and the Hebrue Greeke Apostles also as Athenians But now sixe yeares triall hath taught that it is one thinge to dreame of tongues an other to knowe them And now they are said to be at a stand And would willingly giue ouer but that the Kings authoritie requireth an end But that your most learned Maiestie may se what is to be hoped for from them least the Churches be forced to buy bables for the word of God I will in few words deleuer that it may appeace that such pore students are not to be suffered to lest with the Kinge and the flocke Hitherto this greate linguists oration his exceptions are to tedious to be recited Onely because these men haue so magnified the Hebrue text of the old testament in respect of the septuaginta and vulgare Latine now this greate searcher of Hebrue monuments can heare onely for hee neuer se either of them of two perfect Hebrue copies of the old testament in all the world and both they be in the Iewes custodye one in Hierusalem and the other at Nehardegh in Mosopotamia Veteris testamenti duo exemplaria tam accurata atque mens humana prouidere potuit seruantur à Iudaeis Hierosolymis alterum alterum Nehardeghae in Mesopotamia Then if wee haue no better comfort from these Hebritians for a true Hebrue text then that England neither hath had or can procure any and none is to be had but from our Enemyes the Iewes and yet if they could procure a true copie which they haue not done there is not any one in England by their owne Iudgments able truely to translate it and these last translators were weary of their entreprise and would haue giuen it ouer after sixe yeares experience of their disabilitie but that the Kings Maiesties pleasure was to haue one end or other wee may not easely admitt such translations for holy scriptures nor Religion deduced from them for a true Religion And â—his the rather because since the birth of this new translation it is condemned by their owne approued writeings I will omitt others and onely cite one place out of their late commended history of the world in these Histor of the world l. 1. cap. ◠§. 14. Chron 2. cap. 21. v. 16. The Protest new transl sup words The ill translation of Ethiopia for Chus is amonge other places made moste apparant in the second of Chronicles in these words So the Lord styrred vpp against Iehoram the spiritt of the Philistines and the Arabians which confine the Ethiopians The Geneua translation hath it which were besides the Ethiopians the new English readeth thus more ouer the lord stirred vpp against Iohoram the spiritt of the Philistines and of the Arabians that were neare the Ethiopians Now how farre it is betweene the Philistines and the Negros or Ethiopians euery man that looketh in a mapp may Iudge For hee Philistines and Arabians doe mixt and ioyne with the land of the Chusites and are distant from Ethiopia about two and thirtie or three and thirtie degrees and therefore not their next neighbours but all Egipt and the deserts of Sur and Pharan are betweene them And to aggrauate this matter the more these new Protestant translators takeing vppon them to translate the old testament out of the Hebrue and new out of the Greeke and onely alloweing those texts in words are so farre from performing it in deeds that in the old testament they haue forsaken the Hebrue text diuers thowsands of times as may be proued by their owne merginall obseruations of that matter my leasure was not to recompt them all but in Genesis the first booke they haue thus behaued themselues aboue two hundred tymes and after the same rate in all the rest As in the 5. 20. and 25. chapter of the booke of Iudges fourtye times Fyfteene tymes in Sam. l. 1. cap. 18. in the 2. Booke of Samuel in cap. 22. thirteene times in cap. 1. 7. 18 20. in fower chapters aboue fyfty times in the third booke of Kings And so they deale with the Greeke in the new testament and in the old testament where the scripture is written in the Chaldy and Hebrue mixed as in the time of captiuitie so they vse the Chaldy tongue as in Esra cap. 4. they forsake the Hebrue thrise and the Chaldye eleuen or twelue times in the second chapter of Daniel they leaue it thirteene times in the third chapter twelue times in the 5. chapter neyne times c. and in these and other places where they refuse the originall tonge as for example the Hebrue they doe it not many times to preferre either the vulgare Latine Septuaginâ—a or Syriacke but their owne conceipt and Imagination Yet in places where they forsake the originall to preferre any of the other it is euidently against their owne profession and Religion and in places of their former translations censured by Mr. Gregory Martyne or other English Catholicks they often times neither regard their owne or ours but giue vs new scriptures and reuelations of their owne thoughe not many times in greate matters and so in this multiplication and chaunge of scriptures they haue also multiplied and chaunged Religion deduced from them and for that one Article of their auntient creed I beleeue in the holy ghost may now say by such proceedings wee beleeue in the foure and fourtie English Protestant holy Ghosts For whosoeuer reiect all texts of scripture as their owne marginall obseruations tell vs they doe though as before often not in great things yet sometimes otherwise and deny vnwritten traditions of this kinde must needs be in such estate CHAPTER VI. PROVETH BY THESE PROtestants that the true and Iuridicall exposition of scriptures is against them and for the doctrine of the Romane Church AFTER these I am to entreate of the true lawfull and Iuridicall Exposition of holy scriptures And that it belongeth to the Church of Rome haueing both the true scriptures the true translation of them and it self haueing power and authoritie being the true Church of Christ to propose it to all Christians and not to these Protestants for no companie or congregation of men wanting and denying diuers bookes of scriptures in which diuers Articles of Religion as prayer to Angels their patronadge prayer and sacrifice for the Deade meritt of good workes c. are directly proued not so apparently taught in other scriptures besides followeing and alloweing erroneous and corrupt translations can haue the true and Iuridicall exposition of scriptures especially hauing no Iurisdiction ouer others by their owne graunt But the English Protestants are in this state Therefore they haue not this true lawfull and Iuridicall exposition of scriptures Bothe propositions are graunted before and so nothinge remaineth to be proued in this argument Further I argue thus No priuate Interpretation of scriptures by conference of places and such Rules as Protestants assigne for Interpreteinge scripture is bindeing or iuridicall But all Protestant Expositions in respect of true byndeing
thinke be plurall That whosoeuer by their Interpretations should allowe such absurdities cannot haue the true interpretation of scriptures Now the Minor is easely proued by him also for all men are bownde to obey lawfull superioritie and authoritie such as hee saith a generall Councell hath ouer all Christians in these cases his wordes before cited be these They that haue supreame Feild l. 4. â— 16. pag. 228. power that is the Bishops assembled in a generall Councell may interpret the scripture and by their authoritie suppresse all them that shall gaynesay such Interpretations and subiect euery man that shall disobey such determination as they consent vppon to excommunication and Censures of like nature Wherefore seing generall Councells haue this bindeing and commaundeing power ouer all men by these Protestants and yet by their Article before may erre and haue Art 21. sup erred euen in things pertayning vnto God the whole Christian worlde with so many absurdities may be in this damnable error the Church might cease not be Catholicke Christ Feild pag. 203. should be without a Church which D. Feild before esteemeth greate absurdities Againe thus I argue They which straungely peruert bely depraue abuse and falsefye holy scriptures cannot be thought to be true interpreters of them But M. Parkes so testifieth of our Parkes ag lymbom def of the 1. 2. 3. testim English Protestants Therefore they cannot be thought to be true Interpreters of them Notheing remaineth in this Argument to be proued Further I argue thus No Interpreters or expositors of scripture whose Interpretations be partiall vntrue seditious sauoureing of Treason poysen the Ghospell c. are to be Iudged true and Iuridicall But the English Protestants hy their owne testimonyes be such Therefore not to be iudged true and iuridicall interpreters The Maior is true and euident And the Minor thus proued first by the Protestant Confer at Hampt pag. 47. conference in these wordes The notes annexed to the Geneua translation some are very partiall vntrue seditious and sauoureing toâ— much of daungerous and trayterous conceits Yet these were allowed and published as publicke and approued interpretations An other Protestant writeth in this maner The Bishops Aduerment An. 1604. notes betray our Lord and Redeemer and befoole the rocke of saluation they are the verie poyson to all the Ghospell M. Ormerod writeth thus of his fellowe Ormer pict purit q. 4. Protestants They fill the margents of their bookes full of places of scripture in a wronge sense that by this meanes they might more easely deceaue the simple people They neither care for Maior Minor nor Conclusion so they may say some thinge They point their margents with shamefull abuseing of scripture To these I might add more arguments as that by their owne testimonies they are Hereticks Scismaticks haue no ttue Churche no true Religion and the like as amonge other reasons from themselues why Catholiks may not communicate with them in spirituall and religeous affayres is proued in a late treatise against them I will therefore passe them ouer as allready proued CHAPTER VII WHEREIN BY THESE PROtestants is proued that vnwritten traditions lawfully proued are the word of God equally as the holy scriptures That many such are and all confirme the doctrine of the Church of Rome and condemne Protestants Religion AFTER this entreateinge of holy scriptures the written worde of God lett vs come to that parte of his sacred worde delyuered by traditions and vnwritten verities preserued and proposed to faithfull Christians by the holy spouse and Church of Christ whose Iudgment Rule and direction is so dignified aboue all Inferiour Iudgments by these Protestants before Concerninge the validitie and authoritie of truely proued traditions I argue thus All Rules Groundes and Authorities in matters of Religion that are equall with holy scriptures in the Iudgment of Protestants the highest Rule in such causes are â—eghely to be reuerenced and obeyed of all Christians But the holy traditions and vnwritten verities deliuered by Christ and Apostles being lawfully proued are of this nature Therefore to be reuerenced embraced and receaued The Maior proposition is euidently true for where there is absolute equalitie there is not inferioritie but paritie as is manifest in all equalities The Minor is thus proued in this maner first M. Wotton speakeing of such hath these Wotton def of Perk. pag. 405. pag. 436. supr words out of all question wee are bounde to keepe them and telleth vs that M. Perkins was of the same opinion D. Feild speaketh thus concerninge traditions In this question by tradition wee vnderstand such partes of Christian doctrine or Feild pag. 238. l. 4. cap. 20. discipline as were not written by them by whomâ— they were first deliuered For thus our Aduersaries vnderstand traditions which they diuide into diuers kindes First in respect of the authors so makeing them of three sortes Diuine Apostolicall and Ecclesiasticall Secondly in respect of the matter they concerne in which respect they make them to be of two sortes for either they concerne matters of faiâ—he or matters of manners and these later againe either temporall or perpetuall vniuersall or particular All these in their seuerall kindes they make equall with the words precepts and doctrines of Christ the Apostles and pastors of the Church left vnto vs in writeinge Neither is there any reason why they should not so doe if they could proue any such vnwritten verities For it is not the writeing that giueth things their authoritie but the worthe and credit of him that deliuereth them though by worde and lyuely voyce onely Thus the authoritie of Traditions is iustified by Protestants to be equall with the scriptures if they can be proued Now because Protestants mayntayneinge the sufficiencie of scripture for matters of faith deny traditions of that nature I argue in this maner All Articles and matters of faith are in Protestants Iudgment proued and deliuered to vs by tradition Therefore some articles and matters of faith are in their Iudgment or so must be graunted to be deliuered by tradition The consequence is euident for euery generall proposition includeth the particular The Antecedent is thus proued by them Whosoeuer doe graunte those things which by them conteyne all matters and Articles of faith to be delyuered by tradition must needs allowe traditions in matters of faith But these Protestants doe so Therefore they must allowe such traditions The Maior is euident for whatsoeuer conteineth all excludeth none and so comprehending all comprehendeth also some and the parts of that all The Minor is likewise proued in this maner supposeing the Common opinion of these Protestants set downe in the sixt Article of their Religion Articl of Relig. art 6. in these wordes Holy scripture conteyneth all things necessarie to saluation so that whatsoeuer iâ— not reade thâ—rein nor may be proued thereby is not to be required of any man that it should be beleeued as an Article of the
Whitsontide was generally receaued as a Tradition deliuered by the Apostles then the times themselues not being either commaunded or directly exemplified in scripture must also be allowed by tradition And yet the Sabboth day in the old lawe which was abrogated by this tradition of the Sonday the Lords day as hee nameth it was so expressely commaunded by scripture that in order it is the third of the ten cheife commaundements and one of the first table belongeing to the worshipp of God Therefore a Tradition so powerable as to giue a ceaseinge to the expresse writteÌ„ worde lawe and commaundement of God must needs be of equall power And the Christians feaste of Easter likewise crosseing with and euacuateing the Pascha of the lawe written and without scripture onely by the prerogatiue of Tradition cannot be inferior especially seeing as before the Quartadecâ—mans denyers thereof were condemned as Hereticks by the primatiue Church for that cause And the like reason is of the feast of Whitesontide in the Church of Christ receaued by the same Rule of Easter onely by vnwritten tradition yet clearely abolisheinge and takeinge away the written lawe and word of God in that behalf Further I argue thus whatsoeuer is not a perfect and compleate Rule and Square in matters and questions of Religion without the help and dyrection of vnwritten traditions cannot be termed an absolute Rule in this kinde But the scripture and written worde of God by these Protestants is such Therefore by them no absolute and perfect Rule in matters of faithe The Maior is euidently true in the light of nature otherwise one and the same thinge in the same respect might be absolute and not absolute perfect and not perfect and two Contradictories might be true which is vnpossible The Minor proposition is thus proued by D. Feilde who speakeing of traditions Feild l. 4. cap. 20. pag. 239. vnwritten and yet allowed by him hath these wordes The third kinde of tradition is that forme of Christian doctrine and explication of the seuerall partes thereof which the first Christians receauing of the same Apostles that deliuered to them the scriptures commended to posterities This may rightly be named a tradition for that wee neede a playne and distinct explication of many things which are somewhat obscurely conteyned in the scripture Which is sufficient proofe that tradition vnwritten is the cause why many things are beleeued by faith grownded vppon tradition not written which the scriptures could neuer warrant vs to beleeue For things obscurely handled and not playnely and distinctly explicated which as hee saith is by tradition cannot be the formall obiect of faith by any possibilitie for seeing true certayne and vndoubted Reuelation from God euen by Protestants is the formall cause of beleeueinge things obscurely conteyned or taught cannot haue this priuiledge And yet by D. Feilds wordes many thinges be in this state without the assistance of tradition and yet firmely to be beleeued Therefore not the obscuritie in scripture but to vse his wordes a playne and distinet explication of many thinges by tradition receaued by the first Christians from the Apostles commended to posterities is the formall cause and reason of beleeueinge such verities Now to drawe to an end in this question of traditions D. Feild to his fowre before acknowledged kindes of traditions The holy scriptures the Creede of the Apostles the forme Feild pag. 238. l. 4. of Christian doctrine and explication of the seuerall parts thereof which the first Christians receaueinge of the same Apostles that deliuered to them the scriptures commended to posterities and the continued Feild pag. 239. practise of such thinges as neither are conteyned in the scripture expressely nor the example of such practise expressely there deliuered thoughe the growndes reasons and causes of the necessitie of such practise be there conteyned and the benefitt or good that followeth of it hee addeth the fift kinde in these wordes The fift kinde of traditions comprehendeth Feild supr pag. 239. such obseruations as in particulare are not commaunded in scripture nor the necessitie of them from thence concluded though in generall without limitation of times and other circumstances such things be there commaunded Of this sorte many thinke the obseruation of the lent faste to be the faste of the fourthe and the sixt dayes of the weeke and some other This supposed as also the Feild pag. 242. same Protestant Doctors Rules before to know true traditions the consent and doctrine of the Churche the moste renowned for learninge the constant Testimonie of the pastors of an Apostolicke Church amonge which next to generall Feild pag. 202. Councells bynding and commaunding all the Church of Rome is especially to be obeyed reuerenced and respected as moste priuiledged from error yt must needs be euident by these Protestants that Traditions whether deliuered in scripture to be deduced from them or to be receaued without scripture are to be adiudged for the Romane Churche for that before is proued by them to be the true Church of Christ the Pope of Rome to be the supreame commaunding Ruler in it that the scriptures receaued by it are Canonicall and the vndowbted worde of God and all true and Iuridicall expositions and deductions from them are onely for the doctrine of the same Churche of Rome And so their other grounted Rules of generall Councells and Learned Fathers to be handled in the next chapters doe also teach vnto vs the same doctrines by these Protestants for by their Iudgment they may not nor can proceede in such bâ—sines but by the holy scriptures and true expositions and deductions from them allreadie proued by these Protestants for the present Roman Church Therefore I conclude this question with this Arguments following Whatsoeuer doctrines in Religion generall Councells the highest binding and commaunding Rule and authoritie ouer all Christians in the Iudgment of Protestants haue defined by the Bishops and Fathers assembled in them in matters of Religion by traditions written or vnwritten are to be receaued and embraced of all But all or the cheefest Articles in question betweene Catholicks and Protestants are directly concluded by the grounte of these Protestants by the Councells and Bishops in them assembled at Nyce the seconde the greate Laterane Florence and Constance Basile cited and allowed for generall Councells by the Protestant Bishop of Winchester D. Bilson D. Willet D. Couell M. Bils Middlet papist â—9 119. 120. 124. 125. Willet synop cont 1. q. 7. Liniban ap Parkes and others in such maner as the present Church of Rome now teacheth Therefore they ought so to be receaued and embraced of all Christians bothe propositions are graunted before by these Protestants or in these citations Therefore nothinge remayneth to be proued in this Argument And because these Protestants Parkes pag. 137. 180. Couell def of Hook pag. 21. Parkes ag lymb pag. 176. Willet Antil pag. 178. c. Abbot ag Hill pag 38. 48. 49. 51.
there bounds there were three principall Bishops or Patriarkes of the Christian Churche namely the Bishop of Rome Alexandria and Antioche After which time Constantinople before named Bizantium made greate by Constantine and being the seate of the Emperors the Bishops of this See not onely obtayned to haue the dignitie of a Patriarche amonge the rest but in the second generall Counâ—â—ll holden at Constantinople was preferred before bothe the other of Alexandria and Antioche and sett in degree of honor next vnto the Bishop of Rome Hitherto See D. Feild l. 4. c. 5. pag. 202. clearely allowtâ—e Popes sentence to be greatest next to a generall Councell It is cited in the next chapter D. Feild by which discourse of his there is euident demonstration made that the priuiledge of the Bishop of Rome was not giuen him by generall Councells but hee had it before the first Nicene Councell the first generall Secondly that it was the moste principall that was in the Christian Church for of the twoe moste principall Churches â—atine and Greeke to vse his words the Latine the moste principall was vnder him thirdly hee was from the begynninge preferred before the Patriarches of Alexandria and Antioche and Constantinople in so much that for Constantinople claymeing after to be cheefe hee calleth it a pretended Title Feild sup pag 62. and false and further his words of the Bishops of Constantinople be these The mognificence and glorie of his citie dayly encreaseinge hee challenged to be superior and would be namâ—d vniuersall B. not challengeing to himself to be B. alone but enchroacheinge vppon the Right of all other and thereby declareinge Himself greater and more honorable then any of the rest and the cheife Bishop of the whole worlde Hitherto his words of the encreacheing and vsurpation of that Bishop Then by his sentence the Pope of Rome still was cheife and obtayned by right the primacie in the whole Christian Church And this cheefnes and primacie as D. Couell hath told before must needs be supreamacie for no other could haue it and D. Downame alsoe hath acknowledged Down l. 1. Ant. pag. 36. that both the Emperor and generall Councell attributed to the Pope of Rome in the primatiue Church to be heade of the Churche the greatest stile in his Iudgment and it must needs be if as it is amonge all members of the bodie the heade is cheife supreame and most excellent Lett vs add to this twoe sentences of D. Feild the one concerninge the authoritie of Traditions in these words There is no reason why traditions or vnwritten verities should not be made equall Feild pag. 238. with the words precepts and doctrines of Christ the Apostles and Pastors of the Church left vnto vs in writeinge if they could proue any such vnwritten verities for it is not the writeinge that giueth things their authoritie But the worthe and creditt of him that deliuereth them though by word and lyuely voyce onely And after delyuering three Rules Feild pag. 242. how to knowe certaynely these so authorized traditions and vnwritten verities hee speaketh in this maner The third Rule is the constant testimonie of the Pastors of an Apostolicall Churche succeedeingly deliuered To which some add the present Testimonye of any Apostolicall Churche whose declynings when they began wee cannot precisely tell Hitherto the words of this Protestant Doctor of the authoritie of traditions equall to scriptures being proued by this his Rule Then if the opinion of these some his Protestants by his maner of argueinge teacheing that the present testimonie of an Apostolicke Church is sufficient Rule to proue true traditions of so high authoritie not onely this Catholique doctrine of the Popes supreamacie and commaunding power but all other doctrines taught against these Protestants of necessitie must needs be true by this Rule for they all being the doctrines of the present Church of Rome the first and principall Apostolicke Church must needs be iustified by the Testimonie of an Apostolicke Church at this present when they ar taught by it And this is sufficient for my purpose for so that some Protestants be of this opinion it is as much as I request and doe not desire or expect D. Feilds voyce or an harmony of Protestants neuer yett agreeing well in any thinge to be all of one mynde in this matter But to vrdge this particular question in hand of the Popes supreamacie by that Rule of traditions which hee alloweth which is The constant testimonie of the Pastors of an Apostolicke Churche succeedingly deliuered It is proued by these Protestants before that the Pastors of that greatest Apostolicke Church euen from the Apostle S. Peter haue succeedingly claymed taught decreed exercised and executed that highest power of supreamacie in all parts of the knowne worlde And yett for further proofe of my Minor proposition Mr. Powell writeth of these holy primatiue Powell l. 1. Antichrist pag. 230. 231. Popes followeing in this maner Calixtus Pope defined that all Bishops thoughe gathered in a generall Councell shall fullfill the will of the Churche of Rome They which doe not this ar pronownced of Pope Pelagius to keepe a Conciliable and not a Councell And againe in these wordes Powell sap pag. 240. Pope Damasus wrote that it is not lawfull for the Bishopps to doe any thinge against the decrees of the Bishops of Rome Therefore by these Protestants The Pope of Rome of right is and of all ought to be acknowledged and admitted for the supreame heade and Ruler of the Church of Christ And this being thus vnuincibly proued by these English Protestants themselues our mortall enemyes and persecutors I conclude with their owne words graunted before vppon such triall and conuiction That the Pope and the Offer of Conference pag. 16. Church of Rome and in them God and Christ Iesus himself haue had greate wronge and Indignitie offered vnto them in that they ar reiected and that all the Protestant Churches arre scismaticastin forsakeinge vnitie and communion with them Which D. Feild must alsoe Iustifie affirminge as Feild l. 4. c. 5. pag. 202. shall be cited at lardge in the next chapter that the Iudgment of the Pope of Rome or Church of Rome is one of the greatest in this world and as greate disobedience to resist or deny it which is euident alsoe before but more of it hereafter Now lett vs come to the New Protestants historie it self maliciously by their Bishops published against the Church of Rome First entreateing of the conuersion of this kingedome to the faith of Christ they sett downe this marginall supposition in these Theater of the Empire of greate Britanie pag. 203. cap. 9. n. 5. wordes Saint Peter the Apostle supposed to haue preached in Britaine And further write as followeth To which vncontrolable testimonie some others haue added that Saint Peter the Apostle preached the worde of life in this Iland as to other gentils hee did for whome God had
faithe or be thought requisite or necessarie to saluation Now to proue my second proposition D. Feild will testifie that both these scriptures and the right order of deductions from them in matters of faith are deliuered vnto vs by tradition onely his â—ordes be these Much contention there hath Feild l. 4. pag. 238. cap. 20. beene about traditions some vrgeing the necessitie of them and other reiecting them For the cleareing whereof wee must obserue that wee reiect not all for first wee receaue the number and names of the Authors of bookes diuine and canonicall as deliuered by tradition This tradition wee admitt The number Authors and integritie of the partes of these bâ—okeâ— wee receaue as deliuered by tradition Thus much for the scriptures that their number Authors partes and euery chapter verse and sentence is by tradition Then their pretended deductions from thence must needs be such for in euery theologicall Syllogisme they must needs take eyther the one or both propositions from this graunted tradition and their conclusion must much rather be tradition as also the maner of deduceing for they graunt they are not expressely in scripture and to decide this D. Feild wittnesseth againe in this order The Feild sup pag. 238. 239. seconde kinde of tradition which wee admitt is that summarie comprehension of the cheife heades of Christian doctrine conteyned in the Creede of the Apostles which was deliuered to the Churche as a Rule of her faith The orderly connexion and distinct explication as these principall Articles gathered into an Epitome iâ— rightly named a tradition And howsoeuer hee will contend that the Articles are in scripture or may thence be deduced in which his fellowes in Religion hereafter will giue him deniall for Christs discendeing into Hell communion of Saincts and others yet hee must needs graunt that the Creede of the Apostles being composed by them and deliuered to the Church as a Rule of her faith before the scriptures of the new testament wherein hee will say it is conteyned were written is absolutely a Tradition And yet hee maketh it so absolute a thinge that to vse his wordes in it are implyed and whence are inferred all conclusions Theologicall But that the Feild supr cap. 20. true explication also of scripture is a tradition hee wittnesseth in these wordes The third is that forme of Christian doctrine and explication Feild pag. 239. of the seuerall partes thereof which the first Christians receauinge of the same Aposiles that deliuered to them the scriptures commended to posterities This may right be named a tradition for that wee neede a playne and distinct explication of many things which are somewhat obsâ—urely conteyned in the scripture Therefore seing these deductions from scripture are not without tradition and thinges obscurely conteyned may not be receaued as articles of Religion by them without a playne and distinct explication by tradition and the playne things of scripture by them before as also that epitome of our faith the Apostles Creede are traditions it is manifestly proued that all Articles and matters of faith are by tradition by these their writeings Further I argue thus whatsoeuer doctrine is of that necessitie that the denyall Feild 〈…〉 obstinately is Heresie must needs be a matter of faith and necessarie to saluation But by these Protestants there is such doctrine onely by tradition Therefore some matters of faith and necessarie to saluation are beleeued onely by tradition The Maior proposition is euidently true yet further confirmed by these Protestants D. Couells Couell exam pag 202. Ormer dial 2. wordes be these Hereticks are neyther simple Infidells nor Idolaters but obstinately erringe in some fundamentall poynt M. Ormerod writeth thus hee is an Hereticke which so swarueth from the wholesome doctrine as contemning the Iudgment both of God and the Church persisteth in his opinion Thus wee see that Heresie is not without deniall of a matter of faith wherein both the Iudgment of God and the Churche is contemned The Minor is proued by D. Feild in this maner where first to vse his wordes hee alloweth for a cleare Instance not to be proued by Feild pag. 240. scripture the perpetuall virginitie of Mary and after confesseth that Hiluedius for pertinatiousely deniall thereof was condemned of Heresie In that hee saith this is no point of Christian faith but a Feild sup cap. 20. seemely truthe deliuered vnto vs by the Church of God fitting the sanctitie of the blessed Virgin and the honor due to so sanctified a vessell of Christs Incarnation as her bodie was hee speaketh truely in allowing it for a Tradition but denying it to be any point of Christian faith and yet telling vs that Heluidius for deniall of 〈◊〉 was condemned of Heresie hee both contradicteth himself the truth and his fellowe Protestants before assureing that Hereticks be they that obstinately erre in fundamentall points as D. Couell writeth or as M. Ormerod noteth swarue from the wholesome doctrine as contenininge the Iudgment both of God and the Church Where it is euident that a matter of faith is denied in euerye Heresie and also that things deliuered onely by tradition as D. Feild acknowledgeth the perpetuall virginitie of our blessed Ladie to be are the worde and Iudgment of God Further these Protestants seeme to condemne the Anabaptists and denyers of the necessitie to baptise Infants yet D. Feild writeth thus Feild pag. 239. The foarth kinde of Tradition is the coÌ„tinued practise of such things as neyther are conteyned in the scripture expressely nor the example of such practise expressely there deliuered Of this sorte is the baptisme of Infants which is therefore named a tradition because it is not expressely deliuered in the scripture that the Apostles did baptize Infants nor any expresse precept there found that they shoulde doe it And his wordes of the plurall signification The fourth kinde of traditions such things of this sorâ—eâ— c. are sufficient argument that hee alloweth diuers other Traditions of this nature That which he addeth wee fynde the scripture to delyuer the grounds of it is expressely Feild pag. 228. Couell def of Hook pag. 85. against himself before and D. Couell thus assureing vs in these wordes doctrines deriued exhortations deducted Interpretationâ— agreeable are not the worde of God and D. Feild Feild supr pag. 226. priuate Interpretation is not so proposed and vrged as if they woulde binde all others to receaue it Yet all men are bownde to receaue and firmely beleeue articles and matters of faithe Further D. Willet telleth vs that Vigilantius Willet Antilog pag. 13. was condemned of Heresie for denying reuerence to Relickes and yet Protestants generally teach that doctrine is not conteyned in holy scriptures D. Feild writeth Feild pag. 138. l. 3. cap. 29. in these wordes Aerius condemned the custome of the Churche in nameing the deade at the altare and offeringe the sacrifice of the Eucharist for them For this his
teach that those doctrines are not conteyned in or to be proued by scriptures consequently they defined them by vnwritten traditions of equall authoritie with scripture by D. Feild before being so adiudged allowed and approued by that highest commaunding sentence in the Churche of Christ But of generall Councells I am to entreate in the next chapter In the meane time I vrdge onely this one particular of the highest authoritie and gouermnent in the Church by tradition as these Protestants assure vs and I argue thus Whosoeuer defend and teach that which they thinke to be the highest authoritie and function spirituall in the Church without which the word of God cannot be truelâ— preached nor Sacraments duely ministred the essentiall things of the true Church by the Protestants Religion to be an vnwritten Tradition needs must allowe of vnwritten traditions necessarie to saluation But these English Protestants case is such Therefore they must allowe vnwritten traditions necessary to saluation The Maior proposition is euidently true and the Minor thus proued by them The Protestant Author of the offer of conference Offer of confer pag. 12. writeth thus The Bishop of Rochester with the consent and by the direction no doubt of some of the cheefest Prelates hath published his sermon preached before the Kinge at Hampton Court the mayne drift whereof is to proue that the offiâ—e and câ—lling of Bishops is a diuine and Apostolicall ordinance And againe in these words vnwritten ordinances Pag. 34. sup aswell as written or dyuine and Apostoliâ—ke in the constitution of the cheefest office and ministery of the Church D. Couell hath testified the same for himself before and their Bishop Barlowe Barlowe Ser. Sept. 21. 1606. before the Kinge his words before the Kinge and with publicke applause are these of this matter First posuit actu hee acted it by the hands of the Apostles and so the Episcopall function is an ordinance Apostolicall hee hath enacted it for succeeding posteritie and so it is a canon or constitution of the whole Trinitie It is Geographia agraphos vnwritâ—en Housbandrie whereof there is no written precept or Rule from Christ Irenaeus calleth it an Apostolicall tradition manifest to all the worlde To these lett vs add some Protestant testimonies how from the first creation of the world all Articles of Religion for many hundreds of yeares and afterward many cheife and necessarie points thereof were taught and deliuered by tradition without scripture And I will onely cite their late worke Historye of the world much commended Histor of the world lib. 1. pag. 180. and approued amonge them Of the practice and deliuery of Religion thus they write That the Rule in generall was paternall it is most euident for Adam being Lord. Ouer his owne children instructed them in the seruice of God his Creator as wee reade Cayne and Abel brought oblations before God as they had beene taught by their parent the Father of mankinde Their sixt treatise or Paragrah in that first booke is Lib. 1 §. 6. pag. 78. thus intituled of the Patriarkes deliueringe their knowledge by tradition And write in these wordes if wee consider the curiositie and polecie of elder ages wee shall finde that knowledg was the greatest treasure that men sought for and which they also couered and hid from the vulgare sort as Iewells of inestimable price feareing the irreuerent construction of the Ignorant and irreligeous so as whatsoeuer was attayned vnto concerning God and his workeinge in nature the same was not left to publicke dispute but deliuered ouer by hart and tradition from wise men to posteritie equally zelous ex animo in animum sine literis medio intercedente Dion Areop verbo from minde to minde without letters by way of Tradition or worde of mouthe And it was thought by Esdras Origen and Hilarius as Mirandula conceiueth that Moses did not onely vppon the mount receaue the lawe from God but withall secretiorem veram legis enarrationem a more secrett and true explanation of the lawe which saith hee out of the same Authors hee deliuered by mouth to Iosuah and Iosuah to the Elders for to teach these misteries which hee called secretiora to the rude multitude were no other quam dare sanctum canibus to cast pearls before swyne In succeeding times this vnderstandinge and wisedome began to be written in Cyphers and Characters and letters bearing the forme of beasts birds and other creatures and to be taught onely to such as serued in their temples and to their Kings and preists Of the first the Cabala of the Iewes was Pag. 79. an imitation This Cabala importeth a lawe receaued by Tradition and vnwritten Cabala in Hebrue is Receptio in Latine and a receauing in English If then such as would seeme wisest in the vse of reason will not acknowledge that the story of the creation or begynning of all things was written by Inspiration the holy Ghost guiding the hand of Moses yet it is manifest that thâ— knowledge thereof might by tradition then vsed be deliuered vnto him by a more certaine presumption then any or all the testimonies which prophane antiquitie had preserued and left to their successors For leauing to remember that Adam instructed Seth and Seth his children and Successors which cannot be doubted of it is manifest that Mathusalem liued together with Adam himself 243 yeares and Noah with Mathusalem no lesse then 500 yeares and before Noah died Abraham was 58. yeares old from whence this knowledge by an easy and ordinary way might come to Israel and so to Moses And to cleare all doubts and obiections these Protestants proue vnto vs. That the very binding and obligatory precepts of God themselues were thus deliuered and obserued onely by vnwritten traditions They intitle the 8. § of their second booke Histor sup libr. 2. cap. 4. §. 4. in this maner Of the vnwritten lawe of God giuen to the Patriarkes by tradition And thus they add The Patriarkes of the first age receaued many precepts from God himself and whatsoeuer was first imposed by Adam the same was obserued by Seth who instructed Enos from whom it succeeded to Noah Sem Abraham Isaac Iacob Ioseph and Moses Yea many particular commaundements afterward written were formerly imposed and diliuered ouer by tradition which kinde of teacheinge the Iewes afterward called Cabala precept receaued from the mouth of their preists and Elders to which the Iewes after the lawe written added the Interpretation of secret misteryes reserued in the bosomes of their preists and vnlawfull to be vttered to the people But the true Cabala was not to be concealed from any as being in deed the diuine lawe reuealed to the Patriarkes and from them diliuered to posteritie when as yet it was vnwritten And entreating how after letters and writing was inuented and many reuealed misteries so recorded yet men must still maintayne traditions vnwritten and instruction from them they exemplifie in this order out of S.
The Maior or first proposition is euidently true otherwise God hath bownde man to followe and embrace heresie or error of necessitie hee must bee damned without all hope of saluation except heresie false opinions error or infidelitie could bringe to heauen which is against the holy Scriptures true Religion which by no possibilitie can either bee vntrue or vncertayne being reueled by God himselfe and against the light of reason it selfe that men vnder penaltie of damnation should bee tyed to bee obedient to that sentence for obedience whereof they were likewise assured to bee damned which is to accuse God moste mercifull of the greatest Tyranny The Minor or second proposition is proued and the first also in this words of D. Feild D. Feild epist dedicat before hiâ— bookes of the Churche There is no parte of heauenly doctrine more necessarie in this dayes of so many intricate controuersies of Religion then diligently to searche out which amonge all the socities of men in the worlde is that blessed companie of holy ones that housthold of faithe that spouse of Christ and Church of the liueing God which is the piller and grownde of truthe That see they may embrace her communion followe her directions and rest in her Iudgment Hitherto the wordes of this Protestant Doctor by which is euidently concluded the moste certayne truthe of those two Propositions in the Argument before But to auoyde all friuolous obiections and distinctions of these men concerninge the Church generall particular triuÌ„phant militant c. Hee playnely affirmeth that this supreame and infallible iudge is the present militant Church in tymes of controuersies as is demonstrated by this his words Which amonge all the societies of men in the worlde is that blessed companie of holy ones c. Where his words societies of men and in the worlde are manifest testimonie that hee assigneth the present militant Church on earthe and no other to haue this supreame and infallible authoritie and Iudgment to decide controuersies which is alsoe proued by all the rest of the Protestant citations in this chapter hereafter And if their words were not so cleare that they cannot bee wrested otherwise yett the Question it selfe doth make it manifest for all the faithfull people that euer were and be now in many thowsands deceased out of this life cannot now be assembled in a Cowncell to giue sentence And much lesse can they that are not yett borne be so gathered together to pronownce Iudgment and yett all this belonge vnto and ar or shall bee members of the vniuersall Churche further this is conuinced by his cited words That householde of faith which cannot bee possibly ment but onely of the militant Church For in the triumphant Church seeing God in himselfe and truely and perfectly knoweinge without beleefe all sacred misteries faith as the Apostle saith is euacuated in them and turned into knowledge and as for those that ar not yett borne though hereafter in their time ordayned they at truely to beleeue yett now they neither haue faith nor knowledge of any thinge nor any other qualitie or any being at all Thirdly this is euident also in his laste words Embrace her communion followe her directions and rest in her Iudgment Which Protestants will not and cannot meane of the triumphant Churche and by no possibilitie can either bee vnderstoode or verefied of the true beleeuers to come hereafter and not yett produced into this life for this as yett haueing no essence or beeinge for themselues can haue no communion giue no directions nor pronownce Iudgment for vs now extant to embrace and followe And this is inuincibly further proued in the Arguments followeinge Therefore secondely I argue thus That which hath Authoritie in controuersies of Religion to define what is true and good to ouerrule all inferiour and particular Iudgments and bynde all men to beleeue and embrace the definitions thereof must needs bee of Infallible Iudgment and haue the supreame and highest power to commaunde and no man to disobey yt But the true Churche of Christ is such Therefore it hath Infallible Iudgment the highest power on earth and may not bee disobeyed but in all thinges to bee obeyed by all people The maior proposition is euidently true for Authoritie is to bee obeyed by all subiects otherwise it were not authoritie And there were non to commaunde non to bee obedient And definitions in matters of faithe as they must bee moste certayne vndoubted and infallible as euery article of faithe is and of necessitie must needs bee So they ar as firmely to bee beleeued and professed except wee will bee Hereticks and obstinately incur damnation The seconde proposition is thus proued by D. Couell who writeth of the Church in this Couell def of hooke pag. 30. wordes That whiâ—h by her ecclesiasticall authoritie shee shall probably thinke and define to bee true or good must in congruitie of reason ouer rule all other inferiour Iudgments whatsoeuer And to them that out of a singularitie of their owne aske vs why wee thus hange our Iudgments on the Churches sleeue wee answere with Sâ—lonion â—wo ar better then one For euen in matters of lesse moment it was neuer thought safe to neglect the Iudgment of manye and rashlie to followe the fancye and opinion of some fewe Hitherto this Protestant doctor directly proueinge the second proposition for which hee is cited which also is confirmed by the Arguments followinge Thirdly I argue thus whatsoeuer hath authoritie from Christ to approue the scriptures to bee a speciall grownde in the matter of scriptures to publishe and commaund to her children in Matters of Religion is the higest Iudge and of Infallible Iudgment But the true Churche of Christ is such Therefore it is the highest Iudge and infallible in Iudgment The Maior proposition is euidently proued and confessed before and of all men cannot bee excepted against by Protestants commonly attributeing the highest and consequently infallible Iudgement to the scriptures for if they haue their allowance and Infallibilitie soe much as belongeth vnto vs and our knowledge from the authoritie and approbation of the Churche The Church so giueing them allowance and warrant of Infallibilitie must needs bee as much or more Infallible at leaste concerninge vs in which maner wee dispute accordeinge to that Rule of Logicke Propter quod vnumquodque tale illud magis That which is the cause why any thinge is so is rather so it self Which is euident thus in this case For if the scriptures so much as appertayneth to our knowledge haue not approbation and Infallibilitie of truthe but at they at approued and published for such by the Churche This Church which so giueth them such allowance and warrant of Infallibilitie must needs likewise bee infallible which thoughe it needeth not confirmation being iustified by a Maxime in the light of nature may yett for Protestants bee further made manifest by the Protestant Author of the Assertion who to proue the ministery of
CHAPTER IIII. WHEREIN BY THESE Protestants is proued that all Bookes of scripture receaued for such by the Church of Rome ar canonicall That the Protestants also haue either no scriptures at all or vncertaine and doubtfull and no true Canon of them THvs haueinge demonstratiuely proued by these our English Protestants that the true Church of Christ is of that byndeinge and commaunding authoritie power and priuiledge That There is no saluation remission of synnes or Hope of eternall life out of the Churche it is the blessed companie of holy ones household of faith spouse of Christ piller and grawnd of truthe her communion is to be embraced directions followed Iudgment rested in to ouerrule all Inferior Iudgment whatsoeuer c. And that bothe the present Churche of Rome is this so excellent and enfraunchised societie and the Pope and Bishop thereof supreame heade and spirituall gouernor ouer the whole Christian worlde all other Questions against these ProtestaÌ„ts ar all readie determined by them for the Church and Pope of Rome So that nothing is further needfull to be disputed in this busines eyther of scriptures or any other matter in controuersy yet for particular satisfaction to all in all particulars I will proceede and first for the Bookes of holy scriptures and argue these first in generall Whatsoeuer Bookes ar proposed vnto vs by the true Church of Christ and the supreame Gouernor thereof to be canonicall scripture ar for such to be embraced and reuerenced But all Bookes allowed for canonicall by the Church of Rome at this present be such Therefore so to be embraced and reuerenced The Maior proposition is euident before by the priuiledges of the true Church recited in generall and not onely so but in particular also concerninge the authoritie of the true Church in approueinge and proposeinge holy scriptures for Mr. Wotton hath thus testified for Wotton â—ef of Perk pag. 442. Protestants The Iugdment of the Church wee are so far from discreditinge that wee Holde it for a very speciall grownde in this matter of scriptures And D. Couell hath these conuinceing Couell against Burg. pag. 60. words The Church of Christ accordeing to her authoritie receaued from him hath warrant to approue the scriptures to acknowledge to receaue to publish and commaunde vnto her children And to make it euident that this priuiledge by these Protestants cannot be attributed or ascribed to any other Church then the Church of Rome they haue before confessed that neuer any other Church but that onely exceptinge the Church of Constantinople pretended Title much lesse enioyed it to this supreamacie to propownde scriptures or make decrees and lawes to the whole Church and the children thereof and the clayme thereof in that behalf was but pretended and vsurped and now is by their desolation left desolate And to make this the next argument and others more cleare I will in this place recite the words of D. Feild wherein to omitt the Holy scriptures because they in no place tell vs which be or be not canonicall scriptures But wee ar as these Protestants before haue told vs and shall more particularely testifie Hereafter in this chapter to receaue them from the Church of Christ That wee may knowe whome moste to trust and obey in this and such matters of controuersy hee writeth thus haueing spoken of the Church before Hither Feild pag. 202. l. 4. c. 5. wee may referre those different degrees of obedience which wee must yeeld to them that commaunde and teache vs in the Church of God excellently described and sett downe by Waldensis Wee Waldens doct Fidei l. 2. art 2. 3. p. 27. must saith hee reuerence and respect the authoritie of all Catholicke Doctors whose doctrynes and writeings the Church alloweth wee must more regard the authoritie of Catholicke Bishops more then these the authoritie of the Apostolicke Churches amongst them more especially the Church of Rome of a generall Councell more then all these Hitherto D. Feilds allowance that this sentence is excellent Therefore soeinge Protestants neuer had nor can haue as they haue testified before any generall Councell and deny all Councells to be generall which Catholikes alledge for this Question of the Bookes of scriptures and others also They ar bownde to be obedient to that sentence next vnto them which D. Feild here hath told vs to be the Iudgment of the Church of Rome or Pope of Rome which hath defined and allowed the catholicke doctrine for the Bookes of canonicall scripture as alsoe other questions as all Protestants acknowledge Otherwise they ar in one of highest degrees of disobedience that is in this world as his words before are wittnesse For hee alloweth it for an excellent direction for this present time and state of controuersies And yett if he would contend which hee neither doth nor can being allowed for this present time to drawe it to the dayes of Thomas Waldensis disputing against Witcliffe their Brother in Religion as they write and resisting the Popes authoritie it maketh nothing for his excuse for if Witcliffe as they say was of their Religion the case betweene Waldensis and him was the same which now is with my self and other Catholicks writinge against these Protestants Brethren and Associates in Religion vnto Wickliffe and his Adherents This supposed I make the like Argument againe in this maner Whatsoeuer bookes ar proposed for canonicall scripture by the true Church ar the highest Rule that can be had or fownde in time of controueâ—sie ar to be receaued for holy scriptures But all those Bookes which the present Romane Church alloweth ar so proposed Therefore to be receaued for holy scriptures The Maior proposition is euidently true otherwise all Christians in such times must needs be perplexed in the cheifest matter of Religion by Protestants the scriptures themselues which cannot be for so contradictories might bothe be true The highest Rule ought to be followed the highest Rule ought not to be followed Which be contradictorie It ought to be followed because it is our Rule and the best that can be assigned it ought not to be followed because it is false and deceatefull And no man can be so bownde vnder damnation to followe a false Rule And concerninge the authoritie of the Church in this case it is further confirmed by these Protestant sentences D. Couells words be Couell def of Hook pag. 31. these The Church of Rome teacheth no badd opinion to affirme that the scriptures are holy and diuine in themselues but so esteemed by vs for the authoritie of the Churche And againe That the scriptures ar true wee haue it from the Church And further thus The Church hath fowre Couell sup pag. 32. 33. singular offices towards the scripture First to be of them as it were a faithefull Register Secondly to discerne and Iudge betweene false and adulterate and that which is true and perfect The third to publish and diuulge to proclayme as a cryer the true edict
them Apochypha is vtterly ouerthowne For an opinion fownded vppon old Iewish Cauills against Christians singularly held or renewed reclaymed by the Author and generally giâ—â—ing offence as these Protestants affirme this was is not probable to be true D. Couell against Burges the Puritane answeareth the obiections against these Couell ag Burges pag. 8â— 86. 87. 88. 89 90. 91. bookes as Catholickes doe And sheweth that these bookes haue without cause beene accused of faultes by Protestants onely to deny them to be canonicall as Catholicks esteeme them And further hee addeth thus They ar moste true and might haue the reconcilement Couell sup pag. 87. of other scriptures And againe in these wordes If Russinus be not deceaued they were approued as parts of the old testament by the Apostles For when S. Hierome writt so scornefully of the historie of Susanna and the songe of the three children hee chargeth him therein to haue robbed the treasure of the holy ghost and diuine Instrument which the Apostles deliuered to the Churches And S. Hierome whoe is not vsually slowe to defend himself leaueth that point vnansweared pretending that what hee had spoken was not his owne opinion but what the Iewes obiected And for his paynes in translateing the booke of Iudith which Protestants deny hee giueth this reason because wee reade that the Councell of Nyce did reckon it in the number of holy scriptures Hitherto D. Couells words and much like vnto this of Russinus hee citeth from S. Augustine S. Ciprian and others Temporibus Apostolorum proximis in the next ages to the time of the Apostles And thus wee see how weake that Protestant Religion is that by their owne testimonie is fownded vppon so singular new reuiued Iewish Cauills disclaymed and generally offensyue and disliked opinion From hence I argue further All Bookes which were approued by the Apostles for parts of the old testament were the treasure of the holy ghost and diuine Instrument which the Apostles deliuered to the Churches which ar moste true and might haue reconcilement of other scriptures ar to be allowed for such But all these things ar verified of bookes which these Protestants deny and by themselues as is cited from them before Therefore ar to be allowed for canonicall scriptures bothe propositions be graunted by these Protestants before and so in this argument nothing remayneth to be proued And againe thus I argue whatsoeuer a generall Councell in the primatiue Church the highest Rule by Protestants before to approue scriptures and bynde all men vnto the definitions of it receaued for scripture ought to be receaued for such But more bookes then Protestants allowe were so receaued as these Protestants tell vs Therefore more are to be admitted Both propositions ar here also graunted before by Protestants and so the Argument concludeth truely against them Further I argue thus Those Bookes which the Iewes before and at the comminge of Christ for their greatest or greate part dwelleing out of Iury vsed as parts of the old testament and deliuered as a canon to the Christian Churches and were Ioyned in one volume read by them of the Latine Church then the acknowledged true Churche of Christ and were receaued in the third Carthagenian Councell which was confirmed in the sixt generall Councell ar now to be receaued and allowed for canonicall scriptures But those bookes which Protestants denie and Catholicks allowe be such Therefore they ar to be now allowed for canonicall The Maior proposition is euidently true for if the Iewes before and at the commeing of Christ the primatiue Christians of that time and their practice the authoritie of the true Church of Christ the moste principall Church before by D. Feild and other Protestants a fomous prouinciall Councell and the confirmation of a generall Councell ar not to be admitted to direct and instruct vs there is no meanes left for instruction in this case these beinge by these Protestants before the greatest warrants and Rules wee can haue in such causes The second proposition is proued in this manen D. Feild haueing spoken how the Hebrue Iewes had made their Hebrue canon accordeing to their Iewish reckoninge of the number of their letters how probably I leaue to Hebritians and may not now entreate hee concludeth thus These onely did Feild l. 4. c. 23. pag. 245. the auncient Church of the Iewes receaue as diuine and canonicall Neither much meruaile all the others being the last that were written and in the time of their decayeing state and afflictions Of these hee writeth thus in the next words That other bookes were added vnto Feild sup these whose authoritie not being certayne and knowne ar called Apocryphall fell out on this sortè The Iewes in their later times before and at the Act. 6. c. gloss ordinar lyr in eandem locum comminge of Christ were of two sortes some properly and for distinction sake named Hebrâ—es commorant at Hierusalem and in the holy land others named Hellenists that is Iewes of dispersion mingled with the Gretians These had written sundry bookes in Greeke which they made vse of together with other parts of the old testament which they had of the translation of the Septuagint But the Hebrues receaued onely the two and twentie bookes before mentioned Hence it came that the Iewes deliuered a double Canon of the scripture to the Christian Churches Thus wee see that the greatest parte of the Iewes Proselytes and all our of Iurie did add these bookes with the other for scripture vsed them as part of the old testament deliuered them to the Christian Churches as part of the canon of scripture and the primatiue Church consequently so receaued them otherwise they were not thus deliuered Therefore thus farre the Minor proposition is proued for I doe not expect D. Feild to say or not say expressely that these be or be not canonicall but what in true consequence hee must say by his owne graunte before and hereafter Then hee telleth vs they in S. Augustines time were receaued Feild pag. 246. by him the fathers of third Councell of Carthage and Innocentius then Pope of Rome in the best estate of that Church when it was as before by Protestants Kings speach sup a Rule vnto all in the catalogue of canonicall scriptures Now that the Canons of this Carthagenian Councell were confirmed in the sixt generall Councell holden at Trallo to vse his words and which Protestants acknowledge Feild l. 4. cap. 23. pag. 258. for a generall Councell their highest Rule hee testifieth after in the same chapter Neither is his exception because the Laodicean Councell which nameth not all Ob. them is there also confirmed of any purpose Answ for that generall Councell by Protestants approueing and confirminge bothe that which named them for canonicall and that doth not name them all must needs confirme them for canonicall otherwise against supposition this Councell of Carthage had not beene confirmed as they teach it was Further I
rash and inconsiderate holdenes and presumption in condemninge the vniuersall Church of Christ hee was iustely condemned For the practise of the Churche at that time was not euill in any of these things neither doe wee concurre with Aerius in the reprehension of that primatiue and auncient Churche What was this practise of the primatiue Church concerning the deade for deniall whereof Aerius was condemned as D. Feild hath told vs I will recite from other Protestants M. Middleton assureth vs thus Middleton papistom pag. 64. 45. 46. 51. 47. 48. 49. S. Chrisostome taught it to be the Apostles ordinance to pray for the deade it was a tradition in the primatiue Church receaued from the fathers to pray for the deade and begg mercie of God for them The deade were prayed for in the publicke liturgies of Hull Rom. pole pag. 86 Morton Apol. part 1. pag. 273. Basile Chrisostome and Epiphanius The Churche in Epipbanius time vsed to craue mercye for the deade M. Hull saith Leo 15 Leo the pope appointed Masses for the deade D. Morton citeth from Caluine this ipsi veteres preces fundebant pro defunctis The auncient fathers prayer for the deade And to giue finall content to D Feild the sentence of his true Greeke Church is Gennad Schol. def 5. cap. 3. this The doctrine of purgatorie prayer and sacrifice for the deade was a Tradition of the Apostles That which the Latines call Purgatorie they of the Greeke Church name Catharteâ—ion They were onely Scismaticorum sectatores followers of Scismaticks which denied it The seing Protestants doe ordinarily teach that prayer for the deade is not conteyned either expressely or deducebly in scriptures it must needs be by tradition for denyall of which tradition Aerius was condemned of Heresie and the vniuersall Church at that time by D. Feild taught prayer for the deade for hee telleth vs that Aerius in his opinion contemned the vniuersall Church of Christ and so must D. Feild confesse of himself and his fellowe Protestants if they deny this to be a Tradition as they haue denyed the Bookes of Machabees where this veritie is taught to be caconicall scriptures to gaynesay this primatiue and Catholick doctrine And from hence thus I argue againe by the Rule of S. Augustine allowed by D. Feild whatsoeuer the whole Church holdeth not Feild l. 4. c. 21. pag. 242. being decreed by the authoritie of Councells but hauing beene euer holden may rightly be thought to haue proceeded from Apostolicke authoritie But the Catholicke doctrine of prayer and sacrifice for the deade is such by the testimonie of these Protestants Therefore a tradition from the Apostles by these Protestants The Maior consisteth of the verie wordes of S. Augustine as they be translated and allowed by D. Feild in this maner Feild pag. 241. Hauing sett downe the kindes and sortes of traditions it remayneth to examine by what meanes wee may come to discern and by what rules wee may Iudge which are true and Indubitate traditions The first rule is deliuered by S. Augustine Quod vniuersa Aug. l. 4. cont Donatist cap. 23. tenet ecclesia nec concilijs institutum sed semper retentum est non nisi authoritate apostolica traditum rectissimè creditur Englished by D. Feild as in the Maior proposition where rectissimè creditur is moste rightly beleeued hee hath translated may rightly be thought The Minor proposition is proued before by these Protestants in teacheing this doctrine to haue beene the doctrine of the vniuersall Church resisted by Aerius and also that it was an Apostolicke tradition which all Protestants of England must needs graunt vnto by S. Augustines and D. Feilds first Rule before for by their proceedings they are so far from graunteing that this doctrine is defined by Councells and by that title to be embraced That they playnely teach in the Articles of their Religion the definition of a generall Councell in matters of faith not taken out of scriptures as they teach this is not is nothing worthe The Articl of Relig. art 21. wordes of their Article be these Things ordeined by generall Councells as necessarie to saluation haue neither strength nor authoritie vnlesse it may be declared that they be taken out of holy scripture Hitherto their subscribed article And that this is a thinge necessarie to saluation must needs also be yeelded vnto by these Protestants telling vs before both that Aerius was condemned of Heresie for denying it as also that Heresie is arror in some fundamentall point Couâ—ll sup which must needs be necessarie to saluation My next Argument shall be taken from the next Rule of D. Feild to knowe true traditions and my Maior proposition shall be his verie wordes thus next followeing The second Rule is whatsoeuer all or the Feild supr pag. 242. moste famous and renowned in all ages or at the leaste in diuers ages haue constantly deliuered as receaued from them that went before them no man contradicting or doubting of it may be thought to be an Apostolicall Tradition But the Catholicke doctrine of prayer for the deade praying to Saincts single life of the cleargie especially in the Latine Church and others in their proper place to be proued such by these Protestants are in this state Therefore by Protestants they be Apostolicke traditions The Maior is the very sayinge and sentence of D. Feild before and the Minor concerning prayer for the deade also before allowed by these Protestants the others are to be proued in their order this now sufficeth The first proposition for my next Argument shall be D. Feilds third and laste Rule to knowe true and indubitate traditions and is deliuered by him in these wordes The third Rule is the constant testimonie Feild supr l. 4. c. 21. pag. 242. of the pastors of an Apostolicke Church successiuely delyuered But prayer for the deade c. is so proued by such testimonie therefore an Apostolicke tradition The maior is D. Feild sentence And the Minor is before proued by these Protestants for if the vniuersall Church as before by them consented is this veritie not onely one Apostolicke Church sufficient for his Rule but all did consent vnto it otherwise it could not be said the doctrine of the vniuersall Church And of all Churches Apostolicke there can be no question with Protestants bur the Church of Rome euer taught thus and D. Field hath told vs before that Feild l. 4. c. 5. pag. 202. amongst Apostolicke Churches the Church of Rome is more specially to be obeyed reuerenced and respected Further thus I argue whatsoeuer thinges are either approued by these Protestants themselues for true and indubitate traditions or allowed by them that the primatiue Church and fathers receaued for such are to haue that allowance But the signe of the crosse mixture of water with wine in the Eucharist reuerence of holy Imadges and Relicks sacrifice and prayer for the deade vowes of chastitie and single life of
venerable Imadges commaunding the making and vse of them In the last Canon they giue diligent and longe directions Can. 102. vnto preists how to behaue themselues in aduising and absoluing penitents in the Sacramen◠of penance Therefore I may conclude that Protestants Religion is vtterly condemned by generall Councells both of the primatiue Church and latter ages And consequently by all other Iudgments in the Church of Christ Because these men haue told vs that all Bishops Doctors and Professors of Religion are bownde to followe the definitions of generall Councells CHAPTER IX WHEREIN IS PROVED BY these Protestants That the authoritie of the primatiue Fathers is to be receaued and followed in matters of Religion And how it wholly proueth the present doctrine of the Church of Rome vtterly condemninge all Protestant Religion THE authoritie and value of the Testimonie of the auncient Fathers and that they taught and approued the doctrine of the present Churche of Rome euen by the graunt of these Protestants is euident in the laste Chapter for being of that opinion in generall Councells and publicke assemblies and sentences to which by their owne consent and subscription they submitted and bownde themselues as to their lawfull and commaunding Rule they could not and might not teache and write otherwise in priuate then in publicke themselues and others had authoritatiuely concluded Yet for a full satisfaction to Protestants in all things I will breefely entreate of these also as they wer◠priuate writers And first of their authoritie I argue thus Whoso euer allowe in shewe and wordes amonge the Ignorant Readers or hearers of their writings and sermons the authoritie of the auncient and primatiue Fathers to procure people to beleeue that their Religion and doctrine agreeth with them as men teaching and writing the truthe and to that purpose doe yeeld vnto them greate respect and reuerence ought truely and syncerely to beleeue and embrace their Religion But these English Protestant writers be such Therefore they ought and are bownde to followe and embrace their doctrine The Maior proposition is euidently true for as dissimulation craftie and double dealeinges to delude and deceaue others in all thinges is a vile and abominable synne against truthe charitie and Iustice so in matters of Religion wherein not the least equiuocation of to saue a mans life may be vsed it must needs be an offence moste damnable and deuelishe The Minor proposition is thus proued by these Protestants Their Protestant Bishop D. Bilson writeth thus The Bilson suru pag. 85. auncient consent of godly Fathers is with greate care to be searched and fallowed of vs cheifely in the Rule of faith And agayne Wee rest vppon the Pag. 82. sup scriptures of God vppon the authoritie of the auncient Doctors and Councells And maketh the same reason with Vincentius Lirinensis in these Pag. 83. sup words Leaste euery man should wrest the scriptures to his fansye and sucke thence not the truthe but the patronage of his error And hee addeth that S. Augustine gaue this respect not onely to generall Councells but to the testimonies of particular Fathers Irenaeus Ciprian Hilarius Ambrose Gregory c. Chrisestome Basil and others D. Sutcliffe writeth thus Wee Sutcl subuers pag. 87. acknowledge the faith of the Fathers of the fourth fift and sixt ages and adioyne our selues to that Church And to credite his cause and make his readers beleeue hee consenteth with those Fathers hee speaketh in this maner The Fathers in all points of faith are for vs Protestants Sutel ag D. Kell pag. 17. and not for the Pope D. Willer knowing of what little credit his bare worde is euen by his Protestants as appeareth hereafter would procure creditt to his protestancye by damnable periury in these wordes I take God to wittnesse before Willet Antilog pag. 263. whome I must render accompt c. That the same faithe and Religion which I defend is taught and confirmed in the more substantiall points by these Historians Councells Fathers that liued within syne or sixe hundred yeares after Christ And further Pag. 264. sup thus It is moste notoriously euident that for the grossest points of Popery as Transsabstantiation sacrifice of Masse worshipping of Imadges Iustification by workes the supreamacie of the Pope prohibition of Mariage and such other they of the Romane Churche haue no shewe at all of any euidence from the Fathers within syue hundred yeares of Christ In all which questions amonge others I am to proue the contrary be these Protestants themselues hereafter in their place And in an other page of the same treatise hee writeth thus The auntient Fathers that liued within sixe hundred yeares of Christ are Willet Antil pag. 271. K. speache in parl An. 1603 conference at Hampt pag. 73. against them His Maiesties speach in parlament it this I will euer yeeld all reuerence to antiquitie And in their conference For my parte I knowe not howe to answeare the obiection of papists when they charge vs with nouelties but to tell them their abuses are new And hee approueth the dayes of Constantine for a Rule in Religion saying Constantine is not to be appeached of superstition but thinges then vsed may still be continued Confer pag. 69. But now it shall appeare that these Protestant Doctors and Ministers are so far from iustifying these their oathes protestations and assertions they be enforced to acknowledge those primatiue Fathers doe allowe teache and approue the doctrine of the present Romane Churche which these men impugne and persecute and for that cause doe not onely deny the authorities of those primatiue learned and holy Fathers but call and censure them with vnciuill barbarous contemptuous and Irreligeous names and phrases For proofe whereof I argue thus Whatsoeuer Sect Religion or People being vrged by such testimonies as Protestants haue giuen for allowance of the Fathers authorities before to followe them accept of their doctrine and stand to their Iudgment in these controuersies of Religion doe vtterly refuse and disallowe it though his Maiestie should approue it but say they are vnfit Iudges in controuersies of diuinitie that their Iudgment is little to be respected their testimonie is not worthe answearing there is no probabilitie in their opiniōs they are not to be beleeued deserue not credit are not credible to be admitted are not fitt Iudges were to partiall are to bee forsaken contemned and dispised such men cannot with any apparance of truthe affirme those primatiue Fathers and Doctors to allowe their Religion and proceedings or defend their cause by their Authorities But these Protestants Doctors and Ministers of England be such Therefore those Fathers are not for their Religion The Maior proposition is to manifestly true and the Minor is proued also by these Protestants themselues in this maner M. Wotton expressely controlleth the Kings sentence before concerninge Wotton def of Perk. pag. 15. 16. the time of Constantine and antiquitie his wordes be these the
133. Pag. 134. of chastitie The Fathers are not fitt Iudges to determine either of Preists marriage or vawes of chastitie And for this doctrine thus hee writeth of S. Ambrose That man hath the Apostaticall dragon the deuill dwelling in hym And so hee will send Midd. pag. 135. Ambrose away with his Quietus est Chrisostome is so hotte in his amplifications that hee forgetts himself Pag. 137. Chrisostome in his vehemencie goeth beyonde Pag. 138. measure in reprehendinge and the Christians of his time in their lightnesse went beyonde measure in vowinge The Canons which Epiphanius citeth against Priests mariadge or marryed men to be made Preists Middleton sup Pag. 141. Pag. 143. Pag. 144. Pag. 156. Pag. 161. are apocryphall Hee was two partiall affected in this matter The auncient Fathers did erre Augustine was a moste subtile disputer yâ—t a quicke wiâ—â— soonest falleth into contradiction Neither is Hilarie howsoeuer the Romish Church hath made him a Sainct ouer hastely to be receaued Irenaeus Hilary and Epiphanius for teaching free will are Pelagian Pag. 179. Pag. 180. Hereticks Wee haue harde before what great respect in wordes the Protestant Bishop of Winchester giueth to the auntient Fathers yet by his owne confession his owne Protestant Brethren charge him with the contrary in these wordes all this Bilsons surâ—â— pag. 84. greate shewâ— of cleauing to the Fathers Iudgment is but coloured in you For in other points againe wee see when they speake not to your liking the case is altered You forsake the auntient and learned Fathers You contemne and despise them You affirme Pag. 85. against all the Fathers You little regarde the sownde doctrine of the Fathers And the same Protestant Pag. 98. Bishop D. Bilson telleth vs that these Protestants which haue thus written of him doe for themselues lesse if it may be regarde those auntient learned Fathers for writing Bilson sup pag. 98. pag. 274. 275. prefa to the Kingâ— sup against them in this kinde hee intituleth one Treatise thus The defenders disdayne of the Father Others wrested and leudely falsyfied And againe They condâ—mne all the Fathers Greeke and Latine as conspiring against the truthe and peruerting the scriptures Therefore I conclude this Argument by these Protestants that the primatiue Fathers be not for their Religion but wholly for the doctrine of the Church of Rome And herevpon though needeles I make a new argument against them by themselues in this maner whosoeuer to make their Readers beleeue that the Fathers be for their cause doe falsefye them corrupt indignely and iniuriously handle them clipp shamfully corrupt them greately abuse vntruely alleadge misquote mayme mistranslate notably corrupt Father falsehoods vppon them peruert their true Arguments disdayne wrest and lewdely falsefy them cannot iustely pretend that they be for their Religion But these English Protestants are by their owne testimonie in this case Therefore they cannot iustely pretend that the Fathers be for their cause The Maior proposition is euidently true And the Minor is sufficiently proued before by D. Bilson and other Protestant writers To which I add affirmed and publickly with priuiledge published against D. Willet whoe before hath so damnably sworne that the Fathers be for the Religion of Protestants Parkâ—â— against Lymbomastix p. 170. pag. 151. def of 3. test sect k. k. k. def of 1. and 2. test p. 2. 5. sect 18. 21. pag. 181. 166. 101. 100. def of 2. place sect 10. 11. 20. def of 3. test sect 7. 12. 15. 16. c. pag. 7. 10. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. def of 3. test sect 16 pag. 28. def of 1. 2. 3. test M. Parkes in his booke dedicated to the then Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury writeth of him in these wordes Hee condemneth all the auntient Fathers for dreamers Condemneth all the auntient Fathers for dreamers Condemneth all the Fathers Hee condemneth all learned and godly diuines for enemyes of Christs Crosse and blasphemers of his passion Hee instifieth moste wicked Hereticks and condemneth moste holy Fathers Hee falsely translateth corrupteth indignely handleth greately abuseth vntruely alleadgeth misquoteth mayneth mistranslateth much abuseth notably corrupteth c. S. Augustine Origen S. Ambrose S. Chrisostome S. Leo S. Hierome Tertullian S. Bernard c. Fathereth falsehoods vpon them peruerteth their true Arguments corrupteth their wordes Hee teacheath vs further that he belyeth Bellarmine and Catholicke writers deceaueth the world Hee straungely peruerteth belyeth depraueth abuseth much abuseth falsefyeth holy scriptures And the same D. Willet hath writen and published with priuiledg also as fowle dealings or more vile in his Iudgment and the Censure of the Protestant Approuers of his booke of the same English Protestant Author The particulars are toe many grosse and tedious therefore I will onely set downe the Title of his booke to giue some coniecture of the contents in this kinde It is stiled in these wordes Loidoromastix that is a scourge for a Willet in Loâ—doromastix in the Title of it Rayler conteyning a full and sufficient Answeare vnto the vncristian Raylings slaunders vntruthes and other iniurious imputations vented of late by one Richard Parkes Master of Artes against the Author of Lymbomastix wherein three hundred Raylings errors Contradictions falsifications of Fathers corruptions of scripture with other grosse ouersights are obserued out of the saide vncharitable discourse by Andrewe Willet Professor of diuinitie Hither to the onely Title of that Booke published by a Professor of diuinitie as hee termeth himself and priuiledged by publicke allowance of English Protestants Therefore there is no shewe either of probabilitie or possibilitie that the authoritie and testimonies of the holy learned and auntient Fathers of the primatiue Church should be for the Religion of these Protestants when by their owne writings it is directly condeÌ„ned by them whether wee examine their workes and authorities in particular or when they were assembled in generall or others generally coÌ„firmed Councells as demonstration is made by their owne Assertions And by this it is euident by these Protestants themselues that their so termed Religion is Hereticall impious and damnable and for such condemned in their owne Iudgments by all generall and approued Rules and growndes in diuinitie The holy scriptures sacred traditions The Church of God decrees and sentence of the highest and all Apostolicke Sees generall and other approued holy Councells learned Fathers and whatsoeuer can be pretented to be a Iudge in these causes So that not any one true Christian Consistorie or Censure can be truely claymed or cited for iustifying of their proceedings Which is as much as can and more then needeth to be alleadged for condemninge of Heresie or any error in Religion Yet to leaue nothinge omitted to satiffy these Protestants in these questions and recall them to the vnitie of the true Church of Christ or from their sauadge crueltie of persecution I will in the next and second parte of this worke immediately following make like demonstration by
authoritie in such cases is priuate Therefore no Protestant Interpretation is binding or Iuridicall The Maior proposition is thus proued by D. Feild Feild l. 4. c. 19. pag. 235. in these wordes Wee confesse that neither conference of places nor consideration of the antecedeÌ„tia and consequentia nor lookinge into the originalls are of any force vnlesse wee fynde the thingâ— which wee conceaue to be vnderstoode and ment in the places interpreted to be consonant to the Rule of faithe And hee writeth thus againe priuate Interpretation Feild pag. 226. is not so proposed and vrged as if they would binde all others to receaue it The Minor proposition That all Protestant expositions in respect of a bindeing and Iuridicall power are priuate is thus proued by this Protestant Argument No Interpretation or Interpreters wanteing Iurisdiction and authoritie to commaunde their Interpretations and expositions in matters of faith to be beleued as suche is to be accompted byndeing and Iuridicall But all English Protestant Interpretations expositions and definitions by their owne Iudgment want this bindeing and commaundeing authoritie in matters of faithe Therefore they are not Iuridicall and byndeinge to be beleeued The Maior is euidently true for where there is not power and authoritie in things those things cannot be rightly and iuridically commaunded or bindeing men to doe or beleeue them The Minor proposition is proued by D. Feild in these wordes As before wee made Feild pag. 228. three kinds of Iudgment the one of discretion Common to all the other of direction Common to the Pastors of the Churche and a third of Iurisdiction proper to them that haue supreame power in the Church So likewise wee make three kindes of Interpretation the first priuate the seconde of publickâ— direction and so the Pastors of the Church may publickly propose what they conceaue of it And the third of Iurisdiction and so they that haue supreame power that is in the Bishops assembled in a generall Councell may interpreate the scripture and by their authoritie suppresse all them that shall gaynesay such Interpretations and subiect euery man that shall disobey such determinations as they consent vppon to excommunication and Censures of the like nature Hitherto D. Feilds wordes playnely declareing that in his Iudgment the Protestants neither haue nor can haue this Iuridicall and commaundeing Iudgment or Interpretation because as is proued by themselues before they neither haue had nor can haue any generall Councell in which alone he placeth this Iurisdiction and bindeing power For proposeing without authoritie which hee giueth there to Bishops is not Iuridicall and coactiue If hee shall answeare that in the first three hundred yeares there was no generall Councell and yet matters of Religion were decided and embraced hee condemneth himself and all Protestants in this busines for either hee must leaue that primatiue Church absolutely without Iurisdictâ—on and power which is moste absurde or leaue it to them that both truely claymed and vsed it the Popes of Rome as these Protestants haue before acknowledged And aboue all men D. Feild must be of that opinion for hee Feild pag. 202. hath written and allowed in this maner Wee must reuerence the authoritie of all Catholiâ—ke Doctors whose doctrine and writeings the Church alloweth wee must more regarde the authoritie of Catholicke Bishops more then these the authoritie of the Apostolicke Churches amongst them more especially the Church of Rome of a generall Councell more then all these Therefore by this Protestant Doctor in tyme when generall Councells cannot be the highest deciding and Iuridicall sentence and power is in the Church and Pope of Rome And by this hee is also preuented from sayinge that Protestants may commaunde such Interpretations and definitions within their owne temporall Territories for so they should not moste reuerence and respect next to a generall Councell the Church of Rome the next Iudge as hee hath written but quite the contrary their owne stubborne and disobedient wills which in such causes is Hereâ—icall or Scâ—maticall vsurpation and yet D. Feild in his diuision of Interpretations before assigneth no Iurisdiction at all to inferior Bishops to commaunde either in the whole Church or in Prouinciall in such cases Further I argue thus No opinions or Articles not grownded vppon the worde of God are to be beleeued or commaunded as matters of faith But all Protestants deductions and Interpretations in these controuersies are such not grownded vppon the word of God therefore not to be beleeued or commaunded as Articles of faith The Maior is the Common doctrine of Protestants The Minor is proued both before when Protestants haue depriued themselues of Councells Popes and all true proposers of the word of God tying themselues to their owne doctrines and deductions and is thus further confirmed by D. Couell in these wordes Couell def of Hook pag. 85. Doctrines deriued exhortations deducted Interpretations agreable are not the word of God Therefore the whole Religion of Protestants against Catholicks beinge thus fownded vppon so deceatefull a grounde as humanee deduction is cannot truely and Iuridically be commaunder Yet it is so manifest to all that their Religion consisteth wholly on their Imagined Interpretations and deductions that Mr. Wotton and Wottoâ— def of Perk. pag. 467. c. others are enforced absurdely to say that deduction from scripture maketh a matter of Faithe otherwiâ—e hee â—annot make any articlâ— of faith to be in their doctrine against vs. And D. Feild himself so resolute before against these priuate Interpretations and expositions seemeth to be of the same minde to defend their Religion in makeing such deductions to be matters of faith by euery priuate deduction his wordes be these Wee Feild pag 226. say that men not neglâ—cting that light of direction which the Churche yeeldeth noâ— other helps and meanes may be assured out of the nature of the things themselues the Conference of places the knowledg of tongues and the sutable correspondence that one parte of dyuine truth hath with an other that they haue sownde out the true meaneinge of it And by this assurednes hee seemeth to vnderstand assurednes of faith makeing their priuate deductions and Interpretations the worde of God as M. Wotton before cited doth in Wotton def of Perk. pag. 467. these wordes Wee acknowledge both and holde all matters concludeth Logically out of the scriptures to be the word of God as well as if they were expressely sett downe in it worde for worde Therefore I may lâ—wfully take it is a Common Protestant doctryne both Doctor Feild and M. Wotton speakeinge for their Protestants in the plurall number wee say wee acknowledge c. so that by their Religion M. Feilds or M. Wottons Logicke vaine and vncertayne deduction is of higher authoritie and more to be beleeued then any generall Councell or Articl of Relig. art 21. other externall Rule of Religion for all these by them as is presently to be proued may erre euen in
things appertayning vnto God but their priuate Interpretations and deductions suteing with their humour is the worde of God aswell as if it were sett downe in scripture worde for worde as M. Wotton hath told vs before My next Argument is this No people or professors of Religion freely acknowledgeing that all Rules in their Religion though their best approued and moste publicke to be moste reuerenced and respected be subiect to error may erre and haue erred in things belongeing to God are erroneous vnconstant variable often recant and correct their publicke proceedeings in such things can be saide to haue the true and Iuridicall exposition of scriptures otherwise there is a lawfull and true Iurisdiction and power to bynde them of their Religion both to errors in things against God and misbeleefe in this life and to eternall damnation the peneltie thereof in the next But the Protestants of England are in this Condition by their owne Iudgment Therefore they haue not the true and Iuridicall exposition and Interpretation of scriptures The Maior is proued before and directly by M. Wottons Wotton sup words all matters concluded logically out of the scriptures are the worde of God as well as if they were expressely sett downe in it word for word But the worde of God neither is nor can be erroneous to be recanted amended corrected c. therefore the Maior is moste certainely true by these men And the Minor also is proued by them in this order They haue graunted before that a general Councell is the highest Iudge And yet in publicke and subscribed Articles haue these Articl of Relig. art â—1 wordes Generall Councells may erre and sometime haue erred euen in things pertayning vnto God Wherefore thinges ordeyned by them as necessarie to saluation haue neither strength nor authoritie vnlesse it may be declared that they be taken out of holy scripture Therefore no certayne Interpretation with them for they haue assured vs Feild pag. 228. that a generall Councell may expownd scripture and by authoritie suppresse all them that gaynesay such Interpretations to excommunication and Censures of like nature and is by them the highest Iudge hath no more priuiledge but to erre and be examined and controlled by inferior for none is higher as before Reprouers and particular Interpreters amonge them whome as they haue also taught before wee are not bounde to beleeue but be so vile corrupt and erroneous as they haue confessed there is none amonge them to decide things in controuersie or define a truthe And least any man should absurdely say that their Conuocation Parlament or any other pretendeing superiotie among them in these matters should be better able to Iudge and interprett scriptures then Bishops assembled in a generall Councell Willet Antilog first D. Willet writeth thus In England the temporall prince is gouernour Ruler cheefe ouerseer praef Engl. pag. 71. 120. 150. 43. Pref. 19 the Reader in Antill and steward of the Church to whose Iudgment and redresse the reformation of Religion belongeth Yet hee addeth Neither hee nor their Church hath any priuiledge from error but playnely protesteth they must take out a new lesson and learne to reforme their erroneous conceites Which their Bishop D. Doue alloweth to haue beene their state from the first originall of their Doue persuas pag. 31. protestancie in England his wordes and graunt are these When the Massâ— was first putt downe Kinge Henry had his English liturgie and that was iudged absolute without exception but when Kinge Edwarde came to the Crowne that was condemned and an other in the place which Peter Martir and Bucer did approue as very consonant to Gods worde When Q. Elizâ—â—eth began heâ— Raigne the former was Iudged to be full of Imperfections and a new was deuised and allowed by the consent of the Cleargie but about the middle of her Raigne wee were weary of that booke and greate meanes haue beene wrought to abandon that and establishe an other wee doe at the leaste at euery chaunge of prince chaunge our booke of Common prayers wee be so wanton that wee know not what wee woulde haue Hitherto this Protestant Bishop of the publicke proceedings in their Religion And hee freely confesseth errors in all these their states and chaunges And this their flitting from error to error findeinge no Center or hope of settleing in truth hath so perplexed euen their best learned that a late Protestant writer amonge them hath these wordes The late Archbishoppe of Canterbury D. Whiteguist as is credibly reported Suruey of the B. of com prayer pag. 159. 160. tooke such a greife when their communion booke was to be amended discouered by these or like wordes good Lord when shall wee knowâ— what to trust vnto that hee presently fell into his palssy was curryed from the Court and dyed shortely after And D. Morton D. Couell M. Wotton Morton Apol. part 2. pag. 315. Couell ag Burg. pag. 75. 43. Wotton def pag. 42. c. M. Middleton and now the vniuersitie of Cambridge teacheth it is a generall position there is none in their Church whose Iudgment is Infallible Then I conclude their Interpretations be false and their Religion erroneous vncertayne and false for they haue graunted before that the worde of God which is Infallible moste certayne and vndoubted is the grounde of true Religion and euery article in it so fownded But these their highest and best sentences in Religion being so erroneous to be corrected fallible deceatfull c. must needs be the worde of lyeinge and deceatefull men or the wicked spiritt and in no wayes the holy Infallible and moste certayne word of God who can neither be deceaued in himself or deceaue others Further thus I argue whosoeuer teach not onely that the whole Christian world may erre in things pertayning to God but are bownde to receaue such errors vnder payne of excommunication and like Censures and yet teach this from scriptures cannot be said to haue their true Interpretation But the Protestants of England by their owne testimonie are in this state Therefore haue not this true Iuridicall Interpretation of scriptures The Maior proposition is euidently true for so God that is iust should ordayne Iurisdiction and power to bynde men to things vniust such as errors in Religion be and these Protestants though to excuse or alleuiate their owne Heresies they affirme that any particular Church or a generall Councell may erre in this maner yet they deny it of the whole Churche in which cause D. Feild pag. 203. l. 4. c. 5. Feild writeth in these wordes wee thinke that particular men and Churches may erre damnably because notwithstanding others may worship God aright but that the whole Churche at one time cannot so erre for that the Churche should cease vtterly for a time and so not be Catholicke being not at all times and Christ should sometimes be without a Church Thus it is euident by these Protestants for the wordes wee