religion Exorcisme exufflation in baptisme Pelagians aliue againe in Protestants Baptisme necessary for saluation of children ChauÌ„ge of religion neuer made by us Altares prayer for the dead used alwayes Reall presence of Christ in the SacrameÌ„t Pilgrimage reliques of Saints S. Hierom of our religioÌ„ Miracles for reliques Churches coÌ„firmed by miracles VVhat an impudeÌ„t atteÌ„pt is chauÌ„ge of religioÌ„ Of the churches practise custome I say euen as of the churches iudgement that how much soeuer it be to be esteemed yet is not the Popish church the Catholike church of Christ but an apostasie schisme from it Neither is it sufficieÌ„t for Bristow to say y e Popish church practiseth many things that the auÌ„cieÌ„t church of Christ practised therfore it is the true church of Christ except he can proue that the Popish churchteacheth practiseth all nothing els but that which the ancieÌ„t church of Christ did teach practise In stede whereof Bristow can allege nothing but certeine spots wrinkles of the elder church which the Popish church doth embrace hauing almost nothing els like vnto it But let vs see how substantially he proueth out of S. Paule S. Augustine that the churches custome and practise is an infallible rule of truth First S. Paule saith he 1. Cor. 11. after many reasons for the vncomelines of womeÌ„s going bareheaded recoyleth to this inuincible forte Si quis c. But if any man seeme to be contentious we haue no such custome for women to pray vncouered nor the church of God See how this impudent asse to stablish his ground of custome is not ashamed to falsifie the wordes of holy Scripture S. Paul saith if any man seme to be desirous of contention we haue no such custome nor the churches of God whereby he meaneth plainly that it is not the custome of the Apostles nor of the church of God to be contentious about such small matters of external behauiour May we herof inferre that whatsoeuer the church at any time hath vsed is allowable to be vsed alwaies S. Aug. Ep. 118. Ian. is cited by Bristow but corruptly Si quid tota per orbeÌ„ frequentat ecclesia hoc quia it a â—acienduÌ„ sit disputare insoleÌ„tissimae insaniae est If y e whole church do vse any thing only to call it in question whether that thing should be so don is a poinct of most prowd or most straÌ„ge madnes But Augustine is not so generall for his words are siquid horuÌ„ if any of these things speaking of ceremonial obseruations as of receiuing the coÌ„munion fasting c. be vniuersally vsed of all the church when it is not coÌ„trary to the word of God it were madnes to striue about it For in the first place Augustine setteth the auctority of Gods word secoÌ„dly the custome of the vniuersal church being not contrary to Gods word last of all the customs of particular churches which are varied according to the diuersities of coÌ„tries natioÌ„s Now for these matters in coÌ„trouersy betwene vs I answer as Augustine doth to the questioÌ„ of Ianuarius immediatly after the words cited by Bristow Sed neque hoc neque illud est in eo quod tu queris But neither is this nor that in the question that thou propoundest that is neither the practise of the vniuersall church nor the auctority of the Scriptures serueth to decide this question but it is the third kind So say I to Bristow nether the auctority of the holy Scriptures nor the practise of the vniuersall church can be shewed for these things which thou defeÌ„dest but they are of a third kind that is contrary to the word of God and the practise of the most auncient Primitiue church But Augustine sayth Bristow proueth that infants are borne in sinne against the Pelagians which are reuiued in ProtestaÌ„ts by the customes practise of the church which was to baptise theÌ„ for remission of sinnes And this practise he called the waight of truth a most plaine bignes of truth The slauÌ„der that PelagiaÌ„s are aliue in ProtestaÌ„ts by denying children to be borne in sinne I wil no more esteme then the barking of a dogge against the moone But where he sayth that Augustine by the only practise of the church coÌ„uinceth the Pelagians calling the practise poÌ„dus veritatis c it is a shameles lye for his words are in the same Epist. 105. Circunstiâ—antur enim diâ—inarum auctoritate lectionuÌ„ antiquitus tradito retcÌ„to firmo Ecclesiae ritu in baptismate paruulorum For they are compassed about both by the auctoritie of the diuine readings also by the stedfast practise of the church deliuered of old reteined in the baptisme of infants But he vrgeth them with exorcisme and exsufflation which were there vsed in the church I confesse but their meaning by exufflatioÌ„ exorcisme he defendeth out of the Scriptures And who can blame Augustine if after he haue mightely confuted the Pelagians out of the Scriptures to shew the nouelty of their heresie he alleaged the perpetuall practise of the church which she alwaies had alwaies shall haue in praying for the conuersion of infidels for the perseueraÌ„ce of the faithful in goodnes This is all one saith Bristow as if we should reason against these heretikes out of priuate mens beades out of the publike prayers which are in the portuse or Breuiary or in the missall and such like bokes The deuill it is except Bristow can proue that such beades and prayers were euer vsed in the church For Augustine sayth de bono perseuer ca. 22 Atque vtinam tardi corde infirmi qui non possunt velnon dum possunt Scriptur as vel earum expositiones intelligere sic audrient vel non audirent in hac quaestione disputationes nostras vt magis intuer entur orationes suas quas semper habuit habebit ecclesia ab exordijs suis donec finiatur hoc seculum And I would they that are dull of hart weake which can not or as yet can not vnderstand the Scriptures or the expositions of them would so heare or not heare our disputations in this question that they would rather consider their owne prayers which the church alwaies hath had shall haue from her beginning vntil this world be ended You see plainly that Augustine ioyneth to the auctority of the holy Scriptures the perpetuall practise of the church which hath continued from the beginning and shall remayne vnto the ende Which seeing it can not be shewed for Poperie the argument of the practise of the church serueth not for Popery Bristowe proceedeth and passeth ouer the example of Christian women which killed them selues rather then they would haue their bodies abused yet notwithstanding by the churches iudgement were honored as martyrs To which I aunswere the church considered their minde which was good not the fact which was euell At last he commeth to affirme that the
altogether purged from all similitude of popish actions by yelding vnto the infirmitie of the weaker sort yet is the Church of God perfect in her selfe and needeth not to borrow of any secte any thing for her perfect furniture in doctrine ceremonies or discipline but hath absolute rules to direct her in any of these expressed in the holy Scriptures For the diuision of parishes the holding of Councells excommunication suspension publike solemnising of mariage with the lawes of the same punishing of heretikes by death c. are all manifestly proued out of the Scriptures Probat of testaments and such like matters pertayne to the ciuill lawe And whereas Bristow sayth we could not tell that we shoulde vse baptisinge of men more then washinge of feete or this lesse then that or one to be a sacrament and not the other except we had bene taught by the popishe Churche it is a greate falshoode For althoughe we might alleage the iudgement of the moste auncient Churche of Christ which did not accept that action of Christ as a sacraments yet the wordes of our Sauiour Christ are manifest which doth not institute a sacrameÌ„t or visible signe of the inuisible grace of God giuen vnto vs but onely giueth vs an example thereby of seruice able humilitie one to an other Ioan. 13. 12. Wherefore no more in this then in any other matter doe we take any light out of the bookes and doings of those owles that flye in the darkenes of mens traditions but onely out of the lawe of God which is a light vnto our steps and a lanterne vnto our feete that we neede not like apes counterfeit externall toyes as they doe but being followers of God as wellbeloued children we may walke in loue as Christ hath loued vs and so faâ—re to followe the steppes of other men as we see plainly that they haue followed Christ. The 35. motiue is the 25. demaund States of perfection Monkes Monasteries Parliament religion We confesse that we haue no states of perfection in this life amonge vs which to affirme in any mortall man is blasphemye against the bloode of Christ. As for Monkes and Fryers names Eremites c none were farther from a Christian or honest life then they as the worlde knoweth sufficientlye And therefore by lawe they and their Monasteries were iustly subuerted As for the solitarye men of the auncient tymes dwelling by them selues or in the desert places called Mâ—nachâ— Anchoritae or Eremitâ—e these popishe orders of whose subuersion Bristow complayneth were no more like vnto them then Apes and Monkeyes are to men and women The communitye of goodes that was in the Church of the Apostles Act. 4. was none other then suche as is and ought to be amonge all true Christians which was not as Bristowe ignorauntlye and impudently affirmeth to liue without propriety of goodes hauing all thinges in an Anabaptisticall communitie but that they accompted nothing of that they possessed to be their owne when the necessitie of their brethren required the vse therof Act. 4. 32. 34. And Act. 5. 4. Peter affirmeth that both the lande and the price thereof was in the proprietye of Ananias so that he might haue retayned ether his land or the whole price thereof but that he was an hypocrite and would beare the Churche in hande that he had brought the whole price when he withdrewe a parte thereof As for Virgines although there be fewer amongest vs that boast of that profession yet are there more both men and women which freely keepe their purpose of virginitie then were amonge those popishe vowed cloystralls The 36. motiue is the 46. demaund The state of our predecessors Prayer for the deade the ground of building Christian monuments Vniuersities of heretikès and Catholikes Protestants be ashamed of their fathers The demaund serueth to be contrary to the motiue for in the motiue he confesseth that we will not condemne our auncestors that haue dyed these many hundred yeares in popish ignorance nor the auncient doctors which haue held some errors which the Papistes doe hold but in the demaund he asketh if all these are damned in hell if not then theirs is the true Church those errors are truth I aunswer we deale not with condemnation of men for lacke of two causes which make a Iudge the one austeritie the other is knowledge Concerning the first it pertayneth onely to Christ to be the Iudge of the quicke and the deade whose office we dare not vsurpe otherwise then he hath commaunded vs to pronounce sentence out of his word concerning the latter we take not vpon vs to knowe ether the faith or repentance of them that dyed before our time and therefore we commit their iudgement to God But generally we are taught by the Scriptures that such as holde the onely foundation which is Iesus Christ in a true faith shall be saued although they build vpon this foundation chaffe straw wood c. 1. Cor. 3. And therefore we doubt not but S. Augustine Chrysostom Hierom Gregory Bernard many thowsands euen in the tyme of great blindnes holding the same only foundation may be saued notwithstanding the chaffe and stubble of a few errors which the former sort did hold or a number of errors and superstitions wherewith the later sort were defiled As for Fraunces and Dominike such late leaders of the locustes we rather thinke they are returned into the bottomlesse pit from whence they came then that they be Saincts in heauen But if we excuse the rest by ignorance Bristow asketh why we condemne not Augustine which was not ignoraunt of our doctrine because he condemned it for most wicked heresie in Aerius Iouinian and Vigilantius who although they be our fathers he sayth we are ashamed to blesse their memorie First concerning Iouinian although he helde an heresie in not preferring virginitie before mariage in some respect yet haue we nothing to doe with him for we hold not that opinion which if we did yet were it no damnable heresy Touching AErius he is coÌ„demned of Augustine for an Arrian his opinioÌ„ of prayer for the deade although it were not liked of Augustine yet doth he in no place condemne it for most wicked heresie as Bristow calleth it but that he did allowe prayer for the deade it was an error of ignoraunce euen in S. Augustine as that he thought the communion necessary for infants Cont. duas ep Pelag. lib. 2. cap. 4. As for Vigilantius I finde him not reckened ether by Epiphanius or Augustine for an heretike or for one that erred in doctrine although Hierom did write so bitterly against him who likewise did write against Augustine and Ruffinus yet are nether of both accompted for heretikes And AErius as he helde some truth with vs against prayer for the deade so helde he also much popishe superstition and errour for like the order of Carthusians they of his sect admitted none to their felowship but such as professed
the Sacraments haue not fayth 2. Thess. 3. 2. The 8. marke of the Church if not onely the playne vnderstanding of any one sentence but also the circumstance of the place and the conference of Gods worde be necessary the Papists haue vsed it in euery question For proofe herof M. Sanders referreth vs to his treatise of the supper of the Lord lib. 4. and to his booke of Images cap. 2. 11. in this booke to the ca. 2. 4. I answer you make a light shew for a fashion but you nether coÌ„sider the circumstances rightly nor make any true collation of one place with another as is proued by the answers of these bookes Therefore your Academical conclusion is false hereticall blasphemous that the onely word of God being neuer so well handled is no sufficient marke to shew the truth When Christ sayth Sanctifie them in thy truth Thy word is the truth Ioan. 17. 17. The 9. M. Sander sayth the heads of the Church the councels the Bishops and the auncient fathers must be Iudges whether we do well apply the Scriptures or no as whether S. Peter be the rock which M. Iewel denieth he proueth by 16 doctors afterward cap. 4. of w c proofe we shall consider God willing in due place But whereas M. Sander quoteth Aug. cont Iulian. lib. 2. for his rule of Iudges I say he hath no such rule in that booke onely Augustine doth coÌ„uince the argumeÌ„ts of the Pelagians of nouelty by the iudgemeÌ„t of Iren. Cyprianus Rheuanus Ambrosius c. and other which liued before their time and therefore were no partial iudges so do we conuince the Popish heresies and their argumentes of noueltie not only by the manifest worde of God but also by the testimonie of the most auncient fathers although we may not admit all that they did write to be true euen as the same Augustine being pressed with the auctoritie of Ambrose Chrysostome and Cyprian by the Donatists Pelagians prouoketh from them onely to the Scriptures de nat graâ—cap 61. de vnit eccl cap. 16. cont Crescon lib. 2. cap. 31. de gratia Christ. cap. 43. That the allegation of the fathers suffiseth not of it selfe we agree with Maister Sander but that there is any other triall of the truth theÌ„ Scripture we wil neuer graunt seeing God hath therein deliuered his whole doctrine whatsoeuer is necessarie for vs to beleue that we may be saued Ioh. 20. 31. But the Papistes for the tenth marke ioyne tradition and practise of Gods church which can neuer deceaue amaÌ„ VVe thinke sayth Chrysostom the tradition of the church to be worthie of beleefe Is it a tradition aske no further But howe shall we proue it to be a tradition of the church The Valentinians as I shewed before out of Irenaeus denyed the Scriptures to be sufficient without knowledge of the tradition Therfore to discerne the tradition of â—â—â—â— church from the tradition of the heretikes we haue none other triall but by the Scriptures Therefore Chrysostom saith in 2. Cor. Ho. 3. that S. Paule did write the same thinges which he told them before in preaching As for the vniuersall practise either of the Popes supremacy or of the sacrifice of the masse which he braggeth of shall neuer be proued but the contrarie The eleuenth marke is the auctority of generall couÌ„cells confirming the truth condemning heretikes such he maketh the late councell of Trent to be But we deny that Conciliabulum of a few Popish hypocrits to be a generall councell in which no man should haue a definitiue voyce but they that were accused of heresie and whereof he that is most of all charged with heresie that is the Pope is made the supreme iudge wherefore the Papists haue no lawfull generall councell on their side although generall councells as he confesseth are no sufficient triall of the true church both because they may be hindered many wayes and also because they may erre as did the conncells of Arimine and Ephesus In respect of these considerations he maketh the twelfth marke to be the supremacy of the Pope whichis wholly theirs for triall whereof this booke following was written But for proofe that Christ hath appoynted such a iudge ouer all he citeth Ioan. 21. that Christ coÌ„maunded Peter to feede his sheepe as though that perteyned not to euerie one of the Apostles as much as to Peter Also Lu. 22. that Christ hauing praied that Peters faith might not fayle commaunded him when he was conuerted from his fall to confirme his brethren which perteineth only to the person of Peter and can not with any cable ropes be draweÌ„ to the Bishop of Rome or any successor of Peter for it concerneth his singular full comfort duty in respect of his fall Gods mercy except that according to analogy it may be applied to any man that is so raised after his fall and so that precept confirme thy brethren geueth no speciall commaundemeÌ„t to the Pope but to euery man whom God hath mercifully conuerted as he did Peter With the twelfth marke M. Sander would haue ended but that the Protestantes affirme the lawfull preaching of Gods word and the lawfull administration of the Sacramentes to be a marke whereby they wilbe tried But seeing lawfull preaching ministring must be tried by Gods worde M. Sander first asketh what we call Gods word secondly he asketh if he haue not proued it to be more with theÌ„ theÌ„ with vs whatsoeuer it be It is like this Popishe academicall Atheist hath proued Gods word to be on his side â—â—â—â— wil not haue it certeinly known what Gods word is After this he will proue the Papists to be most lawfull preachers because they are likest to the Apostles in conuerting many nations within these 900. yeres wheÌ„ he sayth no man aliue could once heare vs peepe As though controuersie of nations would argue a true church By which reasons not only the Protestants may nowe proue them selues to be most like the Apostles in conuerting so many nations of Europe but also the Arians and most of all the Mahumetists might proue them selues the true church It is not therfore coÌ„uersion of nations but conuersion of theÌ„ to the true doctrine of the Apostles which maketh vs like the Apopostles the Papistes Arians Mahometists most vnlike vnto them And where he saith that no souÌ„d of ours was heard in 900. yeares space by any man aliue to see how impudeÌ„tly he lyeth read Flaccius Illyricus in catalogo testium veritatis you shal see in all ages what monumeÌ„ts are extant of some few whom God reserued from that generall Apostasie of Antichrist Read also the acts monumentes set forth by M. Foxe you shall see the same most plentifâ—lly He wil proue their administration of the Sacraments to be more lawful then ours because they haue fiue more then we But I answer because they haue fiue more then the
to the former doctrine of Peters primacie namely that seeing the Apostles needed no heade because they were not in dauÌ„ger of error the head was appoynted ouer them for an example of the Church afterward when that personall priuiledge of the Apostles ceased to be in their successors But how wil he proue that the priuiledge of not erring hath continued in Peters successors more then in the successors of all the Apostles Forsooth because Christ prayed that Peters faith might not fayle that he might confirme his brethren I haue often shewed that he prayed for the perseuerance of all his Apostles and the cause of his speciall prayer for Peter was proper to Peters person therefore can not be drawne to his successors And what madnes is it to defend that the Pope can not erre when Pope Honorius was condemned for an heretike both by the 6. Councell of Constantinople and by the decree of Leo 2. Bishop of Rome confirming the same councell Act. 18. Ep. Leon. 2. ad Constant. But M. Sander concludeth to aunswer the argument of the equalitie of the Apostles that Paule was equall with Peter in Apostleship but by the appoyntment and will of Christ Peter was heade to shew that his Church hauing one Pastor in it aboue the rest is one as a kingdom one by hauing one king in it Howbeit we sinde the will of God for the supremacie and headship of Christ ouer all his Church to make it one in the holy Scriptures when of Peters headship or supremacie there is neuer a word And Paule sayth that he was nothing inferiour to the highest Apostles 2. Cor. 2. if nothing absolutely then was not Peter his superiour in any respect That Paule reprehended Peter M. Sander sayth he might doe it by equalitie of his Apostleship If that be so why may not euery Bishop reprehende the Pope by equality of Bishoprike If you graunt they may then haue you so many Canones against you as you can neuer saue their authoritie and abide by your confession But this fault you say with Tertullian was of conuersation not of preaching that Peter might not seeme to haue erred in doctrine Neuertheles it can not be excused but Peter also erred in doctrine Not in the generall doctrine of the abolishing of the lawe or of Christian libertie but of bearing too much with the Iewes in preiudice of the Gentils whom he compelled to Iudaisme in derogation of the truth of Paules doctrine which dissimulation he entred not into for any worldely respect but because he was dâ—ceyued in opinion thinking that in that case he ought so to haue done before he being reprehended by Paule sawe the inconuenience and then myldely yelded to the correction But in this humble submission sayth Maister Sanders Peter proued him selfe to be the head of all the Apostles seeing Christ had sayde he that is greater among you let him be as the lesser In deedâ— he shewed herein such greatnes as Christ commendeth but no headeship or authoritie ouer his brethren Cyprian ad Quintum sayth he did not iudge this reprouing of Peter to be an argument against his supremacie but a witnes of his humilitie but he giueth vs this much to vnderstande that if he had chalenged primacie he had taken vpon him arrogantly his wordes are these Nannec Petrus quem primum Dominus elegit c. For nether did Peter whome our Lorde chose the first and vpon whome he builded his Church when Paule did striue with him about circumcision afterward chalenge any thinge insolently or take vpon him arrogantly to say that he had the primacie and that he ought rather to haue bene obeyed of Nouices and aftercommers nether did he despise Paule for that he was before a persecutor of the Churche but he did admitte the counsell of truth The like sayth Augustine for his humilitie but as a later writer more pregnant for his primacye De bap cont Don. lib. 2. cap. 1. In Scripturis c. VVe haue learned in the holy Scriptures that Peter the Apostle in whome the primacie of the Apostles in so excellent grace hath the preheminence when he vsed to dâ—e otherwise then the truth required about circumâ—sion was corrected of Paule who was admitted after him to be an Apostle In this saying the primacye is of tyme and order not of dignitie and authoritie But Gregory much later then Augustiue graunteth to Peter not onely a primacie bâ—t also a maioritie in Ezech. Hâ—m 18. Quatenus c. That he who was chiefe in the toppe of the Apostleship should be chiefe also in humilitie And agayne Eâ—ce à minore c. Beholde Peter is reproued of his lesser and he disdayneth not to be reproued Nether doth he call to minde that he first was called to the Apostleship These wordes make Peter greater none otherwise then that he was first called to the Apostleship which argueth small authoritie ouer his iuniours Hereupon he taketh occasion to inueye against the pride of Luther Zwinglius Caluine c. and their bitter dissentions shewing how farre they are vnlike to the Apostles It is not to be doubted that they were many degrees inferior to the vertue and holmes of the Apostles but yet as well in humilitie as all other vertues if they come not nearer to them then the Pope and his pompous Clergye let God and all indifferent men bee Iudges Moreouer where as it is obiected against the supremacie of Peter that the Apostles sent him to lay hands vpon those whom Philip the Deacon had baptized he aunswereth that proueth no more their equalitie then when the Canones of a Cathedrall Church doe chose their Deane or Bishop to go about busines of the chapter it proueth the Deane and Bishop to be inferior to the CanoÌ„s But by his fauor where the Deane or Bishop are sent about busines it argueth the Bishop and Deane in respect of those busines to be inferior to the whole chapiter as Peter Iohn were to the whole Colledge of the Apostles though the Bishop or Deane in other respects be superior to the Canons and Peter and Iohn were equall to euery one of the Apostles Wherefore M. Sanders conclusion is vpon a false supposition that Peter had authoritie to depose the Apostles if they had fallen as Iudas did therefore the Pope hath the like ouer Bishops For nether had Peter any singular auctoritie to depose any of his fellow Apostles no more then he had to chose one in place of Mathias nor the Bishop of Rome ouer other Bishops euer had of right but by concession election or vsurpation The 12. chapter THat S. Peters prerogatiue aboue the other Apostles is most manifestly seenâ— by his chiefe Bishoply power Howe Christ loued Peter aboue others M. Sander fantasying that he hath proued Peter superior to the Apostles not in their Apostleship but in his Byshoply degree doth yet againe distinguish the order and office of a Byshop from the authoritie and iurisdiction of the
32. that r. the. 260. 3. petram r. PetruÌ„ 276. 6. den r. doome 279. 3. deforme r. defame 280. 14. vncertainly r. vnreuereÌ„tly l. 38. vvith r. vvhich 281. 4. challeng r. calling 297. 17. Barbarita r. Borberitae 314. 13. Cyrians r. Collyridianes A RETENTIVE TO STAY GOOD CHRISTIANS IN THE TRVETH OF THE GOSPELL WRITTEN BY W Fulke against the Motiues of R. Bristow and by him directed to his friends of the Popish Church AMong such English papistes as haue written within these twentie yeares against the religion of God nowe mainteyned by publike authoritie in this Realme some haue shewed greate witte some muche readinge some flowing eloquence some all these indifferently but among them all none hath shewed lesse witte learning or good vtterance then this Richard Bristow So much the more doe I meruell when I heare that many Papistes make so great accompt of his witlesse and senselesse writinges But it fareth with them as with litle children to whome newe trifles seeme alwayes most worthy to be played with al. And verily I had thought of all other least to haue delt against this peuish prater both because he bringeth no newe matter but such as in other of his cote was with more coullor of trueth set foorth before and also for that I had alreadie made aunswere to Ryshtons challenge which as I take it is that table of the Church which Bristowe confesseth to conteine all his demaundes whiche demaundes are almost all conteined in his motiues But my friendes requiring mee not onely to aunswere this but all other writinges also of the papistes what soeuer they haue set foorth in the englishe tongue since the happie raigne of our soueraigne Ladie I haue condescended to confute euen that which deserueth no confutation and somewhat the rather because Bristow would haue this alone to bee a sufficient motiue vnto poperie that wee hauing nothing to gainesay most of their popish bookes haue not dared I vse his owne wordes once to goe about the aunswering of most of the saide Catholikes bookes But are faine to get them forbidden by proclamation althoughe ourselues haue prouoked confidently the Catholikes to write them Whervppon also he noteth that Iewels challenge is turned into proclamations how rightly or truly he that hath but halfe an eye may see His preface to the reader conteining neuer an argument or motiue which is not repeated either in the treatise it self of motiues or in the demaundes I will passe ouer and come to the firste motiue gathering the principall contentes out of his owne table as I haue done with the rest Name of Catholikes The verie name of Catholikes a certaine marke of right Catholikes Iewel vnwars testifieth the Romane religion to be Catholik Laâ—rence HuÌ„frâ—is Troian horse his pseudocatholicâ— Luthers consciens the Catholike Church to be against him Pontaâ—us erred not whose historie Humfrey himselfe vnawars confirmeth For Catholikes saith he were present as lookers on and earnest defenders What then â— but none such were moderators saue onely lay Lordes and vnlearned heretikes ergo The first motiue is the 6. demaunde In whiche he woulde proue the verie name of Catholikes to whoÌ„ soeuer it is giuen to be a certain marke of right Catholikes to be knowen as readely easely and certainely by that name as such a citie is knowne by the name of London and such a countrie by the name of England If euer he learned any logike at Oxforde he left it behinde him or else lost it by the way when hee ranne ouer the sea For if all thinges may bee knowen by the name whereby they are coÌ„monly called nothing beareth a false name all Idoles are true gods and saintes al deade carcales be liuing men Yea all heretikes which are commonly called Christians in respecte of Iewes Turkes be true Christians But we must bring him a companie of men commonly knowne by the name of Catholikes which proued heretikes Forsooth the Arrians among themselues were commonly called bv the name of Catholikes and so reputed and taken when the true Catholikes were called homousians and heretikes yea all heretikes among the Pagans were coÌ„monly knowen by the name of Christians whiche â— thinke is as glorious a name as the name of Catholikes Yet Augustine saith â—ee maketh much of the name of Catholikes Cont. â—â— Fund c. 4. Tâ—net me postremò c. Last of all the verie name of the Catholike Church doeth holde me which not without cause amongest so many heresies this Church alone hath so obteined that whereas all heretikes would haue themselues to be called Catholikes yet to a straunger which asketh where men meete at the Catholike Church none of the heretikes dare shewe either their minster or house But let vs see howe Augustine and Bristow agree Augustine maketh this name the last motiue Bristowe the first Augustine ioyneth it with many thinges Bristowe maketh it alone to be a sufficient motiue Augustine in the nexte sentence after confesseth the playne demonstration of the trueth wheresoeuer it may be shewed to bee preferred before al those motiues of Vniuersalitie miracles consente succession and name of Catholikes by which he saith that he might be helde in the Catholke Churche although he grounded no argument vppon that wisedome which the Maniches would not acknowledge to be in the catholike church his words are these Apud vos autem vbi nihil horum est quod me inuitet ac teneat sola personat veritatiae pollicitatio quâ—e quidens sutam manifesta monstratur vt in dubium venire non possit praeponenda est omnibus illis rebus quibus in Catholica tenâ—or Among you Maniches saith he where there is none of these thinges whiche might allure and hold me the onely promisle of trueth doth sounde whith trueth if it be shewed so manifeste that it caÌ„not come in doubt it is to be preferred before al those things by which I am helde in the Catholike Church This is Augustines iudgement of such simple motiues which with the trueth may helpe to confirme it but are not worth a straw when they are alledged against the truth Wherfore seing we make so plaine demonstration of the trueth out of Gods word that no maÌ„ can doubt of it but such as will followe the bare name of Catholike contrarie to the Catholike doctrine of the scriptures against all such vaine motiues wee may be bolde to oppose the trueth it selfe What a mockerie is this that hee saith that anâ—eretike in Germanie being asked where the Catholike Church is will point to â—â—â—â— popish Church Admit this to be so doth this proue the Massing Church to bee the Catholike Church In France if you aske a Papist which is y e reformed Church he will point you to the place where the congregation of true Christians vse to assemble Doth the Papist therfore acknowledge the Church of protestantes to bee in deede the reformed Churche Iâ— hee doe not the name of Catholikes proueth no more on the one syde theÌ„ the
Caecilianistes as the Papistes call vs. Heretiques Protestants Lutherans c. but these were but dilatorie deuises of Heretiques to auoyd the true trial which as the Catholikes in the forenamed conference confessed was onely by y e Scriptures The 4. motiue is the 38. demaund Olde heresies Arrians againe aliue in Protestantes Protistants be Pelagians in denying Baptisme to be necessarie for the saluation of Infants Her etiques are not Christians Whatsoeuer was heresie in times past saith Bristow is heresie now also some opinions holden by the Protestants were heresie in times past Ergo they be heresies now also so Protestants be Heretiques and no Christian but almost Apostataes But I deny that any opinion holden by vs was euer Heresie Yes saith Bristow the denying of prayer and oblation for the dead was accounted heresie in Aâ—rius both by Epiphanius and Augustinus True it is they both following the errour of their times account it for an errour in Aâ—rius but it doth not followe that bicause they accounted it so that it was so in deed seing neither of them both doth proue it to be an errour by the authoritie of the holy Scriptures but by the corrupt vsage of their Churches which had turned thankesgiuing for the dead into prayers and oblation for the dead And yet the same Epiphanius denyeth fasting and almes to bee profitable to the dead wherefore the Papistes do now hold the contrarie Contra Melchisedec sumus Haer. 53. Hee accounteth the hauing of the images of Christ and the Apostles one of the heresies of the Gnostikes Haer. 27. many such like things which the Papistes defend for Catholike The like doth Augustine wherefore let Bristow aduise him selfe whether it be a good argument Epiphanius and Augustine accounted prayer for the dead to be an errour Ergo it was an heresie in deede For an other example of old heresies by vs recyted he bringeth in That cruell heresie of theirs against the necessitie of childrens baptisme wherin they agree with the Pelagians through which they suffer many thousand poore soules to perish which can not helpe them selues while they promise them both life euerlasting and the kingdome of heauen without baptisme whereas the Pelagians promised life euerlasting only Who would thinke that this slaunderous heretique had liued so long in England as hee did before he became fugitiue which lyeth so impudeÌ„tly without all colour or shewe of trueth Was there euer any of vs heard to preach of baptisme as not necessarie for infaÌ„ts if they might obteine it according to the institution of Christ. But contrariwise that it is a cruell errour of the Papists which condeÌ„neth infants who being preuented by death can not obteyne the outward Sacrament yet hath this error Augustine and Cypriane to vpholde it But if Augustine and Cypriane neuer erred no not about the doctrine of the Sacramentes then let their authoritie defend the Papists But when Cypriane denyed the Baptisme of Heretikes to be any thing auayleable how many thousand soules both of yong and olde dyd he condemne And wheÌ„ Augustine with Pope Innocent holdeth the communion to be as necessarie for the saluation of Infants as Baptisme how many huÌ„dred thousand soules doth he condemne or the Papistes destroy which denye the communioÌ„ vnto them Cyprian lib. 1. Epi. 6. Magno Augustin Contra duas Epist. Pelagi lib. 2. Cap. 4. where he accuseth the Pelagians as well for affirming the Communion not to be necessarie for Infants as for houlding that Baptisme was not needefull for them In the 38. Demaunde he chargeth vs with denying prescript fasting dayes which is falle when they be prescribed by the Churche of God and not vsurped of superstition and opinion of merite He chargeth vs further with denying of Free Will and quoteth in the margent August Tom. 6. De fide coÌ„tra Manichaeus Cap. 9 10. where in deede Augustine against the Manichees affirmeth the Free Will of man but in his retractations he sheweth that euen then hee vnderstoode it of the state of Man before his fall and therefore the Pelagians whiche were maynteyners of Free Will to remayne in man since the fall of Adam did slaunderouslie vsurp those his sayings against him and the truth euen as the Papists do now Cùm autem de libera voluntate rectè faciendi loquimur de illa scilicet in quae homo factus est loquimur Ecce tam longè antequam Pelagiana haeresis extitisseâ—â—sic disputanimus velut iam contra illos disputaremus Whensoeuer we speake of the Free Will of man to do well we speake of that Will in whiche man was made Behold so long before the Pelagian heresie arose we haue disputed eueÌ„ so as though we had disputed against them Retract lib. 1. cap. 9. Now iudge whether if Papistes or we be more like to the Pelagians He chargeth vs moreouer to hold against the merite of single life quoting Aug. haer 82. with Iouiaian which is false for as Augustine vnderstandeth by merite worthines or excellency we acknowledge that the state of virginitie is more excellent then of matrimony in such respects as the Apostle preferreth it 1. Cor. 7. Last of all he chargeth vs with holding against the vowe of single life quoting Aug. Retract lib. 2. c. 22. where there is no word of any vowe and much lesse of vowing a single life in them that can not liue an honest chast life without mariage There is mention of certaine sanctimoniales holy and deuout women of whose chastity was no suspition which leauing their purpose of virginitie were perswaded by Iouinian to marie Not we therefore haue reuiued any old heresie but the Papists haue continued many old errors reuiued many old heresies of the Pharises Pâ—â—â—gians Anthropomorphites added many new of their owne such as were neuer heâ—â—d of in the primitiue Church for six hundred yeares after Christ as hath often bene shewed at large The 4. and 5. motiues are included in the 10. demaund Miracles dogmaticaâ—â— a marke of true doctrine for the sacrifice of the Masse for purgatory Deuills expelled with a Masse by a Priest of S. Augustines who was of our religion S. Bede of our religion Masse sayd for the dead oftentimes to redemption both of body and soule The saerament of the altare sticked by the Iewes bleedeth Mâ—rkes and mâ—nasteries Visions for our religion An Englishe woman miraculously cured of late by the blessed sacrament Holy water Masse confirmed by miracles in Afrike Englande and Brabant Bristow diuideth miracles into dogmaticall and personall Of the first sort he setteth this conclusion VVhosoeuer haue at any time set them selues against any doctrine confirmed by miracle they haue bene against the truth There can to this no instans be giuen our doctrine which they resist hath bene confirmed by miracles therefore plaine it is that they are enemies of the truth Doe you heare this shameles beast say there can be no instans giuen against his proposition When y e Lord
himselfe giueth an expresse law against a false prophet which sheweth signes or miracles Deut. 13. Did not Iannes and Iambres whâ—ch resisted moses worke miracles doth not our Sauiour Christ prophecy that many false christes and false prophets should arise and worke such great signes and miracles as if it were possible the very elect should be deceiued Matth. 24. Doth not S. Paule prophecy that the comming of Antichrist shalbe according to the working of Satan in all power and lying signes and miracles and therefore no maruel if Bristow bragge that he can fill whole volumes with them But miracles are not the triall but the confirmation of doctrine which must be tried onely by the Scriptures of God without the authoritie whereof no miracles ought to moue vs to giue credit and much lesse any miracles may moue vs to beleue any doctrine which is against it But yet let vs consider of such miracles as Bristow rehearseth First for the sacrifice of the Masse and for purgatory August de ciuit Dei lib. 22. cap. 8. writeth that in a Ferme house of one Hesperius was great hurt and trouble by euill spirits which at the prayers of a certaine Priest or elder of Augustines Chutch was staied ceased There is no word of deuills expelled with a Masse or with the sacrifice of y e Masse That which in Bristowes eare soundeth that way is Perre â—it vnus c. One went thether he offered there the sacrifice of the body of Christ praying with all his power that the same vexation might ceasse But Augustine by offring the sacrifice of Christes body meaneth nothing but ministring of the communion as that holy action was then figuratiuely called but yet nether the Masse nor the sacrifice thereof was at that time inuented as I haue often plentifully shewed els where and namely against Heskins lib. â— cap. 22. That he nameth the sacrifice of the body of Christ it is not sufficient to proue him of Bristowes religion greater cause haue we to chalenge him to be of our religion when he calleth the sacrament the signe of the body of Christ and sayth that Christ will not giue vs that body which was borne of the virgine and crucified c. contra Adimant In Ioann tract â—0 cap. 12. From Augustine he passeth to a tale reported in Bedes historie of a captiue whose chaines were loosed at such time as his brother which was a Monke and Priest sayd masse for him by which reporte Bede sayth many were moued to pray giue almes or offer the sacrifice of the holy oblation for the deliuerie of their frendes which were departed out of this world a sorie motiue without the autoritie of Gods word which albeit it was credited of Bede as diuerse other fables were yet may we doubt of the truth of it and although it were true that such a feate was wrought yet it can not establish a doctrine contrarie to the holy Scriptures And notwithstanding that Bede liuing in a corrupttime holdeth many errors of Papistrie yet I haue shewed against Stapletons sortresse that he holdeth not all not many of the chiefest After this miracle of Bede he beginneth the storie of our countrye woman which hauinge plaied the harlot in London and running ouer into Flanders to seeke the knaue that got her with childe was made lame with childbearing so that one legge was shorter then an other by more then halfe a foote sayth Bristow But after often shrift and other holy exercises of Poperie in time of a masse she was restored to health by the sacrament of miracle I doubt not but the masters of Bridewell neere which place she dwelled sometime which haue done as great cures as that coulde haue healed her of her lamenes without the sacrament of miracle In rehearsall of this doggetricke miracle he interlaceth an other as monstruous a lye as this That the pixe being stollen by a Iew the cakes sticked in despight among the Iewes did bleede aboundantly that a druncken woman a Iew borne and christned being admonished by an Angell in a vision restored that pixe with three hostes in it to her gostly father from whom they were translated to S. Gudulaes church in Bruxells where they are kept vntill this day from the yere of our Lord 1369. which is moe then 200. yeares agoe The like fable they haue at the Monasterie of Billets in Paris where they haue a cruse full of the miraculous blood which issued out of the masse cake so sticked by the Iewes which are euen as great miracles as the blood of Haâ—les was in England For if the Papists durst for their credit coÌ„mit those miraculous hostes and blood vnto indifferent vewe and custodie where no fraude might be vsed I durst aduenture my life which is almost all that I haue to leese that within lesse then two yeares they shall either be founde to consist of a counterfait matter that is perdurable or els they shall putrefie and rotteâ— which they woulde beare vs in hande haue continued more then two hundreth yeares In the demaund and in the next motiue mâ—Ì„tioÌ„ is made of miracles wrought in Indâ—a and by Pius quintus the Pope at Rome which either are lyes or iuggling casts of counterfeating coseners But if they or their Pope haue any such power as they bragge of why come they not in the face of their aduersaâ—â—es challenge them as Helias did the Priests of Baal and in open sight of their enemies shewe their mightie miracles and not prate of wonders done in the Indes of which they may lye where there is none to controlle them or wrought among them selues where we can â—udge nothing of them but counterfeating and cosening with which practises they haue bene taken tâ—ied too often to gaine any credit with any that haue any wisedom in them The 6. motiue Miracles personall a marke of true Doctors S. Barnarde of our religion with what miracles he confirmed images churches the reall presence transubste â—atiâ—n sacrifice of the masse praying for the dead praying to Sainâ—tes and manâ— other articles Miracles for by holy bread for the signe of the crosse The signe of the crosse worketh miracles Excommunication of Pius v to be feared who by his prayers signing of the crosse did cast deuills out of fiue women Bristowes principle against which there can be no instance is this VVhatsoeuer persons at any time since Christes ascention haue had the grace of miracles they were the ministers of Christ I say not alwayes iust and holy but alwayes preachers of his truth and consequently whosoeuer set themselues against such persons they were against Christ against the truth In the last chapter before I haue brought instance both out of the Law and the Gospell of salse Prophets and false Christes which should worke great miracles and yet preach against God Christ. Wherefore this conclusion is vtterly false Bristow replieth they are lying signes such as were wrought by
in Protestants Because Augustine writing against Iulian the Pelagian lib. 1. cap. 2. sayth of the fathers Quâ—d credunt credo c. That which they beleue I beleue also I holde that they holde I teache that they teach I preach that they preach and lib. 2. quos oporâ—ct c. Christian people ought to prefeâ—re the auncient holy truth before your profane nouelties and chose rather to sticke to them then to you And are Pelagians aliue in Protestants because Augustine recâ—iueth the olde writers that were agreeable to the scriptures Did not the Pelagians alledge the authority of the old writers also Lâ—b cont Iul cap. 2. 3 But what should I contend about that which is so cleare in Augustine De baptism câ—nt Dâ—natâ—si cap. 2. Quis autem nesciat â—anctam scripturam canonicam tam râ—t ris quam noui testaâ—â—â—â— â—ertis sâ—is terminis contineri camque omnibus postericribus Episcopâ—rum literis it a praeponi vt de ill a omnino dubitari d. s epâ—ari non pâ—ssâ—t vtrum verum vel vtrum rectuÌ„sâ— quiâ—quâ—â— in ea sâ—riptum esse constiterit Ep sâ—â—porum autem literas que post confiâ—matum canâ—nem vel scriptâ—e sunt vel sâ—riâ—untur per sermâ—nem forte sapientiorem cuiuslibet in care periti râ—s per alioruâ—n Episâ—â—porum grauiorem auctoritatem doctâ—orumque prudentiam per conâ—ilia liâ—ere reprehâ—ndi si quid in â—is forte à veritate deuiatum est iâ—sa concilia c. Who knoweth not that the holy canonical scripture both of the old and new testament is conteyned in their certeine bands and that the same is so preferred before all later writings of Bishops that of it there can be no doubt or question at all whether that be true or right whatsoeuer is knowen to be written therein But as for the writings of Bishops which since the canon is confirmed haue bene written or bâ— nowe in writing that by some speach perhaps more wise of any man that is more skillfull in that matter and by the more graue authoritie of other Bishops and wisedom of them that are better learned and by councells they may be reprehended if any thinge perhaps in them is gone a straye from the truth and that euâ—n those councells which are helde in euery region and prouince without all controuersie doe giue place to the authoritie of generall councels which are made out of all the Christian worlde and that euen the generall councells are often tymes corrected the former by the later c. as in the 13. motiue By which saying you may playnly see howe the olde fathers were S. Augustines motiue euen none otherwise then they are our retentiue to staye vs in Christian truthe which they write agreeable to the holye Scriptures and therefore it is an impudent slaunder of Bristowe bothe where he saythe that in our preachinge and writinge we thinke it not necessary to alledge the tâ—stimonies of tâ—e olde fathers and also that in familiar talke amonge our selues we are not afearde plainely to confesse that the fathers all were Papistes As vayne a cauill it is that the Protestantes are ashamed of their fathers When we acknowledge no fathers vnto whose iudgement we will stande absolutely in all controuersies but the Prophetes and the Apostles and God him selfe by whose spirite they did write As for Simon Magus Eunomus and suche olde heretikes we detest more then the Papistes doe But AErius Vigilantius and Iouinian were playnely of our opinion and of them we are ashamed And doe you Papistes beleeue nothinge common with AErius Vigilantius Iouinian Doe you in no poynte holde that which Arius Macedonius Eutyches did holde Doe you mayntayne no opinion which was taught by Mahomet him selfe you will aunswer that there neuer was heresie but it hâ—lde and taught many articles of truthe which if you holde as they did you are not therefore their children in suche articles wherin they were heretikes Euen so we aunswere you of AErius Vigilantius Iouinian we are not ashamed to beleue any truth which they helde their errours we leaue vnto them selues But I know you will replye that among the errours of AErius the denyall of prayers to profit the deade was one accompted by Epiphanius and Augustine Then it is your parte to shewe what argumentes out of the holy Scripture they bring to proue this opinion to be an errour Otherwise their auctoritie alone is not sufficient to make it a truth Vigigilantius is baighted only by Hierome of other learned men in his time he was counted a godly man and a learned As for Iouinian we take not his parte if in all respects he made mariage equall with virginitie which in some respect the Apostle preferreth But we must see of what religion and auctoritie the fathers were First sayth Bristow you may perceaue by Iewells challenge that for Purgatorie prayer for the dead and to Saincts merite of good workes c. there is somthing conteined in the olde fathers which liued within 600. yeares after Christ because he durst not make his challenge of these articles but of the Masse the Pope the eucharistie c. But I pray you Bristow are not these greater matters among you then the other If therefore you be not able to proue your greatest mysteries of antiquitie out of any one father for so many ages what great matter is it if you haue them fauourable in a fewe articles of lesse moment But Bristow with wayght of reason will beare vs downe that all the fathers are on their side wholly and against vs in all poynctes of our controuersie And this is his reason who are driuen to mayteyne the fathers credit and auctoritie Papistes or Protestantes Not Protestantes verily but Papistes ergo the fathers be all for Papistes and against Protestantes A mightie reason of mayne force Dioscorus and Eutyches in the councell of Chalcedon boasted of the auctoritie of the holie fathers and stoode much in defense of their creditte therefore the fathers were whollie on their side But let vs heare L. Humfreys opinion out of his booke of B. Iewells life of Iewells challenge of the fathers and of the Saincts in the calender Nay rather let vs heare Bristow yelping like a little curre agaynst so great a lyon First he snatcheth peeces of his sentences gnawne from the rest and then squeleth out as though he had hearde some maruelous straunge soundes D. Humfrey sayth Iewell gaue the Papistes too large a scope when not content to haue beaten them downe with the auctoritie of the holy Scriptures he made his challenge vpon the testimonie of the fathers and that so many hundreth yeares after Christ. And herein he was iniurious to him selfe that refusing that meane by which he might more easely more straightly haue maynteyned his cause after a maner he spoyled him selfe and the church This is his opinion of Maister Iewells challenge Howe followeth his opinion of the fathers and of the Sainctes in the calender
are made according to that which is namely the trueth set foorth in the holy Scriptures not according to that which euery foole will fondly suppose or imagine The 44. Motiue is the 49. demaund The Church that all Chrsstes enemies fight against Englande ioyneth with Christes enemyes againste Christendome VVhat Religion the Iowes impunge as the Religion of Christ. Christ is to bee beleeued for conuerting of Emperours and powers from their Idols to serue his seruauntes The Church is euerlasting and visible Saincte Augustines motiue Emperors turned from their Idols and praying at Peeters sepulchre and the Christianitie of humane lawes Sainct Augustine of our Religion Protestants bee of many olde heresies The popish Church was not persecuted by the heathen Emperous but the Catholike church of Christ The popish Church is not of so great antiquitie that shee had then any shewe in the worlde although the misterie of iniquitie did then woorke and euen in the Apostles time The Heathens Turks and Iewes doe no more hate the popish church then they doe the church of God which is in England The warres against the Turke be at this day maintained by the states of Germany which are of our religioÌ„ aswel as by the Papists That there is no publike ayde sent against the Turk out of England it is not in any allowaunce of Turkish religion but because the state seeth it not necessary neither was there any publike ayde sente an hundreth yeeres be ore the reuolte from Papistrie And yet euen in the Queenes maiesties raigne there hath gone ayde out of England against Soliman which died at the siege of Segesto where diuers noble Gentlemen of Englande goinge on their owne charges as Bizia testifieth wan more true glory then they that 2. or 3. hundred yeeres before vpon a superstitious vowe were signed with the crosse to fight against the Saracens for the possession of the earthly Ierusalem How often shall I aunswer that the first christian Emperours were not conuerted from Idolatry to Christianitie by the popish Church but the later Christian Emperours by her haue bene peruerted from the true worship of God vnto Idolatry That the Emperours being conuerted from Idolatry did pray at Peter the fishermans sepulchre as Augustine sayth it sheweth the vertue of y e Gospel of Christ that had made so great alteration in them but nothing at all proueth the authoritie or any error of the popish Church for Augustine sayth not that they prayed vnto Peter but at the sepulcher of Peter meaning in the Church that was builded vpon the place that was supposed to be the buriall of Peter The lawes that those Emperours made against Idolaters may well serue against the Papistes w c are as grosse in all kindes of Idolatry as the Gentills for the most part were Finally it was not y e popish Church but the Church of Christ that suppressed the heresies of the Arrians Sabellians Nestorians c. But Iouinian did let out of hell Priestes and Nunnes mariage which gate not the Church of Protestantes but our Church sayth Bristow hath stopped The Church that striued against Iouinian was nether for mariage of Priestes of whom many thowsands were maryed in that tyme yea and a thowsande yeares after nor yet for mariage of such as had vowed virginitie and could not contayne when both Epiphanius the hatchet of heresies and Hierome that greatest aduersary of Iouinian agree that they ought to marye Epiph. cont Apostolicoshaer 61. Hierom ad Demetriadem Nether were Epiphanius Philaster and Augustine which disalow the opinion of Aerius concerning prayers for the dead members of the popish church for this one error which they held seeing they hold the principall substance of religion against the Papists and agreeable to the word of God That Bristow sayth in the demaund VVe count Turkes Iewes and very Atheistes for our frendes and all that be not Papistes it is a most detestable slaunder The Anabaptistes burned in Smithfield were no Papistes the blasphemer of Christ lately burned at Norwiche was no Papist whose sharpe execution sheweth that heretikes blasphemers and Atheistes when they are discouered finde no friendship at the handes of Christes Church but such as they deserue Finally the Easterne Church which of long tyme hath bene separated from the Romish communion hath as great enemies of the Turkes heathen and Iewes as the Popish Church hath yet will not the Papistes allow it for the Catholike Church The 45. motiue conteyneth the 31. 32. 33. 40. demaundes Euer visible and Catholike Vniuersalitic Antiquitie Consent Protestants were neuer before this tyme. They are ashamed of their fathers Hus was not a Protestant VVicklefe was not a Protestant VVicklefe condemned by Melancthon Prophecy for our religion No Scripture against the Catholikes but all for them Here is nothing but the old popish bragge of vniuersalitie antiquitie and consent which is as easily denied as it is allwayes alleaged without proofe Sauing that in the demaundes they are sundered as though euery one of them without the other two were a sufficient triall of truth which nether Vincentius nor Optatus nor Augustine nor any that vsed this argument did euer meane But that is truth which being most auncient hath at all tymes of all true Christians by general consent bene receyued But this can not be proued of any one error of poperye For if any of these three be omitted the argument is of no force to proue truth All nations by generall consent embraced Idolatrie yet was the true worship of God which was knowen onely in Iurye the more auncient The worship of Iupiter was more auncient then the honor of Christ shewed in the flesh and more vniuersally receyued but not of the true worshippers of God As for generall councells which in the demaund of consent he sayth to be all against the Protestants he is not able to shewe one approued generall councel that was held within six hundreth yeares after Christ that decreed any thing contrary to that which we beleue in any poynt But confessing that in many ages some there haue bene in some poyntes of our opinion yet he sayth we can shewe no lyneall succession but leape from Luther to Christ without any recorde of our religion in all the meane tyme hauing no monument of such Church nether in leafe or lyne of seruice booke As one that loueth antiquities well I would fayne see what leaues the Papistes can shewe of their seruice bookes to proue a lyneall descâ—nt from Christ to Pope Gregory the 13 when Bristow sweareth perdie to agree in all poyntes with Pope Leo the tenth which was in Luthers tyme some of their seruice being made by Thomas Aquinas some by Fulbertus some taken out of Beda some out of Gregory some out of Augustine some out of Hieronyme some out of Iohn Chrysostom and of Ambrose and the eldest I thinke not of Origen which argueth nether antiquitie nor vniuersalitie to stand with the popish seruice as for
all Churches when the history is plaine he did M. Sander bringeth in these and such like alledgged before which acknowledged a certaine primacie of the see of Rome And certaine it is the Bishops of Rome before Phocas tyme affected a great primacie which of many was acknowledged but yet neuer absolutely neuer without coÌ„trouersie vntil Phocas for a great summe of money receyued of Boniface the thirde strake the stroke and made the decree for which in all popish writers he is highly praised although in the Greeke church his decree was not long obserued Touching the examples of Emperours and Princes of later times although I could shewe they haue often resisted the Pope yet I know many may be alledged that haue submitted them selues to his Antichristian tyranny which I will not staÌ„d to examine because they can be no preiudice to the truth approued by examples of the eldest age As for the history of Lucius king of Britayne that sent to Eleutherius for preachers if it were true it maketh nothinge for the supremacy of the romish Bishop I will therefore conclude this chapter with a saying of Socrates in proe lib. 5. to shew what authoritie he iudged them perours to haue in Ecclesiasticall matters Etipsos quidem Imperatores hac historia continua complectimur prâ—pterea quod ab illis postquam Christiani esse coeperunt res Ecclesiasticae pendent maximae Synodi ex illorum sententia congregatae sunt congregantur And in this continuall history we comprehend the Emperours them selues because that vpon them since they began to be Christians the matters of the Church depend and the greatest synods haue bene gathered are gathered by their authoritie The punishment he threatâ—eth to them that forsake the Church of Rome shal one day fall vpon them that take part with â— Church of Rome as in part it doth already The 17. chapter THeir doctâ—ine who teach the Bishop of Rome to be Aâ—â—ichrist him selfe is confuted by the auctoritie of Gods worde and by the consent of auncient fathers VVhy Antichrist is permitted to come AFter he hath shewed his opinion what maner a one Antechrist shalbe alleaged â—â—â—â— cause of his coÌ„ming out of S. Paul 2. Thes. 2. because men haue not receaued the loue of the truth that they might be saued God shal sende theÌ„ the working of error y t they may beleue lying c. he stormeth out of measure against the Protestants for that they can find no place to setle Antichrist in but in the see of Rome so beautified dignified by Christ and all the primitiue Church But seeing Antichrist is appoynted to sit in the temple of God which is a higher place then S. Peters chayer it is no meruayle if Satan haue thrust him into that see which of olde tyme was accompted the toppe and castell of all religion But let vs see his reasons taken out of Gods word by which it is proued that the Pope can not be Antichrist him selfe The first is because in S. Paule he is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. the man of sinne which signifieth one singular man and not a number of men in succession and this is affirmed to be the Greeke article in this worde man by Cyrillus in Ioan. lib. 1. cap. 4. But how frendly Cyrillus was deceaued you shall see by some examples euen out of the new Testament In S. Mathew cap. 12. 35. you haue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A good man out of the good treasure of his heart and an euill man out of the euil treasure of his heart bringeth c. where no one singular man is ment In S. Mark cap. 2. verse 27. The Sabboth was made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for man not man for the Sabboth In S. Luke cap. 4. verse 4. Not with breade onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a man shall liue but by euery woorde of God S. Paule 2. Tim. 3. ver 17. That the man of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be perfect and prepared to euery good woorke These places and an hundreth more which might bee brought doe proue howe vaine the argument is thatis taken of the nature of the Greke article Nether is Hierom or any of the auncient writers to be heard without authoritie of the Scripture which supposed that Antichrist should be one man Although none of them directly affirmeth that he should be one man as Christ was Hierom in Dani. cap. 7. sayth we must not thinke that Antichrist should be a Deuill but one of the kind of men in whom Satan should dwell This proueth not that he should be a singular man no more then the fourth beast which signifieth the RomaÌ„e Empire out of which he should rise should be one singular Emperour No more doth it proue that because Antiochus was a figure of him he must be but one man And as litle that Ambrose in 2. The. 2 sayth Satan shall appeare in homine in a man which may signify the kind of men and not one singular person Likewise Augustine calling Antichrist the Prince and last Antichrist meaneth no one person for the words Prince and last may agree to a whole succession of men in one state as well as the wordes king and beaste to a whole succession of Emperours in Daniel To conclude there is not one whome he nameth that denyeth Antichrist to be a whole succession of meÌ„ in one state of deuilish gouernment And Irenaeus thinketh it probable of the Romane kingdom lib. 5. The second argument is that Antichrist is called the aduersary therefore is the greatest enemy of Christ denying Iesus Christ to be God and man or to be our Mediatour I aunswer the Pope doth so denying the office of Christ although with the deuills he confesse in wordes Iesus to be the holy one of God and to be Christ the sonne of God Marke 1. 24. Luke 4. 41. his diuinitie the Pope denieth by denying his onely power in sauing his wisedom in his word to be onely sufficient his goodnes in the vertue of his death to take away both payne and guylt of sinne which he arrogateth to him selfe by his blasphemous pardons Christes humanitie he denyeth by his transsubstantiation his mediation in which he is principally Christ he denyeth by so many meanes of saluation as he maketh beside Christ videlicet mans merits ceremonies inuented by man pardons a newe sacrifice of the Masse c. The third argumeÌ„t is that Antichrist shall not come before the Romane Empire be cleane taken away For that which Saint Paule sayth ye knowe what withholdeth c. Although it be not necessary to expound this of the Romane Empire yet following the olde writers that so vnderstood it I say the Romane Empire was remoued before Antichrist the Pope was throughly enstalled For beside that the see of the Empire was remoued from Rome the gouernment it selfe was in a manner cleane remoued the title of the Romane Emperour onely remayning at last an
Homousians Athanasians c. but the doctrine of the Cathotholike Christians agâ—eeing with the woordes of God proued them to be no sâ—ctaryes nor Hetetikes so doth our doctrine iustifie vs what names soeuer be deuised against vs. But Maâ—ster Sander woulde haue vs to shewe a man whose pâ—oper name was Papa or Romanus as though many Heretikes were not called of their hearisie or place from whence they came and not of proper names of men Angelici Apostolici Barbarita Cathari Collyridiani Enâ—ratitae Patripassiani and a great number more were called of their heresie Cataphryges Pepuziani and such like were called of the place where they were Wherefore the name of Papistes and Romanistes agreeth â—ith the example of olde heretikes As for the longe tarying large spreadinge and straunge commng in of the Popishe heresie is therefore without example in all poyntes lyke because Antâ—christ is not a common pettit heretike but the greatest and most daungerous enemy that euer the Gospel had The names of Benedictines Fraunciscanes c. Maister Sander woulde excuse because these sectes maintaine no doctrin dissenting froÌ„ the Pope but all seeke the perfectiou of the Gospell by diuerse wayes as though there were any other way but Iesus Christ. Sainct Paule 1. Cor. 1. condemneth the holding of Peter of Paule of Apollo when the Doctrine was all one and counteth them schismatikes that so did And the purer Pâ—imatiue church condemned such apish immitators of the Apostles in forsaking all things and possessing nothing in abstayning from Marriage c. for Heretikes and called them Apostolicos witnesse Epiphan Cont. Aposto haer 61. The thirde Marke of an Antichristian is dissagreement among Heretikes and heere not content to charge vs with the dissagreeing of Anabaptistes from vs he amplysieth the dissention betweene Luther and Zwinglius about the presence of Christes body in the sacrament for which contradiction he thinketh it muste needes followe that one of them is an Antichriste I aunswere euery errour stifely mayntayned maketh not an Heretike except it be in an article of fayth necessary to saluation Cyprian againste the Byshopps of Rome Stephanus and Cornelius helde an errour in Baptisme as greate as that same of Luther dissenting from Zwinglius in the Supper of the Lorde yet is not Cypryan accoumpted for an Heretike Maister Sander replyeth and sayeth that Cyprian was not so stubborne that he woulde excommunicate them that held the contrary Luther also and Zwinglius althoughe they coulde not bee reconcyled in opinions yet agreed to abstaine from contention at Marpurge Anno domini 1529 Sleid. lib. 6. Maister Sander sayth further that in the contention of Cyprian and Stephanus the Catholike Faythe was not fully and vniuersally receiued in any generall Councell But hee forgeteth that the Byshoppe of Rome was one partie whose iudgement should haue ended the striefe if his authoritie had beene such then as he vsurped moste ambiciously afterward Nowe where as he defendeth the Papists for their vnitie which he sayeth could not bee with out the spirite of God I aunsweare he might as well defend the Doctrine of the Mahometistes where is greater vnitie then euer there was amonge the Papistes who to omit an hundreth small contentions of the schoolemen are not yet agreed of the greatest question of all whether the Pope be aboue the councell or the councell aboue the Pope For seeing some of the Papistes make the Popes determination to be the rule of truth other make the councell there is no vnitie among the Papistes in truth when they are not agreed what is the onely rule of trueth whereas we all agree that the word of God is the only rule of truth wherby we would haue all doctrine tried and examined The fourth marke of an Antichrist is to reigne but a short tyme and here he woulde haue vs to marke howe Luthers kingdome is come to an ende whose doctrine Melancthon hath chaunged although Illyricus woulde defend it What depe roote y e doctrine of God deliuered by Luther hath taken it is so well knowne that it can not be dissembled Neither hath Melancthon departed from him except it were in his opinion of the reall presence Wherefore this is a great impudency to triuÌ„phe ouer the decay of Luthets doctrine which dayly encreaseth to the ouerthrow of the Popish kingdom The fall of Hosiander an heretike no man either marueleth or pitieth The doctrine of Zwinglius and Oecolampadius of the Sacrament is the same that Caluine teacheth as euery wise man doth know and their learned workes shall liue and be in honor when the Popes decretalls and his Masse bookes c. shall stoppe mustard pottes and be put to viler vses Neither is Caluines doctrine failed by our othe of supremacie for Caluine in the right sence of it taught the same supremacie of Christian Princes which we sweare to acknowledge in our soueraigne Neither doth Beza teache any otherwise of the descending of Christ into hell then Caluine did nor otherwise expounded the place of the Psalme cited in Actes the 2. then Caluine doth as all men that wil read them both may see notwithstanding the shamelesse cauill of M. Sander The long continuaunce of the Popish kingdome is a small cause to bragge of when it being sound enemie to the kingdome of Christ is nowe entered so farre into destruction out of which it shall neuer escape although Maister Sander sayth it doth florish when it is banished out of so many regions and dayly decreaseth in euerie place Gods holy name be praised therefore The fift marke of Antichrist he sayeth is to preach without commission as Luther did who was sent of none I aunswere in the state of the church so miserablie deceaued as it was in his time God sendeth extraordinarily immediatly from him selfe as Helias Helizaeus the Prophetes were sent to the Iewes Israelites which were not of the Priests ordinary teachers so Christ sent his Apostles and Euangelists And so was Luther and such as he sent to repaire the ruines of the churche And yet the Papistes haue small aduauntage against the calling of Luther seeing he was a Doctor authorised to preache in that church where he first beganne which after he had reformed the abuses therof and restored true doctrine in many poyntes banished by the false doctrine of Antichrist The same reformed church hath euer since sent forth ordinarie pastors and teachers and shall doe to the end of the world The sixt marke of an Antichrist is that heretikes preferre the temporall sword before the spirituall And therefore Antichrist shall by force of armes compell men to a new faith for he shall come as S. Paule sayeth in virtute that is to say in power or strength O impudent falsifier of the holy Scripture doth not Sainct Paule say that his comming shalbe according to the efficacy of Satan in all power signes and lying wonders in al deceitfulnes of vnrighteousnes 2. Thes. 2. by which is shewed seduction by false
Bishoppe but as an Apostle for the conuersion of the Iewes which not onely out of all Iurie but out of all partes of the world came thither ordinarily to worshippe Of S. Peters sitting at Antioch as Bishoppe we finde nothing in the Scriptures and lesse of his remouing to Rome But we finde that when Peter came to Antioche Paule withstoode him to his face and reproued him openly which he might not well haue done if Peter had bene supreame heade of the church in his owne see as M. Sander doth fantasie Where he alleageth the text Episcopatum eius accipiat alter and let an other take his Bishoprike to proue that Iudas and so the Apostles were Bishoppes it is too childish fonde an argument seeing the Greeke word which S. Luke vseth the Hebrue word which the Prophet vseth signifieth generally a charge or office and not suche a particular office of a Bishoppe as nowe we speake of He citeth farther Theodorete in 3. cap. 1. ad Tim. to proue y t the name of an Apostle in the primitiue church did signifie such a Bishoppe But howe greatly Theodoret was deceaued appeareth by this that he citeth for proofe Philip. 2. Epaphroditus to be the Apostle of the Philippensians because S. Paule sayth of him Epaphroditus your Apostle and my helper whereas he meaneth that he was their messenger vsing the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the generall signification for a messenger and not for the name of suche an officer as an Apostle or Bishoppe He nameth also Titus and Timotheus which in the Scripture are neuer called Apostles likewise the Apostles and Elders at Ierusalem which were in deede the true Apostles of Christs immediat sending and not Bishoppes ordeyned by men And whereas Hierome sayeth that all Bishoppes be successors of the Apostles he meaneth manifestly in auctoritie within their seuerall charges and not that the Apostles were Bishops Likewise where Augustine sayth that the Bishoppes were made in steede of the Apostles it rather proueth that the Apostles were no Bishoppes for then if the Apostles were Bishoppes he should say Bishoppes were made in steede of Bishoppes The last reason is that if the office of Bishoppes had not bene distinct in the Apostles froÌ„ their Apostleship that office woulde haue ceased with the Apostleshippe for the whole being taken away no parte can remayne except it had an other grounde to stande in beside the Apostleshippe as the Bishoppely power had In deede if the Apostleshippe had ceased before Bishoppes had bene ordeyned Bishoplike power woulde haue ceased with it but seeing the Apostles ordeyned Bishops and Elders in euery congregation to continue to the worlds ende the Bishoppes office hath not ceased though the office of the Apostles is expired Wherefore seeing neither by Scripture reason nor Doctors this distinction of offices in the Apostles can be proued when Peter is called heade Prince chiefe first Capteyne of the Apostles by Cyrill or any auncient writer we must vnderstande as Ambrose teacheth a primacie of confession or fayth not of honor or degree de incar dom cap. 4. The 11. chapter HOw farre S. Peter did ether excell or was equall with the Apostles in their Apostolike office VVhere in diuerse obiections are aunswered which seeme to make against S. Peters supremacie BVt that necessity enforceth him M. Sander thinketh it sinne of curiositie to inquire of that equality or inequalitie of the Apostles where as it should suffice vs to follow the present state of the vniuersall Church practised in our time As though the vniuersall Church of any time did euer acknowledge the Pope to be supreame heade although a great part of the world hath of long time so taken him He thinketh it out of contronersie that S. Peter was the first of the Apostles as S. Mathew sayth primus the first Simon which is called Peter And he is not coÌ„tent that he was first in the order of numbring but he will haue him first in dignitie because he is alwayes named first But that is nether true nor a good reason if it were true because he is named first therefore he is of greatest dignitie But Gal. 2. 9 Iames and Cephas Iohn are sayde to haue bene pillers of the Churche and yet Paule equall with them Although if we graunted greatest dignity to Peter yet thereupon did not follow greatest authority For these three Apostles last named were of greatest dignity among the Apostles yet not of greater authoritie then the rest And although the auncient fathers of the worde primus haue deriued the name of primatus or primacy yet haue they also expressed wherin this primacie doth consist namely not in authoritie but in order nether doth those names Prince chiefe heade toppe guide mouth greatest of the Apostles vsed by some of them signifie his authoritie ouer them but his dignitie amongest them But if you aske him wherin Peter was chiefe He answereth â—â—â—â— question is curious For in y e nature order of the apostleship euery Apostle was equall with all his fellowes so is euery Bishop Priest King Duke Knight with euery one of his degree If this be as he sayth then was Peter chiefe nether as Apostle nor Bishoppe But there may be another thinge sayth he coincident to some degree of men not necessary for the being but for their well being One therefore was set ouer the Apostles for vnities sake and to auoyd schismes as Cyprian Hierom write in places before cited This must nedes be a primacy of order and not of authoritie for amonge men of equall authoritie as he confesseth the Apostles were one may be chosen as the President or Primate to auoyd confusion the austeritie remayning equall to euery one but one can not be preferred in authoritie to remayne still equall with his fellowes in auctoritie But wheras Optatus lib. 2. de schism Don. Leo ad Aâ—astas Ep. 82. are cited to proue that the same primacie which Peter some time but yet not alwaies had among the Apostles should be reteyned in succession of his chayre to mayntayne vnitie amonge all men it hath no ground in the holy Scriptures and yet those good men were farre from imagining suche an absolute power of Peters successor as M. Sander defendeth in the Pope although some times he doe handle it so nicely as it might seeme to be a thing of nothing wherein the Pope is aboue his fellow Bishops where I sayd that Peter had not alwayes the primacie of order among the Apostles it is proued both by the 15. of the Actes where Iames was President of the councell Gal. 2. not onely where Iames is named before Peter but also where Peter abstayned and separated him selfe after certayne came from Iames fearing them of the circumcifion left he should haue bene euill thought of as he was before for keeping company with Cornelius and in diuerse other places of the Actes of the Apostles But M. Sander will adde another truth