before I come to the full period of this worke Curteous Reader BEARE WITH THE FAVLTS IN PRINTING WHICH CAN HARDLY BE FEW CONSIDERING THE MANIFOLD DIFFICVLTIES OF THE time And yet besides the ouer-sights in pointing are not very many which be thus corrected IN THE MARGENT THESE Generally a ss is set in the quotation of Caluins Institution for the Section or Number For. Page Reade Beza in Neoph. 9. in Creophag simil ibid. Simler sess 17. 2. 11. number 1. 2. Homil. in praeâ—rat 48. In priorem ad Corint Conc. 56. Canon IN THE TEXT THESE For. Page Line Reade declared 7 15 declare Atheisme 20 9 Atheismes was this 40 35 was it pithagorically 63. 22 pithagoricall I say to solemnely 86 22 to be solemnely Euchirines 135 24 Eucherius established 145 17 establish Cesanis 155 39 Caesarius Pomachius 156 1 Pamachius demised 180 18 deuised proofe 181 16 disproofe The quotation of S. Augustine which is in psalm 33. conc 2. is omitted in the 68. page Hier. cont Lucif cap. 6. wanteth page 209. And in the Aduertisment page the 25. for apud Dionysium 1. Cor. reade apud Ludolphum de vita Christi part 1. cap. 5. pag. 17. AN ANSVVERE VNTO M. PERKINS ADVERTISEMENT M. PERKINS Aduertisement to all fauourers of the Roman religion shewing as he weeneth that the said Religion is against the Catholike principles of the Catechisme that hath beene agreed vpon euer since the dayes of the Apostles by al Churches which principles be fowre The Apostles Creede the tenne Commandements the Lordes prayer the institution of two Sacraments Baptisme and the Lordes supper 1. COR. 11. vers 23. I HAD once determined to haue wholy omitted this goodly post-script because it containeth in manner nothing else but an irkesome repetition of that which hath beene I will not say twise before but more then twenty times handled ouer and ouer in this former small treatise notwithstanding considering both howe ready many are when they see any thing omitted to say that it could not be answered and also for that these pointes here reiterated are the most odious that he could cull out of all the rest to vrge against vs I finally resolued to giue them a short answere And further also by prouing their newe religion to be very opposite vnto those old groundes of the true religion to requite him with the like that I die not in his debt Thus he beginneth The Roman religion established by the Councell of Trent is in the principall pointes thereof against the very groundes of the Catechisme the Creede the tenne Commandements the Lordes prayer the two Sacraments THE Catholike religion embraced and defended by the Church of Rome was planted and established there by the Apostles S. Peter and S. Paul fifteene hundreth yeares before the Councell of Trent and hath beene euer sithence by the Bishops of Rome their lawfull successors constantly reteined and most sincerely obserued and maintayned some articles thereof called into question by the Heretikes of this latter age were in that most learned generall Councell of Trent declared and defined And great meruaile it were if the principall pointes thereof should be against the groundes of the Catechisme which is in euery point most substantially expounded by the decree and order of the very same Councell Or is it credible that the Church of Rome with which all other ancient Churches and holy Fathers did desire to agree and which hath beene euer most diligent to obserue all Apostolicall traditions should in the principall points of faith crosse and destroy the very principles of that religion that hath beene agreed vpon by all Churches euer since the Apostles daies as he saith Is it not much more likely and probable that the Protestantes who slaunder all Churches euer since the time of the Apostles with some kind of corruption or other and who hold no kind of Apostolicall tradition to be necessary is it not I say more credible that they should shake those groundes of faith which come by tradition from the Apostles and haue beene euer since by all Churches agreed vpon I suppose that fewe men of any indifferent judgement can thinke the contrarie But let vs descend to the particulers wherein the truth will appeare more plainely Thus beginneth Master PERKINS with the Creede First of all it must be considered that some of the principall doctrines beleeued in the Church of Rome are that the Bishoppe of Rome is the Vicar of Christ and head of the Catholike Church that there is a fire of Purgatory that Images of God and Saintes are to be placed in the Church and worshipped that prayer is to be made to Saintes departed that there is a propitiatory sacrifice daylie offered in the Masse for the sinnes of the quicke and the dead These pointes are of that moment that without them the Roman religion cannot stand c. And yet marke the Apostles Creede which hath beene thought to contayne all necessary pointes of religion to be beleeued and hath therefore beene called the key and rule of faith This Creede I say hath not any of these pointes nor the expositions made thereof by the ancient Fathers nor any other Creede or confession of faith made by any Councell or Church for the space of many hundreth yeares This is a plaine proofe to any indifferent man that these be newe articles of faith neuer knowne in the Apostolike Church and that the Fathers and Councels could not finde any such articles of faith in the bookes of the old and newe Testament Answere is made that all these points of doctrine are beleeued vnder the article I beleeue the Catholike Church the meaning whereof they will haue to be this I beleeue all thinges which the Catholike Church holdeth and teacheth to be beleeued If this be as they say we must beleeue in the Church that is put our confidence in the Church for the manifestation and the certainety of all doctrine necessary to saluation And thus the eternall truth of God the creatour shall depend vpon the determination of the creature And the written word of God in this respect is made insufficient as though it had not plainely reuealed all points of doctrine pertaining to saluation And the ancient Churches haue beene farre ouer-seene that did not propound the former pointes to be beleeued as articles of faith but left them to these later times Thus farre Master PERKINS Wherein are hudled vp many thinges confusedly I will answere briefly and distinctlie to euery point The first is that in the Apostles Creede are contained all pointes of religion necessary to be beleeued which is most apparantly false as the Protestantes themselues must needes confesse or else graunt that it is not necessary to beleeue the King to be Supreame-head of the Church or that the Church is to be gouerned by Bishops or that vve are justified by Christes justice imputed to vs or that there be but two Sacramentes or that the Church seruice must be said in the
from that which is in question first it is granted by all that what Christ did in his last supper that did he institute to be done by his Apostles Priests and by his Ministers their successors for euer after Also that Christ was a Priest according to the order of Melchisedecke because both these haue euident warrant in the written word That then which is to be proued is that this order of Melchisedeckes Priest-hood doth properly or principally consist in the forme manner of his sacrificing We say yea M. PER. saith no and proueth it out of S. Paul who shewing Christ to be a Priest after the order of Melchisedecke doth make no mention of his Sacrifice but compareth them together in many other points as that he was a King of justice a Prince of peace without Father and Mother Hebr. 7. or Genealogie finally that he tooke tithes of Abraham and blessed him and in these points only saith M. PERKINS standeth the resemblance Reply Not so for that in none of these thinges doth any speciall order of Priest-hood consist what his owne name or the name of his Citty doth signifie are accidentall incident thinges to Priest-hood to receiue tithes and to blesse belong to Priest-hood in deede but generally to all sortes of Priest-hood as well to the order of Aaron as to that of Melchisedecke and therefore cānot distinguish one order of Priest-hood from another Wherefore it remaineth apparant that the proper order of Melchisedeckes Priest-hood must be gathered not from any of those circumstances specified by the Apostle but out of the very forme and manner of sacrificing which is as it were the correlatiue of a Priest and his proper function as the Apostle in the same Epistle defineth Cap. 5. vers 1. where he saith That euery high Priest is appointed to offer Sacrifices for sinnes Nowe that both the order of Melchisedecke consisted in sacrificing bread and wine and that therein Christ resembled him let the learnedst and most holy ancient Fathers no partial judges betweene vs for they knewe neither of vs be our arbitrators Let vs heare first that famous Martyr S. Cyprian vvho vpon those vvordes Thou art a Priest for euer according vnto the order of Melchisedecke Lib. 2. epist 3. writeth thus Which order surely is this proceeding of that Sacrifice and thence descending that Melchisedecke was a Priest of the most high God that he offered bread and wine that he blessed Abraham For who is rather a Priest of the most high then our Lord Iesus Christ that offered Sacrifice to God the Father and did offer the same that Melchisedecke had offered that is bread and wine to wit his body and bloud The same he repeateth in his treatise of our Lordes supper De coena Domini saying That Sacraments signified by Melchisedecke did then appeare when our high Priest brought forth bread and wine and said This is my body Can any thing be more plaine Epist 126 ad Euag. S. Hierome following the sentence of the most ancient Doctors Iereneus Hippolitus Eusebius Apollinaris and Eustathius defineth the order of Melchisedecke to consist properly in this that he offered not bloudy sacrifices of beasts as Aaron did but in single bread and wine being a cleane and pure Sacrifice did prefigure and dedicate the Sacrament of Christ The same doth he teach vpon the twenty six Chapter of S. Mathewe S. Augustine in diuers passages of his most learned workes doth confirme the same most plainely I will cite one In the old Testament there was a Sacrifice after the order of Aaron afterward Christ of his body and bloud ordained a Sacrifice according to the order of Melchisedecke He that desireth to see more of this point let him reade Theodorete Arnobius Psal 109. In cap. 7. 10. Cassiodorus and all ancient commentaries vpon that verse of the Psalme Thou art a Priest for euer after the order of Malchisedecke and in like sort those who haue written vpon the Epistle to the Hebrewes and he shall find it to be the generall resolute opinion of all antiquity that Christ in his last supper did institute the Sacrifice of his body and bloud vnder the formes of bread and wine according to the order of Melchisedecke But why then did not the Apostle treating of this resemblance betweene Christ and Melchisedecke make mention of this point of the Sacrifice The reason is in readinesse because it was not conuenient First it made not to his purpose because he doth proue that the order of Melchisedecke was more excellent then that of Aaron which could not be proued by the Sacrifice of Melchisedecke in bread and wine which were inferior vnto Beefes and Muttons the sacrifices of Aaron The second cause was the weakenesse of those Hebrewes faith who were not then sufficiently instructed in Christes owne person and in his Sacrifice on the Crosse and therefore incapable of his Sacraments and other mysteries thereupon depending which the Apostle himselfe forewarneth saying Hebr. 5. vers 11. Of Melchisedecke we haue great speach and inexplicable because you are become weake to heare Therefore very absurdly doe the Protestants argue here ab authoritate negatiuè as they speake in Schooles thus The Apostle made no mention of this point of resemblance therefore there is none such whereas he himselfe told them before that there were many profound points concerning Melchisedecke to be spoken off which he omitted because those Iewes vvere not as yet fit to heare them And in truth what could haue beene more out of season then to haue spoken to them of the Sacrifice of the Masse which is but a liuely resemblance of Christes death vvho were not then rightly informed of Christes death it selfe Epist 126 He spake saith S. Hierome to the Iewes and not to the faithfull to whome he might haue beene bold to vtter the Sacrament And thus much to this first euasion of M. PERKINS Nowe to the second That forsooth Melchisedecke did not sacrifice at all in bread and wine but only brought forth bread and wine to refresh Abraham and his souldiers and is called a Priest there not in regard of any Sacrifice but in consideration of his blessing of Abraham as the wordes teach saith he And he was a Priest of the most high and therefore he blessed him Reply He deserueth to be blessed with a cudgell that dareth thus peruert the word of God First he addeth to the text this vvord therefore againe where the point in the Hebrewe text is at the end of this sentence He was a Priest of the most high he remoueth it to the end of the next clause joyning that togither which is separated in the text Thirdly the reason is friuolous as M. PER. pointeth it For it can be no good reason vvhy Melchisedecke was a Priest for that he blessed Abraham for Abraham was a Priest as well as he and often offered Sacrifice as wel as Melchisedecke did Nowe it standeth
busines so for pleasing of God who making an Antithesis betweene the Virgin and the married woman saith Vers 32.33.34 The Virgin is careful for the thinges that appertaine vnto our Lord how she may please God and be holy in body and spirit whereas the wife is carefull of this world and howe to please her husband so that for sanctification of body and soule and for pleasing God virginity by the expresse sentence of the Apostle is better then mariage and therefore they must needes be much blinded with partiallity that cannot see it or obstinately bent against the truth that seeing it will not confesse it The fift argument It is good for me to dye rather 1. Cor. 9. vers 16. then that any man should make my glory voide For if I Euangelize it is no glory to me for necessity lieth vpon me c. What is my reward then that preaching the Gospell I yeeld the Gospell without cost Out of which words we collect that S. Paul preaching the Gospell on his owne charges without any cost vnto his Auditors did a worke of supererogation and that therefore he expected both glory and reward at Gods handes M. PER. answereth That generally it was in Pauls liberty to preach the Gospell freely or not to doe it but in Corinth vpon speciall circumstances he was bound in conscience to preach it freely as he did by reason of false teachers who would otherwise haue taken occasion to disgrace his ministery and haue hindred the glory of God Now it was Pauls duty to preuent that hinderance Reply S. Paul himselfe hath confuted for vs both partes of this answere The former That he was bound to preach freely in that place in these wordes If I preach it is no glory to me so that if he were bound in conscience to preach freely he could expect no such glory as he speaketh off and yet he saith That he would rather die then leese that glory and reward whence it appeareth plainely that he was not bound in conscience to preach there of free cost which he also most largely proueth from the third verse of that Chapter vnto the three and twenty By Moyses lawe by Christes Commandement by the example of all the other Apostles and by many comparisons and reasons so that nothing is more cleare then that he might haue liued at Corinth as well as in other places on their charges to vvhome he preached And by his whole discourse a man may easily gather that the false teachers did cleane contrary to M. PERKINS imagination accuse him for not taking his charges as the rest did vvherevpon they malitiously gaue out that he was no Apostle nor had not the freedome to liue by the Gospell as the Apostles had to vvhich in the beginning of the Chapter he answereth Am I not free am I not an Apostle and my defence to them that examine me is this haue not we power to eate and drinke as also the rest of the Apostles c. Where he proueth that he had power so to doe yet would not vse that power but preach freely both for his owne greater glory and reward in heauen and also that no kinde of let might be giuen vnto the couetous persons and niggardes who not being liberall in expences he chose rather to liue among them at his owne cost then to burden them vvho might perhaps not be so vvilling to receiue him if they must haue beene at charges to maintayne him or else to auoide the sinister report of some malitious who would not haue spared to haue bruited abroadâ— that he made gaines of the Gospell although he had sparingly liued by it Briefly to auoide some such let as he was not in conscience bound to auoide because it vvas not any scandall of the weake which we are bound to auoide but of the wicked and malitious which may with good conscience be contemned as the other Apostles did yet S. Paul of a superaboundant charity had an eye to that also so that the other Apostles that did liue vpon the Gospel did very well but the better that would not vse that his power and liberty Our sixt argument is taken from the testimony of the ancient Church Origen saith In cap. 15. Roma Those thinges which we doe aboue duty we doe them not by commandement For example virginity is performed not of duty for it is not required by any commandement but is offered aboue duty De habitu Virginiâ— S. Cyprian speaking of virginity saith Neither doth our Lord command this but commend it and exhort vnto it and whereas in his Fathers house there be many mansions you Virgins tend vnto the better places and by cutting-off the desires of the flesh you shall obtayne in heauen a reward of greater grace The like saith S. Basil de Virginitat S. Chrysostome Homil. 8. de penitent S. Hierome lib. 1. cont Iouin S. Augustine de sanct Virg. cap. 30. with many others which to auoide perplexity I doe omitte OF THE WORSHIPPING OF SAINTS SPECIALLY OF INVOCATION OVR CONSENTS M. PERKINS Page 245. THe first conclusion The true Saints of God are to be worshipped three wayes First by keeping in remembrance their vertues Secondly by giuing thankes to God for them and the benefits that by them God vouchsafed to his Chrurch Thirdly They are to be honoured by imitation of their vertues The second conclusion Their true reliques that is their vertues and good examples left to all posterity we keepe and respect with due reuerence yea if any man can shewe vs the bodily true reliques of any true Saint and can proue it so to be though we will not worshippe it yet will we not despise it but keepe it as a monument if it may be done without offence And thus farre we agree with the Church of Rome ANNOTATION HOwe vvell the Protestants obserue and keepe the vertues and good examples of the Saints I leaue it to the vertuous readers consideration But what deuotion they haue to their holy reliques may appeare partly by the manifold limitations this man vseth If they be true reliques if of true Saints if we can so proue them for they are resolute to call all into doubt and finally If it may also be done without offence to wit of their vveake Bretheren and fellowe Heretikes vvhich can neuer be then loe this considerate and aduised man Will not despise them By these exceptions one may easily espie the coldnes of their affection towardes them But the practise of their predecessours vvho made hauocke and burnt all the honourable reliques of the best Saints that they could lay their handes vpon without reuerence and respect doth demonstrate the same wicked spirit to haue possessed them which of old spurred foreward the Iewes and Pagans to consume into ashes the blessed bodies of the Martirs least the Christians should worshippe them and keepe them most reuerently as they were alwayes accustomed to doe when they could get them Yea if they
question but that they heare all prayers made by vvhosoeuer to them and obtayne very many of their requests And as S. Gregory saith What doe they not see Lib. 12. Moral cap. 13. who see him that seeth all thinges yea contayneth all thinges within himselfe Yet M. PER. blusheth not to say that it is but a forgery of mans braine to imagine that the God-head is such a cleare glasse representing all thinges because it should then followe that the Angels who behold Gods face should be ignorant of nothing but the Angels haue learned some thinges of the Church as S. Paul witnesseth therefore they see not all thinges in God To this we answere that in God all thinges are represented and shine more brightly then in their owne naturall places yet doth not God communicate and reueale all thinges vnto euery body there present but his diuine nature in three persons Christ God and Man with all other naturall and ordinary thinges from the cope of heauen to the center of the earth are seene of euery Cytizen of heauen though with a different degree of clearenes but of Gods counsels concerning the gouernement of the world so much is only knowne vnto either Angell or Men as appertayneth vnto their state and that when it belongeth vnto them therefore the Angels might well not knowe many thinges belonging to the gouernement of the Church vntill they sawe it accomplished and therefore might be said to haue learned some such thing of the Church But as we haue said before it properly appertayneth vnto the state of Saints in heauenly blisse to knowe their friendes reasonable requests made vnto them or else their conditions should not be so perfect but that they might in equity require the bettering of it and consequently they could not be so throughly contented as their estate of perfect felicity in heauen doth demande and thus much of M. PER. reasons To which I will here adde one argument commonly vsed by the Protestants though M. PER. for the weakenesse of it perhaps thought best to omit it it is taken ab authoritate negatiuè which Schollers knowe to be naught worth Math. 11. vers 28. Christ saith come yee vnto me all yee that labour and be burdened and I will refresh you he saith not goe to the Saints but come to me I answere neither doth he say doe not goe to the Saints and therefore here is nothing against vs. We goe to Christ for remission of our sinnes which lye more heauy then a talent of lead vpon our backes and through our redeemers merits doe we craue pardon of them but to moue more effectually this our redeemer and God his father to haue pitty vpon vs we humbly desire the Saints his best beloued seruants to speake a good vvord in our behalfe acknowledging our selues vnvvorthy to obtayne any thing at Gods handes through our owne vngratefull wickednes Now that our Sauiour Christ IESVS doth very well like and approue the mediation of others euen to himselfe may be gathered out of very many euident texts of holy Scripture Math. 8. vers 13. for he at the intercession of the Centurion cured his seruant and * Math. 9 vers 2. seing the faith of them that brought a man sicke of the palsey before him he healed the sicke man and a Luc. 4. vers 38. at his disciples request cured S. Peters mother in lawe And vvhen the vvoman of Chanaan sued vnto him for her daughter b Math. 15 vers 23. he answered her not a word before his disciples had besought him for her by which and many such like recorded in the Gospell euery man that is not wilfully blinde may well see that the intercession of others for vs doth much preuaile euen with our soueraigne intercessor and mediator Christ IESVS himselfe nowe to his authorities Lib. 3. cōt Parmenia cap. 3. The first is out of S. Augustine Christian men commend each other in their prayers to God And who prayeth for all and for whome none prayeth he is the one and true mediatour I answere these wordes be rather for vs for approuing and confessing our Sauiour Christ to be the only mediatour of redemption as we haue already declared they teach that all Christians may commend themselues each to others prayers Nowe the Saints departed be Christians I trust as good as we or rather farre better therefor all other Christians may very well in S. Augustines judgement commend themselues vnto the Saints holy prayers because each one may commend himselfe to any others prayers Concerning the word Mediatour S. Augustine neuer attributeth it vnto any sauing only to our Sauiour taking it alwaies in the second signification aboue named to which three thinges are properly required according to S. Augustine first that he pray for all and that none pray for him which property M. PER. toucheth but misquoteth the place for it is in lib. 2. cap. 8. cont Parmenianum The second property and the most necessary of all is that he pay the full price and ransome of all our sinnes and that his redemption may in equall ballance counterpoise the grieuousnesse of our sinnes which is taken out of diuers places of Scripture The third which is the ground of al the rest is that the Mediatour be both God and Man that participating of both natures he may be as it vvere a naturall middle or meanes to reconcile the two Extreames and so as Man be able to suffer something to appease Gods wrath and as God to giue to that suffering of his man-hood infinite value making thereby Christs sufferinges more then sufficient to pay for the redemption of an hundred vvorldes if neede had beene And these proprieties gathered out of c Lib. 9. de ciuitate cap. 15. alibi S. Augustine and other Fathers will put downe M. PER. odde deuise of proprieties of a Mediatour all which make nothing against the intercession of Saints who be not in that sence to be called mediatours and yet cease not to pray for vs let vs then goe on M. PERKINS citeth secondly another sentence out of S. Augustine where he bringeth in our Sauiour saying Tract 22. in Iohan. Thou hast no whether to goe but to me thou hast no way to goe but by me Answere S. Augustine there alludeth vnto those vvordes of our Sauiour I am the way the truth and the life and saith that for life and truth vve haue no other way to seeke vnto but vnto Christ vvho according vnto his diuinity is truth and life vnto the vvorld And in this high degree of redemption and mediation he was the only way vnto his Father for neither the Gentiles by their morall vertues nor Iewes by the power of their law could without him leade them to God All this is very good doctrine but no whit more against praying to Saints then against commending of vs one to anothers prayers or vsing any other meanes of saluation as S. Augustine vpon
himselfe As for example when a man is asked whether he said or heard Masse in such a place though he did he may say that he did not and sweare to it meaning he was not there to reueale it to him whereas in the law of nature he that taketh an oath should sweare according vnto the intention of him that hath power to minister an oath and that in truth justice and judgement Let them cleare their doctrine from all defence of perjury if they can Answere If he had cited but one author you should haue heard a ful satisfaction of this matter The truth is that swearing a truth in his meaning that sweareth it although it be against the intention of him that ministreth the oath may be lawfully vsed in two cases The first if he that ministreth the oath haue not sufficient authority to minister it The second when hauing authority he asketh something beyond the order of lawe and against justice then he that sweareth is excused by the rule touched by M. PERK himselfe because a man must sweare as in truth so in justice that is to doe or say nothing againg justice And so when one enquireth after saying or hearing Masse as of a haynous crime to punish good Christians for it the man is bound not to reueale it as being against true justice to make his neighbour punished for so holy a fact The sixt sinne is that they reuerse many of Gods Commandements making that noâ— sinne which Gods word maketh a sinne for example If one steale some little thing that causeth no notable hurt that is no mortall sinne Molanus and a merry or officious lie is but a veniall sinne c. If Catholikes make stealing of thinges of smale value and officious lies veniall sinnes then M. PER. committeth herein a mortall sinne in belying them so maliciously as to affirme them to make that no sinne which Gods word maketh a sinne seeing that by his owne confession vve make them and such like sinnes though not so haynous because there is lesse malice in them He goeth on lying vvhen he affirmeth vs to say that none is bound to salute his enemy for we hold all men bound to salute their enemies and to afford them all common duties of ciuillity and though it be but a counsell to yeeld them the extraordinary offices of friendshippe yet vve hold that it is much more Christan-like so to doe As for rash judgement sodainely giuen without aduisement I see not howe it can be more then a veniall sinne for the party considering better of the matter changeth his opinion straight way and so doth his neighbour no vvrong And if it be the part of a wise man sometimes to dissemble according vnto that saying of the wise Sapientis est loco dissimulare then surely is it better to dissemble and fayne holynesse then wickednesse As for painting of the face in a moderate and modest fashion to amend the fauour vvhen it is done without any euill end or purpose and without scandall I see not howe one can make any more of it then a veniall sinne but to daube the countenance so as some leude women doe to allure men thereby to vnlawfull lust is without doubt very damnable and for no other is taken of Catholikes Touching begging let him name who holdeth it for vnlawfull to prohibite and forbidde it if sufficient meanes be otherwise prouided for the mainetaynance of the poore for I knowe none such True it is because the truth it selfe hath so said That we shall haue alwayes the poore among vs. Mat. 26. vers 11. But who doubteth but that it is much better to prouide for them charitably in some certayne places of aboade then to suffer them to wander vp and downe idly and to liue dissolutely as the greater part of them are thought to doe Moreouer no authour can be truly said to vphold or excuse blasphemy or swearing though vvhen they deliuer their opinions in schooles concerning that matter they affirme that rash cholerike othes not being vsuall are no mortall sinnes because they breake out in manner against a mans vvil choler for the time troubling and hindering the vse of reason M. PERKINS doth lastly charge our writers with manifest lying to justifie our doctrine in that they pleade all antiquity to be on our sides whereas saith he it is as much for them as for vs. Hereof he yeeldeth no proofe and no maruaile for many of his bretheren are ashamed to denie this and doe ingeniously confesse that in many points of religion the auncient Fathers are wholy for vs. And in no one point that I can heare off will he or any of his pew-fellowes be tryed by the judgement and consent of antiquity vvhich is a most manifest proofe that in their owne conscience they knowe wel enough that al antiquity is flat against them else vvhy should they so feare to stand vnto their most vpright determination and so fleete and flie from it vvhich point vvell considered off is alone sufficient to disswade any man from their newe doctrine For it not agreeing with the doctrine of pure antiquity must needes be false and wicked because that was most true holy and good And the holy Ghost doth not nowe teach one to be true and afterward change After his Lastly he hath Againe that our manner is to proue our opinions by forged and counterfeit writinges of men namely by S. Iames liturgie by the Canons of the Apostles by the bookes of Dionisius Ariopagita and so forth reckoning vp some one and twenty peeces which he calleth counterfeit but he goeth not about to proue any one of them to be forged It may therefore suffice for answere that when he or any other shall vndertake to proue that we vse any forged writinges to confirme our doctrine they shall God willing be answered In the meane season the better to content such weaklings I haue not past once to my remembrance alleaged any sentence out of these bookes by him suspected for counterfeit And as touching the marrying of a Catholike vvith a Protestant we dislike it more then many Ministers who will make no bones to marrie them togither which no Catholike Priest wil doe Finally we accord with him in leagues of amity as he tearmeth them and hold that Catholike and Protestant Princes may not combine in league to defend each other in all causes or else one should stand bound to aide the other sometimes against both honesty and religion which were very absurd So as where M. PERKINS saith well vvhich he doth seldome in this booke of his I willingly agree vvith him not sparing on the other side to reprehend that which he speaketh against the truth vvhich all indifferent men will I hope take to be honest vpright dealing Here endeth his booke vvere it not that after finis put to it he addeth a further Aduertisement which may not be left vnanswered vvherefore I haue annexed hereunto both it and the answere
vulgar tongue or that all thinges necessary to be beleeued to saluation are contained in the Scriptures To be short not one article of their religion which is contrary to ours is contained in this Creede of the Apostles therefore to affirme as de doth all necessarie pointes of religion to be contained in this Creede is to cast their owne religion flat to the ground and to teach that not one point of it is to be beleeued this Creede may neuerthelesse be called the key and rule of faith because it containeth the principall pointes of the Christian religion and doth open as it were the doore vnto all the rest and guide a man certainely vnto the knowledge of them by teaching vs to beleeue the Catholike Church 1. Tim. 3. vers 15. Ioh. 16. vers 13. which being the piller and ground of truth directed and guided by the spirit of truth will alwaies instruct her obedient children in all truth necessary to saluation Then saith Master PERKINS The eternal truth of God the creatour shal depend on the determination of the creature Nothing lesse for Gods truth is most sincere and certaine in it selfe before anie declaration of the Church but vve poore creatures that are subject to mistaking and errour should not so certaynelie vnderstand and knowe that truth of God vnlesse he had ordained and appointed such a skilfull and faithfull Mistris and interpreter to assure vs both what is his word and what is the true meaning of it Like as pure gold is not made perfect in it selfe by the Gold-smithes touch-stone but other men are thereby assured that it is true and pure gold euen so the word of God doth not borrowe his truth from the Church but the true children of God are by the holie Church assured which is the same his word If we did hold as we doe not that the written vvord contayneth all pointes of doctrine necessarie to saluation yet vvere it most necessarie to relie vpon the Catholike Churches declaration both to be assured which bookes of Scriptures be Canonicall which not whereupon S. Augustine a man of farre better judgement then any of these daies said Con. Epist Iud. cap. 5. that he would not beleeue the Gospell vnlesse the authority of the Church moued him thereunto as also to vnderstand them truly because the wordes of holy Scripture without the true meaning and sence of them doe but deceiue men and leade them into errour and to that end haue alwaies beene and yet are by Heretikes abused to drawe others after them into destruction The like may be said of other ancient Creedes and confessions of faith which holding the Apostles Creede did adde some fewe pointes vnto it namely such as were in those daies called into question by Heretikes of greater fame and who were followed of many not touching in particuler diuers other articles generally beleeued of all true Christians or else by some fewe and obscure men only questioned Wherefore to argue that no other pointes of faith are to be beleeued but such as are expressed in ancient Creedes is to cut of a great part of our faith Lastly it is most vntrue to say that those ancient Fathers and Councels knewe not of these articles of faith by him mentioned for they haue most plainely taught them in their writinges yea and expresly condemned of heresie most of the contrary positions nowe againe reuiued and holden by the Protestantes as in those seuerall questions I haue before proued Touching beleeuing in the Church which he thrusteth in by the way we vse not that phrase as the very Creede sheweth following therein S. Augustine with others who hold that to beleeue in a thing is to make it our creatour by giuing our whole hart vnto it in which sence we beleeue not in Saintes nor in the Church albeit some other ancient Doctors take the wordes to beleeue in not so precisely but say that me may beleeue in the Church in Saintes that is beleeue certainely that the Catholike Church is the only true company of Christians and that to the lawfull gouernours thereof it appertaineth to declare both which bookes be Canonicall and what is the true meaning of all doubtfull places in them so we beleeue the Saintes in heauen to heare our prayers to be carefull to pray for vs to be able to obtaine by intreaty much at Gods handes in whose high fauour they liue Thus much in answere vnto that which M. PER. objecteth in generall nowe to that he saith in particuler He chargeth vs first with the breach of the third article Conceiued by the holy Ghost Which saith he is ouerturned by the transubstantiation of bread and wine in the Masse into the body and bloud of Christ for here we are taught to confesse the true and perpetuall incarnation of Christ beginning in his conception and neuer ending afterward Answ Here is a strange exposition of the Creede Is Christes incarnation perpetuall and not yet ended then it is true to say that Christ is not yet incarnate as we may say truly that a man is not borne vntill his birth be accomplished and ended But to the present purpose because Christes incarnation beganne at his conception cannot bread be turned afterward into his body how hangeth this together Belike he meanes that Christes body was but once conceiued and that was by the holy Ghost in his mothers wombe therefore it cannot afterward be made of any other thing This to be his meaning he declares in the question of the Sacrament but it is too too simple and childish For we hold him not to be so conceiued by bread as he was by the holy Ghost who was the efficient cause of his conception but that the same body that was cōceiued by the holy Ghost is made really present in the Sacrament by transubstantiation of bread into it which hath no opposition at al with this article as I haue more largely proued in the foresaid question And whereas he saith further cleane besides the purpose of this article that Christes body hath the essentiall properties of a true body standing of flesh and bone we grant the same but when he addeth that local circumscription cannot be seuered from a body he is deceiued for the greatest body of all others which is the highest heauen is not circumscribed by any place because there is no other body without it whose extreamities might compasse in and circumscribe that body of the highest heauen And when he saith that to be circumscribed in place is an essentiall property of euery quantity and that quantity is the common essence of euery body he makes himselfe but a common mocking-stocke vnto euery simple Logitian who knoweth that no accident such as euery quantity is can be of the essence and nature of a substance such as Christes body is Neither would any man say that cared what he said that to be circumscribed in a place is essentiall to euery quantity when all numbers that be quantities