reasonable subjection Therfore besids many other works in the yeare 1520. Luther writ a book called Praeludium captivitatis Babilonicae wherin he maintayned that Christians are not subject to human Lawes at least in foro Conscintiae Christ hauing made them all equall by the Gospell but that the Pope Prelates and Princes had tyranically usurped a Iurisdiction ouer them and kept them for many years in gross ignorance and wors then in a Babylonian captivity therfore that God had sent him to reforme these abuses and restore vnto all oppressed people the Christian liberty which they had received in Baptisme and by his reformation they might enjoy so fully as to judg and govern all omnia judicemus regamus Then he published his doctrin of justification by only faith so resolutly that he doubted not to preach though mens words be the greatest blasphemies and their works the most damnable villâ—nies If they haue as much confidence to belieue without doubt as impudence to act without scruple they may be sure that God hath receiued them into his fauor and cannot be damned unless they doubt of their saluation This abominable presumption Luther grounded upon the infinitness of Christs merits as if forsooth our Sauiour had suffered to the end we might not only be happy in heauen but by his passion hah waranted our wickedness upon earth grossly mistaking and confounding the sufficiency of Christs merits with the sufficiency of their application none can deny but that the least drop of our Sauiours Bloud is sufficient to redeeme millions of worlds because it is of infinite value but all Catholicks euer held that though his Bloud and merits be infinitly sufficient in themselues yet are they not sufficiently applyed to sinners unless they concurr to their own reconciliation and justification not only by faith but by good works Sacraments and other meanes which God hath appointed for that purpose Yet Luther pretended that faith alone is a sufficient application of Christs merits and that men needed not mortify their bodys nor endeavour to secure their salvation by good works thinking it a diminution of our Redeemers glory and a disrespect to his person that with our free will we should cooperat with his passion and help our selues and vpon this ground do Protestants raise all their batteries against Indulgences Purgatory Pilgrimages praying to Saints Confession of sins Penance Satisfaction Merit austerity of Monastical life Works of supererogation c. A reformation so indulgent to liberty and sensuality could not want Proselits and in a short tyme appeared the effects therof the Peasants of Germany rebelled against their Princes and Lords in defence of that Euangelical liberty which Luther had preached and in the space of one summer were on both sides a hundred thousand men slain Some Princes to make themselues considerable by heading the multituds which ran to Luther professed his Religion and protected his person and he layd for the foundation of his reformation the ensuing principles SVBSECT I. The fundamentall principles of Protestancy THe first principle and foundation of Luthers and of all Protestant reformations is a supposition that the whole visible Church fell from that primitiue pure doctrin and true meaning of Scripture which Christ our Sauior and the Apostles had planted and the first Christians had professed All râ—formed Churches do and must agree in this supposition the very name of a Doctrinal reformation implies a change and decay of doctrin though they disagree in the tyme and other circumstances of the change Untill Luther had conferred with the Devill he durst not vent this principle he appealed indeed from the Pope to a generall Councell and from a generall Councell when he perceiued one was summon'd to the Church diffusiue but after his conference with Satan he ventured to say Lay aside all the armes of orthodox antiquity Schooles of Diuinity authority of Councells and Popes consent of so many ages and all Christian People we receiue nothing but Scripture yet so that we must haue the certain authority to interpret the same Our interpretation is the sence of the holy Ghost that which others bring though they bee great though many proceedeth from the spirit of Sathan and from a distracted mind The reasons why Luther and all Protestants run this desperat course is because hauing examined and found that orthodox antiquity was Roman Catholik and not one Church parish or person ever Protestant before 1517. they are inforced to maintain by mis-interpreting Scripture that the whole visible Church erred and that God sent them to reform it The second principle of Protestancy is to admit of no rule of faith but only Scripture of no other infallible Judg of the letter or sence of Scripture or of any controversies in Religion but every particular Church and person interpreting Scripture according to their best endeavors and discretion This is expressly declared in the last mentioned words of Luther and inculcated by the Devill to him in his Conference and though few are willing to speake the same words yet is there not one Protestant in the world that doth not practise the very same doctrin and defend it when the matter is argued It necessarily followeth from the first principle Because if the whole visible Church fell from the pure faith and from Gods meaning of Scripture the belief tradition and testimony of that visible Church Councell and Fathers can be no true rule of faith nor themselves fit Iudges of Religion or of the sense of Scripture Therfore every privat Protestant must be his own Guide and Iudg in matters of saluation and Scripture For though Luther Calvin or any Protestant Congregation should pretend that their sense and interpretation of Scripture is that of the holy Ghost and the interpretation of others Diabolical yet no privat Protestant doth look even upon their own reformers or Churches as infallible in this or in any other particular but in as much as he Iudges it agreeth with Scripture and therfore every one that supposeth the fall of the Roman Catholik and visible Church and the fallibility of the Reformers and reformations as all Protestants do will deny that him-self hath any obligation to submit his Iudgment in controversies of Religion to any interpretation of Scripture or decision of doctrin besids his owne and so becoms his owne Guide and his owne Iudg of controversies and makes his owne interpretation of Scripture his only rule of faith The third principle of Protestancy is that men are justified by only faith and that he who hath once justifying faith can neither loose it nor be damned This tenet is cleerly professed as the doctrin of all Protestant Churches in the Catholik doctrin of the Church of England art 11. pag. 5â— seqq And pag. 54. The Papists are declared heretiks for holding that men are to remain doubtfull whether they shall be saved or not From these principles flow that infinit variety of Protestant Religions
by faith in Christ not by good works which they in no wise did affect We Catholicks do not pretend to have no evill-livers in our Church but this we may say with truth and I hope without offence that the difference between Protestant and Catholick â—â—â—ll-livers is that when Protestants sin they do nothing but what they are encouraged vnto by their justifying faith and the other principles of their Religion but when Catholicks sin they go against the known Tenets of their faith and profession Even our Pardons and Jndulgences how-ever so plenary are so far from encouraging vs to a continuance or relapse of sinning that they involue as a precedent and necessary condition a serious and sincere repentance of our former offences and afirm purpose and resolution of never returning to the like crimes and after all is don we pretend to no such vndoubted certainty of being pardon'd either by confession or Indulgences because we are not certain whether we do al as we ought as Protestants presume to have of their justification and saluation by only faith The nature of this justifying faith and of other Protestant principles considered We Catholicks have reason to thanck God that the prudence â—f the Prince and moderation of his Ministers is so extraordinary that it keeps the indiscreed zeal of a multitude so strangly principl'd if not as much with in the limits of Christianity and civility towards their fellow subjects as were to be wished yet so that the execution of the sanguinary and penal statuts is not altogeather so distructive as the Presbiterians and others endeavor Untill the generality of these Nations reflect vpon the impiety of the first Reformers and vpon their own mistakes in preferring the mad fancies of a few dissolute Friars concerning the nature of Christian faith before the constant Testimony and doctrin of the whole visible Church we cannot expect that they who govern so mistaken a multitude can make justice the rule of the publick Decrees which depend of the concurrence and acceptance of men whose greatest care is to promote Protestancy and persecute Popery SECT IX Protestants mistaken in the consistency of Christian faith humility Charity peace either in Church or state with their making Scripture as interpreted by privat persons or fallible Synods or fancied general Councells composed of all discenting Christian Churches the rule of faith and Iudg of Controversies in Religion How every Protestant is a Pope and how much also they are overseen in making the 39. Articles or the oath of Supremacy a distinctive sign of Loyalty to our Protestant Kings LVther Zuinglius Calvin Cranmer and all others that pretended to reform the doctrin of the Church of Rome seing they could not prove their new Religions or Reformations by testimonies from antiquity or by probability of Reason were inforc't to imitat the example of all Heretiks who as S. Austin says l. 1. de Trin. c. 3. endeavour to defend their falls and deceitfull opinions out of the Scriptures If on shall ask any Heretick saith that ancient Father Vincentius lyr l. 1. cons. Haer. c. 35. from whence do you prove from whence do you teach that I ought to forsake the vniuersal and ancient faith of the Catholik Church Presently he answereth scriptum est It is written and forthwith he prepareth a thousand testimonies a thousand examples a thousand authorities from the law from the Apostles from the Prophets This shift is so ordinary and notorious that Luther him-self postill Wittemberg in 2. con 8. Dom. post Trin. fol. 118. Dom. post Trin. fol. 118. affirmeth the sacred Scripture is the book of Heretiks because Heretiks are accustomed to appeale to that book neither did there arise at any time any heresy so pestiferous and so foolish which did not endeavor to hide it self under the vaile of Scripture And yet Luther Calvin Cranmer c. finding nothing to say for them-selves either in History or Fathers and seing Tradition so cleerly bent against them that they could not name as much as on Parish or person which ever professed their protestant doctrines they appeal'd from the word of God proposed by the visible and Catholick Church and Counâ—â—ls to their own Canon and Translations of Scripture and from that sense of Scripture which the Church and Councells had follow'd for 1500. years to that which their own privat spirit temporal interest or fallacious reason diâ—â—â—ted to them-selves and so did others that followed their examples making every privat Protestant or at least every reforâ—â—d Congregation Judg of Scripture Church Councells and Fathers In so much that Luther tom 2. Wittemberg cap. de Sacram. fol. 375. setteth down this rule for all Protestants to be directed 〈◊〉 The Governors of Churches and Pastors of Christ's sheep 〈◊〉 indeed power to teach but the sheep must judge whâ—â—â—er they propose the voice of Christ 〈◊〉 of strangers c. Wherfore let Popes Bishops Councells c. decree order enact what they please we shal not hinder but we who are Christ's sheep and heare his voice will judge whether they propose things true and agreable to the voice of our Pastor and they must yeeld to us and subscribe and obey our sentence and censure Calvin though contrary to Luthâ—â— in many other things yet in this doth agree as being the ground wherupon all protestant Reformations must rely in his lib. 4. Institut cap. 9. § 8. he says The definitions of Councels must be examined by Scripture and Scripture interpreted by his rules and Spirit The same is maintained by the Church of England as appears in the defence of the 39. Articles printed by authority 1633. wherin it is sayd pag. 103. Authority is given to the Church and to every member of sound judgment in the same to judg controversies of faith c. And this is not the privat opinion of our Church but also the judgment of our godly brethren in foreign Nations And by Mr. Bilson Bishop of Winchester in his true difference c. part 2. pag. 353. The people must be Discerners and Judges of that which is taught How inconsistent this doctrin is with Christian faith is evident by the pretended fallibility and fall of the visible Church which all Protestants do suppose and must maintain to make good the necessity and lawfullness of their own interpretations and Reformations For if the Roman Catholik and ever Visible Church may and from time to time hath erred as the Church of England declares in the 39. Articles no reformed Congregations whether Lutheran Presbiterian or Prelatick can have infallible certainty but that them-selves have fallen into as great errors as those which they have pretended to reform in the Roman Church And if they have not infallible certainty of the truth of their reformed doctrin they can not pretend to Christianity of faith that involves an assurance of truth which assurance is impossible if that the Church can be mistaken in it's proposall So that Christianity of faith including
as an essential requisit the vndoubted assurance of the truth of what is proposed by the Church as revealed by God and Protestancy necessarily supposing fallibility or possibility of error in that same Church and proposal Christian faith is ther by rendred impossible and the Protestant Doctrin demonstrated 〈◊〉 be inconsistent with the nature of Catholick Religion with the certainty of Divine faith and with the Authority of Christ's Church Neither is the Protestant doctrin in this particular less consistent with Christian charity and humility then with Catholick faith For what judgment can be more rash injurious and contrary to Christian charity then to assert that so many holy and learned Doctors as have bin and are confessed Papists and even the whole visible Church for the space at least of 1000. years could either ignorantly mistake or would wilfully forsake the true sence of God's word so cleerly shining in Scripture as every petty Protestant doth pretend or what is more repugnant 〈◊〉 Christian modesty and humility then that homely Doctors and half witted wits should preferr their own privat opinions in matters of faith before the common consent and belief of 〈◊〉 Fathers of the Church the Definitions of general Councels the Tradition and testimony of so many ages Jt is both a ridiculous and sad spectacle to see how every student of the University that hath learn'â— to conster 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 or to quibble or scribble some-what in Greek English or Latin takes vpon him to talk of Religion and to censure St. 〈◊〉 St. Austin St. Christom c. and contemn both ancient and modern Catholick Avthors preferring before the whole Church him-self and his Poâ—antick Tutors or Fellows of Oxford and Cambrige Collâ—gâ—s Nay the illiterat people even the women are grown to that height of spiritual pride an infallible 〈◊〉 of Heresy that they pitty our Popish ignorance and fancy they can 〈◊〉 with the Text of their English Bibles falsly translated and fondly interpreted the greatest Roman Divines So true is the saying of St. Hierom in Epist. ad Paulinum Scripture is the only art which all people teach before they have learn't The pratling woman the old doting man c. And therfore advers Lucifer bids men not flatter them-selves with quoting Scripture to confirm their opinions seing the Devill him-self made vse of God's word which consists more in the sense then in the letter How impossible is it to govern peaceably so pratling and presuming a Protestant multitude either in Church or state is too manifest by the last experiences in England wher the endeavours of reducing this Protestant arrogancy to some kind of reason was the occasion and object of the Rebellion King Charles I. and his Councel for attempting to make the inferiors subordinat to their superiors in doctrin and disciplin and the subjects obedient to the laws of the land were aspers'd as Papists and destroy'd as enemies to the Evangelical liberty of Protestancy and as subverters of the fundamental principles of the Reformation Popish rebellions happen because the Promotors therof fall from that fervor of their faith and devotion which they ought to practise but the English Protestant Rebellion was raised and continued by the most devout pure fervent and zealous sort of Protestants in persuance and maintenance of their Religion Other rebellions are commonly vnexpected chances springing from a sudain fury or feare of desperat people but the late Rebellion was and is to this day pretended by many to have bin a pious and sober proceeding the King's murther only excepted of the prudent and Religious men of the Nation assembl'd in Parliament and is so justifiable by the principles of Protestancy that he must be thought not only a wise but a fortunat King of England that can prevent or suppress the like revolution in his Reign so long as Protestancy doth reign with him The reason is as manifest as the experience and the cause as the effect For if a Common-wealth were so instituted that every privat person might pretend by his birth-right or Privilege to admit of no other Iudg or Interpreter of the laws but him-self or at least might lawfully and legaly appeale from all Courts of Judicature even from the highest which is the Parliament to his own privat Judgment what intollerable confusion would it breed what justice subordination peace propriety or prosperity could be expected in such a government The same laws and authority which ought to decide all differences would be the subject and occasion of perpetual quarrells This is the condition and constitution of Protestant Churches and States Every privat person is a supreme Iudg of Religion and sole Interpreter of Scripture he may appeale both from Soveraigns and Bishops from their temporal and Ecclesiastical laws to his own privat judgment or spirit and him-self must determin the difference and conclude whether the Decrees of Church and State be agreable to God's word that is to his own Interpretation therof which commonly is byassed by privat interest or some singular fancy of his own And though the Governors and Clergy of his Church and Country tell him he ought to suspend his judgment and submit the same to 〈◊〉 Parliament or to a general Councel not like that of Trent but to one composed of all Nations and Christian Congregations called by the joynt authorâ—â—y of all temporal Princes but in the mean time he must 〈◊〉 to the Decrees of the Church and state wherof he is a member when they inculcat this lesson vnto a zealous Protestant◠〈…〉 not so simple as to believe that they who read this 〈◊〉 speak as they think or that they believe any such general Councel is possible for that every 〈◊〉 knows temporal Princes will never agree about the President time place and other circumstances of such a Counceâ—â— and though they should and the Turck and other Infidels give way to such a sâ—spitious Assembly of Christians yet when they mâ—tâ— nothing could be resolu'd â—or want of their agrement in a 〈◊〉 of judging of controversies every sect â—â—icking to it 's own principles and proper sence of Scripture So thaâ— every Protestant vnderstands the design of this doctrin to be but a fetch of their own Clergy to make it-self in the mean time solâ— Judg of Religion contrary to the principles and privileges of Protestancy and therfore laugh at the folly of such a proposal and pretext We Roman Catholicks need no such Devices nor delays we are content to submit to such general Councels as may be had our Popes and Councels define according to the tradition and sense of Scripture of the true Church our Censures must suppose known causes and crimes and if with all these cautions the Pop's spiritual jurisdiction is thought to be so dangerous to the soveraignty of Kings and peace of subjects least forsooth it might be indirectly applyed to temporal matters that all Protestants vpon that score renounce the Papal authority with how much more reason
vs as sacred Thus much have I thought good to remember that Volanus may receive answer from himself when he so often inforceth against vs the authority of learned men and the consent of the Church c. And truly Socinus doth defend his error concerning Christ with as many and as cleer texts of Scripture not vnderstood in the sense of the Roman Catholick Church as any point of Protestancy is maintained by other Protestants The Puritans now called Presbiterians vse the same way of arguing against the Prelatiks and with no less success then socinus against Volanus as may be seen in Cartwright in his second reply against episcopacy p. 1. pag. 484. And that it may appear saith he how justly we call this Canon of the Councell the first generall of Nice in the Canon touching the Metropolitan which the Prelatiks vrged in favor of Episcopacy vnto the tuch stone of the word of God let it be considered c. In the same Councell appeareth that to those chosen of the ministery vnmarried it was not lawfull to take any wife afterwards c. Paphnutius sheweth that not only this was before that Councell but was an ancient Tradition of the Church in which both him-felf and the whole Councell rested c. If the ancient Tradition of the Church can not authorise this neither can ancient custome authorise the other The Prelatick Clergy would fain hould Episcopacy by virtue of Tradition and of the authority of the Nicen Councell and yet would have Priests marry contrary to the same tradition and authority In like manner as the same Mr. Cartwright well observeth ibid. pag. 582. the Bishops of the Church of England would needs have the Nicen Councell be of sufficient authority to maintain Arch-Bishops but not the Pope wheras the on is as cleerly expressed as the other and no less necessary for the government of the Church If saith he an Arch-Bishop be necessary for calling a Provincial Councell when the Bishops are divided it is necessary there be also a Pope which may call a generall Councell when division is among the Arch-Bishops for when the Churches of one Province be divided from other as you ask me so I ask you who shall assemble them togeather who shall admonish them of their duties when they are assembled If you can find a way how this may be don without a Pope the way is also found wherby the Church is disburdned of the Archbishop When Prelaticks dispute with Presbiterians about Episcopacy and ceremonies c. they extoll the four first general Councells but when they dispute with Roman Catholicks about the vnmarried life of Priests the Pop's supremacy or any other point of Popery then they extenuate the authority of the same Councells and will admitt of no other rule of faith but Scripture So that a Prelatick Protestant against Presbiterians is a Papist and against Papists is a Presbiterian what he is or would be if both did argue against him at the same time is not well known to me nor as I suppose to him-self but if he admits of the two main pillars wherby protestancy is supported which are the pretended fall and fallibility of the visible Church and the arbitrary interpretation of Scripture he may be any thing he pleases and to speak more modestly of him then Modestinus of Calvinists he is in a faire way to be a baptised Iew Mahometan or Arian and can not miss that way if he will be guided by the Protestant principles and follow the track of the most learned of the reformation Both Luther and Calvin dislik't the word Trinity on sayd it sounded couldly the other barbarously and Luther by omitting in his Translation of the new Testament this Text of Scripture There-be three which give witness in heaven the Father the word and the holy Ghost and these three be one sheweth how little inclined he was to believe that sacred Mystery and by saying that his soule hated Homusion and that the Arians did very well to reject that new and profane word from the rules of faith he declareth how his Protestant rule and reformation doth direct men to heresy and to all kind of infidelity for there is not a more refined heresy then Scripture mis-interpreted and mis-applyed and Scripture may be as easily mis-interpreted and mis applyed against the Trinity or the second Person 's equality and consubstantiality as applied to any on point of Protestancy The Anti-Trinitarians of Poland Transilvania and Hungary think themselves as good Calvinists as any French Hugonots and better Protestants then English Prelaticks or German Lutherans because they not only agree with all reformed Churches in the Fundamentalls of Protestancy that is in supposing the Apostacy of the Catholick Church and in reforming it by privat authority and their own interpretation of Scripture but go a step further in the Reformation by denying the Trinity By the principles of Protestancy and the practise of the first Protestant Reformers it is left to the choyce and discretion of every particular Church and person what articles of Popery are fitt to be rejected by their privat interpretation of Scripture and indeed it is impossible for men not tyed to any rule but to their own fancies of Scripture to agree in the points of Popery what to reject or retain They who confine with the Turk's Dominions venture to deny the Trinity and the Divinity of Christ and laugh at their brethrens arguments against their impiety as deduced only from Tradition Councells and Fathers and call them old Roman raggs long since torn in pieces by the Protestants them-selves in other points of Protestancy c. Hi sunt vetusti panni quos vos laceratis in aliis fidei articulis c. lacerata jamdudum calceamenta Nullus Nemo H. 9. They are say they patcht showes worn out long agon but heer in England France c. where no neighboring Nations deny the Trinity or Incarnation Protestants make those Misteries fundamental articles of faith but in Transilvania and Hungary The principles of Protestancy are not kept in such awe as heer they make bold there to apply Scripture against any mysteries of Christianity Wherfore we must not admire that they as Mr. Hooker tells vs Eccles. Polâ—â— l. 4. pag. 183. Of the reformed Churches of Poland think the very belief of the Trinity to be a part of Anti-Christian corruption and that the Pop's triple Crown is a sensible mark wherby the world might know him to be that misticall Beast spoken of in the Revelation in no respect so much as in his doctrin of the Trinity Nor when they say that St. Athanasius his Symbol is the Symbol of Sathan and brag that Luther did scarce vntile the Babilonian Jower of Rome but that they do vtterly demolish it and dig vp its very foundation By which words they give cleerly to vnderstand that the Protestants of Germany England Denmark c. are but superficial Protestants
charity towards Catholicks is but forc't and feigned Whatsoever is required that a Church be truly Catholick is visible in the Roman It may judge and censure all other dissenting congregations without note of partiality or illegality Protestants have no credible nor legal witnesses to testify that their doctrin is the same which Christ and his Apostles taught Roman Catholicks have If all sects of Christians were admitted to general Councells and therin Judges of themselves and of their faith greater illegality it would be and greater partiality then that only Roman Catholicks be Judges of their cause Since the Apostles time one part of the Christians judged the other and the part that judged the other was that which obeyed and stuck to the Bishops of Rome as St. Peters Successors proved in every age vntill this present SECT XII HOw Gods veracity is denyed by Protestancy as also by the prelatick doctrin of fundamental and not fundamental articles of faith The belief of Gods veracity consists not in acknowledging that whatsoever God sayd is true never any heretick denyed that and all hereticks deny Gods veracity but consists in believing that God will not color nor countenance falshood with supernatural and evident signes of truth Protestants give less credit and obedience to Gods Ministers and Orders declared by the Church though qualified with vndeniable signes of Gods truth then they do to a Constable Catchpol or any other the meanest officers of a Court or Commonwealth though their warrants or badges may be more easily counterfeited then the miracles or signes of the Roman Catholick Church They will not believe God speaks or commands by the Roman Catholick Church though it hath the supernatural signes of his trust and sheweth his great seal Miracles but they believe that the King speaks and commands by any Minister of state or inferiour Magistrat No Ministers of judicature or officers of war have so authentick marks of the Kings authority to command the subjects and to end Suits of law as the Roman Catholick Church hath of Gods authority to instruct mankind and determin controversies of faith As it is rebellion to contemn the Kings authority represented by the authentick badges therof in his Ministers so is it heresy to contemn Gods authority represented in the Roman Catholick Church by supernatural signes as miracles sanctity Conversion of nations c. Gods veracity might be lawfully questioned if it were lawfull to judge that he permits the Roman Catholick Church to err in any point of faith whatsoever Proved by a similitude of my Lord Chancelor delivering the Kings mind to the Parliament in his Majesties own hearing and presence Veracity is a vertue inclining to speak truth not only when the person speaks but when any other speaks by his commission for then the person that employes an other to speak is bound by virtue of his own veracity to endeavour to the vttermost of his power that his Minister or Messenger vtter nothing but truth and this is to be vnderstood not only in matters of great but also of small importance Protestants make their own conveniency not Gods veracity the motive of their faith and measure therby which articles are fundamental which not The most fundamental article or the foundation of faith is to believe that God can not permit his Church to err even in not fundamentals A Demonstration ad hominem against the Protestant doctrin of the Churches fallibility in not fundamentalls SECT XIII THe same further demonstrated as also that neither the Protestant faith nor that of the Sure footing in Christianity is christian belief Not the matter believed but the motive and manner of believing makes our belief Christian. Protestants and the Author of the Sure footing believe not any thing in matters of faith which they do not imagin to be evident in it self or evident to them that it is revealed They agree in making cleer or self evidence the rule of faith but vary in the application of that rule the Author of the Sure footing applies it to all or most of the Roman Catholick Tenets Protestants to few The doctrin of the Sure footing can not be excused by the opinion of some Schoolmen that say an act of faith is possible and consistent with evidence of the revelation Christian faith must have a mixture of obscurity Mr. Robert Boyles expression that faith and twilight agree in this property that a mixture of darknes is requisit to both for that with too refulgent light the one vanisheth into knowledge as the other into day is not only witty but agreable to the sense of the ancient Fathers and to Scripture Hebr. 11. To believe is to trust the person believed and take his word for the truth as you doe a mans word or bill for mony Gods worth and veracity being infinit we ought not to admit of any doubt in matters of faith our assurance of faith must not be grounded vpon evidence either of the object or of the revelation but vpon an impossibility that God should by evident signes oblige mankind to believe that he revealed the mysteries of Christianity and yet not reveale them or permit the Church to deceive us God were not omnipotent did he permit the Church to err in any matter of faith though not fundamental because according to the proportion of ones inclination to any thing is the application of his power to effect the same and Gods inclination to truth even in not fundamentalls being infinit he must be infinitly concerned and applied to preserve the Church from falshood in the least articles as well as in fundamentalls The different manner of believing God and men Wee could not believe God if it were evident to us he spoke what we assent vnto Wherin doth consist the guilt of heresy Declared by that of rebellion The absurdity of the privat spirit and of all other Protestant pretexts against the publick testimony and authority of the Roman Catholick Church SECT XIV PIety and policy mistaken in making prelatick Protestancy the legal Religion of the state and in continuing the Sanguinary and penal statuts against the Roman Catholick faith It was want of Christian piety in Q. Elizabeth to introduce the Protestant Religion but not want of human policy because she had no title to the Crown but by Protestancy The title of the Stevards is vnquestionable and therfore they need not the Support of Protestancy How dangerous and damnable a thing it is to make the temporal laws of the land the rule of faith the Protestant prelatick Religion hath no better The Principles and priviledges of Protestancy being inconsistent with Soveraignty and government every Protestant Commonwealth found it necessary to mold and moderat those principles and priviledges by human lawes according to the customs and constitutions of every Kingdom and therfore Episcopacy without which our Parliaments could not be legal was here in England continued with prelatick Protestancy though contrary to the Tenets of Protestancy and to
their own Canon and sense of Scripture and of the falshood of the Canon and sense of Scripture of the Church of England as there is for the English Church to make it self judg of the falshood of the Canon and sense of the Church of Rome As for the authority which the Prelatick religion receives from the laws of the land that gives but little advantage seing the Roman Catholick doctrin hath bin confirmed by the temporal laws of every Kingdom Country and Citty besor and at the tyme that Protestancy succeeded and prevailed and yet that legality was not valued by the Reformers The 35. Article is to authorise some Puritan homilies as the 2. wherin the danger of idolatry in Popery is much insisted vpon as if Christians could easily mistake Images for Idols or Saints for Gods Jews and Hereticks have often endeavoured to confound the one with the other Catholicks never The ancient Fathers as also the second Councel of Nice have long since declared the Protestant Doctrin against Images to be heresy and the Councel of Trent confirms the same decree of Nice and demonstrats how far that the Catholick doctrin of worshiping Images is from any danger of Idolatry The words of the Councel sess 25. are The Images of Christ of the Virgin Mother of God and of other Saints are to be had and retained especialy in Churches and that due honour is to be imparted vnto them not for that any Divinity is to be believed to be in them or vertue for which they are to be worshipt or that any thing is to be begg'd of them or that hope is to be put in them as in tyms past the Pagans did who put their trust in Idols but because the honour which is exhibited to them is referr'd to the first pattern which they resemble So that by the Images which we kiss and before which we vncover our heads and kneele we adore Christ and his Saints whose likness they beare we reverence that which is ratified by the Decrees of Councels especialy of the second of Nice against the impugners of Images In the 36. they make it an Article of Religion that their new form of ordaining Priests and Bishops is valid and containeth all things necessary but since his Majesty's happy restauration they have judged the contrary and therfore thought necessary to add thervnto the words Priest and Bishop Yet this wil not serve their turn for before they can have a true Clergy they must change the Caracter of the Ordainers as wel as the form of ordination a valid form of ordination pronounced by a Minister not validly ordained gives no more caracter then if it had continued invalid and never bin altered The present Protestant Bishops who changed the form of their own Ordination vpon their Adversaries objections of the invalidity therof might as wel submit to be ordained by Catholick Bishops as alow by altering the from after so long a tyme and dispute that it was not sufficient to make themselves and their Predecessours Priests or Bishops In their 37. Article they give a spiritual supremacy to the temporal Soveraign But because the world laught at that vanity and at the statuts 1. 8. Eliz. 1. Wherin is declared that the English Soveraignty is so spiritual as that it may give to any person whatsoever whether man or woman lay or ecclesiastick power and authority to exercise any spiritual function and consecrat Priests and Bishops they would fain make vs now believe that they did not attribut to the Queen and her Successours any power of ministring God's word or the Sacraments notwithstanding that the aforesaid Statuts yet in force certify the contrary And indeed if none can give what himself hath not seing the Kings of England can give power and authority to any person watsoever to consecrat Priests and Bishops and to exercise all kind of spiritual ministery and jurisdiction concerning God's word and Sacraments this power and ministery cannot be denyed to be inherant in themselves In the 38. and 39. articles they endeavour to supress some errors of the Anabaptists which necessarily follow from the foundation and principles of Protestancy for if it be lawfull to deprive men of a spiritual authority and jurisdiction wherof they are in present possession and which their Predecessours had peaceably enjoy'd tyme out of memory the consequence of the lawfulness to deprive men of their temporal jurisdiction Dominions riches and goods is evident by a parity of reason for if peaceable and present possession confirm'd by a prescription of many ages be not sufficient to ground right for the Roman Bishop and Clergy to govern souls and to enjoy the Church livings ther is no temporal Prince or person can be secure or have a right to govern subjects or possess his Dominions So that by the same warrant wherby Prelatick Protestants have taken from the Pope and Roman Clergy their spiritual jurisdiction and temporalities the Anabaptists and all others may evidently demonstrat that all goods are common and no one person can pretend right to Superiority or any thing he doth possess SECT VI. Of the effects which these 39. Articles of Prelatick Protestancy immediatly produced in England and may produce at any tyme in every state wher such principles are made legal and how the Roman Catholick Religion was restored by Act of Parliament of Queen Mary AFter that Prelatick Protestancy had not only bin permitted but established by Parliament in England ensued the destruction of many thousand innocent people as also of the Protector Seamor and K. Eduard 6. togeather with the exclusion of Q. Mary and others the lawful Heires of the Crown and the in trusion of the Lady Jane Grey and in her of Dudly's son and family vnto the Royal throne These were effects of Protestancy not events of fortunc they were designs driven and directed by the principles of the Reformation the like wherof any politick and popular subject may compass as wel as Dudly witness our late long Parliament and Oliver Cromwel's proceedings Though K. Edward 6. was but a Child and his vncle the Protector no great Polititian yet they had a grave and wise Councel but against the liberty and latitude which men are allow'd by the principles of Protestancy no conduct can prevail nor government be safe as appeareth in many examples and in our late Soueraign's Reign and death Jt's in vain to make particular articles of Religion or temporal Statuts if there be a general principle admitted as if it were the word of God wherby both are rendred vnsignificant One of the general principles and indeed the foundation of Prelatick Protestancy is that it is lawful for privat men and subjects such were all the first Protestant Reformers to despise and depose their spiritual Superiours by their own arbitrary interpretations and applications of Scripture notwithstanding the peaceable possession immemorial prescription legality and exercise of their sayd Superiour's authority and jurisdiction From hence it
had made or don by any person or persons in or about any consecration confirmation or investing of any person or Persons elected to the office or dignity of Archbishops or Bishops by vertue of the Queens letters patents or Commission since the beginning of her Reign So that to know whether D. r Parker and his Camerades were true Bishops none must have examined whether they had bin consecrated by other Bishops but only whether the person or persons that were the Consecrators whether lay men or Ecclesiastick it matter'd not performed that ceremony by virtue of the Queens letters patents or commission If they could shew her great seal they might vse what matter and form they pleased for by the Act 1. 8. Eliz. there was given to the Queens Highness her Heires c. full power and authority by letters patents vnder the great seal of England from tyme to tyme to assign name and authorise such person or persons as she and they shal thinck meet and convenient any lay man or woman would serve turn to exercise use enioy and execute vnder her Highness all manner of jurisdictions Priviledges preheminences and authorities in any wise touching or concerning any spiritual or ecclesiastical power or jurisdiction within this Realm or any other her Majesties Dominions or Countrys Now priesthood being nothing but a spiritual power to Consecrat Christ's Body and Bloud and forgive sins and Episcopacy including besids the same a spiritual power to consecrat and ordain other Priests and Bishops who can doubt but that by these words and Statut the Queen might and her Successours may by their sole letters patents and great seal make any lay man whether Carter or Catchpole a Protestant Bishop or Priest seing therby he receiveth ful power to exercise vse execute c. all manner of jurisdictions preheminencies and authorities in any wise touching or concerning any spiritual or ecclesiastical power c. And because ther might remain no ambiguity or scruple of Parker and the first Protestant Bishops valid and legal Consecration the same Statut 8. Elizabeth 1. assures us that the Queen in her letters patents for that purpose directed to any Archbishop Bishops Or Others mark the word Others for the confirming investing and consecrating of any person elected to the Office or dignity of any Archbishop or Bishop hath not only vsed such words and sentences as were accustomed to be vsed by the late King Henry and King Edward her Majesties Father and Brother in their like letters patents made for such causes but also hath vsed divers other general words and sentences wherby her Majestie by her supreme power and authority hath dispensed with all causes or doubts of any inperfection or disability that can or may in any wise be objected against the same as by her Majesties sayd letters patents remaining on record more plainly wil appeare Now Mr. Bramhal the late Primat would fain make the Parliament so sensless and his Readers so simple as to referr the words mentioning and comparing the records of the Queen and her Father and Brother's tyme in this Act to the Archbishop of Canterbury's Register and not to their Majesties letters patents wher as by the whole context and discourse it is evident that the Parliament's drift is to shew no such ceremonious solemnity as of late hath bin pretended and printed by Mr. Mason was necessary Had ther bin any such legal or formal Consecration at Lambeth as 50. years after was forged and foisted into the Archbishop's Register the Parliament 8. Eliz. 1. would have remitted us therunto named Lambeth and not insisted al-togeather vpon the Queen's dispensation for the validity and legality of her first Bishops Consecration and caracter Many ar the reasons lately printed and not like to be answered that persuade all prudent men who have not too great a passion for the Prelatick Clergy to believe that Mr. Mason's new found Register of Lambeth is forged 1. It was never produced nor mentioned by the first Bishops so much pressed by their Adversaries to shew some Register or any evidence for their Consecration 2. They were only desired to let the world know wher when and by whom they had bin made Bishops questions easily answered had they bin consecrated at Lambeth or any Register then extant when Dr. Harding Stapleton and others charged them with nulity and illegality of Episcopal caracter 3. It 's no more credible that such knowing and conscientious men as Stapleton Harding Fitzherbert c. then living in England and probably at London would question so publick and solemn an action then it is that a sober man would now cal in doubt King Charl's 2. coronation at Westminster or ask in print who set the Crown vpon his head pretending he neuer had bin crown'd And though Bishop Godwin and other Prelatick Writers abuse Dr. Harding Holiwood Fitzsimons c. for relating the meeting of the first Protestant Bishops with a design to be ordained at the Nagshead in Cheap-side yet all the world knows that albeit there could be no design to feign that story yet our Controversy with the Prelaticks is not whether their first Prelats were ordained there but whether they were ordained any wher We know Bishops might be as validly consecrated in a Tavern though not so decently as in a Church But t' is fit they also consider that if Dr. Parker and their first Bishops were so narrowly watch't by Mr. Neal and other Catholicks whom Primat Bramhal doth cal Spies that they could not be merry in a Tavern without their knowledg they could hardly perform so serious and solemn an Action in a Church as the first Consecration of a Protestant Archbishop without their observation it being a matter then so much sought after and controversed of so great curiosity in it self and of greatest concern to us the total credit and being of their new Reformation depending therupon And yet for aboue 50. years none of the Writers of either side Catholick or Protestant who mentioned all other particulars relating to the reformation writ or spoke a word of this solemnity at Lambeth The Puritans indeed upraided the Prelaticks with saying their Episcopal ordination in England had it's beginning and progress in a corner not in a Congregation but we can not imagin they could mistake the Archiepiscopal Chappel of Lambeth for a corner or deny that the great Assembly pretended to have had bin at Dr. Parker's Consecration deserved not to be caled a Congregation Queen Elizabeths Clergy thus created by her patents and Parliaments they endeavored to shew themselves gratful to her Majesty by making the people believe that Popery by the principles wherof she was vncapable of the Crown was Idolatry the Pope Antichrist c. And to that end corrupted Scriptures in their English Translations as shal be proved herafter And because their frauds and follies were discoverd by Catholick Priests the sanguinary and penal laws were enacted and executed
every day rather loose then gain ground and the generality of these Nations can not be wrought vpon either by fair or foul means to thinck wel of that Religion or to submit their Judgments and consciences to the direction of the Bishops and Prelatick ministery The reasons are obvious to such as are not obstinat 1. The incredibility of their pretented spiritual caracter and jurisdiction 2. The incoherency of their doctrin with the fundamental principles of Protestancy Their Episcopal caracter and jurisdiction is as incredible as King Henry 8. spiritual supremacy Queen Elizabeths legitimacy and the validity and solemnity of their first Bishops consecrations They have indeed of late endeavored to excuse the latness of their Masonian Registers discovery and to cleere them from the suspitions of forgery but so faintly and fraudulently that their vindication though pen'd and published by on of the ablest Prelats of their Church hath furnished their adversaries with so many new demonstrations against their Caracter that in steed of a reply the Protestant Bishops have resolued vpon a submission to the evidence of our arguments and changed the controverted and essential part of their forms of Ordination As they endeavored of late to vindicat their Registers from forgery so they long since explained the Queens supremacy but so contrary to the known laws of the land and cleer words of their Oaths both of supremacy and Episcopal homage that neither can bear their fond interpretations and if they could the Bishops would have nothing to shew for their pretended spiritual function and jurisdiction it being manifest they cannot deduce either of them by succession from any Apostolick Church or orthodox Councel and therfor must content them-selves with what they can buy from a lay soveraign and temporal Statuts or acknowledg the truth and confess ingeniously they are but lay-men and have no lawful authority to take vpon them a spiritual function and jurisdiction seing they have no Catholick Predecessours and degenerat from the first Protestant Reformers and are ashamed to claim with Presbiterians and Fanaticks the extravagancy of a privat spirit and extraordinary vocation The incoherency also of the Prelatick doctrin maks these nations averse from the Prelatick Church and Clergy â—n the 39. Articles of Religion they declare with Luther and the first Reformers that no visible sign or ceremony and by consequence no such thing as imposition of Episcopal hands was instituted by Christ or is the necessary matter of a Priest's and Bishop's ordination and yet now of late that visible sign and ceremony is held by them-selves to be so essential that without the same no caracter of Priesthood or Episcopacy is thought to be given to the party ordained and therfor they reordain such Presbiterian Ministers as did neglect or contemn imposition of Episcopal hands 2. They maintain in the same 39. Articles that the Roman Catholick Church hath falen into damnable errors and acknowledg that only such a fal can justify the Protestants separation or excuse them from sin and schism And yet when they are pressed with a consequence that necessarily follows out of this supposition to wit that if the Roman and visible Church had so erred Protestants can have no Christian faith nor certainty of the Scriptur's being God's word or of the Trinity and Incarnation c. which they received and retain vpon the sole Testimony of the Roman Catholick Church having in their own 39. Articles declared the Greeck Church Heretical for the doctrin of the Holy Ghost's procession and therfor it 's testimony even in other Articles is invalid and it's concurrence in those other Articles with the Roman Church is vnsignificant And yet they again contradict them-selves and confess that the Roman Catholick Church is infalible in all articles necessary for saluation 3. The same inconstancy and incoherency they shew in denying that doctrinal Traditions are the word of God or that Tradition it self is a sufficient ground of Divine belief and yet when they are demanded to shew a proof by cleer Scripture of the distinction between single Priesthood and Episcopacy v.g. then they maintain that traditional doctrin is God's word and the testimony of the Roman visisible Church a sufficient evidence therof Their wavering and inconsequent way of proceeding doth manifest to the world that as wel in this as in other particulars of Christian Religion nay even in declaring which are necessary or not necessary points of faith the Prelatick Clergy hath a greater regard to their own conveniency then to God's veracity and to the revenues of â—he Church then to the saluation of souls Otherwise why should they take our Roman Catholick word for Episcopacy and not for the Pop's supremacy for the letter but not for the sence of Scripture for not rebaptising or for receiving relaps'd penitents more then for Purgatory or Transubstantiation or for keeping Sonday and not praying to Saints c. Seeing all these doctrins are equaly proposed to them as Catholick truths by the sole credible testimony and tradition of our one and the same Roman Catholick Church the testimony of the Greeck and all other Churches as hath bin sayd being rendred invalid by the hereticks wherwhith Protestants confess they are infected Some are of opinion that if the more modern Prelaticks had not forsaken their ould way of being ordained Bishops by the Queens letters patents or by some such publick testimony and superficial ceremony of their Congregations without troubling them-selves with the doctrin of the inward caracter given by imposition of Episcopal hands so contrary to the principles of the reformation a broad and to the 23. and 25. of their own 39. Articles at home they had not bin so hard put to it by their Presbiterian Brethrens arguments who stick to the Tenets and Rules of pure and primitive Protestancy detesting those formalities and dregs of Popery which Prelaticks of late have so much affected in ordaining of Ministers Mr. Hooker Dr. Couel and some other Prelaticks in their writings towards the end of Queen Elizabeths reign began to inculcat the doctrin of making Ordination a spiritual caracter imprinted in the soul by imposition of Episcopal hands and not a bare formality of the secular Magistrat's election by some outward ceremony or letters patents as all English Protestants had believed and practised vntil Hooker and Couel broacht this among their other Popish novelties and therfor were publickly blamed and complained of by Prelatick Writers and particularly by Dr. Willet in his worck vpon the 112. Psalm printed 1603. and dedicated to the Queens Majesty page 91. he saith From this fountain have sprung forth these and such other whirlpoints and bubles of new doctrine and amongst others he sets down as a novelty in the Church of England this That there is in ordination given an indelible caracter and then addeth Thus have some bin bould to teach and write who as some Schismaticks the Puritans have disturbed the peace of the Church one
diximus tali lege vt quae hic damus anno aetatis nostrae quadragesimo secundo propendeant eis quae quadragesimo dederamus quando ut diximus tempori potius scripsimus quam rei sic jubente Domino vt tali ratione aedificemus ne inter initia Canes Porci nos rumpant He had no great opinion of the Apostles writings as is proved by his altering the very Text of Scripture contrary to all copies both Greek and Latin and by his saying that S. Paul did not attribut so much to his own Epistles as to think that all therin contained was sacred for that were to impute immoderat arrogancy to the Apostle tom 2. Elench contra Catabaptistas fol. 10. And because the other Cantons of the Suitzers would not accept of this Reformation he sticking to the principles therof endeavored by force of arms to bring them vnder subjection and to his own Ghospel and in this attempt Zuinglius was killed sealing with his bloud what he had writ tom 1. in explanat art 42. fol. 84. that Kings and Magistrats may be deposed when they resist the Ghospel that is any privat Protestant interpretation of Scripture As for the Reformers of the Protestant Church of England they were King Henry 8. Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterbury Peter Martyr Hooper Rogers Ridley Bucer Okin The Revivers were Jewel Parker Horn c. of whose lives and conversations we have sayd somthing and enough to prove they were not fit men to reform christian Religion their doctrin they borrowed from Luther and Zwinglius the supremacy only excepted which King Henry 8. invented and therfore Bishop Iewel the chief maintainer both of the Protestant doctrin and Prelatick caracter of the Church of England in his defence of the Apology edit 1571. pag. 426. as also in the Apology part 4. c. 4. thought it necessary for the credit of the 39. Articles of the English Religion which had bin compiled out of Luther and Zwinglius writings to commend those two Pillars of Protestancy as most excellent men even sent by God to give light to the whole world in the midst of darkness when the truth was vnknown and vnheard of As for B. p Iewel him-self we remit the reader to Doctor Hardings Confutation of the Apology wherin he may cleerly discern the false lustre of this counterfeit Jewel and the value which men ought to set vpon this pretious stone layd for a foundation of the Prelatick Church and vpon the rotten stuff which he and his Successours have sould for Divine truth to English Protestants ever since he vndertook to maintaine their cause for as Doctor Heylin ingeniously acknowledgeth in his Ecclesia restaurata all the learned English Protestant Writers have borrowed from B. p Jewel what they have sayd in defense of the Protestant Religion and that is one reason why their works are so full of manifest vntruths and them-selves so frequently convicted of gross mistakes they rely too much vpon this reviver of their faith or at least would make the world believe that he may be relyed vpon in matters of faith But because Doctor Heylin makes it his busines to persuade the world that Ievel then did make good the caracter and ordinary vocation of the Church of England against Harding and that Doctor Bramhall late Protestant Primat of Ireland triumph'd over the supposed Jesuits who renewed Harding's quarrel I judged it necessary to cleer both these mistaks in few words As for Bishop Iewel we have sayd in the 1. part sect 7. of this Treatise how easily he might have stop't Harding's mouth by only naming the Bishop who consecrated Parker and his Camerades for Harding vsed no other Argument against the nullity of the English Protestant Clergy but this A Bishop must be ordained by an other Bishop but Parker and his Camerades were not ordained Bishops by any other Bishop Ergo. His proof that they were not ordain'd by any Bishop was this name the Bishop that ordained them name the place where they were consecrated This was a demand soon satisfied if ever Parker or his fellows had bin ordained Bishops especially with so much ceremony and solemnity as the new records of Lambeth report that matter Yet Jewel could never name Parker's and the first Protestant Bishops Consecrators he named indeed Parker for his own Consecrator but being press'd by Harding to name Parkers insteed of answering Harding's question whervpon depended the whole controversy the credit of his Clergy and the satisfaction of the Reader he maks an impertinent digression and long discours of the obligation which some pretended to have bin in ancient times of consulting the Bishop of Rome before they proceeded to the election and consecration of Bishops but never returned to the point of naming the first Protestant Bishop's Consecrator whom he would have named to Harding if ever they had bin consecrated And this is one part of the great victory which Doctor Heylin so much brags of The other part concerns Bramhall and the supposed Iesuits The true relation wherof is as followeth After that his Majesty and the Royal Family had bin driven out of England and France by the late vsurped powers and all Christian Princes thought it their conveniency to court the Rebells and not entertain in their Dominions the Person of our King much less embrace his quarrell it happen'd on day at Bruges that Doctor Crouder Chaplain to his Royal Highness the Duke of York in his Master's Chamber and presence without any provocation or occasion given by any of the Roman profession vtter'd very intemperat words against Doctor Goff Almoner to the Queen Mother for having taken orders in the Church of Rome after that he had received them in the Church of England To which a Catholick Gentleman answered he had don no more then what all other Protestant Ministers who became Roman Priests had continually practised and as he believed vpon good grounds Whervpon the Doctor notwithstanding the King was come to his Brother's chamber reassum'd his Argument and continued to dispute with such vehemency that being caled to read morning prayers he mistook the time of the day and in the morning read evening prayers to the congregation The cause of his mistake being known and many believing that his excess of choler argu'd a weakness in his cause Doctor Bramhall late Primat of Ireland Writ a Treatise in vindication of the English Clergys caracter which is the book so much applauded by the Prelaticks and by Doctor Heylin as vnanswerable wheras it was sudainly and so substantially answered that Primat Bramhall never durst reply notwithstanding the general concern of his Clergy and his own particular engagement and the Church of England perceiving the evidence of our arguments against the validity of their forms of ordination thought their best answer was to confess the force of our reasons and correct the errors of their Bishops by changing the forms they had composed of Priesthood and Episcopacy
counterfeited must needs be the effect of prejudice and passion proceeding from want of christianity especialy when they see that others as learned cautious and conscientious as them-selves after weighing all objections and circumstances submit their judgments to the sufficiency of these signs for making the Roman Catholick authority authentickly Divine and that we believe what is proposed with out the least suspition or feare either of fraud or frailty in the Roman Catholick Councells which are the Proposers and Ministers of God's word Besids if Protestants did consider the nature of Veracity and God's Providence they would never doubt of the application of his power to preserve the Roman Catholick Church from error seing it hath so many signs of his truth and Ministery as the conversion of Nations succession and Sanctity of doctrin and Doctors miracles vnity of faith c. For Veracity as Aristotle and all Philosophers define it is a Virtue inclining to speak truth And he is not inclined to speak truth that countenanceth falshood in so particular a manner as God doth the doctrin and jurisdiction of the Roman Catholick Church A King that might if he would and yet doth not hinder his Ambassadors and Ministers or any other persons from abusing other Princes or his own Subjects by their speaking or commanding in his Majesties name or at least in speaking other-wise then he really intended they should and had prescribed by his commission or instructions such a King I say is not inclined to speak truth because he willingly permits his officers or others that pretend to speak in his name or really do speak by his Orders to vtter falshood and misinterpret his words and meaning notwithstanding that he may easily prevent that fraud and frailty and reapeth no benefit by either an evident argument that he is not avers to such false practises No Protestant doubts but that my Lord Chancellor speaks truly the King's mind and sense when he pursues his Majesties speech in Parliament in his Royal presence and hearing and to think other-wise would be not only to tax my Lord Chancellor with folly but the King with an inclination to falshood and a fault unbeseeming the dignity of a Prince the care and charge of the Country's Father as also the sincerity and veracity of an honest man Seing therfore God is as much inclined to speak truth as any thing can be to love it self for God is truth by essence if it be against the dignity of a Prince and against the nature of human veracity and honesty which is but a shadow of the Divine to permit falshood in Ministers of state or in servants sent but of ordinary errands when their Masters can easily prevent it how much more repugnant must it be to the nature of God and to his Divine veracity to permit the Roman Church in his own presence name and hearing tell lyes and disguise them and it self with so probable and plausible signes of his Divine truth and Commission as to seale it's doctrin with marks and miracles so vndeniably supernatural that the most learned Protestants acknowledg they are and can only bewrought by God's power light can as litle concurre to produce darkness as truth to favor falshood Even men that love truth hate to heare others tell lyes and do contradict vntruths if them-selves be present and quoted for Authors of the stories They will not entertain servants given to that vice nor permit them weare their livery much less employ them in matters of concern wherin they may abuse their Master's word and prejudice his friends or Tenants Can Protestants then imagin that God doth not only permit the Roman Catholick Church to weare his livery and his authority but that he doth promote the stories and lies of that Church in case it's doctrin be fals for the space of so many ages with so great signes and testimonies of his Divine approbation that the wisest and wairiest men of the world after much study and examination did and do still preferr it before all other Religions Do they think that God is not as much concern'd in preventing frauds faults and frailties in his Ministers and Messengers as temporal Princes are concern'd in the credit and truth of theirs Wherfore if Protestants judg it a breach of faith or want of truth and worth in a temporal Prince not to endeavor to the vtmost of his power that his Ministers and messengers deceive not his subjects and Allies by mistaking or misapplying his Commands or demands they can not but see the absurdity of believing that God doth permit Ministers and Messengers so supernaturaly qualified as those of the Roman Church are to err in proposing his revelations vnto all man kind his Veracity being as highly concern'd in the infallibility of the Proposers as his power makes him capable of preventing their human mistakes and of confounding the Devill 's malice But Protestants have found out a new device and defence of their distinction They grant it is against God's Veracity to permit the Roman Catholick Church to err in proposing the Fundamental articles of faith that is such articles as Protestants fancy absolutly necessary for saluation which are say they that Scripture is the word of God and JESUS Christ the son of God and Redeemer of the world some add the Mystery of the Trinity hitherto we could never obtain from them a more exact Cathalogue of their Protestant Fundamentals As for the other doctrines of the Roman Catholick Church 〈◊〉 and proposed as Divine Protestants think they may be denyed and questioned without any offence to God denyal or doubt of his veracity I could never heare any other reason or dispâ—rity for this their distinction but that the measure of the infallibility of the Church ought to be our salvation because it was the end proposed by God in the institution and constitution of his Church In such articles therfore say they as are absolutly necessary for salvation the Church cannot but be infallible in the proposal otherwise we could not believe them and consequently not be saved because we can not be sure that God revealed them But this their Fundamental distinction still destroys the foundation of Christian belief which is God's veracity They make their own conveniency and not God's veracity the motive of crediting the Mysteries of faith as if truth it self or God's inclination to speak truth could be greater in on matter then other or that the belief of any article could be more Fundamental or of greater importance and necessity for salvation then to believe that God is as much concerned and as necessarily inclined to speak truth as well by the mouth of his Church as if him-self spoke immediatly as well also in the least matter as in the greatest and by consequence he is as much engaged to preserve the Church from error in on as in the other So that to believe the testimony or proposal of the Church in a matter
absolutly necessary for salvation and not to believe it in a matter not absolutly necessary when equaly proposed by the same testimony and authority is as much as to say that God can speak by his Church litle vntruths but not great vntruths or that he may permit his veracity to be violated or vitiated in litle but not in great matters as if forsooth the authority and infallibility of the Church were to be measured by the matter it proposeth and not by the manner and supernatural marks of the proposal and by the dignity of the speaker More over their pretence of the Churches fallibility in not Fundamental articles hath no solid ground for the Protestant Church is either fallible or infallible in saying so and in it's doctrin of Fundamentals if fallible non can prudently rely thervpon either in this or in any other matters of faith if infallible then the Protestant distinction of Fundamentals must be a fundamental article of faith because they admit not any Church to be infallible in articles that are not fundamental And yet the same Protestants say the Roman Catholick Church is also infallible in fundamentals but the Roman Catholick and Protestant Church contradict on the other in this doctrin of fundamentals Therfore one of both must erre and that on must be the Protestant because it maintains that two Churches teaching contradictory doctrins may both be infallible therin Add hervnto that if the Roman Catholick Church be infallible in fundamentals or in all articles necessary for salvation how can Protestants excuse their reformation and separation from the guilt of a grievous sin and schism so vncharitable a breach is not justifiable by less then damnable or dangerous doctrin in the Church that is forsaken And what damnable doctrin or danger of damnation could or can be in adhearing to the Roman Church it being confessedly infallible in Fundamentals that is in all things necessary for salvation If therfore God's veracity is denyed even according to the Protestants doctrin and distinction by saying that the Church is fallible in fundamentals it can be for no other reason but because the fundamental articles are sufficiently proposed by the Church as revealed by God and seing the not fundamental articles are proposed by the same Church and testimony and by consequence as sufficiently as the fundamental Protestants must grant that God's veracity is no less denyed by maintaining the fallibility of the Church in not Fundamentals then in Fundamentals So that they must either acknowledg the infallibility of the Church in all articles and matters of faith whether absolutly necessary or not necessary for salvation or deny God's veracity and the foundation of all Christian belief SECT XIII The same further demonstrated and proved that neither the Protestant faith nor the faith lately asserted in a book called sure footing in Christianity is Christian belief where also is treated of the resolution of faith NOt the maâ—â—er believed but the Motive and manner of believing makes a belief Christian There may be an historical or imaginary faith of Christ as well as Divine and real that is men may believe the mysteries of Christianity 〈◊〉 they believe the roman history and fancy that such a belief is not human but Divine This we maintain to be the Protestants case and faith which is not grounded vpon Divine revelation but vpon human persuasion and vpon an imaginary evidence of God's revelation They assent not to the mystery of the Trinity or to any other because God revealed it but because they think it vndeniably evident either by the publick confession of all Christians or by the privat suggestion of their own spirit or by the principles of natural reason or by their pretended cleerness of Scripture that God revealed such mysteries as they are pleased to make choyce of for the Articles or fundamentals of their Reformations And therfore according to the diversity of the evidences wherupon they build their faith the Protestant sects are framed and divided into Prelaticks whose Motive and evidence is the concurrence of all Christians in their fundamentals of Christianity and into Fanatiks amongst whom we include Presbiterians c. who rely vpon the evidence of their spirit and the cleerness of Scripture and into Socinians who make evident reason the rule of their Religion c. That these Protestant persuasions are not grounded vpon Divine revelation or vpon God's Authority and veracity we proove because it is impossible to make an authority the motive of our belief vnless we believe all things that are equaly proposed and delivered to vs as depending of and asserted by that authority St. Austin says non can believe that the Ghospel of St. Matthew is the word of God vnless he doth likewise believe that the Acts of the Apostles is the word of God because they are both delivered as God's word by the same authority The same testimony and the same visible Church which delivered to the first Protestants the mystery of the Trinity and Incarnation as revealed by God delivered also to them Transubstantiation Purgatory c. as revealed by God and they or their followers can not pretend to have any other testimony for the engagement of God's veracity in certifying them of the truth and revelation of the articles they retain but the same testimony which delivered to them the articles they reject Therfore the reality and Divinity of the revelation being equally testified and applicable by on and the same testimony to both articles aswell to the retained as to the rejected it is impossible that Protestants can believe those they retaâ—â—â— moved thervnto by God's veracity or for being revealed by God seing the same veracity and revelation is equally and as cleerly applyed by the testimony of the Catholick visible Church to the other articles which they reject as not revealed If you ask a learned Protestant why doth he believe the mystery of the Trinity or Incarnation He will answer as all Hereticks ever did aswell as Catholicks because God revealed it But if you inquire further why doth he believe that God revealed it He will tell you because it is manifest in SVBSECT I. I Am right sorry to number among Protestants and Manichees who hould also this error of believing nothing which they did not fancy to be self evident the Author of a book called sure footing in Christianity who will needs have it self evident by virtue forsooth of tradition that God revealed all the points of our Roman Catholick doctrin Jt's pitty he stumbled so irrecoverably at his very first step pretending to see so cleerly and tread so surely vpon a plain ground had he bin as wary in the choice of his principles as he is witty in deducing his conclusions I should have followed him as an excellent Guide but he striving to raise Christian faith vnto a greater height of evidence then is consistent with it's nature and with our merit and liberty or convenient for the Government of God's
commission The Roman Church therfore being prudently taken for the Organ of God's voice it is as impossible we should be misledd by it's doctrin as it is that God should go against his infinit inclination to truth or should violat his own veracity Had God's veracity bin limited to his own personal or immediat speech and not extended to what-soever he delivers by the mouth and ministery of others and of his Church it had not bin infinit his credit would have ended with Christ's preaching to the Apostles and though they were bound to believe their Master non could be obliged to believe them But seing God's veracity is infinit and his words must continue for ever they can be as little confined to the persons or Pastors of any on certain age as infinit veracity to on particular truth or infinit excellency and goodness to any one degree of perfection Now seing that God's worth and veracity or his infinit inclination to speak truth cannot be greatet in on matter nor in on age then in an other and that according to on 's inclination to any thing must be the application of his power to effect it we must conclude that God is as much engaged by his worth and goodness and as much inclined by his veracity and as much applied by his omnipotency to speak truth by the mouth of the Church as by his own and in the least matter as much as in the greatest and in every succeeding age as in that of the Apostles and that vnless his worth wisdom veracity goodness and omnipotency faile that Church which beareth the miraculous marks of his authority and exerciseth his ministery must be infallible in proposing and declaring his will and word in all Controversies whatsoever So that they who grant the Church 〈◊〉 infallible only in fundamental articles of faith deny Godâ—â—oodness worth veracity and omnipotency and they who believe not the doctrin of the Roman Catholick Church as the word of God because forsooth they have not cleer evidence that it is the word of God do no more believe nor trust God in the other they assent vnto then he who says he believes and trusts a man whose word or writing he will not take for 100. pounds vnless he delivers to him at the same time that summe of money not only sealed but seen in a bag The reason of this last assertion is cleer because one of the differences between the word of God and the word of men is that you mistrust men for the truth though you heare their own voice and have evidence that they speak the imperfection of their nature making their speech subject to falshood and themselves to frailty therfore we may mistrust their veracity and doubt they be mistaken or deceive vs though they pretend and profess to speak nothing but truth It is not so with God whose nature being infinitly perfect and truth it self it is manifest by natural reason that he can neither be mistaken nor deceive vs by his words and by consequence if we knew evidently that him-self speaks or that the words or doctrin vttered by the Church are his we can no more mistrust or not believe him then mistrust his Deity or feare a flaw in his perfections and fraud in his proceedings So that Protestants resolving not to believe the doctrin of the Church of Rome made sufficiently credible by supernatural signes to be Divine vntill it be made cleerly evident to them that it is the word of God resolve their faith into heretical obstinacy because they resolve not to believe or trust God that evidence which they exact not being compatible with the merit trust obscurity and obsequiousness of Christian belief nor with the duty of rationall Creatures They may be compared to some Irish or Scotch Rebells refusing to obey the King's Lieu-tenant and Commissioners because for-sooth they have not clear evidence that the commissions and commands are signed by the King though they see his Majesty's hand and seale for the authority set over them which also is obeyd and acknowledged by the better sort and greater part of both Nations yet the Rebells will not submit to any Orders vnless the King leave England go in person to rule them and satisfie every particular fellow that he hath named such a Lieu-tenant or Commissioner or vnless his Majesty will immediatly by him-self exercise his royal Jurisdiction signe and seale his commissions in their sight c. Some will think there is a great disparity in the comparison for that God may without trouble or prejudice to him-self reveale his will and pleasure to every particular person which Kings can no more do then be in many places at one time Therfore what inconveniency can it be that God make evident to every particular person either by a clear signe of his presence or by an evident proof of his spirit which doctrin is Divine which not without obliging men to believe that the Roman Catholick or any other Church is infallible and can not propose falshood for God's word To this we answer that God might not only reveale his mysteries to every person but save us also without subordination to any Church or Pastors or dependency of Sacraments but all Christians agree that he hath bin pleased not to do so so that the question is not what he could have don but what he hath don But it appears by the light of reason that ther is a certain distance and decorum due to Majesty and superiority by virtue wherof God or even a Creature that is supreme in any government may command his inferiors and subjects by subordinat officers and warant these officer's authority by some outward signes and seales of his Soveraignty which signes though they may be possibly counterfeited yet oblige the People so governed to obey Ministers so qualified as submissively as if him-self had immediatly delivered his own commands Wherfore though it were possible that a King might without trouble write and deliver all his oâ—ders immediatly or without the assistance of Secretaries Ministers and Messengers yet it were not fit And why the Protestant Doctors that write of this subject should think fit that God ought to deprive him-self of a decency and decorum due even to human Majesty to humor their curiosity or to comply with their obstinacy J can not comprehended nor attribute to any other thing but to want of humility and excess of heresy the malice wherof consists in contemning God's authority and denying his veracity when sufficiently appearing in the Church and though not self evidently yet so convincingly as to make our obligation of submitting thervnto evident Jt is therfore agross absurdity to think or say that the reverence due to the Divine authority obligeth vs not to submit or not assent therunto vnless it be more then moraly evident and by consequence more them sufficiently evident vnto us that we can not be mistaken in our submission or assent For hence
the Greek and Latin Church for the most part were spotted with the doctrin of free will oftner it of invocation of Saints c. And from thence infers that in no age since the Apostles time any company of Bishops held so perfect and so sound doctrin in all points as the Bishops of England at this day And Mr. Fulk in his reionder to Bristow pag. 7. I confess that Ambrose Austin Hierom all three Fathers to whom B. p Iewell appealed held invocation of Saints to be lawfull And B. p Bale acknowledgeth that St. Gregory the first of Iewell 's chosen Iudges by his indulgences established pilgrimages to Images and that St. Leo an other of Ievell's Fathers allowed the worship of Images And Doctor Humfrey Iesuitismi part 1. rat 5. pag. 626. cannot deny but that S. Gregory taught Transsubstantiation And Mr. 〈◊〉 in his Papisto mâ—t edit 1606. pag. 143. saith We are 〈◊〉 that the mystery of iniquity did work in Sâ— Paul's time and fell not a sleep so soon as Paul was dead c. And therfore no mermail though pervsing Councells and Fathers we find the print of the Popes feet And Mr. Napper in his Treatise vpon the Revelation dedicated to King Iames pag. 68. 145. affirmeth that Popery or the Anti-christian Kingdom did continue 1260. years vniversaly without any debatable contradiction The Pope and his Clergy during that time possessing the outward visible Church So that it was not one or two Fathers or Councells but all Christendom which professed the Roman Catholick saith for these 1â—00 years past And even Mr. Whitaker himself lib. 6. contra Duraeum pag. 123. notwithstanding his vndertaking to maintain Ievells challenge and bold assertion was forc'd at length to submit but by a profane expression saying that the Popish Religion is a patch't coverlet of the Fathers errors sowed together have them read their English falsified Scripture the subject of controversies and support of errors and will not permit them to pervse the true authentick translation and all this to the end nothing but fraud and fancy may be the rule of the Protestant faith These and all other the like observations which can not but occurr to them who frequent their Churches or company must needs induce men to suspect the weakness of their cause and the guilt of their conscience though there had bin no evidences that they are Falsifiers But seing their are as many evidences against them as there are Chapters in Catholick Books of controversies and that the Books are easily had and vnderstood I see not how any Protestant how ever so illiterat can be excused from eternall damnation by pretending the integrity of his Clergy or his own insufficiency to examin their sincerity When many accuse a man of high Treason and offer to prove it to his face not only by sundry honest and legal wittnesses but vnder his own hand writing it would be censured treachery or great carlesness in the Ministers of state to slight such an accusation and evidence though the person accused vntill then had bin trusted and reputed a loyal subject This is our case with the Protestant writers we have no quarrel against them but Religion we charge them in publick writing with the highest Treason the murthering of the soules of Soveraigns and subjects with corrupting God's word with rebelling against the Divine authority so authentickly appearing in the Roman Catholick Church And these Treasons we offer to prove face to face not only by legal witness but by their Bibles and Books We have no grudge to them but this only of damning soules by treacherous dealing and desire that so important an accusation may come to a publick hearing If their interest and industry can divert the layty from so great a concern that layty must be treacherous to themselves and censured very carless of their own salvation And to the end it may not be objected that these are are but 〈◊〉 words I have resolved to descend to particular crimes I 〈◊〉 the persons their Books I quote their own words I prove them to be no innocent mistakes but wilfull and wicked falsifications and fraudâ— not committed by one or few 〈…〉 of Religion against vs not in our time but alwayâ—◠〈…〉 but the whole body in their 〈…〉 only by connivance and permission but also by contrivanceâ— and positive approbation not only petty 〈◊〉 differences but of ancient condemned heresies which the Protestant writers maintain as orthodox doctrin notwithstanding that 〈…〉 S. Hierom and other Doctors of God's Church censure the opinions as notorious heresies and the Authors as hereticks This is the summe of the Accusations contained in this third part of our Treatise and if we be not mistaken deserues a Trial as well for the satisfaction of privat 〈◊〉 conscience as 〈◊〉 for the probability there is of publick conveniency it being very improbable that I or any man who pretends to the least degree of worth or witt would charge with so many particular grievous crimes so numerous and poweâ—â—ull a party as the Protestant Clergy is without 〈…〉 undeniable evidences If the Protestant Clergy be found guylty besides the salvation of soules which will be obtained by renouncing their errors and is that we all ought principaly to ayme at these Nations will be happy in this world by their revenues If they be not guilty they and their Religion will gain great credit and I nothing but the infamy of being a notorious Jmpostor I know not what others may think of me but I shall never think that any other can be so witless and wicked as to take so much paines as I have don in composing and be at so great charge of publishing this Treatise without manifest profeâ— of the truth therof for if my allegations be not true I can have no further design or hopes but of infamy to my self and of honor and credit to my Adversaries and an addition of strength to the cause I do impugne all which must follow and fall vpon me if the learned Protestant Clergy be not proved to be as great Cheats as I pretend they are But it s strange what deepe impressions education doth make in mens minds and how partial and passionat these Nations are tendred by Protestancy They will not believe that their Protestant Writers are wilfull Falsifiers as for example that Doctor Jeremy Taylor a man that hath writ so many spiritual Books foorsooth and rules of Morality is guilty of maintaining the Protestant Religion by aboue 150. shamefull vnexcusable corruptions and falsifications in his litle Dissuasive And when he the Author his Jrish Convocation and the English Protestant Church that Applauder of the work are challenged in print by sundry Catholick Writers to make good any one of those falsifications all the world besides Protestants observe they have not a word to answer and by consequence themselves must now confess that their Religion is damnable seing it can not be otherwise maintained then
chalenged them to name him Who hath layd hands on you how and by whom are you consecrated saith Harding and Stapleton How chanced then Mr· Iewell that you and your fellowes bearing your selves for Bishops c. have taken vpon you that Office without any Imposition of hands J ask not who gave you Bishopricks but who made you Bishops Me thinks Iewell and his Camerades the first Protestant Bishops might easily have answered by only naming the person who consecrated them and the place of their consecration But not a word of this point Iewell indeed once attempted to answer something but it had bin better for himself and his Companions he had sayd nothing for his silence to the question might have bin interpreted a slighting of the demand by the Bigots of his Church that endeavor to make the most palpable absurdities probable answers in this and other Controversies Iewell therfore saith himself was a Bishop by the free and accustomed Canonical election of the whole Chapter of â—â—lesbury but to the question how he or Parker together with the first Bishops were consecrated or by whom not one 〈◊〉 After having first contented himself and by conseâ—â—nce Arch-bishop Parker and his other Camerades that were â—â—â—stioned with a bare election of the Chapter insteed of an Episcopal consecration yet he adds our Bishops are made in form 〈◊〉 Order as they have bin ever by free election of the Chapter 〈◊〉 consecration of the Arch-bishop and three other Bishops Heere we may observe both fraud and folly because he doth not answer to the question his adversary askes him how himself and the first protestant Bishops wherof Arch-bishop 〈◊〉 was one and the chief were consecrated and by whom 〈◊〉 lieu of answering Arch-bishop Parker my self and the other 〈◊〉 Bishop were consecrated by such a man and in such a place 〈◊〉 his Adversary our Bishops are made by consecration of the Arch-bishop c. Perhaps he meant that Arch-bishop Parker conâ—â—â—rated himself by imposition of his own hands therfore Harding tells him and how I pray you was your Arch-bishop himself consecrated For that was the question and main point of the Controversy what three Bishops were there in the realm to 〈◊〉 hands on him c. There were antient Bishops enough in England who either were not required or refused to consecrate you He alludes to the Bishop of Landaff who refused to consecrate them at the nags-head and to the Irish Arch-Bishop Creagh who refused also to lay hands on them though they offered him his liberty being then prisoner in the Tower if he would do them that favor What Parker Horn Jewell and none of the first Bishopâ— could do but some fiue or six yeares after their pretended conconsecration their successors of the Church of England have don above fifty yeares after They shewed in the yeare 1613. a Register not only with the names of Parker's Consecrators but with a description of the tapestry on the east-side of the Chappell read 〈…〉 Sermon Communion concourse of people c. at the solemnity of his consecration at Lambeth forsooth and yet neither Parker himself nor any Protestant or Catholick ever heard of such a solemnity Consecration or Consecrators when both parties were so highly engaged about the names of the place and persons and made it the subject of printed Bookes and all this their contest was in a time that it might have been soon ended by 〈◊〉 or Horn's only writing in their answers to 〈…〉 of their Adversaries the names of 〈…〉 place of their Consecration without troubling themselves with copying 〈◊〉 of the Registers the richness of the tapestry or the color of the cloath c. menmentioned by M. r Mason to make the fable credible by so common and ordinary stuff seing he durst not venture upon more individual circumstances But because no Protestant can believe so great 〈◊〉 was kept about â—â—thing M. r Mason Primat Bramhall D. r Heylin and all other modern prelatick writers endeavor to persuade the layty of the Church of England that the dispute between Harding and Jewell Stapleton and Horn was not about the validity but concerning the legality of the first Protestant Bishops consecration because forsooth Bishop Bonâ—er in his plea and Controvertists in their bookes only pretended that there was no law 1. Eliz. to warrant Edward 6. forme of consecrating Bishops Q. Mary having repealed the same with the booke of Ordination which Stapleton and the rest fancied was not revived with that of the common prayer 2. Elizab. by act of Parliament But though this evasion hath bin sufficiently confuted by the Author of the nullity of the Prelatick Clergy and 〈◊〉 of England against Primat Bramhall yet I admire he omitted these ensuing words of D. r Stapleton's which demonstrate our Catholick exceptions were not grounded upon Stapleton's persuasion of the want of Laws or statuts then in force for confirming the forme or Booke of Ordination but they were â—â—ther grounded upon a cleere evidence that though the sayd forme and Book of ordination was legal then yet there had bin 〈◊〉 Consecration at all performed For thus saith D. r Stapleton to Horn pretended Bishop of â—â—â—chester It is not the Princes only pleasure that maketh a Bishop 〈◊〉 there must be free election without either forcing the Clergy to 〈◊〉 or forcing the Chosen it seems Horn payd a good summ 〈◊〉 his Bishoprick to filthy bribery and also there must follow a 〈◊〉 consecration which you and all your Fellowes do lack and therâ—â—â—â— you are indeed no true Bishops neither by the law of the Church 〈◊〉 yet by the law of the realm for want of due consecration expressly required by an act of Parliament renewed in this Queenes dâ—yes in suffragan Bishops much more in you By which words 〈◊〉 appeares that the exception was not grounded vpon D. r Staâ—â—â—ton or any other Catholicks persuasion that Q. Elizabeth had not sufficiently renewed the booke and forme of ordination by 〈◊〉 act of Parliament 1. Eliz. but on the quite contrary and that though there was an act yet the Bishops could not be vaâ—â—â—ly consecrated according to that Act of Parliament that Stapleton says was renewed 1. Eliz. for want of a true Bishop to â—â—ercise that function not for want of any Law to authorise â—piscopal consecration all the Catholick Bishops who were named in her first commission having refused to act by her order and her Majesties Dispensation in her second commission not only with her own statute but with the very state and condition of the Protestant Consecrators who were not Bishops could not be of force to give them a spiritual caracter Wherfore M. r Parker Grindall Horn Jewell and the rest of the first Bishops who understood better their own condition then their Successours would seeme now to do resolved in their 〈◊〉 1562. to publish the 39. Articles made by Cranmer and his Junra but with some alteration and addition especially to that article
right against the deceased Queen and other Protestants pretences resolved vpon an other way to secure their Church-livings against the title and claim of the Roman Clergy which was to maintain in their Books that it is impossible for a Papist to be a good Subject because say Protestants it is a principle among them that in some casâ—â— the Pope may depose a King So that now the Protestant preachers are become shrewd Polititians and defend their doctrin and revenues by reasons of state One of the chief of these Church-Polititians was Thomas Morton late Bishop of Duresme more famous for his wicked impostures then for his many volumes He began with a Treatise of Rebellion and Equivocation which having bin answered and restored vpon himself and his Protestants in the begining of K. James his reign and his wilfull falshoods layd open to the world he set forth a pamphlet which he called a preamble of his promised but never performed Reply and in that Preamble omits almost all the material accusations and objections of his adversary F. Persons and to such few as himself had attempted to answer he added new lyes and impostures or layd the fault of his own former falsifications vpon his Brethren who joyned with him in the work as euery one may see in F. Persons Quiet and sober Reckning with Mr. Morton out of which we will borrow some few examples Bishop Morton's falsifications about the lawfulness of Killing a Tyrant AN other like trick he playeth vs saith Persons abusing a place of Doctor Boucher the French man de Justa abdicatione c. therby to make all Catholicks Odious as allowing his doctrin He cites Bouchers words thus Tyrannum occidere honestum est quod cuivis impune facere permittitur quod ex communi consensu dico And then he Englisheth the same thus any man may lawfully murther a Tyrant which I defend by common consent But he that shall read the place in the Author himself shall find that he holdeth the very contrary to wit that a privat man may not kill a Tyrant that is not first Iudged and declared to be a publick enemy by the Common-wealth And he proveth the same at large out of Scripture and by the Decree of the Councell of Constance But the words which I say by common consent are added by Morton and not 〈◊〉 be found in the Author Morton excuseth his fraud and folly by saying the like are in other Chapters as Mirum esse in affirâ—â—â—â—do consensum which words are of other matters and spoken vpon other occasions and not annexed to the former sentence of Doctor Boucher Bâ—· Morton's Falsification of Catholicks against the Soveraignty of Princes and how he excuseth himself with saying he received it from the Arch-bishop of Canterbury BIshop Morton in his Book of Discovery pag. 8. set down this fals proposition That all Catholick Priests did profess a prerogative of the people over Princes for proof therof he citeth this position of Mr. Reynolds in the place aforesayd Rex humana creatura est qaia ab hominibus constituta and englisheth it in this manner A King is but a creature of man's creation where you see first that in the Translation he addeth but and man's creation of himself for that the latin hath no such adversative clause as but nor creation but rather the word câ—â—stitution Secondly these words are not the words of Mr. Reynolds but only cited by him out of S. Peter And thirdly they are alledged here by Morton to a quite contrary sense from the whole drift discourse and meaning of the Author which was to extoll and magnifie the authority of Princes as descending from God and not to debase the same For proof hereof whosoever will look vpon the book and place it self before mentioned shall find that Mr. Reynolds purpose therin is to prove that albeit earthly principality be called by the Apostle humana Creaturae yet that it is originally from God and by his commandement to be obeyed Morton's Answer THis allegation is of all which yet J have found most obnoxious and liable vnto taxation which God knoweth that J lye not J received from suggestion as the Author therof R. C. can 〈◊〉 For 〈◊〉 that time I had not that Rosâ—â—ns alias Reynolds neither by that present importunity of occasions could J seek after him which I confess is greatly exorbitant for I received it as a testimony debasing the authority of Kings so 〈◊〉 When J was advertised saith Persons that R. C. did signify Ric. Cant. J was driven into a far greater mervaile how Mr. Morton could be permitted to publish such a maner the thing having to pass the view of R. C. his officers and how he could presume to have more care of his own credit then of the others that is head and Cheiftain But though the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury did suggest this calumny to Morton it 's probable he did not English 〈◊〉 for him but left that labour to himself The truth is the Arch-Bishop and Morton and all the Protestant Clergy were resolved to make Catholicks and their Religion odious by any means whatsoever and finding they could not do it with truth it was judged convenient for preserving aboue two Millions Sterl per an for themselves and their Children to effect it by falshood And to the same intent and purpose did their whole prelatik Synod held at London 1603. Can. 30. contrive and conspire in a notable cosenage trumpery and calumny against the Roman Catholik doctrin when giving the reason to satisfie puritans why they retain the vse of the sign of the Cross in Baptism they sayd they do it because the same hath biâ— ever accompanied among the prelatick Protestants with sufficient cautions and exceptions against all popish error and superstition and forsooth that the world may vnderstand from what Popish error they have freed the same they signify that the Church of England since the abolishing of popery have ever held and taught that the sign of the Cross vsed in baptism is no part of the substance of that Sacrament and that the Infant baptised is by virtue of baptism before it 〈◊〉 signed with the sign of the Cross received into the Congrâ—gation of Christ's Flock as a perfect member therof and not by any power ascribed to the sign of the Cross c. â—â—erupon they conclude that the vse of the sign of the Cross in Baptism being thus purged from all popish superstition and 〈◊〉 and reduced in the Church of England to the primary 〈◊〉 of it c. is to be reverently retained and vsed Thus teach 〈◊〉 in their foresaid Synod And yet it can not be shewed 〈◊〉 as in one particular Roman Catholick Doctor or 〈◊〉 that the sign of the Cross is an essential or substanâ—â—â—◠〈◊〉 of Baptism Witnes K. James nay the Bishops thâ—â—selves that make this their imposture the ground of a 〈◊〉 of their Church who in the Conference of
who began and perfected the reformation were grosly mistaken and themselves misled in one of the most essential points of Christianity and in one without which there can be no Church Had the dispute between them and us bin about conveniency of disciplin or decency of Ceremonies a change in such things alterable according to the circumstances of time place and persons might be pious and prudent because it might take away occasion of cavills but to alter the essential forms of Priesthood and Episcopacy and to add therunto now after a Century of years words which hitherto wanting concludes the Nullity of their Church and Clergy must rather augment the doubt then avoyd the cavil If they were satisfied of the validity of that form wherby themselves since Ed. 6. vntill this present had bin ordained what needed any addition of Priesthood and Episcopacy which we argued and they denyed to be wanting did they imagin that such an addition would end the dispute I believe it hath for it is an acknowledgment that our exceptions were well grounded but why should they give vs this advantage J fancy they have hopes that some other Spalato will Apostatize and then by this new vndoubted form make them real Bishops Yet that will not serve their turn their want of spiritual Jurisdiction makes their caracter vseless and want of jurisdiction together with their errors in Doctrin doth vn-Church a Congregation as well as want of Orders As this want of ordination renders them incapable of the Benefices and Bishopricks which they enjoy so their corruptions of Scripture and Falsifications of Councells and Fathers make them vnworthy And he can not be a true Christian that will stick to their interest after that he is informed of the nullity of their calling and of the falshood of their doctrin Wherfore it will not be in the power of any prelatick polititian to make himself popular vpon the score of patronizing such a cause or Clergy against Liberty of conscience or Conferences and the Prelatick caracter and disciplin is to all other Protestant parties as odious as our late distempers have evidenced The only objection now remaining is that Presbyterians and other Sectaries will take the advantage of an Act for Liberty of Conscience or even for a change in Religion in case the Parliament should resolve vpon it for crying down of Monarchy But as we said t' is well known these Sectaries either desire Liberty of Conscience or their animosity is as great against Prelatick Protestancy as against Popery and if now they be kept in obedience and aw of the government the King and Parliament will be better able hereafter in case of any such liberty or change to keep them to their duty by the addition of the Church revenues then they are at present Besides it is very certain that among those Sectaries many are moral and conscientious persons and would conform to the truth of the Roman Catholick Religion had they bin rightly informed and the Tenets therof had not bin rendred odious and ridiculous by the impostures of Protestant preachers and the vulgar errors of a homly education all which obstacles will be easily removed if Catholicks have liberty to speak and reason for themselves So that considering the influence which Truth alwayes hath vpon honest dispositions such as our English are and the prejudice which all men retain against falshood when it is discovered and it is not their interest to promote it I see no danger of drawing the people into a Rebellion vpon the account of Liberty of Conscience or of opposing a change from Protestancy into the old Religion especialy seing the generality may hope thereby to see the Church Revenues lawfully and legaly applyed to their own ease and against all disturbers of the peace and Trade of these Nations Let us therfore have a fair Trial and conference in order to Liberty of Conscience and then judge of the truth and sincerity of both Clergys and of both Religions Notwithstanding the evident conveniency of this humble proposal I fear we do in vain flatter our selves with the hopes of a publick Conference We are inclined to believe what we wish for notwithstanding that former experience and our learned Adversaries knowledge of so cleer evidences on our side casts vs again into despair Did the busines depend of the vote of the whole multitude of the Protestant Clergy we might assure our selves of a conference because many of the ordinary Persons are honest and most so ignorant that they believe themselves to be in the right way of saluation for they take all that Bishop Jewell and Iohn Fox say for truth never examining it further But the Bishops and great Doctors are of another stamp I fear their guilt of conscience will busy them in opposing all Treaties and Trials of Truth and yet methinks not any one thing should render them more suspected of fraud and falshood then so vnreasonable an opposition 1. Because it argues diffidence of their cause 2. Because their Church being confessedly fallible and by consequence vncertain of the truth they ought not to refuse any means wherby men may be further informed therof Though we Papists believe the Roman Catholick Church infallible in matters of doctrin yet whensoever our Adversaries desire to conferr about Religion their Request is granted nay the Councell of Trent how ever inconsiderable Protestants make it invited all the learned Protestants of the world to propose therin all their doubts and difficulties offering all safety and civility to their persons And though the infallibility of our Church be not consistent with a submission of our faith to the judgment of a Third in point of doctrin yet that prerogative doth not debarr us from submitting ourselves in matter of fact and falsifications to a fair trial of indifferent persons As for the Pope and general Councells not submitting to a Third in controversies with Protestants it is no pride but a prerogative of all supreme Magistrats whether spiritual or temporal as our Adversaries confess and contest to be reasonable when their own Bishops deal with Non-conformists and all Lay Soveraigns must maintain the same when they treat with their revolted Subjects which Subjects are judged very vnreasonable if they refuse to treat with their King of grievances vnless he submits the controversy to the decision of a Third and much more intollerable if no competent Third were to be found as it is in our case vnless we think that Turks Iews or Pagans are fit men to judge of Christian Religion Wherefore if the Church of England thinks it unreasonable that her Sectaries should not conferr with prelatick Divines unless they have it under the seal and powers of Canterbury that the Arch-Bishops or the Convocation will submit to the judgment of a Third I understand not how Arch-Bishhop Laud could exact the like condition from the Pope or a general Council before Protestants would confer with Roman Catholicks The other reasons alledged
tom 5.22 * See thee nulity of the Prelatick Clergy of England cap. 2. and D. Bramhal in his vindication therof pa. 92. pag. 10â— Dr. Stapleton in his return of vntruths against Jewel fol. 130. and in his Counterblast against Horn fo 79 301 Dr. Harding Confut. Apol. fol. 57. 60 part 2. fol. 59. edit 1563 fol. 57. 59 edi 1566 Stat. 8. Elizabeth 1. Stat. 8. Eliz. 8. See the nullity of the Clergy and Church of England edit 1659. Bramhal in his vindicâ—tion pag. 132. Demonstrat Discipl cap. 8. ¶ 1 2. pag. 43. 2. part See this Act of ParliameÌ„t in the life of the Queen of Scots Written by Mr. V. dal and dedicated to King James pag. 200. 201. See 1 p. seâ— 1. Primat Bramhal's succession and vindication of the Prelatick Clergy was answered by the Author of the nullity of the Church of England and by an other book after he had both these aÌ„swers by him and durst not reply but rather coÌ„curred with his Brethren in adding the words Priests and Bishop to their forms of ordination as appeareth in their last edition of the CommoÌ„ praier rites c. of the Church of England See in the epistle Dedicatory and our Preface the Act of Parliament preferring any natural issue of Queen Elizabeth to the Crown before the royal family of the Stewards See Udal a ProtestaÌ„t in his history of the Queen of Scots wher he proves how the bastard Mâ—rry by the means of John Knox and others that he employed changed the ancient Religion in Scotland to the end him self might be made King by the Protestants and how afterwards by the same way he murthered King James his Father and persecuted King James and his mother all vnder the pretext of a Protestant Reformation Luther in epist. ad Argentinenses anno 1525. Christum à nobis primò vulgatumau demus gloriari See part 2 sect 5. n. 5. See M. r Belson Bishop of Winchester in his true difference c. part 2. pag. 353. See M. r Rogers in the Catholick doctrin of the Church of England pag. 103. pervsed aÌ„d published by the Lawful authority of the Church of England an 1633. Calvin in Dan c. 6. v. 22. 23. Abdicant se potestate terreni Principes duÌ„ insurgunt coÌ„tra Deum c potius ergo coÌ„spicere oportet in illorum capita quam â—llis parere c. (a) Perkins in his exposition vpon the Creed p. 400. vve say that befor the days of Luther for the space of many hundred years an vniversal Apostacy overspread the vvhole face of the earth and that our Church vvas not then visible to the world Mr. Napper upon the revelations dedicated to King Jams pag. 143. saith from Constantin's time vntill these our days even 1260 years the Pope and his Clergy hath possessed the out ward visible Church of christianity [b] vpon thy vvalls ö Jerusalem have I set vvatchmen all the day and all the night for ever they shal not be silent Esay 62.6 see Ephes. 4.11 (c) Dr. Powel in his consideration of the Papist's supplication pag 43. Buchanan in loc com pa. 466. And Whitaker contra Camp rat 7. pag. 101. 102. contr Duc. pag. 277. This Whitaker after vainly attempting to shew the beginning of Popery and seing the insufficiency of his particular instances doth at length acknowledg his weakness and runs with the rest of his Protestant Championâ— to divert the Reader from the evidence of truth so deceitful and silly similituds (d) Luther tom 2. Wittemb anno 1551. lib. de se. arbit pag. 434 [e] Luther in parâ—a Confess to 3. Germ fol. 55. in Colloq mons Germ. fol. 210. (f) Mr. Gabriel Povvel in his consideration of the Papists supplication pag. 70. [g] Fox act and Mon. pa. 40 Jewel in his Apology p. 4. c. 4.5 2. and in his defence of the Apology edi 1571. p. 426 (h) Andreas Museâ—lus in praef in libellum Germ. de Diaboli Tyranide Nicolaus Androphius Conc. â— de Luthero [i] Conrad Schlusletbur Catal. haeret l. 13. pa. 314 seqq (k) M. Cartwright in M. whit gifts defence pag. 17. [l] Luther contra Regem Angliae fol. 344. I pass not if a thousand Austins a thousand Cyprians a thousand King Henry's Churches stood against me Et libro de se. arbit contra Eras. edit 1. Lay a side all the arms of orthodox antiquities c. see also nullus and nemo G. 6. pag. 153. And Cnoglerus his symbola tria pag. 152. [m] Danaeus pag. 939. in his answer to Belarm of the confess'd austerity of life of S. Bernard S. Francis S. Dominick the Monks c. says they were all fools And M. r Willet who maketh a special Treatise against the austerity of the ancient Fathers in pag. 358. of his Synopsis reproved S. Bazil S. Gregory Nazianzen for plucking down themselves by immoderat fasting and concludeth Wher in all the Scripturs learn'd these men thus to punish their bodys Oseander reprehended S. Anthony the Eremit for the same and saith his Religion was superstition And Calvin lib. 4 cap. 12. sect 8. that the austerity of the ancient Fathers was not excusable and differeth much from God's prescript and is very dangerous And Iunius in his animadversions pag. 610. 611 attributs S. Simon Stilletes his austerity and Miracles to cunjuring melancoly and his prophecies to suggestion from the Devill [n] Bucer one of the Composers of the Common prayer-book and of the Religion of the Church of England whom Mr. Withguift Archbishop of Canterbury in his defence pag. 522. termeth a Reverend learned painfull sound Father teacheth in his applauded work of the Kingdom of Christ and translated into English that it is lawful to procure liberty by a libel of divorce to marry again not only in the case of adultery but in case of the on 's departure from the other in case of homicide theft or repairing to the company or banquets of immodest persons likewise in case of incurable infirmity of the woman by Child birth or of the man by lunacy or otherwise See his own words in the aforsaid work l. 2. c. 26. 27. pag. 99. 100. cap. 28. pag. 101. saies that who ever will not induce his mind to love his wife with conjugal charity that man is commanded by God to put her away and marry an other And in Math. cap. 19. saith that the wife repudiated either justly or vnjustly if she hath no hopes to return to her husband and desirs to live piously and wants a husband may be marryed to an other without sin The whole University of Cambridg comends this Bucer for a man most holy and truly devine and this letter of commendations is printed with Bucer's Book wherin he teacheth this doctrin see it pag. 944. Luther's words in Serm. de Matrim are notorious If the wife will not or can not come let the mayd come Et ibd fol. 123. tom 5.
God give us ability to keep it but Christ hath fulfilled it for us [a] Luther in his Sermons translated into English an 1578. pag. 147. 176. [b] Acts and Mon. pag. 1338. [c] Mr. Wotten in his answer to the Popish articles pag. 92. pag. 41. [d] Mr. Fulk against the Remish Testament in Epi. Ioan. Sec. 5. fol. 447. Dr. Whitaker de Eccles. pag 301 We say that if a man have an act of faith sins do not hurt him this truly Luther affirmeth this we all say [e] Acts and Mon. pag. 1335. Sinit quisquis vere credit Deum pro se operari disponere sibi vitam aeternam ipse plane ad eam rem nihil operis seu laboris sibi sumens Hofmannus de paenitentia edit 1540. l. 2. fol. 113. Whitaker contra Campian rat 8. pag. 151. Christus conditionem nobis aliam multo faciliorem proponit Crede salvus eris [f] Dr. Fulk in the Tower disputation against Campian the second days conference 1. 6. [g] Whitaker against Campian rat 8. pag. 143. fides aut perpetua est aut nulla est The Protestant doctrin of justifying faith most daÌ„gerous and damnable My Lord Chancellor in his speech to the Parliament at Oxford Luther in postilla super Evang Dom. 1. Advemus Dominica 26 post Trinit [a] Osiander in epitom Centur. 16. part 2. pag. 647 saith of David George vtebatur enim publico vir Dei ministerio Basiliensi egentibus elëemosy nam subministrebat aegrotos consolabatur c. [b] Historia Georgij Davidis published by the Divines of Basil and printed of Antwerp 1568 si Christi Apostolorum doctrina vera perfecta fuisset c. [c] Osiander in epitom Centur. 16. pag. 818. Schlusselb in Theol. Calvin l. 1. art 2. fol. 9. [d] Idem Schlussenburg cit fol. 9. where he brings many other examples of Protestants to the same purpose as also Osiander centur 16. pag. 207.208.209 Concerning that known Text I and my Father are unum one thing Ioan. 10.30 Calvin avoydeth it as the Arians did saying Abusi sunt hoc loco veteres vt probarent Christum esse Patri homousion Neque enim Christus de activitate substantiae disputat sed de consensu c. Calvin in Ioan. 10. Calvin in admonit ad Polonos explant in Tract Theol. pag. 794. Sententia Christi Pater major me est restricta fuit ad humanam ejus naturam ego vero non dubito ad totum complexum extendere Stancarus contra Minist Geneuenses Tigurinos fol. 94. 95. 118. 123. affirmeth that the Reformed Churches professing the faith of Geneva and Tigure be Arian and saith Conclusum est ô Calvine doctrinam tuam de Filio Dei esse plane Arianam a qua resilias quam primum te oro atque obsecro [a] The word Trinity is but a humaÌ„ inventioÌ„ and soundeth couldly Luther in Postil majore Basileae apud Hernagium in enar Evangel Dom. Trinit Calvin ep 2. ad Polonos in tract Theolog pag. 796 saith Precatio vulgo trita est sancta Trinitas vnus Deus miserere nostri mihi non placet ac omnino barbariem sapit (b) Luther in lib. contrâ— JacobuÌ„ Latomum 〈◊〉 2. Wâ—tteâ—b latine edito anno 1551. The later editions are altered and corrupted herin as in many other things Osiander in Epitom cent 16. pag. 169 Symbolum Athanasiivocant doctrinaÌ„ fidem Satanasii vanissime insuper jactitant Lutherum vix tectum Babilonicae turris detex isse se vero ex imis fundamentis eam ex scindere [a] Whitaker contra rat Camp pag. 78. And in his answer to Mr. William Reynolds cap. 6. pag. 135. art 136. saith The Fathers thought by their external disciplin of life to pay the paines due for sin wherin they derogated not a little from Christ's death c. Which though it be an errour yet were they notwithstanding good men and holy Fathers From whence followeth that Indulgences Purgatory Satisfaction Prayer for the dead Merit c. may be held by learned and holy men Mr. Bunny in his treatise tending to pacification sect 17. pag. 104. excusing some points of popery and amongst others the worshiping of images saith in these therfore or such like whosoever will condemn all those to be none of the Church that are not fully persuaded therin as we are c. committed an vncharitable part towards his Brethren See Doctor Some against Mr. Penry pag. 176. Tindall act Mon. pag. 1338. I doubt not but S Bernard Francis and many other holy men erred as concerning Mass. Mr. Francis Iohnson in Mr. Iacob's defence of the Churches and Ministery of England c. pag. 13. Did not Iohn Hus that worthy Champion of Christ and others also of the Martyrs of fore times say and heare Mass even to their dying day c. Did not divers of them acknowledg some the Pop's calling and supremacy some the 7. Sacraments some auricular confession c. Morgenstein in tract de Ecclesia c. pag. 41. These things were pardonable in the Godly who held the Pope to be the Vicar of Christ and Head of the Church the Papacy for the Church Saints for mediators and the Mass for the supper of the Lord. Luther de vtraque specie saith If thou coms't to a place were the Communion is ministred vnder one only kind take it with others The like indifferency is affirmed by Melancthon in centur epist. Theolog. pag. 252. and not denyed by Bishop Iewell in his reply pag. 110. 106. The Roman Catholick Church is a competent and vnpartial Judg of Controversies of Religion Quid praediâ—averinâ— Apostoli quid illis Christus revelaverit c. non aliter probari debere nisi per easdem Ecclesias quas ipsi condiderunt Tertul. l. 1. dâ— praescri c. 6. All Christians were nâ—ver Iudges of Religion one part always submitted to the judgment of the other that was in obedience to and in communion with saint Peter's Successor the Bishop of Rome See Bishop Morton cit and Bishop Taylor in his Dissuasive pag. 8. edit Dubl Protestancy is Heresy Protestancy contradicts God's veracity The infallibility of the Roman Catholick Church in matters of faith proved against Protestants The Protestant doctrin of fundamentalls confuted See Ariagae disp 4. de fide sec. 4. per totum The infallibility of the Church proved by God's veracity Heresy explained by Rebellion The vnreasonableness of them who pretend a privat spirit aÌ„d refuse to submit to the authority of the Church for want of cleerer evidence then the Roman Catholick hath of God's authority Esay 49.28 Suinglius lib. 4. Epist. Brentius in Confes. Wittemb cap. de Sacra Script in Prologo contra PetruÌ„ a Sâ—to l. 2. sect 6. pag. 112. See heretofore â— part sec. 1. how the centurists and other learned Protestants confess the Councells and Fathers defended worship of Imamages TransubstantiatioÌ„ Purgatory Indulgences and all other points of Popery Bale in his Act. Rom.