vniuersalitie of â—atter but also perpetuall continuation of time supposing it was vnnecessarie for Christ to haue promised his contiuual assistance to his Apostles except the Religion which he deliuered vnto them had ben necessarily to be perpetuallie preached in all times without interruption euen till the day of Iudgement in which respect it implyes that relation of vniâ—ersalitie which my former argument conâ—udes And to this I ioyne Secondlie that the other â—rte of the maintainers of the English faith â—ho enterprise the defence of the visibilitie of there Religion in all ages are yet farther out â—f square then the other In regarde by this â—â—eanes they enter in to a taske which as the â—ustration of their tryall in that particular â—ath alreadie giuen experience they will neâ—er be able to performe By all which it is euidentlie appeares that the English Religion hath no such relation or respect vnto all future times intrinsecallie included in it obiect or matter or if anie reference it had it was of such temporarie smale continuance that it quite lost it by the way in all that vaste space of time which passed betweene the Popedome of sainct Gregorie the Apostacie of Martin Luther Thirdly I yet farther adde that the defenders of the English faith assume false abuse their hearers when they so commonly affirme that their Religion is the same which was taught preached by Christ his Apostles which I proue because it doth not indeed agree in all particulars with the obiect matter of the faith doctrine which Christ his Apostles published to the world as manifestly appeares by comparing some seuerall points of them both conferring the one with the other For where can the nouelistis finde either in the scripture Fathers or authenticall historie that Christ his Apostles taught that those onely bookes of scripture ar Canonicall which the Church of England holdes for such or that Christians ar iustified by that faith onely by which they beleeue their sinnes are remitted the iustice of Christ applyed vnto them by the faith same that euerie one in particular is bounde so to beleeue that this faith onely is necessarie sufficient to saluation or wher doe they finde that Christ his Apostles preached that the onely written worde is necessarie sufficient to saluation where doe they reade in scripture or Fathers that the visible Church planted by Christ increased by the preaching of the Apostles continuated by a disinterrupted succession of Pastors can erre in faith that ther is no Purgatorie nor place of satisfaction either in this world or the next for lesser sinnes or the paine due to greater or that in the Sacrament of Eucharist the bodie bloud of Christ at not contained receiued other wise then figuratiuely by faith a lone I knowe they can shewe vs none of these seuerall propositions either in scriptures or doctors of the Church or by anie authenticall historie or relation that the same haue ben taught by Christ or his Apostles I am assured that all they can performe in this case is to produce certaine textes of scripture which to the ignorant sorte of people may seeme to haue resemblance with those their positions but none soe plaine that without detortion of either sense or wordes or both or without their owne fallatious illations consequences can possible containe anie such doctrine For example for their solifidian iustification or their iustification by faith onely they alledge diuers passages out of the epistles of S. Paule as that man is not iustified by the workes of the lawe but by faith that faith is reputed to iustice yet none of those shewe that faith onely iustifies much lesse doe they mention or insinuate that peculiar faith of remission of their sinnes by which the professors of the English Religion beleeue they ar iustified that which is euidently convinced by the tenor of the texts then selues in which neither of the partes of the former position is contained but added by the expesitions glosses of those who violently drawe the scripturs to their peruerse purpose And the like practice of the Nouellists may easily be discouered to be vsed in the rest of the seuerall propositions aboue rehearsed in Bellarmin other Catholike Controuertists who professedly confute the newe doctrine of the sectaries of this present age to whom I remit the reader for more exact discussion of the same supposing this place is vncapable of more large proceeding And hence it appeares that the professors of the English faith must needes confesse that according to the premisses here breefely declared confirmed the matter obiect of their Religion doth not agree with that doctrine which Christ his Apostles planted published which is the Minor proposition of my second silogisme aboue propunded the verie same I here intend to conuince And now to the confirmation of the instance I responde I graunt the multitude of beleeuers doth not cause formally constitute vniuersallitie in theobiect of Religion neuerthelesse if comparing one Religion wit an other it is discouered to be apparently certaine that the one hath euer had a greater multitude of professors in all tymes places since the first fondation of the true faith then the other yea that the one hath had a greater number of faithfull persons for manie ages together when as the one had none at all In this case I say it is manifest that the multitude of beleeuers doth euidently argue the Religion so beleeued professed to be no other but that same Religion which was first founded by Christ our Sauior with his promisse of perpetuall visibilitie cantinuation with multiplicitie of faithfull people consequently that it onely hath vniuersallitie in matter obiect that on the contrarie the other Religion which can shew no such multitude of professors but is notoriously defectiue in this particular hath not anie vniuersallitie at all in the seuerall points of doctrine which it teacheth them to beleeue And now this may suffice to demonstrate that ther is no vniuersallitie to be founde in the obiect or matter of the English ReligioÌ„ The second kinde of vniuersallitie of Religion is in tyme which I proue not to be had in the English Religion in the forme following That Religion wantes true vniuersallitie of tyme which hath not ben visibly extant in all tymes since the true Religion was first founded But the Religion of England hath not ben visibly extant in all tymes since the first foundation of true Religion Therfore the Religion of England wantes true vniuersallitie of time The maior is most certaine maintained by many of the professors of the English faith if not by all Yet because they are not wholely vnited in this point as farre as I can perceiue by their doctrine because of those whoe maintaine the visibilitie of the Church fewe or none of them graunt that the Church
you neither doe I intend to persuade you in a Rhetoricall manner but onely to propose vnto your ingenuous myndes mature iudgements pure trueth pure falsitie in their owne seuerall natiue habits colors as good an euill to the end that by your free election you may stretch your handes to the one leaue the other according as you shall finde your selues moued by diuineinspiration force of reason Yet not so remissely but that if anie one should require further satisfaction let him but obtaine me a safe conduct graunted by competent authoritie I will not refuse to decipher the Gyrogliffe of my name as euer most readie according to Apostolicall aduise to render reason of the faith I professe And althou ' perhaps it will be iudged more sutable to my manner of proceeding deliuerie of my doctrine to haue put it in the latin tongue yet because I coÌ„sidered ther are in our countrye manie pregnant actiue wits which neuerthelesse haue smale knowledge in that language I resolued rather to publish it in the vulgar tongue to the end that all those who ar studious of trueth may be free from impediments in their search of reason Neither is it intended for euerie pedanticall bibleist but for such as in some sorte are instructed in scholastical discipline qui potest caperecapiat And if by the grace assistance of God my arguments shall but make so much impression in the readers as onely to reduce some passionate partiall myndes in matters of Religion to such a point of temper as they shall come to iudge it a thing repugnant to reason conscience that those who haue so much reason so forcible arguments for their cause should be esteemed worthy of contumelie persecution for their profession defence of the same I shall neuer accounte my paines tyme ill employed And thus I comit commende you to the grace protection of Christ our Sauior THE FIRST PARTE OF THE CONVICTION CONTAINING THE IMPVGNATIVE ARGVMENTS THE FIRST PRINCIPAL ARGVMENT AND for confutation of the English Religion which I assume for the firste parte of my disputation beginning with the name Catholike I argue in this manner All Religions which are not Catholike are false Religions But the Religion now publiklie professed in England is not Catholike Ergo the religion nowe publiklie professed in England is a false Religion In the Maior conclusion of this Sylogisme there is no difficultie neither can the aduersaâ—ies denie them The minor onelie is in controuersie it I proue with another Sylogisme in the manner following All Religions which are not vniuersall geâ—erall or common are not Catholike But the Religion now professed in England is not vniuersall generall or common Ergo the Religion now professed in England is not Catholike That the Religion is not Catholike which â—s not vniuersall generall or common is cleaâ—elie demonstrated by the signification of the worde Catholike which importeth vniuersallitie or generallitie according to the vse which euen our aduersaries themselues make of it Who in their Bibles for the Latin wordes â—pistola Catholica translate put in English the generall epistle of Iames Iude c. Not to stand vpon the ancient authoritie of sainct Augustin other Fathers Councels who when they speake of the true Church or faith â—se the name Catholike in that same seÌ„se as after shall appeare And by this the maior propoâ—ition of the second Sylogisme is sufficientlie â—roued to be true Now touching the minor â—o wit that the Religion publiklie professed in England is not generall vniuersall or common 〈◊〉 likewise proue by distinguishing all the diuers kindes of vniuersallitie which according either to Philosophie or moral doctrine can be imagined by conuincing that none of them agree to the Religion of England which I prosecute in this manner All vniuersallitie in Religion is either in the matter or material obiect of faith or in the time place persons that professe it or els in the rule or reason which directs them in the faith profession of it For proofe declaration of all which particulars that none of them be founde in the Religion of England it is to be supposed as certaine that the worde vniuersall signifieth not onelie generallitie but also vnitie so that the thing which is vniuersall must be one in itselfe as well as common to others that which not onelie the vsuall acception of the worde doth shewe which by Aristotle the rest of the Philosophers both ancient moderne is commonly taken for vnum in multis that is one thing in manie or one common to manie but also the verie etymologie sounde of the same word doth plainely declare Yea the ancient Fathers also affirme the same in those places where speaking of the vniuersallitie of the Church in place they say the Church is one and yet dispersed ouer the whole world Lib. 2. c 2. As doth Sâ— Augustin against the epistle of Gaudentius Where vsing the testimonie of sainct Cyprian among â—other words of his he relates these Vnum caâ—ut est origo vna vnamater foecundis successibus copiosa She meaning the Church â—s one head one origen Maieres nâ—stri Catholicam nominarnus vt ex ipso nomine â—stenderent quia per tâ—tum est De vnit Eccl. cap. 2. one mother replemished with frutefull successes And in the second chapter of his booke of the vnitie of the Church he saith that our ancetors called the Church Catholike to the end they might shewe by the name it selfe that she is in whole In like manner Vincentius Lyrinensis in the third ch of his booke to the vniuersallity of the Church ioyneth consent or vnion And Venerable Bede vpon the 6. chap. of the Canticles affirmes that the Church is called Catholike quia per omnes mundi partes in vnapace in vno Domini timore aedificatur That is because it is planted or built in all partes of the world in one peace one feare of God And thus it plainely appeares that the worde Catholike or vniuersall whatsoeuer els it includes yet it must of necessitie haue vnitie in that generallitie which it signifies This being supposed as a trueth which euen our aduersaries cannot resist I proue against them first that there is no vniuersallitie in the matter or obiect of their Religion with this argumentation following All religions which are not one the same in matter or obiect which Christ his Apostles preached waÌ„te vniuersallity in obiect or matter But the Religion professed in England at this present is not one the same in obiect or matter which Christ his Apostles preached Ergo the Religion professed in England at this present wantes vniuersalitie in obiect or matter The maior of this Sylogisme is iucluded in the supposition before declared at the least in parte graunted euen by our aduersaries as I suppose it being nothing else in sense but
onelie that the particular obiects or matters which a Catholike or vniuersall beleeuer imbraceth by faith are one the same doctrine in euerie point which God hath reueiled the most vniuersal Church proposeth to be beleeued by all persons in the vniuersal orbe And this appeares most true especiallie if we consider that the doctrine or obiect or anie Religion cannot be conceiued to be vniuersal except it be taken in this forme manner in regard that in this sorte not otherwise it attracteth or draweth vnitie froÌ„ the founder so hath the propertie of being one without which vnitie it cannot possible be one and the same in manie in which neuerthelesse the total nature or essence of vniuersalitie consists Now touching the minor or second proposition of the same Sylogisme I proue it in this manner first because the Religion which our Saulour his Apostles preached was vniformerlie indistinctlie one the same both in matter forme I meane both in obiect or matter of faith in the assent of faith itselfe therefore the Apostle Ephes 4. as he affirmes there is one onelie Lord or God soe doth he in the same tenor affirme there is one faith Vnus Dominus vnafides meaning that faith is one as well obiect as in acte And yet this is otherwise according to the doctrine of the English Church whose professors distinguish the obiect of their faith in to fundamentals not fundamentals which diuision of theirs cannot possible stand with vnitie as both natural reason and common sense most plainelie teach And consequentlie the matter or obtect of the English faith cannot be one the same with the obiect or matter of that religion which Christ his Apostles deliuered to the vniuersal world in which true Religion there is no parte nor partial which is not truelie and propethe fundamental to be vniformelie vniuersallie beleeued vpon for feture of eternal Saluation according to that formidable commination of the supreme Iudge himselfe who without anie diuision or distinction pronounceth sentence of condemnation against all such who obstinatelie erre in their assent of faith to anie matter by him Qui vere non â—rediderit condemnabitur Marc. Vâ—◠〈◊〉 â—â—ntes 〈…〉 omniâ— quaâ—unque mandaui vobis Math. 28. his Apostles reueiled to his Church by here for such proposed to the people how smale soeuer it may seeme to bee in it owne nature or condition how necessarie or vncessarie it is in it selfe to saluation in regard that it being once deliuered for true by God who cannot lye or deceiue it is reallie inuested with the same formal reason and motiue of credibilitie which the most noble sublime obiect or matter either humane or diuine can haue that is with the infallibilitie of the prime reueiling veritie to which all faith credit is due necessarilie to be truelie intirelie adhibited vnder paine of eternal punishment Secondlie I proue the same Minor proposition because the obiect or matter of the Religion published by our Sauiour his Apostles hath annexed vnto it a certaine relation or reference of vniuersalitie to all those particular persons to which it is to be preached that is to all people which were are or will be in the world till the consummation or day of iudgement which relation is grounded in the ordinance commaunde of Christ himselfe to his Apostles sayeing Marc. vlt. Euntes in mundum vniuersum praedicate Euangelium omni creaturae Where by the wordes all creatures is vnderstanded all nations or people as sainct Mathew more plainelie declares in the same passage of his Gospel where thus he relates our Sauiours speech Euntes docere omnes gentes And likewise S. Gregorie commenting the same text giues an ingenious exposition of it to the same purpose teaching that by those wordes omni creaturae is ment all men for saith he Sed omnis creaturae nomine signatur homo And in the same place he addes an other explication of the same wordes yet more plaine cleare for this our purpose saying that by the name of euerie creature all nations also may be signified Potest etiam creaturae nomine omnis natio gentium designari So that it is voyde of controuersie that the Religion which Christ his Apostles preached hath this relatiue or respectiue vniuersalitie of obiect or matter of which contrarily the English Religion is quite destitute in regarde that at the least for the space of 9. centenarie of yeares togither partely by some of the pretended reformers partely by euidence of fact it is conuinced not to haue ben preached in anie parte or partial of the vniuersal world in all points as it is now professed in our English nation A matter so cleare manifest by the testimonie of all histories both of those former times ours that I neuer heard of anic of the professors of it who either in writing or priuate discourses or publike sermons hath absolutelie auerred it to haue ben preached without interruption euer since the time of Christ his Apostles And thence it proceeds that for the auoiding the force of this or the like probation I conceiue not what other refuge they can haue then to say that notobstanding the obiect or matter of their Religion neyther is at this present nor hath ben in all precedent ages taught or preached yet that in respect their Religion is the same which was preached by the Apostles their successors in the first fiue hundreth yeares after the lawe of Christ it may be tearmed vniuersal in obiect or matter euen at this present especiallie supposing it is not the multitude of beleeuers which makes the obiect or matter of Religion vniuersal but the totalitie or latitude of the doctrine it selfe as being in all points the same which Christ deleuered to his Apostles to be preached to all nations But to this I replye it is no solution but a miere cuasion of the former argument Yet I confesse that if it were true and solid the pretended reformers had reason to applaude it as a most compendious and easie course for the maintaining of their new Religion But the trueth is that this can not stand in vnitie with the doctrine faith which our Sauior deliuered to his Apostles they to the rest of the world which was not to continue onelie for some dâ—iâ— monethes or yeares but vntil the verie â—nd or consumation of the world And therefore Christ our Sauior to those wordes of the text of sainct Mathewe Euntes docete omâ—es geutes going teach yee all nationes presentlie for conclusion of his speech he added â—â—centes eos seruare omnia quaeeumque mandaui â—obis ecce ego vobiscum sum omnibus dieâ—us vsque ad consummationem seculi teaching them to obserue althings which I haue commaunded you behold I am with you all dayes to the consumation of the world In which wordes is included not onelie
apparent that the English Religion hath no such attribute consequentlie that it is defectiue in that nature Wherefore hence I passe to the last gender or kynde of vniuersallitie which is that of the generall rule of faith of which there be two sortes the one is nothing els but the word of God as it is contained in the scriptures or diuine Apostolicall traditions The other rule is the visible Church by whose authoritie we come to knowe certainely infallibly the true sense of the worde of God all those things which his diuine maiestie hath reuailed as matter of faith to be beleeued by all sortes of people or otherwise necessarie to saluation Tract 1. Suarez de fide disp ◠sec 2. fine And of these two rules which some diuide in to three or more thou ' in my opinion not so properlie conuenientlie the second which is the authoritie of the Church is commonlie called in the schooles regula proponens that is a rule or way by which the prime reuailing veritie or diuine authoritie which is the formall obiect foundation of supernaturall faith is immediatelie applied vnto beleeuers And altho' if indeed the worde of God were so cleare that euerie one by reading the wordes of scripture or Apostolicall traditions as they are sett downe in the Councels or other recordes of the Church could not but vnderstand them in a true vniforme sense the first of those two rules might suffice alone yet because the scriptures are obscure difficult in their vnderstanding as both themselues experience testifie also because out of the imperfection of nature mens iudgements often times disagree in matters of doctrine practice therefore besides that speachlesse rule I meane in decision of matters of controuersie there was necessarie another liuing vocall rule by which the true meaning of the first prime rule which is the worde of God might so infallibly be declared vnto thē as all doubts scruples excluded their mindes consciences might safely rest in euerie point of faith by it proposed without anie further question or tergiuersation Now to come to the purpose in that first foundation of faith which is the authoritie of God as he reuaileth matters to his Church without which true faith cannot stand the defenders of the English Religion agree with the Romanists as also they agree with them in the first of the two rules at the least so farre as concernes this controuersie that is they hould Gods worde to be a rule of faith as the Roman Catholikes hould But the difference is in that our aduersaries will needs haue the worde of God to be the scripture onelie that interpreted by the spirit of euerie priuate person who reades it consequenter they hould this onelie for their rule proponent by which the diuine authoritie is applied to euerie point of faith in the beleeuers Whereas on the contrarie we Romanists beleeue vse the authority of the most vniuersall Church as the infallible applyer of Gods reuailing veritie vnto vs in all matters of faith manners And in this rule vpon which all certaintie of faith dependes quoad nos that is for as much as toucheth the beleeuers or credents I here proue that the English Religion wanteth this vniuersallitie as well as the rest of the obiect circumstances aboue discussed the which I demonstrate in this forme of argument That onelie proponent rule of faith his vniuersall which is one the same in all or at the least in the greater parte of beleeuers But that which the professors of the English Religion hould for their proponent rule of faith is not one the same in all or the greater parte of beleeuers Ergo that which the professors of the English Religion hould for their proponent rule of faith is not vniuersall The maior of this Sylogisme is euident by the definition of vniuersall which according to the doctrine of Philosophers is one in all if it be taken in rigor of Logike or as the Metaphisitians vse the worde Or at the least it signifies the greater parte if it be accepted onely in a morall sense as here I take it From which declaration of the word vniuersall is collected no lesse cleare conuincent proofe of the minor proposition which affirmeth that the proponent rule of faith in the professors of the Church of England is not one the same in all or yet in the greater parte of beleeuers That which I she we first because the priuate spirit of euerie professor of the English Religion which is the onelie immediate rule of saith they professe to follow in matters of faith as the verie sounde of the worde doth declare is peculiar to those that haue it not common to all therefore it cannot possible be generall or vniuersall That the spirit by which the professors of the English Religion interpret the worde of God is peculiar to some onelie not common to all such as exteriorly professe the faith of Christ it is manifest in that it neither passeth into other countries with cōformitie in all points of beleefe to all the rest of the pretended reformed Churches as appeareth in the controuersie of the real presence with the lutherans the inamissibilitie of grace In his booke directed to Christian Princes the point of Predestination free will with the Arminians nay nor yet doth it agree with the spirit of all the inhabitants of England it selfe as both King Iames doth plainely suppose wher he graunteth ther ar manie Puritans in his Realme besides Papists Protestants also experinental knowledge doth manifest the same it being certainely knowne generally confessed on all sides that those three sortes of people be not gouerned by one vniforme spirit but euerie one by their owne rule of faith the rule of the Romanists being one common among them selues in all places of the world but on the contrarie the rule of the Protestants Puritans being diuided seuerall both in their owne countrie out of it both among themselues also from the Catholikes wheresoeuer they be which diuision both from themselues others is an infallible argument that they haue no vniuersallitie in their propounding rule of saith That which yet more plainely appeares is confirmed by a worke lately published by a Protestant Doctor his name I doe not remembers who describes seueral sectes of Puritans or pure Caluinists all different both among themselues from the English Protestants Which diuersitie of sectes cannot stand without a different spirit or rule of faith Secondlie I proue the spirit of the professors of the English religion is not one the same in all or the greater parte of credents because it is not that spirit by which the visible Church hath ben in all times places persons successiuely gouerned without interruption ergo it is not an vniuersall spirit but onelie particular priuate The antecedent of this argument
and not according to the common acception of them which yet is the common practice of the Nouelists of these our dayes as is most apparent euen by that particular passage which I haue in hād that is the place aboue cited in the second chapter of the Acts thou wilt not leaue my soule in hell Lib. 5. de descen Christ c. ◠n. Aboute which Daniel Chamier hauing turned himselfe euerie way tossed all the dictionaries he could finde for his purpose yet could he not finde one author more ancient then Iohn Caluin his great master and first founder of his Religion whoe teacheth that either in this place or in anie other place of scripture according to the proper ordinarie vse the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie the bodie carcasse or life the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the graue as he his fellow partners will needs haue thē to signifie as they vsually translate them in their Bibles excepting onely Arias Montanus if he be truely cited by Chamier In Idiotismis He◠braeis how be it himselfe grauntes that in the cited place of the 16. psalme the Hebrewe wordes in steed of which the Septuagint putteth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doe signifie the soule hell which is all that we can desire For if the Hebrewe text be the foūtaine of all true translations as all the Nouelists will haue it neither can their translation of this place be true nor ours false for that theirs according to our aduersarie Chamiers dissents from the Hebrewe ours agrees Diuers other places of the English Nouelists corrupted translations might be produced as that of the 26. of S. Mathewe wher for Hymno dicto in the Latin hymnizantes in the Greeke they translate when they had sung a psalme In the 28. of the Acts ouerseers for Bishops And in the ninte chapter of the first to the Corinthians Haue we not power to lead about a wife where they put a wife for a woman as if all woman were wiues And in the first chapter of the second epistle of S. Peter they leaue out the wordes by good workes which neuerthelesse are founde in diuers Greeke copies yea Caluin himselfe grauntes that if they be not expressed in the text yet they are subintellected or vnderstood And to this may be added by the way that altho' it is not ill of it selfe to translate the Bible into vulgar languages if it be done truely sincerely by the authoritie of the Church or her cheefe Pastor yet by these few examples we may learne how greately the word of God is abused by false translations how farre the trueth is preiudicated by such partiall proceeding supposing that all the foresaid places as they are by them turned in to the English tongue doe fauore diuers points of their new doctrine wheras on the contrarie they expressely make against it if they be truely trāflated And particularly those wordes of their sixtineth psalme thou wilt not leaue my soule in graue are so absurdely contrarie to sense so extrauagāt in the phrase manner of speech as the like is not to be found in anie translation that euer was extant euer since the scriptures were first published in vulgar tongues euen among the pretended reformers themselues But now this may suffice for examples of false translation of the scriptures vsed by our aduersaries for the first proofe of the Minor of my silogisme aboue framed Which I further proue secondly for as much as concerneth the exposition of the scriptures because the manner of interpretation which both our English professors also the rest of the pretensiue reformers vse is scarce in anie thing coformable to the expositiō of the anciēt Fathers Doctors of the precedent ages as it ought to be according to the rule of S. Augustin in his second booke against Iulian where in the begining he faith the Christian people ought rather to adhere to the Fathers then vnto those which teach the contrarie towards the end of the same booke he addeth thus that which they to wit the Fathers found in the church they hold that which they had frō their Fathers they deliuered to their sonnes But our newe interpreters as they are in their positions so are they in their expositions of the worde of God singular full of affected apish imitation of the Iewish glosses neither doe they scarce euer alledge anie other expositions or constructions then those of Rabbi Salomon Rabbi Kimchi Aben Ezra the rest of that rabble Notobstanding they cannot be ignorant but that some of them were either Scribes Phariseis or Saduceis if not all of whome it may be presumed with reason that they frame their expositions more commonly according to their owne false traditions thē according to the true sense meaning of the lawe By which proceeding the reader may consider how impossible it is for our aduersaries to satisfie their consciences in the deliuerie of such doctrine as dependes vpon so vncertaine fayleable groūdes in how miserable a case that flock is which hath his instruction in matters of saluatiō from such Pastors as partely out of the writings of those profane Iewes enimies of Christ partely also by their owne industrie coine new sense out of the old obstruse decayed significations of wordes which they find in pedantik humanists Lexicōs Dictonaries neglecting the commō current acceptions Ecclesiasticall vse of the same By all which the conclusion of my proposed argument doth appeare true sound which is that the Professors of the English faith haue no certaine and infallible interpretation sense of the diuine scriptures consequently their Religion must needs be voyde of trueth THE FOVRTH PRINCIPAL ARGVMENT MY fourth principall argument I propoūd in the forme following That Religion is false which hath a false rule of faith But the English Religion hath a false rule of faith Ergo the English Religiō is a false Religion The maior is not denyed by our aduersaries therefore it needs no proofe And it they should be so refractorie as to denie it It is cōuinced by the verie leight of naturall reason which teacheth that the ruled followes the nature of the rule so that it cannot possible be streighter then the rule it selfe no more then a boton can be round if the moulde be square Now that the English Religion hath a false rule of faith which is the Minor of my silogisme I demonstrate thus by an other silogisme The Religion of England hath for the rule of faith scriptures interpreted expounded by euerie particular member of their Church But the scriptures interpreted expounded by euerie particular member of their Church is a false rule of faith Therefore the Religion of England hath a false rule of faith That the scriptures expounded by euerie particular member of the Church is a false rule of faith I euidently proue because the
true rule of faith is of it owne nature certaine common knowne to all beleeuers not priuate vnknowne certaine to him onely who hath it Otherwise no man can certainely infallibly knowe what it is except himselfe consequētly none but he onely can followe it wheras the true rule of faith is such as euerie one is bounde to knowe imbrace vpon perill of his saluation Secondly I proue that this English rule is false because it is subiect to error the maintainers of themselues confessing that no man can infallibly interpreter the scriptures so that his expositions euen in the greatest matters of faith be vndoubtedly true certaine in such sorte as he can infallibly persuade others that they are according to that sense which the holye Gost intended when he dictated them to the diuine writers For confirmation of which I further adde that our aduersaries commonly teach that not onely euerie particular priuate person may erre in faith but also the whole number of Bishops 〈◊〉 Prelates of their Church assembled in a Synod or Councell Out of which it is infallibly consequent that their rule of faith is not certaine either in it selfe or at the least not to others neither can others lawfully follow it for the same reason that it is vnknowne vnto them subiect to error deceipte Besides altho ' the professors of the English Religion should denie this same 1. Cor. 2. yet is it conuinced concluded by scripture it selfe saying for what man knowes the things of a man but the spirit of man which is in him Thirdly if the English rule of faith were not false to wit scriptures expounded by euerie member of the Church it would thence necessarily followe that ther were no need of prechers teachers in the Church of England to propose declare the worde of God vn the people because euerie particular man woman that can read the Bible can sufficiently vnderstand expounde it them selues at the least for as much as concernes their saluation And for the ignorant sorte which can not read it were also in vaine for them to haue preachers in regarde they can propose vnto them no other rule of faith then scriptures expounded by their owne particular spirit which neuerthelesse euē according to their owne doctrine is fallible subiect to error by consequence obledgeth no man to followe it but rather to auoy de it by all meanes possible Fourthly I proue the same because this rule of our aduersaries serues no mans turne but his owne who hath it that but vnto wardely neither doth it obledge others to beleeue it neither is it one the same but as manie as ther be people in the whole Church of England all which is most absurde repugnant to the nature of true faith which ought to be one in all the Christian world certaine in fallible binding all persons to embrace it by diuine precept commaund which neuerthelesse could not be such if the rule which it followeth were not one without all multipllcation diuision And to this may be ioy ned for conclusion of the proofe of this argument that which I haue deliuered touching our aduersaries false translation erroneous manner of interpretation of diuine scriptures THE FIFT PRINCIPAL ARGVMENT MY fift principall argument in order to proue the falsitie of the English Religion is this That Religion is false which hath not a perpetuall disinterrupted succession of Bishops Preists deriued from the Apostles But the English Religion hath not a perpetuall disinterrupted succession of Bishops Preists deriued from the Apostles Ergo the English Religion is a false Religiō The maior proposition is so certaine and cleare that our aduersaries a the least all or most of those of the Protestant faith can not denie it And if perpaps anie of them or anie other Sectaries should be so frontlesse imprudent as to denie it they ar manifestly conuinced by those places of scripture which proue the perpetuitie of the gouernement of the Church of Christ in generall As in the fourth to the Ephesians where it is affirmed that Christ gaue to his Church Pastors doctors that is Bishops Preists to the consummation of the saints vnto the word of the ministerit that to rule gouerne feed the flock of the Church vntill the cōsummation of the world And the Prophet Dauid in his 47. psalme faith that God founded his citie that is the Church as S. Augustin expoundes it for euer And surely if God established his Church for euer as truely according to this he did it can neuer wāt Bishops Preists for that if it should wāt them then it were no more a true Church according to the saying S. Hierome Wher ther is no Preist ther is no Church In which word sacerdos Preist Contra Luciferianos he includeth also Bishops as being cheefely Preists those without whome no Preists can be made of ordained sainct Cyprian also in the second epistle of his fourth booke towardes the end teaches that the true Church cannot stand without Bishops Preists And sainct Augustin saith plainelie that it is the succession of Preists by Preists he meaneth also Bishops which keepes him in the Church Contra part Donat. And in his epistle 165. vpon the psalme against Donatus he chalengeth his aduersaries the Donatists to number the Preists which haue ben euen from the seat of sainct Peter see who hath succeeded each other in that Order of Fathers in which Order of Fathers meaning the Popes whose names he specifiech in his epistle to Generosus euen from S. Peter to Anastasius who was Pope in his time because he findeth not one Donatist therefore he concludes that their Religion is false not to be followed So that the reader may plainelie perceiue by these authorities of which kinde manie more might be alledged if need were the place did admit anie larger discourse that the ancient Fathers held the want of succession of Bishops Preists for a common infallible argument of the falsitie of that Religion which not obstanding whatsoeuer other colores of truth it might seeme to haue by pretext of scripture or otherwise was destitute of the same That which is sufficient for the proofe of the mator of my Sylogisme in case anie of the defenders of the English Religion should haue the face to denie it Wherefore hence I passe to the minor to wit that the English Religion hath not a continuall disinterrupted succession of Preists Bishops derined from the Apostles which I proue first Because it is certaine by the testimonie of all writers of those ages that frome the time of sainct Gregorie Pope of Rome who sent sainct Augustin the Monke into England to plant the then professed Roman faith ther were no other Preists or Bishops but such as had their authority deriued from the Roman seat such Bishops onelie as were
appeare to omit other authorities by the wordes of sainct Ambrose vpon the 13. chapter of the Acts of the Apostles Where expounding those words Ieiunantes imponentesque â—is manies He saith that imposition of handes is mysticall wordes where with the person elected is confirmed to this worke receiuing authoritie his conscience bearing him witnesse that he may be bould in our Lordes name to offer sacrifice to God By which wordes the reader may plainelie perceiue that in sainct Ambroses time there was more required in the matter forme of consecration of Bishops then imposition of handes onelie with those wordes receiue the holie Ghost to wit some other wordes by which the person ordained receiueth power to offer Sacrifice which wordes neuerthelesse were neuer vsed in the consecration either of Master Parker or anie other of the Bishops or ministers of the English Church as by them themselues is confessed who by necessarie sequele must also needs confesse the same Bishops ministers to be essentiallie defectiue voy de of true ordination Thirdlie according to the storie of the Nagge 's head tauerne as it was related by Master Neale some time professor of languages in Oxford who was a man that both by reason of his ancient yeares as also for the meanes he had to know the trueth as being imployed about this same busines by Bishop Boner then deposed prisoner ought in all reason to be credited Master Parker was not ordained at all by Master Barlowe but by Master Scorie who by reason he had she name of Bishop during the Reigne of King Enwarde because Master Kitching being a true Bishop tho' then deposed with the rest of the Catholike Bishops of Queenes Maries time partelie out of scruple of conscience partelie for feare of Excommunication menaced towardes him by Bishop Bonner refused to consecrate the newe superintendents vndertooke the worke in the foresaid Tauerne where a meeting was made to that purpose Scorie causing them all to kneele he tooke the Bible laid it vpon them bidding them take authoritie to preach the worde of God sincerelie who without anie more wordes or deedes all escaped Bishops of the new fashion And Master Parker hauing either better fortune or better fauor then the rest for his parce he got the Archbishoprie of Canterburie and the primacie of England The others being seased according to their seuerall lots and election of the Queene Whence it clearelie appeareth that by which soeuer of these formes Master Parker his fellowes were consecrated yet they haue no true Canonicall ordination neither according to the scriptures nor according to the ancient practice of the Church by vnauoidable consequence they haue no true succession deriued from the Apostles but as an ancient Father saith of other heretikes of his time so we may say of them that succeeding to none they are prodigiouslie borne of themselues Cypr. 〈◊〉 de simpl Prael And sainct Cyprian of others saith in like manner that without anie lawe of ordination they preferre themselues assume the name of Bishops not hauing the Episcopate coferred vpon them by anie Both which sentences may verie aptelie be applyed to our nominall Bishops of England who as I haue declared receiue their Bishopries without law full authoritie Yet notobstanding all this which hath ben said perhaps some of them will insiste further in their owne defence say that althou ' they haue no personall succession yet they haue doctrinall succession from the Apostles in respect they maintaine the same doctrine which the Apostles their successors in the primatiue Church preached tought To which I anser that this is the common euasion of those onelie who defend the inuisibilitie of the Church but it doth nothing auaile those who pretende to defend the continuall visibilitie of the same as they doe against whome I now dispute Secondlie whosoeuer maintaines this It is but a miere shif or cloake wherewith to couer the nakednes of their new borne Religion which if it had not falselie disguised itselfe with the Apostolicall robes it could not for shame haue appeared in publike by reason of the great deformitie it hath in doctrine Thirdly If the English Religion hath succession of doctrine not of persons wher was it from the fift or sixt hundreth yeare till the dayes of Luther Was it in men or in beasts In beastes they will not say for the auoyding of their owne shame And if it was in men then showe vs wher when those men liued otherwise we will giue no more credit vnto our aduersaries wordes then we doe wheÌ„ they crye out say it is Apostolicall doctrine but proues it not as ordinarily they do both in their bookes preachings PeradueÌ„ture they will say their Religion was neither in men nor beasts but in bookes they meane in the bookes of the old newe Testament But this is yet more false absurde then the rest for that doctrine inuolued in bookes can not make succession succession being and order or series of things imediately following one other which order doctrine meluded in papers or partchement can not possible haue as being one the same obiect of faith quite indistinguible in it selfe can be onely intentionally or obiectiuely distinguished or deuided by the persons in which as an accident it is subiected receiued Besides All the tyme that those fantastikes imagin their doctrine to haue ben continually successiue in the Bible if they them selues or at least other their companions in sect were not as ther confesse howe can they knowe at this present that anie such bookes or doctrine was then in the world when themselues were not If they say they haue that knowledge from the Romanists then say I why doe they not also giue credit vnto the same Romanists in other matters of faith as particularly in that point of the number of Canonicall scriptures of the true sense of them as they ar applyed to euerie Controuersie betwixt vs them during that long space in which ther were none of their Religion extant among all which points of difference ther is none more important then that of the infallible knowledge of those diuine bookes which the Romanists had in their custodie all the tyme of their aduersaries non existence to be the onely true authenticall worde of God So that for these men to affirme they haue all wayes had a doctrinall succession from the Apostles without a personall is a miere Puritanicall dreame a Chymericall conceite paradox of their owne forgeing an Idea of Plato abstracted onely by distracted myndes Finally for proofe that the English Religion hath no true Preists Bishops I adde that our Sauior ordained his Apostles not onely to preach his worde but also to remit sinnes offer sacrifice according to those two texts of scripture 〈…〉 22. whose sinnes you shall remit they shall be remitted And doe this in my remembrance Wherfore
Religion euerie one according to their seuerall manner And to this declaration of the text I adde the expesitions of all those ancient Fathers who haue applyed this place of malachie to the Eucharist as to the onely proper sacrifice of the newe Testament ther being not one extant in all antiquitie who hath deliuered anie contrarie sense of it or that hath explicated it of prayers or workes alone S. Iustin martyr who liued within the compasse of the second age speaketh plainely to this purpose citing the wordes of the prophet Dialogo c◠Tryphone in which he affirmes that malachie foretels a newe oblation to succeed the sacrifice of the Iewes saying De hostijs quae ipsi deo à nobis Gentibus vbique offeruntur id est Eucharistiae tum predicit cum ait à nobis nomen suum gloria affici vobis autem pollui Which is this in English God by Malachye the Prophet for in this māner Iustin speaketh in his precedent wordes doth prophesie of the hoastes or sacrifices which are in euerie place offered by vs Gentils meaning conuerted Gentils that is of the bread of the Eucharist likewise of the cup of the Encharist when he saith that his name is glorified by vs but polluted by you meaning the Preists of the old Testament Now since this renowned martyr both particularly declares that the Prophet Malachies prediction is meante of the Eucharist supposing he further affirmes the same Eucharist to haue ben offered by the Christian Preists of his tyme in all places yea that therby the name of God is glorified it is extreame want of iudgement or rather plaine madnes in our aduersaries to denie that the Prophet speaketh of a true proper sacrifice And althou the same Father in his precedent lines doth insinuate that the Eucharist is a gratiarumaction or rendering of thankes for diuers benefits receiued by Christians at the handes of God as the creation of the worlde the memorie of their Redemption other of that nature yet those or the like causes of the offering of the Eucharist doe no more diminish the nature of a true sacrifice included in the same then hostia pacifica the hoaste of pacification did cease to be a true oblation or sacrifice because it was offered by way of thankes giuing for benefits receiued or els to obtaine new fauors graces of God almightie By which also the friuolous euasion of kemntitius other Nouellists appeares to be voyde of force while they endeuoure to illude the streingth of this most pregnant testimonie for the proofe of the Euchariticall sacrifice of the lawe of Christ for that reason to wit because the author of the same testimonie in the same place affirmes our sauior to haue comaunded the Eucharist to be celebrated in remembrance of his death an passion as if the one the other could not be included in the same action either according to diuine scripture or naturall reason neither of which is founde repugnant but rather most conformable agreeing Lib. 4. cap. 32. Eum qui est ex creatura pa nem accepit gratias egit dicens Hoc est corpus meum salicem similiter qui est ex ca crentura qua est secundum nos suum sanguinem confessus est noui Testamenti nouam docuit oblationem Quam Ecclesia ab Apostolis accipiens offert Deo in vniuerso mundo ei quialimenta nobis prastat primitias suorum munerum de quo in duodectm Prophetis sic Malachias prasignauit Lib. 4. cap. 32. S. Irenaeus in like manner being one of the same standing testifies that the Prophet Malachie did presignifie the Eucharist in those same wordes which he cites saith That bread which is made of a creature he that is Christ tooke gaue thankes saying this is my bodie And likewise the chalis which is of a creature which is according to vs confessed it to be his owne bloud taught vs a newe oblation of the newe Testament which the Church receiuing from the Apostles offers to God in the vniuersall world to him who giues vs for nourishment the primicies of first frutes of his giftes of which Malachie one of the twelue Prophets did so presignifie Lhaue no pleasure in you And that sainct Irenaeus speaketh not of an vnproper Sacrifice as Kemnitius some other sectaries doe cauille is most euident by other wordes of his towardes the end of the same chapter where he addeth that the former people that is the Iewes shall cease to offer to God Yet neuerthelesse that in euerie place a pure Sacrifice is offerred vnto him his name glorified among the Gentils More ouer in his 24. chapter he saith that one kinde of sacrifice is reproued by God meaning the sacrifice of the Iewes to which the sacrifice the of Church succeedes By which discourse particularlie by those wordes which he saith of Christ noui Testamenti nouam docuit oblatiouem that is he taught a newe oblation of the newe Testament it is clearelie conuinced that this holie Father by the worde oblation could not possible vnderstand almes as our aduersaries contendes because altho' it be in some sorte an oblation to God yet is it neither newe nor proper to the newe Testament onelie but common to both old newe as the scripture it self doth most frequently teach inculcate More ouer this place of sainct Irenaeus did so farre conuince the iudgement of Caluin in this particular that like the deuils which according to the relation of the Euangelist acknowledged Christ against their wils he confesseth him to haue expounded it of the Masse iuste as the Romanists of later times vse to interpret applie it hath no other refuge then plainelie to contradict the foresaid ancient Fathers exposition in this impudent audatious manner sayeing of the Roman diuines When they obiect the place of Malachie to be vnderstood so of the Sacrifice of the Masse by Irenaeus the offering of Melchisedech in like manner by Athanasius Ambrose Augustin Arnobius it is breefelie ansered that the same writers doe in other places also interpret bread the bodie of Christ but so ridiculouslie that reason trueth constreineth vs to dissent from them thus this saucie Nouellist speakes of his betters whose pride bouldnes the Centurists imitate treating this same point in their third Centurie as if they were the onelie men in the world borne for reason not those rather who immediatelie succeeding the Apostles did infinitlie surpasse them both in virtue knowledge of Christian doctrine true sense of Gods diuine worde institution Tertullian declaring the sacrifice prophecied by Malachie against Marcion Sacrificium purum gloria scilicet relatio benedictio laus hymni c. Lib. 3. Contra Marc. alluding to his wordes saith thus In euerie place sacrifice is offerred to my name pure sacrifice viz. of glorie relation benediction prayse hymnes
onely is the true Religion The maior of this silogisme is allowed for true questionlesse by both parties The minor onely is in contronersie for the more cleare proofe of which it is to be supposed that both parties agree in this point to wit that that Church onely hath the true infallible interpretation sense of scripture which hath the infallible assistance of the holie Cost in that action altho' in deed this argreement well considered is onely in wordes for not obstanding this it yet further remaineth Controuersed betwixt vs our aduersaries in whome this speciall assistance of the diuine spirit resides whether in thâ— Prelates Pastors of the Church duely 〈◊〉 â—â—bled or in eâ—â—â—e particular person of the Church In which controuersie neuerthelesse both parties yet further accorde that whersoeuer the foresaid true inspuration of God doth assist ther onely is the true interpretation of the diuine worde Besides this it is to be supposed that ther ar two manners or two sortes of meanes or wayes by which people attaine to the true vnderstanding sense of the scriptures The one is by a sole conference of one place of scripture with another by euerie priuat ChristiaÌ„ man or womaÌ„ learned or vnlearned by reading the bare text of the scripture iudging of the sense according to the spirit which guides them good or bad The other way or manner of exposition is performed not by a miere solitarie or priuate conference comparison of places of scripture one with another but both by comparing or collating them in that maner also by an exacte viewe of the expositions of the holie learned Fathers or doctors of all former tymes succeeding ages euen to the present tyme in which the expounders liue which forme of proceeding as it is most mainfest neither is to be performed by euerie priuate person autheÌ„tically with infallible certainelie but by the publike Prelateâ— Pastors of the Church especially by the cheefe pastor of it Now this being noted aduertised I proue the minâ— of my argumeÌ„t wâ—th anâ— her silogisme in 〈◊〉 manner That oâ—ely Church hath the true interpretation sense of scripture which receiueth it from the Preists Prelates Pastors especially the cheefe Pastor of the Church succeeding linially froÌ„ the Apostles by conference of places viewe of expositions of the holie Fathers doctors of all successiue ages from the Apostles to the end of he world not by euerie priuat man or woman But the Roman Church onely receines the interpretation sense of scripture frome the Preists Prelates Pastors especially the cheese pastor of the Church in the forsaid manner Ergo the Roman Church onely hath the true interpretation sense of scripture The major of this silogisme in which the difficulte coÌ„sistes I could proue first by scriptures which both in the old newe Testament assigne this facultie power to Preists Bishops Pastors as gouerners rules of the Church with a strict commaunde for the people to obey them But because I dâ—e not here professe to make aâ—ie exact large discourse vpon that point but onely intend breefely to make good iustifie my former argumentation therfore I remit the rest of the places of scripture which I could alledge to be seâ—â— as they at cited declared by Bellarmin other diuines will vrge onely that one text of S. Paule in his epistle to the Ephesians which is most cleare pregnant for this purpose Wherfore in his 4. Bell. lib. 3. de verbo Dei c. 4 sequent chapter of this Epistle speaking of the institution of the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchie by Christ he saith thus And he gaue some Apostles some Prophets other some Euangelists others pastors doctors to the consummatior of the saints vnto the worke of the ministrie vnto the edification of the bodie of Christ vntill we meet all into the vnitie of faith knowledge of the sonne of God into a perfect man into the mâ—sure of the age of the fulnes of Christ that now we be not children wauering with euerie winde of doctrine in the wickednes of men in craftines of the circumuention of error By which wordes it is manifest that our sauior among the rest appointed Pastors doctors them not onely for the Ecclesiasticall gouernement of the Church but also to deliuer the true doctrine of Christ to the people least if they were left to them selues in that particular of the knowledge of the true faith they should fall into errors this was thus ordained by Christ not for anie limited tyme but eueÌ„ vnto the consummation of the world in all ages By which it is euident that since Christ our sauior as the Apostle relates 〈◊〉 â—â—point this order subordination of the Câ—â—gie in his Church for the gouernement instruction of the members therof in true faith perfection of virtuous life as superiors to whome he commaunded them to obey according to that of the Apostle Obedite prepositis subiacete eis It is I say by necessarie consequence most manifest that Christs diuine pleasure also was that the common people should not be their owne caruers but should receiue the interpretation sense of his diuine worde from those whome he himselfe designed for their rulers superiors in all matters concerning the safetie of their soules supposing as a certaine euident trueth that the whole structure perfection of a Christian faith life doth necessarily depened vpon the orthodoxe sense meaning of the worde of God That which the generall perpetuall practice of the Church from tyme to tyme doth manifestly conuince which in all occasions of controuersie in matters of faith manners hath vsed no other proceeding then by assembling of Councels consisting of the Prelates Pastors cheefely of the cheefe supreme Pastors the Bishops of Rome according to their seuerall tymes standings for deciding of doubdts questions broached by erroneous teachers that by declaration of the true seÌ„se of those places of scripture aboute which the controuersie was begun For so did the Generall Councell of Nyce vnder Pope Siluester expounde declare to the whole Church euerie particular member therof the true sense of those wordes Pater maâ—or me est And in the first Councell of Constantinople vnder Pope Damasus those Ioan. Amos. 4. Rom. 8. Ego Dominus formans tonitru creans spiritum And those spiritus postulaâ— pronobis In the Councell of Ephesus vnder Pope Celestin against Nestorius those Math. 26. Philip. 2. Deus Deus meus quare me dereliquisti And those habitu inuentus vt homo In the Councell of Chalcedon vnder Pope leo against Entyches those Ioa. 1. verhum carofactum est To this I adde consent of Fathers who write of this matter generally teaching this same doctrine Lib. 3. c. 4. S. Irenaeus in his booke against heresies saith thus