Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that Baptisme taketh away al sinnes both original and actual p. 68. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that concupisence remaning after Baptisme is not sinne p. 69. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that children dying vnbaptised are not saued p. 71. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth sundry Ceremonies of Baptisme now vsed in the Roman Church p. 73. Chapter 7. Concerning the Sacrament of Confirmation p. 76. Chapter 8. Concerning the real presence or Sacrament of the Eucharist Section 1. S. Austin teacheth the real Presence of Christes body and bloud in the Sacrament of the Eucharist p. 81. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that the very wicked do truly receiue the body of Christ p. 85. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that great care is to be vsed lest any part of the Sacrament do fal vpon the ground and that it is to be receiued fasting Besides which he also teacheth and alloweth the vse of holy bread now vsed by Catholickes p. 87. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that the sacrament of the Eucharist is to be adored And other Fathers teach that it is to be inuocated and that Angels are present in time of the sacrifice p. 90. Section 5. S. Austin teacheth that the Eucharist is a true and proper sacrifice and that it is propitiatory euen for the dead and that it was offered vpon Altars consecrated with oyle and the signe of the Crosse p. 104. Chapter 9. Concerning the Sacrament of penance wherin auricular confession to Preistes imposed Penance and dayes of pardon are taught by S. Austin and other Fathers p. 111. Chapter 10. Concerning the Sacrament of Extreme vnction wherein is proued the same to be a Sacrament and vsed in the Primitiue Church p. 122. Chapter 11. Concerning the Sacrament of Orders wherein S. Austin teacheth that they are properly a Sacrament geuen onely by a Bishop who haith authority to excommunicate euen the deade And that Preistes may not marry or be one that was Bigamus p. 125. Chapter 12. Concerning the Sacrament of Matrimony taught by S. Austin and that the innocent party vpon Adultery may not marry an other And of the Preistes blessing after marriage p. 134. Chapter 13. Concerning free wil iustification merit of workes workes of superogation and the difference of mortal and venial sinnes Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that man haith free wil. p. 139. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that our iustification consisteth not onely in remission of sinnes or not imputation therof but likewise in good workes and that the same once had may be lost p. 145. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that good workes do merit and that there are workes of supererogation p. 149. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that mortal and venial sinnes do differ of their owne natures pag. 154. Chapter 14. Concerning praier for the deade Purgatory material fire in hel Limbus Patrum inuocation of Sainctes their worship and Images Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that it is lawful and godly to pray for the dead and that there is a place of Purgatory after this life p. 157. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth local hel and material fire therin as also Limbus Patrum or Christes descending into hel p. 163. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that Sainctes are to be inuocated and worshiped as also their reliques to be reuerenced p. 163. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth
SCTION 4. COncerning the Churches being builded vpon the Rocke as S. Austin acknowledgeth the building thereof vpon Christ as being the primary Rocke or foundation so likewise doth he affirme as from the then common receiued doctrine our Sauiours building of his Church vpon Peter as being a secondary or ministerial Rocke or foundation houlding both these expositions for good and probable saying hereof expresly (a) Tom. 1. l. 1. retract c. 21. post init Let the reader choose whether of these two opinions be more probable To this purpose then he writeth (b) Ibidem in his booke contra epistolam Donati I haue said in a certaine place concerning Peter the Apostle that vpon him as vpon a Rocke the Church is builded which sense is also song by the mouthes of many in the verses of most blessed Ambrose c. but I know that since I haue often expounded that which is said by our Lord thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke I wil build my Church that it might be vnderstood vpon this which Peter confessed saying thou art Christ the sonne of God And then presently afterwardes as before he concludeth but of these two opinions let the reader choose which is the more probable And he alledgeth and approueth S. (c) Tom. 7. de Bapt. cont Don. l. 3. c. 1. ante med Ciprian saying for neither Peter whom our Lord chose first or cheifest and vpon whom he built his Church c. And him selfe saith elswhere (d) Tom. 8. in Psal 30. con 2. ante med O Church that is o Peter because vpon this Rocke I wil build my Church kil and eate And of Peters sea he denounceth that (m) Tom. 7. in Psal cont partem Donat. versus finem It is the Rocke which the proud gates of hel do not ouercome In so much that the Protestant Hammelmannus confesseth this of S. Austin saying (e) De Traditionibus Apostolicis part 2. l. 3. col 622. and see the like sayinges of the other Fathers alledged reiected fâ—r the same col 621. 623. 624. 625. Austin in his booke against the epistle of Donatus teacheth that the Church was founded vpon Peter as vpon the Rocke and he proueth this his opinion by the verses of Ambrose c. concerning the Cooke c. But S. Austin proceedeth yet more particularly saying (f) Tom. 4. quaestion ex Nouo Test quaest 75. post med Our Sauiour when he commaunded that there should be geuen for him and Peter then he seemeth to haue payed for al because as in our Sauiour there were al causes of preheminence so also after our Sauiour al are contained in Peter for he ordained him the head of them that he might be the Pastor of our Lords flocke c. It is manifest that al are contained in Peter for asking for Peter he is knowen to haue asked for al for euer in the superiour the people are either reproued or commended And againe (g) Tom. 8. in Psal 108. enarrat 1. prope initium certaine thinges are said in the Gospel which properly seeme to belong to Peter the Apostle yet they haue not a cleare sense but when they are referred to the Church whose person figuratiuely he is knowen to haue borne by reason of the primacy which he had ouer the Disciples c. S. Austin teacheth the primacy of the Roman Church SECTION 5. COncerning S. Peters successors the Bishops of Rome S. Austin acknowledgeth that in the Roman Church (a) Tom. 2. ep 162. multo ante med the principality of the Apostolical chaire euer florished And (b) Tom. 6. de vtil credendi c. 17. shal we doubt saith he to hide our selues in the bosome of that Church which c. from the Apostolical sea by successions of Bishops haith obtained the hight of authority To which not to geue the Primacy is truly either the greatest impiety or headlong arrogancy And writing to Pope Bonifacius him selfe he saith (c) Tom. 7. cont duas epist Pelag ad Bonifac l. 1. c. 1. circa med It is common to vs al wbo are Bishops although thou therein dost excel by reason of the greater height of thy pastoral watch-tower In like sort he writeth to Pope Innocentius saying (d) Tom. 2. epist 92. ad Innocent prope finem we thinke c. that by the authority of thy holines deriued from the authority of the holy Scriptures that they wil more easily yeald who beleeue such peruerse and pernicious thinges so attributing the Popes authority to the Scriptures them selues And as for Innocentius him selfe the Centuristes confesse (e) Cent. 5. col 1230. 662. and see Osiander cent 5. p. 59. that he laboured much for the primacy of the Roman Church which is euident by al his epistles c. wherupon they alledge from his epistles sundry of his sayinges which importing so much are therefore by them (f) Cent. 5. col 775. 779. reprehended And wheras Innocentius writ one epistle to the Fathers of the Carthage Councel wherein he affirmeth the Primacy of the Roman Church to be (g) In Aug. tom 2. ep 91. prope init and see cent 5. col 825. 780. decreed non humana sed diuina sententia not by humane but diuine sentence And an (h) In Aug. tom 2. ep 93. multo ante med and see cent 5. col 843. 780. other to the Milleuitane Concel wherein he chalengeth that matters of faith are to be referred to the Apostolical Sea Though the Centuristes do dislike and reproue these said epistles for the foresaid doctrines tauhgt therein by Innocencentius yet S. (i) Tom. 2. epist 106. post init Austin writing to Paulinus of the Pelagian heresy which was condemned in those two foresaid CouÌ„cels meÌ„cioning two seueral letters of those two Councels sent to the Apostolicke sea To which two letters Innocentius made seueral answeare in his two former recyted epistles from whence are alledged the testimonies of his clamed Primacy S. Austin I say of these very answeares or epistles writeth thus worthily (k) Ibidem Innocentius of blessed memory writ backe vnto vs concerning al thinges in that manner which was fit and conuenient for the Bishop of the Apostolicke sea and elswhere he further saith of the same epistles (l) Tom. 7. cont Iulian. Pelag. l. 1. c. 4. post med what could that holy man blessed Innocentius answeare to the Affrican Councels but that which aunciently the Apostolicke Sea and the Roman Church continually held with the rest Most euidently so hereby geuing his allowance of that very Primacy which Innocentius clamed in or by these two foresaid epistles But indeede S. Austin was alwaies so duly respectiue to the Roman Sea as that he greauosly reprehended the heretickes of his time for their then (m) Tom. 7. cont lit Petil. l. 2. c. 51. tearming the Roman Church as our aduersaries now do the chaire of pestileÌ„ce teaching with al against the Protestants often
obiection our due reuerence therto not withstanding the wicked liues of any Popes (n) Tom. 2. ep 165. ante med although saith he any traitor in those times had crept into that rancke of Bishops which is continued from Peter himselfe to Anastasius who now sitteth in the same chaire it would nothing hurt the Church and innocent Christians for whom our Lord prouiding saith of euil Pastors what they say do ye but what they do do ye not Lastly this wholsome councel he geueth vnto al heretickes (o) Tom. 7. in Psal contra partem Donati versus finem come ye brethren if you wil be ingrafted in the vine it is a greife when we see you cut of so to lye number the Preistes euen from the Sea of Peter and see in that rancke of Fathers who succeedeth another that is the Rocke which the proud gates of hel do not ouercome S. Austin denyeth Ecclesiastical Primacy to Emperours and Kinges SECTION 6. THe Milleuitan Councel wherat S. Austin was presēt (a) In the last Canon of rhe Mileuitan Councel prescribed decreed in the case of cleargy mē that (b) Can. 19. whosoeuer should aske of the Emperour the knowledge or hearing of publicke iudgements should be depriued of his honour Of which Canon (c) Cent. 5. c. 33. p. 152. Osiander saith It is not worthy of commendation And wheras M. Iewel (d) Reply art 4. p. 272. obiecteth the testimony of S. Austin concerning Constantine the great vndertaking the iudgements of Bishops and their causes vpon appeale made to him in that behalfe S. Austin him selfe shal geue him his answeare in these wordes (e) Tom. 2. ep 162. multo post med The Emperour graunted them another iudgement at Arles to wit of other Bishops not because it was needful but yealding to their importunities c. for neither durst the Christian Emperour so receiue their tumultuous and deceiptful complaints that him selfe would iudge of the sentence of Bishops which sate at Rome but as I haue said he graunted other Bishops frō whom they also chose to appeale againe to the Emperour wherein you haue heard how he detested them c. And as he had yealded to thē to iudge of their cause after the Bishops afterwardes he asked pardon of the holy Prelates Yea S. Austin saith further that (f) Ep. 166. ante med because Constantine durst not iudge of the cause of a Bishop he committed the same to be discussed and ended by Bishops Optatus also who liued with S. Austin alledging Constantines answeare to the Bishops that appealed to him saith (g) Lib. 1. versus finem Constantine with great anger answeared c. you aske of me iudgement in the world when I except the iudgement of Christ And a litle after Donatus thinketh that he may appeale from Bishops to which appeale Constantine thus answeared O outragious bouldnes of fury as in the causes of Gentiles c. Yea this is so cleare in S. Austin that M Carthwright answeareth to M. Whitguifts like obiecting hereof saying (h) 2. Reply part 2. p. 163. Austin saith that the Emperour was driuen by the Donatistes importunity who made no end of appealing vnto him to geue sentence in that matter for the which also he was to craue pardon of the Bishops c. Lastly S. Athanasius reporteth that the Bishop Hosius said to Constantine (i) In ep ad solitariam vitam agentes I beseech thee to cease and remember thou art mortal c. do not entermedle in Ecclesiastical matters nor do thou commaund vs in this kind God haith committed to thee the Empyre to vs those thinges which concerne the Church c. Take heede lest that drawing to thee those thinges which concerne the Church thou be guilty of great crime c. And againe who seeing him in decreeing to make him selfe the prince of Bishops to be president in Ecclesiastical iudgements may not deseruedly say that he is that abhomination of desolation which was foretold by Daniel Concerning the Sacraments CHAPTER 5. S. Austin teacheth that the Sacraments do not only signify but truly confer grace to the worthy receiuer SECTION 1. THough (k) Fulke against Purgat p. 35. Willet in his Sinopsis p. 415. Perkins in his reformed Catholicke p. 294. 298. Iewel in his defence p. 201. Protestants vsually teach that Sacraments do signify grace but not confer it yet S. Austin with vs Catholickes teacheth the contrary saying (l) Tom. 9. in Iohn tract 80. versus finem from whence is that so great vertue of the water that touching the body it washeth the heart but the word working it c. Clensing therefore would not be attributed to the liquid and slippery element if it were not added in the word And he proueth by example of Circumcision the force of Baptisme to children though they want faith saying (m) Tom. 7. l. 4. de Bapt. cont Don. c. 24. post init The Sacrament of it selfe was of great force But this doctrine is so clearly S. Austines that Luther answeareth to Cochlaeus his obiecting of S. Austin in this manner (n) Lib. cont Cochlaeum But if there be any of the Fathers who haue thought the Sacraments to iustify by their owne vertue though it be Austin as Cochlaeus contendeth I nothing care they are the sayinges of men Agreeably to which also writeth Caluin (o) Lib. 4. Instit c. 14. sec vlt. peraduenture those immoderate commendations of the Sacraments which are read in the auncient writers as that of Austin c. haith deceiued those miserable Sophisters And whearas (p) Willet in his sinopsis p. 418. Protestants do further teach that the Sacraments of the old law are equal in force to ours S. Austin with vs to the contrary auoucheth that (q) Tom. 8. in Psal 73. multo ante med There are some sacraments geuing saluation others promising the Sauiour the Sacraments of the new Testament geue saluation the Sacraments of the old Testament promise the Sauiour A saying so pregnant against Protestants that if we beleeue (r) Loc. com p. 299. and see Caluin l. 4. institut c. 14. sec vlt. Musculus it was spoken inconsideratly by Austin Yea saith Caluin (s) Lib. 4. instit c. 15. sec 7. And see Chemnitius examen part 2. p. 38. Let it trouble no man that the auncient Fathers striue to make a difference betweene the one and the other their authority ought not to be such as to shake the infallibility of Scripture c. Neither is that quircke of Austin to be approued that by the Baptisme of Iohn sinnes are forgeuen in hope but by the Baptisme of Christ sinnes are forgeuen indeede S. Austin teacheth that certaine of the Sacraments do imprint a Character or marke in the soule of the receiuer SECTION 2. THough D. (t) Sinopsis p. 419. and vpon the 112. Psal p. 91. Willet with other Protestants vtterly deny al such Character yet
in the very place obiected explaineth him selfe to speake onely against such which neither are contained in the authorities of Scriptures nor found to be decreed in the Councels of Bishops nor strengthned with the custome of the vniuersal Church c. so that scarce or not at al can reasons be found which people followed in the making of them To which purpose also M. Whâ—â—guifâ— directly answeareth to this place obiected saying (m) Defence traâ—â— 10. c. 2. p. 545. Austin ep 119. speaketh but of vnprofitable ceremonies c. neither grounded vpon the Scriptures determined by Councels nor confirmed by custome A further answeare ingeneral to al such obiections as are vrged from S. Austin or others of the Fathers SECTION 7. AS concerning al these such other like triuial and vnworthy obiections so often from S. Austin and the other Fathers by our aduersaries reenforced and vrged and by our writers more then often explained and answeared we do hereby once for al premonish and commend to the readers remembrance these few further general obseruations next ensuing in more ful explanatioÌ„ of these other like occurring obscure sayinges of S. Austin other Fathers wherin as our aduersaries acknowledge (n) Beza ep theol â—p 82. p. 382. Snecanus method descript p. 429. Chemnitius examen part 1. fol. 80. White in his way to the true Church pref to the reader sec 17. and answeare they could not possibly fore see to write of al things so distinctly clearly as is now to be wished The first then is that according to the direction euen geuen by Protestants we do vnderstand the obscure saying of any Father agreeably to his many more plainer sayinges deliuered in other places of the same matter and much more then that we do not insist vpon any seeming doubtful saying against those many more which are plaine and for such confessed Of this obseruation (o) Snecanus method descript p. 414. Snecanus alledgeth Tertulian saying It is fit that the fewer be vnderstood by the more And againe lest one speach should ouerthrow many others it is to be expounded according to al rather then against al. Hereof also saith Pezelius (p) In argument â—t obiect p. 254. A profitable rule in teaching is deliuered that it is fit that the fewe be vnderstood by the more M. Carthwright yet saith further (q) 2. Reply part 1. p. 627. If it be a simple answeare to set one author against another it is much more simple to set one authority at varience with it selfe without shewing any way of reconciliation And yet what more frequent with Protestants then this simple kind of answeare for doth not D. Whitaker in steede of better answeare say (r) De sacra Scriptura p. 690. though Austin in this place seemeth to fauor Traditions yet in other places he defendâ—th earnestly the perfection of the Scripture And of S. Basil he likewise saith concerning the same traditions (s) Ibidem p. 670. he fighteth with him selfe And (t) De principiis Christ dog l. 2. c. 10. p. 675. Lubertus saith I oppose Basil against Basil As also (u) Whitaker vbi supra p. 678. Chrisostome fighteth with him selfe And (x) Lubertus vbi supra p. 676. I oppose Chrisostome to Chrisostome Neither (y) Ibidem p. 678. doth Damascen agree with him selfe The like simple answeare is geuen by Hospinian against S. Austin saying (z) Hist sacram part 1. in indice 3. PatruÌ„ at the word Augustinus col 3. He wanteth the testimony of Scripture neither agreeth he with him selfe yea he contradicteth him selfe Of whom also saith (a) Synopsis de Patribus p. 34. Tossanus Austin is often wauering and not agreeing with him selfe in al thinges with these also answeareth no lesse simply Malancthon saying (b) In ep ad Rom. in c. 14. p. 418. I know many thinges may be gathered out of the auncient writers which are contrary to our opinions c. I prouoke not to al the writers â—ut to the better sort Ambrose Austin and as far forth as the rest agree with these who seeing they sometimes speake contrary thinges they shal geue vs leaue if we reprehend some thinges But Beza extendeth this simple kind of answeare yet further for speaking of the auncient Fathers in Theodosius his time he saith (c) In nou Test in praefat ad principem Condensem p. 4. I confesse that as then there were many most learned Bishops but withal I affirme c. that scarce any of them can be found who differeth not both from him selfe and from many others in matters of greatest moment Caluin also hauing mecioned the auncient Fathers and better writers of this age saith of them (d) Instit in praefat ad Regem Gal. p. 7. Those holy men were ignorant of many thinges they do often feight amongst them selues and somtimes with them selues And the like saith Peter Martâ—r (e) De votis p. 463. that cheifly is to be obserued that the Fathers do not alwayes agree amongst them selues and somtimes not one with him selfe Wherefore to omit this kind of simple answeare as in it selfe base to the Fathers iniurious and vsed onely by such as fynd them selues galled or rather condemned by the same Fathers seeing the forementioned obiections of our aduersaries taken from S. Austin being at the least but places obscure and questionable and those other by vs alledged being plaine and for such by the learnedst Protestants acknowlâ—dged it were absurd and against al sequel of reason either to vrge these places as one contrary to another or to expound and determine the sense of those that be so confessedly plaine and out of question by these other whose sense is obscure doubtful and yet depending in question which only obseruation being in it selfe so cleare and manifest sufficeth of it selfe to dissolue al the foresaid and other obiections framed from S. Austin or other Fathers by so many Protestant writers The second obseruation is that we also vnderstand the Fathers doubtful sayinges according to the then common receiued opinion of the other Fathers as is by S. Austin him selfe in this case confessedly obserued for wheras Iulianus the hereticke to proue that children are without original sinne obiected this sentence of S. Chrisostome we baptise Infantes though they haue no sinnes S. Austin teacheth how to vnderstand this obscure sentence saying (f) Tom. 7. contra Iulian. Pelag l. 1. c. 6. multo ante med intellige propriâ— vnderstand it of sinnes of their owne or actual and there is no contention but thou wilt say why did not Chrisostome ad propria their owne why do we thinke but because disputing in a Catholicke Church he thought he should not be otherwise vnderstood nobody was troubled with such a question you not as then wrangling he spoke securely This point and very example is obserued by Peter (g) Common places in english part 2. p. 228. Martir as also by