doctrin and therfore resolved to accomodat the doctrin of the Church of England to his humour Hooper and Rogers agreed vpon an ecclesiastical Government inconsistent with Monarchy which was that over every 10. Churches or Parishes in England there should be a learned Superintendent appointed who should have faithful readers vnder him and that all Popish Priests should clean be put out And to draw all publick matters of state and Religion to them-selves they composed a Treatise to prove That it is lawful for any privat man to reason and writ against a wicked Act of Parliament and vngodly Councel c. see Fox pag. 1357. col 1. num 72. And Hoopers prophecy against the Prelatick protestants for not conforming them-selves to his Puritan and Presbiterian disciplin pag 1356. And of his contention with Cranmer and other Prelatick protestants about the oath of Supremacy c. Fox pag. 1366. Both Cranmer and Ridly made apear to the Protector and Councel that Hoopers Presbiterian disciplin was not consistent with the Constitution of Parliaments and the refusal of the oath of Supremacy to be of dangerous consequence in a tyme that Deuenshir Northfolk and many other Shires had taken arms in defence of the Roman Catholick faith It was further considered that so sudain a change from on extreme to an other in matters of religion as it would have bin from ceremonious Popery to plain Preâ—bitery was against the rules of policy therfore seing the people had bin so long accustomed to the Mass and to Ecclesiastical ceremonies it was judg'd expedient to make the vulgar sort believe the chang was not of Religion but of language that the common prayr was the Mass in English that the substance of the Catholick faith was retained in the Prelatick caps copes and surplises and what alteration there seem'd to be was but of things indifferent or petty circumstances and had bin resolved vpon by the King and Parliament more to preserve vniformity then to promote novelty as may be seen by any that wil observe the words of the statuts confirming the common prayr book administration rits ad ceremonies of the Sacrament 2. Ed. 6.1 and the Councels letter to the Bishops recited by Fox pag. 1184. col 1. Whereof long tyme there had bin in this Realm of England divers forms of common prayer And where the Kings Majesty hath hereto fore divers tyms assayed to stay innovations or new rits To the intent that an vniform quiet and godly order should be had concerning the premises hath appointed the Archbishop of Canterbury should draw and make one convenient and meet order of common Prayer and administration of Sacraments to be vsed in England Wales c. The which at this tyme by the ayde of the holy Ghost with vniform agreement is of them concluded c. in the Statut. But in very deed the whole substance of Catholick Religion was changed and nothing retained but so much therof as seemed necessary to keep the name of Christians and had not bin rejected by most of the ancient condemned hereticks as shal appeare by our obseruations vpon the 39. ensuing articles of Religion of the Church of England SECT V. Of the 39. Articles of the Church of England WHosoever considerâ—â— these 39. Articles of Religion composed by Cranmer and his Divines may easily perceive their drift was rather to humour factions at home and dissenting Protestants abroad to countenance sensuality and grant a liberty of not believing the particulars of Christianity then to instruct men in the doctrin of Christ or to prescribe any certain rule of Faith For their method is to word so the matter of the Articles that where Protestants disagree among themselves every one of the dissenting parties may apply the Text to his own sense In so much that the Presbiterians except not against the doctrins themsel-ves rightly explained that is according to their explanation but against the wording and expressions therof which say they are ambiguous and capable of more senses then one and so may be and are wrested to patronise errors In the mistery of the real presence they speak clearly against it because it was resolved in Parliament That England should be Zuinglian in that point against the Catholick faith of Transsubstantiation Wherfore after Cranmer and the other his Contemporisers had set down in five of their six first Articles the belief of the Trinity Incarnation Passion and Resurrection wherof no Protestants then doubted they dare not declare themselves in the third wheein they speak of Christ descent into Hell whether it was to that of the damned or to a third place for that if they denyed the first they would have offended Calvin Jf they denyed the last they were sure to disoblige some Lutherans that admitted of Lymbus or a third place In the sixt Article they free all men from an obligation of believing any thing that is not read in Scripture or proved therby and make it their ownly rule of faith and themselves the Judges therof wherin they agree with the ancient Hereticks Arians Donatists Eunomians Nestorians c. But for that some Protestant doctrins are expresly reproved by many Parts of Scripture they make those parts Apocrypha because forsooth they were doubted of by some Churches in the primitive tymes And truly if a man will reflect vpon these words of thâ—ir sixt Article We do vnderstand those Canonical Books of the ould and new Testament of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church he may cleerly see that they believe many parts of the new Testament not to be Canonical Scripture because many parts therof have bin doubted of in the Church before the Canon was determined See after part 2. In the 7. they only declare that Christians are not bound to observe the ceremonial but only the moral law of Moyses In the 8. they tel vs of foure Creeds wherof S. Athanasius his symbol is one are to be believed because they may be proved by Scripture and yet S. Athanasius himself declared in â—he Councel of Nice that the doctrin of his Symbol that is the mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation could not be proved by Scripture alone or without Tradition In the 9. and 10. Article they follow the heretick Proclus the Messalians Zuinglius Luther and Calvins doctrin concerning Original sin In the 11. Article they teach with some of the Pseudo-Apostles with Eunomius and with the same Zuinglius Luther and Calvin that men are justified by faith alone See herafter of the justification by only faith how inconsistent with any solicitude or care for good works And in the 12. would faine but in vaine free themselves and their Doctrin from the aspersion of neglecting good works though they maintain them not to be necessary for justification In the 13. Article they say all virtuous moral actions of men â—hat are not in grace have the nature of sin And in the 14. they follow Eunomius Vigilantius
as Kings and their Courts by the laws But Protestants do not observe that as the interpretation of the laws depends not of them who sue the King but of the ancient practise of his Judges and Courts so the interpretation of Scripture must not be made by tâ—em who sue the Pope and Councels but by the Bishop and the Church who ar to explain it not according to every on 's privat fancy as Protestants do but according to the tradition customs and practises of the orthodox Christians in former Ages And by this we free the Roman Catholick Church and the Councel of Trent from the Protestant calumny of novelty of doctrin not only in this particular of the Canon of Scripture but in all it 's other definitions Proâ—estants confound our new Decrees with new doctrin wheras nothing is more cleer then that old doctrin may be defined by a new Decree that is made more publick and authentick The Councel tels them sess 4. that it only declares what Canon of Scripture the primitive Church held and quotes for it divers ancient Faâ—hers and Councels and therfor it 's Decree maks no new Canon of Scripture but is a promulgation of the old which induceth an obligation of believing what formerly had not bin so generaly known because it had not bin so cleerly and solemnly proclaimed Methinks none ought to carp less at the novelty of our definitions then Protestants if they would reflect vpon their own reformations They pretend that their doctrin is not only renewed but revived because forsooth the whole visible Church had lost that purity of the Primitive faith for many ages which they now have restored Roman Catholicks are more moderat and modest as having a better opinion of the Church and of God's providence they confess that the doctrin defended by the Councel of Trent was never extinguished in the Church but that it lived in the harts and profession of many faithful though many others of the same communion did not hold them-selves obliged to believe it as a doctrin of faith vntil it had bin sufficiently and solemnly proponed by the Definition of the Church in a general Councel as Divine That being don no addition or alteration was made of divine faith For new definitions are not new articles of faith but promulgations of the old faith or declarations of our obligation to believe as articles of faith those things which had bin formerly revealed but not so sufficiently proposed to the whole Catholick Church Wherfore articles of Faith not believed before they be decreed by a general Councel may be aptly compared to laws or ordinances before they ar published as the publication or proclamation of a law maks not a law but declares the obligation of complying therwith so the definition of a general Councel maks not the article of faith but declareth the obligation of believing that doctrin which before the publication or proclamation of the Church had not bin sufficiently proposed as Divine revelation To what purpose then did Doctor Cozins trouble him-self and his Readers with composing a book against the Catholick Canon of Scripture declared in the Councel of Trent when all his arguments are but sayings of men who doubted of books and parts of Scripture before they were declared and only because they were not declared Canonical by a general Councel He would fain impose vpon the world that S. Ierom was so much a Jew and so little a Christian as for the Canon of the old Testament to rely altogeather vpon the Hebrew Rabins and that he set a greater value vpon their testimony then vpon the authority of the Church or of the great Councel of Nice which received into the Canon of Scripture the book of Judith though rejected by the Jews His proof of S. Jerom's judgment being the same with that of Protestants in this controversy is that in some places of his writings he says the contested books of the old Testament are not in the Canon of the Jews nor received as Canonical by the Christian Church to which is answered that S. Jerom altered his opinion as appeareth in his prefaces prefixed to the said books which he translated into latin at the instance of the Churches and Bishops that held them to be Canonical to whose belief S. Jerom at length conformed his own judgment In his preface to the Book of Tobie he says Yee desire me to translate a booke from the Caldean language to Latin the book of Tobie which the Hebrews admit not into the Catalogue of Sacred Scriptures J have satisfied your desire c. The Hebrews reprehend vs c. Because we have translated into latin things against their Canon But I judged it better to displease the judgment of Pharisees then disobey the commands of Bishops c. In conformity to this he says in his preface of Iudith With the Hebrews the book of Iudith is read amongst the Agiographa the authority wherof is judged less fit to decide controversie c. But because the Nicen Synod is read to have computed this book in the number of holy Scripturs J have acquiesced or complyed with your demand Out of which words it is manifest 1. That St. Jerom was not of the same opinion with the Iews concerning these books because he says he displeased or offended their judgment by his translation as a thing against their Canon which would not have â—in vnless his intention in translating and judgment were known to favour the belief of the Bishops and Christians that held them to be Canonical for the translating them only as pious books could not be offensive to the Iews who acknowledged them for such as Cozins with Chemnitius and all Protestants confess though pag. 82. he contradicts him-self having no other shift left to prove St. Ierom a Iew in this particular And his words of the book of Iudith demonstrat that he opposed the authority of the Nicen Councel against the opinion of the Iews to prove that book Canonical and fit to determin controversies of Religion and in case we should grant he doubted whether the Councel numbred it in the Canon yet non can doubt but that he believed the Councel had authority to declare it Canonical which is the point disputed of But Doctor Cozins would willingly make us believe by a notorious fraud and imposture that Cardinal Belarmin doth not only acknowledg St. Ierom to have persisted still in his former opinion of excluding these controverted books from the Canon but also that the Councel of Nice never received that of Iudith into it and to that purpose pag. 45. quotes Belarmin's words de verbo Dei lib. 1. c. 10. vlt. thus Admitto Hieronymum in ea fuisse opinione quia nondum generale Concilium de his libris aliquid statuerat These words the honest Protestant Bishop of Duresme setts down in capital letters and with them concluds Cardinal Belarmin's sentence and sense concerning Hierom's opinion of the book of Iudith and
of the Councel of Nice and most vnconscionably cuts of the words immediatly following where Belarmin says the quite contrary of what Cozins imposed vpon his Readers to make good his English Canon of Scripture The words immediatly following are Excepto libro Iudith quem etiam Hieronimus postea recepit Except the booke of Iudith which also Hierom afterwards received as Canonical So that where Cozins says Belarmin confesseth that S. Hierom sayd the Councel of Nice declared not the book of Iudith Canonical Belarmin in that very place says the quite contrary And in the same page cap. 12. Belarmin proves by S. Hieroms testimony and words that the book of Iudith was declared Canonical in the highest degree by the Nicen Councel It were to be wished that Ecclesiastical promotions had bin better bestowed then upon 139 men whose labour and learning 〈◊〉 altogeather employed in seducing souls concealing the truth of Religion from their flocks and corrupting the writings of the ancient Fathers and modern Doctors of the Church for no other reason but because they speak so cleerly against the Protestant Doctrine of these times wherby our Prelatick Ministers are maintained vsurping vast revenues from the Crown and come to the greatest preferments both of Church and State I have not seen any one Protestant Writer free from this fault 't is strange that after so manifest and manifould discoverys as have bin made of Mortons Andrews Fox Sutclif Jewell Barlow Whitaker Willet Vsher Lauds and others falsifications frauds and labyrinths there should be men yet found to follow their examples and much more to be wondred that they should thrive by a trade so base vnconscionable and distructive notwithstanding so manifest and frequent discoveries of their impostures As to this work of Doctor Cosins it may be properly called a Cosenage independently of an allusion to his name had not his book bin sufficiently confuted by the absurdity of his fundamental principles denying that the Apostles or Christian Church could declare any book of the old Testament Canonical which the Iews omitted or rejected and affirming that no parts of the New Testament were ever questioned by any Church ancient or modern I should set down many more of his willful falsifications and weake evasions but that labour being rendred superfluous by the incoherency of his own doctrin and by the inconsistency of his principles with including in that Canon of Scripture which he vndertakes to defend the epistles above mentioned of Peter Iohn Paul and Iude and the Apocalyps for it is evident by the quoted testimonies both of ancient Fathers and learned Protestants that these epistles of Iohn Iude Peter and Paul as also the Apocalyps were doubted of by many Christian Churches for three or foure ages I do not think fitt to trouble the Reader nor my self with a more particular confutation of this rather fantastical then Scholastical History of the Canon of Scripture fantastical J say because he fancies to him-self that the authority and sayings of men who writ before this controversy had bin decided by a general Councel and at the same time professed a faith which obliged them so submit ther writings and judgments to the decrees of Councels can be of any force against that general Councel by which the contrary was decided and they would have bin guided by if they had bin now living as St. Austin saith of St. Cyprian in a point of doctrine which was determined by a general Councel against the holy Martyrs opinion long after his death Whosoever can take delight in seing the pittifull shifts and sleights wherby interested writers endeavour to blind mens eyes and vnderstandings let him peruse this book of Doctor Cozins and he will find more sport in observing how he tosses and turns the sayings of the Fathers against them-selves then could be wished in so serious a subject When the Fathers call the books of Macabees Tobie Judith c. sacred and Divine Scripture Canonical Scripture prophetical writings of Divine authority c. Holy inspirations revelations c. he tels you pag. 93. alibi passim all this must be understood in a large and popular sence though the contrary may appeare to any vnbyass'd judgment that will read the words by him cited pag. 92. alibi in the Authors themselves as for example let any one observe how Doctor Cozins mingles and mangles S. Austin's words concerning the controverted books of the Machabees and afterwards see what the St. him-self says he will â—â—rce believe the words are the same and may swear the sense is not For S. Austin lib. 2. de doctr Christ. cap. 8. sets down as his own sense the same Canon of Scripture which the Councel of Trent accepts and confirmeth and he subscribed unto in the third Councel of Carthage And because he knew that this Canon had not bin defined by a general Councel and therfore many Churches and Fathers doubted of some books which he and the 3. Councel of Carthage held for Canonical he gives some instructions how they who do not follow his Canon shall proceed vntill they be more fully informed or the matter decided and these instructions which he sets down for others who doubted and differ'd in opinion from him Doctor Cozins wilfully mistakes and misapplies to St. Austin him-self as if he could be ignorant of his own belief of the Canon He is also troubled that St. Austin doth favour so much the doctrine of Purgatory and the authority of the Catholick Church in declaring books of the Old Testament to be Canonical which were rejected by the Iews as to say lib. 18. de Civit. Dei c. 36. That the books of the Machabees are accompted Canonical by the Church although not by the Jews To weaken this testimony he brings an other that strengthens it and quotes St. Austin's words Ep. 61. ad Dulcitium wherin confuting the error of the Circomcellions who to cloake their self-homicides with text and examples of Scripture excused that doctrin with the examples of Eleazarus and Razias related in the Machabees which pretext St. Austin largly confutes not only in his epistle ad Dulcit but in his 2. book against the epistle of Gaudent cap. 23. not by deminishing the Canonical authority of the books of the Machabees as Doctor Cozins falsly imposeth vpon his Readers pag. 108. seq but by declaring how the Scripture doth indeed relate yet not commend the self-homicide of Eleazarus and Râ—zias nor canonize them Martyrs or propose their deaths to be imitated though it cannot be denyed but that they shew'd great worldly courage and contempt of life Did Doctor Cozins imagin that Dulcitius Gaudentius and other learned Circumcellions were such Coxcombs as to prove their Religion by Scripture and then to quote for Scripture a book which their Adversaries admitted not at least for so Canonical as that controversies of Religion could be therby decided or doth he think that St. Austin would not have put them in
mind of that folly in very cleer termes and excuse farther disputes by telling them plainly and without going about the bush that the Machabees was not Canonical Scripture nor fit to be quoted in matters of Religious controversies But the Doctor argues pag. 110. that St. Austin tells Gaudentius the Christian Church receiveth those books not vnprofitably if they be discreetly or soberly read or heard what then All discreet and sober men say the same not only of the books of the Machabees but of all the other books and parts of Scripture and St. Peter sayth the same in substance of St. Paul's epistles Will the Doctor conclude from thense that St. Paul's epistles are not Canonical Scripture because men may read them indiscreetly and deprave them to their own damnation Or that there is no Scripture at all because he himself or some of his Bishoprick of Duresme do not read the Bible with sobriety and discretion these words of St. Austin in the Doctor 's judgment pag. 108. are so cleerly against the Canonical authority of the Machabees that he says Cardinal Belarmin layd his thumb vpon them and durst not relate them I am sure he pointed at them with his Pen and directed all the world to see and examin them by his quoting the book and Chapter where they are as my Lord of Duresme him-self confesseth in the margent neither could Belarmin Peron or any oâ—her Catholick Writer observe any disadvantage to their cause in those following words of S. Austin Which Doctor Cozins pretends to be so notoriously prejudicial Recepta est ab Ecclesia non invtiliter c. The Machabees is received by the Church for holy Scripture not vnprofitably if it be soberly read or heard That is sayth Doctor Cozins pag. 110. As St. Augustin els wher expoundeth him-self but where Doctor Cozins doth not because he cannot tell If those things that we read there be conferred with the sacred and Canonical Scriptures that whatsoever is therevnto agreeable may be approved and what is otherwise may be rejected According to this acute explanation which Doctor Cozins falsly fathers vpon S. Austin the most profane books and Romances Esop's Fables and Don Quixote may be received by the Church for holy Scripture as well as the Machabees if those things that we read therin be conferr'd with the sacred and Canonical Scriptures and whatsoever is thervnto agreable be approved and what is otherwise be rejected It were too tedious to note all Doctor Cozins his mistakes Let these few serve to know by what a pillar the English Canon and Church is supported SECT IV. Protestants so grossly mistaken in their letter and Translations of the Scriptures that they can not have any certainty of faith and are forc't at length by their principles to question the truth of Scriptures and of them who writ the Canonical books therof THe holy Scriptures were writen by the Prophets Apostles and Evangelists either in Hebrew Greeck or Latin the old Testament excepting some few parts writen in Chaldaick and Syriack was writen in Hebrew the new Testament for the greatest part in Greeck S. Mathew's Ghospel in Hebrew S. Marck's in Latin We have not the original writings of these Prophets and Apostles nor of the 70. Interpreters who translated the old Testament into Greek some 300. years before the comming of Christ we have only Copies for the truth and exactness wherof we must rely vpon the testimony and tradition of the Church which in so important a point God would never permit to err at least it must have bin so infallible therin as that the Copy be sufficiently authentick to be a rule of deciding controversies of faith and of directing men to holiness of life though perhaps no copy is so exact but therin may remain some erratas of the press and pen yet easily discoverable by it's coherency or incoherency with other parts of the Text. Notwithstanding the necessity of admitting some true and authentick copy of Scripture for what can it availe a Christian to believe that Scripture is the word of God if he be vncertain which copy or Translation is true and authentick Scripture Protestants pretend there is no authentick copy of Scripture in the world as may be seen in the preface of the Tigurin edition of the Bible and in all their books of Controversy seing therin they condemn the Councel of Trent for declaring that the old Latin Translation is authentick and yet themselves name no other for authentick and therfore though the Lutherans fancy Luther's Translation the Calvinists that of Geneva the Zuinglians that of Zuinglius the English some times one somtimes an other yet because they do not hold any one to be infallibly authentick it followeth from their exceptions against the infallibility of the Roman Catholick Church in declaring or decreeing a true and authentick copy of Scripture and their confession of the vncertainty of their own translations that they have no certainty of Scripture nor even of faith which they ground vpon Scripture alone Most of the old Testament as it is in the vulgar Latin Translation which the Councel of Trent declares to be authentick was â—ranslated out of Hebrew by St. Hierom and the new Testament had bin before his time translated out of Greek but was by him revewed and such faults as had crept in through negligence of the Transcribers were corrected You constraine me sayth he to make a new work of an old that I after so many copies of the Scripture dispersed through the world should sit as a certain Iudg and determin which of them agree with the true Greek and in this Cathalogue he saith Novum Testamentum graecae fidei reddidi vetus juxta haebraicum transtuli The antiquity and sincerity of the first Interpreter and the great Commendations therof to be seene in St. Austin de Civit. Dei lib. 18. c. 43. Non defuit temporibus nostris Presbiter Hieronymus homo doctissimus omnium trium linguarum peritissimus qui non è Graeco sed ex Haebraeo in Latinum eloquium easdem Scripturas converterit Cujus tamen litterarum laborem Judaei fatentur esse veracem And lib. 2. doct Christi cap. 15. togeather with the eminent Sanctity and learning of S. Hierom forceth our Adversarie Bâ—eza to confess Annotationibus in caput 1. Luc. That the old Interpreter seemeth to have interpreted the holy books with marveilous sincerity and Religion and in praefat novi Testam The vulgar edition I do for the most part embrace and preferr before all others Carolus Molinaeus in nov Testam part 30. I can very hardly depart from the vulgar and accustomed reading which in Luc. 17. he professeth to preferr before Erasmus Bucer Bullinger Brentius the Tigurin Translation and even before Iohn Calvins and all others Doctor Humfrey de ratione interpret l. 1. pag. 74. The old Interpreter seemeth to be much addicted to the propriety of the words and truly with too much
Protestant Church of England Pag. 62. Cranmer a meer Cotemporiser and of no Religion at all Pag. 63. Who fram'd the 39 Articles Pag. 64. Of the 39 Articles of the Church of England Pag. 67. Protestant Bishops well pleas'd to see themselves Religiously Worship'd Pag. 70. Protestants though they have chang'd their Form of Ordination yet cannot have a true Clergy till they change also the Character of the Ordainers Pag. 80. Of the Effects immediatly produc'd by the 39 Articles Pag. 82. Dudely Earl of Warwick's Endeavours to have his Son to Reign after K. Edw. His Marrying him to the Lady Jane Gray Pag. 83. Queen Mary's Troubles Pag. 84. The Roman Catholicks willing Resignation of the Church Livings to the Crown Pag. 86. An Act of Parliament in the first year of Q. Mary concerning the fraud and force of K. Henry the VIII's unlawful Divorce from Q. Catharine Pag. 88. Other Effects of Protestancy after it was reviv'd in England by Q. Elizabeth to exclude the Royal Family of the Stewards from the Crown And of the Nullity of her Clergies Character and Jurisdiction Pag. 95. Decreed in Parliament that any Natural Issue of Q. Elizabeths Body should enjoy the Crown after her Death and so the Line of Stewards to be Excluded Pag. 100. Reasons why Q. Elizabeth in her 44 years Reign could not make her Prelatick Clergy and Religion acceptable Pag. 103 How Injurious Protestancy hath been to the Royal Family of the Stewards and how Zealous they have been in promoting the same Pag. 109. K. James the I. declared that Catholicks and their Religion had no Hand in Gun-powder Treason Pag. 112. Of K. Charles the First Pag. 112. Part. 2. Of the Inconsistency of Protestant Principles with Christian Piety and Peaceable Government THe foundation whereon all Reformations are built Pag. 117. The Protestant evasion of the clearness of Scripture against Roman Catholick Doctrine and also of the Invisibility of their own Church Confuted And the Incredibility of the suppos'd Change and Apostacy prov'd by the difference of the Roman Catholick and Protestant Principles Pag. 121 Protestants mistaken in the Canon of the Scripture maintain'd by the Church of England and by Dr. Cousins Bishop of Duresin Pag. 131. Dr. Couzins Exceptions and Falsifications against the Councel of Trent's Authority answer'd Pag. 137. New Definitions are not New Articles of Faith Pag. 141. Protestants so grosly mistaken in their Letter and Translation of Scriptures that they cannot have any Certainty of Faith And are forc'd at length by their Principles to question the Truth of Scriptures and of them who writ the Canonical Books thereof Pag. 149. Particular Instances of Protestant Corruptions in the English Bible Pag. 157. Protestant Interpretation is not the true Sense of Script Pag. 163. Protestants Mistaken in the Ministry and Mission of their Clergy in the Miracles of their Church in the Sanctity and Honesty of their Reformers Pag. 168. Calvin's Miracle Pag. 180. Beza's Lasciviousness He prefers his Boy Andibertus before his Girle Candida Pag. 181. Protestants mistaken in the application of the Prophesies of Scripture concerning the Conversion of the Kings and Nations of the Gentils from Paganism to Christianity foretold as an Infallible Mark of the True Church and whereof the Protestant is depriv'd Pag. 183. Calvin sends Ministers to Convert Gallia Antartica from Heathenism And what success they had Pag. 190. Protestants mistaken in the consistency of their Justifying Faith with Justice or Civil Government Pag. 193. The Protestant Doctrine of Justifying Faith most dangerous and Damnable Pag. 198. Protestants mistaken in the consistency of Christian Faith Humility Charity Peace either in Church or State with their making Scriptures as interpreted by private Persons or Fallible Synods or fancied General Councils composed of all Dissenting Christian Churches the Rule of Faith and Judge of Controversies in Religion How every Protestant is a Pope and how much also they are overseen in making the 39 Articles or the Oath of Supremacy a distinctive Sign of Loyalty to our Protestant Kings Pag. 207. How the Fundamental Principles of Protestancy maturely examin'd and strictly followed have led the most Learned Protestants of the World to Judaisme Atheism Arianisme and Mahometanisme c. Pag. 222. The Protestant Churches of Poland Hungary and Transilvania deny the Mystery of the Blessed Trinity Pag. 230. How the Indifferency or rather Inclination of Protestancy to all kind of Infidelity is further demonstrated by the Prelatick Doctrine and distinction of Fundamental and Not Fundamental Articles of Faith The design of their fundamental distinction laid open The Roman Catholick the sole Catholick Church And how it has the Authority of Judging all Controversy of Religion Pag. 233. The Roman Catholick Church is a Competent and Impartial Judge of Controversies of Religion Pag. 241. Of the Justice and Legality of our Roman Censures against Protestancy Pag. 242. All Christians were never Judges of Religion one Party always submitted to the Judgment of the Other that was in Obedience to and in Communion with St. Peters Successor the Bishop of Rome Pag. 247. Gods Veracity is deny'd by Protestancy and by the Prelatick Distinction and Doctrine of Fundamental and not Fundamental Articles of Faith Pag. 251. Protestancy is Heresie Pag. 254. Protestancy contradicts Gods Veracity Pag. 255. The Infallibility of the Roman Catholick Church in Matters of Faith prov'd against Protestants Pag. 256. The Protestant Doctrine of Fundamentals Confuted Pag. 257. The same further demonstrated and prov'd that neither the Protestant Faith nor the Faith lately Asserted in a Book call'd Sure footing in Christianity is Christian Belief Pag. 260. The Resolution of Protestant Faith Pag. 262. The Infallibility of the Church prov'd by Gods Veracity Pag. 268. Heresie Explain'd by Rebellion Pag. 269. The Unreasonableness of them who pretend a private Spirit and refuse to submit to the Authority of the Church for want of Clearer Evidence than the Roman Catholicks hath of Gods Authority Pag. 269. Reasons for Liberty of Conscience And how much both Piety and Policy is mistaken in making Prelatick Protestancy the Religion of the State by continuing and pressing the Sanguinary and Penal Statutes against the Roman Catholick Faith and the Act of Uniformity against Sectaries Pag. 271. Queen Marys and the Inquisitions Severity against Protestancy can be no President or excuse for the Statutes against Popery Pag. 283. Part 3. Containing a plain Discovery of the Protestant Clergys Frauds and Falsifications whereby alone their Doctrine is supported and made Credible The Conscience and Conveniency of Restoring or Tolerating the Roman Catholick Religion Demonstrated THat either the Learned Protestants or Roman Catholick Clergy are Cheats and how every Illiterate Protestant may easily discern by which of the two Clergies he is Cheated And therefore is oblig'd under pain of Damnation to examine so near a concern And to renounce the Doctrine and Communion of that Church wherein he is Cheated Pag. 287. With what Impudency and Hypocrisy Bishop Jewel
and reformations They began in Luthers owne days and still continue to increase and multiply having no rule of faith but an obscure text of Scripture nor no Church or Court of judging the controversies therof with an obligation to submit there-unto but every ons privat opinion which must needs breed diuision add confusion And so it happened in the very beginning to Luther For his Disciples observing that every one of them-selves might pretend to be sent by God by an extraordinary vocation as well as Luthers seing he proved not his Mission by Miracles or by any supernatural sign to reforme the Church divers of them separated from him and set up for them-selves as Zuinglius who invented the Sacramentarian Religion against Christs real presence in the Sacrament and Bernard Rotman Father of Anabaptists c. It were tedious to relate all their divisions and almost impossible We will only assure the Reader that in the space of 30. years after Luther began his Reformation it was divided and subdivided in Germany alone into 130. Sects For first his Disciples divided them-selves into four principal Reformations of plain Lutherans halfe Lutherans Antilutherans or Sacramentarians and Anabaptists These plain Lutherans into eleuen Sects and these againe into soft rigid and extravagant Lutherans the semilutherans or half Lutherans also into eleven Sects The Sacramentarians or Antilutherans into 56. and one of these into 9. The Anabaptists into 13. Sebastianus Traneus a Protestant numbreth 70. How all these have bin subdivided since we may guess at by the variety we see in England of Protestant Religions not with standing the severity of the Laws in favor of the Prelatik Not one of these Sects have subordination to another and agree only in some generall Notions of Christianity and in impugning the Roman Catholick Religion one of the marks wherby the Holy Fathers discerned Heresies Each of them pretend to be a true Church and condemn the rest as Schismatical and Heretical Congregations perpetualy quoting Scripture one against the other but understood according to every on s conveniency fancying or feigning that the Spirit of God inspires him to reform not only the Roman Doctrin but the Protestant reformations But when we call to them for their comission which must be signed by Miracles and desire to know by what authority they presume to take vpon them so high an employment they tell vs that Miracles are ceased in the Church and all ours either counterfeit or Diabolicall wrought by the Devill to confirm us in the Idolatry of the Mass Invocation of Saints c. But because our Miracles exceed the Devills power and can be wrought only by God rather then Protestants will embrace the truth by Miracles testified they teach a blasphemy saying that God doth give power of working true Miracles unto false teachers not to confirm their false and Popish opinions but to tempt those the Indians Iaponeses and Chineses unto whom they be sent By which Paradox they call in question Christianity it self for why might not God tempt the Iews and primitive Christians by Christs Miracles as well as the Indians and Iaponians by others of the same nature and as prodigious If the Indians be not bound to belieue the doctrin preach't to them though confirmed by our true miracles why should the Jews or any others be obliged in conscience to belieue Christ For if God may work true Miracles to make a falshood so plausibly credible as to oblige prudent men to belieue it no prudent man is bound to belieue the truth when it is euidently confirmed with true Miracles and by consequence none was or is bound to belieue in Christ which doctrin is impious and contrary to our Sauiours own words Ioan. 5.36 and against 2. Cor. 12. Hebr. 2.4 and Marc. 16.20 and Joan 15.24 Where our Sauiour declares that the reason why the incredulous Jews did sin in not believing his Diuinity was because he confirmed his doctrin with Miracles Jf I had not don among them the works which no other man did they had not sinned As for their authority of reforming the Roman Catholick faith they answered that they needed no other warrant but Scripture which did cleerly condemn the Popish Tenets Being desired to shew what parts or words of Scripture were Contrary to the Popish Tenets for that after comparing all places and Texts very godly and learned men could find no such opposition between Gods word and the Roman doctrin they replied that the reason why the Popish Diuins and Prelats did not see their own errors afterall their search and study was because they had not the spirit of God which had reuealed to Protestants the true meaning of holy writ though they could not deny but that their own interpretation was new and contrary to that which the visible Church of the 15. â—n age had receiued from the 14 th and the 14 th from the 13 th and so forth Therfore they all conspired in maintaining that the visible Church had erred in doctrin and that the mystery of iniquity began euen with the Apostles or immediatly after But because some parts of Scripture are so cleere against their new doctrin that they could not be wrested against the Roman Catholicks nor reach the Protestant thy framed a new Canon of Scripture and excluded as Apocryphall many Books and Chapters which spook cleerly against them and in their translations of the ould and new Testament into vulgar languages they added to and substracted from Gods word what they thought fit to make the illiterat people belieue that their new inuentions were agreable to Scripture and that Popery was quite contrary to the same And because none of the first Reformers was a Bishop and they knew Bishops only could consecrat other Bishops and Priests and that no Congregation could be esteemed a Church with out that caracter and calling according to the receiued maxim of S. Hieron Ecclesia non est quae non habet Sacerdotem Luther And the rest who pretended a Reformation judged it necessary to alter this doctrin and declare that all Christians both men and women are Priests by baptism yet that only such as are chosen by the Congregation or Magistrat ought to exercise the function for the auoyding of confusion Luther endeauors to proue it at large thus The first office of a Priest is to preach the word c. But this is common to all next is to baptyze and this also may do euen women c. The third is to consecrat bread and wyn but this also is common to all no less then Priests and this I avouch by the authority of Christ him-self saying Do this in remembrance of me this Christ spook to all there present and to come afterwards whosoever should eat of that bread and drink of that wine c. This also is wittnessed by S. Paul who 1. Cor. 11. repeating this applyeth it to all the Corinthians making them all as
were censured in these four first Councels with the Protestant exceptions and objections against the Councel of Trent especily if they wil pervse but the very first leaves of Cardinal Palavicino his confutation of Fr. Paulo Suarez or Servita his history wherin they wil find above tree hundred lyes and calumnies of that Apostata Friar in matter of fact so notorious and vndeniable that our English Prelatick Clergy wil or ought to be ashamed of the Preface they have set before it and of abusing King Iames and his Subjects with such impostures by their extolling so improbable and infamous a Libel Seing therfore the supposed change and fall from primitive Protestancy to popery hath bin from presumption and pride of a privat and censorious judgment against the publick testimony and sense of the visible Church to submission and humility of an obsequious and prudent belief from notorious rebellion against spiritual and temporal superiours to religious and dutifull obedience from gluttony to abstinence from incontinency to chastity from sincerity to flattery from Cloysters and austerity to Sacrilege and liberty from a pretence of faith alone to the Christianity of faith and good works c. It must be concluded that either Protestancy was not the pure and primitive Religion or if it was that the change therof into popery hath bin for the better and by consequence that the first Papist introduced into the world a more sacred and sincere profession then had bin taught by Christ and his Apostles But this being impious and as impossible as it is that men abandoned by God should exceed God's servants in piety or that they should establish and practice more Godly principles and more zealously promote virtue when they fel from God and the way of salvation then when they were in the same it must be granted that Popery is the pure and primitive Religion taught by Christ and his Apostles and that only weak brains or such tender plants as in their infancy received strong impressions of the possibility and existence of an invisible Christian Church vpon earth can fancy an insensible change of it's doctrin profession and ceremonies into so remarkable and different a worship of God as Popery is compared with Protestancy Congregations of Protestants living in the same Provinces Citties and Parishes with Papists and dissenting from them in the outward and oral profession of faith if they did not profess protestancy which they suppose was Christ's faith with the mouth they were dissemblers and could be no part of the true Church in the Canon and sense of Scripture in the administration and number of Sacraments in Rites and Ceremonies in the substance and language of the Liturgy in adoring the B. Sacrament in worshiping of Images in receiving of the Communion c. such Protestant Congregations I say to be invisible and never heard of in 1500. or 1000. years nor observed nor persecuted by the prevailing Papists among whom they lived is not a thing possible or intelligible much less prudently credible We see by experience in these Kingdoms how impossible it is for a Recusant not to be discerned and discovered Papists are known though not convicted Many of them through the mildn'ss and prudence of the government escape the penalties and rigour of the Law but none the observation of their neighbours and very few the menaces of both ecclesiastical and civil Courts The invisibility therfor of the Protestant Church and the insensibility of it's change to Popery is a fitter subject to ground ther-vpon a ridiculous Romance then a religious reformation Perhaps it wil be sayd that Protestants were vntil the last age among the ten tribes as the Jews of whose appearance ther hath bin of late so much talk but we heare not of Protestants among them neither did Luther Zuinglius Cranmer or Calvin pretend that they came from those Israelits or from Terra australis incognita they were born and bred neerer and they brag'd that them-selves were the first Reformers Now to their Scripture SECT III. Protestants mistaken in the Canon of Scripture maintained by the Church of England and by Doctor Cousins Bishop of Duresme OUr second Argument against the probability or possibility of Protestancy being the word or work of God is taken from the Protestants mistake of Scripture and their altering of the Canon And wheras our learned Adversaries do agree with vs in saying that neither the Scripture it-self nor the privat spirit can determin which parts of Scripture are Canonical or holy but confess that this controversy must be decided by the Testimony and authority of the Church and that above 300. years after the Apostles some of their writings were not held by all orthodox Catholicks to be Canonical which now are comprehended in the Canon and admitted as the word of God by many Protestants it foloweth 1. That the Canon of Scripture was not so sufficiently proposed to the whole Church for the three first ages as to make the denial or doubt therof Heresy 2. That the 6. Article of the Prelatick-Religion of England which admitted only such books of Scripture for Canonical of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church is false and the ground therof fallible For as all men vers'd in the Ecclesiastical History wel know and learned Bilson the Protestant Bishop of Winchester doth acknowledg in his survey of Christ's sufferings c. printed 1604. pag. 664. The Scripturs were not fully received in all places no not in Eusebius his time which was above 300. years after the Apostles he saith the Epistles of Iames Iude the second of Peter the second and third of John are contradicted as not written by the Apostles the Epistle to the Hebrews was for a while contradicted c. The Churches of Siria did not receive the second Epistle of Peter nor the second and third of Iohn nor the Epistle of Iude nor the Apocalips c. The like might be sayd for the Churches of Arabia Wil you hence inferr that these parts of Scripture were not Apostolick or that we need not receive them now because they were formerly doubted of This Argument of Bishop Bilson we apply to the Machabees and to the other books declared by the Church of England to be Apocryphal Doctor Cousins writ a book caled a Scholastical History of the Canon of Scripture for which him-self and his friends think he wel deserved the Bishoprick of Duresme that he now enjoys in defence of the Prelatick Protestant Canon and of the 6. article of the Church of England And because he tels us in his Preface that men of knowledg pressed him to publish it as a piece that would give more ample satisfaction and cleere the passages in antiquity from the objections that some late Authors in the Roman side bring against Protestants then those other writings of home or foreign Divines have don that are extant in this kind I thought fit to give Protestants a proof of the soundness of
their doctrin and of the sincerity of their Doctor And though it seemeth to me impossible for any man to know what parts of the new Testament the 6. Article and Canon of the Church of England declares Canonical it being so intricatly worded that either it must be non sense or els exclude from the Canon the Epistles of Iames the second of Peter the second and third of John the Epistle of Iude the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalips seing the authority of all and every one of these hath bin doubted of in the Church and the 6. Article of the Protestant Religion of the Church of England is that In the name of the holy Scripture we do vnderstand those Canonical Books of the old and new Testament of whose authority was never any doubt of in the Church Though I say it 's impossible for me to comprehend how common sense and Christianity can meet in this Article but that if the words therof signify any thing out of the English Protestant new Testament must be excluded all the aforsaid Epistles and Apocalyps yet leaving this difficulty to the decision of that Church I wil suppose at the present with D. r Cosins that all these Epistles and Apocalyps are included in the English Canon and come to the examination of the Arguments wherby he pretends to defend it He therfor foreseing the impossibility of giving any reason why the parts of the New Testament hertofore doubted of should rather be received by Protestants into their Canon then the Books of the Old Testament no more questioned by the Church of Christ then the aforsaid epistles and the Apocalyps thought to avoyd the force of this pressing parity by flatly denying pag. 5. alibi That ever any intire Church or any National or Provincial Counsel or any multitude of men in their confessions and Catechisms or other such publick writings rejected or doubted of the sayd epistles c. In case so many solemnities had bin requisit for the questioning of Canonical authority which his Lp knows are not necessary It seems his lordship did not peruse Eusebius his works though he quotes them very often or at least did not thinck that the ancient Churches of Syria and Arabia deserve to be called Churches not that the Lutherans of Germany Denmark Suethland c. who stick to Luther's principles and Canon can make one or many Churches It s a gross mistake in the Doctor to say pag. 4. 5. that Luther or his Lutherans recalled or recanted their error concerning the Epistle of St. James he might see the contrary in the very book him-self cites of Chemnitius the famous Lutheran whose authority and words he placeth in his addition of certain Testimonies in the same rank with sentences of St. Augustin and St. Thomas of Aquin c. This Chemnitius in most of his works as in his Enchirid. pag. 63 and in his examin of the Councel of Trent p. 1. pag. 55. 56. declareth his own sense and that of his Church in these words The second Epistle of St. Peter the second and third of John the Epistle of Jude and the Apocalyps of John are Apocryphal as not having sufficient testimony of their authority His lordship might also have bin better informed of Luther's sence and Church by the saying of Illiricus an other pillar and Writer therof whom Mr. Bell in his regiment of the Church pag. 28. termeth a very famous Writer and most worthy defender of the Christian truth his words are Luther in his preface vpon St. Iem's Epistle giveth great reasons why this epistle ought in no case to be accompted for a writing of an Apostolick authority vnto which reasons I think every godly man ought to yeeld Luther's reasons are to be seen in the ancient editions of Jene and are comprehended in these few words of his The Epistle of Iames is contentious swelling dry strawy and vnworthy an Apostolick spirit And because these words and others were omitted in the later editions of Wittemberg by some Divins that would fain reform Luther's Canon Religion and Church the chief Lutheran Doctors mett in a Synod at Altembury complained of their Adversaries corrupting Luther's books and resolved to stick to the ancient editions and to the literal sence of his words So that in case it were true the Canon of Scripture could not be sayd to have bin questioned by any Protestant Congregation whithout declaring their doubt in a publick confession of faith we see the Lutheran doth so as also in their confession of Wittemberg quoted by Belarmin lib. 1. de verb. Dei cap. 7. init which is seconded by all hereticks of these tims saith Belarmin the Calvinist only excepted But the Doctor is so much mistaken in the necessity of such a formality that the Arians were condemned as hereticks notwithstanding that in their publick confessions of faith they endeavored rather to disguise then declare their errors It is wel known that Lutheran Churches in Germany not only do reject from their Canon the Epistles of S. Iames Iude the second of Peter and third of S. Iohn the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalyps but are so obstinat in denying them to be in any wise Canonical Scripture that they do not as much as print them in their Bibles And if my Lord of Duresme thinks that the rigid and moderat Lutherans half Lutherans and other Protestant Congregations wherin are many as learned Ministers and Writers as him-self deserve not the name of a Church he may expect that they wil censure his Church after the same manner and perhaps with as much reason But lett them agree as wel as they can it concerns not vs. Yet I hope he wil not pronounce so severe a Censure against the Greeck and Latin Churches and vn-church both Wherof S. Hierom in epist. ad Dordunum testifieth that the Greeks doubted as much of the Apocalyps against the common consent of the Latins as the Latins did of the Epistle to the Hebrews against the common consent of the Church Seing therfor it is evident by the confession both of ancient Fathers and modern Proâ—estants that in the primitive Church the Canonical Scriptures were not generally received all at once but in so great variety of pretended Scriptures great care and search was requisit to determin which Scriptures were Canonical and which not wherby it came to pass thaâ— sundry books and parts were for a long time misdoubted by some Churches and Fathers and by some Councels omitted or not received which yet afterward vpon greater search and consideration were generally acknowledged it must be very great obstinacy in Doctor Cozins and other Protestants to reject the Canon which the Councel of Trent proposeth and embraceth because forsooth some books therin contained were not as soon believed by all Catholicks to be Canonical as the others Or to deny the authority and authentikness of some books of the old Testament because they were not in
conferences of Religion wherby their title to the churchs-livings may be questioned They will pretend and preach â—hat it is against the rules as well of piety as of policy to inquire into the truth of doctrin or into the right of possession after 100. years prescription But they do not consider or at least would not have others consider that the Roman Catholicks prescriptioÌ„ of 1000. years in England and our Prelats legal possession of lands for the same space of years was not judged by Q. Elizabeths Bishops or Parliaments a sufficient Plea against the pretensions of the Crown to the Church revenues notwithstanding the Church then was thought to be infallible in doctrin and the revenues therof were first intended for and annexed to the Prelats and preachers of the same Roman Catholick doctrin and Church Now if the Protestant Bishops think that the Catholick Bishops were legally and lawfully dispossessed of their revenues and their Doctrin legaly and lawfully condemned and changed by Luther Calvin Cranmer or the Prelaticks interpretation of Scripture confirmed by Act of Parliament how can they imagin to make the world believe that it is now either a sin or sacriledge to be dispossessed themselves of the Church revenues by an Act of Parliament confirming as probable an interpretation of Scripture as theirs or as that of Luther or Calvin is especially seing they confess their doctrin fallible and that the revenues were never intended by those that gave them for preaching or promoting any kind of Protestancy Doubtless this incoherency and their backwardness in reasoning of Religion will render their Zeal for the Church revenues as much suspected as their forwardnes in persecuting tender Consciences hath renderd their persons odious And that there may be no ground for them to work vpon nor to doubt of the Roman Catholick Clergy's loyalty and sincerity in petitioning and pressing for publick conferences of Religion it will be found I doubt not in case any such security be desired or valued that we shall as readily now as in Queen Maries reign resign all the right we can pretend to the revenues of the Church and as then bestow them vpon the Crown for the use and ease of our Country By this it may appear that we have no design but the duty of subjects or the devotion of Christians in desiring that the Protestant Clergys title be examined But they deterr the illiterat layty from this necessary scrutiny by often repeating the word Sacrilege without declaring its signification We know and so do they that it hath bin the ancient practise of God's Church to contribut with all that is Sacred without the least fear or scruple of Sacriledge to the maintenance of the State when the layty is so much empoveris'ht with wars and taxes as we are both in England and Ireland Wee see that in all Catholick Countreys the Clergy doth imitat the example of the ancient Church in the same practise Why our English Bishops Deans and Chapters ought to be exempted from so reasonable and general a custom vnless it be that they are burthend with wives and Children I do not vnderstand But sure their having wives and Children can neither â—make their revenues more Sacred nor â—heir Contributions more Sacriledge on cases of publick necessity As a â—ompetency of maintenance for themselves and for their Childrens education and application to some honest Trades is an act of Charity so to apply the rest of the Church revenues to publik uses for soldiers and seamen and to the payment of the Crown debts is not against Christianity In the conclusion of this Preface I must endeavor to excuse the bulk of my book and the positivenes of my Assertions For the first I could hardly draw into a narrower compass so transcendent a subject and yet I have placed in the end of this Treatise an Index wherin the substance of the whole book is contained to the end every one may find out with ease any point he hath a mind to read As to the positivenes of my assertions most of them being articles of my faith or deductions from my Creed I could not but utter them in the Tone of our infallible Church But becaus I speak to Protestants that condemn our infallibility I attempt to demonstrat their censure against the same is as rash as they fancy our belief is ridiculous J must also ingenuously confess that it is part of my design to diminish the authority of the Protestant and Prelatick writers but seing my arguments are taken out of their own writings and are no other then their wilfull and vndeniable falsifications of Scripture and Fathers I hope none that detests so horrid a crime will condemn my Censure or defend their credit Whether I have bin faithfull in setting down their falsifications I must submit to the Iudgment of my Readers as also beg pardon for intermedling with so much of government as necessarily depends of Religion and ought to be proportioned therunto our Protestant Statesmen will not only pardon but protect me when they reflect vpon the impossibility there is of regulating the motions or appeasing the mutinies of a body politik by a faith so vncertain as that of the fallible Church of England or by a rule of Religion so applicable to rebellion as the letter of Scripture is when left to every privat mans arbitrary interpretation THE TABLE Part I. Of the Beginning Progress and Principles in general And of the Prelatick Church of England in Particular HOw necessary a rational Religion is for a Peacable Government Pag. 1. Wherein the Reasonableness of Religion Consists Pag. 8. How dangerous it is for a Temporal Soveraign to pretend to a Spiritual Jurisdiction over his Subjects Pag. 10. The Grounds of Peace Piety and Policy Pag. 10. The Catholick World ever acknowledg'd the Bishop of Rome's Spiritual Jurisdiction over all Christians Pag. 11. The same Religion which St. Gregory the great held was by St. Augustine taught to our Ancestors Pag. 19. Of the Author and beginning of Protestancy and of Luther's Disputation and Familiarity with the Devil Pag. 22. How weakly Protestants Excuse Luther's Conference with the Devil Pag. 29. The Mass a Visible and True Sacrifie proved by the Councils and Doctors of the Church Pag. 36. The Sacrifice of the Mass offered for the Dead Pag. 37. Of the Principles and Propagation of Protestancy Pag. 39. The Fundamental Principles of Protestancy Pag. 43. Protestants affirm that if a man have an Act of Faith sin does not hurt him Pag. 46. Protestants affirm that all Christians Men and Women are Priests by Baptism Pag. 50. Of the Protestant Church of England in K. H. VIII's Reign Pag. 53. Henry the VIII weary of Queen Catharine Pag. 53. Anne Bullen's Incest and Leudness Pag. 54. Henry the VIII's Tyranny Pag. 56. Tyndal's Translation of the Bible abolish'd Pag. 59. Of the English Religion and Reformers in K. Edw. VI's days Pag. 60. The first Reformers of the Prelatick
Catholick Doctrine is inconsistant with the Sovereignty and safety of Kings and with civil Society between Catholicks and Protestants Pag. 443 Bishop Mortons Falsifications about the Lawfulness of killing a Tyrant Pag. 444 Bishop Mortons Falsification of Catholicks against the Sovereignty of Princes and how he excuses himself by saying he received it from the Archbishop of Canterbury Pag. 445 Mortons Answer in which see an Imposture continu'd against Catholicks by the whole Convocation of the Protestant Clergy in their Synod held Anno 1603. Pag. 546 The Protestant Falsification to perswade that the Canon-Law doth warrant deposition of Kings by the Pope Pag. 447 A Protestant Falsification to perswade that Catholicks may cheat any Excommunicated Persons of their Lawful Debts Pag. 449 Bishop Mortons Falsification to perswade that Catholicks hold it Lawful to Murther and Massacre Protestants Pag. 451 Bishop Morton's Falsification to Assert the Kings Supremacy Pag. 453 Ten Falsifications set down together by Bishop Morton to prove that we hold that Popes cannot be deposed nor be Hereticks Pag. 457 Primate Bramhalls Falsification to prove that Popes may and have Decreed Heretical Doctrines Pag. 458 It is prov'd by Reasons and Examples that no Religion is so little dangerous to the Sovereignty and safety of Kings or so Advantagious to the Peace and Prosperity of Subjects as the Roman Catholicks notwithstanding the Doctrin of the Pope's Supremacy Pag. 459 Protestants cannot clear their Religion from their Doctrin and danger of Deposing Sovereigns and Disposing of their Kingdoms Pag. 470 That Protestants could never prove any of the wilful falsifications wherewith they charge Roman Catholick Writers but themselves are convicted of that Crime wheresoever they Attempted to make good their charge against us Pag. 473 Bellarmin accused by Sutcliff of Falsifying the General Council of Chalcedon in favour of the Popes Supremacy Pag. 474 How Protestants are Convicted by Bellarmin of holding twenty ancient condemned Heresies and how Sutcliff and Bishop Morton to clear them of six only fourteen seems they confess do falsifie the Fathers and Catholick Authors about worshipping of Images Pag. 476 Two Pelagian Heresies imputed to Protestants and how they falsify to clear themselves of the One and say nothing of the other Pag. 477 Two Novatian Heresies Imputed to Protestants the one answered with Silence the other with Falsifying Pag. 478. The Manichean Heresie against Freewill Imputed to Protestants and how pittifully Answered by Bishop Morton Pag. 479. How Bishop Morton Answers to Bellarmin's Imputation of Arianisme unto Protestants Pag. 479. How Morton Falsifies and Abuses Bellarmine who Imputes the denyal of Christs Real Presence in the Sacrament to Protestants Pag. 480. Falsifications Objected against Cardinal Baronius by Mr. Sutcliff Pag. 483. Calumnies and Falsifications of Luther Calvin Archbishop Laud and Primate Usher to Discredit Catholick Religion against their own Knowledge and Conscience Pag. 487. Of Calvins Calumnies against Catholicks and their Doctrine Pag. 488 Frauds Falsifications and Calumnies of Primate Usher against the Real Presence and Transubstantiation Pag. 491. Usher's Falsifications against Confession Pag. 492. His Falsifications against Absolution of Sins Pag. 493. Against Purgatory Pag. 494 Against Worshiping Saints and their Reliques Pag. 496 Against Prayer to Saints Pag. 499 Of Archbishop Laud's Frauds and Falsifications HOw unsincerely Bishop Laud would fain Excuse the Modern Greek Heresie concerning the Procession of the Holy Ghost Pag. 502 How Bishop Laud Abuses St. Augustine to make Protestants believe that General Councils may Err against Scripture and evident Reason Pag. 504 Vicentius Lirinensis abus'd by Laud to prove the Fallibility of the Church c. Pag. 507 How Bishop Laud falsifies Occham to infringe St. Augustin's Authority concerning the Infallibility of the Church in succeeding Ages as well as in that of the Apostles And is forc'd by his Error to resolve the Prelatick Faith into the Light of Scripture and the private Spirit of Phanaticks which he Paliats under the Name of Grace and thereby Warrants all Rebellions against Church and State Pag. 509 Divers Frauds and Falsifications of Bishop Laud to defend that Protestants are not Schismaticks Pag. 512 Whether it be Piety or Policy to permit the Protestant Clergy of these three Kingdoms to enjoy the Church Revenues for maintaining by such Frauds and Falsifications as hitherto have been alledged the Doctrine of the Church of England which also they acknowledge to be fallible and by consequence for all they know false And hâ—re the said Revenues may be Conscientiously apply'd to the Vse and Ease of the People without any danger of Sacriledge or any Disturbance to the Government if a publick Tryal of both Clergies Sincâ—rity be allowed and Liberty of Conscience granted Pag. 521 The same further demonstrated and how by Liberty of Conscience or by Tolerating the Roman Catholick Religion by Act of Parliament the British Monarchy will become the most considerable of all Christendom Peaceable at Home and recover its Right Abroad How evidently it is the mutual Interest of Spain and England to be in a perpetual League against France and how Advantageous it is for Spain to put Flanders into English Hands Pag. 534 The King 's Right to France Pag. 544 My Lord of Clarendin's Policy Censur'd by all Wise Men. Pag. 548. Part 4. The Roman Catholick Religion in every particular wherein it differs from the Protestant confirmed by undenyable Miracles THat such Miracles as are approved by the Roman Catholick Church in the Canonization of Saints are true Miracles and the Doctrine which they Confirm cannot be rejected without denying or doubting of Gods Veracity and how every Protestant doth see true Miracles though he does not reflect upon them in Confirmation of the Roman Catholick Faith Pag. 553 The Miracle of St. Januarius of Naples Pag. 555 The Famous and undenyable Miracle of St. Francis Xaverius wrought on the Person of Marcello Mastrillo Pag. 556 Antichrist's Miracles are not Credible if compar'd with Ours Pag. 561 Of Visible Miracles seen though not observ'd by every Protestant in Confirmation of the Roman Catholick Faith The difference between true and false Miracles Pag. 562 Of True Miracles related in the Ecclesiastical History by men of greatest Authority in every Age to confirm the particular Mysteries of our Catholick Faith and that sense of Scripture wherein Roman Catholicks differ from Protestants Pag. 566 Of Miracles related by St. Chrysostom St. Gregory Nazianzen c. in Confirmation of Transubstantiation Adoration of Christ in the Sacrament the Sacrifice of the Mass Communion under one Kind and Purgatory Pag. 567 Primate Usher's Falsification to discredit two Miracles Pag. 569 How Protestants falsify and corrupt the very Statutes and Law-Books Pag. 572 Miracles for the Mass. Pag. 573. Miracles for Purgatory Pag. 573 Miracles to Confirm the Worship and Virtue of the Sign of the Cross. Pag. 576 Miracles in confirmation of the Catholick Worship of Images Pag. 581 The Protestant Distinction of Civil and Religious Worship misapply'd by Ministers to delude
thou lyest in thy throat foolish and sacrilegious King And other so immodestly base expressions against his Majesty and all other Papists that we ar ashamed to English them By Luthers Language and way of defending his Protestant doctrin we might guess at his Master though him self had not told us his name was Sathan SUBSECT I. How weakly Protestants excuse Luthers Conference with the Devill and the embracing of Sathans doctrin THERE is not any one thing troubleth so much the learned Protestants as their Apostle Luthers acknowledged instruction in Protestancy received from the Devill and therfore some of them endeavor to maintain that this Disputation was only a spirituall fight in mind and no bodily conference but with the same probability of truth they may affirm that all other real apparitions and the effects therof were only spirituall conflicts Luther tells so many corporeal circumstances that it could not be a meere spiritual fight first he says that the Devill spoke to him voce forti gravi in a strong and grave voice 2. That then he learnt how men were found dead in their beds in the morning True it is that these words and circumstances are fraudulently omitted by the Divines of Wittenberg in their later editions of Luthers works and perhaps Mr. Chark and Mr. Fulk did never peruse the more ancient and sincere edition tom 6. Germ. Ien. fol. 28. where all these things are set down Yet grant this were no bodily conference and but only a spiritual conflict what matters it whether Luther was instructed and persuaded this or that way by sensible conference or inward suggestion into Protestancy if therin the Devill was his Master Other learned Protestants excuse Luthers conference saying it was only a dream to mistake which for a reality he was subject as being a German Monk giuing to understand that good drinck doth frequently turn German dreams into reall persuasions But vnless they prove that Luther was in a dream or in drink when he writ this conference they wil never persuade any man that reads it that this Disputation was not real Him self says he was awake tells the tyme of the night that it happened describs the Devills voice his owne feare learnt how people were slain by the Devill in their beds these reflections and impressions are far from dreams especialy when the party delivers them as real truths many years after and maks them the ground of his chang in so important a matter as Religion But suppose German Monks were as much given to drink and after drink as apt to mistake their dreams for real truths as Mr. Sutcliff insinuats and to maintain even when they are sober that their dreams ar not dreams as Luther doth his Conference of what credit can such an evasion or excuse be to Protestants for what difference is ther between a dreaming drunken and Diabolical Religion These answers not being any way probable other learned Protestants grant the Devill did realy conferr with Luther so Hospinian B. p Morton Joannes Regius Baldwin c. This last in a Book of this subject printed at Jsleb 1605. pag. 76.75.83 saith let none wonder that I confess the disputation to be real and not written in iest or hyperbolicaly but seriously and historicaly for Luther writ that history so consideratly and prolixly that I still acknowledg be writ it seriously and according to the truth of the histor But then he adds that Luther had bin a protestant before that Conference and that the Deuills drift was to make Luther despair for hauing said Mass prayed to saints c. But this is impertinent and fals impertinent because our dispute is not of the Deuills intention but of his instruction and whether Luther did well in embracing either before or after his revolt from vs the Devills doctrin fals because vntil that Disputation Luther sayd Mass almost every day as sathan objects to him speaking somtyms in the present and was then no protestant for the only point wherin he differed then from Catholiks was about Indulgences and euen that he maintained more out of a pick and pride then Judgment as appears by what hath bin sayd in the beginning of this section Wherfore Joannes Regius in his Apology against Belarmin saith that the Devills instruction is no argument to confute Luthers doctrin because though it was the Devill that instructed him he instructed him according to the word of God and the Devills speak truth somtyms especialy when they speak that which the Scripture witnesseth This in my opinion is the worst of all other evasions 1. Because the Devill seldom or never applies the words of Scripture to the right sence when he tempted our Savior though he quoted Scripture yet he was no true Interpreter therof Now what ground Protestants can have to believe that the Devill hath altered his ould custom or why they should prefer the Devills Scriptural interpretation before that of the visible Church Councells and Fathers is not intelligible 2. It is not credible that if all the visible Church of Christians did err in professing Popery and committed Idolatry by hearing Mass and adoring the Sacrament that the Devills would dissuade them from that Idolatrous Religion his design and desire is to seduce men not to reduce them to the way of saluation 3. It is not likely that God would compel the Devill to be chief instrument of reforming the Catholik Religion and Church in the ould law he never committed so great a charg unto him he employd holy men and Prophets to convert the Iews and Pagans 't is strang that in the law of grace the Devil should become an Apostle When Dives who was but the Devills Camerade desired leave to come into the world and preach to his Brethren God did not judg him a fit Messenger or Missioner it was answered that his brethren ought to believe Moyses and the Prophets that is the Church and the Ministers therof And though this be a parable it contains real doctrin wherby we are instructed that Gods Church would never be so low brought as to stand in need of Preachers from Hell Seing therfore we have so many reasons to conclude that God would not make the Devill an Apostle or a Reviver and Reformer of the Ghospell Protestants can have none to believe that the doctrin and Reformation which Luther received from him is true or agreable to Scripture Doctor Morton late Bishop of Duresme to proue ad hominem against us that the Deuill doth persuade men somtyms to piety and by consequence that Luthers reformation might be pious though the Deuill instructed him therin objected Delrius a Iesuit affirming that the Deuill appeared to an Abbot in the forme of an Angel and persuaded him to say Mass. Therfore if the Mass be good as Catholiks say the Deuill may and doth exhort men to vertuous actions To this I answer 1. That our question is not whether the Deuill may somtyms persuade men to
do things of themselues good we know he may but when he doth it is always with an euill design and to the end good things may not be well don but that the manner of doing them may vitiat their goodness This Delrius in the place cited by M. r Morton says and proues by many exemples wherof the Mass is one But M. r Morton wilfully conceals and mistakes the truth of the story for Simon the Monk whom the Deuill endeavored to persuade to say Mass was neither Abbot nor Priest but only Diacon as Delrius sheweth and therfore he answered the Deuill that none ought to say Mass without the order of Priesthood and by his aduice to the contrary he was discouered to bee the Deuill though he appeared like an Angell Without doubt this was a Lutheran Deuill and perhaps the same that dissuaded Luther from the Mass because Luther learnd of him amongst other points of the reformation that lay men and euen women are Priests and may consecrat the Sacrament preach and absolue from sins Hauing sincerely related this matter of fact in Luthers own words and not concealed any thing that any of the most learned Protestants could say to interpret or excuse the same and nothing appearing wherby his instruction in protestancy by the Deuill may be denyed or justifyed I leaue it to the consideration of all wise and Religious persons whether it be policy or piety to promote a Religion whose confessed Author or Apostle is Sathan So long as the generality of a people can be made belieue that Luther did seriously and of set purpose belye himself and discredit his own reformation or that the Deuill is a sincere Interpreter of Scripture and Scripture interpreted by him is the word of God so long I say as these Nations can be made belieue so impossible things without doubt both the protestant Church and state may thriue by protestancy but how long so unlikly a persuasion will continue amongst inquisitiue though ignorant people is vncertain as also the greatness grounded thervpon It hath gained more ground in England then could be expected considering the ingenuity of the Natiues but Q. Elizabeths interest went a great way in the begining of her Reign euery Courtier and countrey gentleman expected by giuing his vote in Parliament for reuiuing the Protestant Religion wherby alone she could pretend to be legitimat her fauor and rewards out of the Church liuings and in her long continued gouernment their Children were made belieue that her Reformation was not the work of Cecil but of Christ And euer since their posterity haue bin confirmed in that opinion by false Translations of Scripture and falsifications of Councells and Fathers as shall herafter appeare It s strang so improbable a persuasion can beare such sway and beat down the Catholick truth But as the Deuill insisted most vpon discrediting the Diuine Sacrifice of the Mass in his Disputation with Luther so the Protestant Clergy striue to make that holy Mystery to be lookt vpon by their flock as a blasphemous fable and dangerous deceit We hope notwithstanding that the English Laiety will reflect upon the occasion of their mistake and consider whether it be not a grieuous sin and great folly to preferr Q. Elizabeths temporal interests which now is turned into dust before that of their souls and Whether any thing can be so vnreasonable as to giue more credit to the Deuill and to Martin Luther and his followers debauch't and dissolute Friars and Priests then to the holy Doctors and Martyrs of Christs Church euer since the Apostles in their acknowledgd writings and in general Councels who call the Mass the visible Sacrifice the true Sacrifice the dayly Sacrifice the Sacrifice according to the Order of Melchisedech the Sacrifice of the Body and Bloud of Christ the Sacrifice of the Altar the Sacrifice of the Church and the Sacrifice of the new Testament which succeded all the Sacrifices of the old Testament and that it was offered for the health of the Emperor for the sick upon the Sea and the fruits of the earth for the purging of houses infected with wicked Spirits for the sins of the liuing and dead And this is so undeniable that our learned aduersary Crastoius in his book of the Mass against Belarmin pag. 167. reprehended Origen S. Athanasius S. Ambrose S. Chrysostom S. Augustin S. Gregory the great and venerable Bede for maintaining the Mass to be a propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of the liuing and of the dead And if there can be no policy of state as things now stand in the English Monarchy to make Q. Elizabeths legitimacy and supremacy a matter or ground of Faith I am sure it cannot be Christian piety to press and preferr the reformation which she and her faction introduced for that reason of state against the Stewards before the Religion of all the ancient and learned Fathers of the Catholick Church though we had no other exception against it but that all the wit and learning of Protestants cannot make it probable in any degree that the Deuill is not the Author of Protestancy SECT III. Of the principles and propagation of Protestancy LVther after his Conference with the Deuill hauing resolued upon that Foundation of his Reformation which hee had learnt from so godly a Master endeauored to gaine as many Poets Players Painters and Printers as he could to discredit with Scoffing Ballads Pamphlets Poems and Pictures the Roman Religion which untill then had bin caled and esteemed the only Catholick and Apostolick and to divulge his nâ—w Doctrin amongst ignorant and vicious People For encouragement of the dissolute Clergy to ioyn with him he taught against the doctrin and practise of the whole Church euer since the Apostles as shall be demonstrated that Priests and professed Nuns might mary and to giue them good example he took a professed Nun for his owne wife And prevailed with this doctrin more then Iouinian the heretik For this liberty together with his principle of justification by only faith drew from sundry parts of Europe incontinent Clergymen wherof the chief were Caroâ—stadius Archdeacon of Wittemberg Iustus Ionas head of a College of Canon Regulars Oecolampadius a Monk of S. Brigits Order Zuinglius a parish Priest Martin Bucer a Dominican friar Peter Martyr a Canon Regular Bernardin Ochinus a Capuchin and some Augustin Friars of Luthers own Order Each of these hauing taken a wench were engaged in Luthers quarrel against the whole Church But their course of life and the nouelty of their doctrin being dislik't by all men that were not Libertins and not countenanced as yet by any Princes or Prelates it was thought necessary for their own preseruation and propagation of their Ghospell to make it plausible to the giddy multititude whose ignorance they knew to be as capable of incredible impressions as their nature is impatient of
Divino otherwise how could S. Peter be caled by the Evangelist Chief of the Apostles or Primus in dignity seing his brother S. Andrew was the first Disciple or primus in antiquity and if there was a Chiefe among the Apostles how can it be imagined that their successors should be all equal or that the successour of the Chief Apostle could be deprived of a prerogative so necessary for the peace and government of the succeeding Church Or if the Bishop of Rome had not this supremacy as S. Peters Successour and by Christs appointment how is it possible that all the Christian Princes and Prelats of the world should conspire or consent to submit themselves to one whose temporal power could not force that submission and they had no cause to feare his spiritual more then that of other Patriarchs or Bishops confined to their own Dioceses These were the Kings reasons in behalf of the Popes supremacy against Luther but now his passion made him contradict his pen and love though blind gave him eyes to see more of Christs mind since he had seen Anne Bullen then all the world had discerned in 1500. years before He declared therfore by Act of Parliament that the Popes spiritual jurisdiction was a meer vsurpation and that every temporal Soveraign was Pope in his own Dominions and by vertue of this prerogative he declared his own mariage with Q. Catharin voyd married Anne Bullen and seised vpon all the lands and treasurs of the Monasteries and Abbies dispensed with all the young Friers and Monks vows of obedience and chastity after that he had taken an order they should not break the vow of Poverty and to that purpose framed an instrument and forced the Religious to sign it wherin they declared that now at length through Gods great mercy they had bin inspired and illuminated to see the inconsistency of aâ—â— Monastical life with true Christianity and the salvation of their souls and therfore they humbly petitioned his Majestie by means of his Vicar General in spiritualibus Cromwell who was Earle of Essex and a black-smiths son of Putney to restore them to Christian liberty and a secular life And because the Abbots of Glastenbury Reading Glocester and many others would not subscribe to this instrument nor by their approbation therof declare that S. Austin the Monk and Apostle of England who converted the Saxons to Christian Religion professed a life inconsistent with Christianity they were cruely tormented and put to death The same tyrany was executed vpon all sorts of people without distinction of age sex or quality and amongst them suffered also Sir Thomas Moore Lord Chancelor of England and Cardinal Fisher Bishop of Rochester two of the greatest ornaments of that age for refusing the oath of the Kings supremacy And for that S. Thomas of Canterbury alias Becket had opposed K. Henry 2. Laws made rather against the exercise then the right of the Popes spiritual authority in England and therfore was Kill'd by some officious Courtiers and honoured as a Martyr by the Catholick Church and his Sanctity and Martyrdom had bin confirmed by most authentick Miracles which also confirmed the Popes spiritual supremacy and jurisdiction and condemned King Henry 8. vanity he without feare of God or regard of the world cited a Saint reigning in heaven to appeare and heare vpon earth his sentence which was to have his reliques burn't the treasure of his Church and shrine confiscated and all those declared Traytors that would call him Saint or celebrat his feast or permit his name to remain in the Kalendars of theyr Books of Devotion He also prohitited his subjects to call the Bishop of Rome Pope and every one who had S. Cyprian S. Ambrose S. Hierom S. Austin S. Leo or any of the Fathers works was commanded to write in the first leafe therof that they renounced those Saints doctrin of the Popes supremacy Not content with these extravagancies at home he sent Embassadours to solicit Princes abroad and in the first place to Francis 1. of France that they might follow his example in assuming the supremacy and albeit the Pope was either agreed or engaged in a Treaty with Charles 5. to the prejudice of France yet that Christian King would not as much as hear Henry 8. Ambassadours speak of his imitating their Master in assuming to him-self the supremacy And even the Protestant Princes of Germany to whom the Ambassadours repaired after that their negotiation had bin rejected by the French King told them they were sorry K. Henry 8. did not ground his reformation vpon a more religious foundation then his scandalous passion for Anne Bullen And the first protestant Reformers abroad part of whose design was to get all spiritual jurisdiction rather into their own hands then into the hands of their temporal Soveraigns were much troubled at K. Henry's supremacy and Calvin writ a smart though short treatise against it and no Protestants make a lay Prince spiritual head of a Church but our English Prelaticks Notwithstanding that the lateness of the discovery together with K. Henry 8 motives of his supremacy made it so incredible that no Catholick Soveraign would assume to him-self that prerogative nor any forraign Protestants approve therof yet his cruelty made most of his English subjects swear that which neither themselves nor the world could believe for had it bin any way probable by Scripture History or Tradition that temporal Soveraigns as such are spiritual Superiours how is it possible that all Christian Princes before Henry 8. should be so short-sighted and stupid in their own interest and in a matter of so great consequence as not to see a thing so obvious and aduantagious How careless in their own concerns were Charls 5. Francis 1. and many other Princes their Predecessours who after having bin provoked and exasperated by some Roman Bishops so far as to think it necessary to invade their Teritories sack Rome and imprison their persons yet at the same tyme did acknowledg that spiritual supremacy which gave so much advantage power and credit to their enimy Without doubt the same forces which had bin employed against the Popes person and temporal power would not have spared or favored his spiritual jurisdiction he would have bin forc't to renounce his primacy had not the world and they who subdued him bin fully satisfied that it was no human donation but divin institution Though these reasons were convincing and the example of Charls 5. spiritual subjection and submission to his subdued prisoner Pope Clement 7. was fresh in King Henry 8. memory and that he knew never any Catholick Princes pretended it was a prerogative of soveraignty to share with the Pope in the Ecclesiastical government of the soules of their subjects though many clamed as a priviledg granted by the Roman Sea the liberty to examin and approue the authentikness of Papal censures and injunctions and that his passion for Anne Bullen was turned into hatred
had made or don by any person or persons in or about any consecration confirmation or investing of any person or Persons elected to the office or dignity of Archbishops or Bishops by vertue of the Queens letters patents or Commission since the beginning of her Reign So that to know whether D. r Parker and his Camerades were true Bishops none must have examined whether they had bin consecrated by other Bishops but only whether the person or persons that were the Consecrators whether lay men or Ecclesiastick it matter'd not performed that ceremony by virtue of the Queens letters patents or commission If they could shew her great seal they might vse what matter and form they pleased for by the Act 1. 8. Eliz. there was given to the Queens Highness her Heires c. full power and authority by letters patents vnder the great seal of England from tyme to tyme to assign name and authorise such person or persons as she and they shal thinck meet and convenient any lay man or woman would serve turn to exercise use enioy and execute vnder her Highness all manner of jurisdictions Priviledges preheminences and authorities in any wise touching or concerning any spiritual or ecclesiastical power or jurisdiction within this Realm or any other her Majesties Dominions or Countrys Now priesthood being nothing but a spiritual power to Consecrat Christ's Body and Bloud and forgive sins and Episcopacy including besids the same a spiritual power to consecrat and ordain other Priests and Bishops who can doubt but that by these words and Statut the Queen might and her Successours may by their sole letters patents and great seal make any lay man whether Carter or Catchpole a Protestant Bishop or Priest seing therby he receiveth ful power to exercise vse execute c. all manner of jurisdictions preheminencies and authorities in any wise touching or concerning any spiritual or ecclesiastical power c. And because ther might remain no ambiguity or scruple of Parker and the first Protestant Bishops valid and legal Consecration the same Statut 8. Elizabeth 1. assures us that the Queen in her letters patents for that purpose directed to any Archbishop Bishops Or Others mark the word Others for the confirming investing and consecrating of any person elected to the Office or dignity of any Archbishop or Bishop hath not only vsed such words and sentences as were accustomed to be vsed by the late King Henry and King Edward her Majesties Father and Brother in their like letters patents made for such causes but also hath vsed divers other general words and sentences wherby her Majestie by her supreme power and authority hath dispensed with all causes or doubts of any inperfection or disability that can or may in any wise be objected against the same as by her Majesties sayd letters patents remaining on record more plainly wil appeare Now Mr. Bramhal the late Primat would fain make the Parliament so sensless and his Readers so simple as to referr the words mentioning and comparing the records of the Queen and her Father and Brother's tyme in this Act to the Archbishop of Canterbury's Register and not to their Majesties letters patents wher as by the whole context and discourse it is evident that the Parliament's drift is to shew no such ceremonious solemnity as of late hath bin pretended and printed by Mr. Mason was necessary Had ther bin any such legal or formal Consecration at Lambeth as 50. years after was forged and foisted into the Archbishop's Register the Parliament 8. Eliz. 1. would have remitted us therunto named Lambeth and not insisted al-togeather vpon the Queen's dispensation for the validity and legality of her first Bishops Consecration and caracter Many ar the reasons lately printed and not like to be answered that persuade all prudent men who have not too great a passion for the Prelatick Clergy to believe that Mr. Mason's new found Register of Lambeth is forged 1. It was never produced nor mentioned by the first Bishops so much pressed by their Adversaries to shew some Register or any evidence for their Consecration 2. They were only desired to let the world know wher when and by whom they had bin made Bishops questions easily answered had they bin consecrated at Lambeth or any Register then extant when Dr. Harding Stapleton and others charged them with nulity and illegality of Episcopal caracter 3. It 's no more credible that such knowing and conscientious men as Stapleton Harding Fitzherbert c. then living in England and probably at London would question so publick and solemn an action then it is that a sober man would now cal in doubt King Charl's 2. coronation at Westminster or ask in print who set the Crown vpon his head pretending he neuer had bin crown'd And though Bishop Godwin and other Prelatick Writers abuse Dr. Harding Holiwood Fitzsimons c. for relating the meeting of the first Protestant Bishops with a design to be ordained at the Nagshead in Cheap-side yet all the world knows that albeit there could be no design to feign that story yet our Controversy with the Prelaticks is not whether their first Prelats were ordained there but whether they were ordained any wher We know Bishops might be as validly consecrated in a Tavern though not so decently as in a Church But t' is fit they also consider that if Dr. Parker and their first Bishops were so narrowly watch't by Mr. Neal and other Catholicks whom Primat Bramhal doth cal Spies that they could not be merry in a Tavern without their knowledg they could hardly perform so serious and solemn an Action in a Church as the first Consecration of a Protestant Archbishop without their observation it being a matter then so much sought after and controversed of so great curiosity in it self and of greatest concern to us the total credit and being of their new Reformation depending therupon And yet for aboue 50. years none of the Writers of either side Catholick or Protestant who mentioned all other particulars relating to the reformation writ or spoke a word of this solemnity at Lambeth The Puritans indeed upraided the Prelaticks with saying their Episcopal ordination in England had it's beginning and progress in a corner not in a Congregation but we can not imagin they could mistake the Archiepiscopal Chappel of Lambeth for a corner or deny that the great Assembly pretended to have had bin at Dr. Parker's Consecration deserved not to be caled a Congregation Queen Elizabeths Clergy thus created by her patents and Parliaments they endeavored to shew themselves gratful to her Majesty by making the people believe that Popery by the principles wherof she was vncapable of the Crown was Idolatry the Pope Antichrist c. And to that end corrupted Scriptures in their English Translations as shal be proved herafter And because their frauds and follies were discoverd by Catholick Priests the sanguinary and penal laws were enacted and executed
the Canon of the Iews as if the Jews might not doubt and omitt to put some books divinely inspired into the Canon as wel as the primitive Christians or as if the Apostles might not supply that defect and declare some books of the old Testament wherof the generality of the Jews doubted to be Canonical SVBSECT I. Doctor Cozins exceptions and falsifications against the Councel of Trent's authority answered The difference between new definitions and new articles of faith explained THe Protestant obstinacy is not excusable by the exceptions made against the number of Bishops that voted in the Councel of Trent or against the pretended novelty of the Canon which they decreed As to their number the authority of defining matters of faith in a general Councel is no more limited or diminished by the absence of members legaly summoned and long expected then the authority of a lawful Parliament by the absence of many Lords and commons especialy if there be a necessity of applying present remedies to the distempers of Church or Common-weal Doctor Cozins doth confess that the Catholick Church stood in need of a reformation and that the Councel was too much diferr'd and delay'd After they had met at Trent Seing the Bishops were not as many as the Pope and his Legats expected and wished for the greater solemnity of so important a decision as that of the Canon of Scripture whervpon they were to ground their further definitions they put of that session for 8. months and at the end of them hearing that besids those who were at Trent many Bishops were setting forth and others in their Journey they differred the definition of Canonical Scripture for three months more to the end as many as could possibly come might be present If through neglect contempt age infirmity or other accidents wherof the Pope was not in fault many Bishops were absent that could no more prejudice the authority of the Councel at Trent then the like circumstances disanull the authority or make voyd the Acts of our Parliaments But sure the learned Protestant Pastors cannot but smile at the simplicity of their illiterat flocks when they consider the zeale and earnestnes wherwith they except against the smal number of Bishops and their presumption forsooth in the Councel of Trent For the declaring the Canon of Scripture and other Divine truths and yet them-selves accept the Canon of Scripture and doctrin of their own Churches vpon the bare word of one Luther Zuinglius Calvin or vpon the sole authority of the 12. or seven men appointed by Parliament in the reign of Edward 6. Besids our Canon of Scripture was confirmed by the whole Councel of Trent afterwards together with the other points of faith therin defined And though Doctor Cozins pag. 208. tels how the Princes and reformed Churches in Germany England Denmark c. immediatly set forth their Protestations and exceptions against the Councel aleadging that the caling of this Councel by the Pop's authority alone was contrary to the Rights of Kings and the ancient Customs of the Church That he had summond no other persons thither nor intended to admitt any either to debate or give their voice there but such only as had first sworn obedience to him that he took vpon him most injustly to be Judg in his own cause c. Yet it is sufficiently manifested to the world by the very Acts of the Councel that the Pope did nothing but what his Predecessors had don and the Catholick Princes and Church had approved in the like occasions and that though Protestants were not admitted to vote at Trent yet they were not only permitted but invited in a most secure and civil manner by the Councel to reason dispute and debate their controversies and answer for them-selves and their doctrin and this way of proceeding is no more vnreasonable in a general Councel then it is in a Parliament not to permit any to vote therin before he taks an oath of alegiance not to say any thing of the oath of Supremacy and much less to admit of Lords or Commons accused of treason or rebellion to sit in the House vntil they prove their innocency or acknowledg their fault and obtain their pardon by a dutiful submission and profession of repentance And granted that nothing had bin resolved in the Councel of Trent by the Fathers therof but what first was canvass't at Rome by the Pope and Conclave which is false yet we conceive that to be no more against the constitution or freedom of a Councel then it is against the constitution or freedom of a Parliament that no Bill pass vnto an Act vnless it be first signed by the King and approved by his Councel and yet we know that to have bin the constant custom in one of his Majesties Kingdoms since the reign of King Henry 7. As for the Pope or Church of Rome being Judg in their own cause it is a prerogative so absolutly necessary for the authority and govermnent of Magistracy and the quiet and peace of the people governed that no Monarchy or Commonwealth can want it without falling into great inconveniences and confusion A subject t' is true may sue the King but the sentence must be given in the King's Courts and by his authority notwithstanding any objected dependency or parciality of the Judg explaining the laws and customs in favor of his Soveraign And he who would not acquiesce in such a sentence but would needs have the cause decided by a foreign Prince or People is a rebel If this be reasonable and just in temporal Courts and fallible sentences how much more in spiritual controversies and infallible definitions of the Church which definitions of the Church if not acknowledged to be infallible the Church can not have any jurisdiction or authority in matters of faith as not being able to satisfie doubts and setle the inward peace of Christian souls either perplexed in them-selves or in daunger of being perverted by others whether hereticks or pagans neither of which can be indifferent Judges or competent Arbitrators between the Catholick Church and her Children And seing doubts and differences are vnavoidable in both Church and Commonwealth and that there can be no appeale to Infidels or Foreigners without doubt it is more agreable to Scripture to the law of nature and light of reason that Parents and Pastors be Judges in any cause of their Children and inferiors then the contrary or that there be no Judg at all nor jurisdiction either spiritual or temporal But that which Doctor Cozins and all Protestants most press against the judicature of Popes and the councel of Trent is that they do not judg according to Scripture and to the right sense therof wheras Kings and their Judges are regulated by the laws of the land even when the suit is against the King or his pretended prerogative To this we answer that Popes and Councels are as much regulated by Scripture in their definitions
Centur. 1. l. 2. cap. 10. col 580. and particularly accuse St. Paul of error by the persuasion of St. Iames. Brentius also whom Bishop Ievel in his defence of the Church of England pag. 473. termeth a grave and learned Father affirmeth in Apol. Confess cap. de Concil pag. 900. that St. Peter chief of the Apostles and also Barnabas after the holy Ghost received togeather with the Church of Ierusalem erred Though Lutherans and Calvinists differ extreamly in many points of doctrin yet in this of fallibility of the Apostles in faith and manners even after the receiving of the holy Ghost they fully agree Calvin him-self in his Comentary in omnes Pauli epistolas in Gallat c. 2. vers 14. pag. 612. reprehendeth Peter Barnabas and others and pag. 150. says that Peter added to the schism of the Church the indangering of Christian liberty and the ouer-throw of the grace of Christ See him also in Act. c. 21. Clebitius a learned Calvinist in his Victoria veritatis argum 5. impugneth St. Lukes report in the history of our Sauiours passion saying Matthew and Mark deliver the contrary therfore Mathaeo Marco duobus testibus plus adhiberi debet quam uni Lucae qui Synaxi non interfuit quemadmodum Mathaeus To Mathew and Mark being two witnesses more credit is to be given then to one Luke And Gualter in Act. 21. reproveth St. Paul's shaving of his head And other Calvinists mentioned in Zanchius his epistle ad misc sayd If Paul should come to Geneva and preach the same houre that Calvin did I would leave Paul and heare Calvin And Lavaterus in his historia Sacramentaria pag. 18. affirmeth that some of Luther's followers not the meanest among their Doctors sayd they had rather doubt of St. Paul's doctrin theâ— of the doctrin of Luther or of the confession of Augusta This desperat shift being so necessary for waranting their corruptions of Scripture and maintaining the fallibility of the Church in succeeding ages for the same reasons which conclude it infallible in the Apostles time are applicable to ours and to every former century other-wise it must be sayd that God's providence and promises were limited to few years and him-self so partial that he regardeth not the necessities of his Church nor the saluation of any person that lived after his Disciples this impiety could not be rejected by the Prelatick Church of England without contradicting their brethren abroad and their own principles at home Therfore B. Iewel in his defence of the Apology for the Prelatick Church of England pag. 361. doth affirm that St. Mark mistook Abracher for Abimelech and St. Matthew Hieremias for Zacharias And Mr. Fulck against the Remish Testament in Galat. 2. fol. 322. chargeth Peter with error of ignorance and against the Ghospell and Doctor Goade in his Tower disputation with Campion the second days conference arg 6. affirmeth that St. Peter did err in faith and that after the sending down of the holy Ghost vpon them And Whitaker de Eccl. cont Belarmin Controv. 2. q. 4. pag. 223. saith Jt is evident that even after Christ's Ascension and the Holy Ghost's descending vpon the Apostles the whole Church not only the common â—ort of Christians but also even the Apostles them-selves erred in the vocation of the Gentills c. yea Peter also erred he further more also erred in manners c. And these were great errors and yet we see these to have bin in the Apostles even after the Holy Ghost descending vpon them And truly if the Apostles were not only fallible but did teach errors in manners and matters of faith after the holy Ghost descending vpon them their writings can be no infallible Rule to direct men to saluation which conclusion is so immediatly and cleerly deduced from this Protestant doctrin that the supposal and premises once granted their can be no certainty in Scripture and indeed this all the Reformers aymed at though durst not say it yet they did as well and sufficiently declare what litle esteem they have for Scripture though they make their ignorant flocks believe they teach them nothing but true Scripture and the infallible word of God SVBSECT I. Particular instances of Protestant Corruptions in the English Bible THough it may seem superfluous to specify any corruptions of the English Translators of Scripture after so cleer testimonies and confessions drawn from men of their own party yet to excite a conscience or at least curiosity in the Protestant Reader of examining further this matter I will mention a few of many which he may find both in Doctor Gregory Martins book of this subject and in the Remish Testament To maintain by Scripture that Popery is or at least savoreth Idolatry by worshiping of Images whersoever the Scripture speaks of Jdols they translate Images as 1. Jhon 4.21 My babes keep your selves from Images And how agreeth the temple of God with Jmages And be not worshipers of Images as some of them c. And 2. Paralip 36. vers 8. they added to the Text words that are not in the Greek Hebrew Latin or any copy however so corrupted The rest of the acts of Ioakim and the rest of the abominations which he did and the carved Images that were layd to his charge behold they are written c. These words carved Images layd to his charge are added by the Protestant Translators and not to be found in any copy or Text of Scripture in the whole world And though for meere shame in some later editions this impiety hath bin corrected and Jdols not Jmages put into the Text yet to make the illiterat sort of people believe that they are the same thing Image is put in the margent and in some places left vncorrected The first Protestant Bishops in Queen Elizabeths reign not being able to prevaile with the deposed Catholick Bishops to consecrat them as Scripture commands by imposition of Episcopal hands and therfore relying for their Caracter vpon the letters patents supremacy and election of the Queen translated the Greek word Kerotonia which S. Hierom and all the Ecclesiastical writers before and after him translate Ordination by imposition of hands they to make good I say their want of such an Ordination by words of Scripture in the Bible which then they set forth translated the said Greeck word Ordination by Election but their Successours who of late pretend to a more lawfull caracter then ever their Ordainers durst profess to have had received or them-selves can make good corrected this translation and restored into the text Ordination by imposition of hands To assert mariage of Priests when St. Paul says Have we not power to lead about a woman they translate insteed of woman wife but when he says in the same epistle and vseth the same word It is good for a man not to touch a woman then they translate not wife but woman To cry down the Sacrifice of the Mass they translate Temple or Table for
holy Doctor and then approv'd of by all the world and ever since accepted and applauded in God's Church be defective or deceitfull then a translation made since the pretended Reformaâ—ion by men not only engaged in that new doctrin but maintain'd therby and so addicted to the pleasures and profits of this world as the first Reformers and their Successours the Protestant Clergy are known to be not only in England but in all other parts of Christendom Let them be pleased also to consider whether the judgment of the Roman Catholick Clergy in these Kingdoms who in being of that judgment can have no motive but conscience as is manifest by the incapacities and penalties lay'd vpon them for not conforming to Protestancy be not a more impartial and less to be suspected rule for any prudent person to follow then the judgment of the Protestant Clergy rewarded and promoted to the greatest employments both in Church and state for being of that opinion they profess and who would forfeit all their being if they declared them-selves contrary to Protestancy This being as maturely and impartially considered as the importance of the matter doth require non will believe that the vulgar Translations made by Protestants is holy Scripture they being so contrary to our vulgata in latin translated out of the true Greeck and Hebrew copies writen first by a holy Martyr and after revewed by a St. whose sincerity and learning were sufficient to canonize his Translation had it not bin the word of God and most holy of it self and so declared by the testimony and approbation of the Church for the space of 1200. years before the Councel of Trent In vain therfore do Protestant Writers tell us that theiâ— Translations are taken immediatly from the fountains of the Greek and Hebrew so is our vulgata only with this difference that ours was taken from the fountains when they were cleere and by holy and learned men that knew which were the crystal waters and true copies but theirs is taken from fountains of trouble'd waters by lewd and vicious persons and after that the Arians and other Hereticks had poyson'd and corrupted them with their false and filthy doctrin Thus much against the Protestant letter of Scripture now to their sense of Scripture SECT V. The Protestant interpretation is not the true sense of Scripture THE principal part and as it were the soule of Scripture is the sence which was delivered to the Church togeather with the letter For as St. Hierom in ep ad Galat. sayth the Ghospel is not in the word but in the sence not in the bark but in the sapp not in the leaves of the words but in the root of the meaning So that though we should grant the Protestant Translations to be true yet if we prove their interpretation false we demonstrat they have no Scripture nor the least pretext or colour for their Reformations And first that the Church received togeather with the letter the true sense of Scripture is as evident as it is that God would not speak words without sense or leave the interpretation of them to men whose capacities reach not the mysteries of Religion contained in the words Therfore our learned Adversaries are obliged to confess that no man doubteth but that the primitive Church received from the Apostles and Apostolical men not only the text of Scripture but also the right and native sense therof The dispute therfore between Catholicks and Protestants is not whether the Church ever received the true sense of Scriptures but whether that sense continued as well as the letter in the Church and whether the interpretations of Luther Calvin Cranmer Hamond c. or of the Prelaticks of England ought to be preferr'd before that of the Roman Catholick Church because the true sense of Scripture is supposed by all Protestants to have bin lost for many ages and that the whole visible Church of God was either so careless as to forget the ancient sense or so wicked as to forge a new sense of Scripture And first it seems against reason to believe that any Christian Congregation could be less carefull of the sense of Scripture then of the letter because the sense is that which importeth most for preservation of the faith Therfore if the Prelats and Pastors of the Church have bin so watchfull and diligent in all ages as to find out and correct all heretical corruptions of the letter of Scripture how is it possible they would neglect the same industry for preservation of the sense which is the principal part of God's word And if Protestants think the letter was safe in the custody of the Roman Chatholick Church from which they received it how can they suspect the purity of that sense which was kept and delivered to them by the same Church and authority And if God's providence as they confess was engaged in keeping the leaves and letter of Scripture from corruption surely it could not be so vnconcern'd for the integrity of the sence and substance as to permit it to perish Besides it is much easier to keep the sense of Scripture incorrupt and pure then the letter The letter was writ only in paper or parchment the sense in the heads and hearts of the Bishops Doctors and People of the Church a dash of a pen may alter the letter but cannot have access to the sence which lodgeth in the hearts and heads of the faithfull The precept of receiving the sense of Scripture from the Church is not only agreable to reason but prescrib'd in Scripture as the only way of saluation Go not from the doctrin of the elders for they have learned it from their Fathers and of them thou shalt learn vnderstanding and to answer in the time of need Eccles. 8.8 The first Protestant Reformers observed not this they went to no precedent Church nor Fathers for their interpretation of Scripture and therfore the words of Ieremy 18.15 may be literally applyed to them They have stumbled from the ancient ways to walk in ways not troden The Protestant Clergy ought to say and confess ingeniously that of holy Iob 8.8 Jnquire therfore I pray thee of the ancient generation and prepare thy self to search of their Fathers for we are but yesterday and ought not intrude their own Imaginations as the true explanation of God's word They do not imitat St. Gregory Nazianzen and St. Basil who as Eusebius relates Hist. l. 11. cap. 9. did seek the vnderstanding of the Scriptures not from their own presumption but from the writings and authority of their Ancestors They do not follow the rule of Origen saying tract in Math. 29. That in our vnderstanding of the Scripture we must not dâ—part from the first Ecclesiasticall tradition nor believe other-wise but as the Church of God hath by succession delivered to us Nor that of Tertulian l. 1. de prescrip c. 6. What the Apostles preach'd what Christ reveal'd to them ought not be otherwise proved
and are as yet far short of that substantial and fundamental Reformation whervnto the principles of Protestancy and the Protestant rule of faith or an arbitrary interpretation of Scripture doth direct and incline all Churches of the Reformation As for our English Presbiterians and Fanaticks they agree with the Polonian Hungarian and Transilvanian protestant Arrians and Anti-Trinitarians in believing the Protestant Reformations can not be pious and perfect so long as they retain any on point of Popery and indeed there is as much reason and ground in Scripture to reject all as any on and the Protestant principles warant the deniall of the Trinity and Incarnation as well as of the Mass and Transubstantiation The prelaticks perceive this to be true and therfore in the 39. Articles to avoyd scandal and discredit profess the belief of many mysteries that according to the very foundation of their Reformation they ought to deny and though they seem not to be guilty of impiety in their resolution of retaining some yet are they convicted of incoherency in not rejecting all as we shall now manifestly prove SECT XI How the indifferency or rather inclination of Protestancy to all kind of infidelity is further demonstrated by the Prelatick doctrin and distinction of fundamental and not fundamental articles of faith The design of their fundamental distinction layd open The Roman Catholick the sole Catholick Church and how it hath the authority of iudging all controversies of Religion VNity of doctrin being a confessed mark of the true Church which is called One in relation to one and the same faith and Protestants perceiving they want this vnity and the means to bring them to it every particular Church and person challenging a right to interpret Scripture after his own manner as well as Luther and Calvin c. who could not assume to them-selves that liberty without granting it to others and that not only their sundry Churches and confessions differ extreamly in doctrin but even the members of one and the same Congregation agree not among them-selves in the explanation of their Articles nor in the Authority of their Church to command and determin what articles ought to be believed this I say considered by Protestants some of their chief writers and particularly the English Prelaticks have invented a distinction wherby they hope to foole their flocks and make them believe that there is not only an vnity but an vniversality of faith amongst all dissenting Protestants and by consequence that they are true Catholicks They divide therfore the articles of Christian Religion into fundamentall and not fundamentall Fundamentall they call those wherin all Christians do agree not fundamentall they make every article wherof them-selves or any other Christians doubt how ever so fundamentall it may be held by the rest By which doctrin they make Arians Nâ—â—torians and all ancient Hereticks good Catholicks and their errors not fundamentall or destructive to salvation because forsooth they are Christians though deny the consubstantiality of Christ. This is no wrested consequence of ours but their own confessed Tenet The great prelatick writer Doctor Morton late Bishop of Duresme in his approved and applauded book of the Kingdom of Jsrael and of the Church dedicated to Queen Elizabeth pag. 94 sayth The Churches of Arians are to be accounted the Church of God because they do hould the foundation of the Ghospell which is faith in JESUS Christ the son of God and Saviour of the world And pag. 91. He giveth this general rule Whersoever a company of men do joyntly and publickly by worshipping the true God in Christ profess the substance of Christian Religion which is faith in JESUS Christ the Son of God and Saviour of the world ther is a true Church notwithstanding any corruption what soever c. Thus they plead for the Arrians declaring in their favour that consubstantiality of the son or his being the natural son of God is not the substance of Christian belief A man would think that the real presence of Christ in the Sacrament is a substantial point of faith seing ther of dependeth the reality of our Sacrifice the feeding or famishing of our soules and the verifying or falsifying of Christ's plain and express words and yet Bishop Iewel the greatest piller of the Church of England in his Apology for the same pag. 101. edit 1600. obâ—erving that Protestants were divided in the belief of that mystery tells vs it is but a matter of indifferency The Lutherans and Zuinglians saith he are both sides Christians good friends and Brethren they vary not between them-selves vpon the principles and foundations of our Religions c. But vpon one only question the real presence neither weighty nor great Doctor Reynolds in his 5. Conclusion annexed to his conference pag 722. affirmeth the real presence to be but as it were the grudging of a litle ague if otherwise the party hould the Christian faith And all Protestants conspire in this heretical shift because their change and choyce of articles of faith can not be maintained by any other way but by denying that therby they touch the foundation of Christian Religion So Luther defended his Consubstantiation as may be seen in Amandus Polanus in his Synop. pag. 446. And Iacobus Acontius lib. 3. Stratagematum Sathanae pag. 135. saith It 's evident concerning as well those who hould the real presence of Christ's Body in the bread as those others which deny it that although of necessity one part do err yet both are in way of saluation if in other things they be obedient to God Jn this Protestant distinction we must distinguish two things 1. The design 2. The doctrin wherupon Protestants ground their design In this Section J will discover the design and declare the weakness therof In the next I will demonstrat the falshood of the doctrin wherby they intended to carry on their design Protestants proceed in this affair as weak Ministers of state when they find by experience they have bin mistaken in taking their measures and in the management of publick concerns they would fain be reconciled and make strict leagues with such Potentats as formerly they had disobliged and them-selves now stand in need of their friendship and fancy they can effect all by inculcating vnto them general notions of a common danger grounded vpon the power and pride of some neighbouring and emulous Prince So Prelaticks reflecting vpon the weackness of their cause occasion'd through the dissentions of the Reformed Religions and vpon the incoherency of their own 39. Articles with the foundation and liberty of Protestancy would fain by a generall notion of Christianity vnite all heretical Churches to them-selves against the Roman Catholicks pretended pride and power In which proceedings they commit two great indiscretions 1. They do not consider how they have disobliged the Greek and most of the Eastern Churches by declaring in their 39. Articles the doctrin of the Holy Ghost's procession from the Father and
1260. years And pag. â—4â— From the time of Constantine vntill these our days even 1260. years the Pope and his Clergy hath possessed the outward visible Church of Christians And their chief Doctors ingeniously acknowledg that their Churches were either so obscure or so opprest that notwithstanding their own serious examinatiâ—â— and diligent search into all histories both sacred and profane they can not find in the space of at least 1300. years as much as a record or Tradition of any on person to beare witness that their faith sense of Scripture or Reformation was preach't by Christ and his Apostles Sebastianus Francus in ep de Abrog Statutis ecclesiast saith Statim post Apostolos c. Presently after the Apostles times all things were turneâ— vpside down c. And that for certain through the work of Anti-christ the externall Church togeather with the faith and the Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure and that for these 1400. years the Church hath bin no wher externall and visible Peter Martyr so much commended by Calvin and sent for by Cranmer to help to frame the Religion of the Church of England pag. 462. of his work de caelibatu votis saith as for the judgment of the Fathers because our Adversaires the Papists both in this and other controversies are accustomed to appeale to them J do not think it the part of a Christian to appeale from the Scriptures of God to the judgments of men And pag. 476. So long as we go no further then the Councells and Fathers we shall always remain in the same errors This Sophister would faine make Protestants believe that the question is whether the Fathers sense of Scriptures ought to be preferred before the sense of the Protestants them-selves confess that both Councells and Fathers are contrary to their interpretation Whitaker on of the learned'st Protestants that ever writ answering Duraeus and acknowledging the truth of the assertion coms off with this poore evasion l. 7. pag. 478. Jt is sufficient for us to know by conferring the Popish doctrin with Scripture that they do not agree let Histories say what they list So litle do the Ecclesiastical Annals favour Protestancy that never any point therof is mentioned without mentioning also how it began and was comdemned as heresy Now let Protestants examin our Roman Catholick witnesses we do not stop as they must at the last age 1500. we produce in every Century of years the most eminent persons for Sanctity and learning that then lived who not only professed our faith living but also dying as by the Traditions of all Christendom their own writings and the confession of our Adversaries is manifest wherof the Divines of Magdeburg hertofore quoted writ copiously in their Centuries These Fathers and Doctors of the Church in each respective Century delivered the Roman Catholick faith to the next succeeding not as a privat opinion of their own but as the publick pure primitive Apostolick saith which they had received as such from the precedent age confirmed by the vnanimous testimony of their known Catholick immediat Predecessours What exceptions or objections can Protestants pretend against the holy and learned Fathers so impartial Iudges and witnesses They could not be ignorant of what was the publick and vniversal faith or Church in their times and they were men of so great integrity that they would not for any temporal interest conceale the truth in a matter wherof depended eternity They were not angry saith S. Augustin disputing against the Pelagians advers Julian l. 2. prope finem lib. 3. c. 17. lib. 4. c. 12. neither at you or vs what they have found in the Church that they have holden they have taught what they have learn't what they have received from their fore-fathers they have delivered to posterity The most learned Protestants decline the Fathers judgment and testimony for no other reason but because they find them to be Roman Catholicks in their writings so that the question is not whether they by for vs but whether their testimony for vs averring that the Roman Catholick sense of Scripture is the same which Christ and his Apostles deliuered ought to be preferred before the contrary testimony of Luther Calvin Cranmer or of the other Convocations and Parliaments of England of Edward 6. and Queen Elizabeth who prove not their reformed sense of Scripture by ancient tradition but by a new arbitrary interpretation of Scripture And in what Court of Judicature would such an vncertain guess pass for a legal proof Wheras tradition is the only evidence wherby the greatest civil controversies even of regal successions and titles are decided in the Protestants Courts Therfore it ought not to be excluded as superfluous or superstitious from the Church SVBSET III. AS to their exception that the Roman Catholick Church is but a part and ought not to be judge of all other Christians we answer that not by all Christians but by on part were all controversies in the Church decided since the Apostles times and the other part which did not submitt to the judgment of that one in matters of faith and disciplin were censured hereticks That the Judgment and censures in all ages were issued but by on part and this the Roman Catholick party that lived in communion with the Bishop of Rome and the Councells that acknowledged his jurisdiction we prove by the confessed examples of every Century In the first the controversy of the legal ceremonies was determined by S. Peter and the Apostles in a Councell wherin S. Peter presided Act. 15. In the second Century the Christians were divided about celebrating E'aster the controversy was decided by S. Victor Bishop of Rome as S. Peter's successor and because the Churches of Asia would not conform themselves to his sentence he excommunicated them Euseb. l. 5. hist. c. 23. 24. And though S. Irenaeus approved not of S. Victor's severity yet he never questioned his jurisdiction or supremacy or the legality of his censures And because some Christians persisted obstinatly in not conforming to the Pop's Decree of celebrating Easter they were for that obstinacy declared hereticks and as such numbred in Catalogues by S. Epiphanius haeres 50. S. Augustin haeres 26. and by Tertullian de praescript in fine and called Quarto-decimans In the third Century by the Pope Cornelius and his Roman Councell the Novatian heresy was condemned Euseb. ex versione Rufini lib. 6. histor cap. 33. and though there were not as many Bishops in that Roman Councell as at Trent yet the whole Church thought the authority sufficient and legal to declare the Novatians hereticks The same Pope and Stephen his Successour condemned such Christians as thought and taught that they who had bin baptised by hereticks ought to be rebaptised In the forth Century the Arian heresy was condemned by the Councell of Nice wherin were but 318. Bishops whose testimony was thought sufficient and legal against a far greater
subordination the man of sin shall not be revealed So that Succession which by all the ancient and Holy Doctors is believed and defended to be a mark of the true Church is affirmed by Iewell and the first Protestant Bishops to be a mark of Anti-Christ and to prove this their non sense they are pleased to falsify Scripture and all this was don because they knew them-selves wanted succession and imposition of Episcopal hands and were made Bishops only by the Queen's letters patents and dispensation with the inhability of their very state and condition and legitimated or made legal by an Act of Parliament 8. Elizabeth 1. SVBSECT VII Prelatick Falsifications to prove that Popes may and have decreed Heresies IN the Apology of the Church of England part â— cap. 5. Iewell and the English Clergy affirm that Pope Iohn 22. held a wicked and detestable opinion of the life to come and Jmmortality of the soule which accusation they had out of Calvin whose words are that Pope Iohn affirmed man's soule to be mortal This being proved to be a lye by Doctor Harding Iewell and his Clergy replyed in the defence of the Apology thus Gerson writeth in Sermons Paschali Pope John 2â— to have decreed that the soules of the wicked should not be punished before the day of the last Iudgment by which words as you shall see insteed of cleering one fals accusation against Iohn 22 they bring in another for Gerson hath no such words but the true controversy was indeed whether the soules of the just not of the wicked should see God face to face before the day of Iudgment or not wherin Pope Iohn being Reader of Divinity in France before he was Pope inclined to the negative part the Controversy was decided after Pope Iohn's death iâ— the extravagant of Pope Benedictus Not content with this Jmposture they add an other greater in confirmation of their former Charge fathering in the same and these ensuing words vpon the Councell of Constance Quinimo Ioannes Papa 22. yea Pope Iohn the two and twentith held and believed obstinatly that the soule of man did dye with the body and was extinguished as the soules of the bruit Beasts And more over he sayd that a man once dead is not to rise again no not at the last day First this Testimony doth not touch Pope Iohn 22. at all but an Anti-Pope Iohn vsurping the Popedom and calling him-self Iohn 23. and this a hundred years after Pope Iohn 22. 2. These words are not words of the Councell but words of an accusation vsed by a certain man that did accuse him in the Councell of Constance vnder the name Baltazar de Cossa calling him-self Iohn 23. where laying against him 35. articles concerning his wicked life before he took vpon him the sayd name of Pope which Articles were proved but not this point of Heresy SVBSECT VIII Prelatick Falsifications to prove that Popes have insulted over Kings THe Apology of the Church of England doth set forth how a Pope commanded the Emperour to go by him at his hors bridle and the French King to hould his stirrop and the like which Mr. Harding proveth to be lyes then it says that the Pope hurled vnder his table Francis Dandalus the Duke of Venise King of Creta and Cyprus fast-bound with chains to feed of bones among his doggs But neither Francis Dandalus was Duke of Venice when he was sent to the Pope in this Embassage neither was he King of Creta nor Cyprus that name of King not being tollerable in the free State of Venice and as for the Duke at that time his name was Johannes Superantius and Dandalus was but a privat man sent Embassador to Clement 5. then Pope to obtain the revocation of an Jnterdict which was layd vpon the sayd Citty and finding the Pope some what hard to yeeld to his supplication he devised of him-self this Stratagem to cause an Iron chain to be put about his own neck and to creep in vpon his hands and knees while the Pope was at dinner and there lay down vnder the Table and would not rise vntill he had obtained pardon and remission for his Country and this Doctor Harding proveth out of the principal Authors and writers of the Venetian Commonwealth SVBSECT IX Prelatick Falsifications to prove that S. Austin the Apostle of our English Saxons was an hypocrit and no Saint as also to discredit Catholick writers BIshop Iewell and his Prelatick Clergy in their reply to the Objections against their Apology for the Church of England pag. 185. speak thus of St. Austin the Monk and Apostle of England He was a man as is judged by them that 〈◊〉 and knew him neither of an Apostolicall spirit nor any way 〈◊〉 to be called a Saint but an hypocrit and a supperstitious 〈◊〉 cruell bloudy and proud out of measure There is no â—riting extant of any man that saw him and knew him alive but only of St. Gregory the Great who commended him exceedingly and of St. Bede that lived not very long after him who writeth also much of his Sanctity and miracles who then 〈◊〉 those who lived with him and knowing him did Iudge him to be so bad a man Iewell citeth only in the margent Greffey of Monmouth who lived neer six hundred years after St. Austins dayes Bishop Iewell and his Camerades say also that Ioannes de Magistris he would have sayd Martinus writ in his Book de Temperantia that fornication is no sin but this Author houlds the quite contrary and proveth it by six several conclusions and by St. Paul saying that it excludeth from the Kingdom of heaven but yet for that he saith in the beginning Arguitur quod non it may be objected to the contrary the Apologists foolishly and fraudulently accuse in this Author Roman Catholicks with damnable doctrin Much more might be sayd of their fals dealing in this Apology defence and reply of the Church of England but we remit the curious to Doctor Harding Stapleton c. SVBSECT X. Of the protestant prelatick Clergies frauds and falsifications of Scripture and alterations of their 39. Articles of Religion to make the people believe that they have true Priests and Bishops in the Church of England THe point most insisted vpon by Dr. Hâ—rding Stapâ—â—tâ—n c and all 〈◊〉 Catholick 〈◊〉 their Booâ—◠〈◊〉 the 〈…〉 and 〈◊〉 of the Church of England was that it could not 〈◊〉 Church because it had not any one true Bishop and according to St. Hierom saith Harding 〈◊〉 non est quae non habet 〈◊〉 which word 〈◊〉 signifieth Bishop as well as 〈◊〉 That the Church of England had 〈◊〉 in the beginning of Queen Elizaâ—â—â—â— Reign whom Harding and Stapleton writ against it as much as one Bishop validly consecrated they proved because not one of them was consecrated by a true Bishop or by imposition of Episcopal hands and if they durst say they were Harding and Stapleton
so frequently objected they were for meer shame corrected in the new Translation seâ— forth by order of King James And then appeared the forged Register of Mason to supply the 〈◊〉 of that falsification and to make the world believe that the first Protestant Bishops Parker Jewell Horn 〈◊〉 had bin consecrated by imposition of Episcopal hands with great solemnity and all due formalities at Lambeth wheras for the space of above â—0 years before that time as hath 〈◊〉 said â—â—â—tofore no man could tell or hear where or by whom these men had bin made Bishops for at the Nags-head they were rejected by Lâ—â—daf and Sâ—ories consecrating form in the same place was ridiculous notwithstanding that it had bin the greatest controversy between Catholicks and Protestants and the name of the place and 〈◊〉 continually demanded in print If an authentick Register 〈◊〉 my credible witness had bin produced when some such 〈◊〉 was called for by D. r Harding and 〈…〉 50. yeâ—rs before Mason appeared in print the dispute had bin ended 〈…〉 great honour of the Prelaticks and Confusion of the 〈◊〉 but they were answered only with an Act of Parliament 8. Eliz. 1. declaring that whatsoever had bin don in virtue of the great soule of England and the Queens supremacy was well don and should stand legal and valid The falsification of Images for Idols was corrected t' is true in the new Testament but in the ould exod 20.4 and in the ten Commandments and Catechisms for Children they 〈…〉 corruptions translating graven Images for graven thing against all Texts Hebrew Greek and Laâ—â—n for that the hebrew word pesel is the very same that sculpâ—â—â— in latin that is a graven or carved thing and the Greek 〈◊〉 eidâ—â—lon an Jdol So that by this fals and wicked practise 〈◊〉 Protestant Clergy doth still endeavor to discredit the Roâ—â—n Catholick Religion and therby continue their own auâ—â—ority and Beneficies making the layty believe contrary to their own consciences and corrections in the new Testaâ—â—â—â— that popery is Idolatry for admitting worship of Images 〈◊〉 if Image and Idol were the same thing and equally forbidden by Scripture and God's Commandements To confirm their flocks in this persuasion they tell them the reason why Catholicks leave out some repetitions of the first Commandement in their Catechismes is because they know that to worship Images is against Scripture wheras in our Latin and many vulgar Roman Catechismes nothing is omitted and in such short ones wherin all the words are not expresly mentioned it 's don only not to charge Childrens memories with more then with the substance of every Commandement and the substance of the first consists in the first â—ords therof In the last Commandement also we put in brief only these words Thou shalt not covet an other man's goods Omitting Oxes and Asses c. If our design had bin to corrupt 〈◊〉 conceale the words and sense of Scripture in the first comâ—â—â—dement in favor of Images we would not have set down the Text so cleerly in any of our larger Catechismes and much less in our Latin and vulgar Translations of the Bible Hence it followeth that we do not take away the second Commandement as Protestants object who begin the second precept from these words Thou shalt not make to thee a graven thing c. which we make part of the first and with S. Austin q. 71. in Exodum we divide the first table into three precepts directing vs to God the second into seaven belonging to our selves vpon this reason among others because to make or have any graven thing or similitude of any creature to the end to adore it as God were indeed to have a strange God which is forbid in the first words of the first Commandment and so all that followeth to the commination and promise forbiddeth false Gods and appeareth to be but one precept in substance But the desire and internal consent to adultery and theft differ altogeather as much as the external acts of the same sins and therfore seing adultery and theft are forbidden by two distinct precepts the prohibition of the internal desire doth also require two precepts To maintain their heresies against the single life of Priests as also against the excellency of Virginity vowes of Chastity free will and the possibility of Keeping God's Commandments they corrupt the Text of Math. 19.11 translating contrary to all Copies both Hebrew Greek and Latin All men can not receive this saying in steed of all men do not receive this saying for we may have the gift of continency if we will S. Austin lib. de gratia lib. arbit c. 4. faith whosoever have not this gift given them it is either for that they will not have it or that they fulfill not that which they will and they that have this gift or attain to this word have it of God and their own freewill And Origen explaining this very text tract 7. in Math. saith this gift is given to all that ask for it To authorise the Protestant error of Iustification and Salvation by faith only set down as an article of saith in the 39. of the Church of England they translate Luc. 18 4â— Receive thy sight thy faith hath saved thee insteed of Receive thy sight thy faith hath made thee whole it being cleere that the blind man who answered Christ's question desired corporal sight and that our Saviour accordingly granted what he asked in the same manner and with the same words he did to others that he cured of the same disease Mark 10.52 Luke 8.48 50. which places are corrected and rightly translated but as they did in the translation of Images for Idols leave some places vncorrected so they thought fit to do in this particular to the end some places or other of their Scripture might remain still â—â—â—tore against Popery as Rom. 11.4 they translate for Bâ—al the Jmage of Baal c. Acts 19.24 they translate for Temples of Diana Shrines 〈◊〉 make shrines of saints Bodies and of other Reliques odious â—nd vers 35. they add Image to the Text which is not in any Copy Greek or Latin to condemn the worship of Images And Chap. 20. v. 28. to attribute the rule and Government of the Church to the King principaly and more properly then to Bishops Insteed of rule the Church of God they translate take heed therfore vnto your selves and to all the flock over the which the holy Ghost hath made you overseers to feed the Church of God And with the same fraud and flattery they translate 1. Pet. 2.13 Be subject to every human Creature for God thus Submit your selves to every ordinance of man for the Lords sake as though it were all one to be subject and obey every temporal Prince in things lawfull and to obey every ordinance and by consequence in spiritual as well as in temporal maters In the same place also wheras in K. Edward 6. dayes the English Bible had To
what they say in Controversies of Religion Had Luther Calvin Beza Kemnitius Melancton and Jewell bin as sincere in their writings against Catholicks as Canisius Coccius Bellarmin Gualterus Peron and Baronius are against Protestants we could not have discovered so many palpable falsifications in the later Protestant writers as our Books manifest to the world wherof I have sayd more J fear then my Readers will have patience to peruse Yet I shall entreat them for the Conclusion of this matter to permit me to mention somewhat of Luther's and Calvin's sincerity the two chief Apostles of the Protestant Reformation and of two others the most eminent Prelats and writers of the Church of England Usher and Laud one called the Irish Saint the other the English Martyr When such Primats are proved Falsifiers we need not examin further the writings of the Inferior Clergy and petty Ministers but remit the â—ealous defenders of their sincerity to such Books as discover their frauds and are easily found wherof we have given heretofore a Catalogue SECT XI Calumnies and Falsifications of Luther Calvin Archbishop Laud and Primat Vsher to discredit Catholick Religion against their own knowledge and conscience LUther in postilla ad Evang. Dominicoe Annuntiationis saith Among the Papists every one maketh recourse vnto Mary expecting from her more favour and grace then from Christ himself Calvin saith every Papist hath chosen peculiar Saints to whom he hath devoted himself as to so many helping Gods 〈◊〉 are their Gods now according to the number of their Cittyes as the Prophet vpbraided the Jsraelits but according to the number of their very persons This our Popish Babylon saith Luther hath so far extinguished faith in this Sacrament of Pennance as with a shamless forehead she denyeth faith to be necessary nay further she hath with an Anti-christian impiety defended that it is an heresy if any man affirme faith to be necessary His Scholler Philip Melancton saith the same The School-Doctors have foolishly and wickedly taught that sins are forgiven without faith Without doubt the illiterat Protestants who all take Luther to be a Saint at least do not believe him to be an Jmpostor question not but that Roman Catholicks are such men as Luther Calvin c. describe them and will not so much as turn to the Councell of Trent or to any other Book where our Tenets are to be found there they might see that we hold faith to be the beginning and foundation of man's saluation and the root of all Justification without which it is impossible to please God c. And in him that doth repent it is of necessity that faith go before pennance Concerning the necessity of Grace Luther saith The Papists do teach that a man may keep the Commandements of God with the proper forces of nature without God's grace Concerning the immortality of the soul he saith The Papists at this day do not believe at all the Immortality of the soul. And again in the Lateran Councell that was celebrated in the year 1515. in time of Pope Julius it was first of all known and decreed that the resurrection of the Dead was to be believed Of this wicked Friars corruptions of Scripture see Zuinglius tom 2. ad Luth. de sâ—c fol. 412. and many more Authors As for Fathers and Councells he did not value them so much as to trouble himself with falsifying or corrupting their writings though sometimes to impose vpon illiterat people that the holy Fathers were hereticks or ignorant he endeavors in his writings to discredit their persons and condemn their doctrin See what he sayes of them hertofore part 1. 2. SVBSECT II. Of Calvin's calumnies against Catholicks and their Doctrin MR. Walsingham in his search pag. 152. acknowledgeth he had such an opinion of Calvin's Sanctity and sincerity that having read in his Institutions cap. 11. lib. 1. That in the first 500. years after Christ there were never any Images in Christian Churches both himself and other Ministers did often alledge the same as a certain truth to such as knew less then themselves but perceiving that the Papists laughed at them for it he began to doubt and after examination of twenty Authors or witnesses within the first 500. years which Coccius citeth against Calvin he found them truly cited and Calvin a Lyar. How litle Calvin valued the practise or doctrin of the ancient Church he declareth lib. 3. Instit. c. 5. § 10. where he saith when the adversaries object against me that prayer for the Dead hath bin vsed above 1300. years I ask them again by what word of God revelation or example it 〈◊〉 bin so vsed c. But the very old Fathers themselves that prayed for the dead did see that herein they wanted both Commandment of God and lawfull example So as 〈◊〉 accuseth all the holy Fathers because they were Papists of superstition In all the Hymns and Litanies of the Papists saith Calâ—â—â— there is never any mention of Christ but wheras always they pray to dead Saints the name of Christ never occurreth And yet this Impostor could not be ignorant that our Litanies begin Kyrie eleison Christe eleison Lord have mercy â—pon us Christ have mercy vpon us Christe audi nos Christe exaudi 〈◊〉 c. And our hymns he knew were made by St. Ambrose St. Gregory Prudentius Sedulius and other ancient Fathers and conclude Gloria tibi Domine qui natus es de Virgine c. In the very same Book and Chapter Calvin affirmeth that is the third Councell of Carthage wherin St. Austin was present it was forbiden that we should say Sancte Petre ora pro nobis which is fals it was indeed decreed Quod cum Altari assistitur semper ad patrem dirigatur Oratio That when the Priest did assist at the Altar he should offer his prayer and sacrifice to God the Father The Papists do shamefully and impiously define saith Calvin that dayly pennance must only be don for venial sin As though we taught that for mortal sin pennance was not necessary Jn the same place he saith the Papists speak not at all when they treat of pennance of the internal renovation of mind which bringeth true amendment of life and again ibid. 29. they hold that they are reconciled once only by the grace of God when they are Baptised post Baptismum resurgendum esse per satisfactiones but after baptism a man must rise again from sin by satisfactions Wheras this impudent fellow knew well enough that we hold all rising from sin or reconciliation vnto God whether before or after baptism must be by Grace and that satisfactions only are for temporal punishments after the guilt of sin is remitted by Reconciliation In his institutions l. 4. c. 7. he saith that Pope Iohn 2â— affirmed mens souls to be mortal and to perish together with the Body vntill the day of resurrection which calumny we have confuted hertofore In the same
due to Saints Bishops Priests c. 〈…〉 of that religious and supernatural excellency or 〈◊〉 which God hath given them And to Saints we pray 〈◊〉 God's servants not as to Gods as Mr. Vsher would 〈◊〉 Proâ—estantâ— We are calumniated by him as St. Hierom St. Austin and all Catholicks were by Vigilantius and Faustus Manichean Heretick St. Austin his words are The hereâ—â—ck Faustus doth calumniat us because we honor the 〈◊〉 or reliques of Martyrs affirming that we have them for our Idols The Christian people doth celebrat with religious 〈◊〉 the memories of Martyrs therby to stir vp themâ—â—â—ves to their imitation and that they may be assisted with their prayers and made partakers of their merits But with the worship termed in Greek latria and which the latin language can not express in one word it being a certain subjection and servitude due properly to the Deity only we do not honor any but God alone c. Coilyridians who holding our Lady for a Deity adored her 〈◊〉 latria and offered sacrifice vnto her And yet he doth 〈◊〉 how St. Epiphanius in that very disputation inveighed 〈◊〉 against such as did not honor our Lady with due 〈…〉 but let our Lord be adored saith he 〈…〉 none adore her as God for though she be 〈…〉 and most worthy of honor yet not worthy to be 〈…〉 wit with latria And the same Saint condemneth as 〈◊〉 those who do not give due honor to the mother of God 〈◊〉 who give her that of latria For as these saith he 〈…〉 Imaginations of Mary do sow pernicious 〈…〉 in mens minds so these others inclining too much to the 〈…〉 to be in the wrong So that we see 〈…〉 of Latria and Dulia is no Idle invention of the 〈…〉 necessary doctrin of the ancient Fathers Against prayer to Saints MR. Vhser in his answer to the Iesuits chalenge treating of this controversy proceeded with the same fraud he vsed in that of Purgatory Finding that the ancient 〈◊〉 prayed to Saints and that God wrought many miraâ—â—â— at their shrines and Reliques he endeavors to change the 〈◊〉 of the question and place the whole controversy in points 〈◊〉 making his Reader believe that we Roman 〈◊〉 now a dayes do not believe as the ancient Church but 〈◊〉 that the souls of Martyrs are present at their shrines 〈◊〉 when miracles are wrought and other things 〈◊〉 the manner of their intercession and knowledge of our 〈◊〉 and prayers so that saith Mr. Usher pag. 405. to 〈◊〉 good the Popish manner of praying vnto Saints that 〈◊〉 at the first was but probable and problematical to wit 〈◊〉 sayings of the Master of the sentences Scotus Biel and other schoole Divines must now be held to be de fide This calumny and fraud is cleerly confuted by the words Concede nobis Domine quaesumus veniam delictorum 〈…〉 sanctis quorum hodie solemnia celebramus talem nobis 〈◊〉 denotionem vt ad eorum pervenire merâ—amur societatem 〈…〉 â—orum merita quos propria impediunt scelera excuset 〈◊〉 accusat quos actio qui ijs tribuisti coelestis palmam 〈…〉 nobis veniam non deneges peccati Grant us O Lord we 〈…〉 remission of our sins and by the intercession of the Saints 〈◊〉 solemnity we celebrat bestow vpon us such devotion that we 〈◊〉 serve to attain vnto their fellowship And immediatly folâ—oweth let their merits help us that are hindred by our own sins 〈◊〉 their intercession excuse us who are accused by our own 〈◊〉 and thou o Lord who hast bestowed vpon them the palme 〈◊〉 heauenly triumph deny not vnto us the pardon of our sins 〈…〉 pag. 408. quite omitting the first part of 〈…〉 translateth the later part as if it were rather an 〈◊〉 then a supplication thus can their merits help us 〈◊〉 own sins hinder can their intercession excuse us whose 〈◊〉 doth accuse themselves But thou who hast bestowed vpon 〈◊〉 palme of thy heavenly triumph deny not vnto us the 〈…〉 sins You see how he adds interrogations and makes 〈◊〉 on his own head and not only translates the latin 〈…〉 fraudulently but changeth the whole sense and 〈◊〉 into the Text At insteed of and tu which is not 〈◊〉 latin and makes the whole order of the 〈◊〉 as also that of the Benedictin Monks hereticks as 〈◊〉 of that which no Roman Catholick ever called in 〈◊〉 What credit think you doth such a man as this deserve 〈◊〉 collections of antiquities when they agree not with his 〈◊〉 Protestant Religion he who venters to contradict a 〈◊〉 so generaly known and to corrupt a writing so common 〈◊〉 in so many Libraries and Books what will he not 〈◊〉 or hath not don in Papers and Copies which he fancies 〈◊〉 must take vpon his sole word and Testimony Whosoever desires to have a full view of Primat Vsher's vnsincere dealing in maintaining protestancy which we attribute more to the of the Roman Church whose words he quotes were of 〈◊〉 that as the Greeks expressed themselves it was a 〈◊〉 not simply fundamental 〈◊〉 for his Lordship's backwardness in denying the Greeks 〈…〉 Church that is of accusing them of heresy 〈◊〉 forsooth they seem to maintain the equality and 〈◊〉 of the persons so great a prelat and writer ought 〈◊〉 known that a Church may be a fals and heretical 〈◊〉 for denying the generation and procession as well as 〈◊〉 the equality and consubstantiality of the persons 〈◊〉 indeed can the one be denyed without denying the other 〈◊〉 task is to examin the Bishop's sincerity not his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 first fraud is to pretend that Catholick Authors 〈◊〉 him in the Protestant distinction of fundamental and 〈…〉 articles wheras we hold every article by 〈…〉 motive though not of the matter to be 〈◊〉 that is of necessity the matter how ever so small 〈◊〉 believed by us vnder pain of Damnation whensoever 〈…〉 proposed to us as revealed by God or which 〈…〉 whensoever we know any matter to be either 〈…〉 Scripture or declared by Catholick Tradition or 〈◊〉 by the Church we are bound to believe it and can 〈◊〉 if we deny or doubt of it So that doctrin which 〈…〉 grievous â—rror in the greek Church we must call it plain 〈◊〉 which makes them no Church because their error hath 〈…〉 heresy by the Church 〈◊〉 second fraud in this matter is that he conceals from 〈…〉 the true state of the question and abuseth the 〈◊〉 â—uthors he cites as if they had vnderstood it as his 〈…〉 doth set it down or had excused the modern Greeks 〈◊〉 and argues with their sayings and authority in favor of pâ—â—â—estancy The question is whether the modern Greeks 〈◊〉 that the holy Ghost proceeds from the son as well as 〈◊〉 the Father The Bishop pretends they do and that they 〈◊〉 pain of Damnation and proved this saying by these words 〈◊〉 Austin this is a thing founded An erring Disputant is to
be 〈◊〉 with in other questions not diligently digested nor yet made firm 〈◊〉 authority of the Church there error is to be born with but 〈◊〉 not to go so farr that it should labour to shake the very 〈◊〉 of the Church The Bishop sayes this can not be 〈◊〉 of the definition of the Church though St. Austin 〈◊〉 expressly of the authority therof but of Scripture But 〈◊〉 afterwards the words might be vnderstood of the 〈◊〉 of the Church or general Councells to the end that 〈◊〉 might not imagin St. Austin thought such definitions were 〈◊〉 or vnquestionable he adds But plain Scripture with 〈◊〉 sense or a full demonstrative argument must have room 〈◊〉 a wrangling and erring disputer may not be allowed it And 〈◊〉 neither of these but may convince the definition of the 〈◊〉 if it be ill founded And to shew that this is no fancy of 〈◊〉 but the doctrin of St. Austin he quotes his words 〈◊〉 see them in the margent with an F. referring the word 〈◊〉 to Scripture So that if you believe the Bishop and rely 〈◊〉 his quotations St. Austin doubted not but that the 〈◊〉 of the Church in general Councells may be contrary to 〈◊〉 and confuted by full demonstrative arguments I confess that when I read this page and part of Bp. Laud's 〈◊〉 with Fisher I found my self much troubled vntill 〈◊〉 the matter and then I resolved never more to 〈◊〉 him or any Protestant writer however so Saint-like or 〈◊〉 by report or in appearance The truth is St. Austin 〈◊〉 place cited by the Bishop hath nothing at all either 〈◊〉 Scripture or evident sense or demonstrative arguâ—â—â—ts but addressing his speech to the Manicheans he writes 〈◊〉 Apud vos autem vbi nihil horum est quod me invitet ac 〈◊〉 sola personat veritatis pollicitatio and then follow the words 〈◊〉 by the Bishop quae quidem si tam manifesta monstratur c. 〈◊〉 truth so bragd of and promised by the Manicheans to 〈◊〉 demonstrated in that epistle called Fundamentum saith St. Austin if it be demonstrated to be so cleer c. is to be preferred where you see St. Austin's quae referred not to Scripture but to that fictitious truth which the Manichees pretended to be in their doctrin Nay St. Austin is so far from doubting of the infallibility of the Church and general Councells in that very place quoted by the Bishop that he disputes ex professo against the possibility of its erring or of its definitions being contrary to Scripture and sayes that if the doctrin of the Catholick Church could be contrary to Scripture he should not be able to believe rationaly and infallibly either the one or the other not the Scriptures because he receives them only vpon the authority of the Church Not the Church whose authority is infringed by Scripture which is suposed to be brought against her Si ad Evangelium me tenes ego ad eos me teneam quibus praecipientibus Evangelio credidi his jubentibus tibi omnino non credam Quod si forte in Evangelio aliquid in apertissimum de Manichaei Apostolatu invenire potueris infirmabis mihi Catholicorum authoritatem qui jubent vt tibi non credam qua infirmata jam nec Evangelio credere poterâ— quia per eos illi credideram ita nihil apud me valebit quicquid inde protulâ—ris Quapropter si nihil manifestum de Manichaei Apostolatu in Evangelio reperitur Catholicis potius credam quam tibi si aâ—tem inde aliquid manifestum pro Manichaeo legeris nec illis nec tibi illis quiÌ„a de te mihi mentiti sunt Tibi autem qui eam scripturam mihi profers cui per illos credideram qui mihi mentiti sunt Aug. cont Epist. Fundament cap. 4. Wherfore St. Austin doth not suppose as the Bishop pretends that Scripture or reason can be contrary to the definitions of the Church he professedly teaches the contrary in the very place cited and vses the alledged words quae quidem si tam manifesta monstratur c. only ex suppositione impossibili in the same manner as St. Paul speaketh Gal. 1. Jf an Angell from heaven teach otherwise then we have taught you let him be accursed St. Paul well knew it was impossible that an Angell from heaven should teach contrary to the Ghospel and so did St. Austin that the definitions of a general Councel should be contrary to Scripture or reason as appeareth by his own discours against the Manichees Vincentius Liâ—inensis abused by Mr. Laud to prove the fallibility of the Church pretending that learned Father supposed and sayd she might change into Lupanar errorum à strumpet or stewes of errors BUt A. C. tells us further saith Mr. Laud that if one may deny or doubtfully dispute against any determination of the Church then may he also against an other and so against all since all are made firm to us by one and the same divine revelation sufficiently applyed by one and the same full authority of the Church which being weakned in any one can not be firm in another First A. C. borrowed the former part of this out of Vincentius Lirinensis and as that learned Father vses it I subscribe to it but not as A. C. applyes it For Vincentius speaks there de Catholico Dogmate of Catholick Maxims c. which are properly fundamental but here the Bishop is mistaken for Vincentius speaks also of not fundamentals as of the celebrating of Easter according to St. Victor's decree the not rebaptizing of those who had bin baptized by hereticks c. now in this sense saith the Bishop give way to every cavilling disputer to deny or quarrel at the maxims of Christian Religion c. And why may he not then take liberty to do the like of any other till he have shaken all But this hinders not the Church her self nor any appointed by the Church to examin her own decrees and to see that she keep the principles of her faith vnblemished and vncorrupted for if she do not so but novitia veteribus new doctrins be added to the old the Church which is Sacrarium veritatis may be changed in Lupanar errorum I am loath to english it Hitherto the modest Bishop who quotes Vincent Lirin in his Margent for his lupanar errorum c. and for the whole discours Vincentius Lirinensis is so far from expressing any fear or suspition of danger that the Church should be changed into lupanar errorum a stews of errors by addition of novelties or falling from the primitive doctrin that as if he had foreseen this corruption of his meaning and cutting short his words practised by Mr. Laud he declares in that very place by him quoted that only hereticks and vngodly men can entertain any such thoughts of Christs spouse sed avertat hoc a suorum mentibus divina pietas sitque hoc potius impiorum furor
these are his words and concealed by the Bishop who also striks out of Vincentius Lirin other words wherby it did appear what a kind of keeper the Church is of the truths deposited with her and how litle danger there is of corrupting the old or admitting of new doctrin The Bishop pag. 38. sets down the sentence thus Ecclesia depositorum apud se dogmatum Custos c. Denique quid vnquam Conciliorum Decretis enisa est nisi vt quod antea simpliciter credebatur hoc idem postea diligentius crederetur c. But in Vincentius Lirinensis It is thus Christi vero Eoclesia sedula cauta depositorum apud se dogmatum Custos here first he skips over these two words sedula cauta diligent and wary because they spoiled his plot of persuading us that the Church might by negligence of its Pastors be insensibly changed and corrupted To the same intent he conceales with an c. the rest that followes which would have cleered all and left no room for the Bishops fraud for Vincentius Lirin his words are But the Church of Christ is a diligent Depositary or Keeper of the truths committed to her never changes any thing at all in them lessens nothing adds nothing nether cuts away things necessary nor adjoyns things superfluous neither looseth what is hers nor vsurpes what belongs to others Let any Christian or honest Pagan Iudge whether these words be not Diametrically contrary to what the Bishop pretends vnto in this passage viz. suspition and possibility of the Churches adding novitia veteribus novelties to the old doctrin of making a change of that faith she first received from Christ and his Apostles and of becoming Lupanar errorum which this good man and holy Martyr sayes he is loath to english and yet leaves out cuts and corrupts the Latin text of set purpose to fix vpon Christs Espouse the greatest infamy How Bp. Laud falsifies Occham to infringe St. Austins authority concerning the infallibility of the Church in succeeding ages as well as in that of the Apostles and is forced by his error to resolve his prelatick faith into the light of Scripture and the privat Spirit of Fanaticks which he palliates vnder the name of grace and therby warrants all rebellions against Church and state AN act of divine faith must be prudent that is men are not bound to believe any article therof v. g. that Scripture is the word of God vnless there evidently appear prudent and sufficient motives to exclude all moral possibility that any but God is the Author of the doctrin proposed to be believed These motives of credibility we call the signs of the Church and are the miracles of Christ and his Disciples sanctity and succession of his doctrin and Doctors Conversion of Kings and nations to christianity c. These signs or motives of credibility though they do not evidence demonstratively that our faith is true or that the Church or Congregation of men wherin they be found is the Catholick yet they demonstrat an obligation in us of believing it as we have proved elsewhere in so much that if no such signs or motives of credibility had bin none would be bound to believe any point of Christian Religion with certainty of faith and therfore St. Austin sayd he would not believe the Scripture had he not bin moved therunto by the authority of the Church because Scripture of it self hath no sufficient arguments and signs to ground a prudent and undoubted belief of its being the word of God but the signs and motives of credibility invest the Church with sufficient authority to declare both that and all other mysteries of faith and to make our Ecclesiastical Ministery and Mission more authentikly divin then any Regal Commissions or human Badges can set forth the truth and dignity of Ministers of state and officers of war Therfore as not to believe or to contemn men so qualified when they command in the Kings name is by the light of reason and consent of all nations judged obstinacy and rebellion not to be excused by pretending ignorance or want of greater evidence then those vsual signs of their employments afford so must it be obstinat heresy not to believe that what is proposed by the Church qualified with the aforesaid signs is revealed by God This supposed the main Controversy between Protestants and Catholicks is about the resolution of Christian faith for though both parties pretend that they believe because God revealed to the Prophets and Apostles the Mysteries of faith yet we say that Protestants can not shew how it may be prudently believed that Christ preached or revealed any such doctrin as is pretended vnless it be acknowledged that the Church of every succeeding age was and this present is as truly and realy though perhaps not so highly quoad modum infallible in delivering the Apostles doctrin as the Apostles were in delivering that of Christ. We do not say that Tradition or the Testimony of the Church confirmed by the foresaid signs is the prime motive and last resolution of faith but that the Tradition and Testimony of the present Church is infallible to the end it may infallibly apply the prime motive which is Gods veracity to vs and we prudently assent thervnto But the Bishop denying this is driven with Presbyterians and Fanaticks to an inbredâ—light of Scripture and to the privat Fanatick spirit with this only difference that where they say they are infallibly resolved that Scripture is the word of God by the Testimony of the Spirit within them his Lordship pag. 83.84 averrs he hath the same assurance by grace And because we object and admire that no Catholick could ever perceive this inward and inbred light of Scripture wherby all Protestants pretend they are assured it is the word of God he concurrs pag. 86 with Fanatitks in telling vs that blind eyes can not and pervers eyes will not see it It s strange his Lordship did not foresee the sad effects which this Protestant principle and presumption wrought against himself and his Prelatick Church within a very short time after he writ this doctrin and applyed the same against the Roman Catholicks He might be sure it would be retorted against the Church of England for why may not every Protestant Sectary pretend that the Prelatick Church of England is as blind and pervers in not seing the light of Scripture as Luther and Laud pretend the Roman Catholick is It is but every particular mans fancy and word no other proof is required by Protestants nor indeed can any better be produced to make good that so many honest and learned searchers of Scripture as have bin and are in the Roman Catholick Church can not or will not see the pretended light of Scripture so largely diffused among Protestants and distributed to every Fanatick Presbyterian and Prelatick whose faith can not be maintained without this rash judgment and most dangerous
in that Countrey a greater favor said the Saint then J deserved after all my travels and pains Then he bid Marcello apply the Reliques he had about his neck which were of the Holy Cross and of St. Xaverius himself to his fore he obeyed but the Saint told him he mistook the place and with his own hand applyed them to the contrary side of his head and suddenly was cured having first repeated after the Saint a vow of going to Iapan they who watch't heard Marcellus his words but not any others They ran to acquaint Father Vincentius Caraffa the late General of the Iesuits who was then but Superior or spiritual Prefect of their house in Naples and found that holy man vpon his knees at his prayers but seemed not to be surprised with the news they brought him whence many concluded that God had revealed the matter to him before their coming and granted health to Marcello at Caraffas request He was indeed a person of extraordinary sanctity as his life and death witness and had always a great care of Marcellos progress in vertue Immediatly after this miraculous cure he began his long Journey and being respected as a living Martyr by all the Princes of Italy by the King of Spain Viceroys of Portugal and of the Jndies c. he arrived at length at Iapan and there suffered a most cruel death and glorious Martyrdom as St. Xaverius had told him wherof and of his miracles and Prophesies there are divers Books written and many witnesses living What can Protestants object against this miracle will they deny the fact Thy dare not question the Testimony of a whole Kingdom and City or of so many persons of quality and integrity eye witnesses therof Will they attribute the cure to the power of the Devil his power doth not reach so far as to deaths doors at least he must have more time then was in this case to recall men from thence and restore them to perfect health Will they attribute the prophecy of Mastrillos Martyrdom in Japan to the Iesuits craft and presumption grounded vpon hopes and conjectures They have more wit then to pretend and publish a prophetical assurance of a thing subject to so many vncertainties as the infallible performance of so great a Task and so tedious and dangerous a navigation by a person of so weak a constitution as Marcello whose design if it were human might have bin frustrated by as many casualites and changes of diet Climat c. as every where occurr in that space of time which is spent before men arrive from Europe to the Antipodes What if Father Mastrilli had perished by the way Jn what a condition would himself and the Jesuits have been who gave out so confidently that he would be put to death in Japan according to St. Francis Xaverius his revelation Js it credible they would venture the credit of their order and that reputation of integrity which they have gained in the Catholick world vpon a meer conjecture and contingency and without any necessity of thus playing the Prophet This evidence doth vex peevish Presbyterians but they must have patience and confess that the Jesuits are not limbs of Anti-Christ nor those horns of the Beast wherwith Ministers fool their flocks and feed themselves God would never rais from deaths doors such Jmpostors as Protestants pretend the Jesuits are and command them to go preach their doctrin if fals to so many remote Nations nor countenance their Missioners and Missions with this and many other miracles wrought to confute protestancy and to confirm our Catholick doctrin Though the Magdeburgian Century writers having reliued in every one of the first eleven ages cap. 13. many Popish miracles as they call them and not being able to deny the fact say as the Pharisees did of our Saviours miracles that they were either fables or wrought by the power of Beelzebub and lying signs wherby the superstition and Idolatry of Popery was confirmed yet our English Protestants for the most part condemn these Germans for this sottish answer but themselves give another as litle satisfactory Both their ancient and modern writers being ashamed to deny the reality of our miracles or the supernaturality of the power wherby they are wrought say that true miracles are not of force to prove true doctrin because they are neither infallible nor inseparable marks of truth Jn which rash assertion they contradict not only their learned Brethren Calvin Chamier and others but call in question Gods veracity and maintain the lawfulnes of heresy and infidelity For the perfection of veracity even in men much more in God is not a sole inclination of speaking always truth but includes such an aversion to lying and by consequence to all vnnecessary equivocation that he who is perfectly verax or a man of truth can not without violating that vertue as much as seem to countenance or colour error and falshood with the least sign of his approbation much less can God make errors and falshood credible by miracles or by such an appearance of truth as may not only excuse the mistake of prudent and learned persons but oblige them in conscience to mistake That there is no necessity for God to work miracles in confirmation of errors and fals doctrin is granted by our Adversaries and by consequence they must also grant that he can not use that kind of Equivocation To say that he may work true miracles in confirmation of a falshood therby to exercise and shew an absolut power over us his creatures is as much as to say he may exercise his power against his own inclination to truth and therby destroy himself by violating his veracity Besides though we should suppose this absurdity and contradiction that God can work a miracle to confirm error or falshood and yet himself by such a supernatural action which involves his inclination not be inclined to that error or falshood though I say this absurdity and contradiction were supposed yet can it not be denyed but that by such a miracle at least we rational Creatures would be inclined to error and falshood But he who loves truth especialy if he loves it infinitly as God doth can no more incline others to error and falshood then he can incline himself therunto because he loves truth for it self and because it is truth and by consequence truth being always the same he must love it in others as well as in himself and therfore can as litle incline others by working miracles to error and falshood as himself can be inclined to error and falshood That men are not only inclined but obliged in conscience to believe whatsoever they see confirmed by a true miracle is evident by these Texts of Scripture Had not I don among them the works which no other man did they had not sinned Wo be to thee Corozain wo be to thee Bethsaida for had the miracles don among you bin wrought in Tyrus and
all antiquity did believe and record 3. They may be ashamed of the first broachers of their Protestant doctrin against the worship of Images Iews Saracens and condemned hereticks who as Tarasius proved in the second Councell of Nice corrupted the holy Scriptures to assert their heresies But leaving these things we will mention a few miracles Eusebius and others in the Ecclesiasticall History relate how the woman that was cured by touching Christs garment Math. 9.21 returning home set vp for memory of this benefit the statue of Christ as also her own adoring him and that he himself had seen them and that an vnknown herb did grow at the bottom of Christs statue which so soon as it came to touch the garment of the statue did cure all diseases In the year 362. Iulian the Apostata vexed to see this statue worship't and the worship therof confirmed with so many miracles commanded the same to be thrown down and broken in peeces and sett vp his own in steed therof but his was immediatly destroyed by fire from heaven and the Christians gathering together the peeces of Christs statue placed it in the Church where it was as Sozomenus writeth vnto his time The honest Centutists against all truth of History not having the Authority of as much as one Writer thought by lying impudently to conceal the evidence of this miracle from the illiterat Protestants and some English have imitated their example in so shamfull an imposture saying that Christs statue not Iulians was destroyed by fire from heaven An other miracle you may read in the second General Councell of Nice produced by 350. Bishops as an vndeniable evidence against the heresy of the Image-breakers for the confutation wherof they were assembled and the miracle happened but some 20. years before The wicked Iews in the City of Beritus in Syria crucified the Image of Christ and peirced with a lance the side therof whence suddenly issued such abundance of blood and water that the Churches both of the East and West received reliques therof and with it all diseases were cured By so great and so many miracles those obstinat people were converted and the Church of God appointed a day to celebrat the memory of so notorious a favor And Athanasius a learned Bishop of that age writ a Book intituled De Passione Imaginis Domini The conversion of Iews to Christianity hath seldom bin effected without great miracles None can be moâ—e stupendious then that which St. Vincent Ferrer an 1412. wrought vpon their whole Synagogue in Salamanca wherinto he entred with a Crucifix in his hand on their Saboth and preaching with great fervor of that mystery On a suddain both men and women found white Crosses vpon their Cloaths which made such an impression in their hearts that they all were baptized and turned their Synagogue into a Christian Church which they called of the holy Cross. This Saint Vincent was a Dominican Frier whose preaching against hereticks and Iews God confirmed by miracles 38. dead were revived by his intercession he cured all diseases with the sign of the Cross holy water c. and was of so great esteem among Catholicks that when Martin King of Aragon dyed without issue the naming of a Successor was left to St. Vincent and all the Competitors acquiesced in his choice See all this in St. Antoninus tit 23. cap. 8. The chief Champion of Gods Church against the heresy of Image-breakers was St. Iohn Damascen and therfore was so much hated by the Emperor Leo Jauricus by whose tyranny and Decree that heresy was professed and the Catholicks persecuted at the instance of a Jew his Favorite that Iohn Damascen being in high esteem with the Prince of the Saracens at Damasco the Emperor by the means of Skilful scribes counterfeited his hand and sent a letter to the Saracen pretended to have bin writ by John Damascen to his Majesty inviting him to besiege Damasco and giving him assurance of assistance and good success Whereat the Saracen Prince was so enraged that he commanded Johns right hand to be cut off The Saint retiring to his Oratory and prostrated before an Jmage of our Blessed Lady beggd her intercession for the restitution of that hand which had bin employed vntill then in defending her sons honor and her own against the Iconoclasts and should continue for the future if restored in the same service Wherupon he seemed to sleep and had a vision of the Mother of God and when he waked found his hand joyned as it had bin formerly to his arm The Saracen Prince seing the miracle earnestly intreated him to remain in his Court But St. John Damascen retired to the desert and there writ the praises of our Lady and three excellent Treatises yet extant in defence of the worship of Images All which you may see more at large in his life writ by John Patriarck of Ierusalem and other Authors of those times Jn the Ecclesiastical History it is recounted by Zonaras how in the time that Leo Armenus persecuted Catholicks for worshipping Jmages his son Sabatius Constantinus who had bin dumb came to the statue of St. Gregory Nazianzen praying inwardly in his heart to the Saint that he might obtain of God the vse of his tong which immediatly God was pleased to grant There is scarce a Countrey or County where the exercise of Catholick Religion is publick which aboundeth not with Miraculous Jmages I will only at this time mention that famous miracle don at Sichem an 16â—4 Related by Iustus Lipsius and found to bee true by sundry Protestant Gentlemen attending on the Earle of Hartford Ambassador in Flanders who did see and conferr with the party cured and were satisfied by the publick and credible testimony given to them of the whole matter as followeth Iohn Clement whose Mother being at her delivery of him cut therupon died leaving behind her this her son lame from his Nativity and of a monstrous composition of body his thighes and feet were contracted and turned towards the forepart of his breast so as his knees did grow and stick thereto his body was round or spherical vnfit to stand ly or walk Having from his birth continued in this estate for 20. years and so known to the Jnhabitants of Bruxells and other places adjoyning he was moved in his mind to go to our Ladies Chappel in or neer the town in Brabant called Sicham where he had heard of many miraculous cures credibly published to have bin don Being come thither in a Wagon and having confessed his sins and received the B. Sacrament hee did in the end feel his contracted and bound feet to bee loosed and stretched forth so as presently he stood on his feet himself and the beholders being â—mazed therat Many such or greatet miracles have bin don at â—oreto Zaragoca Guadalupe c. Neither can they be denyed 〈◊〉 any who is not either very obstinat or ignorant Let the most precise and peevish Protestant
desired him at her death to remember her in his Sacrifice of the Altar Calvin saith it was but an old wives request which her son never examined according to the Scriptures and after his own privat affection would have the same approved by others As Calvin Luther and all the first Protestant Reformers contemn the Catholick Churches authority in matters of doctrin when it is contrary to their new interpretations and extravagant fancies of Scripture so do they and their Successors in that of miracles Jf any Miracles be recounted that confirm the mysteries which Protestants reject though delivered by the same Author and in the same book they must needs be old wives tales not duly examined c. And yet the foolish and fals stories of such a frantick and crackt-braind fellow as Iohn Fox was known to be and his Acts and Monuments shew him to have bin are credited by persons that have no other ground to beleive his fables and follies but their education in Protestancy and aversion to Popery His lies and simple storyes must pass for a true Ecclesiastical History notwithstanding that they are contradicted by all the Histories of the world and that many of his Martyrs were found following their trades after that he had described their torments and deaths very particularly and patheticaly his miracles in confirmation of protestancy and indeed his whole book are so ridiculous that I admire some Protestant zealots if they would have the reformation be thought a Religion do not suppress or reform the work He tells for a stupendious miracle that a stone fell from a ruinous building vpon Luthers stool after he had bin eased or weary of sitting vpon it An other that a multitude of German Clowns debauched Clergy men and libertins embraced Luthers reformation it being so indulgent to liberty sensuality and vice and that the Bishop of Rome and other Catholick Prelates Censures did not stop the violent cours and Torrent of their pervers inclinations He makes dreams revelations Merchants Expounders of the Apocalyps and not to seem partial how himself was made a fool by revelation But in steed of suppressing or correcting Fox his foolish Acts and Monuments the Protestant Clergy have reprinted that book divers times since his death with new comments chronologies and great commendations of the work every Parish Church is to have one and few privat families will endure the want of so great a spiritual treasure And though the Bishops know it is not only a very absurd piece but also the chief thing that makes Puritanism and Presbytery spread and so popular in England yet becaus it persuades the simple and vulgar sort that Popery is idolatry they countenance a book so prejudicial to themselves Our Catholick miracles are of a different nature and not related by such lying foolish fellows as Fox but by the greatest Saints and wisest men of Gods Church men so much esteemed for their vertue learning and judgment that Protestants themselves are ashamed to vndervalue their testimony in matters of faith and a fortiori ought to beleive them in matters of fact if they intend to believe any thing at all that is not mentioned particularly in Scripture I say particularly because Christ our Saviour assured us in generall as our Adversaries confess that miracles should continue in the Church forever as signs of the true belief Marc. 16. 20. Ioan. 14.12 2. Cor. 12.12 The Conclusion I have sayd as much as I think necessary for the information and instruction of such Protestants as desire to know the truth and do not find my conscience guilty of any one falsification in this whole Treatise And truly it were a great absurdity in me to commit wittingly that crime which J so much cry down in others Such mistakes as have crept into the printed book will J hope he attributed to the Printer or Transcriber I am sure I have bin so diligent in examining the quotations and assertions pro and con the Catholick cause that want of care cannot be objected and if there be no want of sufficiency in the work that commendation is not due to me but to the goodnes and evidence of the cause I maintain For what acutenes of wit is requisit to defend a Religion that never was impugned but by persons so leud and vnreasonable that at the very first appearance of their opposition they were condemned as hereticks by the whole visible Church that then was What profundity of judgment can be thought necessary to demonstrat that the ancient primitive letter and sense of Scripture ought to be preferred before the Devils interpretation therof embraced by Luther or before any new Canon and fancies of the like debauched fryers and Priests What litle learning is not more then sufficient to discover so palpable frauds and falsifications as the Protestant Writers practise to make their Reformations seem agreable to Gods word What Erudition is so mean that doth not surpass the history of one age or of Protestancy a Religion so lately sprung vp and raysed from the pride ambition liberty and lewdnes of the first reformers and confined to the Northern parts of this least part of the world How can such a Religion be Catholick either in length of time extent of Territories or Conversion of Nations Jts true that for the space of 100. yeares England hath bin so blind as not to see such gross errors but this misfortune was occasioned by their fondnes of Q. Elizabeth to make good her title to the Crown they separated themselves from the communion of the Church and when her interest vanished with her death and for want of posterity few were living after her long reign that observed the motives of her reformation most Englishmen beleived the changes she made had no relation to her illegitimacy but proceeded from pure zeal of the Ghospell Her new Clergy both then and eversince have endeavored to confirm the people in that persuasion by falsifying Scripture Councells and Fathers but the discovery of the frauds and the principles of Protestancy practised against the late innocent King have opend the eyes of many to discern the flaws of the Reformation and the fallacies of their own education And now that it is as much the concern of the whole Nation to tolerat the Roman Catholick faith as it was Q. Elizabeths interest to change it into protestancy I doubt not but that every particular persons ease in the addition of a revenue to the publick will excite both conscience and curiosity to examin whether the prelatick Religion and Clergy of England have not more of human invention then of divin institution And if after perusing this Treatise and proposing the arguments and instances therof to their learned Ministery no satisfactory answer can be given to the particulars wherwith their doctrin and function is charged to what purpose should men continue in mistakes so damnable to the soul and dangerous to the state But if the Protestant Clergy
can divert the Layty from entertaining any thoughts of curiosity or scruples of conscience in order to the examination of this matter of so great importance and can make them believe that K. Henry 8. passion to Ann Bullen was a just cause to introduce the Reformation and to assume the Supremacy or that the Earle of Hartfords ambition of being absolutly Protector of England quite contrary to K. Henry 8. Testament and to his own Oath of not assuming any power above his Collegues and Tutors of K. Edward 6. was a divin inspiration to bring in Zuinglius his Sacramentarian Religion into the Realm or that the Duke of Northumberlands poysoning the yong King and excluding the next and lawfull heirs from the Crown to conferr it vpon his own own son and the Lady Iane Grey pretending therby to promote his new Zuinglian Ghospell was the work of the holy Ghost Or that Q. Elizabeths murther of the Q. of Scots and her Parliaments Decrees and endeavors to preferr any natural issue of her body to this Empire before the legitimat and immediat Heirs the Stevards and therby to continue her prelatick Protestancy were things lawfull according to the principles of Christianity and Catholick faith If the Protestant Clergy I say can persuade the layty that all this was lawfull and agreable to the doctrin which Christ and his Apostles did preach either they have an abundance of wit or they that believe them very litle judgment A great wit maintained that they may as well make Mahomets Alcoran a plausible Religion in England and gain therby as great revenues as they do by their Reformation and Protestant Scripture wherof neither the Canon letter or sense is that which God delivered to his Church as heretofore hath bin proved I do not speak in rallery sayd the gentlemen but seriously when I say that men who believe the Protestant Religion to be true may be induced by the same persons and the like reasons to believe that Mahometisme is the true Religion This hath also bin solidly proved by Doctor Reynolds in his Calvino-Turcismus and by others also when they demonstrat that Calvinism and Turcism agree in the principall points and every one knows that the doctrin of the 39. articles of the Church of England is the quintessence of Calvins doctrin and was by him applauded though he said that as to Point of disciplin there were many tolerable fooleries in in that Church and Lyturgy But let us pursue the Gentlemans parallel of Mahomet and his doctrin with our English Reformers and their doctrin and we shall plainly see that there is as much reason to believe Mahometism as prelatick Protestancy and that both these Religious were planted and propagated by the same means nay that it is more to be admired how our Countreymen became Protestants then the Arabians or Armenians became Turcks When Mahomet began to preach his doctrin in the East Christianity there was so discredited by being divided into sects and into so many heresies of Arians Manichees Nestorians c. that men were disposed by that diversity of opinions to follow any new Religion especialy that of Mahomet becaus he borrowed something from every Sect and as the 39. Articles of the Church of England agree in some fundamental points with Catholicks and also with hereticks so Mahomet agreeth in the worship of one God with Iews and Chriâ—tians and in the doctrin and worship of Christ he comes at â—eer to Christianity as most Arians and Nestorians or the Antitrinitarian Protestants of Hungary Poland c. nay as Bp. Morton and some other Prelaticks But when Luther in Germany and Cranmer in England began Protestancy all the west and Latin Church agreed in the Roman Catholick faith no other Religion was regarded and the â—emnants of Wickleff and Hus were hissed out of the world at least were nothing so considerable any where as the above mentioned heresies had bin in the East when Mahomet began there to preach his Alcoran So that if heresy or apostacy can have any excuse Mahometism in its begining was more excusable then Protestancy by reason of the more considerable divisions that then were among Christians in matters of doctrin then when Luther began his Reformation Now let us come to particular reflexions vpon both Mahomet retained some parts of Scripture as well as Protestants and had as good grounds to reject what he did not fancy of the letter and sense therof as Protestants have to be choosers of their own Canon and interpretation Mahomet gives as many rules of Morality as Protestants and though he allows of many wives Protestants do the same with this only difference that Mahomet says t is lawfull to keep many at once Protestants say you must keep but one at a time and that you cannot have the variety of wives men so much desire without the formality of a divorce how litle is requisit for the validity and legality of Protestant divorces we have proved heretofore by the authority and principles of the first Reformers and the dayly practises of their Successors In all other things Mahomets sect is more austere in fasting praying abstaining from wine c. then Protestancy And becaus both agree in the incoherency and absurdity of their principles both also agree in planting propagating and defending their doctrin not by miracles or rational arguments but by force and sanguinary statuts And this is the reason why Catholicks are as litle permitted to dispute or reason for the Roman Religion in these Kingdoms as Christians in Turky and Priests are as much perseeuted for writing books of Controversies as Printers and Stationers and severely punished Thus much as to the paralell of both doctrins But If we compare their persons or vertues we shall find that Mahomet was an honester man and deserved more credit then Luther Calvin Cranmer or any of the first Protestant Reformers He never was baptized at least never professed any Religion vntill he composed his own with the help of an Arian Monk but all the first Reformers had first professed the Catholick faith which afterwards they renounced pretending that God had forsaken his Church for many ages and presumed to say that he had authorised and inspired them to reform without shewing any warrant that doctrin vnto which their betters in learning vertue and judgment actualy submitted as vnto the true Catholick and themselves also had embraced as such vntill their pride and lust prevailed against their conscience Mahomet married a Widdow and had made no vows not to marry the first Reformers married Nuns and themselves also were votaries Calvin only excepted but his incontinency was no less scandalous and notorious then theirs having lived in adultery with a Gentlewoman of Mongis that left her husband at Lansanâ—â— to enjoy Calvins Company at Geneva who attempted also to commit the like sin with the Lady â—ollande of Bredrode wise to a sickly Nobleman called Iames Borgongue Lord of
Fallaise in so much as she persuaded her husband to leave Geneva and go to Lansanâ—â— where she revealed the whole matter Mahomet t is true was a Cheat but a mere cunning cheat then Luther Calvin or Cranmer c. for by his Dove or fitts of the falling sickness he made people believe that the holy Ghost appeared and inspired to him the Alcoran but the Protestant Reformers had not so much to shew for their new doctrin Canon Translations and their new sense of Scripture Mahomet was constant to his principles the Protestant Parliament and Reformers were as changable as the times and humors of the giddy people and therfore may with more reason then the Turks give the Moon crescent for the Crest of their Religions as Catholicks do the Cross. Here in England they changed with Henry 8. the Roman faith for Articles of Religion devised by the Kings Majesty As soon as he dyed they changed that faith into Zuinglianism to comply with the Protector Somerset within two or three years after they changed Zuinglianism into Calvinianism at the suit of Calvin and reformed the Liturgy accordingly After K. Edward 6. death they returned with Q. Mary to the old faith With Q. Elizabeth they restored the new but with some alterations When K. James succeeded they changed their Translations of Scripture and other things In K. Charles 1. time prelatick Protestancy was pulled down by Presbytery this by Independency c. Prelatick Protestancy being restored again by K. Charles 2. the formes of Ordination wherupon depend the validity of the prelatick Ministery Church and Sacraments were not thought sufficient and therfore are now changed into more Catholick forms and therby all is left doubtfull and changeable for if the Church of England acknowledgeth to have erred in a thing of so great importance what assurance can it have of not erring in all the rest In a word Protestants in this one Kingdom and in this one age have made moâ—â— changes of Religions then Mahometans in the ten ages they have continued and in the greatest part of the world which they have conquered These things maturely considered makes Mahometism as probable a Religion as the best kind of Protestancy and therfore it would be no great wonder if they who believe the Protestant and Prelatick Clergy and take their word and fancies for true Scripture and Christianity should alter their belief vpon the change of that Clergys testimony acknowledging that hitherto they had bin mistaken which they may confess at any time becaus their Church is acknowledged fallible and that now they find the Turks have the true faith for that they reject all such books of Scripture as any Christians ever doubted of and that as lawfully as the pretended apocrypha are rejected by Protestants vpon the same ground and likewise believe all Protestant fundamental points necessary for salvation seing they believe of Christ as much as Arians Socinians and Chillingworth with his Sect of wits nay as much as the moderat and modern Prelatick writers who say that it is sufficient to believe Christ is the word and son of God which Mahomet never denyed If any Mahumetan Prince could pretend a title to this British Monarchy with probability of prevailing why may not we think he would find the Protestant Clergy as ready to comply with his Religion therby to secure their own and promote his interest as they were ready to change the Catholick and legal Religion which was professed in Q. Maries time for complying with Q. Elizabeth and fortifying her weak title against the legitimat and vndoubted Heirs All things weighed there is less difference between Mahumetism and prelatick Protestancy then between prelatick Protestancy and Popery for that Popery and Protestancy agree only in the name of Christianity in the motive and manner of faith they differ and in the ground therof as also in the Canon letter and Sense of Scripture but Mahumetism and Protestancy though they agree not in the letter of Scripture Protestants admitting into their Canon more books therof then the Turks yet they both agree in the rule of Religion though not in the application as also in the rule wherby their Canon and sense of Scripture is discerned which is every mans privat judgment in controverted matters in that point which is not controverted to wit one Deity the consent and concurrence of the generality of the world or evident reason is the foundation as well of Mahumetism as of protestancy as also in the point of the immortality of the soul. Therfore I see no impossibility or improbability said this great wit why Mahumetism may not in time be made the Religion of these Nations without violating the principles or altering the grounds of Protestancy and the prelatick Clergy be as much applauded and rewarded for the one change as for the other The greatest obstacle is that no Mahumetan Prince can pretend a title even such as Q. Elizabeths was to the Crown God almighty deliver us from so great evils and open the eyes of them that do not see the precipices wherunto their souls are led by such principles and grant the learned prelatick Clergy grace to prefer truth before falshood conscience before conveniency and eternity before the few days which they are to enjoy Benefices and Bishopricks But in case they do not for fear of loosing their credit and conveniences recant their errors J hope the Protestant Layty will have so much curiosity as to examin whether it be possible that so many Catholick Authors as have written books of Controversies should damn and discredit themselves by forging and feigning Protestant frauds and falsifications quoting the very places and pages where they are to be found affirming that without such practices protestancy cannot be maintained to examin I say whether we Catholicks can be so wicked and witless as to accuse men of such grievous crimes without hopes of any honor or profit to our selves but rather with a certainty of an immediat discovery of our impostures If this one thing be maturely considered the Protestant Layty and their vnlearned Clergy that rely so much vpon the sufficiency and sincerity of Cranmer Jewel Fox Morton Andrews Whitaker Fulk Perkins Vsher Laud Abbots Chillingworth Bramhall Cosins Hamond Taylor c. will believe us or at least examin and certainly find most palpable vnexcusable corruptions and contradictions in every one of their own Authors books composed against the Roman doctrin and conclude with us that Piety and Policy is mistaken in promoting Protestancy and persecuting Popery and that a good revenue may be conscientiously setled if legaly demanded vpon the Crown and vpon the poor soldiers and seamen that defend these nations against forreign invasions and rebellious insurrections Seing the Pope and his Roman Catholick Clergy in all likelihood will be content to resign their right and interest in the Church revenues to his Majesty as they did in the like occasion to Q. Mary who notwithstanding
the tendernes of her conscience was satisfied there could be no scruple of Sacriledge in applying with consent of the true owners ecclesiastical livings to pious and publick vses And now I hope I may conclude this Treatise with humbly desiring a Conference or examination of Protestant and Catholick books at least of one for each side let the quotations of Doctor Taylors Dissuasive be viewed and that book or any other writ against the Roman Religion stand for the Protestants sincerity t is like he writ nothing carelesly or rashly his declared drift being to make a whole Nation Protestants and professing himself to be only Amanuensis to a prelatick Convocation of reformed Bishops which in his Preface he compares with that Assembly of the Apostles wherin choyce was made of Iudas his Successor and sayes the lot of St. Mathias fell vpon himself and that some other like himself was Barnabas the just Jf this holy Convocation of Protestant Apostles should set forth a Book that hath more lyes then leaves I hope men may advise their friends to consider whether a Religion that cannot be maintained but by such men and means and a Clergy that practiseth such frauds and falsifications ought to be preferred before a Religion and Clergy that not only professeth as all others do to write truth but presseth to come to a publick trial therof in a â—egall way and rather then fail herein are content that the controversy be decided by them that are known to be most zealously devoted to Protestancy I do not instance Bp. Taylors Dissuasive from Popery for the Trial as if his falsifications to maintain Protestancy were more numerous or more enormous then those of other writers that have defended the same cause No. He is more waâ—y then many and more moderat then most of his predecessors or equalls But I instance his book to give my adversaries all the advantages that the learning of the Author and the Authority of a Convocation can afford Jf they have a better opinion of the sufficiency of Bishop Jevell then of Bp. Taylor they may fix rather vpon his Apology for the Church of England then vpon Doctor Taylors Dissuasive from Popery authorized by the Church of Ireland To Jevells Apology we oppose Harding Stapleton and Rastalls Answers To Taylors Dissuasive Worsley Lengar and Sergeants Annotations But if they refuse this offer as pointing but at two particular Doctors of their Church let them be pleased to have the truth of their Reformation and the sincerity of their whole Clergy examined by answering to the frauds and falsifications wherwith I charge their whole Church and calling in this book FINIS The Summe of this Treatise Containing the Substance of every Section THE FIRST PART Containing the Matter of Fact of the Beginning Progress Principles and effects of Protestancy SECTION I. HOw necessary a rational religion is for a peaceable government and wherin doth the reasonableness of Religion consist How dangerous for a temporal Soveraign to pretend a spiritual supremacy over his subjects Heathen Princes durst not assume it without a persuasion in their subjects that it was due by descent from some Deity or that the Gods signified their approbation therof by prodigies and miracles The great Turk notwithstanding his tyranny thinks it not policy to pretend a spiritual jurisdiction over his subjects though slaves The ground of policy piety and peace consists in establishing by law a Religion confirmed by miracles that such a Religion will make the Prince powerfull and popular the Prelats respected the people willing to obey and pay taxes It takes away all pretexts of rebellion vpon the score of a tenderness of conscience How necessary it is for the Government to have a devout Clergy and that Clergy at the Soveraigns devotion and Some of them emploied in State affairs Therby all disputes between the spirituall and temporall jurisdictions are prevented With how much reason Statesmen dread such disputes For the space of 1500. years the Catholick world believed that the Bishop of Rome had the supreme spiritual jurisdiction over souls as being Christ's Vicar vpon earth and that only such as were of his Communion and vnder his obedience were members of the Catholick Church and therfore the Greeks for exempting the Bishop of Constantinople and themselves from that obedience were declared Schismaticks others were condemned as Hereticks for teaching and professing doctrin contrary to the Roman Both the doctrin and authority of the Roman Bishops and Clergy hath been confirmed by vndeniable true miracles even here in England Jt was held to be the only Catholick doctrin in St. Gregory the great his time That faith which wee Roman Catholicks now profess is the same in every particular with that of St. Gregory and of all Orthodox Christians of his time and for confirmation wherof true miracles have been wrought SECT II. OF the Author and beginning of Protestancy The first Preacher therof was Martin Luther an Augustin Friar who from his youth had bin lianted by the Devil and presumed to have bin possessed He resolved to preach and write against the Mass praying to Saints and other Catholick Tenets after that the Devil had appeared to him and convinced him by Protestant arguments How weakly the Protestant writers endeavour to excuse Luthers disputation instruction and familiarity with the Devil Others acknowledge it and maintain that the Devils doctrin ought to be believed when it agrees with the Protestant interpretation of Scripture that is with every privat interpretation contrary to the sense of the whole visible Church How much it is against piety and policy to make the Protestant or any other privat interpretation of Scripture the Religion of the State or to preferr it before that of the Church and of the holy ancient Fathers quoted subsect 1. passim SECT III. OF the principles ad propagation of Protestancy How Luther begun his reformation by gaining Poets Players Painters and Printers to discredit by their Poems Pamphlets pictures and ballads the Roman Catholick Religion and its Clergy How he drew also many dissolute Friars and Priests to his side and married nine of them to so many Nuns in one day taking also one to himself How he made his reformation plausible to Libertins by teaching that only Faith was necessary for Salvation without troubling themselves with good works and popular by preaching that no Christian ought to be subject to an other and how therupon the Clowns and Tenants of Germany rebelled against their Princes and Landlords The three fundamental principles of Protestancy are 1. That for many ages the whole visible Church had bin in damnable errors and so continued vntill Luthers reformation 2. That there is no rule of faith but Scripture as Protestants are pleased to interpret it 3. That men are justified by only faith How from these principles have issued innumerable Protestant Religions contrary one to the other Luther did see his own reformation divided into 130. disagreing sects of
Protestants None could ever prove there was one true miracle wrought to confirm the Protestants doctrin or their pretended authority for reforming the Tenets of the Roman Catholick Church Protestants are forced to say that miracles are ceased and that ours are Diabolical or counterfeit Because no true Bishops were Protestants and by consequence they could have no Priests ordained and so their Priesthood must have perished after the death of the first Apostatas Luther and others the Protestant reformers and Churches taught that all Christians are Priests both men and women and this doctrin is supposed to be true by the Church of England in their 39. articles and in the Act of Parliament 8. Eliz. 1. SECT IV. OF the Protestant Prelatick Church of England The occasion of K. Henry the 8. divorce from Q. Catharin and of his revolt from the Church of Rome was his passion to An Bullen the words of S. Iohn Baptist to Herod concerning his brothers wife absurdly applyed to K. Henrys marriage with his Brothers widdow How zealously he had formerly maintained the Popes supremacy how cruelly he afterwards persecuted the professors therof and how impiously he judged S. Thomas of Canterbury robbed his shrine and burnt his Reliques The Catholick Princes rejected his embasies and solicitations for imitating his example in assuming the supremacy And how much the protestant Princes were troubled and ashamed that he made his lust the motive of his reformation How incredible a thing is the English supremacy K. Henry 8. at length resolved to renounce it and returne to the duty of a Christian King but stood upon such termes and differrd it so long that he died in Schism excommunicated and despairing of Gods mercy His last will and testament was broken before his body was buried The Erle of Hartford made himself Protector and brought into England the Sacramenrian or the Zuinglian heresy against K. Henrys last will and the lawes of the land then in force without a Parliament and contrary to the votes of the Erles of Arundell and Southampton and others of the 16. Trustees named Governors by K. HeÌ„ry 8. during the minority of Edw. 6. SVBSECT I. HOw Seamor was directed and destroyed by Dudley Duke of Northumberland The sayd Dudley notwithstanding he was a Catholick in his judgment as himself confessed at his death concurred to establish protestancy in England designing therby to vnsettle the state and make way for excluding the right heirs of the Crown and crown his own family which he effected by excluding Q. Mary for being a Catholick and by marrying his Son to the Lady Jane Grey who had no other right to the Kingdom but what her Zeal to the Protestant Religion and Clergy gave her What wicked men and great cheats were Cranmer and his Camerades that composed the 39. articles of the Protestant Religion of the Church of England and the common prayer book that of Sacraments Rites and Ceremonies and how the common people were made believe the change was not of Religion but of language SECT V. OF the 39. Articles of the Church of England they contain only some general notions of Christianity and are applicable to all dissenting Sects of Protestancy as Presbytery Zuinglianism c. The design of the composers having bin rather to give men a liberty of not believing the particulars of Christian Religion then of tying them to any certain points therof or to any faith therfore they declare that the visible Church is fallible and determin no certain canonical Scripture of the new Testament They make the doctrin that Luther learnt of the Devil against the Mass Tradition and praying to Saincts c. part of their Creed as also the Tenet against spiritual Caracters of Episcopacy and Priesthood art 25. rejecting imposition of hands as not instituted by Christ. In the 2. last Articles they endeavour in vain to suppress the errors of Anabaptists especialy that of appropriating to themselves other mens goods in vain I say because in their former articles they declare its lawful for Protestants to dispossess the Roman Catholick Clergy of their goods and dignitys by vertue of a privat interpretation of Scripture and the Anabaptists pretend no more but that its lawfull for themselves to deal after the same manner with Prelaticks and t is certain there can be no disparity given So that the two last articles of the 39. as also that of the authority of the Protestant Clergy are against an evident parity of reason in their own Protestant Principles SECT VI. A Particular account of the revolutions which these 39. articles caused in England and how they may work always the same effects if there be such politick and popular heads amongst us as Dudley Crumwell and many of the last long Parliament Q. Maries Reign how much endangered by Protestant designs and rebellions Duke Dudleys speech at his death The Roman Catholick Religion restored by Act of Parliament and the Protestant decreed to be Heresy and Schism as also the force and frauds of K. Henry 8. divorce discovered and his marriage with Q. Catharin of Spain declared valid The Roman Clergys resignation of the Church revenues to the Crown and present possessors Q. Elizabeths intrusion against the right of the Steward 's effected by the zeal of the Protestant faction for suppressing of Popery SECT VII NOtwithstanding that Q. Elizabeth was declared illegitimat by 3. Acts of several Parliaments never yet repealed she possessed herself of the Croun and excluded the Queen of Scots the lawfull and immediat heir to Q. Mary lately deceased By the advice of Cecil and others she revived Protestancy and the Supremacy therby to excuse her illegitimacy She instituted a new Kind of Clergy the Prelatick Protestant Bishops neither had nor have any other caracter of Episcopacy but what the great seal and her temporal laws give them Any Lay person may consecrat a Bishop of the Church of England if he hath the Kings commission to do it all other things being superfluous according to the Act. 8. Eliz. 1. and 25. article of the 39. How the Oath of supremacy divided Protestants and made the Catholicks more constant The simplicity of some Protestant writers pretending that the Pope offered to confirm the English liturgy if Q. Elizabeth would acknowledge his jurisdiction SECT VIII REasons why Q. Elizabeth in her long raign could not settle her Protestant Religion nor gain credit for the Prelatick Clergy Neither is it possible for her Successors to make the generality of her subjects to have any esteem for either SECT IX HOw injurious and prejudicial the Protestant Religion hath been to the Royal family of the Stevards and how zealous they have bin and still are in promoting the same It preferred not only Q. Elizabeth but also any natural child of hers before the line of the Stewards Wherof see the 8. sect â—in How dexterously K. James played his game and how they who murthered his mother were forced to invite him to the Crown
of England Of his design to reform the principles and liberty of Protestancy intending therby to render it less dangerous to lawfull Soveraigns and Monarchy How K. Charles 1. pursued his Fathers design but his sufferings and death demonstrat the impossibility of confining the Protestant liberty within the rules of Government or reason By the fundamental principles of Protestancy every particular person is a Supreme Iudge in spiritual affairs and may more easely apply and abuse that prerogative to the prejudice of his Soveraign then the Pope can his papal Supremacy Therfore it s a great providence of God when any Protestant King of England escapes to be judged and deposed by his Subjects THE SECOND PART OF the vnreasonableness of Protestancy and of the inconsistency of the principles of Protestancy with Christian piety and peaceable government SECT I. THe vnreasonableness and inconsistency of Protestancy with Christian piety or policy proved by the very fundamental principle of all Protestant reformations which principle is a supposition of the fallibility and fall of the visible Catholick Church from the pure and primitive doctrin of Christ to damnable errors and notorious superstition Such a change is demonstrated both incredible and impossible SECT II. THe Protestants proof of such a change is their pretended cleerness of Scripture It is demonstrated that their Sense of Scripture is not clear in any texts controverted between Catholicks and Protestants That the principles of Protestancy incline to vice the Catholick principles to vertue proved in many particulars The invisibility of the Church a ridiculous comment SECT III. THe Protestant letter and Sense of Scripture is not the word of God Doctor Cossins his Scholastical History of the English Canon of Scripture confuted as also his exceptions against the authority of the Roman Catholick Canon The Lutheran Churches of Germany agree not with the English Canon of Scripture SVBSECT I. DOctor Cossins now Bp. of Duresme his exceptions against the Councel of Trent answered The legality of a Councel as well as of a Parliament may stand with the absence of many members if they were summoned and expected The absurdity of Protestant writers excepting against the want of Bishops in the Councel of Trent wheras themselves made new Religions and reformations by a Single voice of Luther Zuinglius Calvin c. and in England by the vote of the major part of twelve persons named by the Parliament to determin matters of faith and Sacraments seaven men were thought sufficient to do the work and cast the Roman Catholick Religion Protestant Bishops can no more pretend to sit and define in a general Councel then proclaimed rebells can pretend to vote in a lawful Parliament It s as reasonable the Bishop and Church of Rome should condemn hereticks and judge all controversies of faith as it is that a King and Parliament condemn rebells and judge suites in law A new definition of Pope or Councel is no new article of faith it is only a declaration of our obligation to believe that which formerly had bin revealed but not sufficiently proposed Doctor Cossins his egregious falsification of Belarmin his wresting words of St. Austin and St. Hierom. SECT IV. THe Protestant translations of Scripture are fraudulent and fals no certainty of Christian faith can be built vpon them Protestants admit no Coppy or translation to be authentick to the end they may be at liberty to reject what they do not fancy of the letter of Scripture as well as of the sense The vulgar Latin is authentick Scripture How corrupt are all English Bibles How in K. Edward 6. his reign Cranmer and the first Apostles of English Protestancy changed the very text of Christs words This is my body three several times Protestants make the Apostles fallible in doctrin even after receiving the holy Ghost and by consequence must hold their writings or Scripture to be fallible SVBSECT I. MAny particular instances of Protestant corruptions in the English Bibles to asert the Protestant and prelatick doctrin of the Church of England Against images Against Ordination by imposition of hands Against the single life of Priests Against the Sacrifice of Masse Against vowes of chastity To favor the Kings Supremacy How fondly these corruptions are excused by Whitaker and how absurdly Scripture is made speak according to the Protestant translations What small hopes there are that a Clergie which corrupts Scripture or continueth and countenanceth corruptions of Scripture will repent or recant their errors and how little reason the Protestant layty hath to rely vpon their Clergys sincerity or vpon their English Scripture SECT V. THe Protestant interpretation is not the true Sense of Scripture The principal part of Gods word is the sense he delivered to the Church together with the letter It s against reason to believe that the Church would be more carefull of preserving the letter then of preserving the sense of Scripture and therfore Protestants are vnexcusable for taking the letter from the Roman Church and rejecting the sense The holy Fathers bid us receive the Sense of Scripture as well as the letter from the Church An infallible mark of heresy to do the contrary It is at least 16. to one that the Roman Catholick Sense of Scripture is true and the Protestant fals SECT VI. NO Protestant Church hath a true Ministery Miracles Succession of doctrin or Sanctity of life Their extraordinary vocation is ridiculous and incredible it being impossible that God should send Ministers to contradict doctrin confirmed with so many signs of his own authority and approbation as the Roman Catholick is God never sent such vitious men as the Protestant reformers were to reform his Church either in the old or new Testament If the Protestant doctrin had bin true God would have wrought miracles to confirm it for the conversion of the seduced Papists as Protestants confess he doth for the conversion of the Jndians Iaponians and China What wicked men were Luther Zuinglius Calvin Beza Cranmer and the rest of his Camerades that framed the Religion and Liturgy of the Church of England and how little credit in matters of faith deserves the Parliament that confirmed the same Calvins miracle at Geneva foretold by Tertullian SECT VII THe conversion of pagan Kings and Kingdoms to Christianity foretold in Scripture is a more cleer sign of the true Church then any other miracles and not to be found in any other Church but in the Roman Catholick acknowledged by learned protestants Of Barlows three-score invisible Queens converted by protestants No greater an absurdity then their invisible Church The vain endeavors of Calvin and other protestants to convert Heathen nations Bezas despair of Success in that Ministery and his advice to protestants to leave that labor to the Jesuits and rather busy themselves at home Tertullians saying that its a sign of hereticks to pervert Christians not convert pagans may be properly applyed to Protestants Their success in propagating their new Ghospel no
Law of England our Kings may minister all ecclesiastical functions consecrat Bishops and their letters patents are sufficient to give any lay person man or woman power to consecrat Bishops and Priests Ten wilfull falsifications set down together by Bish Morton for proving that Catholicks hold the Pope cannot be deposed nor become an heretick Primat Bramhalls falsification to prove that Popes may and have decreed heretical doctrin SECT IX PRoved by reasons and examples that no Religion is so little dangerous to the soveraignty and safety of Kings or so advantagious to the peace and prosperity of subjects as the Roman Catholick notwithstanding the Popes spiritual supremacy Bellarmin the Author most excepted against in the opinion of deposing of Kings sayes that a King cannot be deposed for being an heretick vnlesse he forceth his subjects to heresy The Author of this Treatise doth not intend to promote Bellarmīs doctrin but only sheweth there can be no danger in it though it were allowed as true Not any thing more contrary to sound policy then to lay for the foundation of loyalty an Oath or engagement against opinions plausible popular and practised The best way to suppress them is to silence the Authors not censure their doctrin How litle the Popes power is feared by protestants though they make it the pretext of persecuting Catholicks How little his censures can disturb the government in regard of the notoriousness of the fact and the solemnity of his sentences required for their validity How Arch Laud and other protestants contradict them selves in this matter A fancied possibility without probability can bring no danger to the government How vnreasonable it is to exact a more strict profession of allegiance from catholick subjects to a protestant Soveraign then is given by any other Catholicks to their Catholick Soveraign That the french Kings exacts such engagements or Remonstrances from their subjects against the Popes authority as is required in England and Ireland from Catholiks against the same is a gross mistake All such disputes are prohibited in France as tending to sedition and no way profitable The Censure of the Parliament of Paris and some Doctors of the Sorbon against the Popes authority disanulled by the King and privy Councell in France Protestants cannot cleare their own principles in this particular from the aspersions they lay on the Catholick Tenets One of the fundamental principles of Protestancy is a power in the people to depose Soveraigns and dispose of their Kingdoms for the use of the Ghospel Proved by the examples of all Kingdoms and States that received the Reformation even the Prelatick of England SECT X. THat Protestants could never prove any of the wilfull falsifications wherwith they charged Roman Catholick writers but on the contrary themselves are convicted of that crime whensoever they attempted to make good their charge against us Of the Index Expurgatorius Bp. Taylors objections in the Dissuasive as also Bp. Mortons Bp. Jewells c. retorted vpon themselves Item Sutcliffs accusations against Bellarmin The Councell of Calcedon confirmed by Act of Parliament of Q. Elizabeth and by consequence the Popes spiritual supremacy which that Councell asserts SUBSECT I. PRotestants convicted by Belarmin of holding 20. ancient condemned heresies and how fourteen are admitted by them or at least vnanswered and the other six wherof they endeavor to cleere themselves are excused only by falsifying Fathers and Catholick Authors among which are two Pelagian heresies two Novatian one Manichean and one of the Arians Besides these Protestants maintain Iustification by only faith with the Simonians and Eunomians That God is the author of sin with the Florinians That women may be and are Priests with the Peputians That Concupiscency is a sin with Proclus That the true Church was invisible for many ages with the Donatists That men ought not to fast the Lent pray nor offer Sacrifice for the dead with the Aerians That Saints ought not to be prayed vnto nor their reliques or images worshipt with Vigilantius SVBSECT II. FAlsifications objected against Baronius by Dr. Sutcliff How ridiculous The difference between the falsifications objected by Catholicks and those that are objected by Protestants SECT XI CAlumnies and falsifications of Luther Clavin Arch-bishop Laud and Primat Vsher to discredit the Roman Catholick Religion and vphold Protestancy against their own conscience and knowledge What impudent impostors were Luther and Calvin Proved in many particulars Frauds and falsifications and calumnies of Primat Vsher called the Irish Saint by Protestants against the real presence and Transsubstantiation Against sacramental Confession Against absolution of sins by a Priest His cheat concerning Duli◠nd Latria No new invention of Jesuits but the ancient doctrin and distinction of the Fathers Against prayer to Saints His imposture of the Breviary of the Premonstratensian Order SVBSECT I◠OF Bp. Laud the English Protestant Martyr How fraudulently he would fain excuse the modern Greeks from being hereticks notwithstanding his 39. Prelatick articles condemn their doctrin of the holy Ghost as heresy He abuseth S. Austin to make Protestants believe that general Councells may err against scripture and evident reason He abuseth Vincentius Lyrinensis laying to that ancient Fathers charge his Graces own blasphemy and commits therin many frauds He falsifies Orcam and resolves the Prelatick Faith into the imaginary light of Scripture and the priva◠spirit and therin agrees with Presbiterians and Fanatiks And pretends that Prelaticks are not Schismaticks and Sectaries But to excuse them commits divers frauds His pretence of the lawfulness for privat Churches to reforme themselves confuted His doctrin doth justify all the sectaries proceeding against himself and the Church of England His vanity in pretending that the Church of Britain is independent of the Pope as also that the Pope can not be judge in his own cause His fraudulent and absurd explanation of S. Ireneus against the primacy of Rome item of the gallican libertys His abusing and corrupting S. Greg. Nazian because that Saint asserteth the infallibility of the Roman Church His falsifying of Gerson vpon the like accompt A faire offer to Protestants for the trial of falsifications SECT XII Whether it be piety or policy to give the Protestant Clergy of these 3. Kingdoms a million sterl per an for maintaining by such frauds and falsifications as hitherto have bin alledged the doctrin of the church of England which also they acknowledge to be fallible and by consequence for all they know fals And how the sayd million per an may be conscientiously applyed to the vse of the people without any dangerous disturbance to the Government It was policy in Q. Elizabeth to make such a clergy and Religion but not piety The case being now altered neither piety nor policy to preserve either No seditious or interessed persons can disturb the Government by pretending zeal for preserving a Religion and Clergy so prejudicial to the soul and state if liberty be granted to discover the cheat wherby the