means they could to come to vnitie amonge themselues as in the true Church it must bee Crammer and others vsed all deuises and Caluyne wrote vnto him sayeing That might his labours stand the Church insteed ne decem quideÌ„ Maria it would not greeue him to sayle ouer ten seas to such a purpose But this proued a worke of much difficultie if not altogether vnpossible in mans eyes Where they well might haue left out their addition if not and haue playnely sayd without any exception as it hath playnely proued that it was altogether vnpossible in mans eyes especially in the common order of proceedings amonge them which by their owne Relation was this That euery kingedome and free state or principalitie which had abandoned the Religion of Rome should diuulge a breife of that Religion which amonge them was taught and beleeued Wherevppon as this men tell came forthe the seuerall Protestant confessions or Religions of the seuerall Protestant Congregations of Wittemberge Ausburge Bohem Sueue Scotland Heluetia Fraunce Belgia Basile Saxonie England in their 39. Articles c. amonge whome euen those of England it selfe what contradiction there is euen in matters by their owne doctrine fundamentall and essentiall in Religion demonstration is lately made by this same maner and methode by their owne authorities and will be also manifest in this worke And yett The Answ of Orford â—â— the 1000. pet Articul 19. 21. this men which say they ar the learnest ministerye in the worlde and definitiuely condemne all Churches as Ierusalem Alexandria Antioch and Rome and generall Councells themselues of error and may not pleade Ignorance for themselues to excuse them from error Neither can they with the least pretence of truth affirme their acknowledged lyeing and erroneous Churche to be the true Church of God except they will also moste blasphemously teach and mayntayne that prima veritas and eternall truthe is eternall August lib. de mendas falsehood or with the damned Priscillianists that God in his Reuelations to his Church and in the holy scriptures hath deliuered lyes and errours commaundinge vs to beleeue them For they haue before assured vs that the true Church of God warily keepeth all doctrine committed to her chaungeth diminiâ—heth addeth loseth vsurpeth nothinge Therefore this chaungeing diminishinge loseinge and vsurpinge Church of Protestants cannot be this true Church of Christ by their owne doctrine And as materiall essentiall and fundamentall it is in Religion concerninge the true grounde and fowndation of faith and as greate a falsehood to say in the meanest or least point of faith that truth is error God a lyar or his Church a seducer as so to affirme in the greatest and moste concerninge mystery of Religion The true groundes and fowndation of true beleeueinge equally weakened or ouerthrowne in the one as the other And the first proposition which our Catholick Preists and brethren prisoners at Wisbych offered to the vice-chaunceller of Cambridge and that vniuersitie that is Ecclesia protestantium non est vera Christi Ecclesia The Protestant Churche is not the true Church of Christ is here sufficiently questioned and by themsels not longe since more then sufficiently demonstrated to bâ— Pulâ—â—â—a propositio really Demonstrat of Recuse dem 2. 3. 4. c. and sincerely a true proposition and not scoffingly as hee pleaseth to parenthesize And so will be defended or proued by those propownders of it As also their second proposition for of the third in his proper place dâ—tur externus Iudex in rebus fidei there is an externall Iudge in matters of faith will bee maynâ—ayned not onely in such sense as the Vniuersiâ—ie of Cambridge accordinge to the nature of their Church and Religion graunteth that is fallible and deceatfull But as our Brethren accordinge to the nature of true Faithe Religion and the true Church infallible intended it and still offer to make it good for the Romane Church euer synce the time of Christ and so hereafter When our English Protestant vniuersitie for their so lately as they terme Vicech of Camb D. Carey his letter Aug. 7. it reformed Church and light of the Ghospell ar driuen to this Answeare in these words Your second question is affirmatiue auerring an externall Iudge in maâ—ters of faith If you vnderstand a Iugde infallible in his sentence wee deny what you affirme otherwise wee gaynesay not your assertion Which in their owne meaninge aboue remembred is pulchra propositio for their Illuminated Church which will haue no Iudge or Iudgment in matters of faith aboue all things most infallible and certainely true except wee will allowe it for an Article of faithe or an infallible truthe that the Iudge and Iudgment must be fallible and deceatefull And the Religion and faith so adiudged and propownded to bee followed and with diuine faith to be beleeued against the nature thereof to be false erroneoes fallible or deceatefull for such as the Iudge is the Iudgment and difficultie adiudged must needs be And yett further one scruple more there is in this busines which because Cambridge is now busyed enough against pore prisoners without bookes I wish that Oxford could resolue how it can stand with the Integritie and sownd doctrine of a Reformed Church and spoken consequenter like a learned vniuersitie to graunt as they haue done and must doe by their Religion to this day that there be and must be so many Supreame and Independant Iudges and heaps in their Churche as I haue before remembred from themselues Religions Churches seuerall and different Confessions or Professions of Faithe euery one absolute of it self and without dependance of any other and to vse their owne wordes Without any meanes to take vp their controuersies no Prince with any preeminence of Iurisdiction aboue the rest no Patriarke to haue a common superintendence or care of their Churches Their lett sup Aug. 7. And yett now the vniuersitie of Cambridge haueing as they write warrant from our Kinge to accept our Preists challendge God graunt they performe their warrant Ioyneth with them in this position datur externus Iudex there â—â— an externall or one externall Iudge in matters of faith If there is but one externall Iudge for Iudex externâ—â— and externall Iudge in the singular number is but one then those Churches or Church of theirs which from their begynning haue had so many supreame Iudges and Iudgments cannot be the true Church of Christ which as now the graunt hath but one And if their former both doctrine and practise of many such Iudges is true then their present doctrine and graunt of onely one is false and inferreth a false Church But I leaue them to our Preists at Wisbych Onely here I will adde because they haue now allowed one externall Iudge in matters of faith in the true Church to whose Iudgment all must be obedient otherwise hee is not to be named a Iudge they must also against their owne limitation allowe that his Iudgment
The Maior or first proposition is euidently true otherwise God hath bownde man to followe and embrace heresie or error of necessitie hee must bee damned without all hope of saluation except heresie false opinions error or infidelitie could bringe to heauen which is against the holy Scriptures true Religion which by no possibilitie can either bee vntrue or vncertayne being reueled by God himselfe and against the light of reason it selfe that men vnder penaltie of damnation should bee tyed to bee obedient to that sentence for obedience whereof they were likewise assured to bee damned which is to accuse God moste mercifull of the greatest Tyranny The Minor or second proposition is proued and the first also in this words of D. Feild D. Feild epist dedicat before hiâ— bookes of the Churche There is no parte of heauenly doctrine more necessarie in this dayes of so many intricate controuersies of Religion then diligently to searche out which amonge all the socities of men in the worlde is that blessed companie of holy ones that housthold of faithe that spouse of Christ and Church of the liueing God which is the piller and grownde of truthe That see they may embrace her communion followe her directions and rest in her Iudgment Hitherto the wordes of this Protestant Doctor by which is euidently concluded the moste certayne truthe of those two Propositions in the Argument before But to auoyde all friuolous obiections and distinctions of these men concerninge the Church generall particular triuÌ„phant militant c. Hee playnely affirmeth that this supreame and infallible iudge is the present militant Church in tymes of controuersies as is demonstrated by this his words Which amonge all the societies of men in the worlde is that blessed companie of holy ones c. Where his words societies of men and in the worlde are manifest testimonie that hee assigneth the present militant Church on earthe and no other to haue this supreame and infallible authoritie and Iudgment to decide controuersies which is alsoe proued by all the rest of the Protestant citations in this chapter hereafter And if their words were not so cleare that they cannot bee wrested otherwise yett the Question it selfe doth make it manifest for all the faithfull people that euer were and be now in many thowsands deceased out of this life cannot now be assembled in a Cowncell to giue sentence And much lesse can they that are not yett borne be so gathered together to pronownce Iudgment and yett all this belonge vnto and ar or shall bee members of the vniuersall Churche further this is conuinced by his cited words That householde of faith which cannot bee possibly ment but onely of the militant Church For in the triumphant Church seeing God in himselfe and truely and perfectly knoweinge without beleefe all sacred misteries faith as the Apostle saith is euacuated in them and turned into knowledge and as for those that ar not yett borne though hereafter in their time ordayned they at truely to beleeue yett now they neither haue faith nor knowledge of any thinge nor any other qualitie or any being at all Thirdly this is euident also in his laste words Embrace her communion followe her directions and rest in her Iudgment Which Protestants will not and cannot meane of the triumphant Churche and by no possibilitie can either bee vnderstoode or verefied of the true beleeuers to come hereafter and not yett produced into this life for this as yett haueing no essence or beeinge for themselues can haue no communion giue no directions nor pronownce Iudgment for vs now extant to embrace and followe And this is inuincibly further proued in the Arguments followeinge Therefore secondely I argue thus That which hath Authoritie in controuersies of Religion to define what is true and good to ouerrule all inferiour and particular Iudgments and bynde all men to beleeue and embrace the definitions thereof must needs bee of Infallible Iudgment and haue the supreame and highest power to commaunde and no man to disobey yt But the true Churche of Christ is such Therefore it hath Infallible Iudgment the highest power on earth and may not bee disobeyed but in all thinges to bee obeyed by all people The maior proposition is euidently true for Authoritie is to bee obeyed by all subiects otherwise it were not authoritie And there were non to commaunde non to bee obedient And definitions in matters of faithe as they must bee moste certayne vndoubted and infallible as euery article of faithe is and of necessitie must needs bee So they ar as firmely to bee beleeued and professed except wee will bee Hereticks and obstinately incur damnation The seconde proposition is thus proued by D. Couell who writeth of the Church in this Couell def of hooke pag. 30. wordes That whiâ—h by her ecclesiasticall authoritie shee shall probably thinke and define to bee true or good must in congruitie of reason ouer rule all other inferiour Iudgments whatsoeuer And to them that out of a singularitie of their owne aske vs why wee thus hange our Iudgments on the Churches sleeue wee answere with Sâ—lonion â—wo ar better then one For euen in matters of lesse moment it was neuer thought safe to neglect the Iudgment of manye and rashlie to followe the fancye and opinion of some fewe Hitherto this Protestant doctor directly proueinge the second proposition for which hee is cited which also is confirmed by the Arguments followinge Thirdly I argue thus whatsoeuer hath authoritie from Christ to approue the scriptures to bee a speciall grownde in the matter of scriptures to publishe and commaund to her children in Matters of Religion is the higest Iudge and of Infallible Iudgment But the true Churche of Christ is such Therefore it is the highest Iudge and infallible in Iudgment The Maior proposition is euidently proued and confessed before and of all men cannot bee excepted against by Protestants commonly attributeing the highest and consequently infallible Iudgement to the scriptures for if they haue their allowance and Infallibilitie soe much as belongeth vnto vs and our knowledge from the authoritie and approbation of the Churche The Church so giueing them allowance and warrant of Infallibilitie must needs bee as much or more Infallible at leaste concerninge vs in which maner wee dispute accordeinge to that Rule of Logicke Propter quod vnumquodque tale illud magis That which is the cause why any thinge is so is rather so it self Which is euident thus in this case For if the scriptures so much as appertayneth to our knowledge haue not approbation and Infallibilitie of truthe but at they at approued and published for such by the Churche This Church which so giueth them such allowance and warrant of Infallibilitie must needs likewise bee infallible which thoughe it needeth not confirmation being iustified by a Maxime in the light of nature may yett for Protestants bee further made manifest by the Protestant Author of the Assertion who to proue the ministery of
godlines and deuotion and whosoeuer hath obtayned these things cannot doubt of heauen which is onely prepared for people endued with such graces to which if wee add his excellent order of gouerment no propertie of the true Church is wantinge And yett the scruple of this Protestant Relator for those fyue things also shall be fully satisfied euen by himselfe and his fellowe Protestants that in them also as in the rest the Church of Rome mayntayneth the truthe and Protestants See part 2. cap. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. be in error as will appeare in the seconde parte of this worke in the chapters here cited Thirdly I argue thus No Church wantinge the supreame and byndeing authoritie ouer all others which their Bishop D. Bilson D. Feild D. Morton D. Sutcliffe c. affirme to be a generall cowncell can be the true Church of Christ and consequenly because there is of necessitie one true Church that which enioyeth it is the true Church of Christ But neither any Protestant or other Church besides the Church of Rome hath or can haue this supreame byndinge authoritie Therefore that onely is the true Churche of Christ The Maior proposition for the supreame bynding authoritie to be in the true Church is euidently true otherwise no controuersie could be decided nothinge in Religion warranted for truthe nothinge condemned for Heresie For where there is no such bindeinge and commaundeinge authoritie to be obeyed or resisted there can be no truth beleeued by authoritie nor any obstinate resistance vnto it which as D. Couell Mr. Ormerod and other Protestants Couell exam pag. 202. Ormer dial 2. c. Feild pag. 228. tell vs is required to heresie Now that this supreame bindinge authoritie is onely in a generall cowncell by these Protestants is testified by D. Feild in these words The supreame and binding authoritie is onely in Bishops in a Generall Cowncell So the Protestant Bishop of Winchester D. Bilson so D. Morton D. Bilson Suruey pag. 85. Mort. part 2. apolog pag. 340. Sutcliffe against D. Kell pag. 41. 4. 102. Protest Demonstrat cap. 2. c. Sutcliffe with others The seconde proposition is euidently of late demonstrated in the booke Intituled Protestants Demonstrations where manifest proofe is made by these Protestants themselues that they ar so farr from euer haueing a Generall Cowncell of Bishops that their English Protestants neither haue nor can haue true and lawfull Bishop Preist or Minister amonge them of their creation And if by impossibilitie they could haue Bishops yett that they cannot haue any such Cowncell is wittnessed by their Relator in these words which I haue also Relation c. 47. cited before The Protestants ar seuered bandes or rather scattered troopes eache draweinge dyvers way without any meanes to pacifie their quarrells to take vp their controuersies No Prince with any preeminence of Iurisdiction aboue the rest no Patriarcke one or more to haue a common superintendance or care of their Churches for correspondencie and vnitie no ordinary way to assemble a Generall Cowncell of their parte the onely hope remayninge to asswage their contentions And in their publick glosse vppon their booke of Articles they Rog. vppon the â—ooke of Articl in praefat acknowledge this thinge so vnpossible in their Religion that they could neuer with all meanes they made bringe to passe to haue any meeting of Protestants to come to vnitie amonge themselues but euery Protestant State and Contry hath a seuerall Confession or Profession in Religion As also those seuerall Confessions witnes Where wee see that it is a thinge so vnpossible for these meÌ„ to assemble a Generall Cowncell which they teach is to consist of all Professions that they cannot doe it for their owne poorte as the words ar nor haue any other meanes amonge them of Iurisdiction to decide controuersies when contrary wise of the Romane Churche hee speaketh Relat. sup cap. 47. in this maner in the same place The other haue the Pope as a common Father Aduiser and Conduâ—â—â—â— to them all to reconcile their Iarrs to appease their displeasures to decide their difference aboue all things to drawe their Religion by consent of Cowncells to vnitie Neither can any Protestant say that this is spoken of this Relator consideringe the present states of those Churches and is onely so in that meaneinge Obiect and not absolutely and generally true for it is both absolutely and generally true Answ and euen by the nature and doctrine it self of those Religions for the Romane Church mayntayneth for the Pope and hee for himself claimeth as Successor to S. Peter Superioritie and Commaundeinge Authoritie in the whole Christian Worlde in spirituall causes which no Prince Parlament Presbitery or other Regent amonge Protestants doth out of their owne temporall confines and Gouernment as is playnely sett downe in the Relators sentence and freely acknowledged by all Protestant writers My next Argument is this That which is a congregation of faithfull men in the which the pure worde of God is preached and the Sacraments duely ministred in all thinges requisite is the true Church of Christ But the Romane Churche is such Therefore it is the true Churche of Christ The Maior proposition consisteth of the Englishe Protestants definition of true Churche sett downe in the Articles of their Religion in these words The visible Articles of Relig. art 19. Churche of Christ is a Congregation of faithfull men in the which the pure worde of God is preached and the Sacraments be duely ministred accordeinge to Christs ordinance in all those things that of necessitie ar requisite to the same The seconde proposition supposeing their former doctrine onely requireing in the true Church points of essentiall fundamentall and necessary doctrines which is also expressed in this Article Relation of Relig. cap. 48. Couell def of Hock pag. 68 is proued before and further by these Protestants Their Relator writeth in these words The Romane Church still keepeth inuiolable the fowndation of Religion D. Couell writeth thus toucheinge the mayne points of Christian truthe they of the Church of Rome constantly persist in them Their Bishop D. Doue supposeing their Religion for true which Doue persuas pag. 11. they do or should holde writeth in this maner In fundamentall points of doctrine the greatest papists in the worlde agree with vs. Concerninge Sacraments hee alloweth that accordeinge to our definition which is more limited and saict then that of Protestants There be as many as wee teache which be seuen and this shall not breede any such I arre betweene vs Doue sup pag. 27. 28. that therefore wee shoulde refuse to communicate together Which no man in conscience can say if hee supposeth vs to be in error For his owne words be these This proposition is vndoubtedly true no Heretiks nor Schismaticks ar to be communicated with all And to giue all contentment euen to those Protestants which doe not allowe their owne Articles in this doctrine of the
CHAPTER IIII. WHEREIN BY THESE Protestants is proued that all Bookes of scripture receaued for such by the Church of Rome ar canonicall That the Protestants also haue either no scriptures at all or vncertaine and doubtfull and no true Canon of them THvs haueinge demonstratiuely proued by these our English Protestants that the true Church of Christ is of that byndeinge and commaunding authoritie power and priuiledge That There is no saluation remission of synnes or Hope of eternall life out of the Churche it is the blessed companie of holy ones household of faith spouse of Christ piller and grawnd of truthe her communion is to be embraced directions followed Iudgment rested in to ouerrule all Inferior Iudgment whatsoeuer c. And that bothe the present Churche of Rome is this so excellent and enfraunchised societie and the Pope and Bishop thereof supreame heade and spirituall gouernor ouer the whole Christian worlde all other Questions against these ProtestaÌ„ts ar all readie determined by them for the Church and Pope of Rome So that nothing is further needfull to be disputed in this busines eyther of scriptures or any other matter in controuersy yet for particular satisfaction to all in all particulars I will proceede and first for the Bookes of holy scriptures and argue these first in generall Whatsoeuer Bookes ar proposed vnto vs by the true Church of Christ and the supreame Gouernor thereof to be canonicall scripture ar for such to be embraced and reuerenced But all Bookes allowed for canonicall by the Church of Rome at this present be such Therefore so to be embraced and reuerenced The Maior proposition is euident before by the priuiledges of the true Church recited in generall and not onely so but in particular also concerninge the authoritie of the true Church in approueinge and proposeinge holy scriptures for Mr. Wotton hath thus testified for Wotton â—ef of Perk pag. 442. Protestants The Iugdment of the Church wee are so far from discreditinge that wee Holde it for a very speciall grownde in this matter of scriptures And D. Couell hath these conuinceing Couell against Burg. pag. 60. words The Church of Christ accordeing to her authoritie receaued from him hath warrant to approue the scriptures to acknowledge to receaue to publish and commaunde vnto her children And to make it euident that this priuiledge by these Protestants cannot be attributed or ascribed to any other Church then the Church of Rome they haue before confessed that neuer any other Church but that onely exceptinge the Church of Constantinople pretended Title much lesse enioyed it to this supreamacie to propownde scriptures or make decrees and lawes to the whole Church and the children thereof and the clayme thereof in that behalf was but pretended and vsurped and now is by their desolation left desolate And to make this the next argument and others more cleare I will in this place recite the words of D. Feild wherein to omitt the Holy scriptures because they in no place tell vs which be or be not canonicall scriptures But wee ar as these Protestants before haue told vs and shall more particularely testifie Hereafter in this chapter to receaue them from the Church of Christ That wee may knowe whome moste to trust and obey in this and such matters of controuersy hee writeth thus haueing spoken of the Church before Hither Feild pag. 202. l. 4. c. 5. wee may referre those different degrees of obedience which wee must yeeld to them that commaunde and teache vs in the Church of God excellently described and sett downe by Waldensis Wee Waldens doct Fidei l. 2. art 2. 3. p. 27. must saith hee reuerence and respect the authoritie of all Catholicke Doctors whose doctrynes and writeings the Church alloweth wee must more regard the authoritie of Catholicke Bishops more then these the authoritie of the Apostolicke Churches amongst them more especially the Church of Rome of a generall Councell more then all these Hitherto D. Feilds allowance that this sentence is excellent Therefore soeinge Protestants neuer had nor can haue as they haue testified before any generall Councell and deny all Councells to be generall which Catholikes alledge for this Question of the Bookes of scriptures and others also They ar bownde to be obedient to that sentence next vnto them which D. Feild here hath told vs to be the Iudgment of the Church of Rome or Pope of Rome which hath defined and allowed the catholicke doctrine for the Bookes of canonicall scripture as alsoe other questions as all Protestants acknowledge Otherwise they ar in one of highest degrees of disobedience that is in this world as his words before are wittnesse For hee alloweth it for an excellent direction for this present time and state of controuersies And yett if he would contend which hee neither doth nor can being allowed for this present time to drawe it to the dayes of Thomas Waldensis disputing against Witcliffe their Brother in Religion as they write and resisting the Popes authoritie it maketh nothing for his excuse for if Witcliffe as they say was of their Religion the case betweene Waldensis and him was the same which now is with my self and other Catholicks writinge against these Protestants Brethren and Associates in Religion vnto Wickliffe and his Adherents This supposed I make the like Argument againe in this maner Whatsoeuer bookes ar proposed for canonicall scripture by the true Church ar the highest Rule that can be had or fownde in time of controueâ—sie ar to be receaued for holy scriptures But all those Bookes which the present Romane Church alloweth ar so proposed Therefore to be receaued for holy scriptures The Maior proposition is euidently true otherwise all Christians in such times must needs be perplexed in the cheifest matter of Religion by Protestants the scriptures themselues which cannot be for so contradictories might bothe be true The highest Rule ought to be followed the highest Rule ought not to be followed Which be contradictorie It ought to be followed because it is our Rule and the best that can be assigned it ought not to be followed because it is false and deceatefull And no man can be so bownde vnder damnation to followe a false Rule And concerninge the authoritie of the Church in this case it is further confirmed by these Protestant sentences D. Couells words be Couell def of Hook pag. 31. these The Church of Rome teacheth no badd opinion to affirme that the scriptures are holy and diuine in themselues but so esteemed by vs for the authoritie of the Churche And againe That the scriptures ar true wee haue it from the Church And further thus The Church hath fowre Couell sup pag. 32. 33. singular offices towards the scripture First to be of them as it were a faithefull Register Secondly to discerne and Iudge betweene false and adulterate and that which is true and perfect The third to publish and diuulge to proclayme as a cryer the true edict
caused without a cause The Minor proposition is manifestly proued by these Protestants in this order for they haue before condemned all other Rules which they haue of error as their parlement Kings Censure and all priuate Interpretations and made them subiect and controleable by generall Councells as hauing authoritie ouer all parsons D. Feilds wordes of allowance after hee had with others graunted generall Councells to be supreame bynding and commaunding all be these Wee must obey without scrupulous questioninge with all modestie of Feild pag. 202. minde and reuerence of bodye with all good allowance acceptation and repose in the wordes of them that teach vs vnlesse they teach vs any thinge which the authoritie of the higher and superior controlleth Immediately before hee had allowed the supreame and highest Iudgment to generall Councells and the next to the Pope and Church of Rome Then Protestants teacheing contrarie to superior and higher authoritie in the Pope are to be condemned by him But notwithstanding all this to make their cause desolate and demonstrate that their Religion hath no warrant of truth and Infallibilitie at all Thus they write of this highest Rule of generall Councells euen in their publick Articles of Religion Articles of Relig. art 21. generall Councells may erre and sometime haue erred euen in things pertayninge vnto God Wherefore things ordeyned by them as necessarie to saluation haue neither strength nor authoritie vnlesse it may be declared that they be taken out of holy scripture Therefore how truely or certainely soeuer generall Councells make decrees and definitions in matters of faith they giue no validitie to Protestant Religion if in themselues they should approue it for by their cited Article their ordination hath neither strength nor authoritie as it is the decree of the generall Councells but as it may be declared by a priuate Protestant writer Prince Parlament or Conuocation in their conceipt to be taken out of scripture and yet before they haue tolde vs a generall Councell commaundeth all all must submitt themselues vnto it and all other their Rules be erroneous and deceatefull Therefore by these Protestants neither generall Councell nor any other Rule assigned by them can by any possibilitie proue their Religion true Further I argue thus No societie people or professors of Religion which by their owne confession neither haue nor by their proceedings can hereafter haue or haue heretofore had any generall Councell or meanes to assemble and call it can in reason pretend it for their cause But the state of Protestants by their owne confession is such Therefore generall Councells cannot be pretended for them The Maior proposition is euidently true for esse and beinge must needs in all things goe before operari and workeinge by them For as by nature nothinge can be made of nothinge so that which wanteth being and is not can produce nothinge The Minor proposition is likewise manifestly true for neuer any Protestant nor altogether so much as clayme authoritie or Iurisdiction in this matter none amonge them pretending it further then their owne particular temporall dominions which all vnited together neuer like to be are farre to shorte and vnequall to make a Councell generall which they say excludeth none especially of the greate patriarkes of Rome Constantinople Alexandria and Antioche not one of them being for them but all with their whole precincts limitts subiects and ditions against them by their owne confession To this I add the Censure of their owne Protestant Relator in these wordes The Protestants Relation of Religion cap. 47. are seuered bandes or rather scattered troopes each drawing diuers way without any meanes to pacific their quarrells to take vpp their controuersies No Prince with any preeminence of Iurisdiction aboue the rest no Patriarke one or more to haue a Common superintendance of care of their Churches for correspondencie and vnitie no ordinary way to assemble a generall Councell of their part the onely hope remayninge euer to assuage their contentions And yet if they could haue meanes for such a meeteing of Protestants so few in number and weake in Iurisdiction by their owne graunte in regard of Catholicks and other Christian Kingdomes and prouinces different to them in Religion this would be farre from the leaste shewe and name of an vniuersall and generall Councell such as they allowe to Iudge and sentence in this busines Neither can these men now deny the necessitie of generall Councells hauing so much allowed them for supreame sentencer before and appealed to a generall Councell to be assembled Neither may they compare their so desolate estate with the primatiue Church of the first three hundred yeares for themselues haue graunted before that a supreame and commaunding binding power ouer all was not onely claymed but lawfully and iuridically exercised and executed by the Popes of Rome in those times in all partes of the Christian world and both power and authoritie to approue and reproue Councells was belongeing vnto them by publickly receaued Canon in those dayes And herevppon I argue in this maner that generall Councells are for the doctrine of the Church of Rome Whatsoeuer Church in the primatiue time of Christianitie was endowed with such priuiledges that euery thinge was voide that was done without the consent of the Bishop and Ruler of it and no Councell could be called without his allowance and at this present hath by the graunte of Protestants a common Father aduiser and conductor to end Iarrs displeasures differences to keepe Religion in vnitie by Councells when no other Church enioyeth these immunities must needs in all reason be sayde to be warranted and defended by generall Councells But the Church of Rome is by the graunte of Protestants in this Condition Therefore warranted and defended by generall Councells The first proposition is euidently true for hee that from the begynning had these prerogatiues to approue or disproue Confirme or inualidate Councells cannot be conceaued to haue ratified or confirmed any thinge against the immunities and Common receaued doctrine of that Church so exalted dignified and priuiledged aboue all others of the whole Christian worlde and against his owne supreame and eminent Authoritie The Minor proposition is thus proued first D. Couell sheweth that an hundred yeares before the Nycene Councell in the yeare of our Lorde 2â—5 when there was no Emperour Christian to call Councells as Protestants would pâ—rsuade the world they did and should the Pope of Rome had this prerogatiue to call Councells Therefore from the begynninge by preeminence of his See seing there had not beene either generall Councell or Emperour to giue it vnto him His wordes be these The synode of Rome called Couell ag the plea of the Innoc. pag. 110. by Cornelius Pope of Rome against Nonatus consisted of threescore Bishops and many others of the cleargie Where wee see Heresie condemned and â—â— that scarcetie of Bishops in those first dayes of Christianitie so greate in Councell assembled by the Popes authoritie
133. Pag. 134. of chastitie The Fathers are not fitt Iudges to determine either of Preists marriage or vawes of chastitie And for this doctrine thus hee writeth of S. Ambrose That man hath the Apostaticall dragon the deuill dwelling in hym And so hee will send Midd. pag. 135. Ambrose away with his Quietus est Chrisostome is so hotte in his amplifications that hee forgetts himself Pag. 137. Chrisostome in his vehemencie goeth beyonde Pag. 138. measure in reprehendinge and the Christians of his time in their lightnesse went beyonde measure in vowinge The Canons which Epiphanius citeth against Priests mariadge or marryed men to be made Preists Middleton sup Pag. 141. Pag. 143. Pag. 144. Pag. 156. Pag. 161. are apocryphall Hee was two partiall affected in this matter The auncient Fathers did erre Augustine was a moste subtile disputer yâ—t a quicke wiâ—â— soonest falleth into contradiction Neither is Hilarie howsoeuer the Romish Church hath made him a Sainct ouer hastely to be receaued Irenaeus Hilary and Epiphanius for teaching free will are Pelagian Pag. 179. Pag. 180. Hereticks Wee haue harde before what great respect in wordes the Protestant Bishop of Winchester giueth to the auntient Fathers yet by his owne confession his owne Protestant Brethren charge him with the contrary in these wordes all this Bilsons surâ—â— pag. 84. greate shewâ— of cleauing to the Fathers Iudgment is but coloured in you For in other points againe wee see when they speake not to your liking the case is altered You forsake the auntient and learned Fathers You contemne and despise them You affirme Pag. 85. against all the Fathers You little regarde the sownde doctrine of the Fathers And the same Protestant Pag. 98. Bishop D. Bilson telleth vs that these Protestants which haue thus written of him doe for themselues lesse if it may be regarde those auntient learned Fathers for writing Bilson sup pag. 98. pag. 274. 275. prefa to the Kingâ— sup against them in this kinde hee intituleth one Treatise thus The defenders disdayne of the Father Others wrested and leudely falsyfied And againe They condâ—mne all the Fathers Greeke and Latine as conspiring against the truthe and peruerting the scriptures Therefore I conclude this Argument by these Protestants that the primatiue Fathers be not for their Religion but wholly for the doctrine of the Church of Rome And herevpon though needeles I make a new argument against them by themselues in this maner whosoeuer to make their Readers beleeue that the Fathers be for their cause doe falsefye them corrupt indignely and iniuriously handle them clipp shamfully corrupt them greately abuse vntruely alleadge misquote mayme mistranslate notably corrupt Father falsehoods vppon them peruert their true Arguments disdayne wrest and lewdely falsefy them cannot iustely pretend that they be for their Religion But these English Protestants are by their owne testimonie in this case Therefore they cannot iustely pretend that the Fathers be for their cause The Maior proposition is euidently true And the Minor is sufficiently proued before by D. Bilson and other Protestant writers To which I add affirmed and publickly with priuiledge published against D. Willet whoe before hath so damnably sworne that the Fathers be for the Religion of Protestants Parkâ—â— against Lymbomastix p. 170. pag. 151. def of 3. test sect k. k. k. def of 1. and 2. test p. 2. 5. sect 18. 21. pag. 181. 166. 101. 100. def of 2. place sect 10. 11. 20. def of 3. test sect 7. 12. 15. 16. c. pag. 7. 10. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. def of 3. test sect 16 pag. 28. def of 1. 2. 3. test M. Parkes in his booke dedicated to the then Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury writeth of him in these wordes Hee condemneth all the auntient Fathers for dreamers Condemneth all the auntient Fathers for dreamers Condemneth all the Fathers Hee condemneth all learned and godly diuines for enemyes of Christs Crosse and blasphemers of his passion Hee instifieth moste wicked Hereticks and condemneth moste holy Fathers Hee falsely translateth corrupteth indignely handleth greately abuseth vntruely alleadgeth misquoteth mayneth mistranslateth much abuseth notably corrupteth c. S. Augustine Origen S. Ambrose S. Chrisostome S. Leo S. Hierome Tertullian S. Bernard c. Fathereth falsehoods vpon them peruerteth their true Arguments corrupteth their wordes Hee teacheath vs further that he belyeth Bellarmine and Catholicke writers deceaueth the world Hee straungely peruerteth belyeth depraueth abuseth much abuseth falsefyeth holy scriptures And the same D. Willet hath writen and published with priuiledg also as fowle dealings or more vile in his Iudgment and the Censure of the Protestant Approuers of his booke of the same English Protestant Author The particulars are toe many grosse and tedious therefore I will onely set downe the Title of his booke to giue some coniecture of the contents in this kinde It is stiled in these wordes Loidoromastix that is a scourge for a Willet in Loâ—doromastix in the Title of it Rayler conteyning a full and sufficient Answeare vnto the vncristian Raylings slaunders vntruthes and other iniurious imputations vented of late by one Richard Parkes Master of Artes against the Author of Lymbomastix wherein three hundred Raylings errors Contradictions falsifications of Fathers corruptions of scripture with other grosse ouersights are obserued out of the saide vncharitable discourse by Andrewe Willet Professor of diuinitie Hither to the onely Title of that Booke published by a Professor of diuinitie as hee termeth himself and priuiledged by publicke allowance of English Protestants Therefore there is no shewe either of probabilitie or possibilitie that the authoritie and testimonies of the holy learned and auntient Fathers of the primatiue Church should be for the Religion of these Protestants when by their owne writings it is directly condeÌ„ned by them whether wee examine their workes and authorities in particular or when they were assembled in generall or others generally coÌ„firmed Councells as demonstration is made by their owne Assertions And by this it is euident by these Protestants themselues that their so termed Religion is Hereticall impious and damnable and for such condemned in their owne Iudgments by all generall and approued Rules and growndes in diuinitie The holy scriptures sacred traditions The Church of God decrees and sentence of the highest and all Apostolicke Sees generall and other approued holy Councells learned Fathers and whatsoeuer can be pretented to be a Iudge in these causes So that not any one true Christian Consistorie or Censure can be truely claymed or cited for iustifying of their proceedings Which is as much as can and more then needeth to be alleadged for condemninge of Heresie or any error in Religion Yet to leaue nothinge omitted to satiffy these Protestants in these questions and recall them to the vnitie of the true Church of Christ or from their sauadge crueltie of persecution I will in the next and second parte of this worke immediately following make like demonstration by
A BOOKE INTITVLED THE ENGLISH Protestants Recantation in matters of Religion WHEREIN IS DEMONstratiuely proued by the writings of the principall and best learned English Protestant Bishops and Doctors and Rules of their Religion published allowed or subscribed vnto by them since the comminge of our King IAMES into England That not onely all generall grownds of Diuinitie are against theÌ„ But in euery particular cheife Question betweene Catholicks them they are in errour by their owne Iudgments Diuided accordingly into two parts whereof the first entreateth of those generall Grounds The other of such particular Controuersies Whereby will also manifestely appeare the vanitie of D. MORTON Protest Bishop of Chester his booke called Appeale or Ansvveare to the Catholicke Authour of the booke entituled The Protestants Apologie Psal 126. v. 1. Except our Lord build the howse They labour in vayne that build yt With Licence Anno 1617. TO ALL HIS WELBELOVED CONTRYMEN ENGLISH PROTESTANTS especially persecutors of the Romane catholicke Religion DVely and moste frendly I remember my seruice and best loue vnto you In maladies and diseases desperate vsuall remedies will not â—uer in controuersies those that bee and wrongefully distressed when equall triall will not bee graunted must accept vnequall or none at all Your late commended history of the world recommendeth vnto vs for moste true this sentence nothing can bee a more excellent wittnessinge then where an Enemy doth approue our cause Your D. Morton doth testifie as much and no man will deny it neyther this that followeth that in controuersed questions and their tryall no condemnation is more approued then where men in their owne cause are condemned by their owne Iudgment Thus in our lawes confession of wronges and euill behauiour is conuiction And in matters of Religion a Recantation But without some high commaundinge cause how shall wee finde such enforceinge and forced wittnes Balaam his Asse spake not of himselfe nor Cayphas of himselfe did prophesye And in English Protestant Religion where euery one is made a Iudge ouer all that will gayne say him in their conceipts no man will suppose or once Imagine that any one will bee fownde amonge them to giue sentence against themselues whome they value and esteeme at so high a rate aboue all the world besides especially for the church of Rome which they hate and persecute so much Yett because no other meanes is left I must build vppon this vnleuell groundes and come for Iudgment at such a Consistory onely to take what they shall giue and haue nothinge but what they please to allowe Which I hope will bee that which is expressed in the Title of this booke the same to which they haue all sworne or subscribed ratified or confirmed printed and published for their doctrine and Religion I dare not goe hygher to the dayes of Queene Elizabeth nor bringe the testimonies of Protestants in other contries leaste I receaue for Answeare as others haue done that they stand not vppon what forreyne and former Protestants haue taught which though it bee a vayne and onely cauillons exception to bee at variance or defyance with them in faith of whose church as they name it they would bee members yett to auoide all suspition and colour of euasion though neuer so friuolous Because no protestant may deny but that is their protestant Religion in England vnder our Kinge supreame heade stiled of that Church which hee by his lawes and proceedings with their Consents and Assentinge hath here established and this their Bishops and Doctors by oath or subscription haue synce then confirmed and by their published printed writings defended or mayntayned or by their Religion ought so to doe I will onely insist in this their owne priuiledged and allowed testimonyes and authorities And assume by them to proue not onely that all grownds of Religion in generall doe proue and mayntayne the doctrine of the church of Rome and condemne this protestant Religion But further and demonstratiuely to manifest by true consequence that in euery cheife question betweene this ProtestaÌ„ts and Catholicks they ar in error and wee in truthe Which will be more then euident demoÌ„stration against D. Morton ProtestaÌ„t Bishop of Chester his Appeale or pretended Answeare to the Catholick Author of the Protestants Apologie And therefore being confidently assured that I haue truely and fully performed what I vndertake by their so greate aduantage as to make them both wittnes and Iudge in their owne cause I presume as it is soe to name this Booke The English Protestants Recantation in Matters of Religion I wish it were as easye and no more difficult labour to bridle their wills and Appetites from libertie ouermuch loue of this world and wanton delights thereof as it is to demonstrate to their vnderstandings that they bee in error many men ar able to doe this But God and themselues must reforme the other which of his greate mercy I moste humbly beseech him to grauÌ„t That they which so longe tyme haue onely talked of Reformed Churches and Religions may come to the true and reall practise of reformation both in mynde and maners Which I hope they may the soener attayne vnto if they shall duely consider how fowle and deformed the face of this their new doctrine is euen as it is poynted by their owne colours and pencell That which remayneth as my onely suite to you is this not to bee regardlesse of your best good not willfully to erre from the way of truthe to esteeme of the sacred Religion of the Church of Rome as the greatest enemyes to it and frends to you shall conclude it worthye and lett my self and labours enioy your loue as wee shall deserue it And so I shall euer rest Your most wellwishing Contriman and frend Author of this Booke THE ENGLISH PROTESTANST RECANTATION IN MATTERS OF Religion THE FIRST PART CHAPTER I. PROVEINGE BY ENGLISH Protestant writers since the begynninge of his Maiesties Raigne in England that the true Church of Christ is of Infallible Iudgment The Protestants not so and so not the true Church BECAVSE the cheefest and moste generall controuersie in Religion in this time betweene the Catholicks of England and their Aduersaries their contry persecutors and Innouators is concerninge the true Churche of Christ which where with whome and what it is what bee the properties true notes signes qualities authoritie office and commaunde of it I will first begin with that Question In which I argue thus Whatsoeuer Companie Societie Consistorye Iudgment or Authoritie is in time of difference about Religion moste necessarie to bee knowe followed and obeyed and is the companie of holy ones the howsholde of faithe spouse of Christ the piller and grownde of truthe whose communyon is to bee embraced directions followed and Iudgment to bee rested in must needes bothe bee priuiledged from error and to bee obeyed in Matters of controuersie But the true Church of Christ is such Therefore free from error and to bee obeyed in this busines
argue thus all those Bookes which Protestants in their authorised communion booke and bookes of Honolyes allowed by their conuocation and parlament and our Kinge doe prescribe to be vsed as canonicall scriptures as well as others and are so cited and practized ought to be receaued and allowed for canonicall But those Bookes which they denie and Catholicks receaue for canonicall are suche Therefore they ought to admitt them into the Canon of Holy scriptures The Maior proposition is euident for bookes Rules lawes and directions proposed by true authoritie as those be supposed of Protestants ar to be obeyed and followed The Minor proposition is likewise l. 1. homel l. 2. homel Artic. 25. Communion B. Tabl. direct of seruice Suruey of the Booke of comm prayer pag. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. Petit of 22. Preach exc ag hom and except 4. ag comm Booke Articl of Relig. Articul 6. moste certaine for their bookes of Homelyes receaued in the 25. Article of their Religion doe ordinarily so cite them and their Communion booke so termeth and vseth them too often to be alleadged in this place Whereuppon to be breife the Protestant Author of the Suruey of the booke of Common prayer affirmeth playnelye and often vrdgeth it That the Protestants of England must approue with the Romane Churche these bookes for canonicall So likewise doe the 22. preachers of London in their petition If any man shall Answeare that the Articles of their Religion exclude them from the canon of the scripture and so they cannot be saide to receaue them I answeare him againe that this is so farre from freeinge them in this point that it both excludeth them defineing and embraceing so contradictorie doctrines in so important busines from all hope of truthe and further proueth that these men buildeing all vppon scriptures haue either no scriptures at all or els such doubtfull vncertaine and vnresolued scriptures that true Religion which must be moste assured and infallible cannot be grownded or mayntayned by them For proofe whereof I will first recite their subscribed Article in this question and then frame my Argument Their Article is sett downe in these Articl of Rel. articul 6. definitiue wordes Holy scripture conteineth all thinges necessarie to saluation so that whatsoeuer is not read therein nor may be proued thereby is not to be required of any man that it should be beleeued as an Article of the faithe or be thought requisite or necessarie to saluation In the name of holy scripture wee doe vnderstand those canonicall Bookes of the old and new testament of whose authoritie was neuer any doubt in the Churche Of the first part of this Article I am to entreate in my chapter of Traditions hereafter Of the later part I will speake in this place onely first admonisheing my Readers in what ample maner D. Feild and others of that Religion Feild l. 3. c. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. pag. 60. 62. 63. 64. c. Feild l. 3. Titul c. 1. 2. take this worde the Churche for breuiate whereof the Titles of the first and seconde chapters of his third booke be these Of the diuision of the Christian worlde into the Greeke Latine Armenian Aethiopian and Nestorian Churches c. 1. of the harshe and vnaduised Censure of the Romanists condemninge all these Churches as Scismaticall and Hereticall cap. 2. Now this supposed I argue thus No bookes whose authoritie haue at any time beene doubted of in the Churche are by this Protestant Article to be allowed for Canonicall scriptures But all bookes that either Protestants or Catholicks receaue for canonicall haue in the Iudgment of these Protestants beene doubted of in the Church Therefore by these Protestants there be no canonicall scriptures at all The Maior proposition is euidently proued by their recited article defineing those bookes canonicall of whose authoritie was neuer any doubt in the Churche The Minor proposition is directly proued by D. Willet who writeth Willet Synop quaest 1. of scripture pag. 2. 3. edit An. 1594. and after published againe directly and at large how euery booke both of the old and new testament haue not onely beene doubted of but also denyed in this their Churche I suppose the laste edition of his booke was since the commeing in of his Maiestie my prescribed time otherwise it is so directly there proued by him that no Protestant can deny it And to shew the pitifull case of this their Protestant Article and Religion their Protestant Bishop of Wincester D. Bilson suru pag. 664. Bilson within my limitation writeth thus The scriptures themselues were not fully receaued in all places no not in Eusebius time Hee saith the Epistle of Iames of Iude the second of Peter the seconde and third of Iohn ar contradicted The Epistle to the Hebrues was contradicted the Churches of Syria did not receaue the seconde epistle of Peter nor the seconde and third of Iohn nor the Epistle of Iude nor the Apocalipse the like might be saide for the Churches of Arabia Will you hence conclude that these partes of scripture were not Apostolicke or that wee neede not receaue them now because they were formely doubted of Therefore the Protestants of England haue no certayne and vndoubted scripture if they will stand to their suscribed Articles and their owne subscription Which this Protestant Bishop before seeing the absurditie thereof hath refused to doe Therefore they may not as they doe denie those other bookes which Catholicks admitt vppon so greate and highest warrants before in Protestants Iudgment because in former tymes they haue beene doubted of as those laste recited by the testimonie of their Bishop and all the rest as D. Willet hath wittnessed haue beene To these I might add more Arguments from these Protestants true Greeke Churche and the generall Councell of Florence both allowed by some of these writers and yet alloweing and warranting for canonicall all bookes receaued by Catholicks And other Arguments by them but these ar sufficient for this matter at this time And as demonstration is made that these Protestants either haue no true scriptures at all or not the true Canon of holy scriptures So it is as euident that their Religion cannot be proued true and infallible as true Religion is by euidences that in their proceedings ar doubtfull fallible or no holy canonicall scriptures but by them excluded from that number and sacred Canon CHAPTER V. OF THE INTEGRITIE AND excellencie of the Latine vulgare translation of scriptures vsed in the Romane Church and Protestants false corrupt and erroneous Translations in their owne Iudgment and Censure NOW lett vs entreate of the vulgare Latine translation of holy scriptures handled in the next Chapter for whose allowance by these Protestants I argue by them in this maner That Latine Translation of scriptures which is to be vsed in scholes and pulpits and for antiquitie to be preferred before all others was vsed in the Church thirteene hundred yeares agoe by S. Augustine preferred
things appertayning vnto God but their priuate Interpretations and deductions suteing with their humour is the worde of God aswell as if it were sett downe in scripture worde for worde as M. Wotton hath told vs before My next Argument is this No people or professors of Religion freely acknowledgeing that all Rules in their Religion though their best approued and moste publicke to be moste reuerenced and respected be subiect to error may erre and haue erred in things belongeing to God are erroneous vnconstant variable often recant and correct their publicke proceedeings in such things can be saide to haue the true and Iuridicall exposition of scriptures otherwise there is a lawfull and true Iurisdiction and power to bynde them of their Religion both to errors in things against God and misbeleefe in this life and to eternall damnation the peneltie thereof in the next But the Protestants of England are in this Condition by their owne Iudgment Therefore they haue not the true and Iuridicall exposition and Interpretation of scriptures The Maior is proued before and directly by M. Wottons Wotton sup words all matters concluded logically out of the scriptures are the worde of God as well as if they were expressely sett downe in it word for word But the worde of God neither is nor can be erroneous to be recanted amended corrected c. therefore the Maior is moste certainely true by these men And the Minor also is proued by them in this order They haue graunted before that a general Councell is the highest Iudge And yet in publicke and subscribed Articles haue these Articl of Relig. art â—1 wordes Generall Councells may erre and sometime haue erred euen in things pertayning vnto God Wherefore thinges ordeyned by them as necessarie to saluation haue neither strength nor authoritie vnlesse it may be declared that they be taken out of holy scripture Therefore no certayne Interpretation with them for they haue assured vs Feild pag. 228. that a generall Councell may expownd scripture and by authoritie suppresse all them that gaynesay such Interpretations to excommunication and Censures of like nature and is by them the highest Iudge hath no more priuiledge but to erre and be examined and controlled by inferior for none is higher as before Reprouers and particular Interpreters amonge them whome as they haue also taught before wee are not bounde to beleeue but be so vile corrupt and erroneous as they haue confessed there is none amonge them to decide things in controuersie or define a truthe And least any man should absurdely say that their Conuocation Parlament or any other pretendeing superiotie among them in these matters should be better able to Iudge and interprett scriptures then Bishops assembled in a generall Councell Willet Antilog first D. Willet writeth thus In England the temporall prince is gouernour Ruler cheefe ouerseer praef Engl. pag. 71. 120. 150. 43. Pref. 19 the Reader in Antill and steward of the Church to whose Iudgment and redresse the reformation of Religion belongeth Yet hee addeth Neither hee nor their Church hath any priuiledge from error but playnely protesteth they must take out a new lesson and learne to reforme their erroneous conceites Which their Bishop D. Doue alloweth to haue beene their state from the first originall of their Doue persuas pag. 31. protestancie in England his wordes and graunt are these When the Massâ— was first putt downe Kinge Henry had his English liturgie and that was iudged absolute without exception but when Kinge Edwarde came to the Crowne that was condemned and an other in the place which Peter Martir and Bucer did approue as very consonant to Gods worde When Q. Elizâ—â—eth began heâ— Raigne the former was Iudged to be full of Imperfections and a new was deuised and allowed by the consent of the Cleargie but about the middle of her Raigne wee were weary of that booke and greate meanes haue beene wrought to abandon that and establishe an other wee doe at the leaste at euery chaunge of prince chaunge our booke of Common prayers wee be so wanton that wee know not what wee woulde haue Hitherto this Protestant Bishop of the publicke proceedings in their Religion And hee freely confesseth errors in all these their states and chaunges And this their flitting from error to error findeinge no Center or hope of settleing in truth hath so perplexed euen their best learned that a late Protestant writer amonge them hath these wordes The late Archbishoppe of Canterbury D. Whiteguist as is credibly reported Suruey of the B. of com prayer pag. 159. 160. tooke such a greife when their communion booke was to be amended discouered by these or like wordes good Lord when shall wee knowâ— what to trust vnto that hee presently fell into his palssy was curryed from the Court and dyed shortely after And D. Morton D. Couell M. Wotton Morton Apol. part 2. pag. 315. Couell ag Burg. pag. 75. 43. Wotton def pag. 42. c. M. Middleton and now the vniuersitie of Cambridge teacheth it is a generall position there is none in their Church whose Iudgment is Infallible Then I conclude their Interpretations be false and their Religion erroneous vncertayne and false for they haue graunted before that the worde of God which is Infallible moste certayne and vndoubted is the grounde of true Religion and euery article in it so fownded But these their highest and best sentences in Religion being so erroneous to be corrected fallible deceatfull c. must needs be the worde of lyeinge and deceatefull men or the wicked spiritt and in no wayes the holy Infallible and moste certayne word of God who can neither be deceaued in himself or deceaue others Further thus I argue whosoeuer teach not onely that the whole Christian world may erre in things pertayning to God but are bownde to receaue such errors vnder payne of excommunication and like Censures and yet teach this from scriptures cannot be said to haue their true Interpretation But the Protestants of England by their owne testimonie are in this state Therefore haue not this true Iuridicall Interpretation of scriptures The Maior proposition is euidently true for so God that is iust should ordayne Iurisdiction and power to bynde men to things vniust such as errors in Religion be and these Protestants though to excuse or alleuiate their owne Heresies they affirme that any particular Church or a generall Councell may erre in this maner yet they deny it of the whole Churche in which cause D. Feild pag. 203. l. 4. c. 5. Feild writeth in these wordes wee thinke that particular men and Churches may erre damnably because notwithstanding others may worship God aright but that the whole Churche at one time cannot so erre for that the Churche should cease vtterly for a time and so not be Catholicke being not at all times and Christ should sometimes be without a Church Thus it is euident by these Protestants for the wordes wee
Iude his Epistle Iosephus Pag. 79. 80. Origen Tertullian S. Augustine Beda Procopius Gazaeus and others that Enoch did write diâ—ine things And thus they add it is probable that Noah had seene and might preserue this booke For it is not likely that so exquisite knowledge as these men had was sodenly inuented and fownd out And entreating how the booke of the battailes Pag. 306. cap. 5. §. 7. with others of holy scriptures had beene lost thus they write it seemeth probable that such a booke as this there was and that the same should now be wantinge it is not straunge seeing so many other volumes filled with diuine discourse haue perished in the longe race of time or haue beene destroyed by the ignorant and malitious heathen Magistrate For the bookes of Henoch howsoeuer they haue beene in later ages corrupted and therefore now suspected are remembred in an Epistle of Thaddaeus and cited by Origen and by Tertullian That worke also of the Patriarke Abraham of formation which others bestowe on Rabbi Achiba is no where fownde The bookes remembred by Iosua c. 10. v. 13. and in the second of Samuel c. 1. v. 18. called the booke of Iasher or Iustorum is also loste The booke of Chozai concerninge Manasse remembred in the second of Chron. 33. v. 18. and 19. of this booke also lost Hierome conceyues that the Prophet Isay was the author The same mischaunce came aswell to the story of Salomon written by Ahia Silonites as to the bookes of Nathan the Prophet and to those of Ieedo the Seer remembred in the second of Chron. c. 9. v. 29. with these haue the bookes of Shemaiah and of Iddo remembred in the second of Chron. c. 12. v. 15. perished and that of Iohn the sonne of Hanain cited in the second of Chron. c. 20. v. 34. also that of Salomons which the Hebrues write Hiscirim of 5000 verses of which that part called Canticum Canticorum onely remaineth 1. Kings 4. 32. and with this diuers other of Salomons workes haue perished as his booke of the natures of trees plants beasts fishes c. 1. Kings 4. 33. with the rest remembred by Origen Iosephus Hierome Cedrenus Ciccus Aesculanus Picus Mirandula and others Of Pag. 307. these and other bookes many were consumed with the same fyer wherewith Nebuchadnessar burnt the temple of Hierusalem Hitherto this Protestant discourse of the necessitie of vnwritten traditions not onely before the scriptures were written but after so many bookes of holy scriptures dictated by the holy Ghost hauing vtterly perished Except wee will say which God forbid that God reuealed and published in holy scriptures so many needles and fruitelesse things or els so many necessary and diuine Reuelations haue alltogether beene loste and concealed from those that should beleeue and keepe them CHAPTER VIII WHERE THE HIGHEST supreame Iudiciall definitiue authoritie of generall Councells is both proued to be such by these Protestants To binde all Christians in matters of Religion to approue the doctrine of the Church of Rome and condemne protestancie THE next Question is concerninge generall Councells of what authoritie and commaunde they are in controuersies of Religion and whether the Doctrine of the present Churche of Rome or that of English Protestants is proued and confirmed by them in the sentence of these Protestants themselues Toucheinge their power and commaunding authoritie in these causes I argue thus Whatsoeuer in controuersies of Religion is the highest Iudge the onely remedie to redresse errors hath soueraigne authoritie is aboue others to be appealed vnto hath authoritie to interprete scriptures and to supresse all them that gaynesay such interpretation and subiect euery man disobeyeing suche determinations to excommunication and Censures of like Nature and aboue all other Iudgments is moste to be reuerenced and respected in the opinion of Protestants must also by them be allowed for the supreame highest and laste not to be appealed from Iudgment in this world in such questions But by the testimonie of these Englishe Protestants a generall Councell is of these preeminences in these matters Therefore by them the supreame moste bynding vncontroleable and Iudgment not to be appealed from or denyed by any The Maior proposition is euidently true for that which is supreame and highest cannot be Inferior vnto any neither that which hath commaunde and authoritie ouer all can possibly be vnder the controlement and correction of any none being left to be superior vnto it The Minor is proued by these Bilson Suru pag. 82. Morton part 2. Apol. pag. 340. l. 4. cap. 18. Relat. cap. 47. Protestants following The Protestant Bishop of Winchester D. Bilson hath these words The authoritie of generall Councells is moste holsome in the Church and hee citeth S. Augustine to that purpose D. Morton writeth thus Concilium publicum est summus Iudex a generall Councell is highest Iudge The Protestant Relator of Religion nameth it the onely remedie in such times of controuersies D. Sutcliffe hath Sutcliffe subu pag. 119. Sutcl ag D. Kell pag. 41. 42. 102. these wordes generall Councells haue soueraigne authoritie in externall gouernment And thus againe False it is that wee will admitt no Iudge but scriptures for wee appeale still to a lawfull genenerall Councell Wee holde all the Christian faith explaned in the sixe generall Councells D. Feild hath written thus Bishops assembled in a generall Feild pag. 228. Councell haue authoritie to Interprete scriptures and by their authoritie to suppresse all them that gaynesay such Interpretation and subiect euery man that shall disobey such determinations as they consent vppon to excommunication and censures of like nature And Feild l. 4. cap. 5. pag. 202. as before is cited alloweth this sentence Wee must reuerence and respect the authoritie of all Catholicke Doctors whose doctrine and writings the Church alloweth wee must more regarde the authoritie of Catholicke Bishops more then these the authoritie of the Apostolicke Churches amongst them more especially the Church of Rome of a generall Councell more then all these Now to proue that generall Councells thus allowed by these Protestants for the highest and irreuocable Iudgment cannot by their owne doctrine proue their Religion to be true and so consequently no Inferior authoritie Iustifie their cause I argue in this maner whosoeuer by publicke decree and constitution doe condemne generall Councelle of error and to be a fallible and deceatefull Rule in Matters of Religion and haue no other meanes to finde the truth cannot pretend their Religion to be infallibly true as matters of faith and reuealed of God are by such testimonies But the English Protestants are in this condition concerninge generall Councells Therefore their Religion neither is nor can by their owne proceedings be warranted and proued by them to be true The Maior proposition is euident for no Iudgment erroneous and fallible can possibly make any matter or question free from error and infallible otherwise a thinge might be effected and
venerable Imadges commaunding the making and vse of them In the last Canon they giue diligent and longe directions Can. 102. vnto preists how to behaue themselues in aduising and absoluing penitents in the Sacramen◠of penance Therefore I may conclude that Protestants Religion is vtterly condemned by generall Councells both of the primatiue Church and latter ages And consequently by all other Iudgments in the Church of Christ Because these men haue told vs that all Bishops Doctors and Professors of Religion are bownde to followe the definitions of generall Councells CHAPTER IX WHEREIN IS PROVED BY these Protestants That the authoritie of the primatiue Fathers is to be receaued and followed in matters of Religion And how it wholly proueth the present doctrine of the Church of Rome vtterly condemninge all Protestant Religion THE authoritie and value of the Testimonie of the auncient Fathers and that they taught and approued the doctrine of the present Churche of Rome euen by the graunt of these Protestants is euident in the laste Chapter for being of that opinion in generall Councells and publicke assemblies and sentences to which by their owne consent and subscription they submitted and bownde themselues as to their lawfull and commaunding Rule they could not and might not teache and write otherwise in priuate then in publicke themselues and others had authoritatiuely concluded Yet for a full satisfaction to Protestants in all things I will breefely entreate of these also as they wer◠priuate writers And first of their authoritie I argue thus Whoso euer allowe in shewe and wordes amonge the Ignorant Readers or hearers of their writings and sermons the authoritie of the auncient and primatiue Fathers to procure people to beleeue that their Religion and doctrine agreeth with them as men teaching and writing the truthe and to that purpose doe yeeld vnto them greate respect and reuerence ought truely and syncerely to beleeue and embrace their Religion But these English Protestant writers be such Therefore they ought and are bownde to followe and embrace their doctrine The Maior proposition is euidently true for as dissimulation craftie and double dealeinges to delude and deceaue others in all thinges is a vile and abominable synne against truthe charitie and Iustice so in matters of Religion wherein not the least equiuocation of to saue a mans life may be vsed it must needs be an offence moste damnable and deuelishe The Minor proposition is thus proued by these Protestants Their Protestant Bishop D. Bilson writeth thus The Bilson suru pag. 85. auncient consent of godly Fathers is with greate care to be searched and fallowed of vs cheifely in the Rule of faith And agayne Wee rest vppon the Pag. 82. sup scriptures of God vppon the authoritie of the auncient Doctors and Councells And maketh the same reason with Vincentius Lirinensis in these Pag. 83. sup words Leaste euery man should wrest the scriptures to his fansye and sucke thence not the truthe but the patronage of his error And hee addeth that S. Augustine gaue this respect not onely to generall Councells but to the testimonies of particular Fathers Irenaeus Ciprian Hilarius Ambrose Gregory c. Chrisestome Basil and others D. Sutcliffe writeth thus Wee Sutcl subuers pag. 87. acknowledge the faith of the Fathers of the fourth fift and sixt ages and adioyne our selues to that Church And to credite his cause and make his readers beleeue hee consenteth with those Fathers hee speaketh in this maner The Fathers in all points of faith are for vs Protestants Sutel ag D. Kell pag. 17. and not for the Pope D. Willer knowing of what little credit his bare worde is euen by his Protestants as appeareth hereafter would procure creditt to his protestancye by damnable periury in these wordes I take God to wittnesse before Willet Antilog pag. 263. whome I must render accompt c. That the same faithe and Religion which I defend is taught and confirmed in the more substantiall points by these Historians Councells Fathers that liued within syne or sixe hundred yeares after Christ And further Pag. 264. sup thus It is moste notoriously euident that for the grossest points of Popery as Transsabstantiation sacrifice of Masse worshipping of Imadges Iustification by workes the supreamacie of the Pope prohibition of Mariage and such other they of the Romane Churche haue no shewe at all of any euidence from the Fathers within syue hundred yeares of Christ In all which questions amonge others I am to proue the contrary be these Protestants themselues hereafter in their place And in an other page of the same treatise hee writeth thus The auntient Fathers that liued within sixe hundred yeares of Christ are Willet Antil pag. 271. K. speache in parl An. 1603 conference at Hampt pag. 73. against them His Maiesties speach in parlament it this I will euer yeeld all reuerence to antiquitie And in their conference For my parte I knowe not howe to answeare the obiection of papists when they charge vs with nouelties but to tell them their abuses are new And hee approueth the dayes of Constantine for a Rule in Religion saying Constantine is not to be appeached of superstition but thinges then vsed may still be continued Confer pag. 69. But now it shall appeare that these Protestant Doctors and Ministers are so far from iustifying these their oathes protestations and assertions they be enforced to acknowledge those primatiue Fathers doe allowe teache and approue the doctrine of the present Romane Churche which these men impugne and persecute and for that cause doe not onely deny the authorities of those primatiue learned and holy Fathers but call and censure them with vnciuill barbarous contemptuous and Irreligeous names and phrases For proofe whereof I argue thus Whatsoeuer Sect Religion or People being vrged by such testimonies as Protestants haue giuen for allowance of the Fathers authorities before to followe them accept of their doctrine and stand to their Iudgment in these controuersies of Religion doe vtterly refuse and disallowe it though his Maiestie should approue it but say they are vnfit Iudges in controuersies of diuinitie that their Iudgment is little to be respected their testimonie is not worthe answearing there is no probabilitie in their opiniōs they are not to be beleeued deserue not credit are not credible to be admitted are not fitt Iudges were to partiall are to bee forsaken contemned and dispised such men cannot with any apparance of truthe affirme those primatiue Fathers and Doctors to allowe their Religion and proceedings or defend their cause by their Authorities But these Protestants Doctors and Ministers of England be such Therefore those Fathers are not for their Religion The Maior proposition is to manifestly true and the Minor is proued also by these Protestants themselues in this maner M. Wotton expressely controlleth the Kings sentence before concerninge Wotton def of Perk. pag. 15. 16. the time of Constantine and antiquitie his wordes be these the
Protestant preacher in his more then vncharitable booke against Catholicks witnesseth of Prot. proof-part 1. c. 9. cap. 8. c. his owne brethren in Religion the English Protestants Of the more then irreligeous and prophane behauiour of their cleargie of English Protestants in abuseing falsefieing peruertinge the holy Scriptures Fathers Councels and all Authorities for Religion I haue for this point sufficiently entreated before to proue that they are not iust or righteous but most vniust and impious by their owne testimonie What other syns they are defiled with let their owne liues and the world censure But suer I am they are not voide of all greuous sinnes which they must be if they be iustified and in grace and such they must be in deed before they knowe themselues to be such except they can know that to be which is not as their sharp wits would seeme to doe in this and other questions of Religion Then seeing it is to apparant that Protestants are not iust either by their Imagined assureinge faith or howsoeuer let vs further examine by these writers and Protestant professors whether it is in it self possible that this supposed faith should Iustifie The contrary whereof thus I demonstrate from their owne writings All men that pretend to be iustified by this Imagined faith must needs be iustified by some act or acts thereof But no man is Iustified by any act or acts thereof Therefore no man is iustified by it The Maior is manifest The Minor is thus proued by Protestants First D. Feild with Feild pag. 177. others doth and of necessitie must affirme that in this busines of their fantasied Iustification their deuised faith hath twoe and onely twoe acts One going before iustification teaching vs to pray entreate God and humble ourselues when wee are not iust and this act as hee acknowledgeth it to goe before Iustification so hee thus freely confesseth that it doth not iustifie The second Act as hee telleth vs doth followe Iustification and so by no possibilitie because the cause cannot be after the effect caused by it that is able to iustifie wherefore his owne words of this Act of their inuented faith be these Shee doth not actiuely Iustifie but findeth the thinge done Therefore seeing they teach there be but two acts in their new faith the first and second te laste which admitt no more and neither the one nor other nor both together because they graunt there is no partiall influence or cooperation from them to that purpose dothe doe or can iustifie there is no possibilitie of Iustification by such idle faithe for so two contradictoryes should be true man is iustified by some act of faith man is not iustified by any act of faith Which in Logicke and nature is knowne to be vnpossible and a stupide absurditie to affirme it This matter is further proued by D. Couell who reiecting Luthers Couell def of Hooker pag. 42. opinion in this question graunteth a seperabilitie of faith and workes and that faith as they commonly graunte doth not iustifie Then Iustification cannot possibly be by onely faith which in an other treatise hee declareth by example in these words Faith is the fowndation of spirituall buylding of Gods howse charitie the Roofe without which the best are Couell against Burges pag. 148. but as howses vncouered that cannot longe continue Then iustification which is the Roofe of our spirituall buildinge in this world is and musts needs be the worke and buildinge of charitie and not of faith alone Which demonstratiuely is true by his graunt that faith and the works of charitie may be seperated for they consent that without such works man is not iustified therefore not possibly by this their Poeticall faith Further both the present Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury D. George Abbot against D. Hill and D. Feild also doth often tell vs that the Greeke Church is the true Church of Christ Then supposing from my first chapter in the first part of this worke by the graunt of the same D. Feild Protest proaf part 1. cap. 1. D Couell D. Sutcliffe M. Wotton and M. Ormerod that the direction thereof is to be followed her Iudgment to be rested in that it hath authoritie to commaund her children the Iudgment of it is a very speciall grownd of faith supporting the truthe as a piller doth vnderpropp a building is a diligent and true keepr of doctrines committed to her chaungeth nothing diminisheth nothing at any time addeth nothing superfluous looseth not her owne vsurpeth not things belonging to others and that there is no saluation remission of syns or hope of eternall life out of the Church All which be the verie words of those laste cited Protestants related in that place From which graunts thus I argue No doctrine or opinion that is a thinge moste horrible vnworthie any Christian against the lawe of God and light of nature is or can possibly be true But the paradoxe of Protestants that this their supposed onely faith doth iustifie is such Therefore it neither is or can be true The Maior is euidently true and to affirme the contrary is to denie all true Religion and the Authoritie of God for yf hee should or could teach or reueale to men to followe doctrine that is horrible vnworthie a Christian against his owne lawe and naturall light such doctrine could not be true nor hee honored as God but to be accoumpted a deceauer and seducer The Minor or second proposition be the expresse words of the Greeke Church so true to be obeyd and followed in doctrine by these Protestants as before is cited For Hieremias Patriarke of Constantinople cheef in Hieremias Patriarcha constant in censura cap. 5. that Church in his censure against Protestants vseth these words in this article The doctrine that onely faith doth iustifie is a thinge moste horrible vnto or thie any Christian against the lawe of God and the light of nature Therefore these men mayntayning so horrible doctrine by the censure of the true Church as they teach and out of which as they affirme before there is no saluation remission of syns or hope of eternall life are so farre from being iust iustified or to be saued by faith or any other meanes in their proceedings that by their owne confession they haue left vnto themselues no hope of eternall life or saluation at all Moreouer I argue thus Nothing which cannot be defended without graunting and mayntayninge more new and straunge absurdities and impossibilities is or can be true doctrine But this Protestant assertion of their onely assuring faithe iustifying is such therefore it neither is nor can be true The first proposition is euidently true for euery truthe may and is defended without any absurditie or inconuenience The seconde proposition is also manifestly proued from D. Feild and others before To whome I add M. Wotton who laboureing what hee can to defend this his forged faithes iustification and answere that place
of S. Paule How shall they call on hym in whome they doe not beleeue being vrged to Rom. 10. proue that faith goeth before prayer and other good workes without which they teach a man is not iustified and which themselues vrge in a sence like to that as they thoughe vntruely suppose against prayer to Angells and Saincts in whome wee doe beleeue yet the beleeuing allthough not in them that it is lawfull to pray to them sufficeth in that case hee maketh his supposed faith a very chimericall fiction and no true reall thinge of that nature but is forced to this absurditie to say assuring faith and prayer proceeding after WottoÌ„ def of Perkins pag. 209. faith be simul tempore bothe together in the same instant of time Which is vnpossible being diuers distinct acts specified from diuers obiects produced by diuers powers and operations of the soule one precedent going before the other following and to vse his owne words proceeding after Therefore by himself except before and after Prius Posterius be simul and simul tempore together and together in tyme which euery yonge logitian in Cambridge will tell him is moste childish and absurde both this his Answere is a new grosse absurditie and that his former doctrine that cannot be otherwise defended is of like qualitie which will more appeare in the next argument by this mans diuinitie also Therefore I argue furâ—her thus Nothinge that wanteth assurednes but hath doubteinge and is not without doubt can be a matter of faith But this Protestant position euen by their owne confession wanteth assurednes hath doubting and is not without doubt Therefore it is no matter of faith or true faith The Maior or first proposition is so certainely true that ProtestaÌ„ts generally acknowledge as the truthe is that nothing can be more certayne and vndoubted then faith for being grownded vppon the vnfallible word and Reuelation of God which it moste vndoubtedly certayne true assured and without all doubt vnpossible to be otherwise â—f God be God and truthe it self How can there be any place of doubt of any thinge of that nature and therefore that common sayeing Dubius in fide est infidelis hee that doubteth in faith is an Infidell so much as in him lyeth makeing God vnworthe to be beleued is ordinaryly allowed with Protestants The Minor proposition is also proued by Protestants and M. Wotton himself wittnesseth of this their Imagined faith in these wordes Without doubt it is not And againe in this WottoÌ„ def of Perkins pag. 135. 152. pag. 161. maner I may graunt the faithfull ordinarily are not assured of their saluation by such a faith as hath no doubteing in it And further thus our faith is not without some doubteing and our feeleing not so stronge as it should and may be And they haue spoken so longe in defence of this their fantasticall faith that they proued themselues not to haue a sownd and certayne faithe of those things that of all others are moste generally beleeued of all excepting Atheists that there is a God for amonge Protestants the same Protestant faith there be such doubts Whether there be a God or no. Wherefore M. Parkes a Protestant writer amonge them might iustly speake of his English fellowes in Religion in this maner Heresie and Infidelitie Ioyne and labour to subuert Parkes Apol. pref and ouerthrowe all grownds of Christian Religion Thus hee of these Protestants Againe I argue in this maner from the 16. article of their Religion Where it is thus Artic. 16. defined After wee haue receaued the holy Ghost wee may depart from grace and fall into syn And after it teacheth that true repentance procureth forgiuenes of syn Now this true repentance either goeth before or followeth this their Imagined iustifieing faith If it goeth before this their faith then that faith iustifieth not because man is made iust before any Act of that applying faith is exercised If this Repentance followeth then againe that their supposed faith doth not iustifie for by their owne doctrine a synner Impenitent is not iust For theyr applying faith is to apply as they say the promises of Christ vnto vs but Christ in scriptures is so fare from promisinge saluation to man impenitent that hee promiseth and denownceth damnation That both these Acts should be together is vnpossible as I haue demonstrated against M. Wotton in the like case before This is also proued by the Arguments concerning predestination in the former chapter for those Protestants which hold this Iustification by faith defend also assurednes of predestination teaching that euery one that is at any time iust is predestinate and so the one is as well knowne vnto them as the other and either of them a matter of faith with these men Againe faith and hope be distinguished faith is the grownds of things to be hoped Faith Hope Charitie these three But where there is assured faith to obtayne a thinge or hauing a thinge Hope is there euacuated Againe These Protestants with the scriptures graunt that the iuste and iustified are in heauen But faith is not in heauen being euacuated by beatificall vision therefore Iustice is not by faith Againe faith is not discursyue D. Feild Feild pag. 226. Couell def of Hooker pag. 85. writeth as truthe is that priuate Interpretations bynde not and D. Couell saith doctrines deriued are not the word of God then they are not matter of faith But all these pretensed faithes of these Protestants are onely their owne priuate interpretations applications and deriued doctrynes for no scripture saith that any one Protestant in particular D. Willet D. Powell or other is iustified or shall be saued Therefore no faith much lesse iustifying faith CHAPTER III. WHEREIN BY THESE PREsent English Protestant writers the Catholicke doctrine of Iustification by inherent grace and Iustice is proued against the same Protestants and their opinion NOW it will be no difficultie for a Christian man to beleeue doctrine of inherent grace â—ustice iustification by good workes if hee will as all Christians doe are ought graunt and beleeue any iustification at all For the contrary opinion of Protestants being euen by Protestants our Aduersaries themselues confuted that of the Catholicke Church must needs be true In which question the Councell of Trent for Catholicks Concil Trid. sess 6. can 11. defineth thus If any shall say a man is iustified either by onely Imputation of the Iustice of Christ or the onely remission of syns excluding grace and charitie which is diffused in their harts by the holy Ghost and is inherent or that the grace whereby wee are iustified is onely the fauour of God lett him be Anathema For proofe of which doctrine euen by my contry Protestants and to procure their conformitie as they ought first I argue thus Wheresoeuer there be degrees of Inherent Iustice and man more or lesse accordingly so iustified there must needs be inherent Iustice and iustification by