other beginning or beginners of Protestancy than those whom hitherto they have taken for their glorious Fathers and persons qualified with such gifts and endowments as make them fit to reform the whole Christian world and these being once removed from the rank of their Forefathers how will they answer this question Who in particular were the first beginners of their Protestant Church at what time and in what place did they live To which demand I am sure they cannot answer with satisfaction but perforce they must be content to be like the Donatists of whom St. Optatus sayd that they were Filii sine Patre Sonns without Father and every one must be to himself a begining of his Faith and Religion A dreadfull point in the business of an Eternity and necessary subject to that weighty saying of St. Bernard Qui se sibi magistrum constituit stulto se discipulum subdit He who will be his own Master shall be Scholler to a Fool. Secondly For Manners who can imagin that God being Truth Purity and Peace it self would choose for Reformation of the World such men as confessedly have shamefully erred against Truth for Doctrin and against not only Purity but common honesty and morality and against Peace by being both for their Doctrines and Practises Authors of Tumults Seditions and Rebellions Thirdly it ought to be considered with deepest grief and Tears what a lamentable thing it was that people should have been seduced from that antient Religion which the World professed with the specious names of Dr. Luther c. and with a fair but false and lying title of Reformation by men who indeed were such as hath been declared and proved from their own Writings and the expresse and direct Assertions of their own brethren Fourthly since we have found them to be most inconstant in their Doctrine in matters of highest concernment expresly professing to have temporized accommodated themselves to the times and not to that which even themselves judged true who can rely on them unless he first resolve not to be settled in any truth but to be ranked among those who circumferuntur omni vento doctrinae which in effect is no better than to have no true Faith at all Fiftly seeing they cannot nor ever could agree with those whom they stile Brethren and which is the main point have no possble means of agreement no men in wisdome can join themselves to the common generall name of Protestants not knowing which of them in particular hold the Truth nor who are or are not Protestants nor why they should believe one sect of them more than another neither is it possible to join with them all they believing and professing to believe contradictory Tenents some of which must needs be false Sixtly Seing those first Reformers are confessed to hold Doctrines in themselves damnable and detested even by Protestants how can they be excused from Heresy And seing they left the whole Catholick Church extant before Luther upon pretence of Errous in Doctrine of lesse moment than those wherin they thus differ among themselves and yet forsake not one another but will needs be Brethren and of one Communion how can they be excused from Schism by their division from the Communion of all Churches But now having declared what kind of men the Progenitots of Protestants were let us in the next place examine of what Fathers we Catholicks may deservedly glory even by the Confession of our Adversaries who by evidence of Truth are forced to confesse that the Antient Holy Fathers taught the same Doctrines and practised the same things which Protestants disprove in us and for the Reformation whereof they pretend to have forsaken our Church This then according to the order prescribed in the Preface must be the subject of the next Consideration THE SECOND CONSIDERATION By the Confession of Protestants the Antient Holy Fathers believed and practised the same things which we believe and practise against Protestants 1. FIrst saith Brereley tract 1. sect 3. subdivis 1. concerning Vows it is confessed that the Fathers did allow Vows of perpetual Chastity affirming them to be obligatory Non ignoramus saith Chemnitius exam part 3. pag. 14. ante med quod Patres vota perpetui caelibatûs probent quodque illa obligatoria etiam agnoscant In so much as he Chemnitius doth thereupon specially recite and reject in this behalf the several sayings of Basil [q] Chemnitius ibid. pag. 40. a. ante med Ambrose and Chrysostom Also of [r] Ibid. pag. 42. a. Epiphanins Austine and [s] Ibid. pag. 42. b. ante med Innocentius And it is likewise yet further affirmed that the [t] Peter Martyr de Votis pag. 490. saith Erant ergo Clementis aetate professiones vota fateor I am tune incaeperant homines deflectere à Verbo Dei c. With whom agreeth Mr. Parkins in Problem c. pag. 191. initio saying In antedictis saeculis stipulationes de continentia publice in Ecclesia fieri solebant nam Anno Christi 170. Clemens Alex. l. 3 stromat ait c. profession and Vows of Chastity were extant among Christians in the time of Clement Bishop of Alexandria who by [u] Euseb hist l. 6. c. 11. paulâ—ante med saith Clemens de se ipso loquitur quod prope ad Apostolorum tempoâ—a successerit his own testimony lived neer to the Apostles times that [x] Peter Martyr ibid. pag. 524 fine saith Scio Epiphanium cum multis aliis ex Patribus in eo errare quod peccatum esse dicunt votum hujusmodi violare cum onufuerit malè illum id referre in traditiones Apostolicas Epiphanius and many other Fathers erred therein that [y] Cent. 3. c. 6. col 140. linea 27. cent 3. c. 7. col 176. lâ—ea 39. Tertullian and Cyprian taught Vows of Chastity that the famous antient [z] Iustus Molitor de Ecclesia militante c. pag. 80. fine saith Chalcedonense Concilium contra Spiritus Sancti oracula Monachis Virginibus monialibus usum conjugii interdixit Council of Chalcedon did hereupon forbid Marriage to Monks and Nuns that St. Augustine and all the Fathers assembled with him in the Carthage Council [a] So saith Danaeus contra Bellarm. primae partis altera parte pag. 1011. initio And see Concil 4. Carthag can 104. and 1 Tim. 5.9 10 11 12. abused manifestly the word of God saying upon the Apostles words If any Widow how young soever c. hath vowed her self to God left her secular habit and under the testimony of the Bishop and Church appeared in a religious weed if afterward she go to secular Marriage she shall according to the Apostle have damnation because she dared to make void the vow of Chastity which she made to God that [b] Mr. Fulk against the Rhemish Testament in 1 Tim. 5. fol. 381. b. sect 10. initio And see Danaeus contra Belar 1. partis altera parte pag.
6. fine in his Treatise tending to Pacification sect 14. circa med pag. 89. acknowledgeth a particular blessing of God in the Church of Rome and an evident work of the Holy Ghost saying That the Church of Rome hath ever continued after a sort in profession of the faith since the time that by the Apostles it was delivered to them c. and hath also in some manner preserved and hitherto maintained both the Word and Sacraments that Christ himself did leave unto us which surely saith he is a very special blessing of God and an evident work of the Holy Ghost c. To make good saith Brereley ibidem in the margent at †M. Bunny's words of the evident work of the Holy Ghost in preservation of the Roman Sea the same hath appeared many waies extraordinary and admirable As first in that the other four Patriarchal Seas are noted and known to have been pestered every one of them with confessed Arch-hereticks or Inventers of new doctrines against some principal Article of our Christian faith As at Antioch Paulus Samosetanus at Hierusalem Joannes and Arsenius at Alexandria Dioscorus at Constantinople Macedonius and Nestorius onely the Sea of Rome hath been preserved free from all such known note or touch For howsoever our Adversaries do pretend some one or other Pope to have had his private errour yet to charge any Pope with being an Arch heretick as before-said they have not any colour Secondly in that the Cities of all the other Patriarchal Seas and the Bishops belonging to them now are and of long have been oppressed with Infidels and their succession is either none or but inglorious whereas God hath yet hitherto disposed otherwise of the City and Sea of Rome Thirdly in the example of so many great Christian Kingdomes and Countryes in Asia Africk and Europe which forsaking the Communion of this Sea became not long afterwards barbarous and subject to Infidels accordingly as it is foretold of the true Churches prerogative The Nation and Kingdome that will not serve thee shall perish and those Nations shall be utterly destroyed Esay 60.12 Fourthly in that this is the onely Sea or Church which is confessed by our Adversaries to have continued known and visible for these last thousand or 1300 years whereof see Brereley tract 1. sect 2. at k. l. sect 8. in the margent at c. tract 2. c. 2. sect 7. fine at 3 4 5 6 c. converting also to the Christian faith during all that time by its Legats and Preachers so many confessed Nations and Kingdomes of the Gentiles agreeable to the predictions of the Prophets in that behalf whereof see Brereley tract 2. c. 1. sect 4. initio in the margent at* Fifthly in that this Sea hath been persecuted by the contrary factions of so many Christian Princes by the very Citizens and Cardinals of Rome by the Schisms Factions and wicked lives of the Popes themselves by the implacable hatred and contradiction of so many confessed heresies and hereticks of every age conspiring all of them howsoever divided otherwise among themselves to malign and impugn this Sea as the principal object of their daily continued malice So Hell gates may be said to have assaulted her and yet not prevailed Matth. 16.18 Upon which consideration but duely had of all Hereticks though divided among themselves yet joyning so together in malice against the Roman Sea how can that out-faced opinion of our Adversaries be possibly true which M. D. Downham in his treatise concerning Antichrist l. 2. pag. 22. ante med delivereth saying We hold Antichrist to be the whole body of Hereticks in the last age of the world c. The head of which body is the Papacie The Pope to be their Head and yet he ever against them all and they all ever against him is it possible 6. Pu. Besides what hath been said out of Brereley of this point that Protestants confess that the Roman Church wants nothing necessary to salvation I will shew the same yet more at large D. Potter in his Answer to Charity mistaken pag. 63. saith The most necessary and fundamentall Truths which constitute a Church are on both sides unquestioned And for that reason learned Protestants yield them Romanists as he calls us the name and substance of a Christian Church Where we see that he saith in generall learned Protestants yield them c. In proof whereof he cites in his margent Iunius D. Reinolds and sayes See the judgement of many other writers in the advertisement annexed to the old Religion by the Reverend Bishop of Exeter and adds The very Anabaptists grant it Fr. Johnson in his Christian Plea pag. 123. So that with this one Testimonie of Potter we have many other even of our greatest Adversaries And pag. 62. he saith To those twelve Articles which the Apostles in their Creed esteemed a sufficient Summary of wholsome Doctrine they Catholicks have added many more Such are for instance their Apocryphall Scriptures and unwritten dogmaticall Traditions their Transubstantiation and dry Communion their Purgatory Invocation of Saints Worship of the Images Latine service trafficke of Indulgences and shortly the other new doctrines and decrees canonized in their late Synod of Trent Upon these and the like new Articles is all the contestation between the Romanists and Protestants And then he adds the words which we have cited The most necessary and Fundamentall truths which constitute a Church are on both sides unquestioned and for that c. Where we see he grants we believe the twelve Articles of the Apostles Creed which he teaches at large to contain all Fundamentall Points of Faith and that we hold all the most necessary and Fundamentall truths which constitute a Church Therefore those Points of our Doctrine which he gives for instance are no Fundamentall errors nor the contrary Articles necessary and Fundamentall truths and yet he names all the chiefest Points controverted between us and Protestants even Transubstantiation Communion in one kind and Latine Service which are the things they are wont most to oppose Yea he comprises all the Doctrines and Decrees of the Councill of Trent Therefore we are free from Fundamentall errors by the confession of our Adversaries pag. 59. he further saith The Protestants never intended to erect a new Church but to purge the old The reformation did not change the substance of Religion but only cleansed it from corrupt and impure qualities If the Protestants erected not a new Church then ours is still the old Church and if it were only cleansed from corrupt qualities without change of the substance the substance must be still the same it was and that which was must be still the same with that which is pag. 61. The things which the Protestants believe on their part and wherein they judge the life and substance of Religion to be comprized are most if not all of them so evidently and indisputably true that their Adversaries themselves do avow and receive them
PROTESTANCY CONDEMNED BY THE EXPRESSE VERDICT AND SENTENCE OF PROTESTANTS LUKE 19.22 By thine own mouth I judge thee DOWAY Printed in the Year 1654. THE PREFACE TO THE READER I Cannot doubt but that every Protestant if he have not a mind to divest himself of common reason and proclame himself to be inexcusable will confess Protestancy to be cast and condemned by Protestants if by their own free and open Confession these ensuing points be acknowledged for true First That the first Protestants who forsooth undertook a Reformation of the Universal Catholick Church existent before Luther after their pretended Reformation led so lewd lives and held doctrines confessedly so absurd that no man of sense or wisdom can judge them fit instruments for that supposed strange sublime supernatural and divine work Secondly That in opposition of the late and vitious Fathers of Protestants those men who even by Protestants are stiled Antient and Holy Fathers believed taught and practised the very same things which we now believe teach and practise against Protestants Thirdly That not only the Antient Fathers but even the chiefest and most learned Protestants convinced by evidence of truth stand with us against their Protestant Brethren in most of the chiefest points of Religion controverted between us Fourthly That our doctrine hath been approved by the Omnipotent hand of God using for Instruments of working Miracles those who were confessedly of our Religon yea and in express confirmation of points believed by us and rejected by Protestants Fifthly That by the confession of Protestants we Catholicks may be saved though we live and dye in the belief of all those Articles wherein Protestants disagree from us Which last consideration though it were alone ought effectually to move every one who believes an Eternity of Joy or Torment speedily to joyn himself with that Church wherein by the confession of all both friends and foes Catholicks and Protestants salvation may certainly be attained if our life agree with our belief Now for proof these Truths most important to be known I present not to the Reader any new VVork or Invention of mine own but in effect only transcribe and publish what I find in that excellent Book intituled The Protestants Apology for the Roman Church the true Author whereof thought fit to conceale himself under the name of John Brereley Priest though indeed he was neither Brereley nor Priest nor Clergy-man not John but rather James He dedicated his Book to King James and writes with so great exactness fidelity temper and moderation that Protestants though they must needs feel themselves deeply wounded by the substance of his discourse yet cannot with any shadow of reason pretend to be justly offended with his manner of discoursing In so much as Thomas Morton confesseth that whatsoever strong argument in any place in Roman Authors is to be found in favour of that Religion whatsoever hath by chance fallen from the pen of any learned Protestant but in outward appearance consonant to their doctrines which may seem any way to promote the Roman cause all that we see in this volume collected to be brought and presly urged against us with so singular a choice of the things themselves with such force of arguments with such an elegant and exquisite stile Lastly with so moderate a kind of expression as their subtilty judgement wit art and moderation could do I wish the Book were in the hands of many but it being of some bulk and not easy to be had and the points which here I offer being but few and comprised in no very great compass and of themselves very intelligible and clear to every mans understanding they will come to the knowledge of more by being published thus apart than if they were to be sought in the Book it self mixed with many other matters by the Author handled in different and distant places and upon several occasions and in a method not obvious to men who have no great mind to take much pains If upon occasion I put in a word of mine own the Reader will understand it to be mine by the word Publisher abbreviated by Pu. I make use of the Edition of An. 1608. It is clear that he is most exact in his Citations citing not only the Book but the year Edition place of Print and sometimes even the page and line as appears by the Table set down in the beginning of his Book with this title A Table of certain Protestant writers and their particular writings whose folio or page for more ready and certain direction are specially alleged in the subsequent Discourse and of their several Editions or year of Print according to which they be so alleged unless it be otherwise noted in the margent But yet notwithstanding all the care exactness used by the Author it was not in his power to exempt the Print from many Errors and Omissions as also I cannot doubt but he who Prints this publication of mine will have his errors The five Heads or Truths mentioned above I will call so many Considerations Neither have I any more to say in this place than with my whole heart to beg of the Protestant Reader even for the love he ows to the Redeemer of Mankind and for the care he should have to save his own soul that he will peruse these Considerations with a hearty desire to find and an absolute resolution to embrace the truth laying aside prejudice passion sloath and all humane and wordly respects seriously meditating the words of our Blessed Saviour Matth. 16. v. 26 27. What doth it profit a man if he gain the whole world and sustain the damage of his own Soul Or what exchange shall a man give for his Soul For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of his Father with his Angels and then will he render to every man according to his works If the Reader come not with such a disposition and resolution every word he reads will rise against him in that dreadful day of Judgement upon which all Eternity must depend O ETERNITIE ETERNITIE THE FIRST CONSIDERATION Concerning the lives of the first Protestant pretended Reformers OUR Saviour forewarning us saith Brereley tract 2. cap. 3. sect 9. subdivis 1 That a good Tree yieldeth good fruit Math. 7.17 and beware of false Prophets which come to you in sheeps clothing but inwardly are ravening Woolvs by their fruits you shall know them Math. 7.15 16. omitting petty examples saith Brereley tract 2. chap. 3. sect 9. subdivis 2. we will intreat of Principals namely of Luther of Jacobus Andreas the greatest enlarger of his Doctrine and of Zuinglius Calvin and Beza and of these also for other respects but with a gentle sparing and forbearing touch as not undertaking to allege any thing of them but that which is in it self evident and for such confessed Of Luther 1 COncerning Luther's Life and Manners saith Brereley tract 2. cap. 2. sect 10. subdivis 11. for so much as he
jussu Superiorum cum missus fiuisset ibi habitaturus nocturnis horis illi specie Angelcia Daemon apparuit ut Missam celebret hortatur ipse nec planè dormiens nec perfectè vigilans contradicrit non debere fine praesbyterii ordine aliquem hoc ministerium implere contra inimicus instat c. Whereby it appeareth that the Devill did not make this perswasion to the Abbott for the Abbot whom Surius allegeth is but the reporter thereof but to Simeon a Monk who as there afterwards yet more fully appeareth being not as yet Priest but Deacon refused to say Masse the Devill useth to perswade against the Canons c. and that accordingly that the party whom the Devill here so perswaded to say Masse was not yet Priest a perswasion I confess fitting for the Devill and but answerable to Luthers doctrine who teacheth as is before said that Laymen and even Women are Priests and may consecrat the Sacrament and preach [m] Brereley in his conâ—â—â—sion to the judges Sect 9. nex asâ—er n. The last of whom I sind any mention to offer help in relief of Luther from this so known scandall is Baldwinus And what saith he First directly against Mr. Clark Mr. Fulk and Mr. Sutcliff he acknowledgeth the conference between the Devill and Luther to have been not spirituall only nor yet a dream but that it was a reall truth written by Luther not hyperbolically but seriously and according to the truth of the historie for in his book de disputatione Lutheri cum Diabolo Printed Islebii 1605. c 4. fine pag. 83. fine he saith thereof Quapropter non est cur Monachus miretur me fateri disputationem illam esse veram neque joco neque hyperbolicè sed serio historicè scriptam And again there pag. 75. post med he saith Historiam illam tam prolixè tam consideratè Lutherus conscripserit quod enim eam scripserit quidem serio historicè etiamnum constanter fateor Et vide ibidem pag 76 fine How then would he evade The substance of his long answer is that Luther had before and then quite abandonned the Masse that therefore the Devill intended no disputation against Luther but only by way of strong temptation to put Luther in mind of his old errours so thereby to drive him to despair urging to such purpose such only known truths and reasons against the Masse as Luther then and before knew to be most true and wherein Luther was allerady satisfyed in regard whereof saith he ibidem pag 127. fine Semper in praeterito loquitur Sathan c. talis sacrificulus fuisti the Devill speaketh alwayes to Luther as in the time past thou saidst Masse thou hast done this that c. But how extremely false and impertinent is all this First for the matter of despair it is a false [n] Brerâ—ley in his Conclus to the judges Sect. 7. at q. in the margent supposall for there is not in all the passage of that disputation so much as the least mention or signification of any perswasion to despair whereas to the contrary in the same disputation there fol. 228. b. paulo ante med the Devill reproveth Luther and the Papists for thinking Christ unmercifull saying Nos Spiritus rejecti non fidimus illius misericordiae neque habemus eum pro Mediatore aut Salvatore sed exhorrescimus ut saevum Iudicem ejusmodi fidem non aliam tu habebas c. omnes alii c. Ideo à Christo tanquam crudeli Iudice confugiebatis ad S. Mariam Sanctos illi erant Mediatores inter vos Christum sic erepta est gloria Christo c. Thus doth Sathan quite against the pretence of despair amplify the mercies of Christ urging the same as a speciall argument against Prayer to Saints And whereas Luther which some urge doth there afterwards fol. 230. b. post medium answer to the Catholicks who as he foresaw would object to him that the Devill was a lyer labours to prevent the same alleging there to that end the example of Judas whom the Devill tempted with urging to him that he had betrayed the innocent blood and so brought him to despair with like alleging also the example of Cain yet is this no part of the Conference between the Devill and Luther which is there before fully ended but are only the words of Luther himself used by him uppon the occasion aforesaid many years after at his writing of the said Conference But though we should admit this supposall for true yet it is also [o] Brereley ibid. Sect. 7. in the margent at r impertinent for though he had withall perswaded Luther to despair as having sinned in his saying of Masse yet this proveth not which is the only point now questionable that he did not also then dispute with Luther to perswade him agaiust the Masse For this is evident throughout the whole passage of that his long disputation against which the other pretence of despair though admitted to be mentioned in the same disputation as it is not maketh for that nothing Secondly [o] Brereleâ— ibidem Sect. 9. in the text versus finem as conceruing the Devills supposed speaking to Luther alwayes in praeterito as of the time past it is egregiously false for as in regard of his then former saying of Masse the Devill somtimes speaketh to him as in the [q] Brereley in the conclus to the judges Sect. 8. in the margent at v and x. time past So likewise in regard of Luthers present custome then continued in saying Masse he also speaketh very often as in the time present as appeareth in Luther tom 7. Wittemberg An 1558. fol. 229. a paulo post med where the Devill saith Tu solus in angulo tuo tacens mutus comedis solus et bibis solus Et ibidem fol. 229. a. post med the Devill speaking to Luther as of his saying Masse in the time to come saith Ponam similitudinem Si quis Baptismo uteretur ubi non est persona Baptizanda c. cujusmodi esset hic Baptismus c. deest enim persona quae Baptismum accipiat Quid si idem tibi accideret in tua Missa c. Nam persona accipiens Ecclesia non esse ibi c. Hic for san dices etiam sialiis in Ecclesia non porrigam Sacramentum tamen ipse sumo ipse mihi porrigo c. And ibidem fol 229 b. Prope finem the Devill further saith to Luther as being then one with the Papists in this point En audaciam vestram in tenebris geritis haec abutimini nomine Ecclesiae ac deinde onmes abominationes vultis defensas nâ—mine Ecclesiae And again ibidem fol 230. a. prope initium Quare ergo in Missa privata blasphemè eontravenis claris verbis Ordinationi Christi postea tuo mendacio tuae impietati praetexis nomen intentionem Ecclesiae
Castalio in defen trans pag. 170. Castalio that learned Calvinist and most learned in the tongues reprehendeth Beza in a whole Book of this matter and saith that to note all his errours in Translation would require a great volume And Mr. Parkes saith [x] Parks in his Apology for three testimonies of Scripture c As for the Geneva Bibles it is to be wished that either they may be purged from those manifold errors which are both in the text and in the margent or else utterly prohibited All which confirmeth King James his grave and learned Censure in his [y] In the Conference before his Majesty pag. 46. thinking the Geneva Translation to be worst of all and that [z] Ibid. fol. 47. in the marginal notes annexed to the Geneva Translation some are very partial untrue seditious c. Lastly concerning the English Translations the Puritans say [a] Master Christopher Carlile in his Book that Christ descended not into Hell pag. 116. a. 117 c. Our Translation of the Psalms comprised in our Book of Common Prayer doth in addition subtraction and alteration differ from the truth of the Hebrew in two hundred places at the least In so much as [b] Purita Petiti to his Majesty pag. 76. initio they do therefore profess to rest doubtful whether a man with a safe conscience may subscribe thereto And Master Carlile saith of the English Translators that they have [c] Carlile pag. 118. depraved the sense obscured the truth and deceived the ignorant that in many places they do detort the Scriptures from their right sense And that they shew themselves to love darkness more than light falshood more than truth And the Mininisters of Lincoln [d] In their Book delivered to King James 16. of Decem. pag. 11. Diocess give their publick testimony tearming the English Translation a Translation that taketh away from the text that addeth to the text and that sometime to the changing or obscuring of the meaning of the Holy Ghost Not without cause therefore did his Majesty affirm [e] In the confer before his Majesty fol. 46. that he could never yet see a Bible well translated into English Thus far Brereley 34. Pu. Now let Protestants consider duly these points First Salvation cannot be hoped for without true Faith Faith according to them relyes upon Scripture alone Scripture must be delivered to most of them by the Translations Translations depend on the skill and honesty of men in whom nothing is more certain than a most certain possibility to erre and no greater evidence of truth than that it is evident that some of them embrace falshood by reason of their contrary translations What then remaineth but that truth faith salvation and all must in them rely upon a fallible and uncertain ground How many poor souls are lamentably seduced while from Preaching Ministers they admire a multitude of texts of Divine Scripture but are indeed the false translations and corruptions of erring men Let them therefore if they will be assured of true Scriptures fly to the alwaies visible infallible [f] St. Aug. l. 4. de Trinit c. 6. saith Contra rationem nemo sobrius Contra Scripturas nemo Christianus Contra Ecclesiam nemo pacificus senserit Catholick Church against which the gates of Hell can never so far prevail as that she shall be permitted to deceive the Christian world with false Scriptures Translations or Interpretations wherein there is a main and clear difference between us Catholicks who rely upon an infallible and living Guide the Church and Protestants who believe not only every private man but the whole Catholick Church to be fallible and subject to error and if it were but for this cause alone we ought to believe the Catholick Church to be infallible without the belief whereof we can have no absolute certainty what Books be Canonical nor what is the certain interpretation of them and the end of all will be that we cannot believe Christian Faith to be infallible and certainly true in so much as Luther himself by unfortunate experience was at length forced to confess thus much saying [g] In lib. cont Zuingl de ver ta Corporis Christi in Eucha If the world last longer it will be again necessary to receive the decrees of Councels and to have recourse to them by reason of divers interpretations of Scripture which now reign On the contrary side [h] Brereley tract 1. sect 10. subdivis 4. pag. 259. as our learned adversaries do thus agree to disagree in their own translations mutually condemning as before each other so also have they upon a second and more advised consideration afforded honourable testimony of our vulgar Latin translation had from Rome which Master Witaker otherwise in splene and spirit of contradiction tearmeth [i] Whitaker in his answer to Mr. Reynolds Preface pag. 2. fine 26. initio an old rotten translation c. full of faults errors and corruptions of all sorts [k] Whitaker de Sacra Scriptura quaest 5. c. 11. pag. 543. initio then which nothing can be more faulty or desteined and [l] Whitaker in his answer to Mr. Reynolds pag. 223. fine vide pag. 218. fine of all others most corrupt To this purpose Beza saith [m] Beza Annot. in Cap. 1. Lucae ver 1. The old Interpreter seemeth to have interpreted the holy Books with mervyllous sincerity and Religion Vetus Interpres videtur summa Religione sacros Libros interpretatus which Religious observation of the old Interpreter is acknowledged in like sort by D. Humfrey de ratione interpret l. 1. pag. 74. where he saith Proprietati verborum satis videtur addictus vetus Interpres quidem nimis anxiè quod tamen interpretor Religione quadam fecisse non ignorantia Also Beza further saith in praefat novi Testam Anni 1556. Vulgatam editionem maxima ex parte amplector caeteris omnibus antepono the vulgar Edition I do for the most part imbrace and prefer before all others Carolus Molinaeus in nov Testam part 30. signifieth his no less answerable liking thereof saying aegerrimè à vulgari consuetaque lectione recedo quam etiam enixè defendere soleo I can very hardly depart from the vulgar and accustomed reading which also I am accustomed earnestly to defend In so much as he professeth [n] See Molinaeus in Luc. 17. to prefer the vulgar Edition before Erasmus Bucer Bullinger Brentius the Tigurine translation also before John Calvin etiam Joannis Calvini omnibus aliis and all others Whereto might be added the like further answerable commendation thereof given by that famous Protestant Writer Conradus Pelicanus who in praefat in Psalterium Anni 1534. saith Tanta dexteritate eruditione fide Hebraica quoad sensum concordare deprehendimus vulgatam editionem Psalterii ut eruditissimum pariterque piissimum verè Prophetali Spiritu fuisse interpretem Graecum Latinum non dubitem And
comisisse scelera ut propter turpitudinem suam non possit aut denique incurabili impediri impotentia quo minus per corporis vires illa valeat conjugii officia persolvere Moreover Bucer concludeth the lawfulnes of Divorce and marriage again to be Verbo Dei consentienter Agreeable to the word of God ibidem pag. 124. versus finem and see pag. 120 prope finem And all this in that very book of his de Regno Christi which is by our learned Adversaries highly magnifyed of which book Nicholas Car in epist de obitu Buceri ad Joannem Checum extant in Bucer's Scripta Anglicana pag. 873. fine saith Liber Buceri de Regno Christi editus continebat absolutissimam perfectissimam totius Doctrinae Christianae effigiem In like manner also in case of the Husbands one years voluntary absence the Opinion of Bucer in Script Anglic. pag. 122 ante medium is that it is lawfull for the Wife to marry again An Errour so manifest and confessed that it being objected to Mr. Whittaker by Dureus contra Whittakerum printed at Paris 1581. fol. 287. b. fine Mr. Whittaker in his Reply to that Booke and very folio forbeareth all mention and defence thereof 59 As concerning divers [p] Brereley tract 3. sect 7. in the margent at †notable Inconstancies for which Luther in Ep. ad Joan. Har. Typ Arg. calleth Bucer a very Monster charging him further with Perfidia in Lutheri Locis Comm. quinta Class fol. 50. antemed See further Osiander in Epitom c. Centur. 16. pag. 249 initio That after his first Apostacy from our Religion he defended with Luther the Reall-Presence is in it self evident and confessed by Peter Martyr in his Treatise of the Lords Supper annexed to his Common Places in English 138. ae fine after which he became a Zuinglian as appeareth by Bucer himself in Epist ad Norimb ad esseingenses After which he revoked that Opinion and joyned again with Luther as appeareth by the Acts of the Synod holden at Luther's House in Wittemberg Anno 1536. And is further confessed by Osiander in Epit. c. Centur. 16. pag. 246 post med and by Schlusselburg in Theolog. Calvanist l. 2. fol. 17. b. ante med and by Lavaterus in Hist Sacrament pag. 31. alleged also by Schlusselburg ubi supra Insomuch as Lavaterus in Hist Sacrament allegeth by Schlusselburg l. 2. fol. 129. a. post medium saith of Bucer non parum abalienatus a Tigurinis esse visus est quos ante amârat plurimum singulare quâdam pietate coluerat And see there also fol. 129. b. circa med where it is further said Bucerus a Tygurinis Zuinglianis omnino abalienatus est And see Bucer's first Edition of his Commentaries upon the sixt of John and the 26 of Matthew where he asketh Pardon of God and the Church for that he deceived so many with the Errour of Zuinglius And see further also Functius in Chronic. And for his fourth change after all this into Zuinglianism again at his coming to Cambridge it is to all men evident and he therefore noted by the Protestant Writer Schlusselburg in Theolog. Calvin l. 2. fol. 70. b. fine where he saith Idem tamen Bucerus Anno 1551 Cantabrigiae in Anglia iterum ad Zuinglianorum haeresim deficit And ibidem fol. 17. b. circa med it is further said Bucerus Anno 1551 Cantabrigiae in Anglia rursus parva cum honestate ad Calvanistas defecit So evidently he did change his Doctrine First to Lutheranism and from thence afterwards to Calvinism from thence back again to Lutheranism and from thence lasty again to Calvinism And all this thus done both by Melancthon and Bucer with solemn Profession and shew at every such change of all full confidence and resolution of opinion and the same with great vehemency pretended evermore as plain and evident from the Scriptures Pu. Which shewes that Scripture alone cannot be a perfect Rule of Faith but that we must have recourse to a living infallible Judge of Controversies Of Knox. 60 THE most turbulent and seditious Doctrines and Deeds of John Knox the pretended Reformer of Religion in Scotland are so notorious and known and exorbitant that I have no mind to set them down in particular nor can any man of a quiet spirit take pleasure in recitall of them Yet if any desire to be further informed he may read Brerely in his Preface to the Reader particularly besides other places sect 14. Here therefore I will only set down that which a person of honour of worth and truth relates namely that when King James came first into England being received and entertained by a person of eminent rank at that time took occasion one day at dinner where at least a hundred persons attended to see and serve him to inveigh in earnest manner against some kind of disobedient seditious and mutinous persons upon which subject he was large and as for Knox in particular I remember well saith the foresaid most worthy person the Relator hereof who then was present and so well that I am able to depose it that the King sayd in particular of him that God thought fit to set a visible mark of Reprobation upon him even in this life before he went to the Devill which was that being sick in his Bed with a good fire of coales by him a candle light upon the table a woman or maid of his sitting by him he told her that he was extreamly thirsty and therefore willed her to fetch him some drink She went and returned quickly but found the Room all in darkness For not only the Candle but the Cole-fire also was utterly extinct and she by that light which her self brought in imediatly after saw the body of Knox lying dead in the middle of the floor and with a most gastly horrid countenance as if his body were to shew the condition of his Soul 61 Pu. Holy Scripture saying Prov. 17. v. 6 The Glory of Children their Fathers I beseech the Protestant Reader to weigh unpartially what Fathers the Protestant pretend Religion hath by reflecting upon what we have demonstrated even out of learned Protestants concerning the Doctrins and Lives of their first Reformers and if they find them to be such as indeed they were they ought to resolve speedily to forsake such infamous Fathers and return to that Religion from which those Sectaries departed to which end these ensuing Reflections may help if they be pondered not cursarily nor with prejudice or a Resolution to find out some kind of answer to all that may be objected but uprightly and with a harty desire to find the Truth for attayning the salvation of their Souls Consider then and collect from what we have said First that as I said heretofore seeing they taught Doctrines which Protestants themselves do not only reject but detest and abhorr they cannot be said to have been of the Protestant Religion and so Protestants must find some
Theodoret himself in his Epâ—stle to Leo placed before his Commentaries upon Pauls Epistle saith Behold after all this travail and sweat I am condemned being not so much as accused But I look for the sentence of your Apostolick Sea and I humbly beseech and require your Holiness in this case to aid me justum vestrum rectum appellanti judicium appealing to your right and just judgement and command me to come before you c. And in his Epistle ad Renatum Praesbyterum he further saith Nudarunt me Sacerdotio c. Dâ—pâ—ecor teut sanctissimo Archiepiscopi Leoni sundeas ut Apostolica authoritate utatur jubeatque ad vestrum adire Concil um tenet enim sancta ista sedes gubernacula regendarum cuncti Orbis Ecclesiarum c. did accordingly make his appeal to Pope Leo and was thereupon by him [g] Cent. 5. col 1013. lin 26. it is said Restituit Theodoreto Episcopatum Sanctissimus Leo. And see the same in Concilio Chalcedonensi act 1. restored to his Bishoprick that [h] Chrysostom in Ep. ad Innocentium saith I beseech you write that these things so wrongfully done in my absence and I not refusing judgement may not be of force as of their own nature they are not and that those who have done wrong may be subject to the penalty of the Ecclestastical Laws c. and command us to be restored to our Church c. See this in Palladius in vita Chrysostomi extat in Aloysio Lipomanno tom 2. l. 3. part 2. And Chrysostom Ep. 2. ad Innocentium desireth that his enemies if they will repent may not be excommunicated Chrysostom did the like to Innocentius who thereupon [i] See in Cent. 5. col 663. lin 36. Pope Innocentius his Epistle to Arcadius the Emperor and his wife who were adverse to Chrysostom and took part with Theophilus where he saith I the least of all and a sinner having yet the Throne of the great Apostle Peter committed to me do separate and remove thee and her from receiving the immaculate mysteries of Christ our God and every Bishop or any other of the Clergy which shall presume to Minister or give to you those holy mysteries after the time that you have read the present letters of my bond I pronounce them void of their dignity c. Arsacius whom you placed in the Bishoplicke Throne in Chrysostoms room though he be dead we depose and command that his name be not written in theroll of Bishops In like manner we depose all other Bishops which of purposed advise have communicated with him c. To the deposing of Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria we adde excommunication c. decreed Chrysostomus adversary Theophilus to be excommunicated and deposed that lastly the famous and [k] So it is tearmed by Mr. Thomas Bell in his regiment of the Church pag. 158. initio antient Council of Sardis consisting of [l] See Socrates history l. 2. cap. 16. initio Zozomen l. 2. cap. 11. 300. Bishops and above assembled from [m] See Cent. 4. col 747. lin 50. and Theodoret hist l. 2. cap. 8. Spain France Italy Sardinia Greece Egypt Thebais Libia Palestine Arabia c. and most other parts of the Christian world and whereat sundry Fathers of the Nicene Council were [n] Of this presence thereat see Theodoret hist l. 2. cap. 7. Socrates hist l. 2. cap. 16. and Carion in Chro ni pag. 282. post med present [o] The seventh Canon of this Council acknowledged and recited by the Centurists Cent. 4. col 764. l. 6. And by Osiander in epitom c. pag. 294. is Placuit ut si Episcopus c. It hath sermed good to us that if a Bishop be accused if the Bishops of the Province assembled together have judged the matter and have deprived him if the party deprived do appeal and fly to the Bishop of Rome c. If the party accused desiring his cause to be heard once again do intreat the Bishop of Rome ut è Latera suo Praesbyteros mittat to send Legates from his side it shall be in the power of the Bishop to do as he shall think good c. And see also in those Authors the 4. and 5. Canons of the said Council decreed appeals to the Bishop of Rome And so confessedly that the same is accordingly granted and the said Council therefore reproved by [p] Osiander in Epitom c. pag. 294. circa med a pud Brereley tract 2. cap. 1. sect 3. at 104. margent speaking of the Council of Saâ—dis decreeing appeals to Rome professeth to deliver the then common received opinion and reason thereof saying Inveteratus communis de manu traditus fuit error quod Petrus fuerit Romae primus Episcopus ideo hunc honorem habendum censuit successori Petri juxta communionem opinionem c. Osiander Calvin [q] Of Calvin and Peter Martyr see in Brereley tract 1. sect 7. in the mrgent at d. subd or exemple 2. Peter Martyr [r] Frigevillaeus Gauvius in his Palma Christiana pag. 30. 122. 124. circa med Trigevillaus Gauvius and [s] The Centurists do confess and recite this Canon ut supra at 70. the Century Writers In so much that whereas the Arians had expelled Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria Paulus Bishop of Constantinople and divers other Catholick Bishops of the East Church it is testified that Julius Bishop of Rome upon the Arians first accusation made to him against Athanasius [t] Nicephorus l. 9. c. 6. and Hâ—st Tripartit l. 4. c. 6. it is said Ipsis Romam vâ—nire praecepit venerabâ—lem Athanasium ad judicâ—um regulariter evocavâ—t ille continuo evocatione suscepta venit c. And see Theoâ—oret hist l. 2. c. 4. summoned Athanasius the great 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the Canons And afterwards upon relation had from Athanasius of the truth of the matter [u] Hist Tripartâ—t l. 4. c. 15. and see Zozomâ—n hist l. 3. c. 7. Julius hearing the accusations and complaint of each one c. Commanded certain of the Bishops of the East to appear before him at a certain day c. And as the Centurists confess [x] Cent. 4. col 550. lin 20. and see this further in Socrates hist l. 2. c. 11. prope initium And Zozomen hist l. 3. c. 7. initio saith of Julius Accum propter sedis dâ—gnitatem cura omnium ad ipsum spectaret singulis suam Ecclesiam restituit restored every one of those foresaid other wronged Bishops to their own place or Bishoprick and that not by intreaty or arbitrably but as the Centurists say fretus Ecclesiae Romanae praerogativa [y] Cent. 4. col 550. lin 15. and Zozomen ut supra and see Socrates l. 2. c. 11. and Hist Tripartit l. 4. c. 15. Also D. Philippus Nicolai dâ— Regno Christi l. 2. pag. 149. circa med saith of this matter Julius Pontifex
nomen ante illud tempus notum fuisse conseat He that first invented Transubstantiation was Innocent the third in the Laterane Council whereto we answer first that Mr. Whitaker barely affirmeth but proveth not this assertion neither doth he allege so much as one Author of those times charging this Pope Innocent or that Council with any Innovation or change of Doctrine in this matter And we further say that Mr. Whitaker urgeth this example howsoever against his knowledge and learning yet most clearly against all evidence of truth For this Council of Laterane was holden Anno 1215. and as appeareth by the said Council and further testimony of [*.] Crespinus in his Book of the Estate of the Church pag. 345. fine Protestants there were present thereat the Patriarchs of Hierusalem and Constantinople 70. Metropolitans 400. Bishops and 800. Conventual Priors Now that so many learned men of so many several remote Nations of the Christian world as were here assembled should all of them agree to decree Transubstantiation and yet the same to be an Innovation as Mr. Whitaker saith then first invented is more then improbable The truth hereof therefore was most plainly to the contrary that in the age before that Council the doctrine of Transubstantiation was publick and general only Berengarius as then impugned the same and was therein publickly contradicted and specially written against by divers [o] There did in that age write purposely in proof of the Real presence Anselmus Lanfrancus Guitmundus Adelmannus Algerus Hugo Lingonensis and others In so much that Papyr Masson Annal. Francorum l. 3. in Henrico Rege testifieth saying Berengario omnes illius temporis Theologi bellum indixere And Oecolampadius in lib. Epist Oecolampadii Zuinglii l. 3. pag. 712. fine saith Vivo Berengario multi contra ipsum scripserunt Fathers of several Nations in that age In so much as the foresaid Council of Lateran was at length then afterwards assembled against that this new seeming opinion A thing so evident that Master [q] Fox act mon. Printed 1576. pag. 1121. b. circa med And Joachim Camerarius in his Historiae narratio c. pag. 161. paulo post med saith Transubstationis dogma de evanescentia panis post annum Christi 850. tanquam in quieta possessione mansit usque ad Berengarii tempora annum Christi circiter 150. Nam etsi antea privatis scriptis quorundam notata res fuit publica tamen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 à Berengario prima extitit Fox confesseth and saith thereof About the year of our Lord 1660. the denying of Transubstantiation began to be accompted heresy and in that number was first one Berengarius who lived about Anno 1060. So far was Transubstantiation from being as Mr. Whitaker pretendeth first affirmed or invented afterwards in the Council of Lateran Anno 1215. Secondly we say that also the many sayings over tedious here to recite of the other much more antient Fathers who lived long before the Lateran Council are so plain and pregnant for Transubstantiation that the learned Protestants themselves do in plain tearms accordingly acknowledge the same and therefore reprehend the said Fathers To omit the plain testimony [*] Osiander in Epitom Hist Eccles cent 9 10 11. pag. 95. fine saith Anno. 950. exorta est in Clero Cantuariensi acris contentio de pane Eucharistico Alii enâ—m asseverabant priorem panis substantiam remanere nihilominus simul ibi verum Christi corpus porrigi Alii verò pugnabant recitatis verbis Domini priorem substantiam elementorum prorsus evanescere atque transire in corpus Domim c. And Crispinus in his Book of the estate of the Church pag. 286. circa med pag. 289. initio 323. post med confesseth that Paschasius who lived Anno Dom. 880. taught Transubstantiation herein of Osiander and some others in this sort it is confessed and affirmed that [r] Affirmed by Mr. Carlile in his book that Christ descended not into Hell fol. 58. and by Oecolampadius in libro Epistolarum Oecolampadii Zuinglii l. 3. pag. 661. And see Mr. Fulk against Heskins pag. 217. post med 204. ante med 296. fine And by Carion in Chronic. pag. 451. initio Damascen taught Transubstantiation that both [s] See Vrsinus his treatiseâ—ntituled Commonefact cujusdam Theologi de Sacra Domini Coena ejusdam commonefactionis consideratio pag. 211. post med where it is said Theophilactus Damascenus planè inclinant ad Transubstantiationem vide Chemnicium examen part 2 pag. 83. a. paulo post med pag. 90. b. circa med Damascen and Theophilact do evidently incline to Transubstantiation that [t] Humfredus in Jesuitismi part 2. rat 5. pag. 626. saith In Ecclesiam verò quid invexerunt Gregorius Augustinus Intulerunt c. Transubstantiationem c. Gregory the Great and Austin brought into England Transubstantiation that [u] The Century Writers cent 4. c. 10. col 985. lin 30. say of Euâ—â—bius Emissenus that parùm commodè de Transubstantiatione dixit c. Eusebius Emissenus did speak unprofitably of Transubstantiation that [x] The Century Writers undertaking in their fift Century c. 4. col 496. lin 4. to set down Errores Doctorum hujus Saeculi do therein col 517. lin 23. say Chrysostomus Transubstantiationem videtur confirmare â—am ita scribit in sermone de Eucharistia Num vides panem num vinumâ—num sicut reliqui cibi in secessum vadunt Absit ne sic cogites Quemadmodum enim siâ—cera igni adhibita illi assimilatur nihil substantiae remanet nihil superfluit sic hic puta mysteria consumi corporis substantia Chrysostom doth seem to confirm Transubstantiation whereto sundry other like examples might be added A thing so evident that Adamus Francisci a Protestant Writer doth therefore acknowledge how that [y] Adamus Francisci in Margarita Theologica pag. 256. post med saith Commentum Papistarum de Transubstantiatione maturè in Ecclesiam irrepsit Transubstantiation entred early into the Church 17. The [*] Brereley tract 1. sect 4. subd 11. in the text and margent at 2. 3. antient Fathers of the Primitive Church are likewise by our learned adversaries confessed to have believed Melchisedechs offering of Bread and Wine in Sacrifice to have been a prefiguration of our new Sacrifice of the new Testament For Mr. Fulk against Heskins c. pag. 99. post med saith I confess that divers of the old Fathers were of opinion that the Bread and Wine which Melchisedech brought forth was sacrificed by him and that it was a figure of the Sacrament which they improperly call a Sacrifice And see the Fathers further reproved herein by Mr. Fulk against the Rhemish Testament in Haebr c. 7. sect 8. fol. 405. b. fine and by Mr. Whitaker contra Duraeum pag. 818. and 819. and Master Fulk against Heskins pag. 100. circa med confesseth how the Fathers
D. Field cited in the text And in his said Treatise of the Church l. 2. c. 9. pag. 58. ante med he affirmeth of the contradictory opinions for which saith he some were named Thomists other Scotists that they consisted to use his own words in the controversies of religion not yet determined by consent of the vniversal Church defined Now if these Protestants speak thus of our Bâ—essed Ladies immunity from Original sin much more will they hold that it is no damnable error if it were an error as it is indeed a most certain Catholick truth and so still we are safe for matter of Doctrine But here Chillingworth doth much forget himself not to consider that He his brethren the Socinians and some other Protestants deny all Original Sin and consequently that our B. Lady neither was or could be conceived therein So farr is this doctrine from being an errour or heresie in the grounds of these men 100. Thirteenthly He exemplifies the necessity of Auricular Confession But we have shewed that some learned Protestants hold the necessity of Confession and confess that the Fathers taught the necessity of confessing even thoughts Yea Chemnitius than whom no Protestant was ever more famous 2. part Exam. pag. 960. teacheth perfect sorrow or contrition not to be sufficient without Absolution as also I am informed by persons of worth and credit that Dr. Jeremie Tailor is so much for the necessity of Confession and Absolution that he teaches Contrition without Absolution not to be sufficient for remission of sins which he indeavours to prove in a Book written purposly to that end though for ought I understand it is not printed as yet And M. Spar a Cambridge Man printed a Sermon to prove the necessity of Confession as also in this third Consideration n. 82. fine we have heard Dr. Andrews prove the same out of St. Austine 101. Fourteenthly He allegeth the necessity of the Priests intention to obtain benefit by any of the Sacraments But this as we have seen out of Brereley in this third Consideration n. 49. is taught also by learned Protestants and the thing of it self is so reasonable that no man can deny it who understands the termes 102. Fifteenthly He ends his enumeration with these words And lastly for this very doctrine of licentiousness That though a man live and dye without the practise of Christian vertues and with the habit of many damnable sins immortifyed yet if he in the last moment of life have any sorrow for his sins and joyn Confession with it certainly he shall be saved In this accusation are involved three points or propositions First that Attrition with Absolution is not sufficient for the abolition of sin Secondly that true Repentance requires the extirpation and mortification of all vicious habits Thirdly that we teach any sorrow with Absolution to be sufficient for pardon of sins For the first we appose M. Chillingworth to himself who pag. 32. n. 4. saith God hath no where declared himself but that wheresoever he will accept of that Repentance which you are pleased to call Contrition he will accept of that which you call Attrition For though he like best the bright Flaming holocaust of Love yet he rejects not he quenches not the sâ—oaking flax of that repentance if it be true and effectual which proceeds from hope and fear which is more than we grant who teach only that not Attrition alone but with Absolution is sufficient The second is for ought I know against the common Tenet of Protestants and all Christians who believe that a sinner may be saved at the hour of his death if he have true contrition for his sins past with a firm purpose to amend for time to come though at that instant he cannot extirpate all vicious habits which as M. Chillingworth pag. 391. n. 8. confesses being a work of difficulty and time cannot be performed in an instant So that a poor sinner though he be never so contrite for his sins must despair of remission and salvation The third point that we believe any sorrow with Absolution to be sufficient for pardon of sins is a meer calumny as will appear to any that reads the sacred Councill of Trent declaring what sorrow is required to obtain pardon of our sins or Catholick divines writing on this subject For if the sorrow be conceived upon any Reason meerly of temporall Hope or Fear we teach that it is no wise sufficient to make men capable of Absolution or forgiveness of sins but it must proceed from some motive known by supernatural Faith for example the fear of Hell or desire of Heaven Secondly it cannot be produced by the natural forces of men or Angells as being the gift of God and requiring the special motion inspiration and grace of the holy Ghost and contrarily all the wit pains and industrie of all men that have been are or shall be yea or are possible to be created cannot arrive to it by all the natural forces of them all though they were assisted by the help of all Angels created or creable or of all other natural Creatures contained in the Omnipotency of Almightly God Thirdly Such sorrow must extend it self to all deadly sins in order to which it is to be so effectual that it must exclude all affection to them and the Penitent must be resolved rather to undergoe a thousand deaths than once consent to the least mortal sin And therefore Fourthly He must resolve to avoid for time to come all proximas occasiones or imminent danger of falling into any one mortal sin As also if he have injured any man by taking away his good name or goods or limb or life he must effectually and speedily procure to give satisfaction or make restitution according as the case shall require Yea and sometime if it be justly feared that dealy will cause a failing in his purpose Absolution may prudently or must be deferred till he hath actually satisfied all obligation the neglect whereof would prove a deadly sin And in a word that sorrow which we call Attrition differs from Contrition in the motive only because Contrition is conceived for sin as it is against the infinite goodness of God Attrition as it is repugnant to our eâ—ernal salvation and therefore Contrition is an act of the Theological Vertue of Charity Attrition of the Theological Vertue of Hope which as it moves us to desire and hope everlasting happiness so doth it incite us to fear the loss thereof and out of that holy fear not to fear any other temporal loss with the prejudice of our Souls according to those words of our blessed Saviour doe you not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul but rather fear him who can punish with Hell fire both the body and soul Which words declare that as I said a natural fear meerly of temporal losse though it be even of our life is not a sufficient disposition for pardon of sins as is
composuâ—t c. denique inspectae haereses omnes in multis cum authoribus suâ—s dissentientes deprehenduntur And see cap. 37. Tertullian [q] Chrysost opur imperfect in Matth. hom 20. saith Omnes infideles qui sub Diabolo sunt non sunt uniti nâ—câ—unum sapiunt sed sunt per diversas opiniones dispersi alius quidem sic dicit alius sic c. comodo perfidia haereticorum qui nunquam sapiunt unum sed quot sunt tot sententias habent Chrysostom [r] Hâ—lar l. 7. de Trinitate saith Haeretici igitur omnes contra Ecclesiam veniunt sâ—â—d dum haeretici omnes se invicem vincut nihil tamem sibi vincunt victoria enim eorum Ecclesiae triumphus ex omnibus est dum in eo haeresis contra alteram pugnat c. Hilarie and [Å¿] Athanasius orat 1. contra Arianos saith Illud qâ—oque prorâ—us admirabile omnes quot sunt hae reses in fingendo diversa pugnantiaque inter se adferre nee alib nisi in falsitate sibi invicem consentire c. And see in Decret's synod Nâ—caenae contra haeresim Arianam See surther a notable example hereof in Socrates hist l. 5. cap. 10. c. 22. And see the sayings of Ambrose l. deâ—fi de ad Gratianum c. 4. Hicrom in Matth. 24. Austine contra Epist Parmen l. 3. c. 4. de Baptismo contra Don. l. 11. c. 6. others discover the Hereticks of their times By the same mark also doth Luther himself make his like discovery saying [t] Luther tom 3. Wittemberg in Psalm 5. fol. 166. b. fine A Kingdome divided in it self shall not stand neither have any Hereticks at any time been overcome by Force or subtilty but by mutual dissention neither doth Christ fight with them otherwise than with a spirit of giddiness and disagreement And again [u] Luther tom 5. Wittemb in Galat. cap. 5. fol. 416. a post medium The Authors of Schisms are disagreeing among themselves c. they bite and devour one another c. till at last they perish This to omit Scriptures the examples of all times do testifie After that Africk was overthrown by the Manichees presently followed them the Donatists who disagreeing among themselves were divided into three Sects c. In our time the Sacramentaries first and then after the Anabaptists divided themselves from us neither of them are in Unity among themselves so alwaies Sects bring forth Sects and one condemneth another And the very same argument is yet further afforded against the Anabaptists by [x] Sebast Francus Chronicorum part 111. fol. 263. b. seq numbreth up Seaventy of the Anabaptists different opinions and concludeth their further differences to be so great as no mâ—n can either know or number them affirming further that scarce two of them are found to agree in all things Sebastianus Francus and the Divines of [y] Theologi Heidelbergenses in protocoll Frankentalensi in praefat ad Anabaptistas say Si vobis Ecclesiae titulum concedere vellemus quaenam inter vos Secta pro Ecclesia Dei habenda offet cum tam in multas sectas divisi sitis Heidelberge and also against the Sacramentaries by the Divines of [z] Theologi Mansfeldenses in confessione Mansfeldica latina fol. 120. say Suspectam meritó habemus Sacramentariorum doctrinam c. quod non definitè in eadem sententia concordes sed inter seipsos divisi sunt ut alii sunt Caralostadiani alii Zuingliani Oecolampadiam Calvinistae c. Mansfield 113. But now although the Testimonie of our Adversaries against themselves be great and convincing whether they confesse that the Fathers stand for us and whether Protestants joyn with us and thereby witness our Doctrines to be true yet there remains a greater testimonie that is true Miracles of which our Blessed Saviour saith Joan. 5.36 I have a greater testimonie than John the very works which I doe give testimonie of me that the Father hath sent me And that our Doctrines have been confirmed by Miracles shall be demonstrated out of the very confession of Protestants in the next fourth Consideration THE FOURTH CONSIDERATION That the Doctrine of us Catholickes hath been approved by the omnipotent hand of God using for Instruments of working Miracles those who were confessedly of our Relgion yea and in express confirmation of points believed by us and rejected by Protestants 1 LIKE as in those [a] Brereley tract 1. sect 5. firster times of the Churches infancy our Saviour did make manifest the truth of his Apostles doctrine with undoubted miracles to serve as [b] 2 Cor. 11.12 signs of their Apostleship to that end [c] Marc. 16.20 confirming the word with signs following so likewise this vertue or power of Miracles not ceasing but as our Adversaries confess [d] Whereas our Saviour loan 14.12 saith He that believeth in me the works that I do he shall do and greater In the marginal Notes of the English Bâ—ble printed 1576. it is thereupon said This is referred to the whole Body of the Church in whom this Vertue doth shine for ever shining in the Church for ever the necessity thereof being one and the same in all succeeding Ages to the [e] In Euseb Hist l. 5 c. 7. Irenaeus is alleged saying Quidam Daemones pro certò verè ejiciunt c. alii co qui gravibus morbis afflictantur per manuum impositionem curant c. lam verò ut diximus mortui suscitati sunt multos annos post apud nos commorati quid plura dona fanè ne dicendo quidem numerari poterunt quae Deus Ecclesiae per universum mundum diffusae donaverit quibusque illa in nomine Jesu Christi sub Pontio Pilato Crucifixi in dies singulos multa miracula ad Gentium utilitatem efficâ—t c. And see Irenaeus l. 2. c. 58. versus finem And S. Austine de civit Dei l. 22. c. 8. initio saith Cur inquiunt nunc illa miracula quae praedicatis facta esse non fiunt Possem quidem dicere necessaria quidem fuâ—sse priusquam crederet mundus ad hoc ut crederet mundus And a little afterwards Nam etiam nunc fiunt in ejus nomine c. And Luther tom 7. Wittemberg l. de Judaeis fol. 209. b. saith Nunc autem per hos 1500. annos audierunt Judaei esse verbum Deâ— viderunt maxâ—â—a signa mitabilia contra fremuerunt And ibid. fol. 210. b. ante med he further saith A Deo did câ—mus accepimus ut aeternum verbum veritatem Dei hactenus mille quingentis annâ—s miraculis signis confessam ac confirmatam Conversion of the heathens who contemn the Scriptures are nothing moved with the Miracles therein mentioned our Saviour did in like manner confirm our now faith so then taught by Austine with like manifestation of Miracles not such only as Antichrist or the Devill can by the power of nature or secondarie
m. The Invisibility of the Protestant Church before Luther c 4. n 3. p 408. t. m. â—ish forced to hear English Sermons which they understood not c 3. n 98. p 377. K OF John Knox c 1. n 60 1. from p 165. to 170. inclusivè Why many particulars of his turbulent seditious spirit are omitted p 165. King James his censure of him p 166. His dreadfull death ibidem L Dr. Laud acknowledges Catholike Faith to be saving c 5. n 9. p 465 6. Lent held of obligation by the Fathers c 2. n 12. p 211 12 13. Limbus Patrum held by antient Fathers n 3. p 198 9. t. m. Lyturgy in an unknown tongue c 3. n 87. p 364. c. Of Luther c 1. from n 1. to 20. from p 1. to 71. inclusivè His own testimonie of his pious and penitent life before his Apostacy n 1. p 2. His raging Lust described by himself p 2 3 4 t. m. His blasphemy that no Sin Lust or other can separate from Christ p 4. Whence he gave scope to all villany ibid. He secretly to the disgust of his friends married Katherine Bore a Nun and iâ— such heat that he could not expect untill next morning when the forbidden time for marriage expired p 4 5. t. m. This shamelesly excused by Melancthon Luther himselâ— acknowledging that he did not professe good life but Doctrine p 5. t. m. Hence Protestants when they will be licentious say This day we will live Luther like p 6. t. m. His inclination to Poligamy n 2. p 7 8. t. m. His contempt of superiority His hideous railing against K. Henry the Eigth and other Princes forced the Protestant Lansgrave to disallow his Writings by a publike Manifest p 9 10 11. t. m. He hired Corolostadius to rail against him n 3. p 12. t m He gives as much power to Lay-men yea to Women concerning the Sacraments as to Priests n 4. p 12 13 t m and n 7 p 27 He saies that the Divell can truly consecrate the Sacrament of the Altar n 4. p 13. m. and n 7. p 34. For his opinion of Baptism vide Baptism He held that had not Christs Divinity suffered we had had but a base Redeemer n 5. p 15. That Christ's Soul suffered in Hell after death p 16. He boasted of more truth in his Doctrin than in the Fathers or Apostles n 6 p 16 17. t. m. His contempt of the Fathers p 18. His Doctrine as certainly divine must judge Angells not be judged by them ibid. and p 19. Chief Protestants do sharply reprove this his pride p. 19 20 1 2 3. His inconstancy in Doctrine n 4. p 14 15. He was taught by the Devill to impugn the Mass n 7. p 23. t. m. and that by bodily conference not by spiritual fight as Fulke would have it nor by dream as Sutcliff saies both against Luther's expresse words p. 22. to 36. inclusivè he was grievously haunted frighted by an evill spirit p. 23 22. He affirms the Emp. Oecolampadius and others were slain by evill spirits appearing to them p. 24 25. He denies obedience to spirituall Pastors and G. Councills and right to judge of Doctrine and grants it Lay-people n. 8. p. 37.8 He teaches that whatsoever a Generall Councill commands the contrary is to be done n. 12. p. 44 5. He affirms that when one dies the Soul sleeps as Insensibly as the Body and denies Purgatory and prayer to Saints n 9. p 39. t. m. He puts three Divinities as three persons and praises the Arrians for rejecting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 n 10. p 39 40. t.m. His wicked Doctrine concerning the Author of sin n 11. p 40 1 2. His Blasphemy that God crowns and damns without desert p 42. By these Doctrines he opened the way to all lewdness p 43. To have his will he stuck not to contradict himself and Scripture n 12. p 43. He acknowledgeth that he believed not what he preached p 46. He acknowledgeth his fall to have been Pride and wilfullness and speaks of it with great perplexity and terror of Conscience p 47 8. Yet false Flatterers will call him Saint ibid. He is deeply taxed by Zuinglius Oecolampadius and all Calvinists for his unchristian bitterness against them n 14. p 49 50 1. He most arrogantly conceived himself the onely man opposed by Satan as the first teacher of Christianity and sole right understander of the Gospell n 15. p 51 2. His wicked Doctrine in favour of the Turke and disesteem of Christianity n 16. p 53 55 54 56. His Schollars ashamed of divers things in his Works corrupted them in the edition at Wittenburg n 17. p 57 58. t. m. alibi ipse His wilfull corruptions and impudent censures of Scriptures and holy Writers makes them of no credit p 57 to 64. t. m. inclusivè He acknowledges that the manifold translations of Scripture will force to receive Councills n 34. p 97. He teacheth that onely Infidelity condemns and onely Faith which cannot be without Good works justifies n 18 19. p 64 5. That who is good can do nothing but good that good works neither justifie nor are any way necessary to salvation p. 65. but hurtfull to it p. 66 7. t. m. Erasmus his saying of him n. 20. p 68. m. He cannot be held a Protestant p 68 9. His vild Doctrine and Manners are now so notorious as none can be excusable in following him p 69. He preferrs Melancthon to all the Doctors of the Church n 54. p 155. His Blasphemies against the Holy Ghost c 1. n 2. p 187 8. By his Life and Doctrine many Protestants held Lewdnes to be an Evangelicall Institution and serious Christian Discipline a new Popery c 1. n 1. p 6. M St. Malacias his Miracles c 4. n 1. p 400. i. t. m. and n 4. p 414 15. Calumniated as wrought by the Divel n 1. p 400. m. Dying he gave his Blessing to St. Bernard n 4. p 414. m. Marriage forbidden to Priests from the Apostles time c 2. n 7. p 166 7. t. m. Like for Monks p 167. t. m. Masse and the sacrifice of it most antient n 17 p 267. t. m. Of Melancthon c 1. n 55 6. p 156 7 8 9. He held three Divinities He perswaded Polygamy to King Henry the eight n 56. p 156. He taught that in case of Divorce the offending partie might marry another p 157. He changed from Lutheranisme to Calvinisme n 57. p 157. Yet he perswaded others to remain Catholikes and wished he had rather lost a Finger than wrote of Divinity p 159. Melchisedeck and his sacrifice presigured Christ and his sacrifice c 2. n 17. p 260. c. Merit of Good Workes n 5 6. p 200. c. Of Miracles c 4. per totam wrought in confirmation of points believed by Catholicks Protestants and are testimonies of true Faith although wrought by wicked men they being of that kind which cannot naturally be done n 1 p. 396 7. t. m. The gift