Selected quad for the lemma: world_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
world_n	church_n	particular_a	universal_a	5,727	5	9.3530	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A19220	The Catholike moderator: or A moderate examination of the doctrine of the Protestants Prouing against the too rigid Catholikes of these times, and against the arguments especially, of that booke called, The answer to the Catholike apologie, that we, who are members of the Catholike, apostolike, & Roman Church, ought not to condeme the Protestants for heretikes, vntill further proofe be made. First written in French by a Catholike gentleman, and now faithfully translated. See the occasion of the name of Huguenots, after the translaters epistle.; Examen pacifique de la doctrine des Huguenots. English	Constable, Henry, 1562-1613.; W. W., fl. 1623.	1623 (1623)	STC 5636.2; ESTC S109401	62,312	88

and nation With which definition the Fathers iointly consent All they saith Saint Augustine which are holy and sanctified which are haue beene and shall be are Citizens of the heauenly Ierusalem And S. Gregory the Pope that my proofe may be the more authenticall saith That all the Elect are embraced in the bosome of the Church and all the Reprobates are without And yet was poore Iohn Husse burnt for an Heretike for affirming the very same O wicked Catholikes that haue made a man to be burnt for an Heretike for affirming no more then what a Saint had done and which is more then a Pope had said before him So then in this signification neither the Church of Rome nor that which themselues call the Reformed Church can properly be called the Catholike Church but only parts of it Nay we cannot truly affirme that they be parts of the Catholike Church but that God hath both in the Romane Church and in the Reformed some that be members of the Catholike Church Which is as much to say as that diuers shall be saued in both Churches Like as there were many amongst the Iewes at the comming of Iesus Christ and at this day be in the Greeke Church and in Prester Iohns Country which doe embrace the Christian faith without acknowledging the Pope So that if we appropriate the title of Catholike to the Romane Church only taking it in this signification it must needs so low that either all the Catholikes are elected though the Catholikes themselues write that diuers Popes haue beene damned or else that no Iew was euer saued before Christs comming and that God hath not had his Church at all times or that no Greeke nor Affrican can be saued in our time and then God should not haue his Church in all places Againe if we attribute not this title of Catholike only to the Church of Rome I can see no reason why the reformed Church should be more excluded then the rest To be briefe when we passe our censure vpon any man whether he be of the Catholike Church or not we must speake either according to Faith or according to Charitie If according to Faith we cannot say that such or such a man is a Catholike because it is God that knoweth who are his saith S. Paul But if wee passe our iudgment according to charity this will haue vs esteeme all those to bee of the true Catholike Church which bee of the visible of which I will next speake and shew how it may bee termed Catholike 2 The Church as I haue proued already comprehends all the Elect those as well that be already in heauen as those that are yet on earth and remaine mingled among the wicked which last though generally more in number yet the Elect beare the name of the better part So that both good and bad which make an outward profession of the true faith are reputed members of the true Church According to the Parable of the net which held the bad fishes as well as the good This Church was separated from the rest of the Gentiles with a partition wall as it were and before the comming of Christ pend vp in one country and restrained to the Family of Israel But since Christs comming This partition wall is as S. Paul saith broken downe so that neither Iew nor Greeke are excluded And by reason of this difference that the Iewes in those dayes had onely this priuiledge and that now no one particular country hath it more then another the Church is called Catholike that is to say Spread all the world ouer And for that shee is so vniuersall shee is diuided into particular Churches As in Saint Pauls time into the Church of Ephesus of Rome of Galatia of Corinth c. and no one of these Churches hauing any priuiledge more then another they were all together called The Church Catholike not that it is alwayes euery-where but for that no country is excluded and no place priuiledged So then no place being excluded there may be other Churches besides that of Rome and no place being priuiledged euen Rome it selfe may be cut off from the Church 3 Thirdly the Church is called Catholike in respect of the Donatists who denied the Church to bee dispersed all ouer the world but held it to be coopt vp in Affrica wherevpon it came to passe that those Churches which held the contrary were called the Catholike Churches Euen as at this day these Churches that hold the Church to haue need of reformation are called The Reformed Churches Which is the reason why the more ancient Fathers neuer vsed this terme Catholike to distinguish the pure Churches from the hereticall but called them Orthodoxall But in processe of time by reason that the Orthodoxe Churches held that the Church was Catholike or Vniuersall these two words Catholike and Orthodoxall were taken in one and the same signification so that at last this title of Catholike was not onely giuen to the Church to distinguish the Orthodox from the Donatists but also from all other Heretikes For a Catholike in proper speech is not opposite to all sorts of Heretikes but to the Iewes onely and the Donatists But for as much as custome is the matter of words as we see in this word Tyrant anciently taken in good part for a King and now onely for a bad King this word Catholike is taken contrary to his nature in the signification of a pure Church in such a sense as that a particular Church may be called a Catholike Church and more or lesse Catholike proportionably as it is more or lesse pure So that the question betweene the Catholikes and the Huguenots lies not in this point viz. Which of the Churches is the Church Catholike but whether of them is most Catholike and which most corrupted for in some degree both of them may be Catholike so long as they hold the substance of faith as I shewed in the first Chapter and both of them in some sort may be corrupt it being a thing most certaine That euery visible Church may haue errors more or lesse The Church saith Saint Bernard as long as shee is in the tabernacle of this body hath not attained vnto the perfection of beauty and is not therefore absolutely faire For it is the priuiledge of the Church Triumphant onely to be faire and as S. Paul saith without spot or wrinckle True it is indeed that the Church is sometime called faire but this is euer comparatiuely wherefore the Bridegroome in the Canticles saith of his Spouse which is the Church that shee is the fairest of women that is not simply faire saith S. Bernard but the fairest among women And for that selfe same reason is she in one and the same verse styled both blacke and faire I am blacke saith the Spouse but I am comely I am not ignorant how that the Ancients also did vse this word Catholike for a distinction

but a wrangling about the word as I haue shewed before when I discourst of the number of the Sacraments As for the parts Namely Contrition Confession and Satisfaction if that he blames the Huguenots for not holding them properly parts thereof I answer him That neither doe all Catholikes hold them so For Durandus makes but two parts Confession and Absolution and Scotus saies that there is but one which is Absolution But if the question be whether these three things be requisite or not the Huguenots will also say that they are to wit that it is necessary for a Penitent to haue Contrition and sorrow of heart to confesse and acknowledge our sins vnto God nay and that it is profitable also to confesse them to the Pastors of the Church but not so absolutely necessarie because according to the iudgment of the learned Catholikes this Auricular Confession was neuer instituted by God nor yet of a long time practised in the Church as Beatus Rhenanus who was himselfe a Catholike hath very well obserued Finally as for Satisfaction it is to be considered either in this life or in the life to come in Purgatory That in this life the Huguenots approue of and teach it to bee most necessary to Saluation to giue satisfaction to men whom we haue any way offended and in regard of our sins against God to walke in newnesse of life Moreouer they confesse that God punisheth men in this life by temporall afflictions yea euen those whose sins are pardoned T is true indeed that they deny any satisfaction or punishment to be in Purgatory after death for sinne but herein their error cannot be great first because S. Austen puts it down no otherwise than as a thing probable and not necessary saying no more but It may be that it is true And secondly because that neither can the Catholikes agree vpon it amongst themselues some of them placing Pargatory here vpon earth others vnder it some neither aboue nor below but in the Aire Some affirme that all the Elect shall goe thither yea the Apostles and Martyrs themselues others thrust in those only who haue not in this life giuen full satisfactiō for their sins And for the fire some would haue it a Materiall fire some fire and water others neither of both Lastly some there be that teach that the soules are there tormented by Deuils others by Angels others by neither of both How then I pray is this questiō likely to be so necessary about which there is so much vncertainty that we neither know as I haue shewed who they be that goe thither nor where it is nor by whom they are to be tormented nor what they are to suffer The difference then betwixt the Catholikes and the Huguenots is but this That the Huguenots beleeue it not at all and the Catholikes know not what they beleeue See here in briefe the Huguenots opinions vpon the points before mentioned by which we may perceiue their errours not to be in the substance of Faith and doe not therefore hinder them from being of the Church and Catholike Religion For euery errour in Theologie doth not separate a man from the Church S. Cyprian was an Anabaptist in the point of Rebaptization and yet was he a Martyr S. Hierome as I said before held those bookes of Scripture for Apocryphall which the Councell of Trent hath since concluded to be Canonicall and yet remaines hee still Canonized for a Saint Tertullian one of the ancient Fathers fell to be a Montanist And Origen alone held as many errours as all the Huguenots together yet was he one of the most famous Doctors of the whole Church And to come neerer to our times In how many questions of Diuinitie did Scotus and Thomas Aquinas differ the two prime pillars of Schoole-Diuinitie Melchior Canus and Bellarmine accuse Caietane of diuers errors who for all that remaines one of the venerable Colledge of Cardinals The Dominicans and Franciscans could neuer yet agree about our Ladies conception yet be both of them held for very good Catholikes So that as I said the Huguenots may very safely be accounted good Catholikes so long as they hold the foundation of Diuinitie although they put some few tyles out of order on the roofe of the house and build with hay and straw vpon condition still that as S. Paul saith it be vpon the same foundation Otherwise we must conclude the Martyrs the Saints the ancient Fathers the Doctors of the Church the prime Schoolemen the Cardinals yea and the Catholikes themselues to be no Catholikes CAP. 2. 〈…〉 Catholikes as well as the Huguenots doe not agree with the ancient Church in matter of Ceremonies and that therefore the Huguenots are not to be condemned AS in men we consider their bodies and their apparell so in the Church likewise we consider the Doctrine and the Ceremonies As for the doctrine or body of Religion I haue showne in the former Chapter that the Huguenots haue the braine the heart and the liuer and all other the vitall parts whole and sound that is that they yet hold all the principall points of faith and that the maine thing that can seeme to be blamed in them is that they haue some certaine warts or spots in their skinne certaine errors I meane in the circumstances and application of that faith Now for the apparell and ceremony of Religion I confesse that the Church of the Huguenots is not so gorgeously or richly set out as the Church of Rome and is for the same cause not so well entertained and more despised in the Courts of great Princes and Monarches of the world which I iudge to be the reason why the Catholike Apology endeuoured to excuse the simple and naked Ceremonies of the Reformed Church without any intent thereby to disparage the gorgeous and gay attire of the Catholike Church but to shew onely That wee should not so meanly esteeme this outward simplicity as to condemne it without hearing Euen as that officer would bee held too rigide and seuere that would hinder a poore man from presenting his Petition to the Prince because hee is not clad like a Courtier The reason for which the Apology doth excuse them is for that the ancient Church did sometimes heretofore content her selfe with the like simplicity Now vpon this occasion the Author of the answer perswades himselfe that he hath gotten a great aduantage vpon the Catholike Apology Because saith he he can proue that diuers of these ceremonies which the Huguenots doe reiect are very ancient To which I answer That I willingly accept as much as hee grants that is that he cannot proue that all the ceremonies of the Church of Rome be most ancient but onely as he saith diuers of them As for those diuers which hee instanceth in that you may see how impertinent they are I will make it appeare in these two things First that he doth not proue against the Huguenots that the Church

King the Bishops the Clergie and likewise of all the people of France Admit it were so yet for all this does it not follow that it is receiued in France vnlesse hee can shew withall that all the Estates doe receiue it that is The Church the Nobility and the People But hee makes no mention of the Nobility but onely of the Church and the third Estate so that at the most it is receiued but of two of the three Estates which may be the cause that our Aduersary to keep vp the number diuides the Church into two parts viz. Bishops and Clergie The Councell saith hee is receiued of the Bishops the Clergie and likewise of all the people of France Which is a new diuision of the Estates neuer as I perswade my selfe heard of before Iudge then what iust occasion the Nobilitie of France now haue to reiect this Councell when as those who would haue the Councell receiued doe reiect the Nobility CAP. 6. That the Huguenots may very rightly bee accounted members of the Catholike Apostolike and Romane Church THis Chapter at the first blush seemes to treat of the same Argument that the first does for hauing there proued it That the Huguenots are of the same religion with vs Catholikes it may follow also that they bee of the same Church too And yet to my thinking these two Chapters may very well bee parted not so much in regard of the difference of the nature of the subiect as of the humours of the persons For commonly when a Huguenot would draw a Catholike to his opinion he begins euermore with the particular Controuersies and so vpon the purity of his doctrine hee inferres the verity of his Church A Catholike on the other side when hee would winne a Huguenot beginnes still with the Church and so by the verity of the Church concludes the purity of his doctrine and commonly when either of them gets the other out of this tracke they are to seeke which is one of the reasons that they cannot satisfie the aduerse partie For he that would perswade another must not begin with that principle which to him seemes best though indeed it be so but with that which seemes best in his opinion whom hee desires to perswade otherwise hee shall but lose his labour For when a Huguenot shall haue vrged a thousand passages of holy Scripture to proue the truth of his owne particular assertion hee shall not bee a whit the nearer and why For that a Catholike will say instantly with himselfe What though I cannot answer him yet another may and if I am to beleeue nothing which I am not able to maintaine by disputation then should I not beleeue the proceeding of the holy Ghost the vnion of both Natures in Iesus Christ the mysteries of the holy Trinity all which I haue beleeued without being able to maintain them or so much as vnderstand them And euen so the authority of the same Church which makes mee beleeue these mysteries without being able to maintaine them makes me also to beleeue the holy sacrament of the Altar Purgatory c. without being able to maintaine them So that if a Hugu proceeds no further does not shew a reason how a man may be assured of these mysteries without the Churches authority or else which I hold more reasonable why wee ought wholly to relye vpon the authority of the Church in one point and not in another hee shall neuer say ought to the purpose Nor can the Catholikes haue any happier success in their perswasiues for when they talke to the Huguenots of the Church how the Church saies this and the Church saies that and the Church cannot erre They who are not brought vp to such kinde of phrases and who found their faith vpon this perswasion That the Scripture is cleere on their sides What care wee will they say what the Church saith so long as wee agree in opinion with the word of God So that a Catholike shall neuer bee able to perswade them to any thing if hee beginnes not at their foundation and proue that the Scripture makes not so clearely for them as they imagine it does and then when they once perceiue that they cannot confute the Catholikes by Scripture they will bee compelld to confesse That a man can haue no assurance of his faith without submitting his own iudgment to the iudgment of the Church which as wee say according to Christs owne promise is infallibly accompanied with the holy Spirit For mine own part although it bee not my intention to entice any man either to one Religion or the other but to qualifie onely the passions of men yet for feare that I should commit the same errour in this Treatise of Pacification which they often doe in the course of their perswasiues I thoght good to subioine this Chapter also to the end that my reasons might be drawne from the principles of both Religions And thus hauing proued in the first Chapter by examination of the particular questions according to the Huguenots method That they be no Heretikes I was also desirous to adde this Chapter that according to the Catholikes manner of proceeding that is as much to say as according to the Nature of the Church I might also proue them the Huguenots to be no Heretikes For it were but labour lost to tell many of our Catholikes that the Huguenots hold many of the fundamentall points of faith as well as we seeing they take not the skantling of an heretike by his opinions but only by this marke That he is out of the Church vnderstanding thereby no other Church then that which we call Catholike Apostolike and Romane excluding all those out of the Church to whom these three titles may not be giuen what opinion soeuer they be of For which reason I resolued to proue that these three titles doe belong vnto the Huguenots And first touching the title of Catholike the Church is called Catholike in three respects First in regard of it selfe 2. In regard of the Iewes 3. In regard of Heretikes Now the Church is called Catholike in regard of it selfe because in the vniuersalitie thereof it comprehends all times and all places viz the whole number of the Elect as well those who haue beene since the beginning of the world and are now departed and triumphant in heauen enioying euerlasting blisse as those that are ordained to the like blessednesse whether now aliue or to be borne hereafter Which definition is founded vpon the Scriptures for S. Pauls words are The Church of the first-borne which are written in Heauen and who are written in heauen but the Elect from whom the reprobates are in this specialty distinguished That their names are not written in the Booke of the Lambe The Church then consists of the Elect who are not restrained to any place or time For Iesus Christ hath redeemed with his bloud saith Saint Iohn Out of euery kinred and tongue and people

from an Heretike in another signification which in truth was according to the proper interpretation of the word taking Catholike or Vniuersall for a marke of the true Church For which reason in the ancient Church when as the whole visible Church yet retained the faith receiued from the Apostles and that some part of it became corrupted for the exact discerning vnto whether side we ought to leane Vincentius Lyrinensis gaue this Rule What else should we doe saith he but prefer the safety of the body before a rotten member And therefore for that the body of the Church was at that time sound all the Church was called Catholike for so much this word Body as well as that word Catholike implies an vniuersality so that the distinction of Catholike and Heretike serues but to distinguish the sound body from a corrupted member But so soone as the body it selfe became corrupted then this rule and distinction failed For which reason Vincentius makes a difference betweene a Catholike in place and a Catholike in time And euer when a Catholike in place is not a sure marke he hath recourse vnto a Catholike in time But saith he if any new infection goes on not onely to corrupt a part but the whole Church then must we cleaue to antiquity So that the difference between the Catholikes and the Huguenots lying in this point Whether the body of the Church be corrupted or no wee must not speake of the Church which is Catholike according to place but according to time And that Church is Catholike saith Vincentius which holds that religion which hath beene euer hitherto embraced And to discerne which Religion hath beene alwayes embraced when as the body of the Church or the visible Church as saith the same Vincentius is corrupted we must still haue recourse vnto Antiquity and say with Tertullian Illudverum quod primum That is truest which is ancientest So as that is the Catholike Church which agrees in faith with the more Primitiue Church So that if wee would discusse it whether the Catholikes or the Huguenots be most properly the right Catholikes wee must consider first whether of them best holds of the faith of the Apostles and next of that of the ancient Doctors and Councels of the Church As for the Title Apostolike The Church may bee called Apostolike as well in regard of the Writings as of the Preaching of the Apostles As for their Writings those Churches which imbrace the doctrine deliuered in them are intituled Apostolike yea and more or lesse Apostolike as they do more or lesse agree or disagree to or from the said doctrine So that the word Apostolike is all one with the word Orthodox or with Catholike taken in the last signification And if the Church of the Huguenots may bee intituled Catholike or Orthodox they may also by the same reason be called Apostolike nay and more properly Apostolike then Catholike For the visible Church being as I haue shewed not absolutely but comparatiuely more or lesse Catholike or Apostolike the Huguenots though they may offend in default and so be lesse Catholike rather yet in this they offend rather in the excesse and are too Apostolike as being so strict that they will readily beleeue nothing but what the Apostles haue written Secondly those Churches were called Apostolike which were instructed by the liuely voice of the Apostles and where the Apostles haue had their seats as Ierusalem Antioch Ephesus Alexandria c. where the Apostles Peter Iames Iohn and Marke the Euangelist sate and are therefore from all Antiquity styled Apostolicall Seaes as well as Rome howbeit that this signification is rather an ornament then a mark of a pure Church For Antioch Alexandria and other Churches of Greece where the Apostles preached haue either altogether forsaken the name of Christ or are at the least according to the Catholikes Tenet quite cut off for Schisme and Heresie from the communion of the true Church and France Spaine Poland Germany England and Denmarke where the Apostles neuer had any Bishopricks haue sithence beene the true Churches So that in this signification a Church may bee pure and yet not bee Apostolike and a Church which is Apostolike may be impure The last title though first in estimation with the Catholiques is that of Roman which I haue obserued to haue beene taken in three seuerall sorts First the Roman Church is only taken for the Diocesse of Rome and was in the beginning for the Citie of Rome alone As in S. Pauls time who inscribed an Epistle seuerally to Rome alone as he did likewise to those Churches of Corinth Ephesus Galatia c. For had the Church of Rome beene euery where at that time spread abroad he had not needed to haue written to other Churches seuerally because that in writing to that of Rome he had then written to them all And yet would our people needs make vse of this Epistle to proue by it The Roman church to be the catholique Church because that in it S. Paul saies Your faith is spread abroad in all the world as if S. Paul had not said the same to the Church of Thessalonica Your faith which you haue to God-ward is spread abroad But had the Church of Rome beene as they would haue it esteemed by S. Paul as all one with the Catholique without all doubt his Epistle to the Romans had beene intituled Catholique as well as those of S. Iohn S. Peter S. Iames and S. Iude which are therefore stiled Catholique for that they were written to the Catholique Church Now taking the Roman Church in this signification I confes that not the Huguenots Churches alone are separated from the Roman Church but all other catholique Churches besides so that to this day they in France make a distinction of sundry customes of the Roman Church and of the Church Gallicane Secondly the Church of Rome is taken for the Westerne Church insomuch that the Roman Latine and Occidental Church doth signifie one and the same thing to distinguish it from the Greeke and Easterne Church iust as the Empire of the East and the Empire of the West were called the Empires of Rome and of Constantinople because that these two Cities were the chiefe seats of the Empire and so by reason of the dignitie of the Citie of Rome which was the seat of the Emperours that reigned in the West all this Westerne part was called the Roman Empire and all the Westerne Church the Roman Church that is to say The Church contained vnder the Roman Empire So then if we call it the Roman Church for distinguishing it from the Greeke and Easterne Churches then also may the Huguenots Churches be members likewise of the Roman Church for that they be Westerne and not Greeke nor Easterne Churches If in respect of the Roman Empire taking the Roman Empire largely as it was they also be vnder the Empire and by consequence vnder the Church But

could not be saued without the Eucharist Which opinion of his euen our Catholikes themselues doe condemne Why then should the Huguenots be Heretikes rather for dissenting from S. Augustine in one Sacrament then the Catholikes are for disallowing his iudgement in the other The fourth point is the Worshipping of Images which was confirmed by the second Councell of Nice vnto which I may well oppose the Councell of Franckford celebrated since that of Nice which both contemned and condemned the authoritie of that Councell and the Decrees of it Neither does it make anything for our Aduersary to say that these testimonies are of weight enough amongst Catholikes for there were none in the Councell of Franckford but Catholikes and the Popes Legates themselues which assisted at it Obserue then all the Councels which our Aduersary hath rakt together against the Huguenots All of which excepting those three of Lateran Vienna Florence and this last of Nice are perticular and so by consequence their Decrees may be anulled and reuersed Further of these foure which by some are accounted generall the first that of Lateran I meane was by the sentence of Scotus and Stapleton two grand Catholikes subiect vnto error The words he vrgeth out of the second viz that of Vienna are nothing to the purpose The Iudgement of the third which is that of Florence is contrary to the Decrees of the Councels of Basile and Constance The last of Nice was condemned by that of Franckford wherefore then should the Huguenots giue way to the authoritie of such Councels from whom the Catholikes themselues yea Councels also of Catholikes themselues doe disagree how can wee hope then to conuert them by such proofes let vs call a new one then let vs giue indifferent audience to their Ministers let vs refute their Arguments to their very faces else shall wee neuer recall the Huguenots that are gone astray into the right way The second reason whereby our Aduersarie confutes the Huguenots i● Because they agree in doctrine with the ancient Heretikes viz the Arrians who as S. Augustine testifies reiected 1. Prayers for the dead 2. The set times of Fasting 3. The difference betwixt the Bishop and the ordinary Priest And 4. with Iouinian and Vigilantius in the point of Continencie and Virginitie 5. Merit and rewards of Saints 6. The Adoration of Reliques 7. The Inuocation of Saints 8. The Election of Meats I answer First That euen as a good Catholike may erre so may an Heretike also speake truth S. Cyprian and Ticonius the Donatist hauing diuersly interpreted a place of the holy Scriptures S. Augustine reiects S. Cyprians exposition and allowes that of Ticonius So that it is not enough barely to shew that an Heretike hath maintained such and such an opinion vnlesse he proue withall that the said opinion is hereticall Secondly I haue shewed in the former Chapter that the vse of things indifferent might be lawfull in the ancient Church and yet vnlawfull in this of ours so that the Huguenots may iustly blame the selfe-same things which the said Heretikes did vniustly except against vntill we can proue not only the things to be the same but also make it appeare that there is not now a greater abuse in the same things then there was then As for the opinions following the Huguenots will affirme that neither did the Fathers hold them in the same manner that the Catholikes now doe nor that the Heretikes tooke the same exceptions to them that the Huguenots now doe as we may perceiue by the examples following First as for Prayer for the Dead the Huguenots will affirme That the Church in the beginning celebrated only a Commemoration of the dead wherein as I shewed in the former Chapter they made mention likewise of the Apostles and of those that be already gone to heauen Now this Commemoration will the Huguenots say brought forth Prayer for the dead this Prayer brought forth Purgatorie Purgatorie Pardons and Pardons haue brought in pence into the Popes coffers Now will they say further that so long as these abuses were not in the Church if any man had found fault with this custome of Commemoration he should but haue shewed himselfe to be of a quarrelsome spirit yea they will further say that petty abuses especially such as bare a shew of Charitie might somewhat be winked at as Prayer for the Dead had which custome serued then also to stirre vp in the Pagans a better esteeme of the Christian faith but this occasion being now ceased and the abuses remaining so great as they affirme them to be t is now no time to winke at them any longer nor is there any other meanes left vs to reforme them then to take away the first occasion whence they proceeded thogh in themselues they be of no great consequence So that if we will shew wherein the Huguenots resemble the other ancient Heretikes in taking exceptions vnto Prayer for the dead we must shew withall how that the ancient Church vsed the same chaffering for Pardons and Indulgences for the deliuering of soules out of Purgatorie that the Church of Rome at this day doth Otherwise the abuse being not the same the things deserue not equall blame and they that finde fault with them are not alike faulty Touching set Fasting daies I am heartily sorry that he in giuing out that the Huguenots doe herein imitate the ancient Heretikes giues them aduantage to reuenge themselues vpon vs and to proue the cleane contrary namely that it is we that follow the ancient Heretikes for Eusebius saith That it was Montanus the Heretike who first set downe the Rules for Fasting seeing that before that these set Fasting daies were not ordained with any intention to bind the Consciences but for orders sake only Surely then he was not in the right whosoeuer found fault with them seeing there was at first no superstition in them But since that say the Huguenots the superstition is come to that height that the very day only because it is such or such a Saints Eue is esteemed much holyer th●n other daies So then this order hauing occasioned superstition to auoid this superstition wee may dispose otherwise of that order And now as concerning the difference betweene the Bishop and the ordinary Priest the Huguenots will say that at first they were both equall but that since then some amongst them haue beene promoted to dignity aboue the rest and at last One is become Monarch ouer them all Now will the Huguenots confesse that before this vniuersall Monarchy of the Pope there was not the like reason to blame the distinction of degrees in Pastors which in it selfe was tolerable and not altogether vnprofitable But they will say withall that it is most manifest how that the Fathers neuer held this distinction to haue beene instituted by God but onely to be a positiue ordinance of men to preserue as Saint Ierome saith the vnity of the Church A

Priest saith he is the same with a Bishop but it was afterwards ordained throughout the world that one should be made choice of aboue the rest for the auoiding of Schisme Howbeit he confesseth that Bishops are superior to Priests by Custome rather then by diuine Ordination The fourth point wherein he saith that the Huguenots doe imitate the ancient Heretikes is concerning Mariage and Virginity which is but a meere calumny for the Huguenots affirme not with Iouinian That mariage is simply equall to virginity but onely in such a sense as Saint Augustine speakes it who sayes that he dares not prefer the virginity of S. Iohn before the mariage of Abraham Nor with Vigilantius that it is vnlawfull to make a Priest vnlesse he were first maried but with that holy man Paphnutius that it is lawfull for a Priest to be maried Touching the Merits and rewards of the Saints I cannot tell what he would say for if he meanes by it That the Saints receiue a recompence of their good workes the Huguenots wil agree to it but if he meanes it of workes of supererrogation laid vp as they say in the treasury of the Church and applied by the Popes Indulgences vnto the soules of other men the Catholikes will say that the Church liued in the same ignorance for the first thousand yeares that the Huguenots now doe for it is not long since that for the benefit and aduancement of the Pope God first reuealed this treasure which had lyen hid so long and the most gainfull commoditie of Indulgences also Now as for Reliques I say that euen the same Saint Hierome who wrote against Vigilantius for taking exception to the Reliques of Saints doth yet in the same booke against Vigilantius allow of the Eues of Saints howbeit for certaine abuses committed in the night of the said Eues which they called the Vigils the Catholikes themselues haue forbidden them And now fast onely vpon the Eues although the dayes doe still retaine the names of Eues So then we must either grant that the catholikes are condemned by Saint Hierome as wel as the Huguenots or else that the abuse of things causes them to be thought blame worthy at one time and not at another So that we must not consider whether the Huguenots agree with Vigilantius in the taking exception to Reliques but whether there bee not now more abuse in the worshipping of them then in Saint Hieromes time For the Huguenots doe not now simply except against Reliques insomuch that I haue heard diuers Huguenots say That if they could bee certaine that they had any ancient monument of our Sauiour or of his Apostles they would make very pretious esteeme of them and farre more then of any antique medall or other antiquity of the old Romanes By greater reason then doe they honour their persons although they doe not inuoke them being dead for that say they themselues forbade it whilest they liued So that if we will proue the Huguenots to be enemies to the honour of the Apostles wee must proue out of their writings That such was their will to be inuocated Else will the Huguenots tell vs That they haue the Saints in more honour then the Catholikes in that they haue such a care to obserue their precepts now after their deaths It being euident That that child who is most carefull to performe his last will and testament loues hid deceased father best then if he should onely keepe his picture by him The eight and last opinion of the ancient Heretikes is the Election of meats Whereunto the Huguenots will giue the same answer as to the former obiections viz. that it was vnlawfull in those times to find fault with the election of meats and yet lawfull to condemne it now The reason is for that it was then an order onely without enforcing of the conscience to obserue it And if any man reply That they now in the Church doe but the same and that it is onely the meaner sort of people that account one meat holier then another and that the better learned Catholikes hold that the sin of eating flesh vpon dayes whereon it is forbidden is onely in regard of the ordinance and not in regard of the nature of the meats Whence comes it then that Durandus that great defender of the ceremonies of our Church makes vse of this reason to confirme abstinence from eating of flesh namely That fish is a more holy meat for that in the time of Noahs flood God cursed the earth and the creatures that it brought forth but not the waters See here now the ancient heresies reuiued as he saith by the Huguenots but he is in the wrong for that they ought not to be ranked amongst the Heretikes vntill such time as we haue made proofe how that the Church of Rome doth not onely agree with the Primitiue in the same things but also in the very circumstances of the things for those things which are of themselues ceremonies are also of themselues indifferent and it is the right vse or abuse of them which makes them lawfull or vnlawfull So that by consequence it may be at this time lawfull and at another time vnlawfull to take exceptions to them Euen as it was not lawfull to breake the brazen Serpent whilest it was a Sacrament but necessary to breake it when it became an Idoll CAP. 4. That the Councell of Trent is not lawfull WEE are come at last thankes bee to God to the holy Councell of Trent a Councell whereof our Aduersary had need to make good account for that the proofes drawne from the former Councells concerned only two or three questions and those also rather probable coniectures then proofes But as for the Councell of Trent that openly confutes all the heresies now maintained by the Huguenots by reason whereof our Aduersarie toyles himselfe more in the defence of that then in any other question whatsoeuer albeit hee vses not any proofes to confirme it but answers onely to the obiections of the Catholike Apologie which I find to bee three in number The first is That the Pope did therein take vpon him the office both of Iudge and Partie and that himselfe conuoked the Councell and sat President in it The second is That those who sought the reformation could not bee heard in it The third that for as much as the Huguenots are able to alledge diuers nullities both in the forme and also in the definitions of the said Councell wee are not bound to accept of the ordinances thereof without examination of them For as much as S. Iohn hath commanded vs to try the Spirits To the first Obiection That the Pope was both Iudge and Party he answers That the Pope ought not to lose his right of calling Councells and of being President in them for that hee had obtained this right 1500 yeares before The Huguenots can easily cut him off 500 yeres of his time In all which