of you the second time for all the Protestants do not precisely consent herein how longe do you thinke that the Church of Rome did continue in her Verginall state and Purity without any stayne in her Faith D. WHITAKERS I thinke that during the first six hundred yeares after Christ the Church was pure florishing and inuiolably taught and defended the Fayth deliuered by the Apostles During all which ages the Church of Christ in respect of truth in Faith and Religion was as I may say in the full assent of the wheele And although to speake by resemblance there are found euen many irregularities in the regular motions of the Heauens yet I am fully perswaded that for the space of the first six hundred yeares no annomalous exorbitancies of errours or superstition did accompany the heauenly preaching of the Ghosple in the Church of Christ CARD BELLARM. M. Doctour indeed part of what you here say are your owne words in your booke against D. Sanders and you deale more liberally herein then diuers of your Breehren by affording a hundred and fifty yeares more to the true Church then most of them will allow Now you granting the purity of Faith to continue in the Church of Rome for the space of the first six hundred yeares after Christ do withall implicitly and inferentially grant that no change of Faith was made in that Church within the compasse of the afore mentioned 160. yeares seeing the said 160. yeares are included within the first six hundred yeares as being part of them But to proceed further you are here M. Doctour to call to minde what your selfe at other times no doubt at vnawares haue writen I do finde to instance only in some two or three points that you affirme that Victor who liued anno 160. after Christ was the first that exercised iurisdictō vpon forraine Churches That not Cyprian only who liued anno 240. to vse your owne words but almost all the most holy Fathers of that time were in errour touching the Doctrine of good works as thinking so to pay the paine due to sinne to satisfy Gods iustice Finally that Leo who was Pope anno 440. to speake in your owne dialect was a great Architect of the Antichristian kingdome Are not all these your assertions M. Doctour D. WHITTAKERS I cannot but acknowledge them for mine since they are extant to be read in my owne bookes loath I am to be so vnnaturall as to disauow or abandon any issue begotten on my owne brayne CARD BELLARM. Marke well then M. Doctour my deduction If the Chucrh of Rome remayned in her purity of Fayth without any change for the first six hundred yeares for your owne confessiō aboue expressed is that the Church of Christ so long continued a chast and intemerate Spouse And if as your owne penne hath left it written the doctrine of the Popes Supremacy was taught by Victor the first The doctrine of Merit of Works was mainteyned by Cyprian generally by other Fathers of that age and to be short if Leo were a great Architect of the kingdome of Antichrist you meaning of our present Roman Religion all which said Fathers to wit Cyprian Victor Leo and the rest did liue diuers ages before the sixt age or Century to what time you extēd the purity of the Faith of the Church of Rome doth it not then ineuitably result out of your owne Premisses if al this be true as you affirme it is that the doctrin of the Popes Supremacy the doctrine of merit of workes and our Catholicke Doctrine generally taught by Antichrist as you tearme the Pope were no innouations but the same pure doctrines which the Apostles first plāted in the Church of Rome Se how your felfe through your owne inaduertēcy hath fortified the truth of that doctrine which your selfe did intende to ouerthrow And thus farre to show that their neuer was made any chāg of Fayth in the Church of Rome prooued from the distribution diuision of those two different times which by the learned Protestants acknowledgments do contayne the Periods of the Church of Rome her continuance in the true Fayth of the Publicke and generall Profession of our now present Romane Fayth D. WHITTAKERS My L. Cardinall Whereas you haue produced seuerall testimonies from our owne learned Protestāts who teach that in the second third fourth age after Christ such such an Article of the Papists Religion had it beginning It seemeth in my iudgment that these their authorities do more preiudice then aduantage your cause Since such testimonies if so you will stand to them do shew a beginning though most anciēt of those doctrines after the Apostles deaths and consequently a change of Faith in the Church of Rome For if you will admit the authorities of the Protestants granting the antiquities of the present Romish Religion in those former times you are also by force of reason to admit their like authorities in saying that at such tymes and not before those Articles were first taught for seing both these points are deliuered by the Protestants in one the same sentence or testimony why should the one part thereof be vrged for true and the other reiected as false MICHAEAS M. Doctour Here with my L. Cardinall and your owne good licence I am to make bould to put in a word or two This your reply M. Doctour by way of inference may seeme to lessen the antiqurty of our ancient Iewish Law and therfore I hold my selfe obliged to discouer the weakenes therof though not out of desire to entertaine any contestation with you Grant then that some miscreants or Heathen Writers as Enemies to the Law of Moyses affirme that the Religion of the Iewes had it beginning in the tyme of Esdras for example This their testimony may iustly be alleaged to prooue that our Iewish Law was as auncient at least as Esdras but it cannot be alleadged to prooue that our Law tooke it first beginning at that time only and not before in the dayes of Moyses Therefore in the Authorities of this Nature produced from our Aduersaries writinges we are to distinguish and seuer that which the Aduersaries granteth in the behalfe of vs from that which he affirmeth to his owne aduantage What he grāteth for vs against himselfe so farre we are to embrace his authority seing it may be presumed that ordinarliy no learned man would confesse any thing against himselfe his Religion but what the euidency of the truth therein enforceth him vnto and therefore one of the ancient Doctours of your Christian Church if I do remember his words in this respect said well I will strike the Aduersaryes with their owne weapons But what the Aduersary affirmeth in fauour of his owne cause and against vs their we are not to stand to his own authority since no man is to be a witnes in his owne behalfe and it well may be presumed that such his sentence
most Blessed Trinity concerning which he thus speaketh The Diuinity is threefould as the three Persons be c. And from hence the reason may well be why Luther expungeth out of the Litany this verse Holy Trinity one very God haue mercy vpon vs. And hereupon he is not afraid to say that the word Trinity is but an humane inuention and soundeth coldly And finally he concludeth that his soule hateth the word Homousion or Consubstantiale For thus he writeth Anima me a odit Homousion Optimè exigerunt Ariani ne vocem illam prophanam nouam regulis fidei statuâ— liceret My very soule haâ—eth the word Homousion or Consubstantiale And the Arians not without reason required that it should not be lawfull to put this prophane and new Word meaning Homousios or consubstantialis among the rules of fayth Luthers blasphemy against the B. Trinity was such and so odious that euen Zwinglius did purposely write against Luther touching this very point 2. Touching the euent of things Luther houldeth contrary to all Christian faith that all things come to passe through a certaine Stoical and Fatal necessity for he defending this Heresy thus writeth Nullius est in manu c. It is in no mans power to thinke good or euil but al things as Wicleffs article condemned at Constance did rightly teach proceed from absolute Necessity And againe fateor articulum c. I do confesse Wicleffs article of all things comming to passe by Necessi 〈◊〉 to haue 〈◊〉 falsly condemned in the conuenticle of Constance 3. To the dishonour of Christ his Passion who was cloathed with Essentiall Maiesty and as intimating the insufficiency of it for the redemption of mankinde he teacheth that Christ not only suffered in body but also his Diuinity suffered for thus he writeth Cùm credo quod sola humana Natura pro me passa est Christus vilis noc magni praetij saluator est c. If I beleiue that only the Humane Nature of Christ suffered for me then is Christ a Sauiour but of a base and small worth and himselfe nedeth a Sauiour And Luther speaking of this point in an other place thus reprehendeth the Zwinglians The Zwinglians did contend against me most pertinaciously that the Diuinity of Christ could not suffer A doctrine so blasphemous as that it was not refuted only by the Zwinglians in Luthers dayes as himselfe confesseth but also euen by Beza such chaynes you see of blasphemies one stil following an other are wouen in Luthers faith and Religion 4. Touching the Administration of the Word and Sacraments Luther teacheth that al men and women also haue authority power to administer them These be his owne words The first office of a Priest is to preach the Word c. But this is common to al Next to baptize and this also al may do euen women c. The third office is to consecrate bread and wine But this also is common to al no lesse then Priests And this I auouch by the authoritie of Christ himselfe saying do this in remembrance of me This Christ speake to al then present and to come afterwards If then that which is greater then al be giuen indifferently to al Men and Women I meane the word and Baptisme then that which is lesse I meane to consecrate the supper is also giuen to them Thus Luther Yea Luther proceeded so farre herein as that as D. Couell witnesseth he was not afraid to affirme that the Sacraments were effectual though administred by Satan himselfe With D. Couell agreeth the Protestant Hospintan thus writing Lutherus â—o vsque progreditur c. Luther proceedeth so farre herein that he maintained the Sacrament to be a true Sacrament â—â—iamsi a Diabolo conficeretur though it were to be consecrated by the Deuil 5. For absolute deniall of tempor all Magistrats an Heresy indifferently condemned both by Catholicks and Protestants we finde Luther thus to write Among Christians no man can or ought to be a Magistrate But euery one is to other equally subiect c. And agayne As Christ cannot suffer himselfe to be tyed bound by lawes c. So also ought not the Conscience of a Christian to suffer them 6. Touching Luthers deniall of certayne parcels of Scripture And first the Epistle of S. Iames is called by Luther Contentious swelling strawy and vnworthy an Apostolicall spirit The booke of the Apocalyps is also reiected by Luther by the acknowledgment of Bullenger thus writing hereof Doctour Martin Luther hah as it were sticked this booke with a sharpe preface set before his first Edition in Duch for which his iudgment good and learned Men were offended with him Hereunto I will adde Luthers contempt of Moyses and some of the Apostles Against Moyses he thus writeth Habuit Moyses labia in faecunda irata c. And againe Moyses habuit labia diffusa felle ira Touching the Apostles he thus controuleth S. Peter S. Peter did liue and teach extra verbum Dei besides the word of God Thus we may see how no wynde was able to weigh downe the eares of Luthers pryde 7. Luther also taught an Heresy whereby the Propagation of Christian Religion is much endangered to wit That it was not lawfall to wage warre against the Turke an errour which enen the greatest Idolatours of Luther haue mainly condemned Luthers words are these Praeliari contra Turcas est repugnare Deo visitanti iniquitates nostras per illos To wage warre against the Turke is to resist God visiting our sinnâ—s by theÌ„ A point so confessed that Erasmus thus writeth of the consequence and effects of Luthers doctrine Many of the Saxons following herein that firct doctrine of Luther denyed to Caesar and King Ferdinand ayde against the Turke c. And said they had rather fight for a Turke not Baptized then for a Turke Baptized meaninge the Emperour Thus Erasmus 8. Touching Fayth and good workes Luther taught an Heresy disallowed by all learned Protestants For Luther teacheth as followeth It is impiety to affirme that fayth without Charity iustifyeth not Nay Luther proceedeth further thus writing Fides nisi sit sine c. Except fayth be without the least good works it doth not iustify nay it is not fayth And thereupon the more to debase good works he thus saith Works take their goodnes of the Worker Aud no worke is disallowed of God vnlesse the authour thereof be disallowed before Here now I end touching Luther Where you may perceaue Neuserus that this your Sunne of which you afore vaunted prooues to be but a fading Comet the fyery zeale you spoake of but a turbulent combustion seâ— on flame by Luther in subiects minds against all Christian Magistracy and the reflux which Luther as you pretend caused in the Church of Rome was instantly attended on with a flux and
only through the proper forme of the loadstone And Whether the turning of the irons point to the North being touched with the loadstone is to be referred to some huge supposed mountayne of loadstone in the vttermost Northparts or to any one place of the Heauens neere to the Northpole or to the intrinse call forme of the loadstone it selfe Whether Algebra be a distinct Art from Arythmetyke or but the same aduanced to it height and perfection Whether in the miracles of Christ and S. Peter exhibited in curing of corporall diseases and the like may be demanded of all true miracles of this nature God did for the tyme infuse a Physicall quality for example in the skirt of our Sauiours garment in the shadow of S. Peter which per potentiam obedientialem as the Scholemen speake did worke vpon the diseases and so cure them Or els God himselfe did immediatly worke these supernaturall effects ad praesentiam illorum at the presence of the skirt and shadow which in their absence otherwise he would not worke And finally to omit diuers others such nyce and abstruse speculations and but to touch a little vpon Diuinity Whether Communicatio Idiomatum flowing from the Hypostaticall vnion in Christ is reall in respect of the different natures in Christ or with reference only to the Hypostasis of both the Natures In these I say and many such like curiosities for so I may tearme them this last only excepted diuers of you haue no doubt spent and perhaps with great commondation many howres by perusing with your owne eyes seuerall Authours by discussing the arguments brought on all sides to fortify their different opinions And yet it mattereth litle on which syde the Truth lyeth in most of these speculations But wheresoeuer it is found in them we may equally and indifferently breake forth with the three Children in praysing of God for his Omnipotency and Wisdome discouered in them saying Benedicite Omnia opera Domini Domino If then you haue bene so industrious and breathles herein and so absorpt in the delight of these lesse necessary studyes O with what a spirituall Leithargy are such of you possessed who in matters of Religion the truth or falshood wherof concerns your soules interminable and endles happynes or misery shall runne on headlong till you come to your graues in an vnexamined and yet resolued opinion agaynst the Catholike fayth with a supine resignation of your iudgments in all poynts of Religion without further tryall to the wrytings for example of Caluin and Beza whose pestiferous Scripts many make their Catechismes Men charged euen by their owne Brethren with the execrable cryme of Sodomy And remember you not that we gather not grapes of thorns nor figs of thisles But herewith most excellent Academians I will end and craue pardon for this my fulnes of speach entreating you to call to mynd those words meliora sunt vulnera diligentis quam fraudulenta oscula odientis And thus remitting you to the perusall of these following Dialogues I will with my incessant prayers solicit the Highest who is Pater luminum and from whom Omne datum optimum omne bonum perfectum descendit so to enlighten your iudgements in your studyes and courses that after this life you may be as truly beatifyed with the Intuitiue knowledge of all things in the most happy vision of God As now here vpon earth you labour to enrich your mynds mith all commendable Discursiue knowledge Yours in Christ Iesus I. C. THE CONVERTED IEW. OR A DIALOGVE WHEREIN IS PROOVED That the Church of ROME hath made no change in Faith and Religion since the first Plantation of it by the Apostles INTERLOCVTOVRS MICHEAS A IEWISH RABBIN CARDINALL BELLARMINE DOCTOVR WHITAKERS MICHEAS MOST ILLVSTRIOVS CARDINAL and most reuerend and learned Doctour Such is the spreading fame of both your perfections in the sacred knowledge of Deuinity as that the report therof hath I confesse euen giuen wings to my old age to hasten my fleight to this noble Citty of Cosmopolis in Vtopia which as being honored through both your presence is for the time become the Rendeuous of all good literature Touching my selfe know you both that I am by birth and till this present also in Religion a Iew by name Micheas who euer haue honoured the Lord of Hoasts the God of Abraham the God of Isaack the God of Iacob and the Lord God of the Hebrews beleeuing with your Apostle Paul God grant with the like happy successe to him in change of my Religion who by his rysing faule as I may tearme it was no sooner strucken downe to the ground then he began to ascēd towards Heauen all things that are written in the Law and the Prophets and instructed according to the verity of the Law of the Fathers Of late I haue diligently perused the writings of your Euangelists the foure Historigraphers of that Holy Man whome you Christians call Iesus I also haue exactly red the Acts of your Apostles these faithfull seruants of the said Iesus who first sowed the seedes of their Maisters heauenly doctrine and after did watter them with their owne bloud To be short I haue bene much conuersant in these Letters Missiues if so they may be called I meane in the Epistles of the said Apostles written to diuers Nations for their better instruction in the Christian Faith as also in that most abstruse worke of your Sauiours Best-beloued commonly called the Apocalyps I haue made most particuler reference of all those writings to the Prophesies recorded in our owne Law and I do freely confesse and indeede with an ineffable griefe that that Holy One whome my Fore-Fathers and in them my selfe did put to the most opprobrious death of the Crosse was and is the Sonne of the Highest and the true Sauiour of the World and therefore I thinke it the lesse wounder that the stony harts of vs Iewes best discouered by such our cruell proceedings were figured by the Tables of Stones wherin the Law was first giuen to vs. Yea I am so inalterably perswaded herein that I do auouch that all the cheife Particularities concerning him were most punctually prophesied by the Antient Fathers of the Iewish Law Thus for example was his Precursor foretold in Esay cap. 40. That he should be borne of a Virgine Esay 7. The place of his birth Micheas 5. The death of the Cheldren at his birth Ierom. 31. His preaching Esay 61. His foure Eunngelists Ezechiel 1. The chusing of his Apostles Psalm 8. His riding vpon an Asse into Ierusalem Esay 62. and Zachary 9 The betraying of him by him who dipped his hand in the dish Psalm 41. The Iewes spittiug in his Face and buffeting of him Esay 50. The Iewes mocking of him Psalm 22. The deuiding of his garmēts Psalm 22. Their giuing to him gaule and Vinegar to drinke Psalm 69. The manner of his death by piercing his hands and feete Psalm 22.
a Protestant Church preaching the Word and administring the Sacraments vpon the face of the earth to be seene or heard of But hereat I meruayle not since Philosophy reacheth vs to speake by all â—sion that where the Obiect is wanting there the sense suspendeth it operation DOCTOVR REYNOLDS Admitting all that you say to be true touching the first twenty yeares before Luther yet it is most euâ—cent that Iohn Hus who liued anno 1400. and not very many yeares before those 20. yeares was a good and true Protestant for him I fynd registred for a most holy Martyr by M. Fox and D. Downeham MICHAEAS Iohn Hus did liue in the yeare 1400. Who first was a Catholicke Priest The cause of his death was in that he taught the Necessity of Communion vnder both kinds and the seditious doctrine touching Princes Bishops and Priests being in mortall sinne But to make a more particular dissection of this Instance The Articles wherein his followers the Bohemians dissented from the Church of Rome were these following which M. Fox thus relateth The Bohemians being demanded in what poynts they did differ from the Church of Rome the only Propositions which they propounded were these foure Articles first Communion vnder both kinds The second that al Ciuil dominiou was forbidden to the Clergy The third that the preaching of the Word was free for all Men and in al places The fourth that open crymes are in no wyse to be suffered for auoyding of greater euill Thus M. Fox of the Hussite who we see as comparting with the Church of Rome in all other points cannot possibly be alledged for visible members of the Protestant Church D. REYNOLDS But what do you say of Iohn Hus himselfe was not he a Protestant and dyed in defence of the Protestant fayth MICHAEAS M. D The testimonies of Luther and M. Fox shall decide this point betweene vs. And first M. Fox thus saith of him Quid vnquam docuit aut in concilio defendit Hussius c. What did Hus defend at any tyme or taught in the councel wherein he might not seeme euen superstitiously to agree with the Papists What doth the Popish fayth teach concerning Transubstantiation which he did not in like sort confirme with the Papists Who did celebrate Masses more religiously then he Or who more chastly did keep the vowes of Priestly single life Add hereto that touching freeâ—â—l fayth predeâ—â—nation the cause of iustification merit of Works what other thing taught he then was taught at Rome What Image of any saint did he cast out at Bethleem therefore what can we say for which he deserued death touching the which he is not a like to be condemned with the Sea of Rome or with it to be freed and absolued Thus far M. Fox with whom agreeth Luther thus writing of Hus The papists burned Hus when as he departed not a fingars breadth from the papacy for he taught the same which the papists do only he did find fault with their vices and wicked life agaynst the Pope he did nothing Thus Luther Besides all the Catholicke doctrines mantained by Hus he taught as aboue is touched the Heresy of Wiclef to wit that there are no Princes Priests or Bishopps whyle they are in mortall sinne as M. Fox recordeth with whom agreeth the Protestant Osiander thus wryting Nullus est Dominus ciuilis nullus est Praelatus nullus est Episcopus dum est in mortali peccato Haec propositio approhart non potest sed passus est Ioannes Hus hac in parte aliquid humani There is no Ciuill Prince no Prelate or Bishop whiles he is in mortall sinne This proposition cannot be approued but Iohn Hus suffered herein the infirmity of Man Now I cannot but admire the incredible boldnes of M. Fox who acknowledging the former Heresy mantayned by Hus but especially granting as shewed out of his owne words that Hus did hould all the cheise points and frame of the present Roman Religion was neuerthelesse not ashamed to pronounce Iohn Hus for a most holy Martyr as aboue is expressed meaning a martyr of his owne Protestant Church So gladly you Protestants for the supporting of the continuance and visibility of your Church do make clayme to any Catholicke or hereticke whosoeuer who in one only point of Religion though dissenting in all others may seeme to compart and interleague with you Thus far of Hus whom to legitimate for a Protestant you see it is impossible OCHINVS I must here agree in iudgment with Michaeas And this Instance had far better bene forborne then obtruded And indeed it is no small blemish to our Church to insist in such weake and insufficient examples But M. Doctour Let vs entreate you to rise vp to Higher tymes in your discourse D. REYNOLDS I will satisfy your desire The next then in whom I will instance shal be our owne Contryman Wicklef Whom all the world I hope will euen dispose that he was a perfect Protestant and that himselfe and his followers enioyed the administration of the Word and Sacraments the practize of which is acknowledged to be an essentiall note of the Churches Visibility This my opinion touching Wicklef being a Protestant is not myne alone but it is warranted with the authorityes of M. Fox and the learned Crispinus MICHAEAS Indeede M D. M. Fox Crispinus I grant do so teach but how truly Obserue what followeth and then geue vp your eauen and impartiall iudgment And yet before I come to the tuche of this point I must put you in mind what thy two former Protestants grant in the places by you cited that at Wickleffs reuolt supposing him to be a Protestant the Protestant Church was wholy inuisible for thus M. Fox writeth In the tyme of horrible darknes when there seemed in a manner to be no one so little sparke of pure doctrine left or remayning Wicklef by Gods prouidence rosevp through whom the Lord would first awaken raize vp againe the World Thus he This Wicklef being an Englishman as you know M. D. was a Catholicke Priest and Person of Lutterworth in Leicestershirs and as Stow relateth He first inueighed against the Church of Rome because he had bene depriued by the Archbishop of Canterbury from a certaine benefice He liued anno 1370. Now that Wicklef cannot be truly claymed for a Protestant I proue in that besides he was a Catholicke Priest and no Church of the Protestants then knowne to him he still retayned many Catholicke Opinions and withall taught diuers notorious Heresyes Touching his Catholicke Opinions still beleiued by him I will alledge diuers out of his owne Wrytings First he beleiued seauen Sacraments thus writing of them Quaedam sacramentaper se promulgauit Christus c. Certaine sacraments Christ did promulgate by himself as Baptisme the Eucharist the sacrament of Orders and of Penance certaine also by his Apostles as the sacraments of Confirmation and of Extreme
contrary to the necessary Visibility of Gods true Church proued out of the Scriptures acknowledged by their owne learned Brethren their owne Church to haue beene wholy latent and inuisible or rather wholy extinct and annihilated for so many ages together But this we must asâ—rybe O God to thy holy permission who as thou suffered in the tyme of the Old TestameÌ„t thyne Enemyes to sheath their swords in their brethrens sydes so heare thoâ— permiteest for the greater honour of thy Church so many learned Protestants euen with wounderfull admiration sweete Iesus deadly to wounde their owne Church fayth and Religion with their owne penns D. REYNOLDS Forbeare Michaeas these woundering Interiections the accustomed Dialect of an vngouerned Passion I grant these learned Protestants aboue alledged were of this opinion Notwithstanding to confront their authorityes there may be found many others as learned and iudicious Protestants as these are who absolutly mantayne the Visibility of their Church for all ages And I see no reason but that the sentences and iudgemeÌ„ts of these other should preponderate and weighe equally with the iudgements of the former Protestants by you alledged MICHAEAS You must pardon me M. Doctour if I wounder at things so strangly and vnexpectedly fauling out But to your solution I say it is most defectiue for seuerall reasons First because it mainly crosseth the method agreed vpon amonge vs in the beginninge of our discourse where you tyed your selfe irrephâ—ably to stand to the iudgments and confession of your owne learned Men. Againe though you can bringe other Protestants of as greate eminency for learninge as these by me obiected yet except you and the said Protestants will insist in true and confessed Instances of Protestancy for euery seuerall age which is impossible for you to performe your and their asseuerations are to be reputed but naked verball and inauayleable Lastly and principally your Replye is insufficient Becaus I heare alledge Protestants confessinge the Inuisibility of their owne Church to their owne mighty preiudice and the Catholycks greate aduantage And therefore it must needs be that the racke of Truth forced them being otherwyse ingenuous learned and iudicious to all such Confessions Whereas such Protestants as may be brought to gainsay and contradict the former Confession as being men of more spatious and large Consciences do spake in their owne cause and behalf and therefore as being ready pressed to auere any thinge how false soeuer for the safery of their Church are deseruedly to be reputed in their wrytings more partiall So as in this case the Words of Tertullian may iustly take place Magis fides prouâ— est in aduersus sometâ—psos confitentâ—â— quam pro 〈◊〉 â—egantes NEVSERVS I lyke well Michaeas the reason of your disparity geuen touching some Protestants confessing against themselfs and others affirming the contrary to their owne aduantage OCHINVS The difference set downe by you is most foreible for no doubte the open Confession of one learned Aduersary is to ouerballance twenty denying the same euen for that peculiar reason aboue mentioned D. REYNOLDS Michaeas Suppose for the tyme that we could not proue our Churches perpetuali Visibility yet seinge you are not able if you were pressed thereto to iustify and make good the Visibility of your owne Roman Church during all the ages since the Apostles dayes Therefore looke into what danger through our confessed Inuisibility we may be presumed to tune within the same we may justly includ you And thus you owne argument rebucts vpon your selfe MICHAEAS Heare I see M. D. that for meare want of positiue arguments to support your owne Church you are lastly fled to picke quarrells at our Church as if it were a iustification of yourselfs that wee Catholycks did labour with your infirmities lyke men who reioyce to haue compartuers in misery But to your point vrged say it is impertinent to the whole drift of our dispute which was only touching the want of Visibility in the Protestant Church which alone to proue was by me vndertaken the visibilitye of the Catholycke Church comminge in incidently lyke as a discours of vice doth often in the End biget some specches of Vertue our Contrary being thus brought to our remembrance by meanes of the other Contrary But because M. D. you shall discouer no tergiuersation in vs herein and that here to entreate of the continuall Visibility of our Catholycke Church violateth our former imposed method Therefore I will pawne my credit that there shal be left with you certaine prouffs conâ—ayninge the expresse and confessed Visibility of our Roman Church from the Apostles to these dayes And this by the acknowledgment of sundry learned Protestants though heare by the way I must tell you that the confessed Inuisibility of the Protestant Church during so many former Ages doth potentially and vertually include the proufe of the Visibility of our Roman Church during the said ages Seing the Inuisibility of your Church for so longe a tyme is ascribed by you Protestants as appeareth by many of the former Protestants testimonyes to be the worke of Antichtist you meaninge thereby the Pope and the Church of Rome therefore it ineuitably followeth from your owne Primisses that Popes and the Church of Rome haue euer beene visible during all the said former Ages and Centuryes OCHINVS Newserus I would haue a word or two with you in priuate therefore if it please you let vs walke a little a part NEVSERVS I am willingthereto go into the next roome and I will follow you OCHINVS You see here Neuserus how this Question of the Protestant Churches visibility hath bene discussed and argued And I must consesse that Michaeas hath euen in replicably demonstrated that the Protestant Church hath at least for many ages bene inuisible or rather extinct you see also how royatous and abounding the old Testamentâ—s in prophecyes and other testimonies that the Church in the daye of the true Messias shal be at all cyâ—res most conspicuous and visible Therefore what resteth but that eyther we must reiect the old Testament which I neuer will do for falsly prophetying of the state of the Church Or els we must denye that these tymes of the new Testament are the tymes of Grace that the Church erected by Christ and his Apostles as wanting the accomplishment of the foresayd predictions is the true Church which later poynt I hould to be more probable NEVSERVS You haue preuented me Ochinus in tyme of speaking but not in iudgment For to confesse the truth after I had obserued the weaknes of the Instances alledged though alledged by the Doctour with as much Scholarlike Art and aduantage as might be my houering thoughts transported my iudgment to this your Center Which though it be enuironed with difficultyes yet I hould it the more safe way with you since the one must necessarily be reiected as false and erroneous they so diametrically crossing one the other to retayne our former reuerence to
impudent assertion And first touching Dante 's He thus wryteth of S. Peter in his Italian verses O luce eternâ— del gran viro A cui nostro Signor lascio le chiaui Ch' ei portò giùda questo gaudio mirâ— In lyke sort touching Rome it selfe he thus discourseth Non pare indeg no al huomo d'intelletto Che ei su de l'alma Roma de suo impero Nel ' empirco ciel ' per padre eletto La quale el quale à voler direilvero Fur stabilite per lo loco sancto r ' fiede il successor del maggior Piero. In which verses Rome is called a reuerend Citty a holy place fortified and strenghtned euen from Heauen and finally the seate of Peter Againe Dante 's was much aduers against Pope Nicolas the third whom being dead Dante 's notwithstanding thus honored with his Verse Et se non fusse ch' aucor le me vieta I ariuerentia delle summe chiani Cheiutenesti vella vita lieta Iover ei parcle ancor più graut In which words Dante 's confesseth plainly that the reuerence which he did beare to this Pope in regard that he receaued the keyes of the Church meaning supreme authority in Christs Church was the cause why he did forbeare to wryte more sharply against hym Finally to omit many other lyke passages Dante 's saith that Boniface the eight Ne summo offitio ne Ordini sacri Guardò in se In which verse he acknowledeth that supreme authority and holy Orders did resyde in Boniface whose manners were otherwise displesing to Dante 's In this next place I will come to Petrarch who thus wryteth in acknowledging the power of the Bishop of Rome Quis quaeso non stupeat simulque non gaudeat si amicus sit Vicario IESV CHRISTI And further Romano Pontifici omnes qui Christiano nomine glortamur non modo consilium sed obsâ—quium insuper obedientiam debemus All we who glory in the name of Christians do owe not only counsell but duty and obedience to the Bishop of Rome Now for greater euidency of this poynt I will descend to the particular prayses geuen by Petrarch to particular Popes in his Italian booke written of the liues of Popes We there then find that of Pope Vrbanus 5. he thus writeth Fu nelle sacre Scripture dottissimo santamente visse Vrbanus was most learned in the holy Scriptures and liuod most Sanctly Of Clemens 6. he thus recordeth Fu per nome per fatti di molte virtù pieno Clement was both for his name and for his deeds replenished with much vertue Of Benedict 12. these are his words Beneditto fatto Papa reformò l'Ordine di S. Benedetto c. era feruido nella fide nelle buone operezelatore Benedict being created Pope did reforme the Order of S. Benedict c. He was feruerous in the fayth and zelous in good works c. To be short of Iohn 22. he thus saith Costuifu ottimo glorioso Pastore fece molti bein Hereticiper zelo della fide condamno This man was a very good and glorious Pastour He did many good deeds and condemned Hereticks out of his zeale to the fayth And now I refâ—r to any in different iudgment whether these two Italian Poëtes Dante 's and Petrarch did thinke the Pope of Rome to be Antichrist or no as our Pamphleter semeth to vrge â—hey did and whether the former prayses can be truly applyed to Anthichrist the whoare of Babilon â—o euident it is that what the foresaide PoeÌ„ts did Saâ—yrically wryce was written only against some disorders in the Church of Rome and against the presumed faults of some particular Popes but neuer against their supreme dignity in the Church of Christ And as touching the former Popes by Petrarch so commended We are to remember that his prayses deliuered of them where written after the deaths of the said Popes and therefore his words could not be censured to proceede from adulation and flattery but according to his owne true and secret iudgment passed vpon those Popes In the same manner for their lyke inueâ—ghing against the fulnes of the Popes power and iurisdiction he alledgeth certaine obscure men to wit Dulemus Hayabalus Ioannes Biraensis Ioannes de Rupe scissa three religious Men who liued and dyed in respect of all other poynts in the Roman Church And yet touching Ioannes de Rupe scissa both this Authour and the authour of Catalogus testium veritatis From whom this man taketh it are deceaued if we may beleiue Fox who thus wrytes of hym Ioannes de Rupe scissa liued in the yere 1340. who for his rebuking of the spiritually for their great enormittes and neclecting their office was cast into prison Our Pamphleter after produceth Gerson for a Protestant of whom he thus saith Gerson saw in his ages many horrible abuses of the Church of Rome and in his wrytings spake liberally of it Is not this a learned prouf for Gersons being Protestant in all poynts of Protestancy After all the former â—nstances the Pamphleter euen for want of other matter returneth back againe to the Waldenses or Albigenses iterating with a tedious prolixity his former discouâ—s concerning them and this in many leaues Whereby he sheweth the extreme mendicity of his Cause and that he laboreth with all Art possible to draw out this his Treatise as is aboue said into some reasonable number of sheets But touching the Waldenses I refer the Readeâ— as afore I willed to the pâ—rticular passage of Waldo in the former Dialogue His former Extrauagancyes of discours being ended he is not ashamed to challenge S. Bernard for a Protestant of whom he thus wryteth Before our ascending thus high we might tell you of S. Bernard whom all though it is lykely at the first dash you will challenge as your owne yet when you haue well aduized of hym you may let hym go againe O perfrictam frontâ—m and wonderfull Impudency For who is so ignorant or so bould that wil not confesse S. Bernard to haue bene a Roman Catholicke in all points He was a religious Man and Abbot of Claireuaux and Authour of many Monasteryes in Flanders and France as O siander the Protestant confesseth he also was Pryest and said Masse to his dying day as all Writers of him do testify A poynt so euident that for his being a great and eminent member of our Catholicke Church the Centurists al Protestants thus censure him Bernardâ—â—s coluit Deum Maozim ad nouissimum vitae suae articulum And further they say of him Bernardus fuit acerrimus propugnator sedis Antichristi Bernard was an earnest defendour of the seaâ—e of Antichrist Here now I refer to the candid and vpright Reader what impudency it was in this Man to challenge Bernard for a member of the Protestant Church But heere touching S. Bernard I cannot but abserue
deuills being far absent from their Witches southsayers and coniurers do neuerthelesse heare their inuocations and coniurations As is warranted by all Experience Shall any Man then thinke that the blessed Saincts of Heauen are depryued of hearing the prayers and intercessions which the faythfull heare vpon Earth do make vnto them since otherwyse it would follow that spirituall substances by their losing of Heauen I meane the deuills by their fall did obtayne greater prerogatiues and excellencye then the soules of the Saincts do by gayning and ascending vp to Heauen an absurdity incompatible with the goodnes wisdome and Charity of God And thus much touching the doctryne of Prayer to Saincts The Catholicke doctrine touching Iustification by works Merit of works and Works of Supererogation TOuching Iustification by Works the Catholicks teach as followeth Iustification wheareby a Man being afore wicked and the Sonne of Wrath is become the Sonne of God is wrought by the healpe of Gods grace without any meritte of works on our syde and by the spirit of fayth and Charity infused by God in vs in the very Act of our Iustification Thus our Aduersaries may see that we do not ascribe our first Iustification to any of our works at all though they most wrongfully traduce vs to the contrary For we willingly acknowledge those words of the Apostle It is not of the willer or of the runner but of God who sheweth Mercy Secondly the Catholicks teach that after a Man iustifyed being of wicked become good he may encrease his first iustification by works That is he being already made iust by Gods grace and mercy may by his works become more Iust Which works are not those which are performed by the force of Nature as the Pelagians did teach and the Protestants do falsly charge the Catholicks but as they are performed by the spirit and grace of God and as they receaue their force vertue from our Sauiours Passion Concerning the merit of Works more particularly the Catholicks teach as followeth whose doctrine herein for greater perspicuity I will set downe in certaine propositions Which propositions do contayne certaine condicions necessarily requyred that Works may merit The first proposition is this That works may merit it is requyred that the partye who worketh be in state of grace and an adopted Child of God Thus we exclude all works from meriting which are performed by one who is not in state of grace that is who wanteth true fayth true hope true charity for such Works are performed by force of Nature only not by force of Gods grace The second proposition That works do merit a free liber all promise or Couenant of God is necessary by which his promise of reward made vnto good Works God in a manner obligeth himselfe to reward good works according to his promises Heere our Aduersary may see that we willingly confesse that no works of ours of themselues can merit as we abstract from them the promisse of God for without this promisse and Couenant of God made out oâ— his most mercifull bounty to remunerate good works we do willingly say with the Apostle The passions of this life are not condigne to the glory to come that shal be reuealed vnto vs. The third proposition That Works do merit it is according to the most probable opinion necessarily requyred that they cheifly preceede from actually or virtually Charity loue towards God That is that they be vndertaken cheifly and primatiuely for the honour and loue we beare to God From whence it followeth that no works which are not seasoned with this condicâ—on of Charity in God but haue to themselues only peculiar and lesse principall ends c 〈…〉 merit The fourth and last proposition which is implicitly included in the former Propositions That Works do merit they must take their worth and dignity from the 〈…〉 ritis of our Sauiours Passion and from thence receaue as it were a new tincture and dye Thus we see that originally and principally it is Christs meriâ—ts which do merit for vs and that our works are but once of the meanes whereby we apply Christs meritâ—s vnto vs. That the doctrine here set downe touching merit of works is sutable to the doctrine of the Catholicke Roman Church is euident euen from the authority of the Councell of Trent where we thus reade To them who worke well to the end of their life and do hope in God eternall life is giuen both as a grace and fauour mercifully promised to the Sonns of God through the meritts of Christ Iesus as also as a reward proceeding from the promisse of the same God faythfully to be giuen to their good Works and Meritts c. Thus the Councell The certainty of this doctrine of merit of works receaueth it cheife proofe from the holy Scripture and this from the testimonyes of Scripture of seuerall kinds First then from those places where eternall life is called Merces a wage or reward As Mathew Reioyce for your reward is great in Heauen Againe Call the workemen and pay them their hyre besides diuers others of like nature Secondly from those places wherein a heauenly reward is promised to men according to the measure proportion of their Works as where it is said The Sonne of Man shall come in the glory of his Father and shall render to eueryone secundum opera sua according to his works In like sort it is said God will render to euery one according to his works besides many other like places here omitted Thirdly from those testimonyes of Scripture which expresse the reason that works are the cause why eternall life is giuen thus we read Come you blessed of my Father possesse the Kingdome prepared for you es 〈…〉 iui enim dedisti mihi manducare for I was hungry and you gaue me to eate Againe in the same place Quia in pauca fuisti c. Because thou hast been faithfull ouer few things I will place thee ouer many things enter into the ioy of thy â—ord And in the Apocalyps These are they which are come out of great tribulation c. ideo sunt ante throâ—um Dei therefore they are before the throne of God In all which places the particles Enim Quiâ— Ideo are causases that is implying our shewing the reason and cause of a thing Fourthly from those texts in which a reward is promised to good Works euen by force of Iustice According hereto we reade God is not vniust that he should forget your worke As also that be thou faythfull euen vnto death and I will giue thee the Crowne of life See of this nature other texts quoted in the margent Fiftly and lastly from those passages wherein there is mention made of dignity or worth As where we reade The workeman is worthy his wage Agayne vt digni habeamini regno Dei c. That you may be had worthy the Kingdome of
who will seeme to erre eueÌ„ out of iudgment that these doctrines could stealingly creepe into Gods Church without all resistance of it Pastours Doctours and Fathers I bouldly auerte that these men not only giue the lye openly to the holy Scripture in seuerall places witnessing the contrary but they with all cease to be Men by loosing wholy the naturall light of all humane discourse and Reason But M. Doctour to presse the force of this argument further Haue you not read that in the Primatiue Church there were the Heresies of the Valentinians Tationists Maniches Arians and diuers others all which did embroile the Church of Christ euen before the first foure hundred yeares were expyred D. WHITTAKERS Yea. I haue read all these and I do find them recorded in the writings and Catalogues of Heresies composed by Irenaeus Epiphanius Augustine and others who with their learned Penns openly impugned these and diuets other Heretickes which Hereticks for the tyme troubled the waters of the Church more then after they could at their pleasure calme them CARD BLLARM Haue you not also read of the Heresies of the Nestroians Pelagians Donatists Minothelits All which had their beginnings within the compasse of the 160. yeares aboue mentioned which was betweene the first foure hundred and forty yeares next after Christ and the thousand yeares from vs within which compasse of yeares by the Protestants owne writings the Church of Rome did suffer this supposed and imaginary change in Religion D. WHITTAKERS I haue also read of these latter Heresies and do finde the first three amply recorded and writen against by S. Augustine and the fourth to omit our owne Centurists regestring those Heriticks by the sixt Councell of Constantinople for I haue euer obserued in my reading that the arising Heresies in euery age were the Markes whereat the Canons of the Church and Counceles and the learned writers of the ancient Orthodoxall Fathers did shoote CDRD BELLARM. To decend lower Haue you not also seene the records of many Heresies rysing in euery seuerall age after the first six hundred yeares And to leape ouer diuers ages the-Herisies of Berengarius Waldo Wicleffe c if so you will acknowledge them for Heresies D. WHITTAKERS All this I must and do confesse for I finde the Heresies of euery seuerall age to be registred out of the Fathers writings of euery such age by our owne Centurists in the fift Chapter of euery seuerall Century by Osiander in his Centuries and by Pantaleon the Protestant in his Chronology And for the doctrines of Berengarius Waldo Wicleffe c. I acknowledge them not for Heresies Yet I must confesse I finde them to this day extant in diuers Bookes As of Berengarius in the writings of Langfrancus Guitmundus and Algerus Of Waldo I read in Illiricus as also in Osiander Of Wicleffe in his owne writings as also in M. Fox his Monuments and M. Stow his Annalls of England CAD BELLARM. Well then Thus I compound these Simples I meane thus I infer and collect out of your former granted Premisses Seing it is manifest that the Heresies rising within the first foure hundred yeares The Heresies within the next two hundred yeares the Heresies hatched in euery age during these last thousand yeares are most largly recorded partly in the writings of the ancient Fathers in particular and set tracts against them partly in the Canons of generall Councells condemning them partely by the obseruing diligeÌ„ce of Ecclesiasticall Historiographers whose desined labour is to transmit coÌ„mend ouer to after ages the true state and face of Christs Church in former ages since History is the life of Memory and Embassadour of antiquity and partely by the Protestants like endeauours who haue writen seuerall long Volumes of this very subiect Seing I say all this is manifest and that not only the inundation and flux but euen the Ebb and reflux of euery Heresie was precisely noted by the Pilots of Gods Church can it enter into any brayne but to weene that so many Articles of the present Roman Religion being in number far more then all aboue rehersed in weight and consequently greatly exceeding them for diuersity of Countryes and Nations far further deuulged and spreade then either all or any of the former Hereâ—ies euer were most of these other being restrained only to one Contry or Nation could euer so vnespiedly infect the whole Church of Christ with their contagion and worke a more notorious chang therin then euer yet was wrought by al the Heretick since Christs time put together and yet not one Father or Doctour of those times either to take notice of any of those supposed Heretickes or knowing them not to impugne their first assaults by preaching or writing neither any one Ecclesiasticall History but to mention in their Histories any one of the sayd Articles as Innouations in Fayth Can this be imagined or can it be in the power of man thus to create at his pleasure a new Religion without controule or discouery If this can be dreamed then may we with all dreame that Impossibilities can haue a true reall existence and that the Scripture it selfe for want of due performance of its predictions is most false Into such a depth of absurdities M. Doctour these your very supposals and imaginary speculations do precipitate and cast all those who giue any credit vnto them MICHEAS My L. Cardinall and you M. Doctour I must ingenuously confesse to you both that the former Argumentes are much preuayling the one drawne froÌ„ the distribution of times whreby euery age since the Apostles is by the Protestants owne acknowledgmeÌ„ts cleared from all change in Fayth The other from the silence both of the Fathes and Doctours of Christs Church in not â—â—pugning the supposed introducing of the Catholicke Articles as also of all Ecclesiasticall Historiographers in not so much as intimating or but glancing at any one Article as innouated of the Church of Rome And to paterne these times of Grace with the tymes of the Old Law If any frontlesse and bould Man and some such perhaps may easily and without labour be found since we neede not to plough for weeds they freely growing of theÌ„selues should affirme that the Moysaicall Law had suffered greate changes and alterations betweene the times of its being first promulgated by Moyses and the comming of the Messias I should hould it a most choaking and full demonstration for the ouerthrowing the falsehoode of such an assertion if neither instances of any tymes among so many ages passed from Moyses to Christ wherin such a forged Innouation should happen could be giuen neither could it be showed that any of the Prophets or Iewish Rabbines did openly gaynsay or contradict the said imaginarie new arising Opinions who no doubt would haue maintained the Law with sheading of their bloud before any Nouelisme in Fayth should haue inuaded the Synagogue imitating herein the resolution of Sampson who conquered his enemies by his
owne death Neither lastly if not any historiographer of the Iewish tymes did in their workes and writings giue the least touch therof But pardon me both of you for this my interrupting and I would intreat you to proceede further in this your learned discourse CARD BELLARM. I will satisfie your request but before I descend to any other argument I will annex to my former demonstration for I can tearme it no lesse drawne from the silence of Doctours in contradicting and Historiographers in relating any presumed innouations in the Church of Rome these ensuing Considerations 1 First we finde that the lesse iustifiable liues conuersatioÌ„ in manners of some few Popes were precisely regestred and recorded to all Posterity with intention perhaps to disgrace all Popes as if all Popes were to be represented in some one or other lesse vertuous Pope as all men are in Adam Now then this being most true can we probably thinke that the Historians of those ages being euer ready prepared to taxe the Personall vices of the Popes themselues who as you see were forced by this meanes to passe the Red sea of shame disgrace and obloquy all of them would be wholy silent in relating the greatest change in Religion that euer happened if any such chang had truly really bin effected 2 Secondly we all knowe that the Greeke Church hath bin for many ages emulous of the Church of Rome and therfore if the present Church of Rome had anciently made any Diuision or Scissure from the true Church of Christ the Grecians no doubt who then stood euer vpon the hight of Enâ—â—y the better presently to espy any arising aduantage against the church of Rome would haue bene most apt to recommend the memory of such a change in our church to all after ages in their Histories But no such records we finde in any of their writings Yea the Grecians are so far from that as that on the contrary side the present Church of Rome is able to specifie and note out of most ancient and approoued Authours the very times when the Grecians first introduced those particuler Opinions wherin at this day they dessint from our Roman and catholicke church I will insist for breuity in some few cheife examples First their deniall of Obedience to the Sea of Rome was begun by Iohn of Constantinople and was noted and writen against by Gregory the Great and Pelagius Their denial of the proceedings of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Sonne tooke it beginning and at it first rysing was gainsaid and contradicted about the yeare 764. Their deniall of prayer for the dead was begun by Arius and impugned by Epiphanius l and Augustine Their bringing in of leauened bread by the Grecians in the celeberation of the Eucharist was first begun about the yeare 1053. as appeareth out of the writings of Leo the nynth and the Centurists Now can it be imagined that those being few in number could so precisely be contradicted writen against and left regestâ—ed to all posterity and yet this supposed change of the church of Rome consisteth in bringing in of far more Articles in number and of as great consequence should neuer be noted nor impunged by any one Doctour or Father nor recorded nor obserued by any one Historiographer the said Doctours Fathers Historiographers liuing in the very same ages wherin this supposed alteration is sayd to haue hapned By the same ground might Pythâ—goras well maintayne as in his books he attempted to do that the earth being in speciall motion of 24 houres our selues because we are carryed together with this reuolution cannot obserue that any such motion of the earth is 3 Thirdy we may call to mind that wheras the Ceremonies in the celeberation of the Masse were successiuely and at seuerall tymes added and first brought in by seuerall Popes So we finde accordingly that the Aduersaries of the present Church of Rome as willing to discouer our innouations though in the smalest matters for Malice is glade to take hould of the least aduantage and but in points of indifferency haue most diligently and painfully recorded them in their seuerall bookes written of this very subiect with all due circumstances both of the Popes introducing them and the tymes when they were introduced Here now I vrge If the Enemyes of the present Church of Rome being thus diligent and sollicitous in noting the beginning of eich Ceremony of the Masse all such Ceremonies being meerely accidentall to the Masse and without which the Masse may as truly and effectually be celebrated as with them If they I say could haue discouered any innouation in the maine Doctrine it selfe of the Masse as in the Doctrine of the Reall Presence the Sacrifice of Christs body there offered vp our Adoration of the Sacrament the Priests enioyned chastity for such his celebration would they haue bin silent therin or rather would they not haue loaded their books with the relation of all such innouations they consisting not in smale ceremonies but in most sublime and high dogmaticall points of Christian Religion If otherwise then belike our Aduersaries would haue vs to thinke that herin they resemble the Sunne which reuealeth the Terrestriall Globe being but of a litte quantity but concealeth the Celestiall which is of a far more spatious greatnes But to proceed and to conclude the force of this argument drawne from the impugning and recording of innouations in doctrine if this precise course by our Aduersaryes acknowledgments hath euer bin kept during all precedent ages without intermission in all matters confessed and out of controuersy betweene vs and the Protestants shall we dreame that it was so wholy neglected and forgotteÌ„ touching the supposed innouation of our Catholicke Doctrines as that such our cheife doctrines though first really brought in in those former tymes were neither at there first beginning impugned by any Doctours or Fathers of those ages nor recorded or mentioned by any one Ecclesiasticall Historiographer among so many of the same or later tymes But now to vndertake according to your desire Micheas an other argument You Protestants M. Doctour do affirme that this our present Roman Religion is Antichristian for so commonly most of you in your charitable language do stile it and that the Pope is the true Antichrist deciphered by the Apostle for his first introducing and defending of the sayd Religion and vpon this ground you teach that Papistry first came in when Antichrist first came in D. WHITAKERS We do so teach indeed For seing our mayne assertioÌ„ is that your Religion is Antichristian we cannot euen by the nature of Relatiues seuer and deuide so indissoluble companions they are the one from the other I meane Papistrie from Antichrist he being the Man who first did disseminate it and now the heade who cheifly principally and with all wicked molitions and machinations whatsoeuer maintayns it CARD BELLARM. You are M. Doctour it