three I do once more in answeare therto explaine that the Councel vnder those fiue bookes of Salamon comprehendeth also the other two bookes of Wisdome and Ecclesiasticus both which as S. Austin further explaineth (q) De doctrina Christiana l. 2. c. 8. circa med were said to be Salamons in reguard of a certaine resemblance of stile But the truth hereof is so clearly defended by the Carthage Councel and S. Austin that our aduersary Mathaeus (r) Tract tripart theol p. 46. Hoe confesseth and reproueth the Carthage Councel in these wordes The Councel of Carthage haith decreed for Canonical al the bookes of the old Testament excepting the third and fourth of Esdras the third of Machabees c. I ad that the Councel of Carthage ought not to haue Canonized more bookes because it had not authority c. To which the French Prot. Poliander addeth saying (s) In his refutation p. 44. To come now to the error of some Councels the Councels of Carthage and Florence haue enrouled for Canonical bookes and as diuinely inspired c. The bookes of Tobie Iudith Wisdome Ecclesiasticus and the Machabees c. And the Popes Innocentius and Gelasius haue reckned these bookes among the Canonical c. And to be breife S. Austin is so clearly ours in this waightiest point concerning the number of the sacred scriptures that he with the foresaid Councel is therefore sharply reprehended by (t) Hist sacram part 1. p. 160. Lub de principiis Christ dog l. 1. c. 4. p. 8. Hip. in method theol l. 1. p. 46. Bucer in his scrirpta Anglicana p. 713. Zanch. de sacra Script p 32 33. Field of the Church l. 4. c. 23. p. 246. 247. Reynoldes in his conclusions annexed to his conference conclus 2. p. 699. 700. Hospinian Lubbertus Hiperius Bucer Zanchius D. Field and D. Raynoldes S. Austin teacheth that one text of Scripture may haue diuerse true senses SECTION 3. DIrectly contrary to (a) Confut. of Purgat p. 151. Willet in his sinopsis p. 26. D. Fulke and D. Willet S Austin teacheth with vs that one text of Scripture may haue diuerse true senses saying (b) Tom. 1. l. 12. confes c. 31. initio when one saith this meant the Scripture which I do another saith yea that which I do I thinke I speake more religiously in saying why not both if both be true and if a third and fourth c. why not al which in diuerse other places he so often repeateth and confirmeth that sundry (c) The diuines of Geneua in their propositions and principles c. c. 52. p. 149. Zanchius de Scriptura p. 422. 424. 425. Aretius loc com loc 59. p 187. 177. The author of Catholicke Traditions p. 86. 112. Bilson in his suruey p. 418. Prot. authors do assent to his iudgement therein Now this truth supposed it fully preuenteth our aduersaries vsual euasion in many pointes of controuersy as for example where we alledge the Fathers expounding some texts of Scripture in behalfe of Purgatory Prot. do commonly obiect the same or some other Father vpon occation of other applicatioÌ„ vnderstaÌ„ding thereby the tribulation of this life so opposing this against the other which exposition the said Fathers neuer intended but admitted both the said senses And the like instance might be geuen of our aduersaries like euasion in other pointes of doctrine as namely in the further exposition of Tu es Petrus et super hanc Petram c. Hoc est corpus meum c. and sundry such like Now this is so certainly S. Austines doctrine that the Prot. (d) In the ministers defene for refusal of subscription part 1. p. 61. Hutton accordingly alledgeth and confesseth the forecyted saying of S. Austin to this purpose S. Austin teacheth that besides the sacred Scriptures the TraditioÌ„s of the Church are to be receiued and beleeued as also that al hereticks do insist only vpon the Scriptures SECTION 4. COncerning the question whether the Scriptures do containe al needful pointes of faith and saluation not onely by general direction to (e) Hebrewes 13.17 Obey our Prelates (f) Math. 18.17 Heare the Church hould (g) 2. Thes 2.15 the Traditions c. which we graunt and in which sense the Fathers do often commend the Scriptures perfection but also so particularly as that there should be no neede of any vnwritten Traditions which we deny Protestants affirme S. Austin disputing against Ciprians error of rebaptizing (h) Tom. 7. de Baptismo contra Don. l. 5. c. 23. ante med saith The Apostles commaunded nothing herein but the custome which was opposed against Ciprian is to be beleeued to haue proceeded from their tradition as many thinges be which the vniuersal Church houldeth and are therfore wel beleeued to haue beene commaunded by the Apostles although they be not found writen And speaking of the Baptisme of Infants he (i) Tom. 3. de Gen. lit l. 10. c. 23. prope finem auoucheth that it were Not at al to be beleeued if it were not an Apostolical Tradition Againe (k) Tom. 2. ep 118. ad Ianuar. c. 1. Those thinges which we obserue not written but deliuered which are kept al ouer the world ar to be vnderstod to be obserued as decreed either by the Apostles the selues or general Councels And so likewise (l) Tom. 3. de doctrina Cristiana l. 4. c. 21. prope initium And in concil Carthag 3. can 24. The mixture of water with wine in the Chalice he confirmeth from Tradition which his sayinges are so euident for Apostolicke Traditions that M. (m) In Whirguiftes defence p. 103. Carthwright answearing thereto saith To allow S. Austines saying is to bring in Popery againe Adding (n) Ibidem in Carthwrightes his 2. â—eply part 1. p 84. 85. 86. further that If S. Austines iudgement be a good iudgement then there be some thinges commaunded of God which are not in the Scriptures and thereupon no sufficient doctrine contained in the Scriptures Lastly whereas M. Carthwright and others do vsually (o) In Hookers Eccles pol. l. 3. sec 7. p. 118. obiect against vnwritten Traditions certaine obscure and by vs often answeared sayinges of S. Austin and other Fathers our learned aduersarie M. (p) Ibipem p. 119. Hooker forbeareth not in our so cleare a cause by his special explication and answeare to explaine and cleare them to our handes so that al further answeare I deeme ouer tedious and vnworthy I wil now conclude this point with but remembring how peculiar S. Austin maketh it vnto heretickes to insist vpon onely Scripture To which end he induceth the Arian hereticke saying then to Catholickes as Protestants Puritans Brounistes Anabaptiistes c. do now say to vs If (q) Tom. 6. contra Maximinum l. 1. prope init prope finem you bring any thing from the Scriptures c. it is necessary that we heare it but these words
Puritanes who are now contradicted by Bancroft in the confer at Hampton p. 36. Whitguift in his def p. 384. Downham in his def l. 2. c. 6. l. 4. c. 2. 3. condemning of Bishops for Antichristian the (m) See Willet vpon the Psalmâ— 122. and the Puritanes in their answere to Downhams sermon p. 51. denying of Christes descending into hel the lawfulnes to marry againe in case of diuorce vpon adultery c. And the yet further defection of many other learned Protestants who wholly (n) See Fulke de successione Ecclesiast p. 281. Cooke in his Pope Ioane in ep dedic abandoning their Protestant religion haue withal submitted them selues to our Catholicke faith but do also yet further cal to minde in particular how that theâ—e is almost no man so vnexperienced who knoweth not that in som things he haith altered his owne former iudgement and varied from him selfe condemning vpon a second consideration for false what he once held for vndoubted and most cleare Remarkable examples whereof I might geue in (o) See Hospinian hist sacram part 2. in his Alphabetical table vnder the title Lutheri in constantia in doctrina Luther (p) See Hospin hist sacram part 2. fol. 68. 115. 140. and Colloq Altemberg fol. 377. Melancthon and others but I wil onely content my selfe with Martin Bucer a man in the opinion of (q) In his Scripta Anglicana vnder the tytle of indicia doctis virorum de Bucero p. 944. and vlt. Protestants most learned and holy who after his defection from our (r) Osiand Cent. 16. l. 1. â— 33. p. 88. Catholicke doctrine of transubstantiation sacrifice made his first chaunge into Luthers (s) Osiand vbi supÌ„ra and Peter Martir in his treatise of the Lords supper annexed to his common places in english p. 138. aduerse doctrine of consubstantiation from which he made a second chaunge (t) In his ep ad Norimb et Essengenses Lauatherus hist sacram fol. 31. into Suinglianisme most vehemently impugning Luthers foresaid opinion of Consubstantiation in which respect Luther tearmed him (u) Fabricius in Lutheri Loc. com clas 5. c. 15. p. 50. perfidious but from this yet he made a third chaunge whereby professing againe (x) See Schluffel burge in theol Caluin fol. 17. 129. Luthers doctrine he asked (y) In his firster edition of his comment in Ioan. 6. Math. 26. and in qutauor Euangelia in Ioan. 6. p. 686. pardon of God and the Church for his former Suinglian opinion (z) Lauather in hist sacram fol. 31. estranging him selfe therupon froÌ„ the Tigurin Suinglians whom he before so much honoured after al which he lastly made a fourth change which was his returne againe to Suinglianisme the which he finally professed and (a) Schlusselburge in theol Caluin fol. 70. 17. defended at Cambridge and al this at each time of such his alteration or chaunge with most earnest pretence and protestation in his so often published variable doctrine of vndoubted certanty conceiued from the Scriptures Al which or any part thereof I would not be mistaken to apply or intend in any sense or sort further then onely as thereby in al humble manner to moue your Maiesty vnto a second and more serious consideration vpon occasion of the now thus propounded and confessed ensuing particulars of S. Austines professed religion wherein if according to that liberty of sincere and plaine speaking which as in this case is no lesse then appertaining or rather prescribed to a man of my function I haue forborne as vnworthy that adulterate placency or Sophistication of insinuating or temporizing speach which is not the least infelicity that vsually attendeth vpon greatnes and in steede therof according to the (b) Psal 119 4â— Prophets directing me for to speake of Gods testimonies euen before kinges not be ashamed haue with more candour of minde ingenuously and yet I hope not offensiuely signifyed to your highnes that not vndoubtful possibility of erring from which not Kingly maiesty exempteth humane condition I am not vnconfident that in the equity of your Princely iudgement you wil as in my excuse vouchsaife to approue this worthy saying of S. Amhrose to the noble Emperour Theodosius (c) Ambros ep 17. ad Theodos prope initium neque Imperiale est libertatem dicendi negare neque sacerdotale quod sentit non dicere c. nihil in sacerdote tam periculosum apud Deum tam turpe apud homines quam quod sentit non liberé denunciare The zeale of Gods truth and my deuoted best affections to your highnes as to my gracious and dread soueraige liege Lord whose euer honoured memory with me remaneth in such respect as almost charely enfoulded within the purest find on of my loyal heart haue required at my handes the performance of this duty The which with most humble and suppliant desire of your maiesties pardon which haith enlarged it selfe to become sanctuary to a greater offender I do al prostrate presume hereby to offer vp as sacred to your highnes name with my dayly continued prayer vnto God the author of al truth to direct preserue your royal heart and vnderstanding in the waies of his truth Your humble seruant IOHN BRERELEY The authors preface to his learned aduersaries THough not from any great hope to perswade where the whol frame of our religion appeareth as al declining or rather prostrate vnder the burden of disgrace nor as confident in my owne particular whereby to oppose my selfe against so great a multitude of doctors yet if for no other accasion but that posterity may know we haue according to the measure of our knowledge not beene wanting in our better offices towardes our dearest country from which not perils at home or exile abroad can euer estrange our Christian affections as also to make ful supply in liew of my owne coÌ„fessed vnablnes in that behalfe I haue as no lesse then zealous of the one and al conscious to my selfe of the other vndertaken to offer vnto your graue considerations a breefe suruey of the many collected particulars of S. Austines professed religion a father whose neuer dying memory is by your (a) See hereafter c. 1. h. selues yet hitherto not vnworthily celebrated In which course howsoeuer I haue not made strange to communicate with the commendable labours of our other learned writers with whom I am ioyned in one communion of faith I haue yet neuerthelesse performed it with such addition and further alteration of manner method as I may perhaps be thought to haue written though not noua yet noué as hauing accomplished the same to vse S. Austines (b) Tom. 3. de Trinitate l. r. c. 3. ante med wordes diuerso stilo non diuersa fide for besides the nouelty of this argument in our language and my particular cyting not from others collections but from mine owne eyes perusing the originals at large of the certaine tome
which be besides Scripture are in no case receiued of vs seeing our Lord doth admonish vs saying In vaine they worship me teaching the commaundements of men And elswhere he affirmeth as common vnto al (r) Tom. 3. de Trinitate l. 1. c. 3. prope n. Hereticks to endeuor to defeÌ„d their false deceiptufl opinioÌ„s out of the Script As it is in part confessed and obserued of him and others by the Protestant (s) Symphonia c. 1. p. 96. Polanus Yea he further auoucheth that (t) Tom. 3. de Gen. ad lit l. 7. c. 9. propc fin Not for any other cause they become heretickes but for not vnderstanding the Scriptures aright they obstinatly defend their false opinions against the truth of the Scriptures And that (u) Tom. 9. in Ioan. tract 18. prope init Heresies do not rise c. but when good Scriptures are not wel vnderstood In which respect he saith truly of heretickes (w) Tom. 7. de Bap. contra Don. l. 3. c. 19. post med Scripturas tenent ad speciem non ad salutem they haue the Scriptures for a shew but not to their saluation And agreeably with S. Austin saith S. (x) Orat 2. contra Constantium l. ad Constantium cyted by Polanus in Symphonia p. 95. Hillary remember that there is no hereticke which doth not faigne the blasphemies which he teacheth to be according to Scriptures Yea saith S. (y) Disput contra Arianos Athanasius cyted by (z) In Symphonia p. 95. Polanus euery heresy is masked with the doctrines of Scriptures whereupon (a) Lib. de praescript see S. Hierome ep ad Paulinum Tertulian premonisheth against the vncertaine encounter with the heretickes by Scripture Concerning the Church of Christ CHAPTER 4. S. Austin teacheth that the Church of Christ is freed from error SECTION 1. DIrectly contrary to the general doctrine of Protestants impugning that special priuiledge of the Church of Christ being freed from error S. Austin agreeably with vs Catholickes is so plaine and ful herein to the opposite as that he doubteth not to refer vs to her final determination in al questions of doubt and difficulty for speaking of the Rebaptising of hereticks he saith (c) Tom. 7. contra Crescon l. 1. c. 33. init Although example of this be not brought out of the Canonical Scriptures â—ot the truth of the same Scriptures is houlden of vs in this matter when we do that which now pleaseth the vniuersal Church which the authority of those Scriptures commendeth that so because the holy Scripture connot deceiue whosoeuer feareth to be deceiued with the obscurity of this question let him take councel therein of the same Church which without al ambiguity the holy Scripture demonstrateth Yea he fur-auoucheth that (d) Tom. 2. ep 118. c. 5. circa med It is a point of most insolent madnes to dispute against that which the vniuersal Church thinketh In so much as he faith (e) Tom. 7. de Bapt. cont Don. l. 7. c. 53. cir med Of the Churches vniuersal consent in any point of doctrine Id autem sit securae voâ—is asserere it is secure to affirme it And lastly he affirmeth the decree of a general CouÌ„cel to be (f) Tom. 7. cont duas ep Pelag l. 4. c. 12. prope fin competens sufficiensque Iudicium a competent and sufficient iugdement S. Austin teacheth that the Church of Christ is Catholicke or vniuersal SECTION 2. THough the very name of Catholicke be so vngratful and odious to the auncienter heretickes that the (g) Aug. tom 7. l. 1. cont Gaudent c. 33. prope init et post med Donatists termed the sam an humane fiction which yet saith S. Austin are wordes of blasphemie as also to the more nouel sectaries D. (h) Against Rhem. Test in Act. 11.26 sec 4. Fulke confessing that some Lutherans haue altered the word of the Creed and for Catholicke put Christian And (i) Praefat. Noui Testamenti Anno. 1605. And see the Lutherans in colloq Altemberg in Respons ad accus corrupt fol. 154. 353. Beza styling it The most vaine tearme Catholicke yet S. Austin so highly esteemed thereof that he said (k) Tom. 1. de vera religione c. 7. paul ante med We must hould the communion of that Church which is named Catholicke not onely of her owne but also of her enemies for wil they nil they Heretickes and Schismatickes when they speake not with their owne fellowes but with strangers cal the Catholicke Church nothing els but the Catholicke Church for they could not be vnderstood vnles they discerne it by this name wherewith she is called by the whol world And though it be common to Protestants with former heretickes in wordes to style them selues Catholickes yet saith S. (l) Tom. 6. l. cont epist fundam c. 4. circ med Austin whereas al heretickes would be called Catholickes yet if a stranger aske the way to the Catholicke Church no hereticke dare shew his owne Church or house And the like saying is to be seene in S. (m) Catech. 18. Ciril And euen so at this day the name Catholicke is ordinarily appropriated to vs Roman Catholickes by M. (n) Act. mon. p. 613. Sleid. in the english history l. 7. fol. 96. et l. 10. fol. 127. Iac. in his reasons taken out of Gods word p. 23. 73. 74. 24. Wilkes in his obedience pag. 39. Dres in Millenar 6. p. 214. Humf. in vita Iuelli p. 102. 100. Fox Sleiden Iacob Wilkes Dresserus Humfrey and al other writers Yea this name Catholicke was so powerful with S. Austin as that he made it one special motiue as now the like it should be to vs for to preserue and keepe him in the Churches bosome saying hereof (o) Tom. 6. cont epist fundam c. 4. circa med Lastly the very name Catholicke houldeth me c. which wordes are so vndenyable that D. (p) Against Rhem. test in Act. Apost c. 11. v. 26. see 4. Fulke granteth that Among many other thinges which kept S. Austin in the Church the name of Catholicke was one But to passe from the name to the thing it selfe or reason of the name that the true Church should be called Catholicke not as D. (q) Ibidem Fulke with old hereticks pretendeth only in reguard of it obseruing al the commaundements of God which very assertion S. (r) Tom. 2. ep 48. ad Vincentium paulo ante med Austin confuteth saying to the hereticke thou seemest to haue said somewhat wittily when thou expoundest the name Catholicke not by the communion of the whole world but by the keeping of al the commaundements c. But in reguard of it becomming and continuing after it first encrease Catholicke dispersed ouer the world In proofe whereof S. Austin as the very (s) Cent. 5. c. 4. col 410. col 414. Centuristes do obserue alledgedgeth many testimonies from the sacred Scriptures saying
propitiations or satisfactions Yea S. Austin is so Roman Catholicke as that M. Fulke auoucheth that (c) Confut. of Purg. p. 349. Austin defended prayer for the dead and that (d) Ibidem p. 326. it was the common error of his time for which also he is acknowledged and reproued by (e) Tract theol p. 394. Bulling de origigine erroris c. 9. fol. 223. Caluin and Bullinger In like sort concerning Purgatory or temporal punishment after this life S. Austin affirmeth expresly that (f) Tom. 5. de ciuit Dei l. 21. c. 13. â—ane after the eng translation l. 21. c. 16. p. 857. l. 21. c. 21. p. 860. l. 21. c. 24. p. 863. some suffer temporal punishments onely in this life others after death some in both and that there are (g) Tom. 5. de ciu Dei l. 20. c. 25. ante med certaine Purgatory paines for certaine persons hereafter In so much that D. Fulke acknowledgeth that (h) Confut. of Purgat p. 110. Austin de ciuit Dei l. 21. c. 13. concludeth very clearly that some suffer temporal paines after this life this may not be denyed And that (i) Ibidem p. 78. Austin speaketh indeede of the amending fire but had no ground of that fire but in the common error of his time S. Austin teacheth local hel and material fire therin As also Limbus Patrum or Christes descending into hel SECTION 2. COncerning local hel and that the material fire therof punisheth the wicked spirits and soules of men wheras M. Iacob saith (k) In Bilsons suruey of Christes sufferinges p. 43. You set your selfe to proue that in hel there is material fire c. you cal it true fire which we vtterly deny And (l) Ibidem p. 46. The Scripture show no more any corporal or material or true fire in hel then a corporal worme material brimstone c. which are onely so tearmed metaphorically yet S. Austin to the contrary affirmeth that (m) De ciu Dei l. 21. c. 10. incorporeal spirits may be strange yet true meanes be tormented with the punishment of corporal fire In so much as D. Bilson confesseth that (n) In his suruey p. 44. S. Austin long since haith plainly resolued that the fire of hel is not onely a true fire but a corporal fire that shal punish both men and deuils auoching yet further this to be a doctrine receiued by the Fathers of al ages in Christes Church Amongst whom S. Hierome condemneth Origen for teaching this error that (o) Ad Auitum And see Bilsons suruey p. 51. The fire of hel c. doth not torment but the conscience of sinners And yet Danaeus is content to be condemned for an hereticke with Origen in defending that (p) Resp ad Bellar disput part altera ad 6. controu p. 1227. The word fire is taken in the holy Scripture Metaphorically and tropically not properly As also D. Reynoldes mantaining that (q) Censura librorum Apocriphorum in his title of lecture 51. 52. 53. 54. 56. 57. the fire of hel is not material nor burneth soules corporally with whom also agreeth (r) Institut l. 3. c. 25. parag 1â— Caluin Lastly S. Austin is so cleare herein that Danaeus being to answeare his testimonie obiected by Bellarmine haith no other refuge left him but barely to say that (s) In reâ—pons vbi supra p. 1327. the authority of Austin here is none or of no worth So likewise concerning Limbus Patrum or Christes descending into hel S. Austin teacheth that (t) Tom. 10. de tempore ser 137. prope init Christ laid his flesh in the monument and his soule accompaning him he descended to hel wherby the elect who though they were in the bosome of tranquillity yet being detained within the gates of hel are brought againe to the pleasures of Paradise neither was this the priuate opinioÌ„ of S. Austin for he further auocheth that (u) Tom. 2. ep 99. ad Euodium multo ante med almost the whole Church agreeth concerning the first man Adam that Christ loosed him from hel To which purpose D. Bilson (x) Suruey p. 598. particularly alledgeth S. Austin S. Austin teacheth that Sainctes are to be inuocated and worshiped As also their reliques to be reuerenced SECTION 3. COncerning inuocation of Sainctes S. Austin is so fully agreeing with vs that him selfe doubteth not to pray vnto S. Ciprian being long before martyred saying (a) Tom. 7. de Baptismo contra Don. l. 7. c. 1. see l. 5. c. 17. Let him helpe vs with his prayers c. that our Lord graunting we may immitate his goodnes as much as we are able yea he reporteth in proofe hereof this strange miracle (b) Tom. 5. de ciuit Dei l. 12. c. 8. circ med in the english translation p. 886. One Florentius saith he here of Hippo a poore old man lost his vpper garment and being vnable to buy an other he came to the shrine of the 20. Martyrs and prayed aloud vnto them to helpe him to rayments c. at his departure he espyed a great fish newly cast vp by the sea c. and cutting the fish he found in the bellie therof a ring of gold And in this doctrine S. Austin is so cleare that Chemnitius relating his former prayer to S. Ciprian affirmeth that (c) Examen part 3. p. 211. Austin did this without Scripture yealding to the time and custome So general was the custome of praying to the Sainctes in the time of S. Austin for which he is also further reprehended by other (d) The Centuristes Cent. 5. c. 6. col 674. Lectius in praescript theol l. 2. p. 174. 277. 280. Protestants M. Fulke not forbearing also to acknowledge and say (e) Reioynder to Bristow p. 5. I confesse that Ambrose Austin and Hierome held inuocation of Sainctes to be lawful In like sort in proofe that Sainctes may be worshiped he wryteth thus of martyrs (f) Tom. 5. de ciu Dei l. 8. c. 27. init we honour their memories as of holy men of God And (g) Ibidem l. 20. c. 21. ante med we worship Martyres with that worship of loue c. but with that worship which in greâ—ke is called Latria or which is proper onely to God we neither worship them nor teach them to be worshiped Yea S. Austin is reproued for vsing our now vsual distinction of Dulia and Latria by Hospinian saying (h) De Templis p. 207. Blessed Austin first inuented this distinction of Dulia and Latria and amongst religious worshipes he thus distinguished that that which is due onely to God he calleth Latria and that he nameth Dulia which is lawful to geue vnto creatures And to this purpose he alledgeth sundry sayinges of S. Austin But S. Aust also approueth the feasts celebrated in honour of Sainctes saying (i) Tom. 8. in Psalm 63. initio Hauing this day the feast of the passion or
9. p. 208. of the house haunted with spirits and cleared by the Preist saying Masse in it To conclude therefore this passage concerning the miracles most of them done in Affrica at the memorial of S. Stephâ—n reported by S. Austin in his foresaid booke de ciu Dei it is yet further to be obserued that the same are also acknowledged and recorded by Euodius of whom thus writeth S. Austin at (m) Lib. 22 de ciu Dei c. 8. and after the engl trans p. 888. Vzaly neare Vtica haue many miracles bâ—ne wrought by power of the said martyr Stephen where Bishop Euodius erected his memorial long before this of ours The same Euodius did accordingly publish a special treatise in 2. bookes de miraculis Protomartyris Stephani extant in S. Austins workes Tom. 10. Also Sigebert Gâ—mblacensis 500. yeares since in l. de illust (n) Cap. 15. Eccles script maketh mention of this Euodius and of his treatise of S. Stephans miracles and the Century writers say from (o) Cent. 5. c. 10. col 1137. Trithemius there is a booke of Euodius extant of the miracles done in Affricke by the reâ—iques of S. Stephen of which miracles mencion is also made by S. (p) Tom. 10. de diuers ser 51. Austin elswhere by (q) In script Eccles in Luciano c. 46. in Auito c. 47. in Orosio c. 39. Bede l. Rerract in act Apost c. 5. 8. et in l. de tempor ratione Nicep hist l. 14. c. 9. Genadius Bede and Nicephorus A truth so cleare that Hospinian confesseth that (r) De Templis p. 301. Austin telleth many true miracles done by the signe of the Crosse the deuil put to flight de ciu Dei l. 22. c. 8. Yea he further saith (s) Pag. 138. hither b long those other true miracles which other Fathers mention as also Austin de ciu Dei l. 22. c. 8. And wheras Duraeus obiecteth these foresaid miracles D. Whitaker denyeth not but confesseth saying (t) Reply to Duraeus p. 886. I do not thinke these miracles vaine and therfore not forged which are affirmed to haue bene done at the monuments of the martyrs Moreouer our aduersaries them selues haue in such like respect not forborne to translate and publish in english S. Austines foresaid booke of miracles In further confirmation of al which I might yet ad sundry other miracles mencioned by S. Austin in sundry (u) Tom. 1. l. 1. Retract c. 13. post med tom 7. de vnit Eccles c. 19. ante med Tom. 1. l. 9. confes c. 7. Tom. 9. in Ioan. tract 120. circ med other of his writinges as also by (x) Orat. in mamant Naz. orat in Cipri Chrisost l. contra Gentiles Amb. ser de S. Geruas et Protas Hier. cont Vigilan ep ad Eustochium and in vita Hilarion Sulpt in vita Martini and see Cent. 5. c. 13. from col 1478. til 1493. cent 4. c. 13. froÌ„ col 1433. til col 1456. S. Basil S. Gregory Nazianzen S. Chrisostome S. Ambrose S. Hierome Sulpitius and the Century writers against al which if any yet vnsatisfyed shal oppose his owne bare vnwarranted denyal we leaue that man as much more worthy of contempt then further reply And thus much breifly concerning such miracles collected from S. Austin as do clearly conuince what religion it was whether Catholicke or Protestant which was by him professed and by miracles thus confirmed Concerning such sayinges of S. Austin as are vsually obiected by our aduersaries against his former Catholicke doctrines confessed for such by Protestantes and confirmed by miracles CHAPTER 19. Such places are answeared as are vrged against the Canonical Scriptures against Traditions and the authority of Councels SECTION 1. AGainst the booke of Machabees M. Moulin obiecteth that S. Austin saith (a) Defence p. 152. The booke of Machabees is receiued not vnprofitably of the Church if men read it soberly M. Moulin in the same place geueth the answeare him selfe which in substance is that S. Austin said this as in respect of Razes killing himselfe whose example the Donatistes of indiscret zeale followed in reguard wherof S. Austin required this sobriety explaning further there and elswhere (b) Tom. 2. ep 61. post med which Moulin omitteth that The Scripture of the Machabees haith touching Razes death tould how it was done but not commended it as though it were to be done And in the booke of Iudges (c) Cap. 16.30 is reported the like of Sampson whom yet the Apostle (d) Hebrewes 11.32 and Aug. de ciu Dei l. 1. c. 21. commendeth Wheras M. Carthwright (e) In Hookers Eccles pol. l. 2. sec 7. p. 118. 119. obiecteth against vnwritten traditions certaine obscure sayinges of S. Austin and other Fathers M. Hooker forbeareth not in our so cleare a case by his special explication and answeare to explaine and cleare them to our handes D. Fulke (e) In Hookers Eccles pol. l. 2. sec 7. p. 118. 119. obiecteth against the authority of Councels that S. Austin teacheth that (f) Answeare to a counterf Cath. p. 89. And Aug. tom 7. de Bapt. cont Don. l. 2. c. 3. post med general Councels themselues may be often amended the former by the later when by some experience of thinges that is opened which before was shut and that knowen which before was vnknowen But his meaning here is onely concerning matters of fact or at most but concerning such pointes of faith as were by former Councels not erroneously determined but onely left vndefyned and afterwardes resolued vpon by later Councels for S. Austins wordes of Amendment argue him not to speake of faith seeing faith or heresy is not properly said to be amended but of matters of fact which are subiect to amendment A truth yet more euident in that this amendment is here said to come to passe by the experience of thinges vnto which experience not doctrine of faith but matters of fact be properly subiâ—ct M. Iewel obiecteth (g) Reply art 4. p. 272. the testimony of S. Austin concerning Constantine the great vndertaking the iudgement of Bishops and their cause vpon appeale made to him in that behalfe but M. (h) 2. Reply part 2. p. 163. Carthwright answeareth hereto in our behalfe that Austin saith that the Emperour was driuen by the Donatistes importunity who made no end of appealing vnto him to geue sentence in that matter for the which also he was to craue pardon of the Bishops To which purpose also S. Austin and Optatus haue (i) See before c. chapter 4. sec 6. formerly made their seueral answeares Such places are answeared as are obiected from S. Austin against Baptisme by women in case of necessity And against the real presence SECTION 2. MAister Carthwright obiecteth against Baptisme by women the 4. (k) Can. 100. Carthage Councel saying (l) In Whitguiftes def tract 9. c. 5. p. 523. Let not a woman presume to Baptise But his answeare is geuen him by
Chemnitius who therupon obserueth inferreth (h) Examen part 1. fol. 80. And see Snecanus in method descript p. 429. 430. 432. that In this sort Austin de natura et gratia applyeth the sentences of Hillary Ambrose Chrisostome Hierome which Pelagius had alledged in confirmation of his error according to the Analogy of faith adding a fit interpretation Now according to this obseruation and practise of S. Austin al. our aduersaries mistaken obiectionâ— from him are againe at once determined by the confessed contrary doctrine in the next Chapters alledged from the other Fathers that seuerally liued in the same age with S. Austin and in the other ages next before and after him As also according to both these foresaid rules may easily be auoyded that pretended necessity of childrens receiuing the Eucharist vnder paine of damnation wherwith S. Austin is by D. (i) Answeare to a counterf Catholicke p. 87. Fulke and many others so often and so seriously mischarged For hereto it may be answeared that in S. Austines opinion children in Baptisme receiued the effect of the other Sacrament without which vertual communicating he thought them not saued otherwise that he did not thinke their Sacramental receiuing of the Eucharist necessary appeareth first in that he taught before that in Baptisme was a plenaâ—â— remission of al sinnes Secondly in that our aduersaries cannot alledge any his saying affirming directly to to the point that a Baptised childe dying before his communicating is damned Thirdly in that S. Austin teacheth that (k) Serm. ad Infantes apud Bedam in 1. Cor. 10. And see Tom. 7. l. 1 de pec mer. et rem c. 19. and tom 5. de ciuit Dei l. 21. c. 16. and after the english transl p. 856. none ought any wayes to doubt but that euery one of the faithful is made partaker of the body bloud of our Lord when he is made in Baptisme a member of Christ and that he is not estranged from the fellowship of that bread and Chalice although before he eate that bread and drinke the Chalice he depart out of this world being in the vnity of the body of Christ This point is so cleare in S. Austin as that the (l) Cent. 5. c. â— col 604. Centuristes do in particular free him from this impution As for S. Austines communicating to Infants but without al opinion of the necessity before supposed we graunt his doctrine therof A doctrine likewise houlden good not onely by S. Ciprian who recyteth a (m) Serm. de lapsis circ med memorable miracle concurring therwith and one in his owne presence But also Musculus who maketh true and (n) Loc. com e. de caena Dom. p. 34â— direct answeare to those wordes of S. Paul Let a man proue him selfe and alledgeth (o) Ibid. p. 341. the auncient Churches iudgement and practise in proofe therof A doctrine also stil defended (p) Lib. ep Oecolam et Suing p 305. 329. by the Bohemians The third obseruation is that according to our aduersaries owne (q) Chemnitius examen part 1. fol. 80. Snecanus method de script p. 290. Bancroftes suruey p. 336. Humfrey in Iesuit part 2. rat 5. p. 501. rat 2. p. 129. and see S. Basil ep 64. rule we do discerne the Fathers sayinges by them vttered in heat or feruor of disputation from those other which they write dogmatically for that in the first kind the Fathers being more attent and busied how to conuince and ouercome then alwayes precisely obseruant or circumspect of their manner of speaking which they neuer doubted would be vnderstood otherwise then according to the Catholicke receiued sense euen as next here before S. Austin expounded and excused S. Chrisostome their meaning may the more colourably be mistaken In which respect such their obiected sayinges as namely those commonly vrged against freewil and merit of workes taken from S. Austins disputation with the Pelagians who enhabled these as auaileable without grace are not houlden so conuincing or fit for argument which few obseruations thus propounded being but duly obserued by the studious and indifferent reader wil suffice to deliuer him from the doubtful laborinth of al vprising obiected difficulties And thus much breifly in answeare to al the obiections pretended from S. Austin wherein our aduersaries most colourable endeauour is but to make him no further contrary to vs then confessedly therein he should be contrary to him selfe which is nothing he being in very deede so plaine in our behalfe and so far from Luthers new erected doctrine that one of Luthers scholers blushed not to say (r) Alberus contra Carolastadianos l. 7. And see the like in Musculus in praefat in libel Ger. de diaboli tyrannide And Hospin hist sacram part 1. fol. 346. I doubt not but if that Austin were non liuing he would not be 〈◊〉 to prâ—feâ—â—e him selfe Luthers scholler Concerning the doctrine and religiâ—a of the other Fathers in general and also of those who liued in the age of S. Austin And that it was the same with the doctrine religioÌ„ here formerly taught by S. Austin and at this day taught by the Catholicke Roman Church CHAPTER 20. The Fathers in general who liued in the age of S. Austin confessedly taught the same doctrine with him coÌ„cerning Christ being our mediator only according to his humanity concerning the sacred Scriptures traditions SECTION 1. HAuing thus hitherto entreated of the religion professed by S. Austin to whom aboue al the Fathers Protestants do vsually make their bouldest claime aâ— pretending him to make most for them and against vs Hereby I hope sufficiently appeareth what is to be expected in this kind from the other Fathers for if D. Boyes doth acknowledge that (a) Exposition of the dominic epist the winter part p. 253. and see before c. 1. the most indifferent for both parties among the Fathers is Austin who yet standeth so aduerse against them as we haue formerly seene by al the premisses much more aduerse then in al probability are the other Fathers And for so much as the further explanation of the other Fathers iudgements yealdeth a yet further strong proofe of S. Austires (b) See before in the pref to the learned aduersary professed like consenting religion and that in reguard of my enioyned and affected breuity I haue not opportunity to demonstrate the same from the other Fathers owne alledgedged sayinges at large I wil now therefore onely ad as in ful satisfaction of al reasonable readers a breife recytal of our learned aduersaries them selues charging and reprouing the Fathers indefinitly or els sundry of them at once charging also diuerse of those who liued in S. Austins age with their knowen confessed iudgements practise in particular of our Catholicke faith First then in proofe of our Sauiours office of mediatorship onely according to his haman nature Caluin him selfe denying it yet saith of the Fathers (c) Instit l. 2.
him selfe c. Lastly Sebastianus Francus concludeth for certaine that (z) Ep. de abrogandis stat Eccles Presently after the Apostles times al thinges were turned vpside downe c. And that for certaine through the worke of Antichrist the external Church together with the faith and Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure that for these 1400. years the Church haith beene no where external and visible c. So peremptorily do they charge the auncient and holy Fathers of the Primitiue Church with Antichristian Apostacy from the faith of Christ Yea they do not forbeare to publish to the world their special booke of that argument entituled (a) His Maiesty in his declaratiâ—n concerning his proceedinges with the states in case of Voâ—stius p. 15. 19. 35. De Apostasia Sanctorum and to send the same to the Arch-bishop of Canterbury and to mantaine further by letter vnto the said Archbishop that the doctrine contained in that booke de Apostasia Sanctorum was agreeable to the doctrine of the Church of England The miserable deceiued author therof and other his complices Napier Brightman Brocard Leigh and sundry other Protestant writers not discerning that by such their pretended Apostacy them selues do in very deed as precursors prepare and make way to that fearful Apostacy which is in their opinion foretould by the (b) 2. Thes 2.3 and see Caluin vpon the same place as also Piscator Apostle to happen before the end of the world for what els is this pretended Apostacy of the Primitiue Church other then a plaine preparation and earnest perswasion to make Apostacy or departure from the doctrine of the Primitiue church and so consequently from the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles So cleare it is that not onely the ages subsequent but also precedent to S. Austin vp to the Apostles are al of them disliked and condemned by Protestants as wholly papistical and Antichristian The conclusion of the whole booke HItherto gentle Reader haue I intertained thy paines and patience in making proofe to thee of S. Austines professed religion from his owne alledged sayinges reported miracles with solution also to the contrary obiections vsually pretended from S. Austin only now in conclusion of al I offer to thy consideration how vnlike it is that I should be able to alledge to thee so many plaine and pregnant sayinges of S. Austin in behalfe of so many seueral pointes of religion and al or most of them for such by the learned aduersary confessed and yet further confirmed with like confessed consenting doctrine of the other auncient Fathers that liued next before in and after his age and al this notwithstanding no such matter as some aduersaries pretend to be by S. Austin therin intended or meant Could he not in some onely one or other but in al the cheife pointes of controuersy speake so plainly with vs and against Protestancy and so likewise acknowledged by Protestants them selues and yet himselfe in those very pointes ioyne in religion with Protestants and against vs Al which being so abundantly hertofore in this treatise examined and proued euen from the sparing and wary confession of the learned aduersaries who acknowledge no more then the racke of truth enforceth them vnto may suffice to satisfy thee studious Reader that hereby is deliuered to thee but as it were the bare out side or naked apparance of thinges in comparison of that far greater proofe and euidence which is in very deede at large abouÌ„ding in the writings of S. Austin the other auncient Fathers If therefore any shal without al forehead seeke to abuse thee with denyal of so euident premises I do therein boldly appeale to the equity of thine owne indifferent iudgement And as for those other who with more plaine dealing but no lesse offence in do ingeniously confesse and acknowledge S. Austines foresaid doctrine to make with vs yet withal contemne and reiect the same for Popish if any I say supercilious forehead of that ranke who (c) Math. 13.13.14 hauing eares to heare and wil not heare eyes to see and wil not see shal oppose against vs his owne late aduerse nouel doctrine as pretended from the Scriptures in the vnderstanding wherof he doubteth not to prefer his owne priuate interpretation before S. Austin and the other Fathers I can but yet not without commiseration pronounce of such a one (d) Apoc. 22.11 Qui sordidus est sordescat adhuc And I must needes apply vnto him those wordes of our Kinges most excellent Maiesty which he worthily deliuered against Vorstius a principal pretender of this Christian liberty As for (e) In his foresaid declaration p. 63. 64. this Christian liberty saith he which Vorstius doth vrge so much certainly he doth it with no other intention but onely vnder this faire pretext c. to abuse the world c. To abuse Christian liberty in presuming to propound a new doctrine to the world in point of the highest and holiest mysteries of God is a most audacious rashnes and impudent arrogancy And againe (f) Ibid. p. 61. 62. If one particular man may take vpon him such singularity as this how shal he be subiect to general national and synodical Councels c. Wherefore he is plainly discouered to be resolued not to be subiect in any sort to the iudgement of the Church c. for he knowes to wel that the auncient Church c. is against him And this is the reason why he wil not in these pointes submit him selfe to the iudgement of any mortal man but vpon this occasion mantaines his Christian liberty Thus far his Maiesty against Vorstius and indeede against al Protestants who being pressed with the aucthority of S. Austin the other Fathers of the Primitiue Church either for the interpretation of the Scriptures or for our knowledge of the practise of those purest times in matters of faith and religion do finally betake them selues to this desperate refuge of contemning S. Austin and al Fathers vpon pretence of this Christian liberty that al controuersies are to be decyded onely by the priuate spirit interpreting the Scriptures Now lastly as to al Catholicke Readers I conclude that seeing the faith which at this day we beleeue and professe is confessedly the same with that of S. Austines and the other holy Bishops and Doctors of the Primitiue Church that therfore amongst the other greatest blessinges of God bestowed vpon vs we euer esteeme this with highest respect of our happy vocation In due requital and gratitude wherto let vs with al exultation of minde accept and embrace what pressures punishmeÌ„ts and torments so euer inflicted vpon vs for our defence therof yea if death it selfe be vrged let vs rather make choice to dye in our Lord with S. Austin S. Ambrose S. Hierome S. Gregory and the other holy Prelates Martyrs Confessors Virgins of those purest times then to dye the death of the wicked with Aerius Iouinian Vigilantius
Waldo Wicliue Husse Luther Caluin and other damned Heretickes whose very inconstancy and ciuil dissentions amongst them selues may serue vs for a strongest argument that their singular doctrines first proceeding from the spirit of error and ignorance were after mantained by the spirit of pride and obstinacy shortly wil be ended by the spirit of discord and contradiction God saue the KING THE CONTENTES of the preface to the kinges Maiesty THat the sacred Scriptures alone are not sufficient to determine controuersies p. 5. That controuersies in Religion are to be decyded by the Church p. 9. That long education in any profession or Religion is not sufficient security for the truth therof p. 10. That Protestants haue reuoulted from their former professed doctrines And of their great inconstancy and incertanty therein p. 12. The contentes of the Preface to the learned aduersaries Certaine writinges of S. Austin charged by Protestants for counterfeate are defended and other their euasions preuented p. 25. Chapter 1. The Author beginneth his booke to his Catholicke frend p. 1. Chapter 2. CoÌ„cerning God the humanity of Christ the B. Virgin Mary and the holy Angels Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that the sonne of God is God of God and not of him selfe p. 8. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that God doth not reprobate any to sinne or damnation or commaund any thing impossible p. 10. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that Christ suffered not according to his diuine nature nor according to the same was Preist or offered sacrifice or was mediator and that from his natiuity he was free from ignorance and after his death descended into hel and that his body by Gods omnipotency may be without circumscription p. 16. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that the B. Virgin Mary was freed from original sinne That her body was assumpted into heauen and that she vowed chastity He also teacheth the different degrees of Angels and Archangels p. 22. Chapter 3. Concerning the sacred Scriptures Section 1. S. Austin teacheth the sacred Scriptures to be discerned for such by the authority of the Church p. â—26 Section 2. S. Austin teacheth the bookes of Tobie Iudith Hester Machabees c. to be diuine and Canonical Scriptures p. 28. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that one text of Scripture may haue diuerse true senses p. 33. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that besides the sacred Scriptures the Traditions of the Church are to be receiued beleeued As also that al heretickes do insist onely vpon the Scriptures p. 35. Chapter 4. Concerning the Church of Christ Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that the Church of Christ is freed from error p. 39. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that the Church of Christ is Catholicke or vniuersal p. 41. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that the militant Church must euer continue and that visibly p. 46. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that the Church was built vpon Peter And that Peter was the head of the whole Church p. 50. Section 5. S. Austin teacheth the Primacy of the Roman Church p. 53. Section 6. S. Austin denyeth Ecclesiastical Primacy to Emperours Kinges p. 57. Chapter 5. Concerning the Sacramentes Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that the Sacraments do not onely signify but truly confer grace to the worthy receiuer p. 60. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that certaine of the Sacraments do imprint a Character or marke in the soule of the receiuer p. 62. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that there are seauen Sacramentes p. 64. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that the Sacraments are to be administred with the signe of the Crosse p. 66. Chapter 6. Concerning Baptisme Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that Baptisme taketh away al sinnes both original and actual p. 68. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that concupisence remaning after Baptisme is not sinne p. 69. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that children dying vnbaptised are not saued p. 71. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth sundry Ceremonies of Baptisme now vsed in the Roman Church p. 73. Chapter 7. Concerning the Sacrament of Confirmation p. 76. Chapter 8. Concerning the real presence or Sacrament of the Eucharist Section 1. S. Austin teacheth the real Presence of Christes body and bloud in the Sacrament of the Eucharist p. 81. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that the very wicked do truly receiue the body of Christ p. 85. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that great care is to be vsed lest any part of the Sacrament do fal vpon the ground and that it is to be receiued fasting Besides which he also teacheth and alloweth the vse of holy bread now vsed by Catholickes p. 87. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that the sacrament of the Eucharist is to be adored And other Fathers teach that it is to be inuocated and that Angels are present in time of the sacrifice p. 90. Section 5. S. Austin teacheth that the Eucharist is a true and proper sacrifice and that it is propitiatory euen for the dead and that it was offered vpon Altars consecrated with oyle and the signe of the Crosse p. 104. Chapter 9. Concerning the Sacrament of penance wherin auricular confession to Preistes imposed Penance and dayes of pardon are taught by S. Austin and other Fathers p. 111. Chapter 10. Concerning the Sacrament of Extreme vnction wherein is proued the same to be a Sacrament and vsed in the Primitiue Church p. 122. Chapter 11. Concerning the Sacrament of Orders wherein S. Austin teacheth that they are properly a Sacrament geuen onely by a Bishop who haith authority to excommunicate euen the deade And that Preistes may not marry or be one that was Bigamus p. 125. Chapter 12. Concerning the Sacrament of Matrimony taught by S. Austin and that the innocent party vpon Adultery may not marry an other And of the Preistes blessing after marriage p. 134. Chapter 13. Concerning free wil iustification merit of workes workes of superogation and the difference of mortal and venial sinnes Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that man haith free wil. p. 139. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that our iustification consisteth not onely in remission of sinnes or not imputation therof but likewise in good workes and that the same once had may be lost p. 145. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that good workes do merit and that there are workes of supererogation p. 149. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth that mortal and venial sinnes do differ of their owne natures pag. 154. Chapter 14. Concerning praier for the deade Purgatory material fire in hel Limbus Patrum inuocation of Sainctes their worship and Images Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that it is lawful and godly to pray for the dead and that there is a place of Purgatory after this life p. 157. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth local hel and material fire therin as also Limbus Patrum or Christes descending into hel p. 163. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that Sainctes are to be inuocated and worshiped as also their reliques to be reuerenced p. 163. Section 4. S. Austin teacheth
that is is lawful to vse and worship the Images of Christ and his Sainctes p. 168. Chapter 15. Concerning Christian fastes as abstinence from certaine meates vpon certaine dayes as also concerning vowed chastity and monastical life Section 1. S. Austin teacheth that prescribed dayes of fasting and abstinence from certaine meates are lawful p. 173. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth that the vow of chastity is lawful p. 177. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that it is lawful to vow the state of monastical or religious life p. 180. Chapter 16. Concerning Antichrist vsury and permission of stewes Section 1. Concerning Antichrist his comming at the end of the world And of Enoch and Elias their comming as then to resist him p. 187. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth vsury to be vnlawful p. 192. Section 3. S. Austin teacheth that stewes may be permitted for the auoiding of greater euil p. 194. Chapter 17. Concerning Ceremonies Section 1. S. Austin teacheth sundry holy ceremonies now vsed in the Catholicke Church in the administration of the Sacraments p. 198. Section 2. S. Austin teacheth sundry ceremonies concerning praier now vsed in the Roman Church p. 204. Chapter 18. Concerning miracles reported by S. Austin and making in further proofe and confirmation of our Catholicke religion by him formerly tauhgt Section 1. S. Austin reporteth seueral miracles in proofe of inuocation of Sainctes p. 213. Section 2. S. Austin reporteth seueral miracles in proofe of the honouring of Sainctes reliques p. 216. Section 3. S. Austin reporteth some miracles in proofe of the signe of the Crosse and of pilgrimage to the holy land p. 218. Section 4. S. Austin reporteth certaine miracles in proofe of the sacrifice of Christes body of Altars and of penetration of bodies p. 220. Section 5. S. Austin reporteth some miracles to be wrought by holy oyle p. 223. Section 6. A further confirmation of these foresaid miracles reported by S. Austin in proofe of our Catholicke Church p. 224. Chapter 19. Concerning such sayinges of S. Austin as are vsually obiected by our aduersaries against his former Catholicke doctrines confessed for such by Protestants and confirmed by miracles Section 1. Such places are answeared as are vrged against the Canonical Scriptures against Traditions and the authority of Councels p. 231. Section 2. Such places are answeared as are obiected from S. Austin against Baptisme by women in case of necessity and against the real presence p. 234. Section 3. Such places are answeared as are vrged from S. Austin against inuocation of Sainctes Images and reliques p. 242 Section 4. Such places are answeared as are vrged from S. Austin against Purgatory p. 246. Section 5. Such places are answeared as are vrged from S. Austin against iustification by workes freewil and merit of workes p. 248. Section 6. Such places are answeared as are obiected from S. Austin concerning vowes miracles and Ceremonies p. 250. Section 7. A further answeare in general to al such obiections as are vrged from S. Austin or other of the Fathers p. 254. Chapter 20. Concerning the doctrine religion of the oâ—her Fathers in general also of those who liued in the age of S. Austin And that it was the same with the doctrine and religion here formerly taught by S. Austin and at this day taught by the Catholicke Roman Church Section 1. The Fathers in general and who liued in the age of S. Austin confessedly taught the same doctrine with him concerning Christ being our mediator only according to his humanity concerning the sacred Scriptures and Traditions p. 264. Section 2. The Fathers in general are confessed to teach the Primacy Ecclesiastical of S. Peter and the Bishops of Rome As also to deny supreme Ecclesiastical gouernment to temporal Princes and that the Pope is not Antichrist p. 267. Section 3. The Fathers in general are confessed to teach our Catholicke doctrines concerning the Sacrament of Baptisme p. 273. Section 4. The Fathers in general are confessed for our Catholicke doctrines concerning the Sacraments of confirmation Orders and Extreame vnction p. 276. Section 5. The Fathers in genâ—ral are confessed for our Catholike doctrines concerning Confession Satisfaction and Pardons p. 278. Section 6. The Fathers in general are confâ—ssed for our Catholicke doctrines concerning real presence the preseruation of the Sacrament and receiuing fasting and Christ p. 283. Section 7. The Fathers in general are confessed concerning our Catholicke doctrines of the sacrifice of Christes body and bloud in the Eucharist As also that the same was propitiatory euen for the soules departed and of mingling water with wine in the Chalice and of Altars p. 289. Section 8. The Fathers in general are confessed for our Catholicke doctrines concerning Prayer for the dead Purgatory and Lymbus Patrum p. 295. Section 9. The Fathers in general are confessed for our Catholicke doctrines of inuocation of Sainctes of our reuerent vse of Images Reliques the Crosse p. 297. Section 10. The Farhers in general are confessed for our Catholicke doctrines concerning free wil and merit of workes p. 302. Section 11. The Fathers in general are confessed for our Catholicke doctrines concerning vowes the single life of Preistes Monachisme prescribed fastes and Ceremonies p. 305. Section 12. The Fathers in general are confessed by Protestants not onely for particular points of faith but ioyntly at once for many or most of them together p. 313. Section 13. That the Fathers who liued next before and after the times of S. Austin agreed with him in the Catholicke Roman faith p. 322. The conclusion of the whole booke 335. A TABLE OF THE PRINCIPAL POINTES contained in this booke A ABsolution geuen by imposition of hands enioyned penance 119. Abstinence from certaine meates prescribed 175. Amen and Alleluia anciently vsed 206. Ancient way to be followed Pref. p. 31. Angels and Archangels are different Orders 25. They are present at the sacrifice of the Masse 95. Answeare in general to such obiections as are vrged from Fathers 254. Antichrist one man 187. 272. He shal come from the Iewes 188. Not before the vtter ruine of the Roman Empyre 188. 271. He is to continue but 3. yeares and a halfe 272. 189. Altars anciently vsed for sacrifice 290. Altars consecrated with the signe of the Crosse and oyle 110. Miracles wrought therat 221. S. Austin him selfe a Monke before the Pref. to the King and 183. Sundry his writinges reiected by Prot. are defended Pref. p. 23. Him selfe commended by Fathers and Prot. 3. The age wherin he liued likewise commended 5. Prot. chalenge S. Austin to be of their religion 5. B BAptisme taketh away al sinnes 68. 273. Children dying without it are not saued 71. 274. Laye persons in case of necessity may baptise 72. 275. Obiections against it answeared 234. Ceremonies of Baptisme aunciently vsed 73. 275. Bigami hindred from holy Orders 135. Bishops haue ciuil Iurisdiction 123. their blessing 125. The Pelagians impugning it reproued 127. They are in dâ—grees aboue Preistes 126. They onely consecrate Virgins and