in general all Religious Adorations of the Virgin Mary Epiphan Haeref 72. in fine v. 79. Although saith he she is glorious holy and honourable yet she is not appointed to be Adored Again the Lord in the Gospel speaketh to the Virgin his Mother What have I to do with thee woman In which Speech to the end that none should think her over excellent he calleth her woman Prophesying as it were aforehand of the Heresies which should arise And premonishing that none in admiration of her Sanctity should fall into this Heresie of Adoration 5. Of which doting Heresie of Adoration of the Virgin the Papists are guilty in a high degree For in the Countries subject to the See of Rome all men and women wheresoever they are in the City or in the Field thrice a day when the Ave Mary Bell rings send up their united devotious to her and where one professeth himself a devote to our Saviour whole Towns devote themselves to her where one prayeth at a Crucifix ten pray at her Image where one fasteth on Friday which they account our Lords day Many fast on Saturday which they count our Ladaies day To conclude they conclude all their prayers with an Ave Maria As we do with our Lords Prayer and most of their Treatises with Laus Deiparae Virgini Praise be to the Virgin Mother of God And in the Psalter called Bonaventures they have Intituled all the 150. Psalms of David to her and where he saith Lord they put Lady Touching Adoration of Relicks It is Idolatry the Church of Rome is very much guilty thereof What office is to be rendred to the Bodies of those that are deceased by those that are alive It is not to worship them but to bury them 1. THis the Protestants reproves concerning Relicks of Saints 1. Such Adoration of Relicks as S. Hierome himself and S. Augustine condemned 2. The attributing of Supernatural Effects to Monuments and Relicks which they have not by any ordinance of God 3. To place confidence and merit in these things without any divine authority and to cause people to gad and wander to this or that place that they may receive benefit by them 4. We most of all condemn the Impostures and covetousnesse of the Romanists who in stead of true Reliks brought in counterfeits The Lance is found wherewith Christs side was pierced A Brazen Serpent made of the same Brass which Moses his Serpent was at Milan in S. Ambrose his Church Tunica Inconsutilis Domini nostri c. 5. And consequently for filthy lucre bartered and made Portsale of these Relicks abusing herein the Ignorance and Superstition of fond people 2. And on the side the said Protestants declare That the office which is to be rendred to the Bodies of Saints Deceased by those that are alive is not to Worship them but to bury them In that regard Eusebius writeth thus concerning Polycarp After we had gathered his Bones being more precious than Pearls and Gold we buried them where it was fit Of Miracles wrought by Dead Bones and Carcasses of Saints 1. WHen it pleaseth the Lord to shew his Power and to work Miracles in any place or by any means as seemeth Good unto himself we admire his power and praise his goodness 2. And we are not Ignorant how God hath used dead bones as an Instrument of Life 2 King 13. v. 21. 3. And concerning these things Bishop Jewel hath written in this manner Reply Art 1. p. 39. Almighty God for the Testimony of his Doctrine and Truth hath oftentimes wrought great Miracles even by the dead carkasses of his Saints In witness that they had been his Messengers and the Instruments of his Will But as they were godly Inducements at the first to lead people unto the Truth So afterwards they became snares to lead the same People into Errors We Protestants must not frequent Exercises of Popish Worship nor assist to the Mass 1. WE cannot be present there but either we must give great offence or commit a Greater 2. Give great offence if we do not as the Papists do and joyn not with them in Censing Images bowing before them offering unto them and kissing In calling upon Saints and praying for the releasing of Souls out of Purgatory 3. Or commit a greater if we joyn with them in their superstitious Rites and Idolatries In so doing we give greater offence to the Church of God And not onely receive a mark from the Beast but a grievous Wound 4. Constantine the Emperour thought himself defiled if he had but seen an Heathenish Altar Ambros Epist. 31. David if he had but made mention of an Idol Psal 16. v. 4. Their Offerings of Blood I will not offer nor take their names into my mouth 5. The Corinthians might not be partakers of such meats as were offered to Idols May we be partakers of such Prayers as are offered unto them It was unlawful for them to sit at the same Table with Idolaters when they kept their Solemn Feasts Can it be lawful for us to stand at the same Altar with them 6. Let us think again and again upon those fearful menaces Apoc. 14. v. 9. If any man worship the Beast and his Image and receive the mark in his forehead or in his hand the same shall drink of the Wine of the Wrath of God and he shall be tormented in fire and brimstone before the holy Angels and before the Lamb And the smoake of their torments shall ascend for ever And they shall have no rest day nor night which worship the Beast and his Image and whosoever receiveth the Print of his Name 7. We have not received any print of the Beast we are free from the least suspition of Familiarity with the Whore of Babylon we have kept our selves unspotted of Popery Therefore as we tender not onely our Honour and Reputation but chiefly the salvation of our Bodies and Souls let us keep our selves still from Idols Let us be zealous for Gods honour and he will be zealous for our safety Let us abstain from all appearance of that evil which the Spirit of God ranketh with Sorcery and Witchcraft As the Church of Rome became corrupted by Degrees in Regard of the Doctrine of Faith since the Apostles Times So did she in regard of Manners 1. This is True in regard of the Pope her Head 1. THe Common Opinion which Men did conceive of the Time in which Gregory the Great lived was that Gregory the Great was the last good and the first ill Bishop of Rome 2. He was no better then should be 3. And all the other Bishops that succeeded him were stark nought Every one striving to goe beyond his Predecessor in all leudnesse 4. So that now a Sink of all wickednesse hath hath violently burst into the Church 2. This is true in respect of the Popish Clergy and in respect of other Members of the said Roman Church 1. A Sink of all wickednesse doth now
reason is given by Aquinas 2. part q. 97. Art 3. Because the Law of God proceedeth from the will of God and therefore may not be altered by Custome proceeding from the will of Man 7. In that regard very well doth S. Cyprian write lib. 2. Epist 3. ad Caecilium If only Christ is to be heard we ought not to regard what any before us hath thought fit to be done but what Christ who is before all hath first done For we must not follow the Custome of Man but the truth of God And in another place Custome without truth is nothing but Antiquity of Error Idem ad Pomp. cont Epist. Steph. Papae God alone is the Law-giver of his Church Nothing must be ordained concerning the Things which belong to Religion without the Word of God 1. THe Reason of that is because God alone is the Law-giver of his Church And the onely Author of the Doctrine Concerning Faith or Belief And Religious Worship That God is the onely Authour of the Doctrine concerning Faith or Belief we prove it by the following Arguments 1. THe 1. is taken from the Nature of Faith For all the Doctrines of Faith in regard of the matter which is to be believed must have a certain infallible and undoubted Truth Now it is the property of God alone to be infallibly true of his own nature Let God be true but every man a lyar saith S. Paul Rom. 3.4 And therefore God alone is the Author of the Doctrine of Faith 2. The 2. Argument is taken from the Quality of the Articles of Faith For the proper documents and Doctrines of Faith do exceed the capacity and apprehension of the Creature And therefore they could not be revealed but onely by the Creator Such is the Doctrine of the Trinity of the Persons in the unity of an Essence Such is the Doctrine of the Eternal Birth of the Son of God Such that of the Procession of the Holy Ghost And such that of the hypostaticall union of the two Natures of Christ Divine and Humane And such are all other Articles concerning Faith properly and strictly taken which in that they are above the naturall knowledge of the Creature cannot be known by us but by the supernaturall Revelation of the Creator Of all them this of Christ may be said Flesh and Bloud hath not revealed these things unto mankind but God the Father which is in Heaven Matth. 16.17 3. The 3. Argument is taken from the reward of Faith and the punishment propounded to unbelief and infidelity Which doe manifestly argue that it belongeth to God alone to frame and prescribe to Men Articles and dogmes concerning beliefe and Faith For the reward propounded to Faith is Eternall Life Iohn 3.36 And that is the gift of God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Rom. 6.23 And the punishment denounced against infidelity is Eternall Death Which punishment God alone is able to inflict Christ teacheth it Matt. 10.28 in these words Fear not them which kill the body but are not able to kill the soul But rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell He teacheth it also John 3.36 when he sayes that he that believeth not the Son shall not see life but the wrath of God abideth on him 2. That God is the onely Author of the Doctrine concerning Religious Worship We prove it by the following Arguments 1. THe 1. Argument is taken from the Relation which is between God And the Church God alone in the Spiritual Government of the Soul is Soveraign Monarch Is the Housholder Is the Husband In regard of his Church This Church in regard of her Relation to God Is Called The City of God The House of Cod The Spouse of God Now who should be so Impudent As to prescribe Laws to a Foreign City Concerning her Duties to her King Or to Another Mans Family Or to Another Mans Wife Concerning the Manner Of Obeying And Rendring Service To her Master Or to her Husband 2. The 2. Argument is taken From the Reward And Punishment Annexed to the Works of Divine Worship For the Works of Divine Worship Piously observed have from the Munificence of God a Promise of Eternal Reward But being Neglected or Contemned a Commination of Eternal Death From whence it may be Gathered That God Alone who is the Lord of Life and Death Hath the Power To Ordain such Works And to Injoin Them By the Empire of a Law-giver 3. The 3. Argument is drawn from the Prohibition of God For God himself by an Expresse Law hath attributed to Himself Alone The Authority to Ordain his Service Deut. 12.32 What thing soever I command you observe to do it Thou shalt not adde thereto nor diminish from it From whence also is that of our Saviour Matth. 15.9 But in vain they do worship me Teaching for Doctrines the Commandements of men 4. The 4. Argument is Because the Works of Worship depend from the Will of God who is to be Worshipped Therefore God is not Worshipped at all by those Works By which he did not declare whether he would be Worshipped or Not. But in This None can know the Will of God unlesse he doth reveal it and Injoines it For who hath known the Mind of the Lord Or who hath been his Counsellour That is Confirmed by This That all whosoever did think to Worship God with their own Invented Works Did provoke him to Anger rather than honour him Nay they are found To have worshipped the Devil Or the Idols of their own heart rather than God They went a whoring with their own Inventions Therefore was the wrath of God kindled against his People Psal 106.39 40. §. The onely Ground and Rule of Faith And Divine Worship Is the Holy Scripture 1. NO Mortal Creature can Teach Religion 2. Nor Carnal Man can attain true knowledge unlesse God Instructs Him And his Spirit lead Him to the Truth 3. The Phrophets Agree to the Truth of this Doctrine Esa 8.20 To the Law and to the Testimony 4. So doth Christ Joh. 5.39 Search the Scriptures for in them ye think ye have eternal Life and they are they which testifie of me 5. And so do the Apostles calling the Scriptures a Rule As S. Paul doth Gal. 6.16 And as many as walk according to this Rule And Philip. 3.16 Let us walk by the same Rule 6. And so do the Ancient Fathers and Doctors Sequi Divinas Literas De fide ad Reginas c. To follow this Rule saith Cyrill is the Path unto Heaven And to be led by this Canon is the way to Salvation And S. Irene Non per alios Dispositionene Salutis cognovimus By the Scriptures we Learn to be saved §. Also The Holy Scripture ought to be among us the Supream Interpreter of Scriptures And the Judge of Controversies 1. FOr Confirmation of That this Language of the Reformed is to be noted and observed How better say They would it stand with
the Marcosians of whom Epiphanius doth speak And from the Eutichians against whom Theodoret and Vigilius doe so excellently dispute the Error of Transubstantiation She hath from the Messalians the Euchetes her vain repetitions of Prayers by number She hath from the Manichees the Montanists the Marcionites the Tatianites the Eucratites the Priscilianists and Eustachians her Fastings her Abstinences her Vow of Poverty Her Distinction of Meats And her Law of Celibat or Single Life By all which is accomplished the Prophecie of S. Paul which we have 1 Tim. 4.1 c. With the Marcionites and Pepusians she permits Women to Baptise With the Pelagians and Semipelagians she doth establish Free-will The Merit of Works The Perfection of Holinesse whereof the Monks do principally boast Adding thereunto of their own the Works of Supererogation as a mark of a Supream arrogancie With the Manichees though under another consideration in the Eucharist she hath cut off the use of the Cup. It were a thing too tedious to particularise more upon this matter 8. From the abovesaid it manifestly appears that the Church of Rome is Heretical yea above all others who ever have been Heretical Because she is not infected onely with two or three Heresies but with a great number and multitude of them And because her maladies are not small and slight but the poison of Heresie hath thrust it self through her whole body having almost corrupted all the Articles of Faith Which causeth us to say with the Prophet Isaiah c. 1.21 22. How is the faithful City become an harlot it was full of judgement righteousnesse lodged in it but now murderers Thy silver is become drosse thy wine mixt with water 8. The same also causes us to acknowledge that the Church of Rome hath onely an outward shew Her fairest is the frontispiece and fore front all covered with magnificent Titles But within it is nothing else but falsehood and Corruption She is like unto the Temples of the Egyptians of old which outwardly were fair and magnificent But within nothing was to be found but Cats and Crocodiles and Serpents and such other Beasts fitter for a Den then for such a Temple 9. If so many fair Churches in the East planted by the sacred hands of the Apostles and watered with their bloud are now changed in Mosquies of Mahumetans or in lodgings of Hereticks why then shall we find strange that such a change be happened in the West Since the thousand years ended of the binding in Chains of Satan by Jesus Christ in the preaching of the Gospel he hath been loosed according to the Prophesie of S. John Rev. 20.1 2 3. to work again a little season about the seduction of the Inhabitants of the Earth §. Antithesis of the Popish Doctors 1. Objection Against the Above Exercitations they object 1. That By Testimonies of Stories No Heresie was brought into the Romane Church Or any Change of Doctrine was ever made in the same Answer to that Objection 1. VVE Answer to that Objection That the Papists Histories written in the Time of Antichrists Tyranny Ought not And do not Deserve to be regarded by us Reformed Because the Authors of Them were Infected with the Errors of the Pope And did not Dare write for the most Part otherwise then might well stand with his Honour 2. And to All Histories That since the Defection have commended the Faith of that Church We Oppose the Word of God Which plainly convinceth it of manifold And Damnable Heresies 3. Besides we could alledge Sundry Writers in all Ages That openly have reproved the Same To Instance in one Doth not Sigisbertus the Monk An Historiographer mentioned by the Papists Expressely Charge Gregory the Seventh And his Successours For maintaining and practising Not only an Error But an Heresie Also In taking upon Them Authority to Excommunicate the Emperour And other Civil Princes This Heresie hath ever since continued in that See And is at this Time by the Pope And his Popelings Avouched And therefore by the Confession of the Popish owns Historiographers Some Heresies hath taken Place in the Church of Rome Which is contrary to the Obiection before propounded 2. Objection 2. Against the Above Exercitation The Popish Writers demand At what Time Vnder what Bishop By what way And By what Proceeding Was a New Religion Spread Over the City of Rome And over tho whole World Answer to that Objection 1. IT is hard for us to Answer At what Time Neither is it Necessary to set down the very Instant of Time All Things were not at once overturned in the Church of Rome Sinne And Error Came to their Height by Degrees And by Leisure to Ripenesse The Hairs of our Head are not all Gray of a Sudden Neither doth any thing suddenly come to his Maturity And the Growth of every Thing appeareth long after This is manifest in such Things as having small beginning go on forward unto a greater Quantity Until they come to Perfection 2. But doth it follow that the Church of Rome is not Corrupt Because we cannot tell the Moment of Time When it began to be Corrupt But being so manifest as it is What need we search the Histories to Shew the Beginning What we Pray If you see a Man sick of the Pestilence If you see a City corrupt with Riots and wickednesse If you see a House Ruinous And Ready to Fall If you see a Ship Sinking Will you deny all These Unlesse one can tell you the Time When that Man began to be Sick The Means how the City grew Corrupt Who was Owner And in what Year The House grew Ruinous And in what Day the Ship began first to Leak And what is the Force of the Papists Reason and Demand other then This 3. But do not their own Histories Tell When And By whom Innovations and Corruptions Entred Let Them See a Few of Them 1. He that first usurped Authority over other Churches was Pope Victor After Him Zozimus And Boniface the Third And Celestine And their Successours 2. Pope Syricius first forbad Priests Marriages 3. The Manichees first Denied the Cup to the People 4. The 2. Council of Nice first ordained Worshipping of Images 5. Pope Nicholas the Second first taught the Body of Christ must Carnally be handled broken and Eaten 6. Pope Innocent the Third first established the Doctrine of Transubstantiation 7. Boniface the Third first Declared That the Pope was the Head of all Churches 8. Gregory the Great taught first Purgatory for a certain Truth 9. The Florentine Council first taught And Declared that the Pope was above Councils 10. Innocent the Third brought in Auricular Confession If these were not Sufficient We could produce the Rest of the Popish Errors 3. Objection 3. Against the above Exercitation The Popish Writers take an Objection From the Perpetuity and Continuance of Christs Vniversal Church And demand of the Reformed Doctors With what face they durst accuse of Corruption the Present Church of Rome
Truth thereof Refutation of the Excessive Praises that the Semiminarie Priests of Rhemes gives to the English Rhemish Translation 1. 1. LEt the Seminarie Priests of Rhemes give what Commendation they will to their English Translation 2. We Reformed say against it That that Translation is the worst of all the Translations that hath been set forth of the New Testament 3. And we prove our Assertion because that translation hath such examples of unaccustomed and monstrous novelties of words as the like in no other can be found 4. So as a man may justly call it a new fangled and ridiculous Translation Devised rather to amaze the Readers and make the word of God a laughing stock then to Edifie the Church of Christ 5. For who hath ever heard or read such words and Phrases as they have used and affected in their Translation 6. Whereas They might have retained as well the common and known manner of speaking That their Translation set forth in English might have been understood of English men 7. But they of purpose have so framed the same that the English is in many places as obscure in words as the Latin 8. Which thing is in all Translations a foul fault But in Translating of Holy Scripture Intolerable 9. And what Reason should be hereof but that Men either should contemn or not understand the Scripture which yet they will seem to Translate for the benefit of the Church 2. 10. If the Reader require Examples let him take but the Book and read a little and soon shall he see strange Affectation of Novelties in words and speeches throughout their whole Translation 11. There shall he find The Transmigration of Babylon Matth. 1. v. 17. The Enemie Man Matt. 13. v. 28. Vnlesse you have Penance Luk. 13. v. 3. Give us to day our supersubstantial Bread Matt. 6. v. 11. Whatsoever thou shalt supererogate Luk. 10. v. 36. Not in Chamberings and Impudicites Rom. 13.13 An Emulator of the Traditions of my Fathers Gal. 1.14.24 I Expugned the Faith They Emulate you not well Gal. 4.17 That you might Emulate Them 1 Pet. 2.5 Be ye also your selves superedified Ephe. 4. v. 10. Once at length you have reflorished to care for me denying the onely Dominator and our Lord Jud. 4. To the Redemption of Acquisition Ephes 1. v. 14. Against the Spirituals of wickedness in the Celestials Ephes 6. v. 12. The Archisynagogue Mark 6. v. 22. Ebrieties Commessations Gal. 5. v. 21. The Dominical day Apoc. 1. v. 10. But they are written to our Correption 1 Cor. 10. v. 11. That in the Name of Jesus every knee bow of the Celestials Terrestrials and Infernals Philip. 2. v. 10. But he Exinanited himself Philip. 2.7 For with such hostes God is promerited Hebr. 13. v. 16. Let the Charity of the Fraternity abide in you Heb. 13. v. 1. O Timothy keep the Depositum 1 Tim. 6.20 That he might repropriate the sins of the people Heb. 2.17 Wrapt it in Sindon and laid it in a Monument Matt. 27.59 All shall be docible of God John 6. v. 45. Vpon probatica a Pond John 5. v. 2. Which of you shall argue me of Sin John 8. v. 46. They hated me gratis John 15. v. 26. Beyond the Torrent Cedron John 18. v. 1. It was the â—arasceve of Pasche John 19.14 3. 1. These and such like are the goodly flowers of the Rhemists English Translation 4. 2. Besides the obscurity and ambiguity of Sentences by Reason of leaving out the Verbs and other words in the English Translation which may in Latine more easily be understood 5. Hereby the Reader may judge but better by Reading the Translation it self whether we have not Truely said of it That it is a strange Translation indeed And such an one as hard it were to find the Like 6. 1. But one of the Rhemist Priests doth Answer That we Reformed rather Delight in such Novelty then They seeing they Retain the Ancient words Mass Priests c. And we Reformed refuse them 2. Of these words shall be spoken in our particular handling of Controversies between the Reformed Churches and the Roman 3. And as for certain Names of persons and of places which some of our Interpreters do reduce to the Hebrew Sound They cannot much trouble the Reader And they are rather used in Books then in Speech EXERCITATION Condemnation of the Annotations joined with he Rhemist Translation of the New Testament By the Seminary Priests of Rhemes 1. VVHosoever shall consider with himself advisedly the Rhemists Manner of Collection Their Argument Their Application of Scripture And shall Examine a little how their Conclusion followeth upon their Proofs without all Coherence or consequence of Reason must needs greatly mislike their whole Religion that is founded upon so weak so tickle and so ruinous a Foundation 2. For unless it be granted That of every Thing may be concluded any Thing and that the Word of God may be made applicable to all purposes opinions and Doctrines it is impossible that these and such like arguments of Theirs as they have in their Annotations gathered upon the words of Scripture should have in them such strength and Truth as Divinity and Religion requireth These be the Frauds of the Church of Rome Concerning another of their Principles Which is the Ancient Fathers 1. Fraud The Church of Rome doth Discover an abominable Fraud in this That putting the Ancient Fathers to be one of the Principles of their Doctrine of Faith and Religious Worship by an Expurgatory Index they cause to be blotted out of the Books of the Ancient Fathers all that is displeasing unto them Or else they falsifie them and alter their Sense and Meaning 1. THis is true in Regard of the most Ancient Fathers and particularly of the Books of S. Cyprian S. Chrysostome S. Augustine S. Cyril of Alexandria and of others They make them say the contrary to that which they will and take out from them not onely some Clauses but also whole Leafes 2. We know well that to cover this Sacriledge Sixtus of Sienna doth adde That those Writings of the Fathers had been soiled and infected by the Malice and Venome of the Hereticks of our Age But it is a False Cover For if by Hereticks he doth understand those of the Reformed Religion we maintain that which they cause to be blotted out of the Writings of the Fathers was in Them before the Reformation And That it cannot be Justified that any of the Reformed have Corrupted or Altered any Writings of the Fathers 2. Fraud The Church of Rome acknowledgeth That there are many Faults and Errors in the Books of the Ancient Fathers which are not to be Approved And notwithstanding That The Popish Religion is as it were a Body consisting for the most part of Rottennesse and Corruption Namely of Ancient and New Errors 1. 1. THe Popish Writers can as soon prove out of the Scriptures the following Points of their false Doctrine As they can draw a Fountain
of the Councel of Trent Written by Patre Paulo See the Addition Concerning this Question Whether the Pope be above the Councils Or otherwise Jesuites THe Jesuites puts the Pope above the Councils And they alleadge this Reason Because no Council is of any Authoritie which was not Confirmed by the Pope Answer of the Reformed to that Reason That is false 1. For the Sixth African Council and the Chalcedon Council had their Authoritie without the Pope 2. And Emperours Patriarchs and Bishops have Confirmed Councils 3. And the Council of Constantinople by Letters desired the Confirmation of the Decrees from Theodosius the Emperour Fraud This is a Fraud of the Church of Rome in Regard of another of her Principles That is the Catholick Church That because the Scripture maketh Honorable Mention of the Church The Roman Church is that true Church of Christ of which the Scripture speaketh so often 1. VVE Reformed acknowledge That both in the Old and New Testament there is every where honorable mention made of the Church And that it is called A Holy City A Fruitful Vineyard An High Hill A Direct Path The onely Dove The Kingdom of Heaven The Spouse and Bodie of Christ The Pillar of Truth The Multitude unto which the Holy Ghost being promised poureth all things needful to Salvation The Congregation against which the Gates of Hell shall never so prevail That they shall utterly extinguish the same The Congregation which who so Repugneth though he confesse Christ with his mouth yet hath he no more to do with Christ then hath a Publican and a heathen man 2. The above-said Titles do not belong to the now Church of Rome 1. FOr on the contrary It is the Babylonish Whore A Branch cut off from the true Vine A Den of Thieves A broad way leading to Destruction The Kingdom of Hell The body of Antichrist A Sink of Errors A great Mother of Fornication The Church of the wicked out of which every Christian ought to depart which Christ shall one day fearfully destroy and give her the just Recompence of all her sins 2. In vain then do the Popish Writers reckon up the praises of the Church unlesse they can demonstrate that they are proper to the Church of Rome 3. Which they shall never be able to do so long as Rome standeth As the Church of Rome is Fraudulous in regard of the Principles of Faith and Worship that she doth produce So is her Doctrine false concerning these Principles 1. Concerning the Traditions that she calleth Apostolical 2. Concerning the Church 3. Concerning General Councils 4. Concerning the Ancient Fathers 5. Concerning the Pope And therefore such Principles are justly excluded by the Reformed from the Rule of Faith 1. The Reformed justly exclude from the Rule of Faith the Traditions called Apostolical by the Papists 1. FOr the Popish Apostolical Traditions are but forged and devised Things and therefore no stay for a man to settle his Conscience upon 2. That they are not such as the Papists sayes Let them tell us if they can which be the Apostles Traditions how many and where they may be found If they cannot satisfie this Demand as they cannot indeed How may they then make any Reckoning of that whereof they have no certain knoledge How can They without falling Build their Faith upon Fantasies such as they are 3. The Apostles Doctrine we have in Writing The Apostles Doctrine we have in writing 4. Other Traditions of the Apostles we receive none for our belief The Scripture is the onely Rule of Faith and not Traditions a part of the Rule of Faith that is That Scripture is a perfect Rule 1. THat I prove in this manner 2 Timoth. 3.15 Apoc. 22.18 1 Cor. 4.6 John 20.31 2. That is the onely Rule whereunto the chiefest properties of a rule do solely belong But the properties of a true and certain rule do onely belong to the holy Scriptures in matters of Faith The rule of Catholick Faith saith Bellarmine must be certain and known De verb. Dei libr. 1. cap. 2. Now there is nothing better known or more certain then the Scripture which appears Because Traditions are far more uncertain than the written word and because many of them are false and uncertain 3. The written word is a Rule of Traditions From whence it follows that it is the onely rule That the written word is a rule of Tradition appeareth by the Doctrine of our Adversaries who acknowledge that no Traditions must be admitted but such as agree with the Scripture Bellarm. de verb. Dei libr. 4. cap. 3. And which are derived from the Scripture and the writings of the Primitive Fathers Bellarm. de Script libr. 4. cap. 3. But those Traditions which are derived from the Scriptures have the same to be their rule And there is nothing more common in the Primitive Fathers then to subject all their writings to be Regulate by the holy Scriptures Therefore such Traditions as are found in the works of the holy Fathers have the holy Scripture to be their rule from whence it followeth that the Scripture is the onely primitive rule of Faith 4. It is that which is acknowledged by some of our Adversaries Gabr. Biel Can. Miss Lect. 71. whereof Ferus saith expresly The holy Scripture is the sole rule of veritie and whatsoever differs or contradicteth the same it is error and cokle with whatsoever shew it come forth Ferus in Matth. lib. 2. in cap. 13. pag. 248. col 1. And another saith The Doctrine of the books of the Prophets and Apostles is alone the foundation of truth and the rule c. Villavincen de formand Concion lib. 2. cap. 2. 2. The Reformed justly exclude from the Rule of Faith the Catholick Church 1. VVE Reformed do Reverence and Love The Catholick Church as the Spouse of Christ 2. But we know that her duty is to hearken only to the voice of Christ her Husband And that she hath no Authority to adde so much as one iota in his Word or any waies to dissent from it 3. And further we know That the Romish Synagogue is not that Catholick Church of Christ whereof we speak 3. The Reformed justly exclude from the Rule of Faith General Councils 1. VVE Reformed doe esteem and regard General Councils in their place We thank God for them We Read Allow and Commend them so far forth as they agree with Gods Word 2. Let therefore their Decrees be examined by Gods Word 3. And if they agree let them be received for that Agreement 4. If not let them be rejected for the contrary 5. But the Argument holdeth not in this Form such a Council decreed so and therefore so must we believe 6. If this Principle were set down for certain and perpetual in Divinity we should have strange Beliefs enow yea surely scarcely should we retain any one true Belief 7. Two famous General Councils have been held in Nice The First And the Second In the First is
condemned the Popes Supremacie Can. 6. In the Second is established the Idolatrous Worship of Images The First Belief the Papists will not allow The Second is detested by us Reformed 8. Let Councils therefore be esteemed as they deserve 9. And let them be tried as hath been said §. Objection of the Popish Writers against our Rejection from the rule of Faith the Catholick Church and General Councils IF the Church say they and general Councils be not Grounds and Rules of Faith Why then did the Ancient Fathers draw an Argument from them to Refute the Errors of the Antient Hereticks Answer of the Reformed to that Objection 1. VVE know say the Reformed That the Ancient Godly Fathers in Confuting all Hereticks used onely Arguments drawn out of the Scriptures and plainly taught That by no other Weapons an Heretick can be put to flight 2. The same Reformed do know That the Ancient Fathers did charge the Hereticks sometimes With the Judgment of Churches With Determination of Councils With Succession of Bishops With the Name of Catholicks Not as though this were a necessary Conviction of it self but thereby the rather to induce them to believe the Doctrine to be true which they did see from the first planting thereof in the Church to have remained 3. The case of the Papists drawing Arguments of Conviction from the Doctrine of their Popish Church is nothing like seeing they have onely the bare Title of the Church without the Thing and as it were the empty Casket without the Treasure 4. The Reformed justly exclude from the Rule of Faith The Ancient Fathers 1. VVE Reformed as hath been said of General Councils do esteem and regard them in their place We thank God God for them We Read Allow and Commend them So far forth as they agree with Gods word 2. For it cannot be truely said that they never disagree from it 3. We grant that they were Learned and Godly Men but yet were they Men having their Infirmities and Imperfections 4. Their Learning Their Zeal Their Ages Were not Priviledge unto them but that notwithstanding they might be deceived in their Writings and in their Expositions of Scripture 5. And let the Popish Doctors take this for a sure Conclusion That in the Sayings of Those who are all of them subject to Error there is no stable and stedy Ground to build our Faith upon least perhaps we build upon Error in stead of Truth 6. So that without Tryal and Examination no Sentence of a Father nor of all Fathers may safely be Received §. Objection of the Popish Writers against our Rejection from the Rule of Faith the Ancient Fathers SInce the Reformed Exclude the Ancient Fathers from the Rule of Faith Why say the Popish Writers do they make use of them and alledge them Answer to this Objection 1. THe Reformed do read the Ancient Fathers And oftentimes they rehearse their Sentences and their Expositions of the Scripture 2. But not as Proofs in Doctrines of themselves For they do not acknowledge them as Rule and Ground of the Faith 3. It is to stop the Papists Mouthes that cry so loud in the ears of the simple that all the Fathers are against them 4. It being most true That they are notably and generally for them § How the Reformed carry themselves in regard of the Scriptures in regard of the Ancient Fathers 1. This is their Carriage in regard of the Scriptures 1. THey receive that which the Scripture delivereth 2. They reject that which the Scripture reproveth 2. This is Their Carriage in regard of the Ancient Fathers 1. THey read the Fathers with Indifferent and Free Judgement 2. Weighing all their Doctrine in the Balance of Gods Word and thereby either allowing or refusing the same 3. This they must do or else of Fathers they make Gods of Mens Writings They make Canonical Scriptures Of Doctors Opinions they make Articles of Faith 4. And herein they do no otherwise then they are taught both by Scriptures and by Fathers to do 5. They declare to the Popish Writers That concerning these two Heads they shall never get at their hands more than this § Of Bishop Jewels Challenge to the Fathers that flourished 600 years after Christ The Popish Writers IOhn Jewel say they challenged the Catholicks calling upon and desiring the help of the Fathers as many as flourished 600 years after Christ Answer of the Reformed to that Relation 1. They Answer this THat Bishop Jewel proved all the Ancient Fathers to be against the Church of Rome in Disputing with Doctor Harding as he had affirmed at Paul's Crosse 2. They Answer this 1. THat the present Popish Writers may be ashamed to make mention of that Challenge which they have so long ago given over as a Desperate Cause 2. Wherein Doctor Harding the chiefest Adversarie could not make shew of Proof without using the Testimonies of forged and Counterfeit Writers As Amphilochius Clemens Abdias Hippolytus And such Others of which no more Account is to be made then of Fables and shamelesse Forgeries Such were the Chiefest Proofs which Dr. Harding was able to bring 2. And whatsoever he brought hath been fully Answered in the Reply by the Bishop himself Which Book as yet though it hath been in some parts nipped at by Divers yet throughly confuted was it never what the present Popish Writers can do in this Case may easily be guessed 3. They Answer This. 1. THat what which Bishop Jewel promised to give over and to subscribe If any of the 27. Articles of Controversies propounded by him could be proved by Scriptures Councils or Doctors within 660. years after Christ was not because he meant ever to subscribe to the Popish Doctrine or was unstayed in his Religion but it was of a most assured knowledge and resolute perswasion That the Popish Doctors were utterly destitute in this behalf of all Truth and Antiquity as indeed they are 2. Otherwise the Popish Doctors may remember That our Religion is grounded onely upon the Holy Scriptures of God 3. And therefore though the said Doctors brought against us Reformed Writers and Fathers never so many for these Matters as they can bring not one of Credit and Age. Yet will we never subscribe unto them having once subscribed to the certain Truth of God revealed unto us in his holy perfect and written word 4. By which all Sentences Opinions and Writings of Men whatsoever must be examined §. Notwithstanding some Errors of the Ancient Fathers we Reformed esteem them as Gods Saints and holy Men and holy Fathers 1. THe Ancient Fathers holding the Ground and Foundation of Doctrine did oftentimes build thereon Stubble and Straw partly by some Superstitious Opinions which themselves conceived of such Inventions and partly by the sway and violence of Custome whereby they were carried to a liking of those Things which they saw commended and practised by others 2. And yet God forbid that because of some Errors which they held we Reformed
Nor Chrysostom Nor Ammianus Nor the Tripartite Historie Nor Dantasus Nor Bede Nor Orosius So Carerius The Charter or Edict of Constantines Donation is a base and improbable Fiction 1. ALL that which is proved by Reformed Writers of the supposed Leprosie Persecution and Baptism of Constantine by Pope Sylvester are undoubted Demonstrations of the Forgerie of this Edict of Donation 2. For in the Charter are all these Not onely related as certain truths but they are made the very ground and occasion why Constantine made this Charter 3. Seeing then there is neither truth nor reality in the foundation Certainly there is no truth at all in the Charter it self 4. But leaving these we will propose a few other Considerations in this Cause 1. In this Edict is mentioned the See of Constantinople as one of the Patriarchal Sees Whereas neither it had Patriarchal Dignitie before the Second General Council that is more then fiftie years after the Donation is supposed to be made Nor was there at that time so much as the name of Constantinople For this City was then called Byzantium And divers years after when Constantine had much enlarged it and made it as Socrates saith Parem aequalem Romae equal to Rome choosing it for the Imperial Seat It was then first called by his Name Constantinople And this was done as Baronius himself acknowledgeth a little after the Nicene Council was ended But as Sigonius more truely teacheth five years after that Nicene Council when Gallicanus and Symachus were Consuls So very stupid was the forgerer that to gain to the Pope to the See of Rome principality over Constantinople he makes Constantine write of that City which was not no nor the name of it so much as extant in the World at that time 2. Had Constantine given principality to the Roman See above all Churches in the World as the Charter saith he did What folly was it in John Bishop of Constantinople in Cyriacus and in others to strive for that Preheminence What meant Boniface the third that he would never shew this Charter and grant of principalitie made by Constantine Why did he use so much intreaty and means to Phocas a murtherer that the Church of Rome might be called the first of all Churches when the same was long almost 300. years before given by a fair Charter to the Roman See by Constantine so Worthy and Renowned an Emperour 3. In this Edict Constantine is made solemnly to give unto Pope Sylvester the Lateran Palace whereas not only Sigonius witnesseth that this was given long before to Pope Meltiades Augustale Palatium in Later ano impertiit Constantine gave to Meltiades the Lateran Palace but Baronius and Binnius avouch the same for a certainty and say that no wise body will doubt thereof Those Augustissimae Lateranenses Aedes say they That most princely Palace of the Lateran was given by the same Constantine to Pope Miltiades the Predecessor of Sylvester and to his Successors and that in the Seventh year of Constantine which was twelve years before he was either Baptized or made this Charter of Donation Is not this now a piece of great munificence in the Emperour to give that which it is not his own to give or to give that to Sylvester which many years before that gift was Sylvesters own and his Successours for ever 4. To the above said considerations let us add the Testimony of their great Cardinal Baronius to whom accords Gretser who hath written an Apologie for him in this very point He by many Reasons and at large proves the Edict to be Commentitium prorsusque falsum A meer Figment and Forgerie And as Gretser saith Commentis accensendum docuit He hath taught that it is a Counterfeit One Reason is That this Edict was not in the Ancient Acts of Sylvester but was by forgerie inserted into them The time when this was done he defines to have been after the 1000 year of Christ The Parties by whom this forged Edict was made and published he also declares It was fained by some Grecian under the name of Eusebius and set forth by Theodorus Balsamon whereas a nullo Graecorum hactenus in lucem editum until then no Grecian had published it And from the Grecians it came to the Latins and Western Church Leo the 9. being the first Pope who makes mention thereof Thus the Cardinal By whose acknowledgment it may be seen what truth there is in the Popes specially in Pope Leo who in his Decretal Epistle most solemnly commends this Edict for an Ancient and undoubted Evidence Such as he knew by sight and sense to be the true deed of Constantine Which yet their great Cardinal after long sifting of Monuments and Records testifieth to be a Forgerie and that of the Grecians First of all devised as he saith about 700. years and published 800. years after the Death of Constantine Fraud Of the Fraud and Imposture of the Popes and of the Church of Rome in regard of pretended Revelations both by Dreams and by Extraordinary Visions and Apparitions of the Dead 1. THe Pope and the Church of Rome make use of these pretended Revelations to lead the poor People by the Nose and to make him believe some Doctrines which the word of God doth condemn 2. So was it said that some were Appeared who had said That to come out of Purgatory such and such things were to be done so Sing Masses and by some certain kind of persons that by such forged Impostures the Fable of Purgatory should be established 3. Likewise was it said that some were Appeared who said That they had seen some Tormented in Hell Fire who told them That they were there for sundry Sinnes but particularly for having Stolne a Chalice from the Convent of the Benedictine Monks 4. Others who being Tormented did say That it was because they had Taken and Appropriated to themselves some Possessions belonging to the Church 5. Besides others said That some certain Priests godly persons singing Masse did see an Angel which did accompany them 6. In the Times of the deepest ignorance there was nothing more common then the speech of such Visions and Apparitions either Imaginaries and Phantastical or proceeding from the Devil to abuse the poor people and to establish his False Doctrine Fraud It is a Fraud and a meere Cavillation for the Refutation of the Falshood of a Religion and also for the Proofe of the Truth of a Religion to demand only Formal Places of Holy Scripture contained word by word in it Which Fraud and Cavillation is used by many Doctors of the Church of Rome disputing with the Reformed but wrongfully BEcause if all that which is not opposed by Formal Texts cannot be said to be grounded in the Word of God Then there are none so abominable Heresies nor any so monstrous opinion which may not boast although wrongfully to have the word of God for its Ground So for Example 1. The Heretick Arrians could say
discoursing of the Waldenses a People for substance of the Protestants Religion saith in these termes They are in all the Cities of Lombardy and of Provence No Sect hath continued so long Some say it hath been since Pope Sylvesters time Some since the Apostles These Waldenses believe all Articles concerning God but they hate the Church of Rome 3. So that the Reformed have had a Church and their Religion before Luther A Refutation of this shift of the Jesuites That because Luther was in Error in Regard of his doctrine of Consubstantiation Therefore his Refutations of their Opinions and Doctrines is not to be considerable 1. THis is a strange shift indeed for is it not a miserable perverseness in the Jesuites and others Popish Doctors and Writers that being not able to maintain their own Heresies against Luther they will think to escape in the Judgement of Men from being condemned because Luther himself in one point of Doctrine erred 2. May no man convince Error but such an one as is free from Error at all Himself 3. The Scriptures are left unto us to be our Rule of Truth by them must all Doctrine be squared and directed they sit in the highest Seat of Judgement to give Sentence in every Cause 4. With Them did Luther cut down the Popish Errors 5. But one Error of Luther cannot serve to excuse infinite Errors in the Popish Church The Reformed of England France Holland c. do not Believe whatsoever the late Writers have said 1. VVE are not so addicted in these Reformed Churches as to Believe whatsoever the late Writers have said 2. We are no more partial unto them in this behalf then we are unto the Ancient Fathers 3. Our Religion and Faith hangeth not upon the sayings of Men be they old or young but onely upon the Canonical Scriptures of God 4. And if they be against us so long as Scripture is for us our Cause is good and we will not be ashamed thereof 5. From hence it followeth That therefore most false is it that the Papists say That our Divity resteth upon these late Writers and young Fathers whom the Jesuites and other Popish Doctors do so scornfully compare with the Old Fathers 6. We use not to alledge for proofs authentical of any Doctrine and as the Rule of our Faith Calvin Bucer or others 7. But our Traditive and Use is this Thus saith the Lord Thus say the Prophets Thus say the Apostles Thus the Evangelists Thus it is written in the Scriptures Thus we read in some Book of the Old or of the New Testament Again If Luther or any other Learned Man among the Protestants or of the Reformed in the Churches above mentioned have either Interpreted the Scripture in somthing amiss or have doubted of some one Book of Scripture whereof doubt also hath been made of old in the Church of Christ we are not to defend their Expositions or to approve their Judgement Again The particular Opinions of Luther and Lutherans are not to be objected by the Papists against the Reformation of England France the United Provinces c. 1. FOr these Reformed Churches are not bound to justifie all Luthers sayings and the Lutherans and their private Opinions no more then the Papists will be content to avouch whatsoever hath been spoken or published by any one or other famous man of their Sect. 2. Which thing if they will take upon them to perform then let them profess it or else they offer us the more injury that object still against us a saying which was never either uttered or allowed by us 3. This might suffice men of indifferent Reason § Of Luthers Error concerning the Bodily Presence in the Sacrament LVther retained this Error of his old leaven wherewith in time of Papistry his Judgement was corrupted § Another Answer of the Reformed to the Objection made by the Jesuites against Luther in regard of his Error of Consubstantiation That therefore his Refutation of their Doctrine is not to be considerable THe Reformed again return this answer to that Objection 1. That although Luther therein somthing swarved from the Truth yet that he might bring in other Causes assured thereof out of the Word of God reject the Opinions of such as dissent from the same word 2. Otherwise no Man in Defence of Gods Truth may challenge or bid Defiance to the Adversaries thereof seeing they have no Priviledge or Charter granted to them but that themselves also may be deceived § Again Concerning Luther 1. LVther say the Reformed was an excellent Man and a worthy servant of Christ 2. Whose Ministery especially it pleased God to use in revealing to these Times the Son of Perdition who fitteth in the Temple of God and advanceth himself above God 3. Yet Luther was a Man 4. And therefore no marvel if he were not exempted altogether as from Ignorance so also from Infirmities § Concerning the Contention between Luther and Zuinglius about the Sacrament of the Lords Supper 1. 1. THis Contention and Dissention was a very hard one hotly debated in many Books 2. And the same hath continued since to the great hinderance of the Gospel and offence of many 3. In which contrary Writings and Discourses are found oftentimes harder speeches of either against other then were to be wished 4. Now do come in the Popish Writers like crafty enemies and gathering a heap of such speeches out of sundry of their Books do insert the same in their Books to make their Readers acquainted therewith that seeing such earnest contention among the chiefest Professors of the Gospel they may be further withdrawn in alienation of mind from the love and liking thereof 2. Examination of that matter 1. THose speeches of either against other which are harder oftentimes then were to be wished are yet such as the godly Servants of the Lord in contention about the Truth somtimes are moved to utter against their Brethren 1. S. Paul openly and sharply reprehended S. Peter to his face whereat wicked Porphyrie catched a like occasion to rail at Christian Religion long since as our Adversaries do at these dayes 2. What a violent and troublesome contention was there between Theophilus of Alexandria and good Chrysostome of Constantinople 3. Who knoweth not how sharply Cyrillus a learned and wise Bishop of Alexandria hath written against Theodoretus a good and Catholick Bishop in a Controversie touching the Catholique Faith both Bishops both Catholiques both Learned both Godly both Excellent Pillars of the Church And yet he that readeth both their Writings would think that both were dangerous Enemies of the Church and of the Faith of Christ and to be avoided of all Christians 2. So in the Books of Luther and of Zuinglius and of those that maintain either part appeareth we grant great sharpness and bitterness of Dissention who all notwithstanding if we set the heat of Dissention aside were as godly as learned as zealous Christians as the World had any The Reformed
Religion and Church are not Heretical 1. WHat if the Romish Church condemned Luther Shall we say therefore that Luther is an Heretick 2. The Church of Jerusalem condemned Christ and Him and his they would have denyed to be the true Church but for all their Denial it was not less the true Church 3. The Accusation of being Heretical nothing touches our Reformed Religion and Church For by Gods Grace we are far from all kinde of Heresie and hold no other Doctrine then that which the Prophets and the Apostles and Jesus Christ himself have taught us and which is plainly contained in the Books of Canonical Scripture § The Jesuites maintain the contrary but by a False Ground which is one of their great slights Jesuites 1. THe Doctrine of the Jesuites is That for not to be an Heretick one must have Communion with the Church of Rome and acknowledge the Pope to be Vicar of Christ and Successor of S. Peter in the Quality of Head and Monarch of the Church which Church of Rome they presuppose to be the Catholique Church Answer of the Reformed 1. THe Reformed do answer to that Doctrine of the Jesuites That it must first appear that the Now Church of Rome is the Catholique Church before he that is separated from his Communion can be justly convicted of Heresie which is also to be said concerning the Pope It must appear that he is S. Peters Successor and the Head and Monarch of the Church 2. Which the Jesuites shall never be able to do and yet never have done for since the time that the Ancient Fathers of the Church did call the Church of Rome Catholick Church the course of that Church is turned and the See of Rome hath declined and degenerated from her sincere Faith to detestable falshood 3. Let the Jesuites restore unto us the old Church of Rome and we will never separate our selves from her Communion 4. But of that Church they have nothing left but the Walls and old Rubbish 5. And yet still they brag of the Name of the Catholique Church Exception of the Jesuites SO indeed Calvin answereth say the Jesuites But it shall not serve the Reformeds turn for Optatus say they proveth himself to be in the Catholique Church because he joyned himself to S. Peters Chair Answer of the Reformed to that Exception ANd what do the Jesuites call S. Peters Chair 1. Is it the external Seat or the Succession of the Bishops They shall never prove it 2. And the contrary say the Reformed we can easily object out of Optatus himself Optatus calleth Syricus Bishop of Rome his Fellow and the companion of other Bishops who held a sound and Catholique Judgement with all those Syricus agreed in one Society and Fellowship By their Letters sent one to another as Witnesses of their consenting in Doctrine and lawful Ordination Optatus then proveth that he was a Catholique because he kept the Catholique confession and conjunction with Syricius and with others Bishops 2. Secondly the Reformed do answer that Optatus Argument was good against the Donatists who did separate themselves from the Communion of the Catholique Church while they consented not with these Churches where the Doctrine of the Apostles and a lawful Ordination of Bishops did ever flourish 3. But that is nothing to us Reformed and specially to the Reformed of the Church of England It is not a sound Argument to convince the Reformed of Schisme because they have separated themselves from the Church of Rome The Jesuites do maintain the contrary 1. ANd in that regard thinking to touch the Reformed who have separated themselves from the Church of Rome they produce the Authority of Optatus who did reprove the Separation of the Donatists and did argue them to be Schismatical because they had separated from the communion of the Catholique Church Answer to the Jesuites and Refutation of their Argument 1. A Very good Argument indeed and Augustine observed the same course and it was a good Argument That the communion of the Church should be objected to the Schismatical Donatists which seditiously without cause separated themselves from the Church 2. But this Argument employed by Optatus against the Donatists makes nothing against the Reformed who have separated Themselves from the Church of Rome For the said Reformed deny the Church of Rome to be the Catholique Church 3. And therefore the Jesuites cannot by this Argument of Optatus convince us of Schisme although Optatus might thereby confute the Donatists 4. It must first appear that the Church of Rome be the Catholique Church otherwise the Reformed cannot be convicted of Schisme 5. In the time of Optatus the Church of Rome was the Preserver of Religion the Maintainer of the True Faith and she shined like a Star in the sight of all other Churches 6. No marvel then if the most holy Fathers esteemed much and reverenced this Church and urged the Schismaticks with the example of it and also the Hereticks of their time as a great prejudice unto them 7. But since that time the course of that Church is turned and the See of Rome hath declined and degenerated from her sincere Faith to detestable Falshood 8. Let the Papists as we have said before restore us the old Church of Rome and we will never separate our selves from Her 9. But of that old Church of Rome they have nothing left but the Walls and old Rubbish 10. And yet they still brag of the Name of the Catholique Church Of the Differences in Religion between the Calvinists and the Lutherans 1. THe Jars and Dissentions between the Lutherans and Calvinists are neither many nor so material as to shake or touch the Foundation easily reconcileable if men of any moderation had them in handling 2. The bitter speeches of Luther none can excuse and much less the virulent Pamphlets and Proscriptions of some of his Disciples who in a preposterous imitation of his Zeal are little less then furious But the consequence of Opinions must not be measured by the Passions or Outrages of opiniate men Two Brothers in their choler may renounce each other and disclaim their amity yet that heat cannot dissolve their inward and essential Relation 3. The Divisions of the Lutherans and Calvinists namely of the moderate of either side are rather in formes and phrases of Speech then in substance of Doctrine 4. The first and main Controversie between them is that about Consubstantiation which after occasioned that other of Ubiquity 5. In both these Controversies the main Truth on both sides is out of Controversie That Christ is really and truly exhibited to each faithful Communicant and that in his whole person he is every where The doubt is only in the manner how he is in the Symboles and how in Heaven and Earth which being no part of Faith but a curious nicity inscrutable to the Wit of Man we should all here believe where we cannot understand and not fall a quarrelling about that which we cannot