stileth the Canons of the sayd Councel of Nyce 66) Luther l. de Cōcilijs part 1. p. 92. hay straw wood stubble and demandeth whether the the Holie-Ghost hath nothing els to do in Councels but to bind and burden his Ministers with impossible dangerous and vnnecessarie lawes So absurd was the Councel of Nyce in Luther's iudgement affirming further That more light is brought to a Christian by that Catechisme which children do learne then by al the Councels Caluin calleth the Fathers of the sayd Councel of Nyce 67) Lib. de vera Eccl. reformat opuscul p. 486. And Inst l. 4. c. 9. 3. 10. Phanaticos that is men Phanatical or deluded by the Diuel and withal giueth leaue to euerie priuate man to examin the decrees of Councels by the Scriptures saying 68) Inst l. 4. c. 9. §. 8. 9 11. Let no names or authorities of Councels Pastours Bishops hinder vs but that we may examin al Spirits of al men by the rule of the Word of God And againe 69 Ib. 3. 14. I deny that Interpretation of Scripture to be alwayes true and certain which is receaued by the consent of a Councel But I cannot heer but obserue the strange giddines of this primest protestant Caluin who directly contrarie to his former Assertions writeth thus 70) Inst l. 4. c. 9. §. 8. Those ancient Synods as Nyce Constantinople the first of Ephesus of Chalcedon and the like which were assembled for the confuting of errours we do willingly embrace and reuerence as Sacred for as much as concerneth doctrines of Faith For they containe nothing but the pure and natiue Interpretation of Scripture which the holie Fathers with spiritual wisdome applyed to the vanquishing of the Enemies of Religion which then appeared But to leaue him thus fighting with himself and to come to the Ministers of the Church of Scotland 71) In the end of the Harmonie of Coafes p. 19. And see the sayd Harmonie sect 1. p. 14. Without iust examination we do not receaue say they whatsoeuer is obtruded vnto men vnder the name of a General Councel for plaine it is that as the men assembled were men so haue some of them manifestly erred and that in matters of great weight and importance So far then as the Councel proueth the determination and commandment that it giueth by the plaine word of God so soone do we reuerence and embrace the same Heervnto also do accord our English Protestants teaching that 72) Articles of faith agreed vpon in the Conuocations of A. 1562. 1604. art 21. General Councels c. may erre and sometimes haue erred euen in things pertaining vnto God Wherefore things ordained by them as necessarie to saluation haue neither strength nor authoritie vnles it may be declared that they be taken out of holie Scriptures So vnwilling or rather truly fearful are Protestants to appeale vnto General Councels for the decision of Controuersies But D. Luther proceedeth further seriously expecting exacting that al Councels shal be subiect to his Censure determination 73) Tom. 2. wittenberg f. 375. The Rectours of Churches saith he the Pastours of Christ's sheep haue indeed power to teach but the sheep ought to iudge whether they propose the voice of Christ or of strangers c. Wherefore let the Pope Bishops Councels c. decree appoynt and ordaine what they wil we wil not hinder them but we who are the sheep of Christ and heare his voice wil haue it in our power to iudge whether they propose things true and agreable to the voice of our Pastour or no and they are to yeald subscribe and obey our Censure and Sentence Now if Councels be subiect to the Censure of Luther or anie other such rotten sheep then lesse is the authoritie of Councels then of Luther himself then the which nothing can be spoken more absurd or ridiculous In like sort saith Peter Martyr in general 74) De votis p. 476. As long as we rest in Councels Fathers we shal be euer conuersant in the same errours Yea saith M. Carthwright 75) In whiteg Tract 2. p. 95. If this be a sufficient proof to say such a Councel decreed such a Doctour sayd so there is almost nothing so true but I can impugne nothing so false but I can make true And wel assured I am that by their meanes the principal grounds of our Protestant Faith may beshabken But to conclude 76) De Concil contr Bellar. 9. 6. Fulk Answ to a Counterf Cath p. 89. 90. Will. Syno 92. D Whitaker D. Fulk D. Willet and most other Protestants teaching that General Councels may erre in Faith and manners it is no wonder though they reiect their authoritie but yet it euidently conuinceth that in matters of Faith and Religion Protestants dare not relye and submit themselues to the decrees and definitions either of ancient or moderne General Councels So that though Ministers in their Pulpits where none wil gainsay them do florish and flaunt forth the ancient Fathers prayses approue their authoritie applaud them as Protestants and appeale to those primitiue Doctours as Maisters and Patrons of their errours yet when they are pressed by Catholicks with cleerest euidence of their particular writings sayings and practise and with the answerable acknowledgements of the learned Protestants then their tone is changed bitterly exclaming that The argument drawne from Antiquitie is a Popish argument that To appeale to the Primitiue Church is to iniurie the Protestant Congregation That for Protestants to fil their books with the authorities of Fathers is dangerous and to be eschued That in al Councels Fathers and Stories since the Apostles the print of the Popes feet is to be found That the Papists strongest towers are in the testimonies of the Doctours That the Fathers were blind and ignorant in the Scriptures That they were certainly damned for their Papistical opinions vnles they repented That their interpretations of Scripture were aduantagious to Papists and preiudicial to Protestants That their books and Commentaries were contrarie to Scripture Yea that the Fathers did contradict one another and often one and the same himself That Luther and sundrie other Protestants are much to be preferred for learning before S. Austin S. Ambrose and al the other Fathers That the Doctrine now taught by the Bishops of England is much more sound then euer was taught by any Bishops since the Apostles and therefore that our Bishops are in manie degrees to be preferred before them that euen in the best times Sathan was president in Councels And lastly that al decrees of Popes Bishops and Councels are to yeeld and obey the Censure of Luther Dot not al this most strongly confirme that in the verie harts and consciences of Protestants themselues the ancient Fathers were Roman Catholicks and most aduerse to Protestants and that therefore and only therefore they are thus reiected contemned disgraced and wronged by them euen by Luther Caluin Beza
conscience and true knowledge would also dedicate your further labours I doubt not but you would become a dutiful Child to your Mother-Church and a paineful labourer in Christ's Vinyeard for which I wil not cease to entreate his Infinit Goodnes and wil euer rest Yours in him N. N. THE FIRST BOOKE WHERIN IS PROVED BY THE CONFESSION OF PROTESTANTS THAT THE CATHOLICK ROMAN CHVRCH hath continued Euer most Knowne and Vniuersal euen from Christs verie Time vntil the Date hereof THE ANTIQVITIE OF THE TRVE Church and the force of the Argument drawne from the Authoritie thereof As also of the great necessitie of finding-out this true Church CHAP. I. AS we may not doubt but that the Church of God speaking in general is equal in Ancestrie with our first Parents in Paradise so in regard of her Birth-right prime Antiquitie long precedent and preferred before the Scriptures themselues so euen of the Church of Christians it may not be denyed but that as in the same instant with Christ her Head and Spouse she receaued her first being life and birth in this world according to that of (1) Ad c. 3. Lucae S. Ambrose God built his Church in the chief Corner-stone CHRIST IESVS so was this her greatest nobilitie of birth not only to cōtinue for some few generatiōs but euer to remayne for al posteritie Agreable to which the Prophet Daniel foretold of the Church (2) cap. 2.4 that it is A kingdome that shal neuer be destroyed but shal stand for euer And so shal be according to Esay as (3) cap 60.15 An eternal glorie and ioy from generation to generation So that in steed of further discussing the Ancientest Birth-right and not-interrupted continuance of Christ his Church I wil now only treat of the force of that Argumēt which is drawne from the Authoritie Determinatiō of the sayd so Noble Anciēt a Church Wherein for greater expeditiō I wil pretermit most plentiful proofes both from sacred Scriptures and learnedst Fathers in steed therof wil for the present rest satisfyed with the freest Grants and ample Acknowledgements of the learnedst Protestants who first as they euer pretend to build their whole Faith Religion vpon the Written Word so do they further aknowledge the same to be only knowne and discerned from forged and adulterat Scriptures by the sacred Authoritie and Testimonie of the Church of Christ In which respect (4) Ans to a Counterf catho pag. 5. D. Fulk auoucheth that The Church of Christ hath Iudgemēt to discerne true writings from counterfait and the Word of God from the writings of men and this Iudgemēt she hath of the Holie-Ghost With whom accordeth (5) Def. of the Apolog. p. 201. D. Iewel affirming that The Church of God hath the Spirit of wisdome whereby to discerne true Scriptures from false In like sort M. (6) Ecc. Pol. pag. 86. Hooker teacheth that of things necessarie the verie chiefest is to know what books we are bound to esteeme holie which point is confessed impossible for the Scripture itself to teach Whereof he further sayth (7) Ib pa. 102. It is not the Word of God which doth or possibly can assure vs that we do wel to think it is his word for if anie one Book of Scripture did giue testimonie of al yet stil that Scripture which giueth credit to the rest would require another Scripture to giue credit vnto it Neither could we come vnto anie pause whereon to rest vnles besides Scripture there were something which might assure vs c. which something afterwards he acknowledgeth (8) Ib. pa. 146. 116. And see Aretius his examen p. 24. And Bachmanus his Centuriae tres c. p. 267. To be the authoritie of Gods Church Agreably hereunto D. whitaker doth confesse that this weightiest controuersie concerning Canonical Scriptures is to vs determined not by (9) Cōt Staplet p. 370. 357. HooK Eccl. Pol. p. 147. Testimonie of the Spirit the which sayth he being priuat and secret is vnfit to teach and refel others but as he further teacheth (10) Ibi. p. 300. 298. 24. 25. And against Raynolds p. 44. by the Ecclestical Tradition An argument whereby may be argued and conuinced what books be Canonical and what not And another Protestant Writer (11) Auth. of the scripture and the church f. 71 72. 73. 74 75. much commended by (12) Ibid. in the Preface Bullinger affirmeth that The church is endued with the Spirit of God and that The diligence authoritie of the Church is to be acknowledged herein which hath partly giuen forth her Testimonie of the assured writings and hath partly by her Spiritual Iudgement refused the writings which are vnworthie Yea he further assureth vs with (13) Tom 6. cōt ep fund cap. 5. Tert. lib. 1 de Praescrip cap. 6. S. Augustin and Tertullian that (14) Scrip. and the church p. 72 74. 75. And see Melancthon in epist ad Rom cap. 14. pa 358 359. we could not beleeue the Ghospel were it not that the Church taught vs and witnessed that this doctrine was deliuered by the Apostles So that the authoritie of Gods true Church is so great as that by her warrāt we are only assured of the Written Word of God itself and for such by her wisedome giuen by the Holie-Ghost discerned to vs from al forged Apocryphal and counterfait writings A power and authoritie then which none stronger seing the certain knowledge of the true word of God is the chiefest foundation of our Christian Faith Now if in this question so important we may securely follow and beleeue the Sentence and Determination of the Church how much more then in other doubts of smaller respect Adde further hereunto in surest confirmation of the Churches authoritie that it is likewise granted and taught by the learnedst Protestants that the true visible Church can not wholy erre in matters of Faith Insomuch as they expresly confesse of this verie point that (15) Bertr de Loque in his discourse of the church p. 198. Phil. Act. mon. p. 1401. Bilney ibid. p. 464. Ridley 16. pag. 1361. 1286. Baynhā ib. p 493. Fox ib. pag. 999. Bancroft in his sermon preached 8. Febr. 1588. pag. 42. 43. The Diuines of Geneua in their Propositions and Principles disputed c. p. 142. Zanchius de Relig pa. 157. Rhegius in Discus The. p. 213. Hunnius in Act. Colloq Ratisb fol. 205. KecKermannus in System Theol. pag. 387. Povvel of things indifferent p. 7 The controuersie c. is not of the Catholick or vniuersall Church for we al agree say they herein that she cannot orre touching Faith c. wherefore this question is touching only a particular church Now if the true Church can not erre in matters of Faith Religion then is her Authoritie sacred her Decrees infallible her Children secured and al difficulties arising easily composed Yea from hence also may we iustly collect amongst al
no period or difference of time wherin the Church of Christ hath more gloriously shined either for puritie of Faith or Sanctitie of life then during the time of her primitiue being which according to the accompt (1) Ievvel in his Sermon at Paules Crosse And in his Reply p. 1. Humfrey in vita Iuelli p. 123. 124. VvitaKer Resp ad Ranones Campiani p. 90. of the learnedst ProtestaÌ„ts extended itself to the ful tearme of the first six hundred years after Christ our Sauiour his glorious Ascension In greatest confidence wherof D. Iewel whom M. Mason (2) Consecration of English Bish. p. 267 styleth and esteemeth a Iewel made his so aduenturous a Challenge when he publickly exclaimed at Pauls Crosse O Gregorie O Austin O Hierom O Chrysostom O Leo O Denis O Anaclet O Calixt O Paul O Christ If we be deceaued you haue deceaued vs this you taught vs c. And As I sayd before so I say now againe I am content to yeald and subscribe if anie of our learned Aduersaries or if al the learned men that be aliue be able to bring anie one sufficient Sentence out of anie old Catholick Doctour or Father or out of anie old General Councel c. for the space of 600. yeares after Christ which maketh agaynst anie one of 27. Articles by him there repeated and defended And this he protested to preach not as carryed away with the heate of Zeale but as moued with the simple truth This proffer of D. Iewel was so pleasing to D. Whitaker that he most valiantly renewed it in behalf of al Protestants (3) Resp ad Rat. CaÌ„p p. 90. And see p. 9. saying to our glorious Martyr Campian Attend Campian the speach of Iewel was most true and constant when prouoking you to the Antiquitie of the first six hundred years he offered that if you could shew but anie one cleare and playne Saying out of anie one Father or Councel he would grant you the victorie It is the offer of vs al The same do we al promise and we wil performe it With like courage steppeth forth (4) Of the Church l. 5. in his Appendix therto Part. 1. p. 33. D. Field We say sayth he with Bishop Iewel in his worthie Challenge that al the learned Papists in the world can not proue that either Gregorie or Austin held anie of these twentie seauen Articles of Popish Religion mentioned by him Neither wil D. Morton yeald a foot herein stoutly auouching that (5) Prot. Appeal p. 354. It hath been the common and constant profession of al Protestants to stand vnto the Iudgement of Antiquitie for the continuance of the first foure hundred years and more in al things Yea he further publickly professeth that (6) Protest Appeale p. 573. 574. Protestants in oppugning Doctrines which they cal new and not Catholick c. are so far from suffring the limitation of the first 440. years that they giue the Romanists the scope of the first fiue hundred or six hundred years as our Aduersaries themselues do acknowledge For D. Stapleton writing of the opinion of Luther Caluin and Melancthon sayth that they did yeald vnto the tryal of truth by the testimonie of Antiquitie for the space of the first Fiue or Six hundred yeares M. Campian a Iesuit reporting the Challenge of Bishop Iewel for the mayntenance of these Articles which he then propounded for Catholik sayth that he appealed vnto the Iudgement of Antiquitie for the first six hundred years And againe (7) Ibid. p. 512 Protestants in the disquisition of truth do not absolutely bound the name of Antiquitie within the compasse of the first Centurie of years but are content to allow it a longer extent and therfore in al Doctrines which are truly Catholick c. they refuse not to be tryed by the testimonies of the ancient Fathers in the first fiue hundred years after Christ Yea (8) Ib. p. 680. we repose our securitie in those two impregnable fortresses of the Catholick Faith one is the ancient Tradition of the Primitiue Church as the Protestants are confessed to professe c. So willingly do the learned Protestants prouoke and appeale to the Primitiue Church of Christ for the certayne tryal of truth in matters of Faith and Religion Al which they pretend to do because as Luther sayth (9) Tom. 2. Germ. f. 243. Epist ad Marchionem Branâ—eburg It is dangerous and horrible to heare or beleeue anie thing which is contrarie to the vnanimous testimonie of Faith and to the doctrine of the holie and Catholick Church which she from the beginning agreably kept for aboue One thousand fiue hundred years And as Chemnitius truly obserueth (10) Exam. par 1. f. 74. No man doubteth but the Primitiue Church receaued from the Apostles and Apostolical men not only the Text of Scripture but also the right and natiue sense therof wherupon sayth he (11) Ibid. p. 64. we are greatly confirmed in the true and sound sense of Scripture by testimonie of the ancient Church Which according also to other Protestants (12) Harmonie of Confess p. 400. Is the true and best Mistresse of Posteritie and going before lâ—adeth vs the way Yea sayth D. Beard (13) Retractiue from Romish ReligioÌ„ p. 372 without al question al truth was taught by the Apostles to the Primitiue Church and no part therof was left vnreuealed c. Besides it is as certayn that that Church which next succeeded the Apostles was the most pure and absolute Church whether for doctrine or manners matter or forme that euer was in the world and therefore to degenerate from that must needs be to degenerate from the puritie and sanctitie of Religion And againe it can not be denyed that c. though the Primitiue Age of the Church after the Apostles was most pestered with Hereticks yet euermore the truth preuayled both in regard of birthright and predominance D. Morton Declareth that (14) Protestant Appeale p. 513. In the maine question of discerning the true bookes of holie Writ the Protestants do appeale c. vnto the IudgemeÌ„t of the Primitiue Church attributing vnto it the right and Authoritie of assigning and determining what is the perfect Canon of Scriptures With whom agreeth Chemnitius saying (15) Exam. part 1. p. 69. Andradius affirmeth that the testimonie of the Church is either alwayes to be reiected or alwayes to be receaued I answer c. where the Fathers set downe this Tradition of the books of Scripture they proue it by testimonies of the Primitiue Church if with the same course of certayntie they shal do the like of other Traditions wherof sometimes they make mention it is to be respected and they are to be receaued by the same law D. Sarauia confirmeth the authoritie of the Primitiue Church from her special assistance by the Holie-Ghost saying The (16) De diuersis Ministrorum Gradibus p. 8. Holie-Ghost who gouerneth the Church is the best interpreter
of Scriptures from him therfore is the true interpretation to be sought and seing he can not be contrarie to himself who ruled the Primitiue Church and gouerned it by Bishops it is not agreable to truth now to cast them off D. Iewel acknowledgeth in general that (17) Def. of the Apologie p. 35. The Primitiue Church which was vnder the Apostles and Martyrs hath euermore been accounted the purest of al others without exception D. White testifieth that (18) way to the Church Ep. Dedic nu 8 The Primitiue Church and al the Doctours therof would neuer yeald I wil not say in an opinion but not so much as in a forme of speach or in the change of a letter sounding against the Orthodoxal Faith wherof he further giueth sundrie pertinent examples concluding that So religious were they that had Religion that they would not exchange a letter or a Syllable of the Faith wherwith our Sauiour had put them in trust And in another place he auoucheth that (19) Ibid. p. 385. In the first six hundred yeares there was no substantial or fundamental innouation receiued into the Church So plentifully are the deseruedst prayses of the Primitiue Church during the first six hundred yeares freely giuen and set forth by our greatest Protestants thus much acknowledging and admiring the puritie of her Doctrine and appealing to her Tribunal for the Determination of their doubts And I can not but here admire the potent force violence of truth which racketh from her deadliest Enemies the true Confession thereof For what Church during those primitiue and purest times was euen in the iudgement of Protestants so faithful so chast so constant in soundnes of Faith and sinceritie of manners as the Catholick Roman Church What Bishops euer so renowned either for feeding of their flocks or for patient suffring of so manie and so cruel torments yea and death it self as the Popes and Bishops of Rome (20) Ep. Ded. of F. Persons in his Ansvv to him Doth not Sir Ed. Cooke himself say We do not deny but that Rome was the Mother Church and had thirtie two Virginal Martyrs of her Popes arow What Doctours what Fathers what Pastours more duly honoured by al Posteritie then such as were strictly linked in Faith and Communion with the then Roman Church D. Whitaker being to answer D. Sanders his truest assertion that the Roman Church was not changed during the first six hundred yeares after Christ through clearest euidence of truth acknowledgeth the same saying (21) l. De Antichrist p. 35. c. During al that time the Church was pure and flourishing and inuiolably taught and defended the Faith deliuered from the Apostles D. Iewel confesseth that (22) Reply to Harding p. 246. Aswel S. Austin as also other godlie Fathers rightly yealded Reuerence to the Sea of Rome c. for the puritie of Religion which was there preserued along time without spot And that The Godlie Fathers of those gray-headed times sought to the Church of Rome which then for puritie in Religion and constancie in the same was most famous aboue al others Sundrie other such like testimonies duely dignifying the ancient Roman Church I willingly pretermit hauing treated elsewhere of the same subiect more at large But who likewise more peremptorily pretend the truest harmonie between their Doctrine and the Doctrine of the ancient Fathers as also the iust defence and patronage of their due credit and esteeme then our Moderne Protestants For to omit D. Iewels former complaint that if Protestants be deceaued it was Gregorie Austin Hierom Chrysostom c. that deceaued them not anie one Sentence in anie one Father or Councel of the first six hundred yeares making in his opinion against Protestancie D. Sutcliffe confidently auoucheth that (23) Examination of Kellisons Suruey p. 17. The Fathers in al poynts of Faith are for vs sayth he and not for the Pope D. Willet maketh his solemne Protestation (24) Antilog p. 263. I take God to witnes before whom I must render accompt c. that the same Faith and Religion which I defend is taught and confirmed in the more Substantial Points by those Histories Councels and Fathers that liued within fiue or six hundred yeares after Christ. And againe (25) Ib. p. 264. It is most notoriously euident that for the grossest poynts of Poperie as Transubstantiation Sacrifice of the Masse Worshipping of Images Iustification by workes the Supremacie of the Pope Prohibition of Mariage and such other they to wit the Papists haue no shew at al of anie euidence from the Fathers within fiue hundred yeares after Christ. Pierre de Moulin a French Protestāt is so vndertaking herein that (26) Defenc. against Coefteau p. 139. In this Challenge sayth he I wil lay downe my Ministers cloake readie to be frocked in a Monks Cowle if I shal find a man that wil satisfy me in this point Melancthon sayth (27) Ep. ad Cratonem for the setling of our minds I think the consent of Antiquitie to be of great force c. The best Maisters and guides to vs may be Ireneus Tertullian Augustin who left to Posteritie manie things of this kind And (28) Epist. ad Frider. Miconium As I willingly aduise with such writers liuing as haue some vse of Spiritual things So I think these Ancients whose writings are approued are likewise to be consulted For I think the Church generally beleeued that which they haue writen And it is not secure to depart from the common opinion of the old Church Yea others tearme it in some of their Brethren Paradoxical to disclayme and dissent from the ancient Fathers wherof one sayth (29) The Authour of a Brief Answ to certaine obiect ag the Descension of christ into Hel. p 1. where you say we must build our Faith on the Word of Faith tying vs to Scripture only you giue iust occasion to think that you neither haue the ancient Fathers of Christs Church nor their Sonnes succeding them agreeing with you in this point which implyeth a defence of some strange Paradox D. Bancroft doubteth not to preferre the ancient Fathers before the learnedst Protestants (30) Suruey p. 378. p. 64. For M. Caluin and M. Beza I do think of them sayth he as their writings deserue but yet I think better of the ancient Fathers I must confesse it Yea he purposely vndertaketh their iust defence against the Puritans for where S. Austin sayd to Iulian the Pelagian (31) Contra Iulian. l. 2. c. 10 Truly I haue what to do I haue whither to fly for I may prouoke from these Pelagian darknes to these so cleare Catholick Lights of the Fathers which I now do But tel me what wilt thou do whither wilt thou fly I from the Pelagians to these thou from these to whom c. But thou darest cal them blind And hath time so confounded lowest things with highest Are darknes called light and light darknes
insufficiencie of this desperate answer I wil make proofe of two seueral truthes First that the sayd answer hath euer been and is stil the ordinarie answer of al Hereticks thereby intending to escape not only the foulest stayne of Nouellisme or Innouation but withal to preuent al strongest arguments drawne from general Councels though neuer so lawful from ancient Doctours though neuer so learned and from Ecclesiastical Histories though neuer so true The second truth is that their so appealing to the Sacred Scriptures is the thrusting their owne throates againsts the sharpest poynts of their Enemies swords For by them I wil euidently proue the Roman Church and Religion to be the only true Church and Religion of Christ and his Apostles As also the Congregation of Protestants and their profession to be most aduerse and disagreing with the Scriptures themselues and so in itself to be nouel heretical and damnable And to omit the ordinarie custome of elder Hereticks in appealing from al other proofes to only Scripture obserued and reproued in them by the ancientest and learnedst (4) lib. De Prescript c. 15. Hieron ep ad Paulin tom 3 cont Lucifer Augu. cont Faust Manic l. 32 c. 19 l. 1. de Trinit c. 3. ep 222. Hilar. l ad Const Vincent Lyrin l. aduers haeres c. 35. Ambr. in c. vlt. ad Tit. Orig. hom 7. in Ezech. Doctours and Fathers of the Primitiue Church namely Tertulian Hierome Augustin Hilarie Vincentius Lyrinensis and others And only to obserue how the refinedst Sectaries of these our dayes with the same pretence of Scripture do dayly reuolt and rebel from their other Brethren And first concerning the Puritans agaynst the Protestants D. white guift alleaging and vrging in behalf of Metropolitanes the authoritie of the Nicene Councel (5) In his 2. Reply part 1. p. 484. M. Cartwright replyeth Touching the perfect vnitie of Substance of our Sauiour Christ with God the Father it giuing Sentence vpon the infallible Word of God is worthily to be reuerenced But if the Doctours wil haue their soundnes in that poynt to authorize the rest c. it is that which we can by no meanes assent vnto And that it may appeare how iustly we cal this Canon of the Councel touching Metropolitanes vnto the touchstone of the word of God Let it be considered c. yea the same 6) In Whiteg Def. p. 111. M. Cartwright alloweth the iudgment of his learnedst father Caluin but with this restraynt So far sayth he as we can esteeme that that which M. Caluin sayth doth agree with the Canonical Scriptures This practise is so ordinarie with the Puritans that D. Bancroft in his Suruey of pretended Discipline spendeth wholy his 27. Chapter in obseruing and reprouing the same In like sort the (7) In their Apologie p. 103. 4. 98. 99. 100. And see M. Aynsworth in his Counterpoyson p. 15. 154. Brownists of Amsterdam answering to D. Bilsons allegations from the Fathers resolutely affirme and say Let M. Bilson with these Doctours know that vnles they can approue by the word of God their Prelacie c. Al the colour they bring out of former times and writers is of no moment in this case And as for the Anabaptistes (8) Eccl. Pol. pref p. 38. M. Hooker reporteth of them that the Book of God they for the most part so admired that other disputation against their opinions then only by allegation of Scripture they would not heare for which verie poynt and errour they are reproued by (9) Tract Theol p. 171 in Psycophannichiae p. 451. And in his Instructiō aduersus Anabap p. 478. M. Caluin in these words Because sillie Christians who haue some zeale towards God can be seduced by no shew or appearance more faire then when the word of God is pretended and alleaged the Anabaptists against whom we now write haue it alwayes in their mouths and they alwayes solemnly recite it c. And agayne The Deuil himself armed himself with the word of God and girded himself with that sword to inuade and assault Christ And we find true by experience that he doth daily vse these guiles or artes by organs or instruments to depraue the truth and so to lead miserable Soules to destruction So ordinarie it is with the Anabaptists and the Diuel himself in defence of their errours euer to appeale to the only written word The same answer is likewise giuen by the Protestant Arians of these times insomuch as (10) Lib de Christi Naturae p. 222. Socinus in defence of his errour agaynst the Diuinitie of Christ answereth his Protestant Aduersarie Volanus in these wordes We propound to vs in this question none for Maister or Interpreter but only the Holie-Ghost c. we do not thinke that we are to stand to the iudgement of anie men though neuer so learned of anie Councels though in shew neuer so holie and lawfully assembled of anie visible Church though neuer so perfect and vniuersal Simlerus (11) De aeterno De◠filio l. 1. c. 2. writeth of the Arians They prouoke vs to Scriptures and because they know al Antiquitie to be against them they reiect al without exception And (12) In ep Theol. ep 15. p. 119. 120. Beza sayth to the Arian Statorius who was sometime Bezas Scholler and deare to him Oughtest thou not to remember from whom to whom thou hast reuolted But thou saist I do not depend of men but of the word of God Very wel But doth the word of God teach thee c. that he can be a Sauiour c who is not God So that our moderne Puritans Brownists Anabaptists and Arians do al of them in defence of their seueral errours being vrged by other Protestants with the authoritie of the Church Fathers and Councels euer appeale vnto the only written word But who would not thinke but that our ordinarie Protestants thus reprouing in their reuolting Brethren their contempt of the Church Fathers and Councels and their running to only Scripture would not be found faultie herein themselues And yet when their learnedst Bishops and Doctours are vrged vpon seueral occasions by our Catholick writers with the authoritie of Church Fathers and Councels none more readie then themselues to refuse disgrace and reiect the same and that euer with pretence and appeal to only Scripture A truth so euident that their forsayd rebellious Brethren do playnly acknowledge that this their course of appealing to only Scripture was taught and defended by themselues for thus say the (13) Simlerus De filio Dei in Bullingers pref there fol. 4. And in Simlerus his other Priface fol. 1. Antitrinitarians to the Tigurine Protestans You haue taught vs that nothing is to be receaued besides the Scriptures therfore we demand where it is written in the Scriptures c. Except you shew this according to your Rule we reiect and condemne those things therfore we haue learned of you to contemne the Fathers And
Socinus (14) Lib. de Christi Nat. p. 21. the Arian answering his Protestant Aduersarie Volanus demandeth To what purpose should I answer that which thou borrowest from the Papists c. especially where thou opposest to vs the perpetual Consent of the Church Very excellently doubtles in this behalf hath Hosius the Papist discoursed against you wounding you with your owne sword And therfore you are no lesse deceaued in vrging against vs the Churches perpetual Consent then are the Papists in their vrging therof both against you vs. And againe (15) Ibid. p. 222. Euen Volanus himself disputing against the Iesuits is enforced to reiect the Examples Sayings and Deeds of Athanasius Hierom Austin Theodoret and other Fathers whose authoritie he now opposeth against vs as sacred Thus much haue I thought good to remember that Volanus may receiue answer from himself when he so often inforceth against vs the authoritie of learned men and consent of the Church In like sort sayd (16) In Bancrofts Suruey p. 219. Beza before If anie shal oppose against my Exposition the authoritie of certaine of the ancient Fathers I do appeale to the word of God With whom agreed (17) Cont. Duraum l. 7. p. 478. D. Whitaker teaching that It is sufficient for Protestants by comparing the Popish Doctrine and Scriptures togeather to know their difference we leaue it free for Historiographers to write what they list And yet the same (18) Ibid. p. 472. D. Whitaker in the self same book affordeth this credit authoritie to Histories that sayth he Whatsoeuer the old Prophets haue foretold of the propagation largenes and glorie of the Church that to be performed Historie most cleerly testifieth So that there is no Controuersie but that Ecclesiastical Historie doth giue testimonie to the predictions of the Prophets Yea this foule flight from Histories Fathers and Councels thus practised by al sortes of Protestants is an Argument most conuincing that the said Histories Fathers and Councels make directly against them insomuch as one (19) The Author of A brief answer to certaine obiections against the Descension of Christ into Hel. p. 1. of our English Protestant Writers being ashamed of this course reproueth herein his other Protestant Brother saying Where you say we must build our Faith on the Word of Faith tying vs to Scripture only you giue iust occasion to think that you neither haue the ancient Fathers of Christs Church nor their Sonnes succeeding them agreing with you in this point which implyeth a defence of some strange Paradox By al which we may see this miserable shift of al kind of Hereticks in refusing al proofes but only Scripture to be no lesse in itself then a strongest argument that al Hereticks are deuoyd of al other proofes THAT EVEN THE SACRED SCRIPTVRES themselues do most plentifully testify our Romane Church to be the Church of Christ And the Congregation or Church of Protestants to be no true Church but a Sect Heretical and most contrarie to the said Scriptures And that first by the Churches necessarie continuance and vniuersalitie CHAPTER II. AS it hath been euer most frequent so to me stil it is most strange why al Hereticks both ancient and moderne for their last Refuge do euer betake themselues to the sacred Scriptures Seing as nothing is of greater power and authoritie in itself to iudge condemne so nothing more strongly confuteth Heresies then the forsayd Scriptures if either they be taken in their literal sense or according to the exposition of the Primitiue Church The Sacred Scriptures do plainly teach that the true Church of Christ is euer to continue euen from Christs time vntil the end of the world and that not in one particular Nation or Countrey but that most vniuersally with plentiful increase In which respect the Church of Christ is foretold to be 1] Dan. 21.44 A Kingdome that shal neuer be destroyed but shal stand for euer 2) Esay 60.15 As an eternal glorie and ioy from generation to generation 3) Act. 5.52 That so being of God it shal not to be dissolued Yea further it is sayd of the Church that 4) Es 6.20 A litle one shal become as a thousand and a smal one as a strong Nation that 5) Es 2.2 Al Nations shal flow to it which place is expounded by Protestants 6) In the Marginal Notes of the English Bib. of An. 1370 in Es 2 2. of the Church of Christ to be enlarged 7) Ps 2.8 This is vnderstood of Christes Church by the Marg. Notes of the Engl. Bib. of 3576. And the Prophet Dauid foretelleth that It shal haue the end of the earth for it possession 8) Ps 72 8. from Sea to Sea And Christ himself sayth of his Church 9) Math. 13 51. Mat 4 3◠And see the Marg. notes of Dan. 2.45 The Kingdome of Heauen is like to a Mustard-seed the least of al seedes but when it is growne it is the greatest amongst hearbes and is made a tree so as the fowles of the aire may come and dwel vnder the shadow therof And concerning 10) In the Engl. Bib. the Contents of the 60. ch of Esay the Gentils coming to the Church in abundance it is sayd 11) Es 60.5 Thou shalt see and shine thy hart shal be astonyed and enlarged because the multitude of the Sea shal be conuerted to thee 12) Es 60.9 The Iles shal waite for thee 13) Esa 60.11 And see Psal 102.15.22 Esay 62.2 Their Kings shal minister to thee and thy Gates shal be continually open neither day nor night shal they be shut that men may bring to thee the riches of the Gentils And in the person of the Church it is sayd 14) Esay 49 20. The place is streight for me giue roome that I may inhabit And againe to the Church 15) Esa 54.2.3 And see there the Contents of the Engl. Bib. Enlarge the place of thy Tents spread out the Curtaines of thy habitation for thou shalt encrease on the right hand and on the left thy seed shal possesse the Gentils and inhabit the desolate Citties From these and sundrie other such places Protestants themselues collect inferre most truly that the Church of Christ is to cōtinue for euer 16) Against Raynolds in his Answ to the Pref. p. 33. D. Whitaker sayth We beleeue to the comfort of our soules that Christs Church hath continued neuer shal faile so long as the world endureth And We account it a prophane Heresie to teach that Christs Catholick Church hath perished from the earth at anie time for this assertion shaketh the foundation of al faith The Diuines of Wittemberg do firmely beleeue the Church to haue continued vpon earth without interruption and with perpetual Succession from the Ascension of Christ to these times 18) Ibid. p. 1065. as also that The true Church is to continue vpon earth
ancient Papists In like for argueth Mr. Carth wright saying That (9) Reply part 1. p. 18. the argument of the authoritie of men which haue interpreted the Scriptures is the best reason in Controuersies of Diuinitie was neuer heard of but by Papists whose strongest towers are in the testimonies of the Doctours c. There is nothing more Papistical then this Assertion So that if Protestants commit themselues to the trial by Fathers they yeeld themselues prisoners to the strongest Towers and Castles of the Papists their Enemies wherin what can they expect but ruine and confusion D. Whitaker affirmeth (10) Cont. Dur. li. 6. p. 423. The Popish Religion to be a patched couerlet of the Fathers errours sowed togeather Wel then if our Religion was beleeued by the Fathers from them deliuered to vs I am perswaded that D. Whitaker admitting this would place litle hope in appealing to Fathers for Confutation of Popish Religion And though he falsely tearmeth our Religion the Fathers errours yet therby he plainly granteth the Fathers to haue beleeued and taught the same Religion which we now professe and Protestants impugne Now the ancient Fathers being thus acknowledged for Papists I do not wonder that Protestants contemne their authoritie and seeke their disgrace with al contumelies possible Why may not D. Luther affirme (11) To. 2. Wittemb l. de Seruo Arb. p. 434. And the same booke printed in 8. p. 72. 73. 276. 337. The Fathers of so many Ages to haue beene plainly blind and most ignorant in the Scriptures to haue erred al their life time and that vnles they were amended before their deaths wherof neuer Protestant had yet the least intelligence they were neyther Saints nor pertayning to the Church but no doubt according to Luther damned Papists Why might not he further auouch That (12) In Colloq mensalibus c. de Patrib Ecclesiae in the writings of Hierome there is not a word of true faith in Christ and sound Religion Tertullian is very superfluous I haue houlden Origen long since accursed Of Chrysostome I make no account Basil is of no worth he is wholy a Monk I weigh him not a haire Cyprian is a weake Diuine c. See how our old Papists are betrampled by a yong Protestant And yet no lesse resolute against them is (13) In Ionam Pomerane Our Fathers whether Saints or no I care not ô zeale and reuerence Protestantical they were blinded with the Spirit of Montanus by humane traditions and the doctrines of Diuels c. they teach not purely of Iustification c. neither are they careful to teach IESVS CHRIST according to his Ghospel Stil are the Fathers reiected as men blinded with Papistical opinions The Centurists endeauouring to discredit the whole multitude of Doctours and Fathers in euerie Age begin euen with the first Age next after the Apostles saying 14) Cent. 2 c. 4. p. 55. Albeit this Age was neerest to the Apostles yet the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles began to be not a litle darkned therin and many monstrous and incommodious opinions to Protestants are euerie where found to be spread by the Doctours therof Perhaps some cause therof may be for that the guift of the Holie Ghost in these Doctours did begin to decay for the ingratitude of the world towards the Protestant Truth Now as for the Doctours of al Ages succeeding they make a Principle that The 15) Cent 3. c. 4. p. 17. further we go of from the Apostles Age the more stubble shal we find to haue been added to the puritie of Christian doctrine So that al Doctours and Fathers since the very first Age of the Apostles are discarded by the Centurists for stubble and Papistical But Luther wil not rest vntil he hath brought these stubble-Doctours to Hel for teaching Papistrie (16) In Deut. c. 13. p. 102. Sathan sayth he hath hitherto deluded vs by signes and lying wonders c. whilst contrarie to the Ghospel we haue admired Pilgrimages Apparitions of Spirits and cures at certaine Sepuchers in so much that Saints also erred herin as Augustin Bernard Hierome and many others c. certainly damned as Wicclif sayd vnles they repented So that if Papists be damned for beleeuing the Catholick faith they haue for their Companions Hierome Augustin Bernard and many others most renowned Doctours of Christs Church and Saints From this true conceipt of the ancient Fathers being Roman Catholicks Protestants further disclayme from their Interpretations and expositions of Scripture refusing to stand to their iudgments for the true vnderstanding therof Thus then they write The Sacred Scripture saith Polanus (17) Symphonia c. 1. Thes 6. p. 56. is not to be interpreted by Fathers neither is the Interpretation of Scripture to be iudged by Fathers the Fathers are not the rule of expounding the sacred Scripture c. what is here sayd of euerie Father alone is to be vnderstood of al the Fathers ioyned togeather as also of Councels That is though al Fathers and Councels conspire togeather in their Expositions of Scripture agreably to the Doctrine and beleef of the Catholick Roman Church yet Protestants wil not subscribe or admit the same but wil valiantly maintayne al such expositions though most contrarie therto as are last coyned at Geneua or Wittemberg or newliest extracted by some Brother more illuminated In like and most prouident manner argue our English Puritans against Doctour Downham obiecting against them That none of the Fathers did euer vnderstand the Text then in question as Puritans do (18) The Puritans in their answ to D. Downham Doth not Mr. Doctour know say they that to argue negatiuely concerning the sense of Scriptures from the authoritie of Fathers is the practise of Papists only and taxed by learned writers against them c. If that manner of disputing be good we shal often loose more truth in taking their Interpretations c. Carthwright tearmeth the seeking into the holy Fathers writings a 19) In Bancrofts suruey of Pretend Discipl p. 331. 337 and see chap. 4. p. 64. Raking of ditches and the bringing in of their authorities the mouing and summoning of Hel. Parker assureth vs that (20) Pref. to his Answer Limbomastix and see Iacob's Treatise p. 1. 3 54. 81. 68. Bilson's sermons Ps 323. Answ to Broughâ—on's Letter p. 17. If you alleadge the ancient Fathers against them they wil tel you roundly that their opinions are nothing els but the corrupt fancies of vaine Imaginations of men toyish fables fond absurd without sense and reason And some stick not to cal the Fathers of the Latin Church the plague of Diuinitie Hence it is that the French Protestants haue enacted it for a (21) Disciplina Magistrorum Galliae art 4. law that no place be giuen to the writings of the old Doctours for the iudgement ad determination of Doctrine So cleerly is Protestancie at an end if the Fathers Interpretation of Scriptures may stand for
that Pelagius Celestius Iulianus al of them Hereticks do see and Hilarie Gregorie Ambrose c. are blind This so worthie a Saying of S. Austin being alleaged against the Puritans by D. Bancroft he therupon inferreth (32) Suruey p. 352. 353. 351. Surely I do not perceiue why I may not without offence apply the same wordes to those men in those dayes c. Were there neuer learned men before you were taught the Principles of the Geneua Discipline c. Do you know what was in the Apostles times better then they who succeded the Apostles c. Is the light that shewed it self so manie wayes in the Ancient Fathers become such darknes that Carthwright Trauerse Fenner to whom I might as truly adde Luther Zuinglius Caluin Beza c. and such like should be thought so clearlie-sighted And shal Ireneus Tertulian Cyprian Ambrose Hierom Chrysostom Austin Gregorie Hilarie and al the rest of those whorthie men be reckned blind So cleerly doth D. Bancroft the Protestant late Primate of England acknowledge the shining light and glorie of the ancient Fathers and defend their authoritie from the imputations of Nouelists D. Morton ioyfully acknowledgeth (33) Prot. Appeal p. 33. That the ancient Fathers c. did obtayne in the Church of Christ honourable Titles as Augustin the great Mall or hammer against Hereticks Basil the light of the world Chrysostome The Doctour of the whole world Athanasius the Pillar as it were of the Church Nazianzene by a phrase of excellencie the Diuine Origen the Maister of the churches Cyprian the President of the whole world And lastly Ambrose A man called by God vnto an Apostolical Presidencie Now as for the Confidence which Catholicks place in the ancient Fathers D. Morton testifyeth for vs that (34) Ib. p 348 Neuer did the ancient Iewes more boast of their original and descent from father Abraham then do the Romanists glory in their pretended consent of ancient Fathers And though it be true that the ancient Fathers were men yet (35) Eccl. Pol. p. 115. The strength of mans Authoritie in M. Hookers iudgement is affirmatiuely such that the weightiest affaires in the world depend therupon Yea (36) Ib. p. 116. whatsoeuer we beleeue concerning saluation by Christ although the Scripture be therin the ground of our beleef yet is mans Authoritie sayth he the key that openeth the doore c. The Scripture could not teach vs these things vnles we beleeued men And wheras the sacred Scriptures do foretel sundrie things to be performed by the Church of Christ in succeeding Ages the answerable accomplishment therof in particular being matter of fact can be to vs at this day no otherwise made knowne then vpon the Credit of humane Testimonie commended to vs by Ecclesiastical Histories In which respect D. Whitaker truly teacheth that (37) Cont. Duraeum l. 7. p. 472. Historie plainly testifyeth al that to be accomplished which the ancient Prophets haue foretold concerning the Propagation amplitude and glorie of the Church So that there is no doubt sayth he but that Ecclesiastical Historie doth strengthen the Predictions of the Prophets Now from the Premisses we may briefly remember that not only al Catholicks but euen the Primest ProtestaÌ„ts that euer were do thus willingly appeale for the decision of Controuersies in Faith and Religion to the Censure and Determination of the Church of Christ which for the first six hundred yeares was confessedly sincere holie and religious Acknowledging withal the integritie and puritie of the Roman Church during the sayd time and professing to beleeue and teach no other Faith and religion then that which was taught and beleeued by the ancient Fathers of the same Church This then supposed I wil now descend in particular to the chiefest articles of Faith disputed at this day between Catholicks and Protestants And wil only examine whether the Roman or Protestant Church is now more agreable with the confessed Faith and Religion of the Fathers of the Primitiue Church in the foresayd poynts And for the cleerest preuenting of the manifold shiftes and euasions vsed by ProtestaÌ„ts when they are vrged in this kind I wil only produce such proofe from the Primitiue Church and Fathers as is recorded and confessed by Protestants and by them disliked and reiected as agreeing with our Roman Faith and condemning Protestancie THAT THE FATHERS AND DOCTOVRS OF the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught that S. Peter was ordayned by Christ the Head of the Apostles and of the whole Church and that the Church was founded vpon S. Peter it is Confessed by Protestants themselues CHAPTER III. BEcause the deciding of this present Controuersie of the Churches Primacie is indeed the speediest and most certaine meanes for the final dissoluing of al doubts in Religion either already begun or hereafter to arise I wil therfore more particularly and at large set downe the manifest and confessed Doctrine and practice of the Primitiue Church concerning the same And first as al gouernment whether Politick or Ecclesiastical the more it reseÌ„bleth the gouernment of this world by the Creatour therof ONE GOD or the gouernment of the Church during our Sauiours aboad vpon earth by ONE CHRIST the more it is to be approued coÌ„mended and followed so nothing is holden more Soueraigne or more needful for the procuring or preseruing of vnitie and concord in anie Bodie or Communitie then the vnitie of one Head or gouernment Monarchical Herevpon the (1) Bel. de Rom. Pont l. 1. c. 10. l. 2. c 12. Catholick Church doth beleeue and teach That S. Peter was ordayned by Christ the Supreme Ecclesiastical Head not only ouer the rest of the Apostles but euen ouer the whole Church And that the Bishop of Rome succeedeth him in the same Power and Authoritie The direct (2) Luther l de Potestate Papae in assertione Art 25. Calu. l. 4 Instit c 6. Morton in his Appeale l. 2. c. 5. Sect. 11. Negatiue wherof is not only taught by the Protestant-Church but withal it further beleeueth maintayneth that the Bâ—shop of Rome in steed of being the true Successour of S. Peter and the Vicar of Christ is the true Antichrist or Man of Sinne wherof so much is foretold in the sacred Scriptures To discouer now the Faith and practise of the Primitiue Church and to begin with the confessed Primacie of S. Peter And first that for the preseruing of vnitie and preuenting of Schismes he was appoynted by Christ the Supreme Head of that slender Bodie or litle Church of the twelue Apostles Wheras S. Hierom l. 1. cont Iouinianum teacheth that Amongst the Twelue one is chosen that a Head appoynted the occasion of Schisme should be taken away From hence (3) In his Examination c. against the Plea of the Innocent p. 106. 107. D. Couel hauing spoken of the necessitie of One aboue the rest to suppresse the seed of dissention thus argueth most strongly If this were the Principal
Leo Foelix Gelasius the Fathers of the Councel of Chalcedon of Africk and the 6. of Carthage of Sardis Sixtus Innocentius Siricius Sozimus Damasus Iulius Stephen Denis Cyprian Victor Anicetus Cornelius Ireneus Papias Peter and the other Apostles The Protestants producing and reprouing the foresayd Fathers are the Centurie-writers Danaeus Caluin Bucer Philippus Nicolai Peter Martyr Carion Bullinger Melancthon Osiander Friccius Beza Crispinus Tilenus Frigiuilleus Gauuius Bibliander Amandus Polanus Hamelmannus Illyricus Lubbertus Sarauia Napper Mornay Whitguift Carthwright Whitaker Fulk Bilson Trige Rainolds Brightman Bale Symonides Bunnie Spark Midleton Fox Morton and Field euerie one wherof do cite and reproue some Father or Councel before mentioned concerning some branch of the Bishop of Romes Primacie It is confessed by Protestants that the Primitiue Church of Christ beleeued the Bookes of Tobie Iudith Esther Sapientia Ecclesiasticus and two first of Machabees to be truly Canonical Scriptures CHAPTER V. AS it is vndoubted by al that the true Scriptures Prophetical and Apostolical are most sacred diuine and of infallible authoritie so it remayneth stil in Controuersie which Bookes be the sayd Prophetical Apostolical and Canonical Scriptures for as the (1) Concil Carthag 3. Can. 47. Trid. sess 4. Catholick Church hath defyned the Bookes of Esther Iudith Tobie two of the Machabees Wisdome and Ecclesiasticus to be sacred Canonical and of infallible authoritie so are al the sayd Bookes reiected by Protestants (2) Luth. Zuingl Praef. Bibl. a se CoÌ„uers Calu. Inst l. 1. c. 12. §. 8. l. 2. c. 5. §. 18. l. 3. c. 5. §. 8. as merely apocryphal and only human Now to decide this so waightie a Controuersie by the Primitiue Church Wheras in the Third Carthage Councel wherat S. Austin and sundrie other Fathers and Bishops were present and subscribed it is expresly defined that (3) Can. 47 Nothing be read in the Church vnder the name of diuine Scriptures besides Canonical Scriptures And the Canonical Scriptures are Genesis Exodus c. fiue bookes of Salomon c. Tobie Iudith Hester two bookes of Esdras two bookes of Machabees c. Wheras also the same Canon of Scriptures is made and numbred particulerly by S. Austin (4) De Doct. Christi l. 2. c. 8 Innoc. ep ad Exup c. 7. Gel. To. 1. Concil in Decret cum 70. Ep. Isid l 6. Etymol c. 1. Rabanus l. 2. Instit cler Cassiod l. 2. diuinarum Lect. himself as also by Innocentius Gelasius and other ancient Writers the truth hereof is so manifest that the same is confessed by sundrie Protestant Writers and the same Councel and Fathers in steed of better answere seuerely reprehended for the same Hiperius (5) Meth. Theol. l. 1. p. 46. auoucheth that In the Third Carthage Councel there are added to the Canon c. Sapientia and Ecclesiasticus two bookes of Machabees Tobie Iudith c. Al which bookes in the same order numbreth Augustin Innocentius Gelasius for which he at large afterwards reiecteth their iudgement In like sort (6) de Princip Christ Dogm l. 1. c. 4. p. 8. Lubbertus I grant sayth he certaine of these bookes to be admitted by the Carthaginians but I deny that therfore they are the Word of God for no Councels haue that Authoritie But to be brief the Third Carthage Councel is acknowledged and reproued for this verie doctrine by D. Raynolds (7) Conclus annex to his Conf p 699 700. Zan de Sacr. p. 32. 33. Hosp hist Sacram. p. 1. p. 160. Trelc loc com p. 15. Hoe Tract Tripart Theol. p. 46. Park ag Symb. part 2. p 60. Field of the Church p. 246. 247. Zanchius Hospinian Trelcatius Mathias Hoe M. Parker and D. Field And so likewise is S. Austin and other ancient Fathers herein acknowledged and reiected by Hospinian 8) Hist sacr part 1. p. 161. Hip. Meth. Theol. p. 46. Zanch. de sacra-Scrip p. 32. 33. Field of the Church p. 246. Hâ—perius Zanchius D. Field But Brentius auoucheth more in general that (9) Apol. Confess Wittemb See Bucers Scripta Angl p. 7â—3 There are some of the ancient Fathers who receiue sayth he these Apocryphal Bookes into the number of Canonical Scriptures And in like sort some Councels command them to be acknowledged as Canonical I am not ignorant what was done but I demand whether it was rightly and Canonically done Lastly D. Couel not only most plainly confesseth S. Austins like Iudgement had of the Booke of Wisdome but withal further affirmeth (11) Ib. p 87 of al these Bookes that If Ruffinus be not deceaued they were approued as partes of the Old Testawent by the Apostles So cleer it is that this foresayd Bookes were confessedly beleeued to be Canonical by the Primitiue Church Adde hereunto that (12) Of the Church p. 245. 246. Hut 2. part of his Answ p 176. D. Field M. Hutton both of them teaching that some of the ancient Iewes receiued the foresayd Bookes for truly Canonical though others of them did not beleeue and receaue the same accordingly yet are the sayd Iewes therfore expresly reproued by Protestants themselues Bibliander tearming it The rashnes of the Iewes in which his censure he is approued by the Protestant Sceltco in his booke of the Second coming of Christ Englished by M. Rogers (13) fol. 6. for the supposed worth therof D. Bancroft (14) p. 60. in the verie Conference before his Maiestie reiecteth the obiections of the Iewes made against these Bookes tearming them The old cauils of the Iewes renewed by Hierom who was the first that gaue them the name of Apocrypha which opinion vpon Ruffiâ—us his challenge he after a sort disclaymed Yea D. Bancroft is so ful with Catholicks in Defence of the sayd Bookes as that other of his owne Brethren charge him further to say (15) The 2. parte of the Ministers Def. p. 108. that The Apocrypha were giuen by inspiration from God which is al one as to affirme them to be truly diuine and Canonical And as concerning the booke Ecclesiasticus it is defended to be truly Canonical by the Protestant Writers (16) Ep. ad Volanum Lascicius and Parker of which later D. Willet (17) LoÌ„doro mastix p. 69 sayth How audacious is this fellow that contrarie to the determination of this Church of England dare make Ecclesiasticus a book of Canonical Scripture 10) Against Burges p. 76 77. Furthermore seing it is expresly taught and defended by sundrie Protestants that this waightiest Controuersie of discerning true Scripture from forged can not be decided by the (18) Hook Ecol Pol. l. 1 p. 86. Scriptures themselues neither by Testimonie (19) Whit. cont Staplet p. 370. 357. Hook vbi sup p 147. of the Spirit but (20) Hook ib. p. 146. 116. Aretiu Exam p. 24. by the authoritie of Gods Church Hence it necessarily followeth that the Church of Christ hauing decided and determined this foresayd Controuersie and
that not only by General Churches of later times but euen by the Councels Tradition of the true Primitiue Church that therfore al parties are bound to approue beleeue the foresayd Bookes to be truly Canonical Al which wil yet be made much more euident by our easie Refutation of their chiefest arguments vsually vrged against them For first it is obiected by D. Whitaker (21) Answ to Rayn p. 22. 23. that therfore they are not Canonical because They were written in Greek or some other forraine language and not in Hebrew nor had for their knowne Authours those whom God hath declared to be his Prophets But neither of these are of force for it is no litle temeritie so to measure the Scriptures by the tongue wherein they are written as to restrayne the Spirit of God to one only language The further falsehood and vanitie wherof is abundantly disproued by example of Daniel a great part wherof (22) to wit from Chap. 2 vers 4. to the end of the 7. chap. though not written in Hebrew is yet by our Aduersaries themselues acknowledged for Canonical Neither likewise is it true that God would direct by his holie Spirit no Authours in their writings but such as were knowne and also further declared by certaine testimonie to be Prophets For Protestants themselues can not yet tel who were Authours of the seueral Bookes of Iudges the Third and Fourth of Kings the Two of Chronicles and the Bookes of Ruth and Iob Euen D. Whitaker (23) De sacra Scrip. p 603. himself doth directly answer his owne obiection saying The Authours of manie Bookes are not knowne as of Iosue Ruth Paralipomenon Hester c. And we receiue sayth D. Willet 24) Syn p. 4 manie Bookss in the old Testament the Authours wherof are not perfectly knowne Yea Caluin Beza and the publishers of certaine of our English Bibles in the Preface or Argument of the Epistle to the Hebrewes do al of them professe to rest doubtful of the Authour therof Caluin Beza there affirming that it is not written by S. Paul So that though the foresayd Bookes be not written in the Hebrew nor haue their Authours or Penners knowne yet by like example of other approued Scriptures it maketh nothing against their Sacred and Diuine Authoritie (25) of Anno 1584. 1578 See Calu. in c 2. Heb ver 2. Secondly it is obiected that the sayd Bookes were reiected or doubted of by sundrie of the ancient Fathers as namely by Origen (26) In Ps 1 apud Euseb Hist l. 6. c. 19. Epiph. de Pondere Mens Haer. 8. Epicureorū Hier Pref. in l Regum Epiphanius and Hierom who agreed therein with the ancient Iewes But first these Fathers in the places cited do not speak of their owne opinion but do only report what was the opinion of certaine of the Iewes therin for Origen was so far from according herein with the Hebrewes that he expresly defended (27) Ep. ad Iulium hom 1. in Leuit. against Iulius Africanus who doubted therof the Historie of Susanna which Iewes and Protestants reiect Yea he auerreth )28) Ep. ad Iulium that part of Esther to be Canonical which Protestants refuse as not being in the Hebrewes Canon In like sort S. Epiphanius 29) Haer. 76 numbreth Sapientia and Ecclesiasticus among the Diuine Scriptures and referreth (30) Lib. de Pond Mensura post init Sapientia vnto Salomon As concerning S. Hierom wheras he vnto an vnwarie (31) Praef. in Daniel Reader may seem to seclude certaine Chapters of Daniel as not being in the Hebrewes Canon insomuch that Ruffinus mistaking herein S. Hierom's meaning doth therfore as Protestants (32) Whit. cont Camp p. 18. stil doe reproue and charge him with refusal of these foresayd parts of Daniel S. Hierome (33) Apol 2. cont Ruffin fin answereth and explaineth himself saying Truly I did not set downe what myself thought but what the Hebrewes are accustomed to say against vs herein calling there further Ruffinus and in him our Protestants a foolish Sycophant for mistaking and charging him herein with the Hebrewes opinion Yea S. Hierom's thus explaining himself is a matter certaine that it is accordingly confessed by D. Couel (34) Answ to Burges p. 87. Banc. in the Conf. before his Maiestie p. 60. D. Bancroft And it is further euident that S. Hierom placed the Bookes of Machabees bees (35) Prolog in Machab. among the Stories of diuine Scripture (33) Apol 2. cont Ruffin fin And of the Booke of Iudith he sayth (36) Pref. in Iudith with the Hebrewes the book of Iudith is read among the Hagiographal writings whose authoritie to strengthen those things which fal in Contention to wit with the Iewes may be thought lesse fit c. But because we read that the Nycene Councel accompted this in the number of holie Scriptures (34) Answ to Burges p. 87. Banc. in the Conf. before his Maiestie p 60. I haue yeelded c. So cleer it is that the Fathers obiected did only relate in the foresayd places the opinion of the Hebrewes from which themselues did yet disclayme Secondly supposing it for true that the foresayd Fathers haue doubted or reiected the foresayd Bookes yet neither hence wil it follow that they are not truly Canonical it being certaine that in the Primitiue Church the Canonical Scriptures were not generally receaued al at once but in great varietie of pretended 37) 2. Thes 2.2 Euseb hist l. 3. c. 19 l. 6. c. 10. Aug. cont Aduers Leg Proph l. 1. c. 20. Gelas in Decret cū 70. Episc Sozom hist l. 7. c. 19. Hamelman de Tradit Apostol 1. part l 1. col 251 part 3 col 841. Scriptures special care and search was requisite whereby it came to passe that sundrie Bookes were for the time misdoubted or by some Fathers or Councels (38) Conc. Laodic can vlt. omitted or not receiued which yet afterwards were vpon greater search and consideration generally acknowledged A poynt so euident that D. Bilson testifyeth in our behalf that (39 Suruey of Christs suffrings p. 664. The Scriptures were not fully receiued in al places no not in Eusebius time He sayth the Epistles of Iames Iude the 2. of Peter the 2. and 3. of Iohn are contradicted as not written by the Apostles the Epistle to the Hebrewes was for a while contradicted c. The Churches of Syria did not receaue the 2. Epistle of Peter nor the 2. and 3. of Iohn nor the Epistle of Iude nor the Apocalyps c. The like might be sayd for the Churches of Arabia wil you hence conclude saith D. Bilson that those partes of Scripture were not Apostolick or that we need not to receaue them now because they were formerly doubted of So fully doth this Protestant Doctour answear his owne Brethrens like vsual obiection had against the Machabees and the other Bookes
the Armenians and the present Protestant Church THAT THE FATHERS CONDEMNED in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning the Scriptures and the Church Militant and Triumphant CHAPTER III. TO examine now such doctrines as concerne the sacred Scripures and the Church both Militant and Triumphant It hath been obserued in al Hereticks to pretend only Scripture in defence of their errours therby to euade the manifest and most conuincing arguments from Councels Fathers and Histories So S. Hilarie 28) Orat. 2. cont Constantium wisheth vs to remember that there is no Heretick which doth not faigne that the blasphemies which he teacheth are according to the Scripture And S. Austin 29) L. 1. de Trinit c. 3. affirmeth that al Hereticks endeuour to defend their false and deceiptful opinions out of the Scriptures Yea he reproueth 30) L. 1. con Maxim Maximinus the Arian for saying as Protestants now do If thou shal bring anie thing from the sacred Scripture which is common to al it is needful we heare you But these wordes which are out of the scripture in no case are to be receaued of vs. In like sort sayth S. Vincent 31) L. 1. coÌ„t haeret If one shal aske anie Heretick c. from whence do you proue from whence do you teach that I ought to forsake the vniuersal and ancient Faith of the Catholick Church Presently he answereth for it is written and forth with he prepareth a thousand testimonies a thousand examples a thousand authorities from the Law from the Apostles from the Prophets c. Agreeably herevnto the Arrians denied the Sonne of God to be consubstantial to his Father because the word Consubstantial is no where in the Scriptures as S. Athanasius S. Austin and S. Hierome testifie in sundry places writing against them The Macedonians 32) Basil de Spiritu Sancto c. 25. l. 1. contr Eunomium and Eunomians denyed the Holie-Ghost to be equal with the Father and the Sonne because in their opinion it is no where expresly set downe in the Scriptures The 33) Cyril Socrates and others writing of the Nestorians Nestorians denyed the B. Virgin Marie to be the Mother of God because these wordes are not expresly in Scripture And the selfe same pretense of only Scripture is stil vsed now by Protestants as I haue proued at large els-where The continuance and visibilitie of the Church of Christ was denied by the Donatists of whom S. Austin affirmeth that they vsed to collect certaine places of Scripture and to wrest them against the church of God that so it might be thought to haue fayled and perished out of the whole world And as Protestants say now of the Church before Luthers time 34) de vnita Eccl. c. 2. so sayd the Donatists before 35) August in Ps 101. Conc. 2. The Church hath reuolted and perished out of al Countries But this saith S. Austin say they who are not in it Or impudent speech The claime of Ecclesiastical Primacie was condemded in the Emperour Constantius to whom Osius 36) Athan. Epist ad Solit. vit agentes Ambr. Ep. 32. 33. Sozom. l. 6. c. 7. Conc. 3. Carthag can 9. Aug. Ep 48. 50. 162. 165. sayd I. beseech thee cease and remember thou art mortal be fearful of the day of Iudgement keepe thyself pure against that day do not intermedle in Ecclesiastical affaires neither commande vs in this kind but rather learne those things from vs. God hath committed the Empire to thee and to vs those things which belong to the Churches Take heede least drawing vnto thee such things as concerne the Church thou be guiltie of great crimes And againe for who seeing him in decreeing to make himself the Prince of Bishops and to be cheef Iudge in Ecclesiastical Iudgement wil not iustly say that he is that abhomination of Desolation which was foretold by Daniel Herof also the 37) Cent. 4 col 549. Polanus in Symphonia p. 836. 837. 8â—8 839. 841. 842. 843. 844. 849. Cartwright in whiteg def p. 700. Osiand cent 4. p. 477. Centurists Emperours also sometimes vnfittingly assumed to themselues the Iudgement of matters of Faith which thing Athanasius reprehendeth in Constantius and Ambrose in Valentinian c. The denial of Inuocation of Saints was condemned in Vigilantius the Heretick of whom 38) Answer to a Count. Cath. p. 46. Par. against Symb. part 1. p. 74. 83. Cent. 4. col 1250. Crisp his Estate of the Church p. 131. Osian cent 4. p. 506. D. Fulk sayth Last of al Vigilantius shal be brought in who wrot against Inuocation of Saints Superstition of Reliques and other Ceremonies him Hierome reproueth And the same is confessed of Vigilantius by M. Parker the Centurists Crispinus and Osiander In like sorte D. Sarauia and Beza do both of them affirme that Aerius was likewise condemned by the Fathers for his then teaching that the Saincts departed are not to be prayed vnto The which also is acknowledged by 40) Loc. com p. 514 Bucanus against Aerius The denial and contemning of Saincts Reliques is condemned in Eunomius and Vigilantius whereof sayth 41) De Ecl. dog c. 73 see Chemnit Exam. part 4. p. 7. S. Austin We beleeue that the bodies of Saincts and especially the Reliques of Blessed Martyrs are most intirely to be honoured if anie man contradict this he is supposed not to be a Christian a but an Eunomian and Vigilantian So likewise the Arrians and Vigilantius denying the Diuels to be tormented by the Reliques of Martyrs are condemned therefore the first by S. Ambrose 42) Ser. 93. De Inuent corpo S. Geruasij Protasij the second by 43) Contr. Vigil c. 4. S. Hierome The denial of the Images of Christ and his Saincts was condemned in Xenaias of whom sayth 44) Hist Eccl. lib. 16. c. 27. Nicephorus That Xenaias first ô audacious soule and impudent mouth vomited forth that speech That the Images of Christ and those who haue pleased him are not to be worshipped According to which the Protestant 45) Comment in proc Chronol l. 7. at Antichr 494. see Cedemus in Compend hist Functius confesseth that 39) Defen Tract de diuersi p. 349. 346. Xenaias first raised warres in the Church against Images The denial of the signe of the Crosse was condemned in some ancient Magicians of whom thus writeth 46) Hist li. 3. c. 3. Theodoret The Diuels appearing in their accustomed shape feare compelled Iulian the Emperour to signe his forehead with the signe of the Crosse whereupon the Diuels beholding the figure of our Lords victorie and remembring their owne ruine forthwith vanished away c. Iulian affirmed that he greatly admired the vertue of the Crosse and that the Diuels fled away because they could not endure the signe therof to whom the Magician sayd Do not so think for they do not feare for that reason which you alleage but detesting your fact they withdrew themselues
p. 350. saying We were determined to be altogeather silent to those your demands neither to giue you anie answer who so plainly alter according to your wil both the Scriptures and interpretations of holie Doctours seing we haue Paul thus exhorting vs Eschiew an Heretical man after one or two admonitions c. we are fully assured by your writings that you can neuer agree with vs or rather with the truth c And therefore (42) Ibid. p. 370. we desire you hereafter not to be troublesome vnto vs c. for the Diuines which were the Lights of the Church you diuersly handle in words you honour them and extol them but in deeds you reiect them c. wherefore forasmuch as concerneth you you haue freed vs from cares So litle successe had our Germane Protestants and so disgraciously were they repulsed euen by the Schismatical Grecians But such is the knowne want of al successe in this behalf in the ProtestaÌ„t Church that Beza (43) In Sarauia his Def. Tract De diuersis grad Minist p. 309. specially disclaymeth from labouring the conuersion of remote Nations leauing that expresly to the Iesuits Wherefore hauing thus fully discouered the manifest and confessed want in the Protestant Church in fulfilling the foresayd predictions from the Scriptures of the true Church of Christ her conuerting of Heathen Kings and Countries to the true Faith It resteth now to proue that the foresayd Prophecies haue been fully performed in the Catholick Roman Church and consequently that the sayd Church is the Church of Christ described in the Scriptures And to begin with the Conuersion of the most famous Emperour or King that euer was Constantin the Great who liued about Anno Domini 311. First it is confessed by our Protestant Aduersaries that Constantin was the first King that euer professed the Christian Faith so M. Bunny (44) Suruey of the Popes Supremacy p. 121. tearmeth him Constantin the first Emperour that publickly allowed of Christian Profession And M Brightman (45) Apoc. p. 323. auoucheth that Constantin was he who first of the Roman Emperours vndertook the open Patronage of the truth and that a Male-child was not borne before Constantin Bibliander (46) fidelis Relatio p 22 teacheth that Constantin first of the Roman Emperours embraced Christian Religion with true Faith And the like is taught by Simlerus (47) De filio Dei in Pref. and others Secondly it is most agreably reported by al Historiographers that this our first Christian Emperour was Baptised by Pope Siluester then Bishop of Rome And thirdly it is before (48) See before l. 1. c. 5. proued at large that the Religion deliuered to Constantin by Pope Siluester and which they both beleeued and publickly professed was the present Roman Religion now taught by Pope Vrbane the Eighth So cleer it is that the Roman Church fulfilled the former predictions of the Scriptures in the Conuersion of K. Constantin As for the other Christian Emperours succeeding Constantin as ConstaÌ„tius Constans Constantin Iulian Iouinian Valentinian Gratian Valentinian the Second Theodosius c. they were so certainly conuerted or rather borne brought vp in the Roman Church that they are greatly disliked and condemned by (49) Brightmans Apoc. p 344 477. Fulkes Reioynder c. p. 2. Protestant Writers as special Patrons and maintainers of the pretended Antichrist the Pope of Rome But to descend to the manifold Conuersions of Kings and Countries made by the Roman Church in these last 1000. yeares It is confessed and reported by the Centurie-writers that our Catholick Roman Church conuerted Germanie (50) Cent. 8 col 20. the Vandals (51) Cent. 9. col 15. the Bulgarians (52) Cent. 9. col 18. Sclauonians Polonians the Dâ—nes and Mâ—rauâ—ans and (53) Cent 10 col 18. 19. sundrie Kings and Kingdomes and a great (54) Cent. 11 col 27. part of Hungarie as also the Noruegians (55) Cent 12 Osiander likewise mentioneth our conuerting of the Danes 56) Ep. hist p. 16. 94. Mâ—rauians (57) Ibid. p. 16. Polonians (58) p. 36. Sclauonians (59) p. 36. 16. the Bulgares (60) p. 36. the Hunnes (61) p. 37. the Normans (62) p. 72. the Bohemians (63) p. 77. the Suecians (64) p. 21. 9 the Noruegians (65) p 86. Liuonians and Saxons the Vagarians (66) p. 104. the Rugij (67) p. 99. Thuscans them of (68) p. 111. Scandia Matorica (69) p. 341. of Tunes in Africa [70) p. 377. and of sundrie other Nations (71) p. 342. M. Brightman (72) Apoc. p 100. likewise reporteth that famous Conuersions are read of at this time of the Polonians Saxons Danes Suecians Noruegians c. And though those Conuersions were done by the paines of Superstitious men the Papists yet was it the Seale of God and profitable to his elect Now al these Countries being summed vp togeather may wel be thought to make a ful accomplishmeÌ„t of the foresayd prophecies in their sayd Conuersions by our Roman Church from Heathnish Infidelitie to the Faith of Christ But I wil yet further descend to particulars and first begin with Germanie wherin Protestancie with Luther first appeared It was so certainly conuerted at first from Infidelitie to Christian Religion by the Rom. Church that the Centurie-writers (73) Cent. 8. Ep. Dedic writing therof do affirme that Antichrist hath his notable Postes or Runners c. Such a Poste was that Boniface called the Apostle of the Germans who with greatest studie art and power applyed himself to this only that he might reduce al Germanie to the Power of the Pope of Rome but although he is reported to haue abolished in some places Heathnish Idolatrie yet he sowed not Christian Religion pure and incorrupt for he ouerthrew and cast downe that hinge of al pietie of free Iustification by only Faith in Christ c. wherfore he often mentioneth the blemishes of Antichrist that is the corruptions of the articles of Faith c. with such insolencie was that false Apostle puffed vp So cleer it is that Germanie was conuerted by S. Boniface from Idolatrie to the Roman Faith Yea ProtestaÌ„t Religion was so vnknowne to the Christian Germans before the Apostacie of Luther that Luther (74) In Deutâ—ron in pref fol 3. himself saith I am of opinion that the Protestant Ghospel was neuer reuealed to Germanie before this Age. As also )75) Enar rationes seu Postillae fol. 271. I am ignorant whether Germanie euer heard the Word of God indeed we haue heard the Word of the Pope which no man can deny So plainly in Germany had our Roman Faith her being and precedence before al Protestancie But now to come to the late Conuersion of the remotest Indians it was so certainly performed by Friars Iesuits and other knowne Members of the Roman Church that D Philip Nicolai writing a special book of this verie argument and
good But yet further they doubt not to affirme the argument or consequence vrged from the (22) Puricans Answ to D. Downham's ser p. 92. receiued opinion in the Church of God euen from the Apostles time vnto our Age to be lyable to iust exception So that though the Fathers of al Ages vp to the Apostles themselues do al of them ioyntly agree with our Roman faith in their Expositions and deliuerie of the sense of Scripture yet may one illuminated Protestant except contemne and reiect them al as not hauing the Spirit nor interpreting according to the Analogie of the Protestant faith But O most miserable and lamentable times O insolencie most impious and incredible What the receiued opinion in the Church of God euen from the Apostles time vnto our Age to be lyable to iust exception The Fathers of al Ages during 1600. yeares of al Countries though most distant in place and different in language and other conditions of nature and gouerment al of them to conspire in one opinion of truth doctrine and yet al of them so fowly and so grosly to erre as that a new-found Protestant is able to discouer it This this may a Protestant often declaime but no man of iudgement can possibly beleeue him Yea our Protestants are so far out of loue and liking with the Fathers as they painfully labour to make the world to think that their Cōmentaries books and beleef were directly contrarie to the Sacred Scriptures and therefore to these they wil euer appeale from the writings of men Captaine Luther 23) L. contra Henricum 8. Regem Angliae saith Against the sayings of Fathers Men Angels and Diuels I place not ancient consent nor the multitude of men but the Ghospel being the Word of One Eternal Maiestie which themselues are enforced to allow Here I stand here I sit here I abide here I glorie here I triumph here I insult ouer Papists Thomists Henricians and al the Gates of Hel much more ouer the sayings of men though neuer so holy and deceauable custome The word of God is aboue al Diuine Maiestie maketh with me so that I care not if a thousand Augustins a thousand Tertullians a thousand Henries or Papistical Churches should stand against me God can not erre and deceiue Austin and Cyprian as also al the Elect may and haue erred My Doctrines shal stand the Pope shal fal Here we haue a man of liuelie Faith but yet heare him further 24) In Comment in ep ad Gal. No other doctrine is to be deliuered or heard in the Church then the pure word of God that is the Sacred Scripture Let other Doctours and Auditours be accursed with their learning but here wanteth Charitie Neither is Luther in this alone for Zuinglius likewise declaymeth 25( In Explanat Artic. 64. Presently thou beginnest to cry Fathers Fathers the Fathers haue so deliuered But I do not ask of thee Fathers or Mothers but I require the word of God In like sort Peter Martyr 26) De Votis p. 462. As concerning the Fathers iudgement because our Aduersaries the Papists are accustomed in this and other Controuersies alwayes to prouoke to them I therfore declare that to me it seemeth not the part of a Christian to prouoke to the iudgements of men from the Scriptures of God Yea saith he 27) Ibid. p. 476. As long as we rest in Councels or Fathers we shal alwayes be conuersant in the same errours And the like is taught by Summerus saying 28) Contr. Carolum l. 1. c. 1. Antiquitie by which they affirme we are condemned is of no force for if they speak of a right beleeuing Antiquitie by which we vnderstand Christ and his Apostles the matter itself cryeth that it is for vs but if they wil vnderstand the same of the authoritie of the Fathers we do not take it il that the word of God is condemned by them Agreably heerunto writeth D. Whitaker 29) Contra Sander p. 92. If you argue from the testimonies of men be they neuer so learned and ancient we yeeld no more to their words in cause of Religion then we perceiue to be agreable to Scripture Neither think your self to haue proued any thing though you bring against vs the whole swarme of Fathers except that which they say be iustifyed not by the voice of men but by God himself And againe 30) Answ to Camp Reas 2. p. 70. And see the like in Abbots in his Answ to His. Reas 10 p. 371. We are not the Seruants of the Fathers but the Sonnes when they prescribe vs anie thing out of the Law and Diuine authoritie we obey them as our parents if they enioyne anie thing against the voice of the heauenlie truth we haue learned not to hearken to them but to God You Papists as vassals and base seruants receiue whatsoeuer the Fathers say without iudgement or reason being affrayd as I think either of the whip or the halter if euerie thing they speake be not Ghospel with you Againe 31) Against Sanders de Antichristo p. 21. We repose no such confidence in the Fathers writings that we take any certain proof of our Protestant Religion from them because we place al our Faith and Religion not in humane but in Diuine authoritie If therefore thou bring vs what some one Father hath thought or what the Fathers vniuersally altogeather haue deliuered the same except it be approued by testimonies of Scriptures it auaileth nothing it gaineth nothing it conuinceth nothing for the Fathers are such witnesses as they also haue need of the Scriptures to be their witnesses If deceiued by errour they giue forth their testimonie disagreeging from Scriptures albeit they may be pardoned erring for want of wisdome we can not be pardoned being green-witted Protestants if because they erred we also wil erre with them Thus doth this Protestant Doctour defend his reiecting the ancient Fathers as writing contrarie to the Scriptures and vpbrayd vs Catholicks for our due estimation of the same and so do Protestants stil labour in derogation of the Fathers to oppose the Sacred Scriptures and holie Fathers as contrarie one to another But al in vaine for who euer more duly reuerenced or more carefully preserued those heauenlie writings then the ancient Bishops and Doctours of the Primitiue Church Who more truly translated them to their greatest paines for the good of al succeeding Ages then those learnedst Fathers Who in searching the deepest difficulties so frequent in them did more submit and captiuate their iudgements then these holy Fathers Who euer more pressed Hereticks with the weight of God's word then those zealous Fathers Who euer writ more large or more learned Commentaries and explanations therof then the aged Fathers And is it then possible that the sayd Fathers should so directly contradict the Sacred Scriptures as our Protestants pretend But this so desperate so vnworthie dealing against the Fathers doth cleerly conuince that
is so copiously preached by vs that truly in the Apostles time it was not so cleare And seing 48) Tom 2. lib. Cont. Reg. Angliae f. 344. God's word is aboue al the Diuine Maiestie maketh for me So that I passe not if 100. Austins 1000. Cyprians 1000. King Harrie 's Churches stood against me Wherefore 49) Lib. de Seruo Arb. And see Cnoglerus his Symbolatria p. 152. Cast you off what armour the ancient Orthodoxal Fathers shal afford or the schooles of Diuines the authoritie of Councels Bishops the consent of so manie Ages of al Christian People we receiue nothing but Scriptures but yet so that the infallible authoritie of interpreting is only in vs what we expound that the Holy-Ghost thinketh what others though great though manie bring it commeth from the spirit of Sathan and a mind distracted Yea the Pope 50) L. aduersus Papatum Romae à Satana fundatum f. 1. knoweth saith Luther that by the singular guift and bountie of God I am more learned in the Scriptures then himself and al his Asses But if Luther himself doth so fully mouthe his owne prayses and deserts we may presume his disciples and followers are not sparing in the like And so indeed writeth Alberus 51) Contra Carolostadianos l. 7. I doubt not but that if Austin were now liuing he would not be ashamed to professe himself Martin Luther's Scholler But Musculus lasheth far further for 52) Praef. in Libellum Ger. de Diaboli Tyramide since the Apostles times saith he there liued not in the world a greater then Luther And it may be sayd that God powred al his guifts vpon this only man and that there is as great difference betwixt the ancient Doctours and Luther as betwixt the light of the Sunne and of the Moone Neither is it to be doubted but that the ancient Fathers euen those that are chief and best among them as Hilarie and Austin if they had liued and taught in the same time with Luther would without blushing haue carried the lanterne before him as his Schollers or Ministers And another professeth that 53) In Hos in Hist Sacra part alt f. 346. He preferreth one leaf in Luther before the writings of al Fathers So that if we beleeue either Luther or his Schollers not only Austin and Hilarie and Ambrose but euen al the Fathers since the Apostles times must giue place to Luther in regard of his profoundest knowledge and learning But not only Luther himself thus far excelleth the ancient Fathers but in his opinion the onlie 54) In Col. mensa c. de Patribus Eccl. Apologie of Philip Melancthon doth far excel al the Doctours of the Church and exceed euen Austin himself Beza in like sort affirmeth 55) Praef. in nouum Testament dicat Principi Condiensi Caluin to haue far exceeded al the ancient and later writers in interpreting of the Scriptures wth varietie of words and allegation of reasons Yea saith he 56) Epist Theol. ep 1 p. 5. I haue been accustomed to say and not without cause as I take it that whilst I compare those verie times next the Apostles with our times they had then more conscience lesse knowledge And on the other side we haue now more knowledge and lesse conscience This is my opinion c. Agreably herevnto saith D. Whiteguift in his 57) Defence c. p. 472. Brief Comparison between the Protestants Bishops of our time and the Bishops of Primitiue Church The doctrine taught and professed by our Bishops at this day is much more perfect and sound then it commonly was in anie Age after the Apostles times 58) Ibid. p. 473. Surely you are not able to reckon in anie Age since the Apostles time anie company of Bishops that taught and held so perfect and sound doctrine in al poynts as â—he Bishops of England do at this time Yea in the truth of doctrine our Bishops be not only comparable with the old Bishops but in many degrees to be preferred before them In like sort saith Zanchius 59) De Sacra Scriptura p. 411. Christ hath now giuen to vs more excellent Interpreters then euer heretofore stnce the Apostles Yea saith M. Iacob 60) Defence of Treatise of Christ's sufferings p. 146. And see the Answ to Downham's sermon p. 20. this is the profit that comes by ordinarie flanting with the Fathers c. if in this case we were to looke after anie man surely we haue more cause to regard our late faithful teachers rather then those of old who being equal with the best of them in anie of the excellent graces of God's Spirit c. By which we may see the smal account made by Protestants of ancient Doctours not blushing thus to equal yea much to preferre their owne latest Writers before al the Fathers since the Apostles times But what should I vrge thus much their dislike disclaiming and disgracing of ancient Fathers when they spare not to reiect and contemne the authoritie of al Councels though neuer so general neuer so ancient And first doth not Luther affirme in general 61) In Asser Articulorum per Leonem X. damnat Art 29. That the way is made to vs Protestants of weakning the authoritie of Councels and of freely contradicting their decrees and of iudging their Acts and of confessing confidently whatsoeuer seemeth true to Protestants whether it be approued or reproued by anie Councel Doth not Beza affirme that 62) Praef. in nouum Testam ad Princ. C ndiens euen in the best times the ambition ignorance and lewdnes of Bishops was such that the verie blind may easily perceaue how that Sathan was president in their assemblies or Councels Doth not D. Humfrey disclaime from the Councels celebrated in the first 600. years saying 63) De vita Iuelli p. 212. What concerneth it vs what the false Synods of Bishops as then shal ordayne And doth not M. Carthwright reiect as erroneous euen the first Nycene Councel saying 64) 2. Reply part 1. p. 509. We haue good cause to hould for suspect whatsoeuer either in gouernment or doctrine those times left vnto vs not confirmed by substantial proofs out of the Word c. This appeareth in the first Councel of Nyce where the most errours decreed vpon c. besides the vngodlie custome which may appeare to haue occupyed almost al the Churches touching the forbidding of the second Marriage of Ministers before that Councel And againe 65) Ibid. p. 484. In the same Councel appeareth that to those chosen to the Ministerie vnmarried it was not lawful to take anie wife afterwards c. Paphnutius sheweth that not only this was before that Councel but was an ancient Tradition in the Church in which both himself and the whole Councel rested c. If the ancient Tradition of the Church saith Cartwright cannot authorize this neither can ancient custome authorize the other to wit of Metropolitans Luther
of free Iustification was as then almost oppressed with the Comments of the Grecian Bishops c. At the same time the Inuocation of the Dead preuailed and the foolish opinion of single life which shameful errours Hierom openly defendeth the multitude also of Ceremonies then encreased c. And al for the most admired the Monks in Aegypt Syria c. no otherwise then if they had been Angels Prayers also for the Dead began then more freely to be vsed and the Platonical question risen concerning Purgatorie c. So ancient and general amongst al the holie Fathers were al the foresayd Articles of our present Roman Faith 26. So that our Catholick Roman Faith concerning the Sacraments conferring grace of Confession of Pardons of Transubstantiation of Holie-Orders of Extreme-Vnction of the Masse of S. Peter's and the Pope's Primacie of the Pope not being Antichrist of Traditions of Purgatorie and Prayer for the Dead of Limbus Patrum of Inuocation of Saints Reuerencing of Relicks Images and the Crosse Vowes of Chastitie single life of Priests Monastical life prescribed Fasts Free-wil Merit of Works and the Ceremonies of the Church was the general receaued Faith of al ancient Fathers and other Christians Witnesses wherof in our behalf are Luther Caluin Zuinglius the Centurists Rhegius Melancthon Adamus Francisci Antonie de Adamo Bucer Crastouius Philippus Nicolai Chemnitius Functius Osiander Peter Martyr Beza Brightman Field Humfrey Fulk Cartwright Whiteguift Couel Fox Gifford Iacob Parker Parkins Wotton Beard Calfhil whitaker and Iewel THAT PROTESTANTS DO NOT ONLY disclaime from al the ancient Fathers as Papists but do further reiect the authoritie of the sacred Scriptures and of the Apostles themselues as being erroneous and that therefore they do not found their Faith or Religion vpon Sacred Scriptures or Christ his Apostles CHAPTER III. I haue laboured often and long for the finding out of some ground work Argument or Principle wherupon the Protestant Church should be builded and sustained And stil obseruing al proofs whatsoeuer drawne either from Histories Fathers Councels Church or Antiquitie to be al of them contemned and despised by them as meerly Papistical I retired and tyed my thoughts at last to that surest Ancker of God's heauenlie Word proposed vnto vs in the sacred writings of his Prophets and Apostles nothing doubting but that the credit authoritie therof would in the iudgement and verie beleef of al Protestants be euer admitted acknowledged and reuerenced as Diuine infallible and inspired from God the Holie-Ghost himself And yet frustrate in this my last expectation I find the verie writings of the Prophets and Apostles to be censured and reiected and the Prophets and Apostles themselues to be scorned disgraced disallowed by the learnedst Protestant Writers And to begin first with the scriptures of the old Testament omitting also Tobie Iudith c. and the rest which Protestants generally reiect for Apocryphal wheras Moyses was confessedly the first that writ anie part of sacred Scripture yea that writ the Law of God or Ten Commandments in Tables of stone he and the sayd Commandments are al of them reiected by our new Protestants 1) Tom. 3. Germ f. 40. 41. And in Colâ—oq Mensal Gâ—rm fol. 152. 153. We wil neither heare nor see Moyses sayth D. Luther for he was giuen only to the Iewes neither doth he belong anie thing to vs. Let him be to the Iewes as the Law of the Saxons and let him not disquiet or trouble vs Gentils As France regardeth not the Law of the Saxons so the Law of Moyses doth not bind vs. If anie propose vnto thee Moyses with his Lawes and would compel thee to keep them then shalt thou say Go to the Iewes with thy Moyses I am no Iew thou shalt not enwrap me with Moyses And againe 2) In Colloq Mensal c. de Leg. Euang. I wil not receaue Moyses with his Law for he is the enemie of Christ If he shal come with me to examination I wil reiect him in the name of God and wil say Let Christ stand heer 3) Fâ—l 118. Moyses is the maister of al hangmen no man matcheth him in terrifying streightning tyranizing threatning and thundring he cruelly assaulteth the consciences he terrifyeth tormenteth and teareth the hart 4) Ad Ps 46. Away therefore with Moyses to obstinate and cruel men and prowd Saints whome he may terrifye humble 5) Tom. 3. Witemb in Ps 45. f. 423. And see 422. And in Colloq Mens Ger. f. 152. 153. Moyses indeed had lips but profunda great ones vnpleasant stopped angrie in which there is not a word of grace but of anger death and sinne Gather al the wisedomes of Moyses and of the Heathen Philosophers and you shal find them to be in God's sight either Idolatrie or hypocritical wisdome or if it be Politick yet the wisedome of wrath c. For Moyses hath his lips ful of gal and anger c. Away therefore with Moyses c. Moyses being thus discarded Away likewise say Protestants with the Law and Commandments 6) Tom. 3. Germ. fol. 121. The Law sayth Luther is a true Labyrinth which only casteth consciences into errour The iustice of the Law is the monster Minotaurus that is a meer fable not leading to saluation but to the waters of Acheron 7) In Colloq Mensal Germ. f. 152. 153. To the Iewes belongeth the Law of Moyses it doth not bind vs c. I wil not haue Moyses with his Law for he is the enemie of Christ our Lord yea 8) Tom. 3. Wittemb f. 6. 7. the Decalogue itself testifyeth that Moyses doth not oblige the Gentils And his owne Brethren alleadge him saying 9) Admonitio Christiana p. 211 And see Hospin concord discord f. 225. As France respecteth not the Law of the Saxons so let not Moyses be thrust vpon vs we in the New Testament wil neither see nor heare Moyses And as for the Ten CoÌ„mandments themselues Luther expresly teacheth that 10) Serm. de Mose the Ten Commandments pertaine not to Christians 11) In Conuiual Colloq cited by Aurifab cap. de lege And therefore saith he Let the Ten Commandments be altogether reiected and al Heresies wil presently cease For the Ten Commandments are as it were the fountain from whence al Heresies spring According to which Islebius Luther's owne scholler 12) Cent. 6. p. 311. 312. 310. taught as Osiander relateth that the Decalogue was not to be taught in the Church c. He dispersed in publick writings his Antinomian errour and drew into errour some learned Protestants He seemeth to haue taken occasion of this errour from the writings of Luther not rightly vnderstood And 13) Act. Colloq Aldeburg p. 94 being great in the Court he preached earnestly for the Antinomian libertie These Antinomians 14) Sleidan Hist l. 12. f. 262. receauing their first beginning from Islebius Luther's scholler publickly taught as other Protestants confesse 15)
So peremptorie is Musculus the Sacramentarie against S. Iames the Apostle In like sort writeth Illiricus 69) In Pref. in Iac. Epi. Luther in his Preface vpon Iames's Epistle giueth great reasons why this Epistle ought in no case to be accounted for a writing of Apostolical authoritie 70) In Enchyr. p. 63 And see Exam. part 1. p. 55. vnto which reasons I think euerie godlie man ought to yeeld But to annexe heervnto the Epistles of S. Peter S. Ihon and S. Iude Chemnitius Luther's chief Scholler affirmeth that 76) Vpon the Apoc. Engl. c. 1. ser 1. f. 2. The second Epistle of Peter the second and third of Ihon the Epistle to the Hebrewes the Epistle of S. Iames the Epistle of Iude and the Apocalyps of Ihon are Apocryphal As 71) Exam. p. 1. p. 56. not hauing sufficient testimonie of their authoritie and that therefore 72) Ib. p. 57. Nothing in Controuersie may be proued out of these books Agreably wherunto saith also Adamus Francisci 73) Margarita Theol. p. 448. The Apocryphal Books of the new Testament are The Epistle to the Hebrewes The Epistle of Iames the second and third of Ihon the second of Peter the Epistle of Iude and the Apocalyps Concerning which last of the Apocalyps of S. Ihon Bullinger expresly auoucheth 74) In Apo. c. 19. serm 84. f. 260. 259. That S. Ihon was intangled with errour And Luther thinketh this Book 75) Pref. in Apo. prioris Edit Neither to be Apostolical nor Prophetical c. nor that it was made by the Holy Ghost c. Therin neither Christ is taught nor acknowledged saith he An errour so manifest in Luther that Bullinger testifyeth the same saying 76) Vpon the Apoc. Engl. c. 1. ser 1. f. 2. D. Martin Luther hath as it were sticked his Book by a sharp Prefac set before his first Edition of the new Testament in Dutch for which his iudgement good and learned men were offended with him 77) In Apol. Confess Wittemb c. de sacra Scriptura Being to speake saith Brentius of the authoritie of sacred Scripture we wil first run ouer the Apocryphal Books which are in the Vulgar Edition of the Bible and which the Papists obtrude vpon vs for truly Canonical Amongst which he then numbreth the Epistle to the Hebrewes of Iames of Iude the second of Peter and the Apocalyps c. and then adioyneth saying Some of these are tearmed dreames some fables Of so smal account with Protestants is this so Diuine and mystical Book of the Apocalyps written by S. Ihon the Euangelist Lastly Zuinglius being impugned for denying prayer for the dead and pressed with the authoritie of Fathers especially of S. Chrysostome and S. Augustin who deriue this custome from the Apostles answereth thus (78) Tom. 1. Epiâ—hâ—rae de Can. Mis f. 186. And see Tom 2. in Elench contra Anabap f. 10. If it be so as Augustin and Chrysostome report I think that the Apostles suffered certain to pray for the dead for no other cause then to condescend to their infirmitie So insimulating the Apostles wilfully to haue permitted others to erre according to the errours of Protestants in praying for the dead which they could not do without errour in themselues Adde only heervnto that seeing according to Brentius other Lutherans as also according to our English Protestants those Books of Scripture are only to be acknowledged Canonical (79) Brent in Confâ—ss Wittemb c. de sacra script Conuocat Lond. Anno 1562. 1604. ar 6. Whitack against Camp Reas 1. p. 28. of whose authoritie there was neuer anie doubt made in the Church then by the sayd Rule our English Protestants Church doth reiect as Apocryphal the Epistle of S. Paul to the Hebrewes the Epistle of S. Iames and S. Iude the second of S. Peter and the second and third of S. Ihon to eather with the Apocalyps sithence al these haue been doubted of formerly in the Church as is confessed by sundrie (80) Towers Disput with F. Campian in the 4. Dayes conference English Protestants amongst whom M. Rogers hauing sayd (81) Vpon the 6. Art Propos 4. p. 26. In the name of the holy Scripture we do vnderstand those Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament of whose authoritie was neuer doubt in the Church himself yet further confesseth that (82) Ib. p. 31. Some of the ancient Fathers and Doctours accepted not al the Books contayned within the volume of the New Testament for Canonical So giddie and inconstant are our Ministers in impugning the truth Now if some deny the plainest premisses notwithstanding D. Whitaker and (83) Wâ—itak Answ to Camp Reas 1. Rogers vpon the 6. Artic. p 30. M. Rogers that Luther and the Lutherans did reiect the foresayd Books of the new Testament besides their owne cleerest words particularly before cited out of their owne writings Whitaker himself saith (84) Vvhitack de sacra Sâ—ript Controu 1. q. 1. c. 6. If Luther or some that haue followed Luther haue taught or written otherwise let them answer for themselues this is nothing to vs who in this matter neither follow Luther nor defend him but are led by a better reason Rogers also alleadgeth (85) Vbi supra p. 32. two principal Lutherans Wygandus and Heshusius accusing them both of errour the one for refusing the first and second Epistles of S. Iohn with the Epistle of S. Iude the other for reiecting the Apocalyps And Caluin acknowledgeth that 86) In Argum Epist Iacobi In his time there were some Protestants that iudged the Epistle of S. Iames not Canonical Oecolampadius testifyeth the same touching the Apocalyps and affirmeth himself to (87) lib. 2. ad cap. 12. Daniel wonder that some with rash iudgement reiected S. Iohn in this Book as a dreamer a mad man and a writer vnprofitable to the Church So cleer it is against Whitakers and Rogers euen by the testimonies of themselues and their other Brethren that Luther and his brood reiected the foresayd Scriptures as not Canonical But now to recapitulate or briefly to reuiew this so strange proceeding of our new Ghospellers with the sacred Scriptures If Christians be to reiect Moses and his writings as the Books of Genesis Exodus Leuiticus c. yea the verie Ten Commandments which comprehend not only the Ceremonial but also the Moral Law as also the Book of Iob with Ecclesiastes and Canticles of Salomon and Tobie Iudith Hester Sapientia Ecclesiasticus Baruch some chapters of Daniel the first and second of Machabees how slender then is the remnant of the old Testament left behind And if al the foure Ghospels be censured as before for erroneous and the Epistles to the Hebrewes of Iames Peter Iohn Iude and the Apocalyps be al of them reiected as Apocryphal how diminutiue a volume wil our new Testament remaine Besides if not only al the foresayd Books be erroneous but the
Apostles withal and the Euangelists themselues euen after their receauing of the Holie-Ghost did write teach and defend seueral errours how can anie Christian build an infaillible sauing Faith vpon the Ghospels or other Apostolical writings How then can they be acerteyned of anie one true sentence of God's Word if the writers and deliuerers therof were not infallibly guided by the Holie-Ghost into al truth and so freed from al errour ignorance misprision or falshood And if some peraduenture except that these so Atheistical and Sacrilegious reproaches imposed vpon the sacred Scriptures and the Blessed Euangelists and Apostles be not the ordinarie opinions or practise of Protestants but peraduenture only of some few either ignorant or not endowed with the spirit the falshood and vanitie of this euasion is most apparent for who of forraine Protestants were euer reputed more learned or more enlightned with the spirit then Luther Caluin Beza Chemnitius Islebius Illiricus with the other Centurie-writers Castalio Zuinglius Musculus Brentius Andreas Friccius Adamus Francisci Bullinger and sundrie such others al of them highly esteemed of by their other Protestant Brethren Or who at home more honoured then Tyndal Iewel Goad Fotherbie Fulk Whitaker c. and yet al of those being indeed the primest men that euer they had do ioyntly conspire in this greatest impietie of censuring controuling correcting or reiecting some one part or other of the forenamed Canonical Scriptures or els of condemning the Euangelists and Apostles of seueral errours infirmities and sliding in matters of faith and Religion Which foule proceeding of so manie and so learned Protestants doth euidently according to D. Fulk's Rule conuince them to be perfect Hereticks For (88) Confut. of Purgatorie p. 214. whosoeuer sayth he denieth the authoritie of the Holy Scriptures thereby bewrayeth himself to be an Heretick Laus Deo B. V. Mariae FINIS A TABLE OF THE BOOKES AND CHAPTERS THE FIRST BOOKE WHERIN IS PROVED BY THE Confession of Protestants that the Catholick Roman Church hath continued Euer most Knowne and Vniuersal euen from Christs verie Time vntil the Date hereof THE antiquitie of the true Church and the force of the Argument drawne from the Authoritie thereof As also of these great necessitie of finding-out this true Church chap. 1. fol. 1. That the present Roman Church and Religion for the last thousand yeares after Christ haue stil continued most Knowne and Vniuersal throughout the Christian world chap. 2. fol. 4. A further confirmation of the vniuersal continuance of our Roman Church Religiō for these last thousand yeares is taken from the Confessed belief and profession of such Persons as liuing within the foresayd time were most Famous and Notorious in one respect or other chap. 3. fol. 8. That the faith of S. Gregorie S. Augustin and whereto England was by them conuerted was our Roman Catholick and not Protestant chap. 4. fol. 10. That the present Roman Church and Religion continued and flourished during the whole time of the Primitiue Church contayning the first six hundred yeares after Christ chap. 5. fol. 20. A further proof of the present Roman Religions Continuance from the Apostles time to these dayes is taken from the Christian belief of the Indians Armenians Grecians and Brittans al of them Conuerted in the dayes of the Apostles chap. 6. fol. 27. THE SECOND BOOKE Wherin is proued through al the chief Articles of Religion and that by the Confessions of Protestants that the same Faith which is now taught by the Roman Church was anciently taught by the Primitiue Church of Christ THat General Councels do truly represent the Church of Christ And of the Credit and Authoritie giuen by Protestants to the sayd Councels chap. 1. fol. 1. That the argument drawne from the Authoritie of the Primitiue Church of Christ and of her Doctours and Pastours is an Argument of force And for such approued by sundrie learned Protestants chap. 2. fol. 3. That the Fathers and Doctours of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught that S. Peter was ordayned by Christ the Head of the Apostles and of the whole Church and that the Church was founded vpon S. Peter it is Confessed by Protestants themselues chap. 3. fol. 8. It is Confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued taught the Bishop of Rome to succeed S. Peter in the Primacie of the whole Church chap. 4. fol. 11. It is confessed by Protestants that the Primitiue Church of Christ beleeued the Bookes of Tobie Iudith Ester Sapientia Ecclesiasticus and two first of Machabees to be truly Canonical Scripture chap. 5. fol. 25. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued taught our now Catholick Doctrine concerning Traditions chap. 6. fol. 30. It is Confessed by Protestants that according to the Fathers of the Primitiue Church the Sacraments do truly conferre Grace and Remission of sinnes And that they are in number seauen chap. 7. fol. 32. It is Confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught the Real Presence of Christs true Bodie and Bloud in the Eucharist As also our further Catholick Doctrines of Transubstantiation Adoration Reseruation and the like chap. 8. fol. 35. Protestants confesse that the Primitiue Church of Christ beleeued taught practised the Sacrifice of the Masse as also that it is a Sacrifice according to the order of Melchisedech and truly Propitiatory for the liuing the dead chap. 9. fol. 41. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church taught and beleeued the Power of Priests to Remission of Sinnes The necessitie of Auricular Confession The Imposition of Pennance and satisfaction to God thereby As also our Roman Doctrine of Pardons or Indulgences chap. 10. fol. 46. It is granted by Protestants that the Catholick Doctrine of Purgatorie of Prayer and Sacrifice for the dead was beleeued taught and practised by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church chap. 11. fol. 50. It is confessed by Protestants that the. Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and taught our Catholick Doctrine of Christs Descending into Hel. chap. 12. fol. 55. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued and practised our Catholick Doctrine of praying to Angels and Saints chap. 13. fol. 57. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed the vse of Christs Image and his Saincts placing them euen in churches and Reuerencing them chap. 14. fol. 60. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church did specially honour reuerence the holie Relicks of Martyrs and other Saints carrying them in Processions and making Pilgrimages vnto them at which also manie Miracles were wrought chap. 15. fol. 63. It is confessed by Protestants that the holie Doctours of the Primitiue Church not only vsed the signe of the Crosse but likewise worshiped the same attributing great efficacie power and vertue thervnto chap.
16. f. 65. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed and practised the vow of Chastitie and that they neuer allowed such as were of the Clergie afterwards to marrie or such as had been twice married to be admitted to holie Orders without special dispensation chap. 17. fol. 69. It is confessed by Protestants that the Fathers of the Promitiue Church allowed practised the Religious State of Monastical life and that manie Christians of those purest times both men and women did strictly obserue and professe the same chap. 18. f. 74. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church allowed practised prescribed fasts and abstinence from certaine meats vpon dayes and times appointed holding the same obligatorie vnder sinne condemning also our Puritan Sabboath Fasts chap. 19. fol. 80. It is admitted by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church expresly taught our Catholick Doctrine concerning Free wil. chap. 20. fol. 84 It is granted by Protestants that the Fathers of the Primitiue Church taught not only Faith but likewise Good works truly to iustifye that the sayd works are meritorious of Grace and Glorie chap. 21. fol. 86. It is acknowledged by Protestants that the Ceremonies now vsed in the Roman Church in the ministring of seruice or Sacrifice as also of the Sacraments were formerly vsed by the Bishops Priests and Fathers of the Primitiue Church chap. 22. fol. 89 THE THIRD BOOK WHERIN is proued that the Church of Protestants was neuer knowne or in Being before the d yes of Luther And that the Articles of Religion now taught by the Protestant Congregation were Heresies condemned by the Primitiue Church of Christ IT is confessed by Protestants that from the dayes of the Apostles vntil the tyme of Luther themselues neuer had any knowne Church or Congregatiō in anie part of the vniuersal World chap. 1. fol. 1. A Further conuincing proof of the Protestant Churches not being during the first 600. yeares is taken from the Fathers Condemning in the ancient Hereticks the chiefest articles of the Protestant Religion and our Protestants Confessing the same And First Concerning the Sacraments chap. 2. fol. 6. That the Fathers condemned in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning the Scriptures and the Church Militant and Triumphant chap. 3. fol. 9. That the Fathers condemned in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning Monachisme the mariage of Priests and prescribed Fasts chap. 4. fol. 12. That the Fathers condemned in ancient Hereticks the opinions of Protestants concerning Free-wil Faith Good works the Commandments sinne and the knowledge and Death of Christ chap. 5. fol. 14. Protestants Vsual recrimination of obiecting old Heresies to the Catholick Roman Church is cleerly examined discouered confuted by their owne acknowledgements chap. 6. fol. 17. A Further trial is Made Whether Catholicks or Protestants be true Hereticks and this by sundrie knowne badges or markes of Heresie chap. 7. fol. 23. A brief Suruey of D. Whites Catalogue wherin contrary to the Confessed truth in the precedent Chapter of no knowne beginning or change of our Romane Faith in anye Age he vndertaketh according to his Title therof to shew That the present Religion of the Roman Church was obserued resisted in al Ages as it came in and increased naming withal the Persons that made the Resistance And the poynts wherin And the time when from fiftie yeares to fiftie through-out al Ages since Christ chap. 8. fol. 35. THE FOVRTH BOOK WHERIN is proued by the Confession of Protestants that according to the Sacred Scriptures the Roman Church is the true Church of Christ And so to haue euer continued from his time vntil the Date hereof And of the contrary the Protestants Church to be only a Sect Heretical and neuer to haue been before the dayes of Luther PRotestants flying to the sacred Scriptures in proof defence of their Church and Religion it is shewed the sayd flight not only in itself to be dishonourable but also to be the ordinarie flight of al moderne Hereticks chap. 1. fol. 1. That euen the Sacred Scriptures themselues do most plentifully testify our Romane Church to be the Church of of Christ and the Congregation or Church of Protestants to be no true Church but a Sect Heretical most contrarie to the said Scriptures And that first by the Churches necessarie continuance and vniuersalitie chap. 2. fol. 5. The second Proof from sacred Scriptures in cōfirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Euer visibilitie of Christ's Church chap. 3. fol. 10. The third Proof from Sacred Scriptures in Cōfirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Churches Pastours which must euer continue with lawful Calling and Succession and with Administration of Word and Sacraments chap. 4. fol. 13. The fourth Proof from sacred Scriptures in confirmation of the Roman Church and Confutation of the Protestant is taken from the Conuersion of Heathen Kings and Nations to the Faith of Christ chap. 5. fol. 24. A Discouerie or brief Examination of sundrie sleights and Euasions vsed by Protestant Writers in Excuse of the manifest confessed want of their Churches fulfilling the foresaid Scripiures concerning the continuance vniuersalitie and visibilitie of Christs true Church chap. 6. fol. 33. THE FIFT BOOK WHERIN is shewed that Protestants in the Decision of Controuersies between them and Catholicks do absolutly disclaime from Antiquitie reiecting the Ancient Fathers and Councels for Papistical and the Sacred Scriptures for erroneous THat Protestants Disclaime from al Antiquitie since the Apostles and further reiect and condemne as Papistical the Ancient Fathers and General Councels chap. 1. fol. 1. That the Protestant Church disclaimeth from the Fathers of the Primitiue Church it is further proued by the Protestants condemning al the ancient Fathers in general for beleeuing teaching and practising the seueral particular actions of our Catholick Roman Faith and Religion chap. 2. fol. 12. That Protestants do not only disclaime from al the ancient Fathers as Papists but do further reiect the authoritie of the sacred Scriptures and of the Apostles themselues as being erroneous and that therefore they do not found their Faith or Religion vpon Sacred Scriptures or Christ his Apostles chap. 3. fol. 18. A TABLE SHEWING THE particular matters handled in this Booke A. AELfricus no Protestant l. 3. c. 8. pag. 51. Albigenses taught sundrie errours lib. 1. c. 3. pag. 12. Almaricus his errours l. 3. c. 8. p. 55. Antiquitie commended Praef. to the Reader and lib. 5. c. 1. pag. 1. 2. Antiquitie reiected by Protestants as a Popish Argument l. 1. c. 5. pag. 26. Anthonie the Monk commended l. 2. c. 18. Apostles according to Protestants erred in Faith euen after the comming of the Holie-Ghost l. 5. c. 3. p. 23. 25. Apocalyps reiected by Protestants lib. 5 c. 3. p. 24. Armenia conuerted by the Apostles lib. 1. c. 6. p.