CHAPTER I. PROVEINGE BY ENGLISH Protestant writers, since the begynninge of his Maiesties Raigne in England, that the true Church of Christ is of Infal­lible Iudgment: The Protestants not so: and so not the true Church.

BECAVSE the cheefest and moste generall controuersie in Religion, in this time, be­tweene the Catholicks of En­gland, and their Aduersaries their contry persecutors, and Innouators, is concerninge the true Churche of Christ, which, where, with whome, and what it is: what bee the properties, true notes, [Page 10] signes, qualities, authoritie, office and com­maunde of it, I will first begin with that Question: In which I argue thus.

Whatsoeuer Companie, Societie, Consi­storye, Iudgment, or Authoritie, is in time of difference about Religion, moste neces­sarie to bee knowe, followed, and obeyed, and is the companie of holy ones, the how­sholde of faithe, spouse of Christ, the piller and grownde of truthe, whose commu­nyon is to bee embraced, directions fol­lowed, and Iudgment to bee rested in, must needes bothe bee priuiledged from error, and to bee obeyed in Matters of contro­uersie: But the true Church of Christ is such: Therefore free from error, and to bee obeyed in this busines. The Maior or first proposition is euidently true, otherwise God hath bownde man to followe and embrace heresie or error, of necessitie hee must bee damned without all hope of saluation, ex­cept heresie, false opinions, error, or infi­delitie, could bringe to heauen, which is against the holy Scriptures, true Religion which by no possibilitie can either bee vntrue, or vncertayne, being reueled by God himselfe, and against the light of rea­son it selfe, that men vnder penaltie of dam­nation, should bee tyed to bee obedient to that sentence, for obedience whereof, they were likewise assured to bee damned, which is to accuse God, moste mercifull, of the greatest Tyranny.

The Minor or second proposition is proued [Page 11] and the first also in this words of D. Feild. D. Feild. epist, dedi­cat. before hi [...] bookes of the Churche. There is no parte of heauenly doctrine more necessa­rie, in this dayes of so many intricate controuersies of Religion, then diligently to searche out, which amonge all the socities of men in the worlde, is that blessed companie of holy ones, that housthold of faithe, that spouse of Christ, and Church of the liueing God, which is the piller and grownde of truthe: That see they may embrace her communion, followe her dire­ctions, and rest in her Iudgment. Hitherto the wordes of this Protestant Doctor, by which is euidently concluded the moste certayne truthe of those two Propositions in the Argument before; But to auoyde all friuo­lous obiections and distinctions of these men, concerninge the Church generall, par­ticular, triūphant, militant &c. Hee playnely affirmeth, that this supreame and infallible iudge is the present militant Church in ty­mes of controuersies: as is demonstrated by this his words: Which amonge all the societies of men in the worlde, is that blessed companie of holy ones, &c. Where his words, societies of men, and, in the worlde, are manifest testimonie, that hee assigneth the present militant Church on earthe, and no other, to haue this supreame, and infallible, authoritie, and Iudgment, to decide controuersies. which is alsoe proued by all the rest of the Prote­stant citations, in this chapter hereafter. And if their words were not so cleare that they cannot bee wrested otherwise: yett the Question it selfe doth make it manifest: for all the faithfull people that euer were, [Page 12] and be now in many thowsands deceased, out of this life, cannot now be assembled in a Cowncell to giue sentence. And much lesse can they that are not yett borne, be so gathered together, to pronownce Iudgment: and yett all this belonge vnto, and ar, or shall bee members of the vniuer­sall Churche. further this is conuinced by his cited words: That householde of faith: which cannot bee possibly ment but onely of the militant Church. For in the triumphant Church, seeing God in himselfe, and truely and perfectly knoweinge without beleefe all sacred misteries, faith, as the Apostle saith, is euacuated in them, and turned into knowledge, and as for those that ar not yett borne, though hereafter in their time or­dayned, they at truely to beleeue, yett now they neither haue faith nor knowledge of any thinge, nor any other qualitie or any being at all. Thirdly this is euident also in his laste words: Embrace her communion, followe her directions, and rest in her Iudgment. Which Protestants will not, and cannot meane of the triumphant Churche: and by no pos­sibilitie can either bee vnderstoode, or ve­refied of the true beleeuers to come here­after, and not yett produced into this life; for this as yett haueing no essence, or beeinge for themselues, can haue no com­munion, giue no directions, nor pro­nownce Iudgment for vs, now extant to embrace and followe. And this is inuincibly further proued in the Arguments follow­einge. [Page 13] Therefore secondely I argue thus.

That which hath Authoritie in contro­uersies of Religion, to define what is true, and good, to ouerrule all inferiour and particular Iudgments, and bynde all men to beleeue and embrace the definitions the­reof, must needs bee of Infallible Iudgment, and haue the supreame and highest power to commaunde, and no man to disobey yt: But the true Churche of Christ is such: The­refore it hath Infallible Iudgment, the hig­hest power on earth, and may not bee diso­beyed, but in all thinges to bee obeyed by all people. The maior proposition is euidently true: for Authoritie is to bee obeyed by all subiects: otherwise it were not authoritie. And there were non to commaunde, non to bee obedient. And definitions in matters of faithe, as they must bee moste certayne, vndoubted, and infallible, as euery article of faithe is, and of necessitie must needs bee: So they ar as firmely to bee beleeued, and professed, except wee will bee Hereticks, and obstinately incur damnation. The se­conde proposition is thus proued by D. Couell, who writeth of the Church in this Couell. def. of hooke pag. 30. wordes: That whi [...]h by her ecclesiasticall authoritie, shee shall probably thinke, and define to bee true, or good: must in congruitie of reason ouer rule all other inferiour Iudgments whatsoeuer. And to them that (out of a singularitie of their owne) aske vs, why wee thus hange our Iudgments on the Churches sleeue? wee answere with S [...]lonion, [...]wo ar better then one; For euen in matters of lesse moment, it was [Page 14] neuer thought safe, to neglect the Iudgment of manye, and rashlie to followe the fancye and opinion of some fewe. Hitherto this Protestant doctor, directly proueinge the second proposi­tion, for which hee is cited: which also is confirmed by the Arguments follow­inge.

Thirdly I argue thus: whatsoeuer hath authoritie from Christ, to approue the scri­ptures, to bee a speciall grownde in the matter of scriptures, to publishe and com­maund to her children, in Matters of Reli­gion; is the higest Iudge and of Infallible Iudgment: But the true Churche of Christ is such: Therefore it is the highest Iudge, and infallible in Iudgment. The Maior pro­position is euidently proued, and confessed before, and of all men cannot bee excepted against by Protestants, commonly attribu­teing the highest, and (consequently) infal­lible Iudgement to the scriptures: for if they haue their allowance and Infallibilitie, soe much as belongeth vnto vs and our knowledge, from the authoritie and ap­probation of the Churche: The Church so giueing them allowance, and warrant of Infallibilitie, must needs bee as much, or more Infallible, at leaste concerninge vs, in which maner wee dispute, accordeinge to that Rule of Logicke, Propter quod vnumquod­que tale, & illud magis. That which is the cause why any thinge is so, is rather so it self. Which is euident thus, in this case. For if the scrip­tures, so much as appertayneth to our [Page 15] knowledge, haue not approbation and In­fallibilitie of truthe, but at they at approued and published for such by the Churche: This Church which so giueth them such allowance, and warrant of Infallibilitie, must needs likewise bee infallible, which thoughe it needeth not confirmation, being iustified by a Maxime in the light of nature, may yett for Protestants bee fur­ther made manifest by the Protestant Au­thor of the Assertion: who to proue the mi­nistery of England to bee no true ministe­ry, Assertion An. Dom. 1604. pag. 277. 218. doth make demonstration of it in this maner: The Queenes Royall Maiestie being neuer capable of any part of spirituall power, The same could not bee deryued from her parson, to the Arch­bishopps and Bishops. Nemo potest plus Iuris in alium transferre, quàm ipse habet. No parson can transferre more authoritie vnto an other, then hee himselfe hath. And thus much concer­ninge Couell. cont, Burg. pag. 60. Wottō def. of Perk. pag. 442. the first proposition.

The second is thus proued by D. Couell, and D. Whitakers, cited and allowed by him in this words: The Church of Christ according to her authoritie receaued from him, hath warrant to approue the scriptures, to acknowledge, to receaue, to publishe and commaunde vnto her children. M^r. Wotton witnesseth the like in this maner. The Iugdment of the Churche, wee ar so far from discrediting, that wee holde it for a speciall grounde in this matter of scriptures. Therefore that Iudgment which may in no wayes bee discredited in the greatest matter, must needs bee infallible. For euery witnes that [Page 16] is fallible may iustely bee discredited, in such busines especially.

My fourth Argument is this: whatsoeuer doth support and sustayne the truthe, in which, and no where els the truthe is pre­serued, which is a diligent and warye keeper of Christs true doctrine, committed vnto it, chaungeinge nothinge at any time, diminisheinge nothinge, addinge nothinge, not loseing her owne, nor vsurpinge things belonginge to others, must needs bee of Infallible Iudgment, and free from error: But the true Church of Christ is suche: Therefore it is infallible in Iudgment, and free from error. The first propositions is euidently true: for truthe once committed vnto one and continually so supported, su­stayned and preserued, without chaunge, diminution, addition, losse or vsurpation, must of necessitie and Infallibly still bee truthe: for neither truthe nor any thinge els so mayntayned, and kept vnuiolable, can by any possibilitie bee ouerthrowne or altered. The seconde proposition is thus proued by this Protestants: M^r. Ormerods Ormerod. pict. pap. pap. 93. words bee thus: The Church is called a piller, because it is like vnto a piller. For as a piller dothe supporte, and vnderproppe a buildinge, and ma­keth it more stable firme and stronge: so the Church doth sustayne, and supporte the truthe: for the truthe is no where preserued but in the Churche: D. Sut­cliffe Sutcliffe against the 3 conuers. pag. 79. approueth this sentence: Christs true Church is a diligent and wary keeper of doctrines committed to her, and chaungeth nothinge at any [Page 17] time, diminisheth nothinge, addeth nothinge super­fluous, looseth not her owne, nor vsurpeth things be­longeinge to others. Therefore Christs true do­ctrine committed to the true Church, and continued and preserued longe time in the Church of Rome, Christs true Church (as this Protestants graunt in the next chapter, must needs still be there and that still the true Church of Christ: because that euer preserueth, and neuer looseth, or chaun­geth the truthe, nor any part thereof, fun­damentall, or not fundamentall.

Lastely in this Question I argue thus: whatsoeuer Societie, or Companie hath au­thoritie in controuersies of faith, and out of it there is no saluation, remission of synnes, or hope of eternall life, must needs bee infallible in Iugdment, free from error, and onely to be obeyed in such things, aboue all other Consistories, Conuenticles, or priuate parsons: But the true Church is such: Therefore Infallible in Iudgment, free from error, and so to be obeyed. The first proposition is euidently true: other­wise men were some times bownde to bee Hereticks, or beleeue errors, because au­thoritie is to bee obeyed, and not resisted: and Hereticks might be saued, or God our moste good and mercifull Lord and Sauiour compelleth and necessitateth man to bee damned, which be euident blasphemies.

The second proposition is proued by these English Protestāts: first their booke of [Page 18] Articles, to which they all sweare or sub­scribe, Booke of Articl. ar­ticul. 20. reconfir­med by his maiestie Feild. pag. 69. Couell def. of Hoocker pag. 76. defineth thus: The Church hath autho­ritie in controuersies of faith. D. Feild hath this sentence. There is no saluation, remission of sinnes, or hope of eternall life, out of the Churche. Like is the Iudgment of D. Couell and others. And thus much of the Infallible, highest Authoritie, Iudgment, Commaunding and Bindinge power, of Christs true Church, in generall. Which can be but one, as that Article of our Creede. I beleeue the holy Catho­lick Church: not Churches. teacheth vs. And these Protestants in their Articles define it: Artic. 19. A congregation of faithfull men &c. not congre­gations: And thus comment vppon it: [...]here Rogers vpp. their Ar­ticl. pag. 86. 88. 89. is but one Church. And proue it by these scrip­tures. Rom. 11. 5. 1. Cor. 10. 17. 1. Cor. 12, 12. 13. 27. Rom. 12. 4. 5. Gal. 3. 28. and add thus: all Gods people agree with vs in this point. And cyte for it, the Protestant confessions of Heluetia, Boheme, Gall. Belgia Aug [...]st. Wittenb. Suew. And these Protestants before haue so taught vs, when they define, or descrebe it allwayes in the singular number onely, by these their names and distinctions, blessed com­panie of holy ones; houshold of faithe; spouse of Christ: Church of the liueing God piller of truthe: &c. And in all verbes, relatiues or demonstratiues of it, so singularly speakeing of it, as, her com­munion; her directions: her Iudgment: her Children: her Definitions: hath warrant to approue; to publish, to commaunde: is a diligent keeper of doctrines, com­mitted to her, chaungeth nothinge, diminisheth no­thing [Page 19] &c. Which by no possibilitie, can bee verified of the Protestants, either in En­gland, or any other nation; none of them in particular, or all together, haueing, clay­ming, or pretending either infallibilitie in Iudgment, to warrant any one article in controuersie: but voluntarily and generally teachinge, that Thesis general [...] est: it is a generall Morton Apol. part. 2. pag. 315. willet An­til. praef. engl. & pag. 71. 120. 150. 4 [...]. pref. to the Read. in Antil. Arti [...]l. of Relig. art. 21. Rela­tion of the state of Re­ligion cap. 47. &c. Comm: vppon the Articl. of Engl. Pro­test by M^r ▪ Rog. in pref. Maxime, there is none in their Church, whose Iudg­ment is of Infallible authoritie. Neither Prince, Par­lament, Cowncell, Ministery or their Church hath any priuilegd from error, but they haue, and doe erre in things pertayning to God. Neither challenge any Iurisdiction generall, to bynde others to their Religion: but absolutely confessinge The Protestant ar without any meanes to take vp their controuersies. No Prince with any preeminence of Iurisdiction, aboue the rest: no Patriarke one or more, to haue a common Superintendance or care of their Churches. And their publick comment vp­pon their Articles, to which they haue all subscribed, assureth vs, is to be so, for re­latinge vnto vs, how in the begynninge of their Reuolt from the Church of Rome, to persuade the world, they laboured by all means they could, to come to vnitie amonge themselues, as in the true Church it must bee; Crammer and others vsed all deuises, and Caluyne wrote vnto him, sayeing: That might his labours stand the Church insteed, ne de­cem quidē Maria, it would not greeue him to sayle ouer ten seas, to such a purpose. But this proued a worke of much difficultie, if not altogether vnpossible [Page 20] in mans eyes. Where they well might haue left out their addition (if not) and haue playnely sayd without any exception, as it hath playnely proued, that it was altogether vnpossible, in mans eyes, especially in the com­mon order of proceedings amonge them which by their owne Relation, was this: That euery kingedome, and free state, or principali­tie, which had abandoned the Religion of Rome, should diuulge a breife of that Religion▪ which amonge them was taught, and beleeued. Where­vppon (as this men tell, came forthe the seuerall Protestant confessions, or Reli­gions of the seuerall Protestant Congre­gations, of Wittemberge, Ausburge, Bohem Sueue, Scotland, Heluetia, Fraunce, Belgia, Basile, Sa­xonie, England in their 39. Articles, &c. amonge whome, euen those of England it selfe, what contradiction there is, euen in matters, by their owne doctrine, fundamentall, and essentiall in Religion, demonstration is lately made, by this same maner and me­thode, by their owne authorities, and will be also manifest in this worke. And yett The Answ of Orford [...] the 1000. pet. Articul. 19. & 21. this men, which say, they ar the learnest mini­sterye in the worlde, and definitiuely condemne all Churches, as Ierusalem, Alexandria, Antioch, and Rome, and generall Councells themselues of error, and may not pleade Ignorance for themselues, to excuse them from error. Neither can they with the least pre­tence of truth affirme, their acknowledged lyeing, and erroneous Churche, to be the [Page 21] true Church of God, except they will also moste blasphemously teach, and mayntayne, that prima veritas, and eternall truthe is eter­nall August. lib. de mendas. falsehood; or with the damned Priscillia­nists, that God in his Reuelations to his Church, and in the holy scriptures, hath deliuered lyes, and errours, commaundinge vs to beleeue them. For they haue before assured vs, that the true Church of God warily keepeth all doctrine committed to her, chaun­geth, dimini [...]heth addeth, loseth, vsurpeth nothinge. Therefore this chaungeing, diminishinge, loseinge, and vsurpinge Church of Prote­stants, cannot be this true Church of Christ, by their owne doctrine. And as materiall essentiall and fundamentall it is in Religion, concerninge the true grounde and fown­dation of faith, and as greate a falsehood, to say, in the meanest, or least point of faith, that truth is error, God a lyar, or his Church a seducer; as so to affirme in the greatest, and moste concerninge mystery of Reli­gion. The true groundes, and fowndation of true beleeueinge, equally weakened, or ouerthrowne in the one, as the other. And the first proposition which our Catholick Preists, and brethren, prisoners at Wisbych, offered to the vice-chaunceller of Cambridge, and that vniuersitie, that is, Ecclesia protestan­tium non est vera Christi Ecclesia, The Protestant Churche is not the true Church of Christ, is here sufficiently questioned, and by themsels not longe since more then sufficiently de­monstrated, [Page 22] to b [...] Pul [...]a propositio, really Demon­strat. of Recuse dem. 2. 3. 4. &c. and sincerely a true proposition, and not scoffingly, as hee pleaseth to parenthesize. And so will be defended, or proued, by those propownders of it. As also their se­cond proposition (for of the third in his proper place) d [...]tur externus Iudex in rebus fidei: there is an externall Iudge in matters of faith: will bee mayn [...]ayned: not onely in such sense, as the Vniuersi [...]ie of Cambridge, accordinge to the nature of their Church, and Religion graunteth, that is, fallible, and deceatfull: But as our Brethren accordinge to the na­ture of true Faithe, Religion, and the true Church; infallible, intended it, and still offer to make it good, for the Romane Church euer synce the time of Christ, and so hereafter. When our English Protestant vniuersitie for their so lately (as they terme Vicech: of Camb: D. Carey his letter. Aug. 7. it) reformed Church, and light of the Ghospell, ar driuen to this Answeare in these words: Your second question is affirmatiue, auerring an externall Iudge, in ma [...]ters of faith: If you vnderstand a Iugde infallible in his sentence, wee deny what you affirme: otherwise wee gaynesay not your assertion. Which in their owne meaninge aboue remembred, is pulchra propositio, for their Illuminated Church: which will haue no Iudge▪ or Iudgment in matters of faith, (aboue all things most infallible, and cer­tainely true) except wee will allowe it, for an Article of faithe, or an infallible truthe, that the Iudge and Iudgment must [Page 23] be fallible, and deceatefull. And the Reli­gion and faith so adiudged, and propown­ded to bee followed, and with diuine faith to be beleeued, against the nature thereof, to be false, erroneoes, fallible, or deceate­full: for such as the Iudge is, the Iudgment, and difficultie adiudged, must needs be. And yett further one scruple more there is in this busines; which because Cambridge is now busyed enough, against pore prisoners without bookes, I wish that Oxford could resolue: how it can stand with the Inte­gritie, and sownd doctrine of a Reformed Church, and spoken consequenter, like a lear­ned vniuersitie, to graunt, as they haue done, and must doe by their Religion to this day, that there be, and must be so many Supreame, and Independant Iudges, and heaps in their Churche, as I haue before remembred from themselues, Religions, Churches, seuerall and different Confes­sions, or Professions of Faithe, euery one absolute of it self, and without dependance of any other: and to vse their owne wor­des, Without any meanes, to take vp their contro­uersies, no Prince with any preeminence of Iurisdi­ction aboue the rest: no Patriarke, to haue a com­mon superintendence or care of their Churches. Their lett: sup. Aug. 7. And yett now the vniuersitie of Cambridge haueing (as they write) warrant from our Kinge, to accept our Preists challendge (God graunt they performe their warrant) Ioyneth with them in this position, datur [Page 24] externus Iudex: there [...] an externall, or, one exter­nall Iudge in matters of faith. If there is but one externall Iudge, for Iudex extern [...], and exter­nall Iudge in the singular number, is but one, then those Churches or Church of theirs which from their begynning haue had so many supreame Iudges, and Iudg­ments cannot be the true Church of Christ, which (as now the graunt) hath but one. And if their former both doctrine and practise of many such Iudges, is true, then their present doctrine, and graunt, of onely one, is false, and inferreth a false Church. But I leaue them to our Preists at Wisbych. Onely here I will adde: because they haue now allowed one externall Iudge in matters of faith, in the true Church, to whose Iudg­ment all must be obedient, otherwise hee is not to be named a Iudge: they must also against their owne limitation, allowe that his Iudgment is infallible, otherwise the whole Church might erre, which D. Feild Feild. pag. 203. l. 4. cap. 5. with priuiledge denyeth in these words: Wee thinke that particular men and Churches may erre damnably: because not withstanding others may worship God arright: but that the whole Church at one time cannot so erre: for that the Church should cease vtterly for a time, and so not be Catholicke, beinge not at all times: and Christ should some times be without a Church. Therefore the Vniuersitie of Cambridge by warrant from our Kinge, al­loweinge the one, and D. Feild with pu­blicke applause in the name of all English [Page 25] Protestants, as his words (wee thinke) ar wittnes, attesting the other, and all English Protestants before assureing vs, that they and all their Churches, doe, or may thus erre, they cannot haue, or be this true Church of Christ: And because there is no other in any probable Iudgment left to be free from such damnable erring, but the Romane Church, because there reason telleth vs, the Church cannot cease, but be Catho­lick in all times, and Christ cannot be without a Church: This externall and Infallible Iudge is in the Romane Church, and that this freed, from damnable error, is the true Church of Christ but of this in the next chapter.

CHAPTER II. WHEREIN DEMONSTRA­tion is made by these English Protestant Doctors themselues, writing, or allowed as before, synce the begynninge of Kinge IAMES, his Raigne, in England, that the Romane Church is the true Church of Christ.

NOw it will be no difficult thinge to proue euen by this Protestants themselues that the Romane Churche, that I meane, which submitteth it selfe to the Iurisdiction of the Pope of Rome, as the vicar of Christ, Suc­cessor to S. Peter and supreame heade thereof, is the true Churche of Christ: for being generally graunted by Protestants, that either their conuenticle and congrega­tion, or the Church of Rome is the true Church of God, and their clayme and title thus shamefully by them selues ex­cluded and ouerthowne, it must needs follow by iust consequence that the Ro­mane Church, is that blessed companie of holy ones, howshold of faith, spouse of Christ and Church of the liueinge God, priuiledged with such Immunities, and commaunding power, as is declared, and by English Protestants [Page 27] ascribed to the true Church, in the former chapter: whereupon the Protestāt offerres of conference speake of themselues, and Offer of conference pag. 16. their cause in these words: If the ministers bee in [...]or, they protest to all the worlde, that the Pope and the Churche of Rome (and in them God and Christ Iesus himself, haue had greate wronge, and In [...]ignitie offered vnto them, in that they ar reiected, and that all the Protestant Churches ar Scismati [...]all in forsakeinge vnitie and communion with them. And a little before speakinge of some po­sitions Offer sup. pag. 11. amonge them, offered then to bee disputed. They write in these termes: diuers of the propositions ar suche, that if the ministers should not constantly holde and mayntaine the same against all men, they cannot see how possibly, by the Rules of diuinitie, the seperation of our Churches from the Churche of Rome, and from the Pope the supreame heade thereof can bee iustified. But to m [...]ke particular, and direct probation, of the is Catholicke doctrine, by these Prote­stants, I argue thus, from their owne diui­nitie, in the 2. Article of their Religion of Articles of Relig. arti­cul 12. & artic. 19. the necessarie and vnseparable (by them) vnion of faith and good workes, and their definition of the true Church in their 19. Article subscribed vnto by all English Mi­nisters, and it is in this maner. Whatsoeuer Church hath in great multitude, men vertuous, learned, fraught with the loue of God, and the truthe aboue all thinges, men of memorable Inte­gritie of hart, and affections, preachinge much both of faith and pietie with wonderfull zeale and spirit. [Page 28] That must needs be the true Church of Christ But the present Church of Rome is such: Therefore it is the true Church of Christ. The first proposition is euidently deduced, from those two Articles of their Religion, and cannot be denyed. The Minor proposition consisteth of the expresse words of their Protestant Relator of the Relation of the state of Religion [...]ap. 48. state of Religion: and so nothing remay­neth to be further proued.

My second Argument is thus framed: where The outwarde state and glorie of the seruice doth engender, quicken, encrease, and norish inward reuerence, respect and deuotion, which is due vnto soueraigne Maiestie and power. Where deedes of charitie be exceedinge, the life of some of their Re­ligions incomparable in seueritie, where there is excellent order of gouernment, singular helps for en­crease of godlines, and deuotion, and profiting of vertue. That is the true Church of Christ: But the present Church of Rome is such: Therefore it is the true Church of Christ. The Maior proposition is manifestly true, by Protestants in their Article of the Church in these words: the visible Church of Articul. 19. sup. Christ is a congregation of faithfull men, in which the pure word of God is preached &c. in all those things that of necessitie ar requisite to the same. All which ar conteyned in the first proposition. The seconde is their owne expresse words, Relation of the state of Religion c. 9. c. 22. c. 26. c. 48. written and published of the present Ro­mane Churche by their Relator of Reli­gion for confirmation of bothe which Ar­guments, [Page 29] the same Protestant Author not ignorant of so many differences in Reli­gion betweene the Romane Church and them, persuading an vnion betweene them, onely requireth Catholicks to giue ouer fyue things, all dispensable, and not any Relat. c. 48. one of them, essentiall, as hee teacheth. Which is as greate testimonie as a true Protestant can giue to the true Church, for their common doctrine (to defend their manifest errors) is this, that the true Church may er in matters not essentiall, and fundamentall. The words of D. Willet Willet Antil-pag [...] 43. Art. 19. Feild. of the Church Sutcl. a­gainst D. Kell. D [...] persuas. Wotton pag. 28. Middles. p. 201. Powell con­sid. at these: to errors of doctrine, which ar not funda­mentall, euen the true Church of Christ is subiect. So their booke of Articles of Religion, so D. Feild ordinarily in his bookes of the Church, so D. Sutcliffe D. Doue one of their Bishops, M^r. Wotton, M^r. Middleton, M^r. Powell, and all the rest, that made Protestants and Puritans but one Church do and must acknowledge. And the benefites which this Protestant Relator assureth his bre­thren to fynde by vnion with the Romane Church, hee setteth downe in these termes: they shall finde excellent order of gouernment, singuler Relat. sup. helpes for encrease of godlines and deuotion, for the conquering of sinne, for the profiting of vertue. Which be all the happines, that the true Churche can giue, or man enioy in this life. For all our combate is to conquer sinne, to haue vertue, godlines, and deuo­tion, and whosoeuer hath obtayned these [Page 30] things, cannot doubt of heauen, which is onely prepared for people endued with such graces, to which if wee add his excel­lent order of gouerment, no propertie of the true Church is wantinge. And yett the scruple of this Protestant Relator, for those fyue things also, shall be fully satisfied euen by himselfe, and his fellowe Protestants, that in them also as in the rest, the Church of Rome mayntayneth the truthe, and Pro­testants See part. 2. cap. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. be in error, as will appeare in the seconde parte of this worke, in the chapters here cited.

Thirdly I argue thus: No Church wan­tinge the supreame and byndeing authori­tie ouer all others, (which their Bishop D. Bilson, D. Feild, D. Morton, D. Sutcliffe &c. affirme to be a generall cowncell) can be the true Church of Christ, and consequenly (because there is of necessitie one true Church, that which enioyeth it, is the true Church of Christ: But neither any Prote­stant, or other Church, besides the Church of Rome, hath, or can haue this supreame byndinge authoritie: Therefore that onely is the true Churche of Christ. The Maior proposition for the supreame bynding au­thoritie, to be in the true Church, is eui­dently true: otherwise no controuersie could be decided, nothinge in Religion warranted for truthe, nothinge condem­ned for Heresie. For where there is no such bindeinge, and commaundeinge authori­tie, [Page 31] to be obeyed, or resisted, there can be no truth beleeued by authoritie, nor any obstinate resistance vnto it, which as D. Couell, M^r. Ormerod and other Protestants Couell exam. pag. 202. Ormer. dial. 2. &c. Feild. pag. 228. tell vs, is required to heresie. Now that this supreame bindinge authoritie is onely in a generall cowncell, by these Prote­stants, is testified by D. Feild in these words: The supreame and binding authoritie, is onely in Bishops, in a Generall Cowncell. So the Protestant Bishop of Winchester, D. Bilson, so D. Morton, D. Bilson Suruey pag. 85. Mort. part. 2. apolog. pag. 340. Sutcliffe against D. Kell. pag. 41. 4. 102. Protest. Demon­strat. cap. 2. &c. Sutcliffe with others. The seconde propo­sition is euidently of late demonstrated in the booke Intituled Protestants Demonstrations, where manifest proofe is made by these Protestants themselues, that they ar so farr from euer haueing a Generall Cowncell of Bishops, that their English Protestants nei­ther haue, nor can haue true and lawfull Bishop, Preist, or Minister amonge them of their creation. And if by impossibilitie they could haue Bishops, yett that they cannot haue any such Cowncell is wittnessed by their Relator in these words: which I haue also Relation c. 47. cited before: The Protestants ar seuered bandes, or rather scattered troopes, eache draweinge dyvers way, without any meanes to pacifie their quarrells, to take vp their controuersies. No Prince with any preeminence of Iurisdiction aboue the rest: no Pa­triarcke, one or more, to haue a common superinten­dance or care of their Churches, for correspondencie and vnitie: no ordinary way to assemble a Generall Cowncell of their parte, the onely hope remayninge to [Page 32] asswage their contentions. And in their publick glosse, vppon their booke of Articles, they Rog. vppon the [...]ooke of Articl. in praefat. acknowledge, this thinge so vnpossible, in their Religion, that they could neuer with all meanes they made, bringe to passe to haue any meeting of Protestants, to come to vnitie amonge themselues, but euery Protestant State and Contry, hath a seuerall Confession, or Profession in Religion. As also those seuerall Confessions witnes. Where wee see, that it is a thinge so vnpossible for these mē to assemble a Generall Cowncell, which they teach is, to consist of all Pro­fessions, that they cannot doe it, for their owne poorte, as the words ar, nor haue any other meanes amonge them of Iurisdiction, to decide controuersies: when contrary wise of the Romane Churche hee speaketh Relat. sup. cap. 47. in this maner, in the same place. The other haue the Pope▪ as a common Father. Aduiser and Condu [...] to them all, to reconcile their Iarrs, to appease their displeasures, to decide their difference, aboue all things to drawe their Religion by consent of Cowncells, to vnitie. Neither can any Prote­stant say, that this is spoken of this Relator, consideringe the present states of those Churches, and is onely so in that meaneinge Obiect. and not absolutely and generally true: for it is both absolutely, and generally true, Answ. and euen by the nature and doctrine it self, of those Religions; for the Romane Church mayntayneth for the Pope, and hee for himself claimeth as Successor to S. Peter, [Page 33] Superioritie, and Commaundeinge Autho­ritie, in the whole Christian Worlde, in spirituall causes: which no Prince, Parlament, Presbitery, or other Regent amonge Protestants, doth out of their owne tem­porall confines, and Gouernment, as is playnely sett downe in the Relators sentence, and freely acknowledged by all Protestant writers.

My next Argument is this: That which is a congregation of faithfull men, in the which the pure worde of God is preached, and the Sacraments duely ministred, in all thinges requisite, is the true Church of Christ: But the Romane Churche is such: Therefore it is the true Churche of Christ. The Maior proposition consisteth of the Englishe Protestants definition of true Churche sett downe in the Articles of their Religion, in these words: The visible Articles of Relig. art. 19. Churche of Christ, is a Congregation of faithfull men, in the which the pure worde of God is preached, and the Sacraments be duely ministred, accordeinge to Christs ordinance, in all those things, that of ne­cessitie ar requisite to the same. The seconde pro­position supposeing their former doctrine onely requireing in the true Church points of essentiall, fundamentall and necessary do­ctrines, which is also expressed in this Ar­ticle, Relation of Relig. cap. 48. Couell def. of Hock. pag. 68: is proued before; and further by these Protestants. Their Relator writeth in these words: The Romane Church still keepeth inuiolable, the fowndation of Religion. D. Couell [Page 34] writeth thus: toucheinge the mayne points of Christian truthe, they (of the Church of Rome) constantly persist in them. Their Bishop D. Doue supposeing their Religion for true, which Doue per­suas. pag. 11. they do or should holde, writeth in this maner. In fundamentall points of doctrine, the greatest papists in the worlde agree with vs. Con­cerninge Sacraments, hee alloweth, that ac­cordeinge to our definition which is more limited, and saict then that of Protestants. There be as many as wee teache, (which be seuen) and this shall not breede any such I arre betweene vs, Doue sup. pag. 27. 28. that therefore wee shoulde refuse to communicate together. Which no man in conscience can say, if hee supposeth vs to be in error. For his owne words be these: This proposition is vndoubtedly true: no Heretiks nor Schismaticks ar to be communicated with all. And to giue all con­tentment euen to those Protestants, which doe not allowe their owne Articles, in this doctrine of the notes of the Church, but to speake in D. Couells words: adde disci­pline the thirde note, and of as much necessitie: al­though Couell a­gainst the pl [...]a of the Innocent pag. 21. 56. for his owne opinion hee affirmeth with their recited Article in this maner. There be but two essentiall notes of the Churche, the true preacheing of the word, and the right admini­stration of the Sacraments. The Relator hath told Relat. 6. 48. Protestants before, that this Note is in the Romane Churche. Wherein (to vse his words) Protestants Ioyneing with it, shall finde excellent order of gouernment, singular helpes for encrease of godlines, for the conquering of sinne, [Page 35] for the profiteinge of in vertue. And their B. Doue per­suas. pag. 29. Doue speakeinge of the late Cowncell, of Trent, hath these words: In that Cowncell of Trent, they sett forth such holsome Canons, concerninge Discipline, as were fitt for a reformed Church. Therefore by these Protestants nothinge is wanteing in the Church of Rome, that belongeth to the true Church of Christ: neither any thinge superfluous vsed in these things.

Further I argue thus: Whatsoeuer Church is not Hereticall, or Scismaticall, is true and Orthodoxe: But the Churche of Rome is neither Hereticall nor Scisma­ticall: Therefore Orthodoxe, and the true Churche of Christ. The Maior proposition is euidently true: for as the true Church of God was euer called Orthodoxe, and Ca­tholicke, so the Impugners obstinately eyther in vnderstandeinge, denyeing the defined doctrine thereof, or in will resi­steing the Superioritie, and true Authoritie▪ were Hereticks and Scismaticks. The se­conde proposition is proued, by their be­fore cited Protestant Bishop Daue, offereinge Doue sup. pers. Catholicks to communicate with Prote­stants, without any chaunge of opinion in Religion. And yett that neyther Hereticks, nor Scismaticks, ar to be communicated wi­thall, hee hath before wittnessed in these words: This proposition is vndoubtedly true; no Doue sup pag. 5. Hereticks nor Scismaticks, ar to be communicated withall. And hee giueth vs securitie, That [Page 36] by no possibilitie (accordeinge to the Ar­gument of Generall Cowncells before) The Church of Rome can be at any time adiudged Hereticall: his words be these: No Church can be condemned and adiudged Hereti­call Dou [...] sup. pag. 14. by any priuate Censure: but it must be publicke: a Generall Cowncell, as hee there expowndeth himself, which Protestants neuer had, nor possibly can hereafter haue, as they haue graunted.

My next Argument is this: All that al­lowe the present Greeke Church, to be the true Church of Christ, and yett further acknowledg, that the Church of Rome consenteth with the same Greeke Churche, except in some fewe things, in which they also holde, that the Romane Church tea­cheth the truth, and the Greekes be in Er­ror, must needs acknowledge the Church of Rome, to be the true Church of Christ: But these Protestant writers of England doe Thus: Therefore they must allowe, that the Church of Rome is the true Church of Christ. The Maior proposition is euidently true, for the comparatiue degree in all things includeth the positiue, and ad­deth an encrease vnto it: as better, or more good, more white, more vertuous, more true, &c. do include goodnes, whitenes, vertue, truth &c. and increaseth them: Therefore that Church which is more true, then that which is affirmed to be true, must needs be graunted to [Page 37] be the true Church of Christ.

The seconde proposition is proued by these Protestants first their present Prote­stant D. George Abbat a­gainst D. Kill pag. 63. Feild. l. 3. cap. 5. &c. Archbishop of Conterbury, and D. Feild allowe the Churche of Greece for true. The Title of D. Feilds chapter hath thus freed it from the contrary, in these words: It no way appeareth that the Churches of Greece ar Hereticall, or in damnable Scisme. And againe: all these holdeinge the Rule of faith, and be­leeueing all those things, that ar on the perill of eter­nall damnation to be particularly and expressely knowne, and beleeued: wee accompt them in the number of the Churches of God, and doubt not but innumerable liuinge and dyeing in them, are, and haue beene saued. Now if wee consider the differences betweene these two Chur­ches, of Rome, and Greece, wee shall finde the cheefest to bee about the proces­sion of the holy Ghost, whether from the Father alone, as the Grecians contend, or from the Father and the Sonne, as the Church of Rome teacheth: and whether in the Sacrament of the Altare leuened or vn­leuened breade, as the Romane Churche, teacheth, is to be consecrated. And in bothe these the Protestants of England consent with the Church of Rome, as ap­peateth by those words of the Creede: Who prooceedeth from the Father and the Sonne, allowed and vsed by them in the one, and their practice in the other. If Protestants will add contention for supreamacie, moste [Page 38] of them confesse, that it neuer belonged to Constantionple in Greece, whose name was not, when Rome enioyed it: And the present Gretians themselues acknowledge, the highest dignitie in Rome. And in the next chapter I am to proue the suprea­macie of the Pope of Rome, ouer all the world, for this place it sufficeth that the recited D. Feild telleth vs, absolutely it was Feild. l. 3. of the Church c. 1. but intruded and vsurped by the Citie of Constantinople, to be accompted superior, greater, more honorable then any of the rest, and the cheife Bishop of the whole Worlde, because his Cittie was the cheife Citie of the Worlde. Which as hee saith, hee challenged because hee was prou [...]e and Insolent. Now how these Churches agree in other questions, that be betweene Prote­stants and vs will appeare in diuers chapters of this treatise, and is conteyned in the censure of the Gretians against Protestants: Hieremias Patriarch, Constant. in censura &c. Relation of Relig. c. 53. or 54. and as in playne words confessed, by the Protestant, Relator, who speaketh of them in the Greeke Churche, in this maner. With Rome they concurre in the opinion of Trans­substantiation, and generally in the seruice, and whole bodie of the Masse, in prayinge to Saincts, in auriculare confession, in offering of sacrifice, and prayer for the deade, and in these without any, or with no materiall difference. They holde Purgatorij Cap. 55. also, and worshipping of pictures. For the forme and ceremonies of the Masse, they much resemble the Latines. Their liturgies he the same that in the olde Cap. 53. or 54. time, namely S. Basils, S. Chrisostomes, and S. [Page 39] Gregories translated, without any bendeinge of them to that chaunge of languadge, which their tonge hath suffered. In summe, all those opinions which grewe into the Church, before that seperation, betweene the Greckes and Latines, and all those ceremonies which were common vnto bothe, they still retayne, as their Crosseings and Thapers with others. Therefore yf this Church of Greece is not to be con­demned, as these Protestants teache, much lesse can the Romane Church be condem­ned by them, but must needs remayne the true Church of Christ.

Thus I argue againe: That which was the true Church in the time of Luther within an hundred yeares, by the confes­sion of Protestants, wherein as in the true Church of Christ, Christianitie, Baptisme, Ordination, and power of Ministry were receaued, and which brought forth of re­nowned Kinges and Queenes many Saincts in heauen, and many moste learned, holy, and ver [...]uous Doctors, and Popes them­selues, and yett of that faithe, which the present Church of Rome now teacheth, must needs be the true Churche of Christ: But the present Romane Church is such, by these Protestants: Therefore by them, it is the true Churche of Christ. The first proposition is euidently true for if (as be­fore by these Protestants there is no saluation out of the true Church so many glorious Saincts and holy ones, Kinges, Queenes, Popes, and Doctors, that could not be excused by [Page 40] ignorance, muche lesse made glorious in it, could not haue gone to heauen. Now sup­poseinge, that euery Church, true, or false, consisteth of the heade, and other members, of him, or them, that rule, and those that be ruled, of the shephards and sheepe, Bishops, Preists, and those vnder their chardge. Thus I proue the Minor proposi­tion of the Church of Rome consistinge of the Pope supreame heade Bishops, Doctors, Preists, and other members D. Feild writeth thus of this Church: The Romane and Latine Church continued the true Church of God euen till Feild. pag. [...]2. our time. Therefore why was it refused by them? or how, not since chaunged, can it be now otherwise? againe hee writeth in these words: Wee doubt not but the Churche in Feild. pag 182. which the Bishop of Rome exalted himselfe, was notwithstanding the true Church of God: that it held a saueing profession of the truthe in Christ, and by force thereof, conuerted many contryes from error to truthe. Therefore the doctrine of it beeing truthe, it must needs be the true Church. Hee further acknowledgeth with D. Feild. pag. 72. Couell def. of Hook pag. 73. Couell and others, that Luther and the rest of his Religion, [...]ere baptized, receaued their chri­stianitie, ordination, and power of Ministery, in that Church, as the true visible and apparant Church of Christ Hee telleth vs further that diuers of the Romane Churche euen of the best learned be Feild. pag. 182. saued and Sayncts in heauen. Then the vnlear­ned neede not feare to followe their guides goeinge before, and theacheing them the [Page 41] way to heauen. D. Willet writeth thus: it is Willet Antilog. pag. 144. not denyed by any Protestant, but many renowned Kings, and Queenes of the Romane faithe, ar Saincts in heauen. And speakeing of the Kings Mo­ther, that glorie of late Princes, Q. Mary of Scotland. Hee attributeth vnto her, and her Religion, that of the Romane Churche, such holines and truthe, that it preuailed with God not onely for herself, but her same also: his words be these: The childe of Willet En­gl. pref. to the K. be­fore Antil. Sutcliffe Ans to the lay pet. pag. 34. such prayers, and teares, cannot possibly fall away. D. Sutcliffe acknowledgeth the scholemen so far and famously to be Papists, (as they terme Catholicks) that hee nameth them especially Pope Innocent the thirde, Thomas Aquinas, Scotus, Albert, Durand, the most re­nowned in schooles, particuler Agents of the Romane Church, and foretops of Popery, and ioyneth them in that sence with the late Doctors of the Church of Rome, defen­deing in their writeings the doctrine there­of, Hardinge, Allen, Bellarmine, Baronius. And yett D. Couell highly speaketh in the Couell def. of Hook pag. 24. praise of suche men in this maner: Alexander Hales, whoe made his summe that excellent worke, by commaundement of Pope Innocentius the fourth, was called the fowntayne of life, because of that lyuely knowledge, that flowed from him: hee was scholler to Bonauenture, a Scholler not inferior to himselfe, of whome hee was wont to say, that in Bonauenture hee thought Adam sinned not: meaninge of that Illumination which was in him (and doubtles there was much in him) as though hee had [Page 42] not beene darkened by the fall of Adam: And there­fore the Church called him the Seraphicall Doctor: To these Aquinas was not inferior whoe came so neare vnto S. Augustine, (whome in his booke (Couell against Burg.) against Burges hee esteemeth the cheifest Do­ctor that euer was, or shall be, excepting the Apostles) that some thought hee had all his workes by hart, and by a common prouerbe it was spoken, that the soule of S. Augustine duelt in Aquinas: in whome aboue all the rest, foure contraryeties were saide to excell: aboundance, breuitie, facilitie, securitie: in resp [...]ct whereof hee gayned the Title to be called Angelicall. And to speake somewhat of our Popes themselues, so odious with this people, The Protestant Relator findeth much ver­tue, deuotion, and pietie in them, which haue beene euen in these dayes: amonge which, to particular in the last Pope Cle­ment Relation of Relig. cap. 42. 43. 8. hee writeth of him in this maner. Hee did often weepe vppon pietie and godly compas­sion, at his Masses, Processions &c. his eyes were still watreinge, sometimes streameing with teares, in so much that for weepeing hee seemed another Hera­clitus: Relation cap. 29. sup. hee was a good Pope, a good Prince, a good prelate. And to exclude Ignorance, hee writeth thus: the Papists crye maynely in all places for triall by disputation. Then if our Popes be so holy, so good Popes, good men, good Princes, good Prelates, our Kings and Queenes and best Learned, Saincts, our Pastors, Doctors and Tea­chers that be the Popes Agents, and foretops of popery, moste excellent for learninge and pietie, their writeings renowned, their doctrine [Page 43] secure, wee may securely followe them, and as securely conclude, by these Pro­testants, that onely this Church of Rome is the true Church of Christ. Lastely in this question I argue thus: That which by the confession of Protestants is our mother Churches, and from which no Churche ought further to seperate it selfe, then it is separated from it self, when it was in her best estate, for true do­ctrine, and in which shee still continueth in all things necessarie to saluation, so vndoubtedly that they confesse it in plaine words, to be the familye, of Iesus Christ, part of the howse of God, and visible Church, that they which liue and dye in it may be saued, must needs be acknow­ledged by them for the true Church of Christ: But the present Romane Church by these Protestants is suche: And there­fore by them the true Church of God. The Maior proposition is euidently true: for all children (to which all other Churches in respect of Rome, or compared) ar bownde to obey their Mother, especially teacheing all necessarie truth, as is here supposed. And that which is the Mother Church, which is the highest, if it be a part of the howse of God, and visible Church, and the familie of Iesus Christ, it must needs be the moste excellent part thereof, the heade, and cheife, and so absolutely the true Church, such societies being named [Page 44] by the moste worthy and ruleing authoritie in them. And if saluation is to be had in it, it must likewise by that title, be the true Church of Christ. For D. Feild with D. Feild pag. 69. Couell def. of Hook. pag. 76. Couell and others before haue giuen their sentence, in these words: There is no saluation, remission of sinnes, or hope of eternall life out of the Church. Then of necessitie that Church wherein there is not onely hope, but by the aduersaries themselues, an assured cer­taynetie of saluation, and eternall life, which cannot be had without remission of sins, must needs be onely the true Church of Christ. The Minor, proposition is thus proued by these Protestants: first his Maie­sties Kings speach in parlam. words be these: I acknowledged the Ro­mane Church to be our Mother Churche, this in publicke Parlament, and in the conference at Hampton court, in this order: No Church Confer. at Hampt. pag. 75. ought further to seperate it selfe from the Churche of Rome, either in doctrine or ceremonie, then shee hath departed from her self when [...]hee was in her florisheinge and best estate. Which before is proued by these Protestants shee hath not done in any essentiall, and fundamentall thinge, which is all they require. And this will more then aboundantly appeare, through out this treatise hereafter. And D. Conell writeth thus of this present Ro­mane Couell def. of Hook pag. 68. Church: toucheing the maine points of Chri­stian truth, they constantly persist in them: Prote­stants doe gladly acknowledg them to be the family of Iesus Christ. They of Rome were, and are still in the [Page 45] Churche, a parte of the house of God, a limme of the visible Church. Which hee addeth also to haue been M^r. Hookers sentence, telling vs, that Hook. l. 5. pag. 188. what hee writeth of the Church of Rome, is but to giue her her due, and wee acknowledge them to be of the family of Iesus Christ. And hee con­cludeth thus: It is straunge, for any man to deny Couell sup. pag. 73. & pag. 76. them of Rome, to be of the Church. And againe: Wee affirme them of the Romane Church, to be parts of the Church of Christ, and that those that lyue, and dye in that Church, may be saued. And all kindes of Protestants when they com­bate amonge themselues, rather prefer the Churche of Rome, then their fellow Protestants. The Relator writeth thus: The Relation cap. 45. Lutherans in Germanie, both the Cleargie, and layetie, openly protest, they will rather returne to the Church of Rome, then ioyne with the Sacramentary Protestants, such as bee in England. And of these M^r. Iacob writeth thus: The Bishops of England when they deale with Puritans, must ioyne Iacob. pag. 73. playnely with the Catholicks in their Answers, if they will mayntayne themselues. Lastely the Pu­ritans haue written against these Prote­stants, Offer of conf. pag. 16. as is cited before, in these words: If the Ministers be in error, they protest to all the worlde, that the Pope and the Church of Rome, and in them God an Christ Iesus himselfe, haue had greate wronge, and Indignitie offered vnto them, in that they are reiected, and that all the Protestant Churches ar Scismaticall in forsakeinge vnitie and communion with them. Then if the Lutherans, or parlamentary Protestants, or Puritans, [Page 46] all, or any of them, ar to be beleeued against others, none of their congregations, but onely the Church of Rome at this present is the true Church of Christ, whose com­munion of all men is to be embraced, directions fol­lowed, and Iudgment to be rested in. Now after all these Protestant wittnesses I come to D. Morton: hee agreeth with his former Bre­thren, concerning things necessarily requi­red to a true Church, and in these words: The beleefe of some Articles ar so absolutely necessarie Morton App. lib. 4. cap. 2. sect. 3. pag. 443. for the constitution of a true Church, as a reasonable soule is for the essentiall being of a man: such as con­cerne the knowledg of the vnitie of the godhead, and of the trinitie of the parsons, together with the true and faithfull apprehension of the natures of Christ the Messias, God and Man: the power of his death, and resurrection, by whome wee haue remissions of sins, and after death life euerlastinge. Wherefore wee presume, that in a Church, although corrupted with error, and superstition, yett if it doth not rui­nate the foundation, the erroneous and superstitious professors may be saued: euen by vertue of that tenor which is in capite videlicet. Christ Iesus, the Lord and Author of life, which notwithstandinge, wee must so vnderstand, as that the error and superstition do proceede not from knowledge, but from igno­rance. Now that the present Romane Church inuiolably holdeth all these neces­sarie things, to a true Churche, is graunted by many Protestants before; and his Maie­stie whome this doctor should allowe, entreateing of such (as they terme them) [Page 47] necessarie points, writeth thus: Wee hope that K. Iames ag D. Con­rad. Vor­stuis pag. 60. no Papists shall euer be found to erre in any of those mayne points. And concerning our scholemen Masters in diuinitie with vs, hee vseth these words: In the maine growndes of Christian Reli­gion, they ar worthie of all commendation. And Pag. 63. sup. toucheinge those doctrines which D. Morton will name our errors and supersti­tions, hee addeth thus: If the subiect of Vorstius Pag. 46. 47. supr. his heresies had not beene grounded vppon questions of a higher qualitie then such matters, as ar in contro­uersie at this day, betweene the Papists, and vs; wee doe freely professe, that in that case wee should neuer haue troubled our selues with the busines in such fashion. By which words it is manifest, that hee did not thinke, that any opinion which Catholicks hold, doth either exclude vs from the true Church, or from salua­tion: otherwise the maintayners of such things though as neare frends as the Nether­landers to England were feruently to be ad­monished. But D. Morton himselfe will Morton App. lib. 5. cap. 25. pag. 663. cleare vs in this matter, and in this maner: and in these wordes: If wee should not acknow­ledge Gods holy prouidence (as in the Greeke, so in the Romane Church, by whom haue beene preserued the lawes of the commaundements conteyninge the same of morall obedience, the Symboll and Creede Apostolicall, which hold the same of the fundamentall Articles of faith, the two Sacraments Baptisme and the Eucharist: and the Scriptures of the old and new Testament in their first originalls: of Hebrue and Greeke, being the euidences of our heauenly Fa­thers [Page 48] will, and conteyninge in them all truth necessa­rie vnto saluation: wee might bee worthely Iudged both impiously vnthankefull vnto God, and mali [...]ious against that Church. Therefore if D. Morton re­quireth onely, as before such necessary points and Articles of faith to a true Church, and here acknowledgeth them in the Romane Church, and protesteth they might bee worthely iudged malicious against that Church, if they should deny it: It is euident that they are malitious against it, they shall deny it, to be the true Church of Christ: because in his Iudgment the true and essen­tiall definition of the true Church, euer was, and still is vnseperably annexed vnto it. Concerning D. Mortons exception and li­mitation: That the error and superstition doe pro­ceede not from knowledge but from Ignorance, is fully answeared by his owne fellowes in Religion before, graunteinge, that the Popes greatest Doctors, and Princes of our Religion, ar Saints and saued soules. And to auoide ignorance, or willfull erringe they haue written: The Papists cry mamely in all Relation of Relig. cap. 29. places for triall by disputation. And that English Protestants, persecutions against vs, ar thought to equall those of Nero, and Dioclesian. Which wee would not suffer, if wee knew our selues in error, willfull both to be afflicted in this, and the world to come. Besides D. Mortons limitation is ridiculous, for error and su­perstition doe not proceede from know­ledge, as his fonde distinction surmiseth: [Page 49] neither doth the state of knowledge, or ignorance, [...]arye the essentiall, necessary, and fundamentall definition, nature, or essence of the Church, being one and the same in that, as in all other things, in all estates and times. The particular exceptions which hee taketh against the Innouation of some doctrines which hee contendeth to haue beene in the Romane Church, first ar friuolous in this dispute, none of them as hee confesseth being of any thinge essen­tiall, and necessarie either to the true Church, or saluation, of which wee con­tend in this place. Secondly they shall be all confuted in their proper places, by these his owne brethren, and present frends and contrymen in Religion. Thirdly not to suspend my Readers Iudgment so longe, Doctor Morton shall answeare and by a gene­rall Morton Appeal. lib. 4. cap. 30. pag. 573. 574. reason, so much as this place, will per­mitt, confute himself in his owne obiection. His words be these: Protestants in oppugninge doctrines which they call new and not Catholicke, ar so farre from sufferinge the limitation of the first 4 [...]0. yeares, that they giue the Romanists, the scope of the first 600. yeares. S. Gregory liued within the first 600. yeares. Hee addeth for himself, and other Protestants, as the Centuriarists, and many more, of our conuersion then, in this Morton lib. 1. cap. [...]. pag. 60. supr. maner: Pagan and Heathnish people by the light of the ghospell throughe the Ministerie of Austen, the legate of S. Gregory were brought vnto the folde of Christ. And therefore our Authors called i [...] a gra­tious [Page 50] conuersion. And yett that this light, Ghos­pell, fold of Christ and gratiu [...] conuersion, to which they were conuerted, was (as they now scoffingly terme our Catholicke Romane Religion) Romanisme, Papisme, Papistry, super­stitions Ceremonies, and the like by which they expresse the full state of our Religion is thus testified by D. Mortons Protestant Au­thors, and wittnesses. The wordes of his Centuriarists be these: Augustinus Romanus or­dinis Centuria­tor. Cētur. 6. An. 1 [...]82. pag. 747. 748. Benedicti Monachu [...] à Gregorio Papa Anno Do­mini 582. Augustine a Romane, a Monke of the order of Benedict was sent from Gregory the Pope in the yeare of our Lord 582. into England to wyn it to the Pope of Rome, and to make it subiect to his super­stitious Iurisdiction. Enterin into the Kentish Isle named Tenet in the yeare of our Lord 596. hee en­dued Kinge Edelbert and his superstitious Wife in the Romane Religion. Yett with that condition, that this Popish worship should be free and not compelled. After calling a councell hee obtruded the Romish Rites and customes to those Churches that it to say Altares, Vestments, Images, Masses, Chalices, Crosses, Cand­lesticks, Censors, Banners, sacred vessels, holy water, thee bookes of the Romane Ceremonies, Oblations, Pro­cessions, Pompes, Tithes and the like. When hee had subiected the brittane Churches to the Antichrist of Rome Romano Antichristo subiecisset, hee dyed. Thus wee see by D. Morton his greately re­uerenced, Col. 749. and esteemed frends, and fel­lowes in Religion, that the state of the Romane Church in that his allowed time, was the same, that it is at this present. And [Page 51] not onely his Centuriarists, but other Pro­testants by his owne Relation ar wittnesses Morton App. lib. 1. cap. 3. Willet de August. mon. Mor­ton supr. pag. 67. l. 1. cap. 6. Centuriat. centur. 7. col. 559. in this cause. Doctor Humfrey as hee acknow­ledgeth, saith that Gregory brought in on us ce­remoniarum, a burthen of Ceremonies. D. Willet saith, hee brought in Popery, Luke Osian­der and his before cited frends call that Re­ligion, ceremonias papisticas, papisticall ceremo­nies. And to vse their words: Ceremonias papi­sticas instituturi, & propagaturi: quod Beda vocat aliquos Christo praedicando acquirere, to teach and publish papisticall ceremonies, which Bede, that glorie of our nation, calleth to gett some to Christ by preachinge. M^r. Bale an other of his frends, Ioan. Bal. l. de script. Brit. cen­tur. 1. in August. pag. 34. fol. 3 5. and Authors hath these wordes: Augustine was sent Apostle from Gregorie to instruct the English Saxons, in the papisticall faith, papistica fide initi­andos. And againe Kinge Ethelbert being conuerted receaued Romanisme with the superstitions adioyned. Romanismum cum adiunctis superstitioni­bus suscepit. Augustine brought in Al [...]rs, Vest­ments, sacred Vessels, Relicts and bookes of C [...]mo­nies, all which Gregory had sent vnto him, with the blessinge of Peter. And that these with the rest of our sacred c [...]remonies which they call the body of popery, were not then newly In­uented, but vsed in the Church of Rome, when his maiestie saithe, it was a Rule to all K. Speach. both in faith, and ceremonies, shall be testified and proued hereafter, in the proper que­stion of such things, by D. Morton him­self▪ and too many others of his now En­glish Protestant confederates in Religion, [Page 52] to be without manifest impudencie to be denyed. Therefore, by these Protestants, The present Romane Church must be al­lowed to be the true Church of Christ; And all their former Inuectiues against it, and their departeing from it, by their owne Iudgments, must be recanted.

CHAPTER III. WHEREIN IS PROVED BY these Protestants, that the Pope of Rome euer was, and now lawfully is, and ought so to be esteemed the supreame pastor, and heade on earth, of the whole Church of Christ: of his sentence and Authoritie.

FROM hence it is euidently proued, That the Pope of Rome is supreame heade of the true Church of Christ: for seeing these Protestants haue tolde vs, that true Regiment and discipline is a note of the true Church of Christ, and thus it appeareth, that the Church of Rome is this true Churehe, and hath this note of true Regiment, the supreame bindeing, and commaundinge Authoritie, of the Pope, being the cheefest of that gouernment, is therein concluded Likewise it so followeth by their note of true doctrine, wherein they haue graunted the Church of Rome [Page 53] constantly persisteth in all things, necessarie and essentiall: such as this Question of the Popes prerogatiue and highest Iuridicall power is: for as it followeth in these mens Iudgments, if the Pope is not supreame heade, and Ruler of the true Church of Christ, then that societie that so accepteth him, is not the true Church: So if it be proued, that hee is the highest supreame pastor, and vicar of Christ in earthe. That Church which so receaueth him, and no other is the true Church of Christ. For to be supreame gouernor of the true Churche, and the true Church so to be gouerned, ar mutuall and vnseparable Correlatyues, as a Kinge and Kingedome, Lord and Seruant and the like. And this with that which is entreated in the former chapter might suf­fice in this controuersie. But to giue all contentment. I will proue it more in parti­cular, and first argue thus.

That Church which is the Mother, and consequently, commaundeing Church ouer all Churches, her children▪ hath supreame authoritie ouer them, otherwise no Mo­ther nor commaunder ouer all: But the Church of Rome is this Mother and com­maunding Church: Therefore it hath su­preame authoritie ouer all. Therefore the Pope highest Pastor in it, is this supreame Ruler, and Commaunder. Bothe proposi­tions be proued by Protestants before: and so nothinge remayneth doubtfull.

Further I argue in this order: No socie­tie or companie wanteing one supreame, and cheefe Pastor ouer the rest, to suppresse Scismes, and auoide factions, can be the true Church of God, whose communion all men ar bownde to embrace, followe her directions, and rest in her Iudgment: But all Protestant com­panies, societies, and Congregations, want this cheefe Rule [...], and commaunder, and the Church of Rome onely enioyeth it: Therefore no Assembly or societie of Pro­testants, but onely the Church of Rome is the true Church of Christ. The Maior though it be euident before, yett thus it also is proued and confirmed againe by these Protestants, teacheing that from the begynninge this supreamacie was in one. D. Feild writeth thus: Tertullian saith rightly Feild. l. 4. c. 2. pag. 196. and ap [...]ly, what was hidden and concealed from Peter on whome Christ promised to builde his Churche? D. Sutcliffe speaketh more plainely in these Sutcliffe sub. pag. 40. words: Tertullian giueth the keyes onely to Peter, saying: that the Church is built vppon him. And to proue that this prerogatiue fownded in thi [...] cheife Apostle, first Bishop of Rome, was to continue to his successors: D. Downame saith that in the primatiue Chur­che: Downame l. 1. Antich. p. 36. Titles of honor, and pr [...]eminence were giuen to the Churche of Rome, as the cheife, or head of the Churches. Further D. Feild citeth and ap­proueth, this sayinge of S. Hierome: Eccl [...]si [...] sal [...] Hieron. contra Lu­cifer. in summi sac [...]rdotis dignita [...] pe [...]de [...] cui si non exors quaedam & ab omnibu [...] [...] de [...] po [...]es [...]a [...], [Page 55] tot in ecclesia efficientur scismata, quot sacerdotes. The health of the Church dependeth on the dignitie of the highest Preist, to whome except an extraordinary and eminent power be giuen by all men, there will be so many scismes, where the wordes Church, highest Preist, and, of all, demonstrate, that hee speaketh of the whole Churche vni­uersall; for those words cannot be applyed to any particular Church. Againe D. Couell hath these words: The twelue were not like to agree, except there had beene one cheife amongst them: for saith S. Hierome, amongst the twelue one was therefore chosen, that a cheefe being appointed, occasion of dissention might be preuented. Which neither S. Hierosme, D. Couell, or any other, Couell ag: the plea of the Innoc. pag. 107. Catholicke, or Protestant, could suspect amonge the Apostles, confirmed in grace, that any mortall or damnable dissention could fall amonge them: Therefore this appointing of one, to be cheife amonge the Apostles, and him that was to be our first Bishop of Rome, S. Peter, it must needs be for a continuall Rule, and lawe, for the Vniuersall Church for euer. And yett, if wee would be maliciously enuious to the Apostles priuiledge in grace; if in that spe­ciall time of the grace, and fauour of God. The supreamacie of one aboue all was so necessarie, that otherwise schismes, (which be more properly against the whole Church and heade thereof then against any particular Church wantinge such supreame authoritie to be disobeyed) could not [Page 56] then he otherwise preuented; it must needs be much more necessarie in the continuan­ce and later ages of the Church, as shall be proued from these Protestants in the next Argument, in the meane time, for this poynt D. Couell writeth in this order? wee easely see, Couell a­gainst the plea of the Innocent. pag. 106. that equalitte doth breede factions, and therefore wisemen to suppresse the seeds of dissentions haue made one aboue the rest. And better to cleare this doubt by these Protestants I will heare repeate againe, what their Protestant Relator hath written in this matter vtterly disa­blinge the Protestants Religion, and com­mending Relation of Religion c. 47. the Church of Rome: his words be these: The Protestants ar seuered bands, or ra­ther scattered troupes, eache draweing diuers way, without any meanes to pacifie their quarrells, to take vpp their controuersies. No Prince with any preemi­nence of Iurisdiction aboue the rest: no Patriarke, one or more to haue a Common superintendance or care of their Churches, for respondencie and vnitie: no ordinary way to assemble a generall Councell of their parte, the onely hope remayninge to asswadge their contentions. The other haue the Pope, as a Common Father, Aduiser and conductor to them all, to re­concile their [...]ar [...], to appease their displeasures, to decide their difference, aboue all things to drawe their Religion by consent of councells to vnitie. Hitherto this Protestant writer: where D. Feild may plainely see, that those three things, wherein hee teacheath the vnitie of the Church consisteth, cannot in the Iudg­ment of his fellowe Protestants, be mayn­tayned [Page 57] without this one supreame, and commaundeing pastor, and authoritie, in the Churche of Christ.

My next Argument is thus: whatsoeuer Regiment, Supremacie, and Gouernment of the Church, was ordayned by Christ in his time, and was as muche, or more ne­cessarie to remayne, and continue in it, for future and succeedeing ages, is still to be allowed, and continued: But the Supreame Regiment, and commaundeing Iurisdic­tion, of one highest spirituall Pastor, and Gouernor is such: Therefore still to be allowed, and continued. The Maior pro­position is euidently true, for Christs ordi­nance aboue all things, is to be obserued, and notheing so necessarie to his Churche, may be without damnation omitted. The Minor proposition is thus proued, by these wordes of D. Couell, that followe: Because in the execution of holy things, where the parsons Couell a­gainst the plea of the Innocent. pag. 106. putt in trust are but men, discord, and disorder vsually doe breake in: the wisedome of God thought it necessarie, that amongst them, whoe for their Mi­nistery were equall, an Inequalitie for Order, and Superioritie to commaunde, should be graunted: that by this meanes, Order, and vnion should both be preserued in Christs Church. Which of it concerne all persons, and ages in the Churche of Christ, (as suerly it doth,) the gouernment must not cease with the Apostles. where it is euident, that Christ amonge his Apostles instituted in one, an Authoritie and Superioritie, to commaund, [Page 58] and without this one commaundeing su­perioritie, vnion, and order could not be preserued, that it concerneth all parsons, and ages, and so must neuer cease, but enduer for euer, which is all I contende to proue, for all Protestants want it, and onely the Romane Church enioyeth it. And further, the same Protestants Doctor pro­ueth this spirituall supreamacie of one Pastor, to be perpetuall, because now in these times of scisme, & dissentions, there is more neede of that commaundeing supe­rioritie: And yett (saith hee) it was the prin­cipall meanes to preuent scismes, and dissentions in the Couell sup. pag. 207. primatiue Churche, when the graces of God were farr m [...]re aboundant, and eminent, then now they ar: nay if the twelue were not like to agree, exc [...]pt there had b [...]ne one ch [...]ife amongst them: for saith S. Hiero­me, amongst the twelue one was therefore chosen that a cheife beinge appoin [...]d, occasion of dissention might be pr [...]u [...]ed. And as in the same place hee thus argueth, against the puritans Presbi [...]ry: how can they thinke that equalitie would keepe all the Pasto [...]s of the world in vniti [...]? So I say to all Protestants, they cannot with reason thinke, that so many equall Regiments, and Rulers in Religion, as they make in their distinct Prouinces, and Churches, if the world were of their Religion, could ouer agree: to which the lamentable expe­rience of their miserable dissentions, and errors allreadie, for want of one supreame Commaunder, and not otherwise to be [Page 59] redressed as the Protestant Relator hath Relat. sup. written before, doth testifie. Which absur­ditie and moste vnsufferable inconuenience, for want of such commaunding power, D. Couell setteth downe in these words: seeing Couell sup. pag. 107. that all men may easely erre, and that no errors ar so daungerous, as those which concerne Religion: the Church should be in a farre worse case, then the meanest Common wealth, nay all moste then a denne of Theeues, if it were destitu [...]e of meanes, eyther to conuince Heresies, or suppresse them. Which can­not be done as they playnely confesse, by any power, in their Church, not by any authoritie, as they write, but by a Generall Feild. Cowncell, and a supreame Commaunder to call it, which they want, and as their Relator telleth vs, can neuer haue it. Further Relation. I argue thus: That Churche which as the Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury wittnes­seth, Abbot ag. Hill pag. 189. by tradition of the auncient, was the seate of S. Peter, the highest and supreame pastor in the Church as D. Feild and D. Couell before haue allowed, from S. Hierome, and Tertullian, and D. Sutcliffe Sutcliff. subt. pag. 40. thus citeth, and writeth, Tertullian giueth the keyes onely to Peter, sayeing: that the Church is built on him. And thus hee testifieth for himself: Peter preached in no place, but hee there ordayned Sup. pag. 3. Bishops, and teachers, and fownded Churches: Which in his booke against D. Kellison, hee Sutel. a­gainst Kell. pag. 105. maketh an Argument of supreamacie. And which as the same Protestant Archbishopp citeth from S. Leo and Prosper greate Doctors [Page 60] and Saincts, was by Religion supreame heade of the worlde: This Church I say must needs be Abb. sup. pag. 189. 190. cheife and supreame: But the Churche of Rome is that Church, as is euident, and appeareth by these Protestants in those their places cited: Therefore it is, and so ought by Protestants to be honored and obeyed. Both propositions be affirmed by Protestants before, and so notheinge in this Argument remayneth to be further proued.

Next I suppose what D. Feild writeth of the greate and patriarchall Churches of Gracia, Armenia Aethiopia, Russia neuer subiect or inferior vnto any except to the Church of Rome as Catholicks holde, teacheing that to be supreame: his words of those Churches be these: Wee conclude there­fore, Feild. l. 3. c. 5. pag. 7 [...]. that their scismes and seperations ar sinfull, wicked and daungerous, and their errors inexcusable. And concerninge scisme hee thus defineth it: Scisme is a breache of the vnitie of the Church. That supposed, and that scisme which is Feild sup. pag 70. contempt of authoritie, is a kinde of diso­bedience, which allwayes is against a Supe­rior, and one higher in dignitie, and com­maunde, I argue thus. Whatsoeuer Church is that, to which, and against which, all patriarchall Churches, excepting one clay­minge to be highest, ar in scisme, and dis­obedience, is supreame, and of highest au­thoritie: But this is the Church of Rome: Therfore that is supreame. The Maior [Page 61] proposition is euident, otherwise those Churches against D. Feilds words before, could not be scismaticall: nor possiblie could be in scisme which hee saith is a breach of the vnitie of the Church, and must needs be a contempt of superioritie. The Minor is manifestly true: for by D. Feild before, the other patriarchall sees besides Rome ar in scisme, and no other Church but the Ro­mane Church was extant in the worlde, besi­des them, at the time of their scisme, and longe after neither any other then did, or now doth clayme superioritie ouer them: Therefore that alone is supreame: otherwise those Churches not resisting superioritie, cannot be in scisme, against D. Feild his graunt before related. Feild sup. l. 3. c. 5. pag. 70.

Further for my next Argument, the same D. Feilds hath these words: Scisme is a breach of the vnitie of the Church. The vnitie of the Churche consisteth in three things: first the subiection of people to their lawfull Pastors: secondly the connexion, and communion, which many particular Churches, and the Pastors of them, haue amonge themselues: thirdly in holdinge the same rule of faithe. This supposed, which as it confirmeth the former argu­ment, for all these things required to the vnitie of the Churche so necessarie to be preserued, must needs imply a supreame au­thorite: So it giueth matter of an other Ar­gument, in this maner.

Whatsoeuer doctrine, and power, in the Church, is so necessary, that without [Page 62] it, neyther all, nor any of these vnities ab­solutely needfull, can be preserued, is to be graunted: But one supreame spirituall commaundeing Ruler, and the doctrine thereof is such: Therefore one supreame gouernor, and doctrine according is to be allowed. The Maior proposition is euidently Relation of Relig supr. cap. 47. true, by D. Feild and other Protestants, otherwise nothinge can be scisme, no­thinge can be heresie. The Minor propo­sition is directly proued before, by the Pro­testant Relator, twice allreadie cited, where hee expressely teacheth that without one such supreame preeminence of Iuridiction aboue the rest, which hee saith all Protestants want and Catholicks haue, quarrells cannot be pacified, vnitie kept, controuersies deci­ded, and consequently neither Scisme, nor Heresie condemned.

Againe thus I argue: whatsoeuer the Church of Rome claymed, or exercised, when by Protestants confession, is was in her Florisheing, and best estate, a Rule to all, Anker of pietie, cheife and onely Church, that it still ought to enioy, and wee to graunt vnto it: But in that time, it claymed, and exercised supreamacie ouer all: Therefore it ought now to enioy it, and wee to graunt it. The Maior is euident, for that which is a Rule to all, may, not be crooked, neither that which is confessed cheife, be made Inferior, And that the Church of Rome had those eminent priuiledges, is thus proued by these [Page 63] Protestants: our Kinge saith of this Romane Kings speach in Parlam. Churche: it is our mother Church it was a Rule to all, bothe in doctrine and ceremonies, when it was in her florisheinge and best estate. D. Couell wri­teth thus: The Churche of Rome was the cheife and Couell def. of Hook. onely Churche. M^• Ormerod calleth it, the eye of the west (in which diussion England is) and Ormerod pict. pap. pag. 184. Down. l. 2. Antichr. pag. 105. the Anker of pietie. D. Downame graunteth, it was a note of a Good Christian, to cleane vnto the Roman Apostolicall Churche.

The seconde proposition, that the Church of Rome claymed and had suprea­macie, in that vnspotted, and primatiue time of Christianitie, is also proued in the former: for that which is Mother, Rule to all bothe in doctrine and ceremonies, cheife Churche &c. must needs be graunted supreame. Yett to proue it further: D. Sutcliffe, citeing S. Sutcliffe subu. pag. 57. Irenaeus, lyueing neare the Apostles time, and longe before any generall Cowncell, or Christian Emperour, to giue supreamacie to the See of Rome, writeth thus: Irenaeus saith, that euery Church ought to haue respect to the Church of Rome, for her eminent principalitie. M^r. Ormerod ascendeth to Pope, S. Anacletus, ly­uing withein one hundred yeares of Christ: his words be these: To proue that the Church of Rome hath the preeminence ouer all Churches, Ormerod. pict. pap. pag. 78. Anacletus alleadgeth Matth. 16. vers. 18. vppon this rocke will I builde my Churche: and hee expowndeth it thus: super hanc Petram (id est) super Eccle­siam Romanam, vppon this Rocke: that is, vppon the Church of Rome, will I builde my Churche. And [Page 64] who shall wee thinke was better acquain­ted with the priuiledge, of that highest Apostle S. Peter, Bishop of Rome, then this so glorious a Pope, Martyr, and Sainct so neare succeedeing vnto him? when especi­ally these Protestāts before haue assured vs, that this supreame power was not to dye with S. Peter, but to continue in the Church for euer. And this was not a singular opi­nion of that Holy Pope, and Sainct, but of others also: the words of D. Downame be Down. l. 1. Antichrist. cap. 3. pag. 35. these: diuers Bishops of Rome before the time of Socrates the historiam (in her that best and florishing estate) contended to haue the primacie, ouer all other Churches: and that is the cheife scope of many of their Epistles decret all. And yett in that time the Protestants confesse those Popes for Saincts: and if their Epistles be decretalls, and lawes to the Church, as this Doctor calleth them how had not these Masters of decrees, and lawemakers vnto the Church, also supreame and highest power in the Church? for lawes and decrees ar made by Soueraignes, and not by subiects. And not onely Popes, but other Saincts, and Do­ctors before, and to be cited hereafter by Protestants, were of the same myndc: for this time it shall suffice that M^•. Middleton Middleton Papistom. pag. 200. writeth thus; Papias (lyueinge in the Apost­les time) taught Peters primacie, and Romish Episcopalitye.

My next Argument, or further confir­mation of the former, is thus: That [Page 65] Church, or gouernor, that in the best and florishing estate of the Church, by Pro­testants, did clayme, exercise, and execute, supreame, & highest spirituall Iurisdiction, in all knowne parts, of the worlde, Asia, Afrike, and Europe was truely supreame, and so still to be accompted: But the Pope and Church of Rome was such: Therefore supreame in authorine. The Maior is eui­dently true, for in this life no supreamacie can extend further, then into the whole knowne world, and all parts thereof. The second proposition is thus proued by these Protestants: and first of Asia, amonge the Greeke Churches, and priuiledges which they clayme: D. Couell telleth vs, that Pope Couell ag: thea plea of the Inn. pag. 65. Victor a glorious Sainct, and Martyr, did in that best time, authoritatiuely take vppon him supreamacie ouer all Asia, excommuni­cating the Churches of it: his words be: inseperateing all Asia from the vnitie of the faithfull, for being disobedient in the point and question of Easter. And what greater supreamacie can be named in the Church, then to excom­municate, and purt forthe of the Churche, so greate a part of the world? Therefore seeing such Iurisdiction is not, but in supe­rioritie, this supreamacie must needs be graunted to the Church of Rome; for of all Churches of the world euen by the graunt of Protestants, the Greeke Church next to the Church of Rome hath euer moste contended for superiotie, and in the [Page 66] auncient cowncells, next to the Church of Rome, is moste priuiledged: yett here they ar by a Sainct Bishop of Rome, iustly excommunicated, as by their superior: for as these Protestants argue in an other place: par in parem non habet authoritatem. An equall against an equall hath not authoritie. And Doctor Couell before hath told vs, that they were thus censured by the Pope of Rome, to vse his words againe, for beinge disobedient in the point and question of Easter: Which makes it playne in his opinion, that the Pope of Rome was supreame, and had highest power not onely to censure, but to decree in matters of Religion, and bynde others vnto it, otherwise not to haue conformed themselues vnto him, had not beene in these Greeke Churches, disobedience, which is onely against authoritie, and superioritie. And although S. Iraeneus disliked this pro­ceedeing, with the Asiaticall Churches, Ob. as these Protestants vse to obiect: yett it Answ. was onely, because hee thought there was not such seueritie then to be vsed, not that hee denyed the power, and authoritie of the Pope to doe it: for of his opinion of the iustice of his supreamacie D. Sutcliffe Sucl. subu. pag. 57. hath wittnessed before that he saith: Euery Church ought to haue respect to the Church of Rome, for her eminent principalitie. Therefore hee thought it had supreamacie. For principalitie eminent ouer euery Church here mentioned, must needs be supreamacie ouer all: for [Page 67] euery Church being subiected vnto it, none is priuiledged, from subiection and obe­dience vnto it.

Next lett vs come to Afrike: for which M. Perkins writeth thus: Appeales were often made out of Afrike, to the Popes of Rome, in those Perk. pro­blem, pag. 237. 238. dayes, of her best estate. And yet appeales be all wayes to superiors, and neuer out of for­rayne kingdomes, but to the highest, for which cause, D. D [...]wname graunteth in this Downam. l. 2. Antichrist, pag. 105. 106. maner, that S. Augustine and Victor Vticensis in Asrike were of opinion, that to adhere to the Churche of Rome, was a Marke of a true Catholicke in those times. Which could not be, except it were the commaunding Churche, and enfran­chised from error. Neither doth this Doctor Down. su [...]. pag. 106. 107. Denye, but the Bishops then did sweare obedience to the Pope. And entreateing of a Bishopp re­canteinge his Heresies, hee writeth thus. Hee sweareth, to renownce his former Heresies, and to professe, and mayntayne that Faith. And Religion, which the Bishopp and Church of Rome did professe. Which is a thinge in it self so absurde for Bishops in that best time to doe, except they did hold, the Popes Authoritie to be supreame, and Iudgment in religeons con­trouersies Infallible, that no man of vnder­standing can beleeue it: Therefore M^r. Ormerod wittnesseth; that S. Leo taught, that Ormerod pict. pap. pag. 44. Sutcl su [...] pag. 19. God did assist, and direct that See in decrees.

Concerninge Europe: D. Sutcliffe giueth particular examples, how S. Gregorie (to vse his words) commaunded the Bishops of [Page 68] fraunce. And commaundeth also in England, the constituting of our Archbishop S. Augustine, and the verie See of that preeminence, at Canterbury. D. Couell writeth the like of Pope Gregorie his Couell a­gainst Burg. pag. 49. commaundeing authoritie, in all Spayne: who prouoked by the Heresie of the Arians, commaunded that through all Spayne there should be but once dippinge in baptisme. And if either a ge­nerall Cowncell, in the primatiue Church, to which Protestants will seeme to giue highest authoritie, or the Emperor, to Bilson Suru. pag. 83. Mort. Apol. part. 2. pag 340. Relat. c. 47. Su [...]cl. subu. pag. 119. Feild pag. 228. &c. Do [...]n, l. 1. Antich. c. 3. pag. 36. whome by their proceedings they would highest power, if they could procure any of their Religion could either giue, or con­firme this highest authoritie, to the Pope of Rome, Then D. Downame denieth not, but that bothe the Emperor Iustinian, and the generall Cowncell of Calcedon in the primatiue Church, attributed to the Pope of Rome, to be heade of the Churche: which hee saith is the greatest style. And addeth of that Church, in that best estate: Titles of honor, and preeminence were giuen to the Church of Rome, as the cheife, or Heade of the Churches.

Againe I argue thus: whatsoeuer power doth rightly ordaine in the Churche gene­rally ceremonies by all to be vsed in it, ap­pointeth Metropolitanes, Archbishops, Bishops, assigneth precincts, to euery pa­rishe, and a certayne compasse to euery presbyter, in the primatiue Church, and best estate thereof, musts needs be supreame: But the power of the Pope of Rome is [Page 69] such: Therefore it is supreame. The Maior is euidently true, for it conteyneth autho­ritie ouer all in the Churches. The Minor is proued by D. Morton, M^r. Ormerod, M^r. Hull, Mort. apol. part. 2. Orm. pict. pur. Couell exam. Hull Rom. pol pag. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. and Doctor Couell, telling vs, that Lent, Im­bringe dayes, Friday Altars, Albes, Corporalls, Preists Robes, Saincts, Fastings euens, Saincts Shrines, Hymnes, Pax, Pascall Taper, Masse for the deade, Canonicall howers, Processione, Holy water, Introite of Masse, Annoyntinge Bishops, crosseing with Chrisme in Baptisme, were ordayned in the Church by these primatiue, and holy Popes, Telespho­rus, Calixtus, Stephanus, Syluester, Sixtus, Vigilius, Honorius, Bo [...]ifacius, Sergius, Leo, Innocentius, Zozimus, Vitellian, Celestine, Pelagius, Vrbanus, Agapitus, Damasus, Higimus, Pius, Alexander: all which ruled the Churche longe before the exceptions of Protestants against it. D. Couell doth not onely tell vs, that Metropo­litanes, Archbishops &c. came from thence, and whoe to whome should be obedient, or superior: and were so vsed before the Nicene Coun­cell: Couell mod. exam. pag. 111. But further (to vse his words) either Euaristus Bishopp in the See of Rome (in the yeare of Christ 112.) or as some say Dionysius first assigned the precincts to euery parishe, and appointed to eache Presbyter, a certaine compasse, whereof him­self should take chardge alone. Therefore that authoritie of the Pope, which thus from Couell exam. pag. 162. sup. the begynninge, and before councells were holden, assigned, limited, and appointed to all spirituall parsons, and callings, their Titles, honors, precincts, Iurisdiction, [Page 70] and power, must needs be supreame.

I argue againe: That Churche, whose Bishoppe was before the first generall Councell, Cheefe Patriarke in the Church of Christ, and in that and other generall Councells, so allowed, and confirmed, by the confession of Protestants, and whose Rulers when that Church was in her floris­heing, and best estate, a Rule to all our mother Churche &c. Did make and publish decrees, and lawes to the whole Church, and in the greatest affaires of generall, and other Councells, that they should not doe against the directions of that commaun­deinge Ruler, els to be accompted no Councells: and that it were not lawfull for Bishops to doe any thinge against his de­crees, must needs be the supreame and com­maundinge Church, ouer all others: But the Church of Rome by the testimonye of Pro­testāts, is in this preeminent and priuiledged estate: Therefore by them it is the supre­ame and commaundinge Churche, of the whole Christian worlde: The Maior propo­sition is euidently true: for, first hee that is the first, and cheife amonge all others, can­not be dependant, therefore hee must needs be supreame, otherwise D. Feilds vnities of the Churche could not possibly be kept, as is proued before, nor the graunt of his fellowes, that there euer was since Christ one supreame in his Church, cannot be iustified. For if the first, cheife, [Page 71] and moste worthie, is not hee; the seconde, lesse cheife or lesse worthy carnot be hee. And if by Protestants, a generall Councell is highest, and supreame Iudge, as D. Morton Morton. Apol. part. 2. pag. 340. Sutcl. subu. pag. 119. Feild pag. 228. saith: a generall Councell is highest Iudge: by D. Surcliffe: generall Councells haue soueraigne authoritie in externall gouernment: by D. Feild: Bishops assembled in a generall Councell haue (and onely haue) authoritie to interprett scriptures and by their authoritie to suppresse all them that gainesay such Interpretation, and subiect euery man, that shall disobey such determinations, as they consent vppon, to excommunication, and censure of like nature: Then that Pope or prelate which in that true Chnrch (where such vsurpation vniustly could not be) that had authoritie to con­firme, ratifie, or to frustrat and inualidate such, and all other Councells, must of ne­cessitie be supreame, and of the highest commaunding power, ouer all. The Minor proposition is proued by these Protestants: first D. Feild writeth in these words: The mayne Feild l. 3. c. 1. pag. 61. 62. diuision of the christian Church is presently, and was formerly for certaine hundreds of yeares, into the Latine and Greeke Church, as most principall. In the time of the Nicene Councell, and before, as appea­reth Nicen. Concil. can. 6. by the Acts of the Councell limiteinge there bounds, there were three principall Bishops, or Pa­triarkes of the Christian Churche: namely the Bishop of Rome, Alexandria, and Antioche. After which time, Constantinople before named Bizantium made greate by Constantine, and being the seate of the Emperors, the Bishops of this See not onely ob­tayned [Page 72] to haue the dignitie of a Patriarche amonge the rest, but in the second generall Coun [...]ll, holden at Constantinople was preferred before bothe the other of Alexandria, and Antioche, and sett in degree of honor next vnto the Bishop of Rome. Hitherto See D. Feild l. 4. c. 5. pag. 202. clearely allowt [...]e Popes sen­tence to be greatest next to a generall Councell. It is cited in the next chapter. D. Feild; by which discourse of his, there is euident demonstration made, that the pri­uiledge of the Bishop of Rome, was not giuen him by generall Councells, but hee had it before the first Nicene Councell, the first generall. Secondly that it was the moste principall, that was in the Christian Church, for of the twoe moste principall Churches [...]atine and Greeke (to vse his words) the Latine the moste principall was vnder him: thirdly hee was from the begynninge pre­ferred before the Patriarches of Alexandria, and Antioche, and Constantinople: in so much, that for Constantinople claymeing after to be cheefe, hee calleth it a pretended Title, Feild sup. pag 62. and false: and further his words of the Bishops of Constantinople be these: The mognifi­cence and glorie of his citie dayly encreaseinge, hee challenged to be superior, and would be nam [...]d vni­uersall B. not challengeing to himself to be B. alone, but enchroacheinge vppon the Right of all other, and thereby declareinge. Himself greater, and more ho­norable then any of the rest, and the cheife Bishop of the whole worlde. Hitherto his words of the encreacheing, and vsurpation of that Bishop: Then by his sentence, the Pope of Rome still was cheife, and obtayned by right the primacie, in the whole Christian: [Page 73] Church: And this cheefnes and primacie, as D. Couell hath told before, must needs be supreamacie, for no other could haue it: and D. Downame alsoe hath acknowledged Down. l. 1. Ant. pag. 36. that both the Emperor and generall Coun­cell attributed to the Pope of Rome in the primatiue Church, to be heade of the Churche: the greatest stile, in his Iudgment: and it must needs be, if (as it is) amonge all mem­bers of the bodie the heade is cheife, su­preame, and most excellent. Lett vs add to this twoe sentences of D. Feild: the one concerninge the authoritie of Traditions in these words: There is no reason why tradi­tions or vnwritten verities should not be made equall Feild pag. 238. with the words, precepts and doctrines of Christ, the Apostles and Pastors of the Church left vnto vs in writeinge if they could proue any such vnwritten ve­rities for it is not the writeinge, that giueth things their authoritie. But the worthe and creditt of him that deliuereth them, though by word, and lyuely voyce onely. And after delyuering three Ru­les, Feild. pag. 242. how to knowe certaynely these so au­thorized traditions, and vnwritten veri­ties, hee speaketh in this maner. The third Rule is the constant testimonie, of the Pastors of an Apostolicall Churche, succeedeingly deliuered: To which some add the present Testimonye of any Apostolicall Churche, whose declynings when they began, wee cannot precisely tell. Hi­therto the words of this Protestant Doctor, of the authoritie of traditions, equall to scriptures being proued by this his Rule. [Page 74] Then if the opinion of these some his Pro­testants by his maner of argueinge, teache­ing that the present testimonie of an Apostolicke Church, is sufficient Rule, to proue true tra­ditions, of so high authoritie, not onely this Catholique doctrine of the Popes su­preamacie, and commaunding power, but all other doctrines, taught against these Pro­testants, of necessitie must needs be true by this Rule, for they all being the doctri­nes of the present Church of Rome, the first and principall Apostolicke Church, must needs be iustified by the Testimonie of an Apostolicke Church, at this present when they ar taught by it. And this is suffi­cient for my purpose: for so that some Pro­testants be of this opinion, it is as much as I request, and doe not desire or expect D. Feilds voyce, or an harmony of Protestants, neuer yett agreeing well, in any thinge, to be all of one mynde in this matter. But to vrdge this particular question in hand, of the Popes supreamacie by that Rule of traditions, which hee alloweth, which is: The constant testimonie of the Pastors of an Aposto­licke Churche, succeedingly deliuered: It is proued by these Protestants before, that the Pastors of that greatest Apostolicke Church, euen from the Apostle S. Peter, haue succeedingly claymed, taught, decreed, exercised, and executed that highest power of supreama­cie, in all parts of the knowne worlde. And yett for further proofe of my Minor propo­sition, [Page 75] M^r. Powell writeth of these holy pri­matiue Powell l. 1. Antichrist. pag. 230. 231. Popes followeing, in this maner: Calixtus Pope defined, that all Bishops thoughe ga­thered in a generall Councell shall fullfill the will of the Churche of Rome: They which doe not this, ar pronownced of Pope Pelagius, to keepe a Conciliable and not a Councell. And againe in these wor­des: Powell sap. pag. 240. Pope Damasus wrote, that it is not lawfull for the Bishopps to doe any thinge, against the decrees of the Bishops of Rome. Therefore by these Pro­testants. The Pope of Rome of right is, and of all ought to be acknowledged, and admit­ted, for the supreame heade, and Ruler of the Church of Christ. And this being thus vnuincibly proued by these English Prote­stants themselues, our mortall enemyes, and persecutors, I conclude with their owne words, graunted before, vppon such triall, and conuiction. That the Pope, and the Offer of Conference pag. 16. Church of Rome, and in them, God and Christ Iesus himself, haue had greate wronge, and Indignitie of­fered vnto them, in that they ar reiected, and that all the Protestant Churches arre scismaticastin forsa­keinge vnitie and communion with them. Which D. Feild must alsoe Iustifie, affirminge (as Feild. l. 4. c. 5. pag. 202. shall be cited at lardge in the next chapter) that the Iudgment of the Pope of Rome, or Church of Rome is one of the greatest in this world, and as greate disobedience to resist, or deny it: which is euident alsoe before, but more of it hereafter.

Now lett vs come to the New Protestants historie it self maliciously by their Bishops [Page 76] published against the Church of Rome. First entreateing of the conuersion of this kingedome to the faith of Christ: they sett downe this marginall supposition in these Theater of the Empire of greate Britanie pag. 203. cap. 9. n. 5. wordes: Saint Peter the Apostle supposed to haue preached in Britaine. And further write, as followeth. To which vncontrolable testimonie some others haue added, that Saint Peter the Apostle preached the worde of life, in this Iland, as to other gentils hee did, for whome God had chosen him, that Act. 15. 7. from his mouth they might heare the Ghospell, (as himself alledgeth) and that hee here fownded Churches, and ordayned preists and deacons, which is reported by Simon Metaphrastes out of the Greeke Meta­phrast. Centur. 1. part. 7. dist. 8. Antiquities, and Guilielmus Eisingrenius in the first of his Centurie, whoe saith that Peter was here in Neroes time. Therefore if the Antiquities of the gretians, and Aduersaries to the Ro­maue See, giue this testimone vnto it, wee need not be scrupulous to receaue it, espe­cially when these Protestant Bishops with their Pantaleon giue creditt to this authoritie of S. Peter ouer this kingedome in these wordes: Much about these times (as Beatus Rhe­nanus Theat sup. pag. 204. n. 9. cap. 9. in his Historie of Germanie, Pantaleon and others doe reporte) one Suetonius a noble mans sonne in Britaine conuerted to the faith by the first planters of the Ghospell in this Iland, and after his baptisme called Beatus, was sent by the brethren from hence vnto Rome, to be better iustructed, and further dire­cted by Saint Peter himself. Therefore a depen­dance of this kingedome from S. Peter, and the Church of Rome in spirituall things [Page 77] from the begynninge of Christianitie is to be allowed. Which they further confirme in their historie of Kinge Lu [...]ius, sendeinge to Pope Eleutherius, at Rome about the Con­uersion of this Kingedome, and his sendeing hither, Faganus and Damianus, two famous Thea of G. Br. pag. 206. n. 18. l. 6. cap. 9. Clerkes, to that purpose, of whome they write in this maner. These together both prea­ched, and baptized, amongst the Britaines, whereby many dayly were drawne to the faith: And as a wor­thie▪ Dicetus Deane of London: a manuscript in the Kings li­brary ad An. 178. and auntient historian saith: the Temples which had beene fownded to the honor of their many Gods, were then dedicated to the one, and onely true God: for there were in Britaine eight and twentie Fla­mins, and three Archflamins, in stead of which, so many Bishops and Archbishops were appointed: vnder the Archbishop of London were the prouinces of Loegria, and Cornubia: vnder Yorke, Deira, and Saint Da­uids in Wales. Albania: vnder vrbs begionum, Cambria: by which meanes, this happie Kingedome vnder that godly Kinge, was nobly beatified with so many cathedrall Churches, and Christian Bishops Sees, before any other Kingedome of the world. Now because these Protestants haue tolde vs before, that to ordaine Bishops and teachers, and to fownde Churches is an Argument of supreamacie, seing all Bishops of this Kingedome were orday­ned, Sutcliff. ag. K [...]ll. pag, 105. their Sees designed, and Churches fownded, by Eleutherius Pope of Rome, and his authoritie, in those which he sent hither, with that power, Faganus and Damianus; all spirituall and ecclesiasticall I [...]risdiction of that primatiue Church in this Kingedome [Page 78] of necessitie was deriued from the Church of Rome. For although M^r Francis Mason in his new defence of the English Ministery, Mason of the conse­cration &c. pag. 52. would attribute greate priuiledge to Eluanu [...] and Meduinus, whome as hee, with his Bis­hops say, Kinge Lucius sent to Pope Eleuthe­rius at Rome, about the conuersion of this nation, standeinge vppon a Reporte in these wordes: Iohn Capgraue reporteth that Eleu­therius made Eluanus Bishop of Britaine, and Me­duinus a Doctour to preach the faith of Christ throughe the whole Iland: Yett hee must needs graunt, that both Order, and Iurisdiction Episcopall, came into, and was preserued in this Kingedome from the Pope of Rome. For first hee writeth of Kinge Lucius in this maner: The Kinge wrote to Eleutherius, desireing that by his commaundement, hee might be made a Mason sup. cap. 3. §. 2. Christian. Secondly hee proueth, Kinge Lucius had but a part of this Kingedome but the Pagan Emperors Marcus Antonius Verus, and Aurelius Commodus his brother, were cheife vnto Beda l. 1. histor. cap. 4. the wall of seperation, and Lucius was tri­butary vnto them. Thus hee writeth of Kinge Lucius: Hee had seene Christians reproched by the Pagans, as infamous parsons, and dispitefully Mason l. 2. pag. 52. cap. 3. §. 1. handled by the Romans that were in authoritie. Therfore the Pagan Romans then were in authoritie. Thirdly his owne words be­fore. That Eleutherius made Eluanus: Bishop of Britaine, and Meduinus a Doctor to preach the faith of Christ through the whole Iland, ar cleare for Eleutherius the Pope, his authoritie, vniuer­sally [Page 79] ouer all, for Kinge Lucius was but a tributary Kinge, for one parcell of this Iland, and the Romans themselues had but part. Yett the Iurisdiction was giuen (as before, through the whole Iland. M^r. Masons words be these: The Romans had spred their golden Eagle ouer a greate part of the Iland. The Emperor Hadrian had made a wall fourescore miles longe: Antonius Pius had made an other, to diuide the Romans from the Brittans: and all that liued within this wall were tributary to the Romans: of which number Kinge Lucius is said to be. There­fore Lucius being but one of that number, of tributaryes, for a part, of the Romans part, had neither spirituall, nor temporall Iurisdiction, any further, much lesse ouer all. His words of this whole Iland ar these: Yorke, London. Caerlegion, in these three noble cit­ties Mason sup. l. 2. cap. 3. pag. 54. were the seates of the Archflamynes, so there were 28. Flamynes, and three Archflamynes in steade of which so many Bishops and Archbishops were ap­pointed. Therefore seing the Romans them­selues had but a part of Brittaine, and Lucius but a tributary part, of that part, and these men assuer vs, that so many were assigned Bishops and Archbishoppes with their seuerall Sees, and Iurisdictions, ouer all this Iland. comprehendeing both. England conteined in the names Loegria, Stowe An­nal. 12. cap. 1. and others. and Cornubia, vnto Humber; the North and Scotland in Deira and Albania; and Wales in Cambria, as our Historians tell vs it followeth by vndeniable consequence, that all spiri­tuall [Page 76] [...] [Page 77] [...] [Page 78] [...] [Page 79] [...] [Page 80] Iurisdiction, and authoritie in all this land, now termed greate Brittaine, was deduced, brought in, and continued, from, and vnder the Pope of Rome. And that nei­ther Kinge Lucius, or any his successor did, or in iustice could clayme any supreamacie in such causes: For none of them vntill our Kinge Iames was quietly possessed of them all; and yett one and the same spirituall Iu­risdiction ruled in all these Kingedomes, of England, Scotland, and Ireland; Ireland subiect to Canterbury, and Scotland to Yorke, and all to the Pope, as these Protestants acknowledge, vn­till late yares. Therefore ridiculous it is, for the Theater Protestants, to giue such supre­amacie to Kings, because as they say, Pope Eleutherius in his epistle to Kinge Lucius calleth him, the vicar of God, in his Kingedome, for by that Kinde of reasoninge, euery vicar in his parish, being so called, might clayme such supreamacy. And the Presbytery must needs be obeyed of all. But if wee may be­leeue these men that the lawes of S. Edward, doe warrant S. Eleutherius proceedings here in Britannye, they will finde in those lawes sett out by themselues that they warrant his supreamacie, further then I meane to S. Edwards lawes pu­blished by M^r. Lam­bert a Pro­testant pag. 2. fol. 1 [...]0. vrdge it: The wordes ar these: The whole land, and all the Ilands to Norway, and Denmarke belonge to the Crowne of his Kingedome, and ar of the Appendancies and dignities of the Kinge. And it is one Monarchie, and one Kingedome, and was sometime called the Kingedome of Britannye, and [Page 81] now called the Kingdome of English men. For Lord Eleutherius Pope, who first sent an hallowed crowne to Britannye, and Christianitie by Gods inspiration, to Lucius Kinge of the Britans, appointed and allowed to the Crowne of the Kingdome, such metes, and bowndes, as ar said before. Therefore English Protestants ar very ingratefull to that Holy Pope, and Saint, our so greate Benefactor. And their owne Theater is a wittnes of that his loue, and well deserueing of this land, and their vngratitude, their wordes be these: Pope Eleutherius thus wrote to Lucius, Kinge Theat. pag. 222. n. 8. lib. 6. cap. 19. of Britannie, for the reformation of the Kinge, and the nobilitie of the Kingdome of Britannie: you de­sired vs, to send vnto you, the Romane and Imperiall lawes, which you would vse in your Kingedome of Britannie. The Romane lawes and the Emperors wee may at all times mislike, but the lawe of God by no meanes. By the diuine clemencie you haue of late receiued in your Kingdome of Britannie, the lawe and faithe of Christ: you have with you in your Kin­gdome both the old and new testament: out of them (in Gods name) by the [...]ownsaile of your state, take Corn. Ta­cit. in an­nal. in Hadr. Pi. Anton. M. Ant. Stowe hist. Ho­linsh. ib. Dauid. in Bric. Polyd. verg. l. 2. h. angl pag. 42. 42, &c. you alawe, and therewith by Gods permission, go­uerne your Kingedome of Britannie. About which times, Lolius, Calphurnius, Agricola, Per­tinax, Cl. Albinus Iunius, Seuerus &c. were Pro­pretors, Lieutenants, and commaundinge Ru­lers here, for the Romane Emperors, as both their owne, and our Historians wittnes. And not onely this, but after entreateinge of the saxons lawes in this Kingdome, and the two much seueritie of triall in suspition [Page 82] of Incontinencie (as they thinke) they write in this maner: This punishment begynning Theater pag. 287 l. 7. cap. 3. n. 6. in these Pagans, and continueing vnto the yeare 750. Stephen the second, and moste pontificall Pope of Rome, did vtterly abolish, as two seuere and ouer­rigorous for Christians to vndergoe. They alledge authoritie alsoe, that the Kingedome of Norway was giuen to Kinge Arthur by the Pope. Pag. 317 l. 7. cap 12. Which is playnely testified in the lawes of S. Edward, as they ar published by the Puri­tan Protestant, M^r. Lambard, and out of the Guliel. Lambard. in legib. S. Edward. fol. 137. 138. print. at London Anno D. 1569. cum priuileg. Reg. Ma­iest. per decem. library of Matthew Parker himself, whome they name their Archbishop of Canterbury. The words be these: Impetrauit enim tempori­bus illis Arthurus Rex à Domino Papa, & curia Ro­mana, quod confirmata sit Norweia in perpetuum coronae Brytanniae, in augmentum Regni huius, vo­cauitque illam dictus Artherus Cameram Brytanniae. In those times Kinge Arthur obtayned from our Lord the Pope, and the Court of Rome, that Norway might be confirmed for euer to the Crowne of Bry­taine, for encrease of this Kingdome, and the said Arthur called it the chamber of Brytaine. And for this cause the Norwegians say, they may dwell in this Kingdome, and be of the body of this Kingdome, to witt, of the crowne of Brytayne. Of his clayme and practyse in later times in such affaires their examples ar two many to be cited. But to insist in his absolute spirituall su­preamacie, of which I entreate, as they told vs before, how all spirituall Iurisdi­ction was deriued to the Brittannes, from the Pope of Rome, in prescribeing and [Page 83] limiteing their Episcopall Sees, and priui­ledges, so they testifie the same in the Re­giment of the Saxons, for allthough England it self, besides Scotland and Wales, was deui­ded Theat. pag. 278. lib. 6. cap. 54. n. 2. pag. 292 l. 7. cap. 4. n. 19. into an Heptarchie, and conteyned seuen Kingedomes, Kent, Southsaxons, Westsaxons, Eastsaxons, Northumberland, Maria, and East-Angels, and none of those Kinges (if they had beene Protestants could) clayme to exercise any spirituall power by their do­ctrine, further then their owne temporall commaunde; yett they teach vs, that the spirituall Iurisdiction in the supreame and highest degree was wholly in the Pope, ouer all those Kingedomes. And for proofe of this, to vse their owne wordes: Honorius Theat. pag. 5. lib. 1. cap. 3. n. 4. (appointed by the Pope) the fift Archbishop of Canterbury first diuided England into parishes: And then they sett downe all the Bishopricks in England, vnder their twoe Metropolita­nes, Canterbury and Yorke, which by noe pos­sibilitie can be reconciled with an Heptar­chicall, Pag. 6. l. 1. or seuen fold gouernment, besides that in Walles. And yett not onely the welch diocesses of Landaffe S. Dauid, Bangor and S. Asaph but Ireland also in those times of diuisions in temporall Regiments; and Kinges, were subiect not onely to the Pope, but to the Archbishop of Canterbury, which was euer subiect to the Pope of Rome, and by him instituted. Their wor­des Pag. 145. lib. 4. cap. 4. n. 8. be these: matters memorable within this prouince ar these: First, that the Bishops of [Page 84] Ireland were wont to be consecrated by the Archbishop of Canterbury, in regarde of the primacie, which they had in this contry: vntill such time, as [...]hou Pa­pirio, a Cardinall, was sent thither from Pope Euge­nius, the fourth, to reforme ecclesiasticall discipline in this Iland. And that this Kingedome of greate Brittaine hath euen from the prima­tiue Church of the first conuerted Brittan­nes, submitted themselues, and their poste­rities, to the Pope of Rome, in the highest and moste commaundeinge power, and Authoritie in this worlde, in their Iudg­ment, a generall Councell (as hereafter) Cap. gene­rall Coun­cels infr. Theater l. 6. cap. 9. pag. 206. [...]. 19. I thus demonstrate from this their Theater; wherein they write in this order: After these times the Brittannes continued constant in Christianitie, and the censures of their Bishops (for the greate estimation of their constancie, pietie, and learninge) required and approued in greate poynts of doctrine, amonge the Assemblies, of some generall Councells: as that of Sardys and Nyce, in the time of greate Constantine, had wee our Bishops present. Whose forwardnes against the Arrian Heresie, after­wards Athanasius aduanceth in his Apologie vnto Io­uinian the Emperour, amongst three hundred Bishops assembled at the Councell of Sardys, in Anno 350. Then seing as these men teach vs, generall Infra cap. gen. Coun­cels. Councells ar the highest Iudge, and binde all men to their decrees, and our bishops that were there, to consent vnto, and em­brace doctrine, for this whole King­dome, were so renowned for constancie, pietie, and learninge, and all this in their [Page 85] confessed puer time of Christianitie, I will recite what doctrine in this poynt of Popes supreamacye, they approued, and receaued there, for this and all nations to followe, and obserue. In the third Canon of this Concil. Sardic. can. 3. their greate Councell it is thus decreed: Bishop Osius said: if any Bishop shall be iudged in an other cause, and hee thinketh hee hath a Good cause, that a Councell should be called againe, if it please you lett vs honor the memorie of S. Peter the Apostle, that they which haue examined the cause, may write to Iulius Bishop of Rome, and if hee shall adiudge, that Iudgment is to be renewed, lett it be renewed, and lett him appoint Iudges; but if hee shall allowe the cause to be such, that the things that ar done shall not be examined againe, such things as hee shall decree, shall be confirmed. Doth this please you all? The Councell answeareth, it pleaseth vs. There­fore all now in England ought to be pleased with the supreamacie of that highest See, and appeales vnto it. The 4. and next Ca­non, Can. 4. sup. immediatly beginneth thus: Bishop Gan­dentius said: lett it be added, if you please, to this sentence full of sanctitie, that when any Bishop shall be deposed by the Iudgment of those Bishops, that be in the places neare. And hee shall demaunde to haue his busines handled in the citie of Rome, that after his appeale, no Bishop be ordeyned in his chaire, that was thought to be deposed, except his cause shall be determined in the Iudgment of the Bishop of Rome. The 7. Canon declareth it to be in the Can. 7. sup. Popes power to send, a latere Iudges in such causes, into any contry, notwitstandeing [Page 86] any sentence of other Bishops. And as these primatiue Bishops of this Kinge­dome, with that learned and Holy assem­ble of that generall Councell, receaued, and approued that supreame power in the Pope of Rome, so hee by these Ptotestants testimonie euer practized it in this nation. For besides that which is written before, they vse these words: Celestine Pope of Rome sent his Archdeacon Palladius into Brittaine to withstand Theater. lib. 4. cap. 1. pag. 138. n. 22. the Pelagian Heresie, whoe at one time did driue out these enemyes of grace, and ordayned a Bishop amonge the Scots, whereby that Barbarous nation [...]mbr [...]ced Christianitic. This they cite, and approue from Prosper Aquitan. And againe in this maner: Pelagius by birth a brittane, by profession a Mouke, by leude doctrine an Hereticke, brought vp in the fame us Lib. 6. cap. 53. pag. 277. n. 10. monasterie of Bangor, in Wales, his Hereticall asser­tions were afterwards condemned by Innocentius the first Bishop of Rome. Whose doctrines were, 1. that man without the grace of God, was able to fullfill all the commaundements. 2 that man in himself had free will. That the grace of God was giuen vnto vs accor­ding to out merits. 4. That the Iust haue no synne. 5. That children ar free from originall synne. 6. That Adam should haue died though hee had not synned. Concerninge the Towne of Stanford Lib. 1. cap. 31. pag. 59. n. 8. they make this relation from Ihon Hardin­ge; it continued an vniuersitie vnto the comeing of Augustine, at which time the Bishops of Rome inter­dicted it, for certayne Heresies sprange vp amonge the Brittaines, and Saxons. They write futher thus: Yorke hath challenged to haue beene sometime Pag. 6. n. 7. [Page 87] Metropolitane ouer all the Bishops in Scotland. It was made equall in honor and power with Canter­bury, by Pope Gregory, as Beda relateth, and had twelue suffragan Bishopricks, that owed obedience. And againe: Yorke was made a Metropolitane Pag. 78. n. 9. cittie by a pall sent vnto it from Honorius. And to shew, that the disposeing of these things, was in the power of that highest See, thus they testifie againe: That Lichfeild was made an Lib. 1. cap. 3. pag. 6. n. 8. Archiepiscopall See, by Pope Hadrian the first, at the suite of Offa the greate Kinge of Mercia, is mani­fested by Mathew of Westminister, vnto whose Iu­risdictiō were assigned the Bishopricks of Winchester, Hereford, Leicester, Siduacester, Helinham, and Dunwich. Like were the condition of S. Da­uids, n. 6. 8. Dorchester by Oxford, and others. And to shew, that these primatiue bishops were onely subiect to the Pope, and no Prince, in their spirituall proceedeings; when the wicked Kinge Vortigern had put away his first lawfull Christian wife, and maryed. Rowena, the daughter of Hengist, a Pagan, Theat. l. 7. cap. 12. pag. 313. about the yeare of Christ 470; for decla­reing the remedie thereof they write in these wordes: Which Pagan mariadge proued not onely the bane of the land, but so ruinated the Church of Christianitie, that a prouinciall Councell of the Brittaines was assembled in Ann. 470. to re­paire those things, that this mariadge had decayed. Then Popes, and not Princes, by these Parker. lib. antiq. Bri­tan nic. pag. 329: Protestants euer had spirituall supreamacie in this Kingedome. For their first Arch­bishop Parker An. 1536. writeth thus: [Page 88] Potentia populis nongentis amplius Annu in Anglia durauit. The power of the Pope continued in England aboue nyne hundred yeares. And there ought to continue still, as I haue made demonstra­tion, by these Protestants before▪ to which I add this sentence of Isaac Casanbon, ex o [...]e Isaac Ca­sanb. re­spons. ad ep. Cardinal. p [...]r. pag. 8. ipso. ser. Regis: taken from the mouth it self of our moste syncere Kinge, commaundeing him to committ it te writeinge; and is as followeth: Rebus ipsis probet Romanus pontifex: lett the Pope of Rome proue by things themselues, that hee doth not seeke his owne, Pag. 67. supr. but the glory of God immortall, and the peace of people, concord, and saluation, to be a care vnto him: then our moste se [...]ene Kinge, as hee hath longe since protested in his Admonitory epistle, without delay primas illi deferet, ipsumque [...], cum Gregorio Nazianzen [...], dicet non in­uitus, will giue primacie vnto him, and not vnwil­lingely say with Gregorie Nazienzen, that hee hath charge ouer the whole Church. To which I an­sweare, that I wish, (and I trust, with more deuotion, and Religion then hee) That not onely Popes, but other Princes, spirituall, and temporall, Bishops, Preists and all men in authoritie, and others, did more seeke the glorie of God, then their owne, and were more carefull of the peo­ples peace, concord, and saluation, then they now ar, or many were euen from the time of Christ; Then so many disorders and Impieties should not haue so full domi­nion, where Protestancie Ruleth; and the scripture had neuer saide, omnes quae sua sunt [Page 89] quaerunt, non qu [...] Iesu Christi: all men, or all sortes of men seeke the things that be their owne, and not of Iesus Christ. And it char­geth vs againe to obey Magistrats, and men in authoritie, though wicked, sed etiam discolis. And to say as you must doe, (otherwise you de­monstrate against your English Protestant Church whose mouthe you so often vnder­take to be and for the Pope of Rome, that Magistrates falling into deadly synne cease to be Magistrates, one of your brother Witkliffe his Heresies, condemned by hi­ghest authoritie. For otherwise, if the pre­sent Pope, Paulus the fift a Sainct in all Indif­ferent Iudgments, as all his predecessors, from Leo the tenth, and the reuolt of Lu­ther, in respect of any Protestant succes­sion, might be thought worthie to be estee­med such, or as your wordes prescribe, in your Protestant Censure; Yett except it were his due, without that your adiudged sanctitie, neither our Kinge of England, nor all the Protestant Princes, and Regi­ments in the world, could by your Reli­gion make the Pope, or any other, to be primate, and haue the charge, or [...]uersight of the whole Church. For by your owne doctrine of Princes, or Presbyteries supreamacie, none ex­tendeth further, then their owne tempo­rall dominions, much lesse ouer the whole Church, or any greate part thereof: And by Lord Cook [...] prot. assert. Iacob Reas. your owne Rule of authoritie, iustified both by the Lord Cheefe Iustice of En­gland, [Page 90] and your Ministers, Nemo potest plus Iuris in alium transferre, quam ipse habet: No man can transfer or bestowe more Right vppon an other, then hee himself hath. Therefore by our sen­tence from our Kings Mouthe (as you assuer vs, all Popes euer were, and this is, su­preame Heade and Ruler of Christs whole Church, in England, and all other par­tes of the worldes [...], of the whole Church, as your Greeke graunt with S. Gregory Nazianzen, is. And all that desire to be accompted the chosen, and true sheepe, and members of this greate flocke, folde, and Church of Christ, ought to submitt themselues, to this high sheephard, primate, and Ouerseer of the whole Christian worlde, and to be Iudged by him, and not to be Iudges ouer him. And to this also D. Morton him­self Morton App. lib. 4. cap. 7. must subscribe though hee will be singular aboue his fellowes, as often times hee is. For first hee alloweth this sentence, of their, so named, Archbishop Whiteguist, against Cartwright: Victor in the yeare of Christ 198 was a godly Bishop and Martyr, and the Church at that time was in greate puritie, as not beinge longe after the Apostles. And his Maiestie telleth him that this Church of Rome was then a Rule to all. Yet D. Morton assureth vs, that this godly Bishop, and Martyr, and Ruler of that Church, which was a Rule to all, did exercise the highest Act of Iurisdiction, and power ouer all Churches, in the world, [Page 91] that did not yeeld vnto him, in the Easter obseruation, inflicting excommunication the greatest act of Iurisdiction by Prote­stants, against them: his wordes be these: Morton App. l. 1. cap. 9. Pope Victor excommunicated all Churches, both Greeke, and Latine, which differed from his Church, in the obseruation of Easter. This clayme, and exercise of this supreame Iurisdiction, was when the Church, of Rome, was a Rule to all, in the Iudgment of these Protestants: and a matter of so greate moment, that the doeing of it if vniustly, had beene moste damnable: and yett hee liued, and dyed an holy Saint. Therefore I vrge D. Morton with these his Morton app. pag. 298. owne wordes in the case of S. Ciprian: This wee thinke might worke in our Aduersaries, at least, blush: except they would intend to proue concerninge Sainct Victor, that the same man of God and holy Martyr of Christ, was neither Sainct, nor Martyr. But vndoubtedly a damnable scismaticke. When D. Morton wittnesseth the quite contrary, sayeinge, they were condemned for Hereticks, whoe after the Councell of Nice, conformed not themselues herein to the Romane Order. But D. Morton insi­steth Mort. supr. pag 76. further in these words: S. Ciprian di­rectly ordeyned in a Councell, that euery mans cause should be hard there, where it was comitted: and Mort. sup. pag. 296. therefore commaunded those men to returne home againe vnto Carthadge, whoe had aduentured to appeale vnto Rome. And yet, Bellarmine vrgeth appealeinge vnto the Bishop of Rome from all the coastes of the world, as a speciall Argument of the Popes absolute primacie D. Morton is answeared [Page 92] by himselfe before, proueinge that the Bishop of Rome exercised this supreame power, ouer all Churches, both Greeke, and Latine. Then ouer Africke, and Car­thadge. And in this very obiection againe confoundeth himself; for hee telleth vs, that in S. Ciprian his time, they appealed to Mort. supr. Rome and proueth by S. Ciprian, whome hee would haue an enemy to such Appeales, and supreamacy of the Church of Rome, that such appeales were then vsed, longe before any generall Councell, or Christian Emperor, to graunt such priuiledges to that Church. And that the Popes, and Bishops of Rome, that claymed, receaued, and admitted such appeales, namely S. Cornelius and others ware Holy Saincts, and Martyrs. Therefore if that had beene true, which D. Morton writeth in these wordes: Morton pag, 296. Saint Ciprian directly ordeyned in a Councell, that euery mans cause should behard there where it wa [...] committed, and therefore commaunded those men to returne home againe vnto Carthadge, who had aduentured to appeale vnto Rome, not alloweinge that any other Bishops should retract things, done by them in Africke, vnlesse (saith Ciprian) a few leude and desperate parsons thinke the Bishops of Africke to haue lesse authoritie, by whome they haue beene allready Iudged and condemned. If this allega­tion of D. Morton were true, and certayne: Yet it nothing preiudicateth the Autho­ritie and supreamacie of the Pope of Rome, not to be censured and Iudged by Inferior [Page 93] Bishops, such as those of Africke were vnto Rome by Protestants doctrine. And D. Morton himself besides all that is said be­fore is wittnes sufficient in this Matter: for writeing of Pope Iulius in those allowed times, hee hath these words: Two points Morton pag. 286. would be obserued in this claime of Pope Iulius. The first is, what it was that hee challenged: the second is, by what right. Bothe these ar recorded by Socrates. His challenge was, that hee ought to be called vnto the Councell, and that, without his sentence, no decrees should be concluded. The right hereof hee pretendeth to stand vppon the authoritie of an Ecclesiastical canon. The wordes of Socrates his Author, Socrat. hi­stor. cccle­siast. circa An. 346. & histor. tripart. lib. 4. cap. 9. because D. Morton is a knowne myncer of authorities, ar these: Regula Ecclesiastica iubeat, non oportere praeter sententiam Romani Pontificis concilia celebrari. The Ecclesiasticall Rule commaun­deth, that Councells he not celebrated, without the s [...]tence of the Bishop of Rome. And againe: Ca­nonibus iubentibus praeter Romanum nibil decerni Socrat. sup. & histor. trip. lib. 4. cap. 19. Pontificem. The canons commaundeinge, that no­thinge be decreed, without the Pope of Rome. And yet D. Morton will not haue any such canon, or constitution, his friuolous distinction, in the Nicene Councell, then lately ended, then they must needs be of more auntient, and vncontroleable antiquitie, and autho­ritie by his owne censure; and S. Ciprians Councell and decree against this highest power, of no validitie; if hee could bringe forth any such decree, or Councell, which hee doth not, but onely alledgeth these [Page 94] words of S. Ciprian, to Pope Cornelius, statutum est omnibus nobis: Which hee thus translated: S. Ciprian directly ordeyned in a Councell: Which Ciprian. ep. 55. ad Cornel. Morton App. lib. 2. pag. 296. S. Ciprian neither had done, nor could doe, to bynde S. Cornelius, and the Church of Rome with all others. For by D. Mortons owne Argument, if Pope and S. Cornelius Pope and Saint Stephen, with others, Bishops of the Mother and commaunding Churche of Rome, then by his Maiestie, a Rule vnto all, might not be a Rule and commaunder ouer the African Church, much lesse could the Church of Africke subiect, Ruled, and dependinge make statutes and decrees, to rule, and commaund, this Rule and com­maunder of all. And M^r ▪ Morton might haue concluded the contrary, of his translation, for the Church of Rome, if hee had consi­dered that S. Ciprians words, be not, Statutum sit ab omnibus nobis, it is decreed of or by vs all, [...]t statutum sit omnibus nobis, a decree is made for vs all: Because S. Fabian Pope of Rome and pre­dicessor to S. Cornelius had made such a [...]abian. [...]ist 3. [...]m. 1. conc. decree to bynde all, as S. Ciprian spake of, Ibi causa agatur vbi crimen admittitur: lett the cause be hard there, where the fault is committed. Yet in the same place Appeales to Rome ar ex­cepted in these words: Wee forbid forreyne Iudgments by a generall decree, reserued allwayes the Apostolicke authoritie. And againe: It plea­seth alsoe, that if a Bishop accused, hath appealed to the See Apostolicke, that shall be decreed, which the high Bishop of that See giueth sentence of. All [Page 95] which, as alsoe that whole epistle of S. Ciprian to S. Cornelius, then Pope of Rome, neuer denyeing appeales thither, but excu­seinge, and defendeing, and purgeing him­self, and other Bishops of Africke, accused by Appellants at Rome, as they had like­wise done, priori anno, the yeare before, suffi­ciently Ciprian ep. 55. supr. confirme the vndeniable supreame authoritie of that Church. Which S. Ciprian there proueth to be of Infallible Iudgment, and vndeceaueable by any Appellants, or others in matters of Religion, and so to be appealed vnto, and supreame. His words in the same epistle, and concerning the same Appellants, ar these: Nauigare audent, & ad Petri cathedram; They dare to saile euen to the chayre of Peter, and to the principall Church, from whence preistly vnitie is risen, and cary thither letters from Scismaticks, and wicked men, nor to thinke, that they be Romans, (whose faith by the Apostle preachinge is praised, to whome false beleefe cannot haue accesse. Hitherto the very wor­des of S. Ciprian, in that place, and epistle, which D. Morton alleadgeth against the Ro­mane supreamacie: by which is euident that S. Ciprian, neither did, nor could by his doctrine deny appeales to that Church, which as hee writeth could not be decea­ued with Hereticks, nor false beleefe could haue accesse vnto it: which could be for no other cause, but for the Infallible Iudg­ment thereof, and that God did assist it in truthe, as other Protestants ar wittnesses [Page 96] before. And D. Morton haueing first written Morton app. pag. 296. in this order: The Title of vniuersall Bishop of the Church, hath beene long vsed of the Pope of Rome: is as mutch to blame, to speake thus: S. Ci­prian saith, none of vs is called the Bishop of Bishops: which not S. Ciprian onely, but the whole Councell of Carthadge, vnder Ciprian, did professe: further­more callinge it a terror tyrannicall, for any one Bishop to impose vppon his fellowe Bishops, a neces­sitie of obedience. For first D. Morton cannot but knowe, that this Councell of Africke de­fendeinge Rebaptization, was iustly condem­ned by the then Popes of Rome, and re­canted by the African Bishops, present at it, as is proued before. Secondly D. Morton will be a Presbyterian if hee maketh equalitie in the cleargie, and denyeth Archbishops, pri­mates, and Patriarkes, as his citation without better glosse implyeth. Thirdly hee doth abuse his Readers, to wish them to beleeue, that S. Ciprian, and the African Bishops, de­creed any thing against the clayme of S. Stephen, then Bishop of Rome, his predeces­sors, and successors to be Bishop of Bis­hops Mort. sup. pag. 296. in a right sence, as hee there citeth from Binias; for so against his owne words, and citation, they had called their owne decree, a terror tyrannicall, for any one Bishop to impose vppon his fellowe Bishops, a necessitie of obe­dience: For D. Morton, dareth not to deny but S. Stephen, and other Popes of Rome, were at the leaste fellowe Bishops, with those of Africke. But S. Ciprian, and those Bishops [Page 97] decreed no such thinge: for D. Morton may so in that Councell, that the sentence of S. Ciprian is the laste of all, and after all the other Bishops, and onely to condemne Baptisme by Hereticks, after recanted and condemned. And the words which hee cited against Bishop of Bishops, ar in S. Ciprians Cartha­gin. concil. sub Cy­prian. to. 1. concil. init. exhortation (not decree) to the Bishops of Africke, begynninge Audistis, Collegae Dile­ctissimi: you haue hard ô moste beloued fellowes, no­thing concerning, except affirminge, or confirminge that clayme, and Title in Pope Stephen, an holy Saint, and Martyr, but all­together about rebaptization, and are these: Superest, vt de hacre quid singuli sentiamus, profera­mus: Yt remayneth, that euery of vs speaketh of this matter what hee thinketh, Iudginge no man, or re­moueing any man from the Right of communion, if hee shall thinke otherwise, for none of vs (there as­sembled) constituted himself, Bishop of Bishops. Which seing S. Stephen an holy Pope, and Martyr, with others of that sacred See, (then a Rule to all, by Protestants, and D. Morton) did; by them also it must be yeelded to be iust and lawfull. Neither must D. Morton be so hyperpapall, as to deny the Councell of Sardyce where appeales to Rome ar warranted, to be generall, for his Masters the makers of their greate Theater, haue so allowed, and receaued it before. Nor slander S. Cyprian, by perswadeing the worlde, that hee dyed out of the vnitie of the Church of Rome; for recallinge of [Page 98] which his greate rashnes, I referre him to better Authorities, of S. Augustine, S. Ierome, Augustin. ep. 48. Hie­ron. dialog. cont. Luci­ferian. and the like. And this sufficeth of this question: By which the vniuersitie of Cambridg may easely resolue themselues, by their owne Doctors, of the second proposition, offered vnto them, by the Preists of Wisbich: There is an externall Iudge in matters of faith; whoe it is, and of what authoritie his defi­nitiue sentence is in such things.

CHAPTER IIII. WHEREIN BY THESE Protestants is proued, that all Bookes of scripture, receaued for such by the Church of Rome, ar canonicall: That the Prote­stants also haue either no scriptures at all, or vncertaine and doubtfull: and no true Canon of them.

THvs haueinge demonstratiuely proued by these our English Pro­testants, that the true Church of Christ, is of that byndeinge and commaunding authoritie, power, and pri­uiledge: That, There is no saluation, remission of synnes or Hope of eternall life out of the Churche: it is the blessed companie of holy ones, household of faith, spouse of Christ, piller and grawnd of truthe, her com­munion is to be embraced, directions followed, Iudg­ment [Page 99] rested in, to ouerrule all Inferior Iudgment. whatsoeuer, &c. And that bothe the present Churche, of Rome is this so excellent and enfraunchised societie, and the Pope and Bishop thereof supreame heade, and spiri­tuall gouernor, ouer the whole Christian worlde: all other Questions against these Protestāts ar all readie determined by them, for the Church and Pope of Rome. So that nothing is further needfull to be disputed in this busines, eyther of scriptures, or any other matter in controuersy: yet for parti­cular satisfaction to all, in all particulars, I will proceede, and first for the Bookes of holy scriptures: and argue these first in ge­nerall.

Whatsoeuer Bookes ar proposed vnto vs by the true Church of Christ, and the su­preame Gouernor thereof, to be canonicall scripture, ar for such to be embraced, and reuerenced: But all Bookes allowed for canonicall by the Church of Rome, at this present, be such: Therefore so to be em­braced and reuerenced. The Maior proposi­tion is euident before, by the priuiledges of the true Church recited in generall: and not onely so, but in particular also con­cerninge the authoritie of the true Church in approueinge and proposeinge holy scrip­tures: for M^r. Wotton hath thus testified for Wotton [...]ef. of Perk: pag. 442. Protestants: The Iugdment of the Church wee are so far from discreditinge; that wee Holde it for a very speciall grownde in this matter of scriptures. [Page 100] And D. Couell hath these conuinceing Couell a­gainst Burg. pag. 60. words: The Church of Christ accordeing to her authoritie, receaued from him, hath warrant to ap­proue the scriptures, to acknowledge, to receaue, to publish, and commaunde vnto her children. And to make it euident, that this priuiledge by these Protestants, cannot be attributed, or ascribed to any other Church, then the Church of Rome, they haue before con­fessed, that neuer any other Church, but that onely, exceptinge the Church of Con­stantinople pretended Title (much lesse enioyed it, to this supreamacie, to pro­pownde scriptures, or make decrees, and lawes to the whole Church, and the chil­dren thereof, and the clayme thereof in that behalf was but pretended and vsurped: and now is by their desolation left desolate. And to make this, the next argument and others more cleare, I will in this place re­cite the words of D. Feild: wherein to omitt the Holy scriptures, because they in no place tell vs, which be, or be not cano­nicall scriptures: But wee ar as these Pro­testants before haue told vs, and shall more particularely testifie Hereafter in this chapter, to receaue them from the Church of Christ, That wee may knowe whome moste to trust, and obey in this, and such matters of controuersy, hee writeth thus, haueing spoken of the Church before: Hi­ther Feild pag. 202. l. 4. c. 5. wee may referre, those different degrees of obe­dience which wee must yeeld to them, that com­maunde [Page 101] and teache vs, in the Church of God, excel­lently described and sett downe, by Waldensis. Wee Waldens. doct. Fidei l. 2. art. 2. 3. p. 27. must saith hee, reuerence, and respect the authoritie of all Catholicke Doctors, whose doctrynes, and wri­teings the Church alloweth; wee must more regard the authoritie of Catholicke Bishops; more then these the authoritie of the Apostolicke Churches: amongst them more especially the Church of Rome: of a gene­rall Councell more then all these. Hitherto D. Feilds allowance that this sentence is excel­lent. Therefore soeinge Protestants neuer had, nor can haue, as they haue testified be­fore, any generall Councell, and deny all Councells to be generall, which Catholikes alledge for this Question of the Bookes of scriptures, and others also, They ar bownde to be obedient to that sentence next vnto them, which D. Feild here hath told vs, to be the Iudgment of the Church of Rome, or Pope of Rome, which hath defined, and al­lowed, the catholicke doctrine for the Bookes of canonicall scripture, as alsoe other questions, as all Protestants acknow­ledge. Otherwise they ar in one of highest degrees of disobedience, that is in this world, as his words before are wittnesse. For hee alloweth it for an excellent dire­ction, for this present time, and state of controuersies: And yett if he would con­tend (which hee neither doth, nor can being allowed for this present time) to drawe it to the dayes of Thomas Waldensis, disputing against Witcliffe, their Brother in [Page 102] Religion, as they write, and resisting the Popes authoritie, it maketh nothing for his excuse: for if Witcliffe, as they say, was of their Religion, the case betweene Wal­densis, and him, was the same which now is with my self and other Catholicks writinge against these Protestants Brethren, and As­sociates in Religion vnto Wickliffe, and his Adherents. This supposed, I make the like Argument againe, in this maner.

Whatsoeuer bookes ar proposed for canonicall scripture, by the true Church, ar the highest Rule, that can be had, or fownde, in time of controue [...]sie, ar to be receaued for holy scriptures: But all those Bookes which the present Romane Church alloweth, ar so proposed: Therefore to be receaued for holy scriptures. The Maior pro­position is euidently true, otherwise all Chri­stians in such times must needs be perplexed in the cheifest matter of Religion, by Pro­testants, the scriptures themselues: which cannot be: for so contradictories might bothe be true: The highest Rule ought to be fol­lowed: the highest Rule ought not to be followed, Which be contradictorie. It ought to be followed, because it is our Rule, and the best that can be assigned: it ought not to be followed, because it is false and deceatefull. And no man can be so bownde vnder dam­nation to followe a false Rule. And con­cerninge the authoritie of the Church in this case, it is further confirmed by these [Page 103] Protestant sentences. D. Couells words be Couell def. of Hook pag. 31. these: The Church of Rome teacheth no badd opi­nion, to affirme, that the scriptures are holy, and diuine in themselues, but so esteemed by vs, for the authoritie of the Churche. And againe: That the scriptures ar true, wee haue it from the Church. And further thus: The Church hath fowre Couell sup. pag. 32. 33. singular offices, towards, the scripture. First to be of them (as it were) a faithefull Register. Se­condly, to discerne and Iudge betweene false and ad­ulterate, and that which is true and perfect. The third to publish, and diuulge, to proclayme as a cryer, the true edict of our Lord himself. The laste is, to be an Interpreter: and in that, followeing the safest Rule (to make an vndiuided vnitie of the truthe, vncapable of contradiction) to be a moste faithfull Couell sup. pag. 34. expositor of his owne meaneinge. And hee conclu­deth thus: W [...]e say, that wee are taught to receaue the worde of God, from the authoritie of the Churche: wee see her iudgment, wee heare her voice: and in h [...]militie subscribe vnto all this. Therefore beinge so proued before, by these Prote­stants, that the Church of Rome is the Church of Christ, endowed with these priuiledges, concerninge scriptures, that the sentence of it by D. Feild before, is more Feild. l▪ 4. c. 5. pag. 202. to be regarded then any they haue, or can pretend, and hath proposed all bookes for scripture, which Catholicks receaue, wee must obey it, and the rather agreeing with the Greeke Church of which D. Feild wri­teth Feild. pag. 71. l. 3. c. 5. thus: wee accompt them in the number of the Churches of God. Which that Church cannot [Page 104] be which proposeth adulterate and false scriptures, for true and the vndoubted word of God: The Minor proposition is also euidently true: That all bookes which the Church of Rome receaueth for Holy scrip­tures as so proposed, published, and proued vnto vs, by the true Church, and that sen­tence, which in this time is highest and to be obeyed, as these Protestants haue writ­ten. And so all things in this Argument ar euidently confessed for true, by our Aduer­saries.

Before my next argument I will cite the opinion of D. Doue Protestant Bishoppe of Peterboroughe, in this matter, that wee may playnely see, where vppon Protestants denyeing so many bookes for canonicall scriptures, which Catholicks receaue, is grownded: his wordes be these: Catholicks Doue per­suas. pag. 15. proue them to be canonicall out of S. Augustine: wee, that they be Apochrypha out of S. Hierome, both which Doctors are of no small authoritie with the Church of Rome: And therefore in this wee differ no more from them, then S. Hierome did from S. Augustine. This supposed, I argue thus, from these Protestants.

Whatsoeuer doctrine, was taught in the time of the primatiue Churche by a Bis­hoppe, Sainct, and Doctor of the Church in the Iudgment of Protestants farre the moste Learned Doctor that euer was, or shall be in all likelyhood, excepting the Apostles, and this so constantly, that this so worthie [Page 105] a man taught it to be the Common do­ctrine of the Churche of Christ, in all pro­babilitie is more like to be true, then that which doubtefully taught by an other Do­ctor of the same time, who bothe (as the same Protestants write) delt vnchristianely, and his authoritie in some other questions was not much worthe, and in this also recalled his opinion, or renownced it to be his meanening: But the doctrine which Ca­tholicks hold, concerning canonicall scriptures, is by the testimonie of Prote­testants, thus much more likely to be true, and worthie to be beleeued, then the con­trary opinion of Protestants: Therefore by Protestants it is more probable, credible, and worthie to be beleeued.

The Maior proposition in the proceedings of these Protestants, (by whome I dispute in this place) is euidently true. For amonge men learned in professions, the Common maxime and reason is, wee must beleeue euery one moste cunninge in his art, and amonge men learned hee that is moste, or more learned, is to be credited before him, that is suppo­sed to be his inferior in learning: And do­ctrine constantly taught not onely to be the doctrine of such a more or moste lear­ned Father, and Doctor and Sainct, but fur­ther to be doctrine generally of Christs true Churche, is of more creditt, and more worthie to be beleeued, then that which by a man supposed not so learned, is either [Page 106] doubtfully or singularly taught, or vncer­taine, whether it was so taught, or if it were, yet was recanted, disclaymed, or re­tracted by himselfe.

The second proposition, concerning these two greate Doctors, and their opinions in this point, is thus proued by these Prote­stants. D. Cou [...]ll writeth of S. Augustine in Couell a­gainst Bur­ges pag. 3. these termes. Hee was farre the moste learned Doctor, that euer was, or shall be in all likelyhood, except the Apostles. And giueing the highest commendation hee could to S. Thomas Aqui­n [...]s our holy and learned schole-man hee Couell ag. Burg. writeth thus: By a Common prouerbe it was spoken, that the soule of S. Augustine dwelt in Aquinas. Concerning S. Hi [...]ome, vppon whose Ima­gined opinion in this point, they would hazard their whole Religion in their Iudg­ments, alloweing onely the scriptures to be Iudges, and grownds: in other poynts they vse him in these termes: M^r. Wottons Wotton def of perk. 495. 500. 519. 520. words be: Hieromes authoritie in the case of single life is not much worthe. Hierome condemninge Io­uinian delt vnchristianely with him. The authoritie of Hierome, concludeinge a worke of perfection from those words of Christ: goe and sell all &c. is not to be admitted. Now let vs heare from these Pro­testants, in what maner these two Doctors taught as this Protestants tell vs, these two diuers doctrines, one for Catholicks, and the other for Protestants. D. Feild writeinge of bookes, which Catholicks admitt for canonicall, and the Protestants refuse, tel­leth [Page 107] vs that S. Augustine, and the third Councell Feild pag. 248. l. 4. c. 23. & pag. 246. of Carthage, (confirmed in the sixt generall Councell) wherein Augustine was present, and Innocentius Pope lyueing in that time seeme to add them to the Canon. Then it seemeth by this Protestant testi­monie, that S. Augustines opinion, approued in so greate a prouinciall Councell, confir­med in a generall Councell, the highest com­maundeinge Iudgement by them before, and by the Pope, of the greatest Aposto­licke See, the seconde Iudge in the Chri­stian world, before in D. Feilds allowance: especially in that best time, when his Maie­stie saith it was a Rule to all, and constantly taught as the doctrine of the Church, by this the greatest doctor, that euer was or is like to be by these men, is worthie to be credited and beleeued: and by their do­ctrine before, All men that will not be dis­obedient bothe in the seconde, and first de­gree also, ar bownde to embrace, and fol­lowe it.

Now let vs heare what these Protestants will testifie of S. Hierome for their opinion, in this Question, of these bookes: The Protestant Conference at Hampton court before Conference pag. 60. the Kinge, entreateing of Protestants ex­ceptions against these scriptures, vseth these words: Moste of the obiections made against those bookes, were the olde Cauills of the Iewes, renewed by S. Hi [...]rome in his time, who was the first that gaue them that name of Apochrypha: which opinion vppon Ruffinus his challendge, hee after a sorte dis­claymed: [Page 108] the rather because a generall offence was taken at his speaches in that Kinde. Hitherto the censure at that publicke Protestant Confe­rence, by which the Protestants grownde for deniall of those bookes of scripture, and tearminge them Apochypha, is vtterly ouer­thowne. For an opinion fownded vppon old Iewish Cauills against Christians, singularly held, or renewed, reclaymed by the Author, and generally gi [...]ing offence (as these Protestants affirme this was) is not probable to be true. D. Couell against Burges the Puritane, answeareth the obiections against these Couell ag. Burges pag. 8 [...]. 86. 87. 88. 89 90. 91. bookes, as Catholickes doe. And sheweth, that these bookes haue without cause beene accused of faultes, by Protestants, onely to deny them to be canonicall, as Catholicks esteeme them. And further hee addeth thus: They ar moste true, and might haue the reconcilement Couell sup. pag. 87. of other scriptures. And againe in these wordes: If Russinus be not deceaued they were approued as parts of the old testament, by the Apostles. For when S. Hierome writt so scornefully of the historie of Su­sanna, and the songe of the three children, hee char­geth him therein, to haue robbed the treasure of the holy ghost, and diuine Instrument, which the Apostles deliuered to the Churches. And S. Hierome (whoe is not vsually slowe to defend himself) leaueth that point vnansweared, pretending that what hee had spoken, was not his owne opinion, but what the Iewes obiected. And for his paynes in translateing the booke of Iudith, (which Protestants deny) hee gi­ueth this reason: because wee reade that the Councell [Page 109] of Nyce did reckon it in the number of holy scriptures. Hitherto D. Couells words: and much like vnto this of Russinus, hee citeth from S. Augu­stine, S. Ciprian, and others, Temporibus Aposto­lorum proximis, in the next ages to the time of the Apostles. And thus wee see how weake that Protestant Religion is, that by their owne testimonie, is fownded vppon so singular new reuiued, Iewish Cauills, disclaymed, and generally offensyue, and disliked opinion.

From hence I argue further: All Bookes which were approued by the Apostles for parts of the old testament, were the treasure of the holy ghost and diuine Instrument which the Apostles deliuered to the Churches, which ar moste true, and might haue reconcilement of other scriptures, ar to be al­lowed for such: But all these things ar ve­rified of bookes which these Protestants deny, and by themselues, as is cited from them before: Therefore ar to be allowed for canonicall scriptures, bothe proposi­tions be graunted by these Protestants be­fore, and so in this argument nothing re­mayneth to be proued.

And againe thus I argue: whatsoeuer a generall Councell in the primatiue Church (the highest Rule by Protestants before to approue scriptures, and bynde all men vnto the definitions of it; receaued for scripture, ought to be receaued for such: But more bookes then Protestants allowe were so receaued as these Protestants tell vs: There­fore [Page 110] more are to be admitted. Both propo­sitions ar here also graunted before by Pro­testants, and so the Argument concludeth truely against them.

Further I argue thus: Those Bookes which the Iewes before, and at the com­minge of Christ, for their greatest, or greate part dwelleing out of Iury, vsed as parts of the old testament, and deliuered as a canon to the Christian Churches, and were Ioyned in one volume, read by them of the Latine Church, then the acknow­ledged true Churche of Christ, and were receaued in the third Carthagenian Coun­cell, which was confirmed in the sixt gene­rall Councell, ar now to be receaued and allowed for canonicall scriptures: But those bookes which Protestants denie and Ca­tholicks allowe, be such: Therefore they ar to be now allowed for canonicall. The Maior proposition is euidently true: for if the Iewes before, and at the commeing of Christ, the primatiue Christians of that time, and their practice, the authoritie of the true Church of Christ, the moste prin­cipall Church before by D. Feild, and other Protestants, a fomous prouinciall Councell, and the confirmation of a generall Coun­cell, ar not to be admitted, to direct and instruct vs, there is no meanes left for instru­ction in this case, these beinge by these Pro­testants before, the greatest warrants, and Rules wee can haue in such causes. The [Page 111] second proposition is proued in this manen D. Feild haueing spoken, how the Hebrue Iewes had made their Hebrue canon, ac­cordeing to their Iewish reckoninge of the number of their letters, (how probably I leaue to Hebritians, and may not now en­treate) hee concludeth thus: These onely did Feild l. 4. c. 23. pag. 245. the auncient Church of the Iewes receaue, as diuine, and canonicall. Neither much meruaile, all the others being the last that were written, and in the time of their decayeing state, and af­flictions. Of these hee writeth thus in the next words: That other bookes were added vnto Feild. sup. these, whose authoritie not being certayne, and knowne ar called Apocryphall, fell out on this sortè. The Iewes in their later times, before, and at the Act. 6. c. gloss. ordi­nar. & lyr. in eandem locum. comminge of Christ were of two sortes: some pro­perly and for distinction sake named Hebr [...]es, com­morant at Hierusalem, and in the holy land: others named Hellenists, that is Iewes of dispersion, min­gled with the Gretians. These had written sundry bookes in Greeke, which they made vse of together with other parts of the old testament, which they had of the translation of the Septuagint: But the Hebrues receaued onely the two and twentie bookes before mentioned. Hence it came, that the Iewes deliuered a double Canon of the scripture, to the Christian Churches. Thus wee see that the greatest parte of the Iewes, Proselytes, and all our of Iurie, did add these bookes with the other for scripture, vsed them as part of the old te­stament, deliuered them to the Christian Churches, as part of the canon of scripture, and the pri­matiue [Page 112] Church consequently so receaued them, otherwise they were not thus deli­uered. Therefore thus farre the Minor propo­sition is proued, for I doe not expect D. Feild to say, or not say expressely, that these be, or be not canonicall, but what in true con­sequence hee must say, by his owne graunte before, and hereafter. Then hee telleth vs, they in S. Augustines time were receaued Feild pag. 246. by him, the fathers of third Councell of Carthage, and Innocentius then Pope of Rome, in the best estate of that Church when it was (as before by Pro­testants) Kings speach sup. a Rule vnto all, in the catalogue of cano­nicall scriptures. Now that the Canons of this Carthagenian Councell were confirmed in the sixt generall Councell holden at Trallo: (to vse his words) and which Protestants acknow­ledge Feild l. 4. cap. 23. pag. 258. for a generall Councell, their hi­ghest Rule, hee testifieth after in the same chapter. Neither is his exception, because the Laodicean Councell which nameth not all Ob. them, is there also confirmed, of any pur­pose: Answ. for that generall Councell, by Prote­stants, approueing and confirminge bothe, that which named them for canonicall, and that doth not name them all, must needs confirme them for canonicall, otherwise against supposition, this Councell of Car­thage had not beene confirmed, as they teach it was.

Further I argue thus: all those Bookes, which Protestants in their authorised com­munion booke, and bookes of Honolyes, [Page 113] allowed, by their conuocation, and parla­ment, and our Kinge, doe prescribe to be vsed as canonicall scriptures, as well as others, and are so cited and practized, ought to be receaued, and allowed for canonicall: But those Bookes which they denie, and Catholicks receaue for canonicall, are suche: Therefore they ought to admitt them into the Canon of Holy scriptures. The Maior proposition is euident, for bookes, Rules, lawes, and directions pro­posed by true authoritie, as those be sup­posed of Protestants, ar to be obeyed, and followed. The Minor proposition is likewise l. 1. homel. l. 2. homel. Artic. 25. Commu­nion B. Tabl. di­rect. of ser­uice. Suruey of the Booke of comm. prayer pag. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. Pe­tit. of 22. Preach. exc. ag. hom. and except. 4. ag. comm. Booke. Articl. of Relig. Ar­ticul 6. moste certaine: for their bookes of Home­lyes receaued in the 25. Article of their Re­ligion doe ordinarily so cite them: and their Communion booke so termeth and vseth them too often to be alleadged in this place. Whereuppon, to be breife, the Protestant Author of the Suruey of the booke of Common prayer, affirmeth play­nelye, and often vrdgeth it, That the Prote­stants of England must approue with the Romane Churche, these bookes for canonicall. So likewise doe the 22. preachers of London in their pe­tition. If any man shall Answeare, that the Articles of their Religion exclude them from the canon of the scripture, and so they cannot be saide to receaue them: I answeare him againe, that this is so farre, from freeinge them in this point, that it both excludeth them, defineing and em­braceing [Page 114] so contradictorie doctrines in so important busines, from all hope of truthe, and further proueth, that these men buil­deing all vppon scriptures, haue either no scriptures at all, or els such doubtfull, vn­certaine, and vnresolued scriptures, that true Religion which must be moste assured, and infallible, cannot be grownded, or mayntayned by them. For proofe whereof, I will first recite their subscribed Article in this question, and then frame my Argu­ment. Their Article is sett downe in these Articl. of Rel. arti­cul. 6. definitiue wordes: Holy scripture conteineth all thinges, necessarie to saluation: so that whatsoeuer is not read therein, nor may be proued thereby; is not to be required of any man, that it should be beleeued, as an Article of the faithe, or be thought requisite or necessarie to saluation. In the name of holy scripture, wee doe vnderstand those canonicall Bookes of the old and new testament, of whose authoritie was neuer any doubt in the Churche. Of the first part of this Article I am to entreate in my chapter of Traditions, hereafter. Of the later part, I will speake in this place, onely first ad­monisheing my Readers, in what ample maner D. Feild, and others of that Religion Feild. l. 3. c. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. pag. 60. 62. 63. 64. &c. Feild. l. 3. Titul. c. 1. & 2. take this worde, the Churche: for breuiate whereof, the Titles of the first and seconde chapters of his third booke be these: Of the diuision of the Christian worlde into the Greeke, La­tine, Armenian, Aethiopian, and Nestorian Chur­ches. c. 1. of the harshe and vnaduised Censure of the Romanists, condemninge all these Churches, as [Page 115] Scismaticall, and Hereticall. cap. 2. Now this sup­posed, I argue thus:

No bookes, whose authoritie haue at any time beene doubted of, in the Churche, are by this Protestant Article to be al­lowed for Canonicall scriptures: But all bookes that either Protestants, or Catho­licks receaue for canonicall, haue in the Iudgment of these Protestants beene doub­ted of in the Church: Therefore by these Protestants, there be no canonicall scrip­tures at all. The Maior proposition is euidently proued, by their recited article defineing those bookes canonicall of whose authoritie was neuer any doubt in the Churche. The Minor proposition is directly proued by D. Willet who writeth Willet Sy­nop. quaest. 1. of scrip­ture. pag. 2. 3. edit. An. 1594. and after published againe. directly, and at large, how euery booke both of the old, and new testament, haue not onely beene doubted of, but also denyed in this their Churche. I suppose the laste edition of his booke was since the commeing in of his Maiestie my prescribed time: otherwise it is so directly there proued by him that no Protestant can deny it. And to shew the pitifull case of this their Protestant Article and Reli­gion their Protestant Bishop of Wincester D. Bilson suru. pag. 664. Bilson within my limitation writeth thus: The scriptures themselues were not fully receaued in all places, no not in Eusebius time. Hee saith, the Epistle of Iames, of Iude, the second of Peter, the seconde and third of Iohn, ar contradicted. The Epistle to the Hebrues was contradicted: the Churches of Syria did not receaue the seconde epistle of Peter, [Page 116] nor the seconde and third of Iohn, nor the Epistle of Iude, nor the Apocalipse: the like might be saide for the Churches of Arabia. Will you hence conclude, that these partes of scripture were not Apostolicke, or that wee neede not receaue them now, because they were formely doubted of? Therefore the Prote­stants of England haue no certayne, and vndoubted scripture, if they will stand to their suscribed Articles, and their owne subscription. Which this Protestant Bishop before, seeing the absurditie thereof, hath refused to doe. Therefore they may not (as they doe) denie those other bookes which Catholicks admitt, vppon so greate, and highest warrants, before in Protestants Iudgment, because in former tymes they haue beene doubted of, as those laste reci­ted by the testimonie of their Bishop, and all the rest, as D. Willet hath wittnessed haue beene. To these I might add more Argu­ments from these Protestants true Greeke Churche, and the generall Councell of Florence, both allowed by some of these writers, and yet alloweing, and warranting for canonicall, all bookes receaued by Ca­tholicks. And other Arguments by them: but these ar sufficient for this matter, at this time. And as demonstration is made, that these Protestants either haue no true scriptures at all, or not the true Canon of holy scriptures: So it is as euident, that their Religion cannot be proued true, and infal­lible (as true Religion is) by euidences, [Page 117] that in their proceedings ar doubtfull, fal­lible, or no holy canonicall scriptures, but by them excluded from that number, and sacred Canon.

CHAPTER V. OF THE INTEGRITIE, AND excellencie, of the Latine vulgare trans­lation of scriptures, vsed in the Romane Church: and Protestants false, corrupt, and erroneous Translations in their owne Iudgment and Censure.

NOW lett vs entreate of the vul­gare Latine translation, of holy scriptures, handled in the next Chapter, for whose allowance by these Protestants, I argue by them, in this maner.

That Latine Translation of scriptures which is to be vsed in scholes and pulpits, and for antiquitie, to be preferred before all others, was vsed in the Church, thirteene hundred yeares agoe, by S. Augustine prefer­red before all others, and both by the Iudg­ment of S. Isidore, and these Protestants themselues, is thought the best translation, and to be preferred before all others, is ac­cordingely to be allowed, esteemed, and preferred: But the vulgare Latine transla­tion, [Page 118] by these Protestants is such: There­fore euen by them so to be allowed, and preferred. The Maior proposition is manifestly true: for that which is so auncient in the true Latine Church, and to be preferred before all others, must needs be allowed and preferred. The Minor proposition is proued, as followeth: first their Bishopp D Doue, writeth in these words, of this vulgare La­tine translation: Wee (Protestants) graunt it Doue per­suas. pag. 16. fitt, that for vniformitie in quotations of places, in schooles and pulpi [...]s, one Latine text should be vsed, and wee can be contented for the antiquitie thereof, to preferre the olde vulgar translation, before all other Latine bookes: so much wee doe yeeld to the Councell of Trent. D. Couell entreateinge of transla­tions of scripture, against Burges the Puri­tan, Couell a­gainst Bur­ges pag. 94. answeareth in these words: Wee are rea­die to confesse, whether you vnderstand the Italian, or that which goeth vnder the name of S. Hierome, that they were vsed a [...]n [...]iently in the Church, a thowsand and three hundred yeares agoe, one of them by S. Au­gustine preferred before all the rest, the other highly commended by Beza, and that of the vulgar (though with Pagnin and Driedo) wee thinke it not S. Hie­romes, but mixt: yet wee can be content, to say as Isodore doth of it. Interpretatio eius this transla­tion is to be preferred before others. Hitherto this Protestant Doctor, who with their Bishop Doue before haue graunted, as much as the Councell of Trent, a Rule to Catholicks de­creed in this matter, yf wee may giue creditt Feild pag. 258. to D. Feild, citeing and alloweing Andradius, [Page 119] writeing in this maner: The Church doth ap­proue translations, not pronownceing that there is no thing amisse in them, but that the diuine mysteries are therein truely deliuered, and nothinge that concer­neth faith, Religion, or good maners, ignorantly or fraudulently suppressed. The Councell of Trent defi­ned, that the vulgare Latine translation shall be holden authenticall: but hee saith, Andreas Vega, whoe was present at the Councell, reported that the Fathers of the Councell, meant not to determine, that it is not defectiue or faultie, but that it is not er­roneous, and faultie in such sorte, as that any hurt­full or pernitious opinion in matters of faith, or man­ners, may necessarily be deduced from it. And that this was the meaneninge of the Cowncell, hee saith, Andreas Vega alleadged the authoritie of the Cardi­nall of Sainct Crosse, afterwards Pope, whoe deliuered so much vnto him. Hitherto D. Feilds allowan­ce, which alloweth that his Protestants be­fore haue testified as much for the vulgare Latine translation, as the Councell of Trent defined, and consequently, as much as Ca­tholicks doe hold in this question.

Further I argue thus: That Translation of scripture which was vsed 1300 yeares age, when the Church was in her best and flo­rishing estate, and from which no hurtfull or pernitious opinion can be deduced, is to be allowed, and preferred: But the vulgare Latine is such: Therefore to be thus al­lowed, and preferred. The Maior proposition is euidently true, and before graunted: and Couell def. of Hook. pag. 29. D. Couell saith: God hath so linked his worde, and [Page 120] his Churche, that neyther can stande, where bothe are not. The Minor is also before proued by these Doctors, their Bishop Doue, D. Couell, and Feild: so nothing remayneth to be proued in this argument: And so it is proued and al­lowed by these Protestants, that of all trans­lations it is to be preferred; that it con­tayneth nothing against Faith, Religion, or good maners, nothing that is erroneous which suffiseth for my purpose.

Now lett vs see how these Protestants can iustifie their Translations from such defects; for they haue graunted before that this vulgare Latine vsed, and allowed in the Romane Churche, is to be preferred before all their Protestant Translations, Latine, English, Welch, Dutch, French or what­soeuer named translations. I argue thus▪

No translation whatsoeuer is authenticall: But euery English and other Protestant trans­lation is a translation: Therefore none of them is authenticall. The Maior proposition consisteth of the verie wordes of D. Couell, Couell ag. Burg. pag. 94. Doue per­suas. pag. 16. which be these: No translation whatso [...]uer is au­thenticall scripture. D. Doue writeth thus: all Tra [...]slations haue many faultes. The Minor is ma­nifestly true: for a translation cannot truly be saide to be no translation: for so contra­dictories might be true, which is vnpossible.

Further thus I argue: No translation, which is not well translated, but requireth new translations, is to be allowed: But all English translations ar such: Therefore not [Page 121] to be allowed. The Maior is euidently true, for things not well done, ar ill done: be­cause Non datur actus indifferens in indiuiduo. No act singularized is indifferent. Therefore being ill, is not to be allowed. The Minor is proued by the Kings speach in the Conference, at Confer. pag. 46. Hampton, where hee saith, that hee could neuer yet see a Bible well translated into English: but the worste of all hee thought the Geneua to be. And therefore a new translation should be made for our English nation. And so D. Couell also Couell ag. Burg. wisheth. Againe thus I argue: No transla­tion, that is peruerred in many hundreds of places, is inferior to the Turkes Alcaron, and denyeth Christianitie, is to be allowed: But the English Protestant Common trans­lation it such: Therefore not to be allowed. The Maior proposition is more then euidently true: The Minor is thus proued by the Pro­testant Author of the booke, called Aduerti­sement: Aduer­tism. in an. 1604. his words be these: The Bible is peruer­ted in eight hundred, and eight and fourtie places in the olde testament. The English Protestant Bible, is inferior to the [...]urkes Alcaron And so Christianitie is denied in England by publicke authoritie.

My next Argument is this: No transla­tion that hath many omissions, many addi­tions, which sometimes peruerteth the sence, is sencelesse, and sometymes con­trary; is a true translation, or to be allowed: But the English receaued Protestant trans­lation is suche: therefore not true, nor to be allowed. The Maior is palpably true. The [Page 122] Minor is proued by M^r. Burges in these wor­des Burg. apol. pag. 93. in D. Couells Answ. of the approued English translation: it is a Translation, which hath many omissions, many ad­ditions, which sometimes obscureth, sometimes per­uerteth the sence: beinge sometimes sencelesse, some­times contrary.

Thus I argue againe: No translation, that is corrupt, hath grosse corruptions, by leaueing out of wordes, by putting to of wordes, and which peruerteth the mea­neinge of the holy Ghost, is a true, or suffe­rable translation: But the vsuall English translation, by Protestants, is such: there­fore not true, nor sufferable. The Maior pro­position is apparantly true. And the Minor is thus proued by these Protestants: The 22 Petit. of 22. prea­chers ex­cept. 21. ag. comm. Booke. preachers write of the translation in the communion booke, in this maner: It con­teyneth in it diuers corrupt translations of scriptures, by leaueing out of wordes, putting to of wordes, per­uerting the meaneing of the holy ghost. The Prote­stant Suruey of the booke of Common prayer, Suruey pag. 160. addeth: There be many grosse corruptions, as may partely appeare by the Abrigment of the Ministers of Lincolne Dyocesse. Then how sownde a Reli­gion these Protestants haue, that must be fownded, and proued by such translations, I leaue to others consideration.

My next Argument is this: No transla­tions that be corrupt; not answeareable to the truthe of the originall; are not to be al­lowed: cannot be defended &c. euen in Protestants Iudgments, are to be reiected [Page 123] and condemned as false, and prophane: But all English Protestant Translations of the Bible, euen from the reuolt of Henry 8. from the Church of Rome, are such, by these Protestants: Therefore by them to be reiected, and condemned as false, and pro­phane. The Maior proposition is euidently true, euen in Protestants Censure, and the Minor is proued by them in this maner. Their sen­tence in their publicke Conference is this: The Conference at Hampt. pag. 45. translations of the Bible allowed in the time of Henry 8. and Edward 6. were corrupt, and not answearea­ble to the truthe of the originall. And of the translations vsed in the time of Q Eliza­beth, Conference pag. 46. sup. and his Maiestie since, they testifie in these wordes: The English Bible as it is translated, is corrupt, and not answeareable to the truth of the originall. His Maiestie professed hee could neuer yet see a Bible well translated into English. Therefore order is there taken, in these wordes: A new Pag. 46. sup. translation is to be made, and none of the former to be allowed. The 22 Protestant preachers of london of their petition write in this maner: Petit. of 22 preachers except. 11. 12. The English Protestants in their publicke proceedeings translate scriptures corruptely, by leaueing out of words, putting to of wordes: peruerting the meaneinge of the holy ghost. Misapply places of holy scriptures to the countenance of errors. Others of them write thus: Wee haue diuers translations of holy scriptures: Def. of the Minist. reasons pag. 10. That which by our Seruyce booke (this is the pra­cticall Rule of their Religion) is appointed to be reade, is the worste of all, and to be charged, with sondry grosse, and palpable errors. And speakeing [Page 124] of M^r. Hutton, takeing vppon him to excuse their translation, their wordes be these: Def. supr. pag. 38. M^r Hutton takeing vppon him the defence of Prote­stants corruptions, is no more able to make his parte good, against the truthe of the exceptions, with all his florishes: then Goliath was against Dauid with all his blasphemies. Therefore the Religion of En­glish Protestants by themselues, to their owne pleaseing, deduced either from such false, corrupt, and erroneous translations, or from Greeke, or Hebrue, or any other auntient, or receaued text, so corruptely, and prophanely translated, and expownded, by no possibilitie can be iustified, for true and holy.

If any man answeareth, that these Pro­testant testimonies of their corrupt trans­lations, and my former Arguments, against the validitie of deductions, and conclusions from so false, corrupted, doubtfull, or vn­certaine texts, and sentences of scriptures, proceed onely against their former trans­lations, and Religion then vsed, and so deduced amonge them: But now they haue a new, and better translation, by his Maiesties order, and commaundement, and thus intituled: The holy Bible conteyninge the old Title of the Protest. new trans­lation of the Bible. An. 1614. testament, and the new, newly translated out of the originall tongues: and with the former translations diligently compared, and reuised, by his Maiesties commaundement. Imprinted by Robert Barker, Printer to the Kings most excellent Maiestie. To this I answeare; that if this new translation [Page 125] be true, and all the others, as they acknowledge false, corrupt, and worthy to be condemned, (otherwise they haue vnworthely condemned them.) Then as all their Religion in their doctrine was de­duced from such false translations, They must needs come to a new correction, and as they haue forsaken their translations for corrupt, and adulterate, from which their Religion was deduced; So they must now alter, chaunge and correct their Religion, or some Articles thereof, because it was de­duced, and fownded from corrupt trans­lations, and deceaueinge principles. For their Religion wholly consisting vppon their conclusions, which allwayes followe the worse part, conclusio semper sequitur deteriorem partem; Their Religion must needs be worse, and more requireing correction, then their translations. Againe, I onely dispute against their Religion, which hitherto they haue practized, not against any new Religion, which they will make from their new translations, not knoweing yet, neither they temselues (so often chaungeing) what it will please them, to be. Thirdly I must deale planely with them, to thinke they had done farre more excu­sably for themselues, and their Religion, still to haue faced out their old for tollera­ble, rather then to haue giuen such a dow­nefull to their Religion, and scriptures, so much troubled their foure and fourtie translators [Page 126] (as M^r. Hugh Broughton, their most admired H. Brough. oratiuncul. ad Iacob. Reg. 1609. linguist telleth vs) and yet still abuse vs (themselues shall be wittnes) with new and more false translations of holy scriptu­res. For the same greatest Protestant Rab­bine thus Intituleth his booke of excep­tions against these Protestants sufficiencie, and synceritie in this cause: Oratiuncula de mo­litione versionis è sacrorum codicum fontibus in Riuu­los Orat. supr. in Imit. Britannicos. Ad Iacobum Regem magnae Britaniae. A little oration of the entreprise of translation from the fowntaines of the holy bookes into the brittish gunnells. To Iames Kinge of greate Britanny. And to tell vs, what indirect dealeinge was vsed by the Protestant Bishops, in this matter, how false both their former translations were, and this can proue no other by any probable Iugdment, thus hee beginneth his oratiuncula, as hee calleth it: O great Kinge the Brittish nation hath now longe desired to obtayne a better translation of the Bible. And I haue meditated these thirtre continuall yeares well to performe it. And your highnes pleasure was that I most exercised of all should take in hand this hard worke. Vestraque Serenitas me voluit, exercitatissimum omnium opus hoc arduum moliri. But the Bishops as wee call, two ways wrastled against it. First that their vsuall trans­lation might continue. But your highnes, the errors being throughly knowne, thought that to be wickednes. Then they themselues would doe it, by chuseing of their fellowes, or rather foure and fourtie vicars of their labour. As though our nation were able to yeeld so many fitt men: when there scarcely are, or euer [Page 127] were, two in all the world, which could handle the Hebrue Prophetts, as good Thalmudists, and the He­brue Greeke Apostles also as Athenians. But now sixe yeares triall hath taught, that it is one thinge to dreame of tongues, an other to knowe them. And now they are said to be at a stand. And would willingly giue ouer, but that the Kings authoritie requireth an end. But that your most learned Maiestie may se what is to be hoped for, from them, least the Churches be forced to buy bables for the word of God: I will in few words deleuer, that it may appeace that such pore students are not to be suffered to lest with the Kinge, and the flocke. Hitherto this greate linguists oration, his exceptions are to tedious to be recited. Onely because these men haue so magnified the Hebrue text of the old testa­ment, in respect of the septuaginta, and vul­gare Latine, now this greate searcher of Hebrue monuments can heare onely (for hee neuer se either of them, of two perfect Hebrue copies of the old testament, in all the world, and both they be in the Iewes custodye, one in Hieru­salem, and the other at Nehardegh in Mosopotamia. Veteris testamenti duo exemplaria tam accurata at­que mens humana prouidere potuit, seruantur à Iu­daeis. Hierosolymis alterum: alterum Nehardeghae in Mesopotamia. Then if wee haue no better comfort, from these Hebritians, for a true Hebrue text, then that England neither hath, had, or can procure any, and none is to be had, but from our Enemyes the Iewes; and yet if they could procure a true copie, which they haue not done, there is [Page 128] not any one in England by their owne Iudgments able truely to translate it, and these last translators were weary of their entreprise, and would haue giuen it ouer, after sixe yeares experience of their disabi­litie, but that the Kings Maiesties pleasure was, to haue one end or other, wee may not easely admitt such translations for holy scriptures, nor Religion deduced from them, for a true Religion. And [...]his the ra­ther, because since the birth of this new translation, it is condemned by their owne approued writeings, I will omitt others, and onely cite one place out of their late commended history of the world, in these Histor. of the world l. 1. cap. [...]. §. 14. Chron 2. cap. 21. v. 16. The Pro­test. new transl. sup. words: The ill translation of Ethiopia for Chus, is amonge other places, made moste apparant in the second of Chronicles in these words: So the Lord styrred vpp against Iehoram, the spiritt of the Phili­stines, and the Arabians which confine the Ethio­pians: The Geneua translation hath it, which were besides the Ethiopians. (the new English rea­deth thus:) more ouer the lord stirred vpp against Iohoram the spiritt of the Philistines, and of the Arabians, that were neare the Ethiopians. Now how farre it is betweene the Philistines, and the Negros, or Ethiopians, euery man that looketh in a mapp, may Iudge. For hee Philistines and Arabians doe mixt, and ioyne with the land of the Chusites, and are distant from Ethiopia, about two and thirtie, or three and thirtie degrees, and therefore not their next neighbours: but all Egipt and the de­serts of Sur, and Pharan, are betweene them. And [Page 129] to aggrauate this matter the more, these new Protestant translators takeing vppon them, to translate the old testament out of the Hebrue, and new out of the Greeke, and onely alloweing those texts in words, are so farre from performing it in deeds; that in the old testament they haue for­saken the Hebrue text diuers thowsands of times, as may be proued by their owne merginall obseruations of that matter; my leasure was not to recompt them all, but in Genesis the first booke they haue thus behaued themselues aboue two hundred tymes, and after the same rate in all the rest. As in the 5. 20. and 25. chapter of the booke of Iudges fourtye times. Fyfteene tymes in Sam. l. 1. cap. 18. in the 2. Booke of Samuel in cap. 22. thirteene times. in cap. 1. 7. 18 20. in fower chapters aboue fyfty times in the third booke of Kings. And so they deale with the Greeke in the new testament, and in the old testament, where the scripture is written in the Chaldy, and Hebrue mixed, as in the time of captiuitie so they vse the Chaldy tongue, as in Esra cap. 4. they forsake the Hebrue thrise, and the Chaldye eleuen, or twelue times, in the second chapter of Daniel, they leaue it thirteene times, in the third chap­ter twelue times, in the 5. chapter neyne times &c. and in these and other places where they refuse the originall tonge, as for example, the Hebrue, they doe it not, [Page 130] many times to preferre either the vulgare Latine, Septuagin [...]a, or Syriacke, but their owne conceipt, and Imagination. Yet in places where they forsake the originall, to preferre, any of the other, it is euidently against their owne profession, and Religion, and in places of their former translations, censured by M^r. Gregory Martyne, or other English Catholicks, they often times nei­ther regard their owne, or ours, but giue vs new scriptures, and reuelations of their owne (thoughe not many times in greate matters) and so in this multiplication, and chaunge of scriptures they haue also multi­plied, and chaunged Religion, deduced from them, and for that one Article of their auntient creed, I beleeue in the holy ghost, may now say by such proceedings: wee beleeue in the foure and fourtie English Protestant holy Ghosts. For whosoeuer reiect all texts of scripture, as their owne marginall obseruations tell vs, they doe, though (as before) often not in great things, yet sometimes otherwise, and deny vnwritten traditions of this kinde, must needs be in such estate.

CHAPTER VI. PROVETH BY THESE PRO­testants, that the true and Iuridicall ex­position of scriptures is against them, and for the doctrine of the Romane Church.

AFTER these, I am to entreate of the true, lawfull, and Iuridicall Exposition of holy scriptures; And that it belongeth to the Church of Rome, haueing both the true scriptures▪ the true translation of them, and it self haueing power, and autho­ritie, being the true Church of Christ, to propose it to all Christians: and not to these Protestants: for no companie or congre­gation of men, wanting and denying diuers bookes of scriptures, in which diuers Articles of Religion, as prayer to Angels, their patronadge, prayer and sacrifice for the Deade, meritt of good workes, &c. are directly proued, not so apparently taught in other scriptures, besides followeing, and alloweing erroneous, and corrupt trans­lations, can haue the true and Iuridicall exposition of scriptures, especially hauing no Iurisdiction ouer others, by their owne graunt: But the English Protestants are in this state: Therefore they haue not this true, lawfull, and Iuridicall exposition of [Page 132] scriptures. Bothe propositions are graunted before, and so nothinge remaineth to be proued in this argument.

Further I argue thus: No priuate Inter­pretation of scriptures, by conference of places, and such Rules as Protestants assigne for Interpreteinge scripture, is bindeing, or iuridicall: But all Protestant Expositions, in respect of true byndeing authoritie, in such cases, is priuate: Therefore no Protestant Interpretation is binding, or Iuridicall. The Maior proposition is thus proued by D. Feild Feild l. 4. c. 19. pag. 235. in these wordes: Wee confesse that neither confe­rence of places, nor consideration of the antecedētia, and consequentia, nor lookinge into the originalls, are of any force, vnlesse wee fynde the thing [...] which wee conceaue to be vnderstoode and ment in the places in­terpreted, to be consonant to the Rule of faithe. And hee writeth thus againe: priuate Interpretation Feild pag. 226. is not so proposed and vrged, as if they would binde all others, to receaue it. The Minor proposition▪ That all Protestant expositions in respect of a bindeing and Iuridicall power are priuate, is thus proued by this Protestant Argument: No Interpretation or Interpreters wanteing Iurisdiction, and authoritie, to commaunde their Interpretations, and expositions in matters of faith, to be beleued as suche, is to be accompted byndeing, and Iuridicall: But all English Protestant Interpretations, expositions, and definitions, by their owne Iudgment, want this bindeing, and commaundeing authoritie in matters of [Page 133] faithe: Therefore they are not Iuridicall, and byndeinge to be beleeued. The Maior is euidently true, for, where there is not power and authoritie in things, those things cannot be rightly and iuridically commaunded, or bindeing men to doe, or beleeue them. The Minor proposition is proued by D. Feild in these wordes: As before wee made Feild pag. 228. three kinds of Iudgment, the one of discretion Com­mon to all, the other of direction Common to the Pastors of the Churche, and a third of Iurisdiction, proper to them that haue supreame power in the Church: So likewise wee make three kindes of Inter­pretation: the first priuate: the seconde of publick [...] direction: and so the Pastors of the Church may pu­blickly propose, what they conceaue of it: And the third of Iurisdiction, and so they that haue supreame power, that is in the Bishops assembled in a generall Councell, may interpreate the scripture, and by their authoritie suppresse all them, that shall gaynesay such Interpretations: and subiect euery man that shall disobey such determinations, as they consent vppon, to excommunication, and Censures of the like nature. Hitherto D. Feilds wordes, playnely decla­reing, that in his Iudgment, the Protestants neither haue, nor can haue this Iuridicall, and commaundeing Iudgment, or Inter­pretation: because, as is proued by them­selues before, they neither haue had, nor can haue any generall Councell, in which alone he placeth this Iurisdiction, and bin­deing power. For, proposeing without au­thoritie, which hee giueth there to Bishops, [Page 134] is not Iuridicall, and coactiue. If hee shall answeare, that in the first three hundred yeares there was no generall Councell, and yet matters of Religion were decided and embraced: hee condemneth himself, and all Protestants, in this busines; for either hee must leaue that primatiue Church absolu­tely without Iurisdict [...]on, and power, which is moste absurde, or leaue it to them that both truely claymed, and vsed it, the Popes of Rome, as these Protestants haue before acknowledged: And aboue all men D. Feild must be of that opinion: for hee Feild. pag. 202. hath written and allowed in this maner: Wee must reuerence the authoritie of all Catholi [...]ke Doctors, whose doctrine and writeings the Church al­loweth: wee must more regarde the authoritie of Ca­tholicke Bishops; more then these the authoritie of the Apostolicke Churches: amongst them, more especially the Church of Rome of a generall Councell more then all these. Therefore by this Protestant Do­ctor, in tyme when generall Councells can­not be, the highest deciding, and Iuridicall sentence, and power is in the Church and Pope of Rome. And by this hee is also pre­uented, from sayinge that Protestants may commaunde such Interpretations, and defi­nitions within their owne temporall Terri­tories: for so they should not moste reuerence, and respect, next to a generall Councell, the Church of Rome the next Iudge, as hee hath written, but quite the contrary their owne stub­borne, and disobedient wills, which in such [Page 135] causes is Here [...]icall, or Sc [...]maticall vsurpa­tion, and yet D. Feild in his diuision of In­terpretations before, assigneth no Iurisdi­ction at all to inferior Bishops, to com­maunde either in the whole Church, or in Prouinciall, in such cases. Further I argue thus: No opinions or Articles, not grown­ded vppon the worde of God, are to be be­leeued or commaunded as matters of faith: But all Protestants deductions, and Interpre­tations in these controuersies, are such, not grownded vppon the word of God: there­fore not to be beleeued, or commaunded, as Articles of faith. The Maior is the Com­mon doctrine of Protestants: The Minor is proued both before, when Protestants haue depriued themselues of Councells, Popes, and all true proposers of the word of God, tying themselues to their owne doctrines, and deductions, and is thus fur­ther confirmed, by D. Couell, in these wor­des: Couell def. of Hook. pag. 85. Doctrines deriued, exhortations deducted, In­terpretations agreable, are not the word of God. Therefore the whole Religion of Prote­stants against Catholicks, beinge thus fown­ded, vppon so deceatefull a grounde as hu­manee deduction is, cannot truely and Iuridically be commaunder. Yet it is so manifest to all, that their Religion consi­steth wholly on their Imagined Interpre­tations, and deductions, that M^r. Wotton and Wotto [...] def. of Perk. pag. 467. &c. others are enforced absurdely to say, that deduction from scripture maketh a matter of Faithe: [Page 136] otherwi [...]e hee [...]annot make any articl [...] of faith to be in their doctrine against vs. And D. Feild himself so resolute before against these priuate Interpretations, and exposi­tions, seemeth to be of the same minde, to defend their Religion in makeing such de­ductions to be matters of faith, by euery priuate deduction, his wordes be these: Wee Feild pag: 226. say that men not negl [...]cting that light of direction, which the Churche yeeldeth, no [...] other helps and meanes, may be assured out of the nature of the things themselues, the Conference of places, the knowledg of tongues, and the sutable correspondence, that one parte of dyuine truth hath with an other, that they haue sownde out the true meaneinge of it. And by this assurednes hee seemeth to vnderstand assurednes of faith, makeing their priuate deductions, and Interpretations, the worde of God, as M. Wotton before cited, doth in Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 467. these wordes: Wee acknowledge both and holde, all matters concludeth Logically out of the scriptures to be the word of God, as well as if they were expressely sett downe in it, worde for worde. Therefore I may l [...]wfully take it is a Common Prote­stant doctryne, both Doctor Feild and M. Wotton speakeinge for their Protestants in the plurall number: wee say: wee acknowledge &c. so that by their Religion, M. Feilds or M. Wottons Logicke, vaine and vncertayne deduction, is of higher authoritie, and more to be beleeued, then any generall Councell or Articl of Relig. art. 21. other externall Rule of Religion; for all these by them, as is presently to be proued [Page 137] may erre, euen in things appertayning vnto God: but their priuate Interpretations, and dedu­ctions, suteing with their humour, is the worde of God aswell as if it were sett downe in scrip­ture worde for worde, as M. Wotton hath told vs before.

My next Argument is this: No people, or professors of Religion, freely acknow­ledgeing, that all Rules in their Religion, though their best approued, and moste publicke to be moste reuerenced, and res­pected, be subiect to error, may erre and haue erred in things belongeing to God, are erroneous, vnconstant, variable, often recant, and correct their publicke pro­ceedeings in such things, can be saide to haue the true, and Iuridicall exposition of scriptures: otherwise there is a lawfull and true Iurisdiction and power to bynde them of their Religion, both to errors in things, against God, and misbeleefe in this life, and to eternall damnation, the peneltie thereof in the next: But the Protestants of England are in this Condition, by their owne Iudgment: Therefore, they haue not the true, and Iuridicall exposition, and In­terpretation of scriptures: The Maior is proued before, and directly by M. Wottons Wotton sup. words: all matters concluded logically out of the scriptures, are the worde of God, as well as if they were expressely sett downe in it word for word: But the worde of God neither is, nor can be erroneous, to be recanted, amended cor­rected [Page 138] &c. therefore the Maior is moste certainely true, by these men: And the Minor also is proued by them in this order: They haue graunted before, that a general Councell is the highest Iudge: And yet in pu­blicke and subscribed Articles, haue these Articl. of Relig. art. [...]1. wordes: Generall Councells may erre, and sometime haue erred, euen in things pertayning vnto God. Wherefore thinges ordeyned by them as necessarie to saluation, haue neither strength nor authoritie, vnlesse it may be declared that they be taken out of holy scripture. Therefore no certayne Interpre­tation with them for they haue assured vs, Feild pag. 228. that a generall Councell may expownd scripture, and by authoritie suppresse all them that gaynesay such Interpretations, to excommunication, and Censures of like nature, and is by them the highest Iudge hath no more priuiledge but to erre, and be examined, and controlled by inferior (for none is higher as before) Re­prouers, and particular Interpreters amonge them, whome (as they haue also taught before) wee are not bounde to beleeue, but be so vile, corrupt, and erroneous, as they haue confessed, there is none amonge them, to decide, things in controuersie, or define a truthe. And least any man should absur­dely say, that their Conuocation, Parlament or any other pretendeing superiotie among them, in these matters should be better able to Iudge and interprett scriptures, then Bishops assembled in a generall Councell: Willet Antilog. first D. Willet writeth thus: In England the [Page 139] temporall prince is gouernour, Ruler, cheefe ouerseer, praef. Engl. & pag. 71. 120. 150. 43. Pref. 19 the Reader in Antill. and steward of the Church, to whose Iudgment and redresse the reformation of Religion belongeth. Yet hee addeth: Neither hee, nor their Church hath any priuiledge from error: but playnely prote­steth: they must take out a new lesson, and learne to reforme their erroneous conceites. Which their Bishop D. Doue alloweth to haue beene their state from the first originall of their Doue per­suas. pag. 31. protestancie, in England, his wordes and graunt are these: When the Mass [...] was first putt downe, Kinge Henry had his English liturgie, and that was iudged absolute without exception: but when Kinge Edwarde came to the Crowne, that was condemned, and an other in the place which Peter Martir, and Bucer did approue, as very consonant to Gods worde. When Q. Eliz [...]eth began he [...] Raigne, the former was Iudged to be full of Imperfe­ctions, and a new was deuised, and allowed by the consent of the Cleargie: but about the middle of her Raigne wee were weary of that booke, and greate meanes haue beene wrought to abandon that, and establishe an other: wee doe at the leaste, at euery chaunge of prince, chaunge our booke of Common prayers, wee be so wanton, that wee know not what wee woulde haue: Hitherto this Protestant Bishop of the publicke proceedings in their Religion; And hee freely confesseth errors in all these their states and chaunges. And this their flitting from error to error, fin­deinge no Center, or hope of settleing in truth, hath so perplexed euen their best learned, that a late Protestant writer amonge [Page 140] them, hath these wordes: The late Archbishoppe of Canterbury (D. Whiteguist) as is credibly re­ported Suruey of the B. of com. prayer pag. 159. 160. tooke such a greife, (when their com­munion booke was to be amended) discoue­red by these or like wordes: good Lord; when shall wee know [...] what to trust vnto? that hee presently fell into his palssy, was curryed from the Court, and dyed shortely after. And D. Morton (D. Couell M. Wotton, Morton Apol. part. 2. pag. 315. Couell ag. Burg. pag. 75. 43. Wotton def. pag. 42. &c. M. Middleton and now the vniuersitie of Cam­bridge teacheth, it is a generall position, there is none in their Church whose Iudgment is Infallible. Then I conclude their Interpretations be false, and their Religion erroneous, vncertayne, and false; for they haue graunted before, that the worde of God which is Infallible, moste certayne, and vndoubted, is the grounde of true Religion, and euery article in it, so fownded: But these their highest and best sentences in Religion, being so erroneous to be corrected, fallible, deceatfull &c. must needs be the worde of lyeinge and de­ceatefull men, or the wicked spiritt, and in no wayes the holy Infallible, and moste certayne word of God, who can neither be deceaued in himself, or deceaue others.

Further thus I argue: whosoeuer teach not onely, that the whole Christian world may erre in things pertayning to God, but are bownde to receaue such errors, vnder payne of excommunication, and like Cen­sures, and yet teach this from scriptures, cannot be said to haue their true Interpre­tation: But the Protestants of England by [Page 141] their owne testimonie, are in this state: Therefore haue not this true Iuridicall In­terpretation, of scriptures. The Maior propo­sition is euidently true, for so God that is iust, should ordayne Iurisdiction; and power, to bynde men to things vniust, such as errors in Religion be, and these Prote­stants, though to excuse, or alleuiate their owne Heresies, they affirme, that any par­ticular Church, or a generall Councell, may erre in this maner, yet they deny it of the whole Churche, in which cause D. Feild pag. 203. l. 4. c. 5. Feild writeth in these wordes: wee thinke that particular men and Churches may erre damnably, because notwithstanding, others may worship God aright: but that the whole Churche, at one time, cannot so erre: for that the Churche should cease vt­terly for a time, and so not be Catholicke, being not at all times: and Christ should sometimes be without a Church. Thus it is euident by these Prote­stants, (for the wordes: wee thinke: be plu­rall) That whosoeuer by their Interpreta­tions should allowe such absurdities, can­not haue the true interpretation of scrip­tures. Now the Minor is easely proued by him also: for all men are bownde to obey lawfull superioritie, and authoritie such as hee saith a generall Councell hath ouer all Christians, in these cases: his wordes be­fore cited be these: They that haue supreame Feild l. 4. [...]. 16. pag. 228. power, that is the Bishops assembled in a generall Councell, may interpret the scripture, and by their authoritie suppresse all them that shall gaynesay such [Page 142] Interpretations, and subiect euery man that shall disobey such determination, as they consent vppon, to excommunication, and Censures of like nature. Wherefore seing generall Councells haue this bindeing, and commaundeing power, ouer all men, by these Protestants, and yet by their Article before, may erre, and haue Art. 21. sup. erred euen in things pertayning vnto God, the whole Christian worlde with so many ab­surdities, may be in this damnable error, the Church might cease, not be Catholicke, Christ Feild pag. 203. should be without a Church: which D. Feild be­fore esteemeth greate absurdities. Againe thus I argue: They which straungely peruert bely, depraue, abuse, and falsefye holy scriptures, cannot be thought to be true interpreters of them: But M. Parkes so testifieth of our Parkes ag. lymbom. def. of the 1. 2. 3. te­stim. English Protestants: Therefore they cannot be thought to be true Interpreters of them. Notheing remaineth in this Argument to be proued.

Further I argue thus: No Interpreters, or expositors of scripture, whose Inter­pretations be partiall, vntrue, seditious, sauoureing of Treason, poysen the Ghospell &c. are to be Iudged true, and Iuridicall: But the English Protestants hy their owne testimonyes, be such: Therefore not to be iudged true, and iuridicall interpreters: The Maior is true and euident: And the Minor thus proued, first by the Protestant Confer. at Hampt. pag. 47. conference in these wordes: The notes an­nexed to the Geneua translation, some are very par­tiall, [Page 143] vntrue, seditious, and sauoureing to [...] much of daungerous, and trayterous conceits. Yet these were allowed, and published, as publicke and approued interpretations. An other Protestant writeth in this maner: The Bishops Aduer­ment. An. 1604. notes betray our Lord, and Redeemer, and befoole the rocke of saluation, they are the verie poyson to all the Ghospell. M. Ormerod writeth thus of his fel­lowe Ormer. pict. purit. q. 4. Protestants: They fill the margents of their bookes, full of places of scripture, in a wronge sense, that by this meanes they might more easely deceaue the simple people. They neither care for Maior, Minor, nor Conclusion, so they may say some thinge. They point their margents with shamefull abuseing of scripture. To these I might add more argu­ments, as that by their owne testimonies they are Hereticks, Scismaticks, haue no ttue Churche, no true Religion, and the like, as amonge other reasons from them­selues, why Catholiks may not communi­cate with them, in spirituall, and religeous affayres, is proued in a late treatise against them: I will therefore passe them ouer, as allready proued.

CHAPTER VII. WHEREIN BY THESE PRO­testants is proued, that vnwritten tra­ditions lawfully proued, are the word of God, equally as the holy scriptures: That many such are: and all confirme the do­ctrine of the Church of Rome: and con­demne Protestants Religion.

AFTER this entreateinge of holy scriptures, the written worde of God, lett vs come to that parte of his sacred worde, delyuered by traditions and vnwritten verities, preserued and propo­sed to faithfull Christians by the holy spouse, and Church of Christ, whose Iudg­ment, Rule, and direction is so dignified aboue all Inferiour Iudgments, by these Protestants before. Concerninge the vali­ditie and authoritie of truely proued tradi­tions, I argue thus.

All Rules, Groundes and Authorities in matters of Religion, that are equall with holy scriptures, in the Iudgment of Prote­stants, the highest Rule in such causes, are [...]eghely to be reuerenced, and obeyed of all Christians: But the holy traditions and vnwritten verities deliuered by Christ, and [Page 145] Apostles being lawfully proued, are of this nature: Therefore to be reuerenced, embraced, and receaued. The Maior propo­sition is euidently true, for where there is absolute equalitie, there is not inferioritie, but paritie, as is manifest in all equalities. The Minor is thus proued in this maner: first M. Wotton speakeing of such, hath these Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 405. pag. 436. supr. words: out of all question wee are bounde to keepe them; and telleth vs that M. Perkins was of the same opinion. D. Feild speaketh thus con­cerninge traditions. In this question, by tradition, wee vnderstand such partes of Christian doctrine or Feild pag. 238. l. 4. cap. 20. discipline, as were not written by them, by whom [...] they were first deliuered. For thus our Aduersaries vnderstand traditions which they diuide into diuers kindes. First in respect of the authors, so makeing them of three sortes, Diuine, Apostolicall, and Eccle­siasticall. Secondly, in respect of the matter, they con­cerne, in which respect they make them to be of two sortes: for either they concerne matters of fai [...]he, or matters of manners: and these later againe either temporall, or perpetuall, vniuersall or particular. All these in their seuerall kindes they make equall with the words, precepts, and doctrines of Christ, the Apostles, and pastors of the Church, left vnto vs in writeinge. Neither is there any reason, why they should not so doe, if they could proue any such vn­written verities. For it is not the writeing that giueth things their authoritie, but the worthe and credit of him that deliuereth them, though by worde and ly­uely voyce onely. Thus the authoritie of Tra­ditions is iustified by Protestants to be [Page 146] equall with the scriptures, if they can be proued. Now because Protestants mayn­tayneinge the sufficiencie of scripture for matters of faith, deny traditions of that na­ture I argue in this maner. All Articles and matters of faith are in Protestants Iudgment proued and deliuered to vs by tradition: Therefore some articles, and matters of faith, are in their Iudgment, or so must be graunted, to be deliuered by tradition: The consequence is euident, for euery generall proposition includeth the par­ticular. The Antecedent is thus proued by them. Whosoeuer doe graunte those things, which, by them conteyne all matters and Articles of faith to be delyuered by tradition, must needs allowe traditions in matters of faith: But these Protestants doe so: Therefore they must allowe such tradi­tions. The Maior is euident, for whatsoeuer conteineth all, excludeth none, and so com­prehending all, comprehendeth also some and the parts of that all. The Minor is likewise proued in this maner, supposeing the Common opinion of these Protestants, set downe in the sixt Article of their Re­ligion Articl. of Relig. art. 6. in these wordes: Holy scripture conteyneth all things necessarie to saluation: so that whatsoeuer i [...] not reade th [...]rein, nor may be proued thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be beleeued as an Article of the faithe, or be thought requisite or necessarie to saluation. Now to proue my second proposition, D. Feild will testifie, that both [Page] these scriptures, and the right order of de­ductions from them, in matters of faith, are deliuered vnto vs by tradition onely, his [...]ordes be these: Much contention there hath Feild l. 4. pag. 238. cap. 20. beene, about traditions, some vrgeing the necessitie of them, and other reiecting them. For the cleareing whereof, wee must obserue, that wee reiect not all: for first wee receaue the number, and names, of the Authors of bookes diuine, and canonicall, as deliuered by tradition. This tradition wee admitt. The number, Authors, and integritie of the partes, of these b [...]oke [...], wee receaue as deliuered by tradition. Thus much for the scriptures, that their number, Au­thors, partes, and euery chapter, verse, and sentence is by tradition; Then their pre­tended deductions from thence must needs be such, for in euery theologicall Syllo­gisme they must needs take eyther the one or both propositions from this graunted tradition, and their conclusion must much rather be tradition, as also the maner of deduceing, for they graunt they are not ex­pressely in scripture, and to decide this, D. Feild wittnesseth againe in this order. The Feild sup. pag. 238. 239. seconde kinde of tradition, which wee admitt, is that summarie comprehension, of the cheife heades of Christian doctrine, conteyned in the Creede of the Apostles, which was deliuered to the Churche, as a Rule of her faith. The orderly connexion, and distinct explication, as these principall Articles gathered into an Epitome, i [...] rightly named a tradition. And how­soeuer hee will contend that the Articles are in scripture, or may thence be deduced: [Page 148] in which his fellowes in Religion, here­after will giue him deniall for Christs discen­deing into Hell, communion of Saincts, and others: yet hee must needs graunt, that the Creede of the Apostles being composed by them, and deliuered to the Church, as a Rule of her faith, before the scriptures of the new testament, wherein hee will say it is conteyned, were written, is absolutely a Tradition. And yet hee maketh it so absolute a thinge, that to vse his wordes, in it are implyed, and whence are inferred, all conclusions Theologicall. But that the Feild supr. cap. 20. true explication also of scripture is a tradi­tion, hee wittnesseth in these wordes: The third is that forme of Christian doctrine, and expli­cation Feild pag. 239. of the seuerall partes thereof, which the first Christians receauinge of the same Aposiles, that de­liuered to them the scriptures, commended to poste­rities. This may right be named a tradition, for that wee neede a playne, and distinct explication, of many things, which are somewhat obs [...]urely conteyned in the scripture. Therefore seing these dedu­ctions from scripture, are not without tra­dition, and thinges obscurely conteyned, may not be receaued as articles of Religion, by them without a playne and distinct explica­tion, by tradition, and the playne things of scripture, by them before, as also that epitome of our faith, the Apostles Creede, are traditions; it is manifestly proued, that all Articles, and matters of faith, are by tradi­tion, by these their writeings.

Further I argue thus: whatsoeuer doctrine [Page 151] is of that necessitie, that the denyall Feild: [...] obstinately, is Heresie, must needs be a matter of faith, and necessarie to saluation: But by these Protestants, there is such do­ctrine onely by tradition: Therefore some matters of faith, and necessarie to saluation, are beleeued onely by tradition. The Maior proposition is euidently true, yet further confirmed by these Protestants: D. Couells Couell exam pag? 202. Ormer. dial. 2. wordes be these: Hereticks are neyther simple Infidells, nor Idolaters, but obstinately erringe in some fundamentall poynt. M. Ormerod writeth thus: hee is an Hereticke: which so swarueth from the wholesome doctrine, as contemning the Iudgment both of God, and the Church, persisteth in his opinion. Thus wee see that Heresie is not without deniall of a matter of faith, wherein both the Iudgment of God, and the Churche is contemned.

The Minor is proued by D. Feild in this maner where first (to vse his wordes) hee alloweth for a cleare Instance not to be proued by Feild pag. 240. scripture, the perpetuall virginitie of Mary, and after confesseth that Hiluedius for pertinatiousely deniall thereof was condemned of Heresie. In that hee saith: this is no point of Christian faith, but a Feild sup. cap. 20. seemely truthe deliuered vnto vs by the Church of God, fitting the sanctitie of the blessed Virgin, and the honor due to so sanctified a vessell of Christs Incarna­tion, as her bodie was: hee speaketh truely in allowing it for a Tradition, but denying it to be any point of Christian faith, and yet telling vs that Heluidius for deniall of [Page 148] [...] was condemned of Heresie, hee both con­tradicteth himself, the truth, and his fellowe Protestants before, assureing, that Hereticks be they that obstinately erre in fundamentall points, as D. Couell writeth: or as M. Ormerod noteth: swarue from the wholesome doctrine as contenininge the Iudgment both of God and the Church. Where it is euident, that a matter of faith is denied in euerye Heresie, and also that things deliuered onely by tradition, (as D. Feild acknowledgeth the perpetuall vir­ginitie of our blessed Ladie to be) are the worde, and Iudgment of God. Further these Protestants seeme to condemne the Anabaptists, and denyers of the necessitie to baptise Infants: yet D. Feild writeth thus: Feild pag. 239. The foarth kinde of Tradition, is the cōtinued practise of such things, as neyther are conteyned in the scriptu­re expressely, nor the example of such practise expressely there deliuered. Of this sorte is the baptisme of Infants, which is therefore named a tradition, because it is not expressely deliuered in the scripture, that the Apostles did baptize Infants, nor any ex­presse precept there found, that they shoulde doe it. And his wordes, of the plurall significa­tion: The fourth kinde of traditions: such things: of this sor [...]e [...] &c. are sufficient argument, that hee alloweth diuers other Traditions of this nature. That which he addeth, wee fynde the scripture to delyuer the grounds of it, is expres­sely Feild pag. 228. Couell def. of Hook. pag. 85. against himself before, and D. Couell, thus assureing vs in these wordes: doctrines deriued, exhortations deducted, Interpretation [...] [Page 151] agreeable, are not the worde of God, and D. Feild: Feild supr. pag. 226. priuate Interpretation is not so proposed and vrged, as if they woulde binde all others to receaue it. Yet all men are bownde to receaue, and firmely beleeue articles, and matters of faithe. Further D. Willet telleth vs, that Vigilantius Willet Antilog. pag. 13. was condemned of Heresie, for denying reuerence to Relickes, and yet Protestants generally teach, that doctrine is not con­teyned in holy scriptures. D. Feild writeth Feild pag. 138. l. 3. cap. 29. in these wordes: Aerius condemned the custome of the Churche, in nameing the deade at the altare, and offeringe the sacrifice of the Eucharist for them. For this his rash and inconsiderate holdenes, and pre­sumption, in condemninge the vniuersall Church of Christ, hee was iustely condemned. For the practise of the Churche, at that time was not euill in any of these things, neither doe wee concurre with Aerius in the reprehension of that primatiue and auncient Churche. What was this practise of the pri­matiue Church concerning the deade, for deniall whereof Aerius was condemned as D. Feild hath told vs, I will recite from other Protestants. M. Middleton assureth vs thus: Middleton papistom. pag. 64. 45. 46. 51. 47. 48. 49. S. Chrisostome taught it to be the Apostles ordinance to pray for the deade, it was a tradition in the pri­matiue Church receaued from the fathers, to pray for the deade, and begg mercie of God for them. The deade were prayed for in the publicke liturgies of Hull Rom. pole pag. 86 Morton Apol. part. 1. pag. 273. Basile, Chrisostome, and Epiphanius. The Churche in Epipbanius time vsed to craue mercye, for the deade. M. Hull saith: Leo 15 Leo the pope, ap­pointed Masses for the deade. D. Morton citeth [Page 152] from Caluine this: ipsi veteres preces fundebant pro defunctis. The auncient fathers prayer for the deade. And to giue finall content to D Feild, the sentence of his true Greeke Church is Gennad. Schol. def. 5. cap. 3. this: The doctrine of purgatorie, prayer, and sacri­fice for the deade, was a Tradition of the Apostles. That which the Latines call Purgatorie, they of the Greeke Church name Catharte [...]ion. They were onely Scismaticorum sectatores, followers of Scismaticks which denied it. The seing Protestants doe ordinarily teach, that prayer for the deade is not conteyned, either expressely, or de­ducebly in scriptures, it must needs be by tradition; for denyall of which tradition Aerius was condemned of Heresie, and the vniuersall Church at that time by D. Feild taught prayer for the deade, for hee telleth vs, that Aerius in his opinion contemned the vniuersall Church of Christ: and so must D. Feild confesse of himself, and his fellowe Prote­stants, if they deny this to be a Tradition, as they haue denyed the Bookes of Macha­bees, where this veritie is taught, to be ca­conicall scriptures, to gaynesay this prima­tiue and Catholick doctrine.

And from hence, thus I argue againe by the Rule of S. Augustine allowed by D. Feild: whatsoeuer the whole Church holdeth, not Feild l. 4. c. 21. pag. 242. being decreed by the authoritie of Councells, but hauing beene euer holden, may rightly be thought to haue proceeded from Apostolicke authoritie: But the Catholicke doctrine; of prayer, and sacrifice for the deade, is such, by the [Page 153] testimonie of these Protestants: Therefore a tradition from the Apostles by these Pro­testants. The Maior consisteth of the verie wordes of S. Augustine, as they be transla­ted and allowed by D. Feild in this maner. Feild pag. 241. Hauing sett downe the kindes and sortes of tradi­tions it remayneth to examine by what meanes wee may come to discern, and by what rules wee may Iudge which are true, and Indubitate traditions. The first rule is deliuered by S. Augustine: Quod vniuersa Aug. l. 4. cont. Do­natist. cap. 23. tenet ecclesia, nec concilijs institutum, sed semper retentum est, non nisi authoritate apostolica tra­ditum, rectissimè creditur. Englished by D. Feild as in the Maior proposition: where, rectissimè creditur, is moste rightly beleeued: hee hath translated, may rightly be thought. The Minor proposition is proued before by these Protestants, in teacheing, this doctrine to haue beene the doctrine of the vniuersall Church, resisted by Aerius, and also that it was an Apostolicke tradition: which all Protestants of England must needs graunt vnto, by S. Augustines, and D. Feilds▪ first Rule before; for by their proceedings, they are so far from graunteing, that this doctrine is defined by Councells, and by that title to be embraced: That they playnely teach in the Articles of their Religion the defini­tion of a generall Councell in matters of faith not taken out of scriptures (as they teach this is not) is nothing worthe. The Articl. of Relig. art. 21. wordes of their Article be these. Things or­deined by generall Councells as necessarie to saluation, [Page 154] haue neither strength, nor authoritie, vnlesse it may be declared that they be taken out of holy scripture. Hitherto their subscribed article: And that this is a thinge necessarie to saluation, must needs also be yeelded vnto, by these Protestants, telling vs before, both that Aerius was con­demned of Heresie for denying it, as also that Heresie is arror in some fundamentall point, Cou [...]ll sup. which must needs be necessarie to salua­tion. My next Argument shall be taken from the next Rule of D. Feild, to knowe true traditions: and my Maior proposition shall be his verie wordes thus next fol­loweing. The second Rule is, whatsoeuer all, or the Feild supr. pag. 242. moste famous, and renowned in all ages, or at the leaste in diuers ages, haue constantly deliuered, as re­ceaued from them, that went before them, no man contradicting or doubting of it, may be thought to be an Apostolicall Tradition: But the Catholicke doctrine of prayer for the deade, praying to Saincts, single life of the cleargie, espe­cially in the Latine Church, and others in their proper place to be proued such by these Protestants, are in this state: There­fore by Protestants they be Apostolicke traditions. The Maior is the very sayinge and sentence of D. Feild before: and the Minor concerning prayer for the deade, also be­fore allowed by these Protestants: the others are to be proued in their order this now sufficeth.

The first proposition for my next Argu­ment shall be D. Feilds third, and laste [Page 155] Rule, to knowe true, and indubitate tradi­tions; and is deliuered by him in these wordes: The third Rule, is the constant testimonie, Feild supr. l. 4. c. 21. pag. 242. of the pastors of an Apostolicke Church, successiuely delyuered: But prayer for the deade &c. is so proued by such testimonie: therefore an Apostolicke tradition. The maior is D. Feild sentence. And the Minor is before proued by these Protestants: for if the vniuersall Church (as before by them consented) is this veritie, not onely one Apostolicke Church (sufficient for his Rule) but all did consent vnto it, otherwise it could not be said the doctrine of the vniuersall Church. And of all Churches Apostolicke, there can be no question with Protestants bur the Church of Rome euer taught thus; and D. Field hath told vs before, that Feild l. 4. c. 5. pag. 202. amongst Apostolicke Churches, the Church of Rome is more specially to be obeyed, reuerenced and respected. Further thus I argue: whatsoeuer thinges are either approued by these Protestants themselues, for true, and indubitate tradi­tions, or allowed by them, that the pri­matiue Church, and fathers receaued for such, are to haue that allowance: But the signe of the crosse, mixture of water with wine, in the Eucharist, reuerence of holy Imadges, and Relicks, sacrifice and prayer for the deade, vowes of chastitie, and single life of preists, parsonall absolution from syn after confession, Baptisme by pri­uate parsons, in time of necessitie, Confir­mation, [Page 156] profession of our faith to beleeue in the Father the Sonne holy Ghost, ordi­nation of Archbishops in their prouinces, and Bishops in their dioces, the Article of Christ discent to Hell the Apostles creede, Baptisme of Infants, the perpetuall virgi­nitie of our blessed Ladie, the celebrateing of our Lords day, called Sonday, for the sabbath in the old lawe, the feastes of Pen­tecoste, and Easter, and their time when to be celebrated, not answeareing to the Iewes, and for denyall of which the quar­tadeciman Heresie was condemned, and others are thus allowed by these Protestants to be true traditions, or so esteemed in the primatiue Church by their testimonie: The­refore they ought to haue allowance for true and indubitate Traditions. The Maior is euident, for against Protestants no better testimonie can be, then from themselues, and they haue graunted before, that the primatiue Church is a true Rule in Reli­gion, and to be followed of vs.

Now to proue the Minor I must ci [...]e these Protestants, and if any of them in the Iudg­ment of some others in their Religion speake not allwaies to their likeinge, or vnproperly as they thinke, lett them try this combate with themselues, it belongeth not to mee in this treatise, First D. Couell and others teache, That the signe of the crosse is Couell ag. Burg. pag. 139. 124. 125. confer. an apostolickall constitution and tradition. And the Protestants against Puritans do not defend [Page 157] it by scripture. The same D. Couell from the Couell ag. Burg. pag. 122. auntient Fathers tell vs: That the mixture of water with wine, is an apostolicall tradition. And as a generall Councell is of highest Iudgment, by these men before, so D. Willet writeth Willet An­tilog. pag. 169. thus: the Greekes in a generall Councell held at Nyce, confirmed and allowed the adoration of Imadges, and it taught that Reuerence of Imadges is an Apostolicall tradition. M. Middleton hath Concil. Nyc. 2. Middleton pap. pag. 64. 45. 46. 51. thus testified: S. Chrisostome taught it to be the Apostles ordinance to pray for the deade, and con­fesseth it was a tradition in the primatiue Church, receaued from the Fathers, to pray for the deade, and begg mercie of God for them. The deade were prayed for in the publicke liturgies (or Masses) of Basile, Chrisostome and [...]piphanius. The Greeke Gennad. Schol. def. 5. c. 3. Church so allowed by Protestants as before te­stifieth thus: The doctrine of Purgatorie, prayer and sacrifice for the deade was a Tradition of the Apostles. M. Perkins, Ormerod, and others assure vs, Perk. probl. pag. 93. Ormer. pict. pag. [...]7 Morton Apol. part. 1. pag. 227. 228. Middleton pap. pag. 134. Willet Antilog. pag. 13. the auntient Fathers taught prayer to Saincts: and D. Morton alledgeth: how all anti­quitie taught Inuocation of Saincts. Then seing Protestants will not allowe it by scripture, they must graunte it by Tradition. M. Middleton telleth vs: that the auntient Fathers so receaueinge it, from them that went before them, taught; that vowes of chastitie, and single life in Preists, is to be obserued by tradition. D. Willet graunteth, that Vigiluntius was condemned for an Hereticke, for deniall of reuerence to Relicks: Then by tradition in the Iudg­ment of Protestants, for they teache, that [Page 158] it is not conteyned in scripture. His Ma­iestie and the Protestant conference tell vs with Confer. pag. 13. the Fathers, and Apostolicke Churches, that the particular and p [...]rsonall absolution from synne, after confession, is apostolicall and a verie godly ordinance. And yet other Protestants there affirme, that neither that nor others followeing are conteyned in scriptures. D. Bilson Protestant Bishop of Winchester with con­sent Confer. pag. 18. of Antiquitie teacheth: That baptisme to be ministred by priuate persons, in time of necessitie is an holy tradition. His Maiestie, and the saide: Conference teach, that Bishops be diuine ordina­tions: Confer. pag 35. 36. and confirmation is an apostolicall tradition. How it ought by these men to be receaued Pag. 10. 11. for a sacrament, shall be proued amonge other Sacraments hereafter. M. Wotton wri­teth, Wotton def. of Perk. pag 465. 4 [...]6. that S. Basile did holde: that the verie profession of our faith, by which wee beleeue in the Father, the Sonne and the holy Ghost, is a tradition. D. Couell wittnesseth thus: that it was an Couell ag. the plea. of the Innoc. pag. 104. Barlowe Ser. Sept. 21. An. 1607. part. 3. cap. 2. apostolicall tradition, or ordination, to ordayne Archibishop [...] in their prouinces: as Bishops also in their diocesse to rule the Church. And yet many English Protestants to be cited hereafter deny such things either directly or conse­quently to be conteyned in scriptures, and yet (as before) doe make true discipline, and Regiment, so essentiall a thinge in Re­ligion, that in their doctrine it is a note of the true Churche. The Protestant Puritans vtterly deny alsoe, that Christs▪ discent into Hell can be proued out of scripture: yet [Page 159] their Protestant Bishop of Winchester D. Bilson Bilson suru. pag. 664. affirmeth: That the Article of Christ [...] discent to hell, and the Creede wherein it is conteyned is an Apostolicall tradition, deliuered to the Church, by the direction and agreement of the Apostles. To which D. Feild hath also giuen testimonie before: Feild pag. 238. 239. And affirmeth the same of other particu­lars, remembred in the Minor proposition; amonge which, that doctrine of baptizing infants is denyed by many of his English Protestant Church, either to be conteyned, or to be proued by scripture: yet D. Feild Feild pag. 239. writeth thus: Baptisme of Infants is named a tra­dition, because it is not expressely deliuered in scrip­ture, that the Apostles did Baptize Infants, nor any expresse precept there founde, that they should so doe. Then if wee should graunte more autho­ritie, and giue greater credit to this Doctor, that in his Iudgment against his fellowe Protestants before, hee coulde probably deduce this doctrine from scripture, which they deny, yet it is but his priuate deduction and Interpretation, and perhaps some few others, which as before by his graunte bindeth vs not to receaue it, as the doctrine of baptizing infants doth. Of the perpetuall virginitie of our blessed Ladie, to be a tra­dition, I haue entreated before. And Do­ctor Feild addeth thus: The fift kinde of tradi­tions Feild supr. 239. comprehendeth such obseruations, as in parti­culare are not commaunded in scripture, nor the ne­cessitie of them from thence concludeth. Of this forte many thinke the obseruation of the Lent fast to be, the [Page 160] fast of the fourth and the sixt dayes of the weeke, and some other. The custome of standeing at prayer on the Lords day, and betweene Easter and Whitsontide, was generally receaued as deliuered by Apostolicke tradition, and when some began to breake it, it was confirmed by the Councell of Nyce. And if Concil Nic. can. 20. to stand at prayers, at such times of the Lords daye, Easter, and Whitsontide was generally receaued as a Tradition deli­uered by the Apostles, then the times themselues, not being either com­maunded, or directly exemplified in scrip­ture, must also be allowed by tradition. And yet the Sabboth day in the old lawe, which was abrogated by this tradition of the Sonday, the Lords day (as hee nameth it) was so expressely commaunded by scrip­ture, that in order it is the third of the ten cheife commaundements, and one of the first table belongeing to the worshipp of God. Therefore a Tradition so powerable, as to giue a ceaseinge, to the expresse writtē worde, lawe, and commaundement, of God, must needs be of equall power. And the Christians feaste of Easter, likewise crosseing with, and euacuateing the Pascha, of the lawe written, and without scripture, onely by the prerogatiue of Tradition, cannot be inferior, especially seeing (as before) the Quartadec [...]mans, denyers thereof were condemned as Hereticks by the primatiue Church for that cause. And the like reason is of the feast of Whitesontide, in the Church [Page 161] of Christ receaued by the same Rule of Easter, onely by vnwritten tradition, yet clearely abolisheinge and takeinge away the written lawe, and word of God in that behalf.

Further I argue thus: whatsoeuer is not a perfect, and compleate Rule, and Square in matters, and questions of Religion, without the help, and dyrection of vnwritten tradi­tions, cannot be termed an absolute Rule in this kinde: But the scripture, and written worde of God, by these Protestants is such: Therefore by them no absolute and perfect Rule in matters of faithe. The Maior is eui­dently true, in the light of nature: other­wise, one and the same thinge, in the same respect might be absolute, and not abso­lute, perfect and not perfect, and two Contradictories might be true, which is vn­possible. The Minor proposition is thus proued by D. Feilde, who speakeing of traditions Feild l. 4. cap. 20. pag. 239. vnwritten, and yet allowed by him, hath these wordes: The third kinde of tradition is that forme of Christian doctrine, and explication of the seuerall partes thereof, which the first Christians receauing of the same Apostles, that deliuered to them the scriptures, commended to posterities. This may rightly be named a tradition, for that wee neede a playne and distinct explication of many things, which are somewhat obscurely conteyned in the scripture: Which is sufficient proofe, that tradition vnwritten is the cause, why many things are beleeued by faith grownded [Page 162] vppon tradition not written, which the scriptures could neuer warrant vs to be­leeue. For things obscurely handled, and not playnely and distinctly explicated, which (as hee saith) is by tradition, cannot be the formall obiect of faith, by any possi­bilitie; for seeing true, certayne, and vn­doubted Reuelation from God, euen by Protestants, is the formall cause of belee­ueinge, things obscurely conteyned, or taught, cannot haue this priuiledge: And yet by D. Feilds wordes, many thinges be in this state, without the assistance of tradi­tion, and yet firmely to be beleeued: The­refore not the obscuritie in scripture, but (to vse his wordes) a playne and distinet ex­plication of many thinges by tradition, receaued by the first Christians, from the Apostles, commended to posterities, is the formall cause, and reason of beleeueinge such verities.

Now to drawe to an end in this question of traditions, D. Feild to his fowre before acknowledged kindes of traditions, The holy scriptures, the Creede of the Apostles, the forme Feild pag. 238. l. 4. of Christian doctrine. and explication of the seuerall parts thereof which the first Christians receaueinge of the same Apostles, that deliuered to them the scriptures, commended to posterities, and the conti­nued Feild pag. 239. practise of such thinges as neither are conteyned in the scripture expressely, nor the example of such practise expressely there deliuered, thoughe the growndes, reasons and causes of the necessitie of such practise, be there conteyned, and the benefitt, or good [Page 163] that followeth of it: hee addeth the fift kinde in these wordes: The fift kinde of traditions com­prehendeth Feild supr. pag. 239. such obseruations, as in particulare are not commaunded in scripture, nor the necessitie of them from thence concluded, though in generall, without limitation of times, and other circumstances, such things be there commaunded. Of this sorte many thinke the obseruation of the lent faste to be, the faste of the fourthe and the sixt dayes of the weeke, and some other. This supposed as also the Feild pag. 242. same Protestant Doctors Rules before, to know true traditions, the consent and doctrine of the Churche, the moste renowned for learninge, the constant Testimonie of the pastors of an Apostolicke Church, amonge which next to gene­rall Feild pag. 202. Councells bynding and commaunding all, the Church of Rome is especially to be obeyed, reuerenced and respected, as moste priuiledged from error: yt must needs be euident by these Protestants, that Traditions whether deliuered in scrip­ture, to be deduced from them, or to be receaued without scripture, are to be ad­iudged for the Romane Churche: for that be­fore is proued by them to be the true Church of Christ, the Pope of Rome to be the supreame, commaunding Ruler in it, that the scriptures receaued by it, are Cano­nicall, and the vndowbted worde of God, and all true, and Iuridicall expositions, and deductions from them are onely for the doctrine of the same Churche of Rome: And so their other grounted Rules of gene­rall Councells, and Learned Fathers, to be hand­led [Page 164] in the next chapters, doe also teach vnto vs, the same doctrines, by these Pro­testants; for by their Iudgment they may not, nor can proceede in such b [...]sines, but by the holy scriptures, and true expositions, and deductions from them, allreadie proued by these Protestants for the present Roman Church: Therefore I conclude this question with this Arguments following.

Whatsoeuer doctrines in Religion, generall Councells, the highest binding and commaunding Rule and authoritie ouer all Christians, in the Iudgment of Protestants, haue defined by the Bishops, and Fathers assembled in them, in matters of Religion, by traditions, written or vnwritten, are to be receaued and em­braced of all: But all, or the cheefest Articles in question, betweene Catholicks, and Protestants are directly concluded by the grounte of these Protestants, by the Coun­cells, and Bishops, in them assembled, at Nyce the seconde, the greate Laterane, Florence and Constance, Basile, cited and allowed for ge­nerall Councells by the Protestant Bishop of Winchester, D. Bilson, D. Willet, D. Couell▪ M. Bils. Midd­let. papist. [...]9. 119. 120. 124. 125. Willet sy­nop. cont. 1. q. 7. Lini­ban. ap. Parkes and others, in such maner as the pre­sent Church of Rome now teacheth: The­refore they ought so to be receaued, and embraced of all Christians, bothe proposi­tions are graunted before, by these Prote­stants, or in these citations. Therefore no­thinge remayneth to be proued in this Ar­gument. [Page 165] And because these Protestants Parkes pag. 137. 180. Couell def. of Hook. pag. 21. Parkes ag. lymb. pag. 176. Wil­let Antil. pag. 178. &c. Abbot ag. Hill pag 38. 48. 49. 51. teach that those doctrines are not con­teyned in, or to be proued by scriptures, consequently they defined them by vn­written traditions, of equall authoritie with scripture by D. Feild before, being so adiudged, allowed, and approued by that highest commaunding sentence in the Churche of Christ. But of generall Coun­cells I am to entreate in the next chapter. In the meane time I vrdge onely this one par­ticular of the highest authoritie, and go­uermnent in the Church by tradition, as these Protestants assure vs and I argue thus.

Whosoeuer defend, and teach that which they thinke to be the highest autho­ritie and function spirituall in the Church, without which the word of God cannot be truel [...] preached, nor Sacraments duely ministred, the essentiall things of the true Church, by the Protestants Religion, to be an vnwritten Tradition: needs must allowe of vnwritten traditions, necessarie to saluation: But these English Protestants case is such: Therefore they must allowe vnwritten traditions, necessary to salua­tion. The Maior proposition is euidently true: and the Minor thus proued by them. The Protestant Author of the offer of conference Offer of confer. pag. 12. writeth thus: The Bishop of Rochester with the consent and by the direction (no doubt) of some of the cheefest Prelates hath published his sermon prea­ched before the Kinge at Hampton Court, the mayne [Page 166] drift whereof is to proue, that the offi [...]e and c [...]lling of Bishops is a diuine, and Apostolicall ordinance. And againe in these words: vnwritten ordinances, Pag. 34. sup. aswell as written or dyuine and Apostoli [...]ke, in the constitution of the cheefest office, and ministery of the Church. D. Couell hath testified the same for himself before: and their Bishop Barlowe Barlowe Ser. Sept. 21. 1606. before the Kinge. his words before the Kinge, and with pu­blicke applause are these of this matter: First posuit actu hee acted it by the hands of the Apostles, and so the Episcopall function is an ordinance Apostolicall hee hath enacted it for succeeding poste­ritie, and so it is a canon, or constitution of the whole Trinitie. It is Geographia agraphos, vnwrit [...]en Housbandrie▪ whereof there is no written precept or Rule from Christ. Irenaeus calleth it an Apostolicall tradition, manifest to all the worlde.

To these lett vs add some Protestant testi­monies, how from the first creation of the world, all Articles of Religion, for many hundreds of yeares, and afterward many cheife and necessarie points thereof, were taught, and deliuered by tradition without scripture. And I will onely cite their late worke, Historye of the world, much commen­ded Histor. of the world lib. 1. pag. 180. and approued amonge them. Of the practice and deliuery of Religion thus they write: That the Rule in generall was paternall, it is most euident: for Adam being Lord. Ouer his owne children, instructed them in the seruice of God, his Creator: as wee reade, Cayne and Abel brought oblations before God, as they had beene taught by their parent, the Father of mankinde. Their sixt [Page 167] treatise or Paragrah in that first booke is Lib. 1 §. 6. pag. 78. thus intituled: of the Patriarkes deliueringe their knowledge by tradition. And write in these wordes: if wee consider the curiositie and polecie of elder ages, wee shall finde, that knowledg was the greatest treasure, that men sought for, and which they also couered, and hid from the vulgare sort, as Iewells of inestimable price, feareing the irreuerent construction of the Ignorant, and irreligeous: so as whatsoeuer was attayned vnto, concerning God, and his workeinge in nature, the same was not left to pu­blicke dispute, but deliuered ouer by hart, and tradi­tion, from wise men, to posteritie, equally zelous, ex animo in animum sine literis medio in­tercedente Dion. Areop. verbo, from minde to minde without letters by way of Tradition or worde of mouthe. And it was thought by Esdras, Origen, and Hilarius (as Mirandula conceiueth) that Moses did not onely vppon the mount receaue the lawe from God, but withall secretiorem & veram legis enarra­tionem, a more secrett and true explanation of the lawe, which saith hee, out of the same Authors, hee deliuered by mouth to Iosuah, and Iosuah to the Elders: for to teach these misteries, which hee called, secretiora, to the rude multitude, were no other, quam dare sanctum canibus, to cast pearls be­fore swyne. In succeeding times this vnderstandinge, and wisedome, began to be written in Cyphers, and Characters, and letters, bearing the forme of beasts, birds, and other creatures: and to be taught onely to such, as serued in their temples, and to their Kings, and preists. Of the first the Cabala of the Iewes was Pag. 79. an imitation: This Cabala importeth a lawe receaued [Page 168] by Tradition, and vnwritten. Cabala in Hebrue is Receptio in Latine, and a receauing in English. If then such as would seeme wisest in the vse of reason, will not acknowledge, that the story of the creation, or begynning of all things, was written by Inspira­tion, the holy Ghost guiding the hand of Moses: yet it is manifest, that th [...] knowledge thereof might by tradi­tion (then vsed) be deliuered vnto him, by a more certaine presumption, then any or all the testimonies which prophane antiquitie had preserued, and left to their successors. For leauing to remember, that Adam instructed Seth, and Seth his children, and Successors, which cannot be doubted of, it is manifest that Mathusalem liued together with Adam himself, 243 yeares, and Noah with Mathusalem no lesse then 500 yeares; and before Noah died, Abraham was 58. yeares old: from whence this knowledge by an easy and ordinary way might come to Israel, and so to Moses. And to cleare all doubts, and obiections these Protestants proue vnto vs. That the very binding, and obligatory precepts of God themselues, were thus deliuered, and obserued, onely by vnwritten traditions. They intitle the 8. §. of their second booke Histor. sup. libr. 2. cap. 4. §. 4. in this maner: Of the vnwritten lawe of God, giuen to the Patriarkes by tradition. And thus they add: The Patriarkes of the first age receaued many precepts from God himself and whatsoeuer was first imposed by Adam, the same was obserued by Seth, who in­structed Enos: from whom it succeeded to Noah Sem, Abraham, Isaac, Iacob, Ioseph, and Moses. Yea many particular commaundements afterward written, were formerly imposed and diliuered ouer [Page 169] by tradition, which kinde of teacheinge the Iewes afterward called Cabala precept receaued from the mouth of their preists and Elders: to which the Iewes after the lawe written, added the Interpretation of secret misteryes, reserued in the bosomes of their preists, and vnlawfull to be vttered to the people. But the true Cabala was not to be concealed from any: as being in deed the diuine lawe reuealed to the Patri­arkes, and from them diliuered to posteritie, when as yet it was vnwritten.

And entreating how after letters and writing was inuented, and many reuealed misteries so recorded, yet men must still maintayne traditions vnwritten, and in­struction from them, they exemplifie in this order out of S. Iude his Epistle, Iosephus, Pag. 79. 80. Origen, Tertullian, S. Augustine, Beda, Procopius, Gazaeus and others, that Enoch did write di [...]ine things. And thus they add: it is pro­bable that Noah had seene, and might preserue this booke. For it is not likely that so exquisite knowledge as these men had was sodenly inuented, and fownd out. And entreating how the booke of the bat­tailes Pag. 306. cap. 5. §. 7. with others of holy scriptures had beene lost thus they write: it seemeth probable, that such a booke as this there was: and that the same should now be wantinge, it is not straunge, seeing so many other volumes, filled with diuine discourse, haue perished in the longe race of time, or haue beene destroyed by the ignorant and malitious heathen Ma­gistrate. For the bookes of Henoch, howsoeuer they haue beene in later ages corrupted, and therefore now suspected, are remembred in an Epistle of Thaddaeus, [Page 170] and cited by Origen, and by Tertullian. That worke also of the Patriarke Abraham, of formation, which others bestowe on Rabbi Achiba, is no where fownde. The bookes remembred by Iosua c. 10. v. 13. and in the second of Samuel c. 1. v. 18. called the booke of Iasher, or Iustorum, is also loste. The booke of Chozai concerninge Manasse, remembred in the se­cond of Chron. 33. v. 18. and 19. of this booke also lost Hierome conceyues that the Prophet Isay was the author. The same mischaunce came aswell to the story of Salomon, written by Ahia Silonites; as to the bookes of Nathan the Prophet, and to those of Ieedo the Seer, remembred in the second of Chron. c. 9. v. 29. with these haue the bookes of Shemaiah, and of Iddo remembred in the second of Chron. c. 12. v. 15. perished: and that of Iohn the sonne of Hanain, cited in the second of Chron. c. 20. v. 34. also that of Salomons, which the Hebrues write Hiscirim, of 5000 verses, of which that part called Canticum Canticorum, onely remaineth 1. Kings 4. 32. and with this diuers other of Salomons workes haue pe­rished, as his booke of the natures of trees, plants, beasts, fishes &c. 1. Kings 4. 33. with the rest, re­membred by Origen, Iosephus, Hierome, Cedrenus, Ciccus Aesculanus, Picus Mirandula, and others. Of Pag. 307. these and other bookes many were consumed with the same fyer, wherewith Nebuchadnessar burnt the temple of Hierusalem. Hitherto this Protestant discourse, of the necessitie of vnwritten traditions, not onely before the scriptures were written, but after, so many bookes of holy scriptures dictated by the holy Ghost, hauing vtterly perished. Except wee [Page 171] will say (which God forbid) that God re­uealed, and published in holy scriptures, so many needles, and fruitelesse things: or els so many necessary and diuine Reuelations haue alltogether beene loste, and concealed from those that should beleeue, and keepe them.

CHAPTER VIII. WHERE THE HIGHEST, supreame, Iudiciall, definitiue authori­tie, of generall Councells, is both proued to be such, by these Protestants: To binde all Christians in matters of Religion, to approue the doctrine of the Church of Rome, and condemne protestancie.

THE next Question is concerninge generall Councells: of what au­thoritie, and commaunde they are, in controuersies of Religion; and whether the Doctrine of the present Churche of Rome, or that of English Pro­testants, is proued, and confirmed by them, in the sentence of these Protestants them­selues. Toucheinge their power, and com­maunding authoritie, in these causes, I ar­gue thus.

Whatsoeuer in controuersies of Re­ligion, is the highest Iudge, the onely re­medie, to redresse errors, hath soueraigne [Page 172] authoritie, is aboue others, to be appealed vnto, hath authoritie to interprete scriptu­res, and to supresse all them, that gaynesay such interpretation, and subiect euery man disobeyeing suche determinations, to excommunication, and Censures of like Nature, and aboue all other Iudgments is moste to be reuerenced, and respected, in the opinion of Protestants, must also by them, be allowed for the supreame, highest, and laste, not to be appealed from, Iudgment in this world, in such questions: But by the testimonie of these Englishe Protestants, a generall Councell is of these preeminences, in these matters: Therefore by them, the supreame, moste bynding, vncontroleable, and Iudgment not to be appealed from, or denyed by any. The Maior proposition is euidently true: for that which is supreame, and highest, cannot be Inferior vnto any: neither that which hath commaunde, and authoritie ouer all, can possibly be vnder the controlement, and correction of any, none being left to be su­perior vnto it. The Minor is proued by these Bilson Suru. pag. 82. Morton part. 2. Apol. pag. 340. l. 4. cap. 18. Relat. cap. 47. Protestants following. The Protestant Bishop of Winchester D. Bilson hath these words: The authoritie of generall Councells, is moste holsome in the Church, and hee citeth S. Au­gustine to that purpose. D. Morton writeth thus: Concilium publicum est summus Iudex: a ge­nerall Councell is highest Iudge. The Protestant Relator of Religion nameth it the onely remedie [Page 173] in such times of controuersies. D. Sutcliffe hath Sutcliffe subu. pag. 119. Sutcl. ag. D. Kell. pag. 41. 42. 102. these wordes: generall Councells haue soueraigne authoritie in externall gouernment. And thus againe: False it is that wee will admitt no Iudge, but scriptures, for wee appeale still to a lawfull gene­nerall Councell. Wee holde all the Christian faith ex­planed in the sixe generall Councells. D. Feild hath written thus: Bishops assembled in a generall Feild pag. 228. Councell haue authoritie to Interprete scriptures, and by their authoritie, to suppresse all them, that gaynesay such Interpretation, and subiect euery man that shall disobey such determinations, as they consent vppon, to excommunication, and censures of like nature. And Feild l. 4. cap. 5. pag. 202. (as before is cited) alloweth this sentence: Wee must reuerence and respect, the authoritie of all Catholicke Doctors, whose doctrine and writings the Church alloweth: wee must more regarde the au­thoritie of Catholicke Bishops: more then these, the authoritie of the Apostolicke Churches: amongst them more especially the Church of Rome: of a generall Councell, more then all these.

Now, to proue that generall Councells thus allowed by these Protestants, for the highest, and irreuocable Iudgment, cannot by their owne doctrine, proue their Reli­gion to be true, and so consequently no Inferior authoritie Iustifie their cause, I argue in this maner: whosoeuer by pu­blicke decree, and constitution, doe con­demne generall Councelle, of error, and to be a fallible, and deceatefull Rule, in Mat­ters of Religion, and haue no other meanes to finde the truth, cannot pretend their [Page 174] Religion to be infallibly true, as matters of faith and reuealed of God are, by such testimonies: But the English Protestants are in this condition, concerninge generall Councells: Therefore their Religion neither is, nor can by their owne proceedings, be warranted and proued by them to be true. The Maior proposition is euident: for no Iudgment erroneous, and fallible, can possibly make any matter, or question free from error, and infallible: otherwise a thinge might be effected and caused without a cause. The Minor proposition is ma­nifestly proued by these Protestants, in this order: for they haue before condemned all other Rules, which they haue, of error, as their parlement, Kings Censure, and all priuate Interpretations, and made them subiect, and controleable by generall Councells, as hauing authoritie ouer all parsons: D. Feilds wordes of allowance after hee had with others graunted generall Councells to be supreame, bynding, and commaunding all be these: Wee must obey without scrupulous questioninge, with all modestie of Feild pag. 202. minde, and reuerence of bodye, with all good allow­ance, acceptation and repose in the wordes of them that teach vs, vnlesse they teach vs any thinge, which the authoritie of the higher and superior controlleth. Immediately before hee had allowed the supreame and highest Iudgment to generall Councells, and the next to the Pope, and Church of Rome. Then Protestants tea­cheing [Page 175] contrarie to superior, and higher authoritie in the Pope, are to be condemned by him. But notwithstanding all this to make their cause desolate, and demonstrate, that their Religion hath no warrant of truth, and Infallibilitie, at all, Thus they write of this highest Rule of generall Councells, euen in their publick Articles of Religion: Articles of Relig. art. 21. generall Councells may erre, and sometime haue erred euen in things pertayninge vnto God. Wherefore things ordeyned by them, as necessarie to saluation, haue neither strength, nor authoritie, vnlesse it may be declared, that they be taken out of holy scripture. Therefore how truely, or certainely soeuer generall Councells make decrees, and defi­nitions in matters of faith, they giue no va­liditie to Protestant Religion, if in them­selues they should approue it, for by their cited Article, their ordination hath neither strength, nor authoritie, as it is the decree of the generall Councells, but as it may be declared, by a priuate Protestant writer, Prince, Parla­ment, or Conuocation, in their conceipt to be taken out of scripture, and yet before they haue tolde vs, a generall Councell commaundeth all, all must submitt them­selues vnto it, and all other their Rules be erroneous, and deceatefull. Therefore by these Protestants neither generall Coun­cell, nor any other Rule, assigned by them, can by any possibilitie, proue their Reli­gion true.

Further I argue thus: No societie, [Page 176] people, or professors of Religion, which by their owne confession, neither haue, nor by their proceedings can hereafter haue, or haue heretofore had, any generall Coun­cell, or meanes to assemble, and call it, can in reason pretend it for their cause: But the state of Protestants by their owne con­fession is such: Therefore generall Coun­cells cannot be pretended for them. The Maior proposition is euidently true: for esse and beinge must needs in all things, goe before operari, and workeinge by them For as by na­ture nothinge can be made of nothinge, so that which wanteth being, and is not, can produce nothinge. The Minor proposition is likewise manifestly true, for neuer any Protestant, nor altogether, so much as clayme authoritie, or Iurisdiction, in this matter, none amonge them pretending it further, then their owne particular tempo­rall dominions, which all vnited together (neuer like to be) are farre to shorte, and vnequall, to make a Councell generall, which they say excludeth none, especially of the greate patriarkes of Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria and Antioche, not one of them being for them, but all with their whole precincts, limitts, subiects, and ditions against them, by their owne confession. To this I add the Censure of their owne Pro­testant Relator, in these wordes: The Prote­stants Relation of Religion cap. 47. are seuered bandes, or rather scattered troopes, each drawing diuers way, without any meanes to [Page 177] pacific their quarrells, to take vpp their controuersies. No Prince with any preeminence of Iurisdiction, aboue the rest: no Patriarke one or more, to haue a Common superintendance of care of their Churches, for correspondencie and vnitie: no ordinary way to assemble a generall Councell of their part, the onely hope remayninge euer to assuage their contentions. And yet if they could haue meanes for such a meeteing of Protestants, so few in num­ber, and weake in Iurisdiction, by their owne graunte, in regard of Catholicks, and other Christian Kingdomes, and prouin­ces, different to them in Religion, this would be farre from the leaste shewe, and name of an vniuersall, and generall Coun­cell, such as they allowe, to Iudge, and sen­tence in this busines. Neither can these men now deny the necessitie of generall Coun­cells, hauing so much allowed them for su­preame sentencer before, and appealed to a generall Councell to be assembled. Neither may they compare their so desolate estate with the primatiue Church of the first three hundred yeares: for themselues haue graun­ted before, that a supreame, and commaun­ding binding power ouer all, was not onely claymed, but lawfully and iuridically exer­cised, and executed by the Popes of Rome in those times, in all partes of the Christian world: and both power, and authoritie to approue, and reproue Councells, was be­longeing vnto them by publickly receaued Canon in those dayes. And herevppon I [Page 178] argue in this maner, that generall Councells are for the doctrine of the Church of Rome. Whatsoeuer Church in the prima­tiue time of Christianitie, was endowed with such priuiledges, that euery thinge was voide, that was done without the con­sent of the Bishop, and Ruler of it, and no Councell could be called, without his al­lowance, and at this present, hath by the graunte of Protestants, a common Father, aduiser, and conductor, to end Iarrs, dis­pleasures, differences, to keepe Religion in vnitie by Councells, when no other Church enioyeth these immunities, must needs in all reason be sayde to be warranted and de­fended by generall Councells: But the Church of Rome is by the graunte of Pro­testants in this Condition: Therefore war­ranted, and defended by generall Councells▪ The first proposition is euidently true: for hee that from the begynning, had these prerogatiues, to approue, or disproue, Con­firme, or inualidate Councells, cannot be conceaued to haue ratified, or confirmed any thinge, against the immunities, and Common receaued doctrine of that Church, so exalted, dignified, and priuiled­ged aboue all others of the whole Christian worlde, and against his owne supreame, and eminent Authoritie.

The Minor proposition is thus proued: first D. Couell sheweth, that an hundred yeares before the Nycene Councell in the yeare of [Page 179] our Lorde 2 [...]5 when there was no Empe­rour Christian, to call Councells, as Prote­stants would p [...]rsuade the world, they did, and should; the Pope of Rome had this pre­rogatiue to call Councells: Therefore from the begynninge by preeminence of his See, seing there had not beene either generall Councell or Emperour to giue it vnto him. His wordes be these: The synode of Rome called Couell ag. the plea of the Innoc. pag. 110. by Cornelius (Pope of Rome) against Nonatus, consisted of threescore Bishops and many others of the cleargie. Where wee see Heresie condemned, and [...] that scarcetie of Bishops in those first dayes of Christianitie, so greate in Councell assembled by the Popes authoritie. Where­fore the Protestant Bishop of Winchester D. Bilson D. [...]orton his late [...]ppeale, with others of his Protestants, graunte these proposi­tions: Bilson true diff. pag. 66. 67. Morton Appeale pag. 286. The Canon of the primati [...]e Church made euery thinge voide, that was done without the Bishop of Rome. And againe: The Canon of the prima­tiue Church forbad any Councell to be called, without his co [...]sent. Which being onely peculiar to him, and his See Apostolicke, and from the begynning, must proue a singular preemi­nence in him; and a power supreame in de­ciding Matters, and doubts of faith. There­fore M. Ormerod wittnesseth, that S. [...]eo, Ormer. pict pa. pag. 44. Orm. sup. pag. 78. that glorious Sainct, and Doctor, taught that God did assist, and direct that See, in decrees. And further hee wittnesseth, in these wordes: To proue that the Church of Rome hath the preemi­nence ouer all Churches, Anacle [...]us (liueing in [Page 180] the Apostles time, and Pope of Rome) alleadgeth Matth. 16. vers. 18. vppon this rocke will I builde my Church: and hee expowndeth it thus super hanc Petram (id est) super Ecolesiam Romanam, vppon this rocke: that is vppon the Church of Rome, will I builde my Churche. This of the testimonie of that Apostolicke Pope, Sainct, and Martyr And D. Downame graunted, that Downame lib. [...]. An­ [...]chr. pag. 105. S. Augustine that renowned Doctor, and Victor Vticensis were of opinion, that to adhere to the Church of Rome, was a Marke of a true Catholicke, in those times. And telleth vs further, of a Pag. 107. sup. Bishop fallen into Heresie, and after recan­ting it, in this order: Hee sweareth to renownce his former Heresies, and to professe, and mayntayn [...] that faithe and Religion, which the Bishoppe, and Church of Rome did professe. All which procee­dings of so greate consequence, and pree­minencie, testified by enemies themselues, could neuer haue beene exercised by that Apostolicke See, with so greate approba­tion of Saincts, and Doctors, in the prima­tiue Churche, and best estate thereof, except supreame authoritie euen in Councells themselues, as those Canons testifie, and peculiar assistance as S. Leo taught to be freed from error in decrees, and conse­quently not to be condemned by generall Councells, whome it was to confirme or reproue, had beene graunted by Christ vnto it. Then this priuiledge and prerogatiue of that Church Apostolicke, being thus both supreame, and perpetuall, it may not [Page 181] now without Irreligeous Iniustice, be de­nyed vnto it. And therefore the Protestant Relator of Religion, hauing, as before, exclu­ded his fellowe Protestants from all hope of comforte, and releife by generall Coun­cell, addeth immediatly of Catholicks in Relation cap. 47. sup. these wordes: The other haue the Pope as a Com­mom Father, Aduiser, and Conductor to all, to re­concile their Iarres, to appease their displeasures, to decide their difference, aboue all things to drawe their Religion by Consent of Councells, vnitie. And that this Iurisdiction of the See of Rome, is not onely ouer the Catholicke and truely be­leeuing members of the Romane Church, but of right belongeth vnto it, ouer all Christians in the worlde is proued before by these Protestants themselues. Cap. 3. sup.

Further I argue thus: whatsoeuer Coun­cells define, or confirme the doctrine of the Romane Churche, and condemne Pro­testant opinions, defended against it, are to be saide to proue the Religion of Ca­tholicks: But diuers Councells bothe al­lowed by Protestants for generall, and others in the primatiue Churche and con­firmed euen in the Iudgment of Protestants, are such: Therefore the Religion of the Romane Church is proued by them. The Maior proposition is euidently true. And the Minor thus is proued first concerninge the first generall Councell of Nice, D. Couell Couell ag. Burg. pag. 87. hath told vs before from S. Hierome, that it receaued more bookes for scripture then [Page 182] Protestants allowe. M. Middleton saith, it Middlet. papistan. pag. 39. taught the dignitie of Rome ouer the West prouinces, (at the leaste) and this by olde custome. How much more ample this custome was, is proued before: and himself sufficiently in­sinuateth, speaking in this maner. Papias Pag. 200. sup. (liueing in the Apostles time) taught Peters primacie, and Romish episcopalitie. And D. Dow­name denieth not, but the greate generall Down. l. 1. Antich. pag. 36. Councell of Calcedon attributed to the Pope of Rome to be heade of the Church. Which hee saith is the greatest stile. D. Feild before hath wittnessed, that the third Councell of Carthage con­firmed Feild sup. in the sixt generall Councell, and wherein S. Augustine was present, re­ceaueth canonicall scriptures, as the Church of Rome now doth. D. Willet per­ceauing Will [...]t An­til pag. 88. 89. the primatiue Councells to be so cleare for the Church of Rome, that hee could not glosse them, with any resem­blance or colour of truthe, calleth the auncient confirmed Councells of Neocesarea, and Toletane the first, and the sixt generall Councell before expressely allowed by D. Sutcliffe, the papall Church, popery, doctrine in popery. And of the seuenth generall Coun­cell hee writeth thus: The Greekes in a Willet sup. pag. 178. Middlet. papist. pag. 193. generall Councell held at Nice, confirmed and allowed the adoration of Images. M. Middleton speaketh in this maner: peruseing Councells, Fathers, and stories from the Apostles, for [...]ward wee finde the print of the Popes feete. So that it is euident by them, that from the very [Page 183] begynning, the doctrine of the Church of Rome as occasion was, is allowed both by Councells, Fathers, and Histories. And this is the reason why in their Article of Reli­gion Artic. 21. before they haue thus defined: generall Councells may erre, and some times haue erred, euen in things pertayninge vnto God. Because from time, to time, as cause was giuen, they haue defined the truthe of the doctrine of the Romane Church, against them. And because, I may not in this breuiate repeate many particulars, breefely I argue thus.

Diuers Councells, allowed by these Pro­testants for generall Councells, haue con­firmed, and allowed all, or the cheefest doctrines, which the Romane Church now teacheath against Protestants, and con­demned the contrary held by them, euen by their owne testimonie: Therefore by their owne Iudgment they are for the Ro­mane Church, and not for them. The con­sequence is euident, and the Antecedent is thus proued by them. The Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury writeth thus: The Councell of Constance was a generall Councell. D. Abbot ag. D. Kill. pag. 38. 48. 49. 51. Bilson Willet a­pud Parkes pag. 137. 180. So their Protestant Bishop D. Bilson, and affirmeth the same of the Councell of Basile. So doth Doctor Willet, and graunteth the same of the Councell of Florence. And yet it is eui­dent to all the worlde, that in these Coun­cells the compleate bodie of their Pro­testant Religion, was condemned, in their predecessors, Iohn Wickliffe, Iohn Husse, and [Page 184] Hierome of prage; and the quite contrary in all things, decreed, and concluded for the Churche of Rome. For further confir­mation whereof, the Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury hath these words: the Councell of D. G [...]orge Abbot sup. pag. 48. & 52. Constance (before by him and others generall) did define Wickliffe to be an Hereticke. Also Pope Iohn the 23 in a generall Councell at Rome did condemne him for an Hereticke. Then by this graunt, The protestancie of England, being the same (as these Protestants tell vs) which was taught be Iohn Wickliffe, and by these Councells (ge­nerall by their owne assertions) condemned for Heresie, must needs be Heresie: And the contrarie doctrine of the Church of Rome, orthodoxall, and Catholicke; otherwise no doctrine euer at any time was or can be hereafter lawfully condemned for Heresie, or iuridically approued, and allowed for true and Catholicke. For by their owne Censure, the highest Iudgment in the Church, generall Councells haue thus defined, and by their doctrine before of the power of generall Councells bownde all Christians, vnder penaltie of eternall damnation, so to beleeue in these questions. And allthough the generall Councells of the primatiue Church were assembled about other Heresies, The Catholicke doctrine of these points now impugned by Protestants, then generally receaued, and not doubted of, as will manifestly appeare in the Chapter of Holy Fathers and [Page 185] Doctors of the primatiue Church: yet because the first fower generall Councells are by name receaued and authorized by Parlament, both by Queene Elizabeth, and our Statut. 1. Eliz. & 1. Iacob. &c. Sutcliffe ag. D. Kell. pag. 102. present Soueraigne: And D. Sutcliffe for Pro­testants hath answeared thus before: wee hold all the Christian faithe explaned in the sixe generall Councells. Then seing the first sixe haue gott this greate papall approbation: first concerninge the first generall Councell of Nice, all though Vitus and Vincentius were presidents there for the Pope of Rome, yet it was further confirmed by that Apostolicke Conc. Rom. tom. 1. concil. See in these words: Whatsoeuer is constituted in Nyce of Bithinia to the strength of our holy Mother the Catholicke Church by 318 Preists wee confirme with our mouth. Wee anathematize all them that shall dare to dissolue the definition of the holy, and greate Councell, gathered together at Nyce. The third Canon of that holy Councell Conc. 1. Ni­cen. can. 3. defineth thus: Omnibus modis Interdixit sancta Synodus &c. The holy Councell hath wholly forbidden, that it shall be lawfull neither for Bishop, Preist, nor Protest. Booke of makeing and Order. Bish. Preists &c. An 3. Edw. 6. 1. El. & 1. Iacob. & can▪ Ia­cob. can. 7. can. 8. Socr. 1. c. 8. Sozom. Deacon, nor any other of the Cleargie, to haue with him any straunge woman, except perhaps mother, or Sister or Grandmother, &c. Where there be more Orders of the Cleargie, then Bishops, Preists, and Deacons, onely allowed with them, and none of these to haue any other woman, or wife, but to lyue in chastitie. Their Answeare that Paphnutius persuaded the Councell, that wiues maryed before orders might be kept, out of Socrates and Sozomen is [Page 186] directly against the words of the Councell l. 1. c. 22. Epip. in Compend. Basil. epist. 17. in ad­dit. Hier. in vigilant. epist. 50. ad Pammach. cone. Car­thag. 2. can. 2. con­cil 6. gener­ca. 2. in Trull. before cited, against S. Epiphanius that glorious Saint, and Father of the Greeke Church, S. Basile also S. Hierome &c. the second Car­thagenian Councell confirmed in the sixt generall Councell allowed by D. Sutcliffe defineing thus: Apostoli docuerunt & ipsa seruauit antiquitas &c. The Apostles taught and antiquitie it self obserued: that Bishops, Preists, and Deacons, and those that handle Sacraments, should be keepers of Chastitie, and abstayne from wiues. And yet these Protestants vtterly deny the opinion of Paphnutius himself, as they them­selues cite hym, for they Marry after Orders, which they confesse both Paphnutius, and the first Nicen Councell denyed to be lawfull, together with Socrates Sozomenus, and all Greeke authoritie, and practice. In the fourtenth Canon of that first gene­rall Councell, the sacrifice of Masse, and Christs reall presence in the blessed Sacra­ment, of the altare are taught in these Concil. Ni­cen. 1. can. 14. words: This neither the Rule nor custome hath deli­uered, that they which haue not power to offer sa­crifice, should giue the bodie of Christ to them that offer it vp. The sixt canon deliuereth by their Concil. 1. Nicen. can. 6. owne Interpretation, that the Pope of Rome is supreame heade of the Church of England, and all others in this part of the world: And in truthe of the whole Iohn Speed in Theatr. pag. [...]06. concil. Sar­dicen. can. 3. 4. 7. &c. Theodoret. l 2. hist. c. 8▪ hist. trip. l. 4. c. 24. 2 [...]. 15. 16. Conc. Con­stantinopol 2. gener. can. 2. Can. 5. Christian worlde, as is declared in the greate Sardican Councell generall, and other­wise binding this Kingdome, by our [Page 187] Bishops presence, and assent there, by our Protestant Theater, where Appeales be graunted to the Pope from any Bishops, or Councells themselues. And the second generall Councell held at Constantinople maketh manifest that the Nicen Councell prescribed no limits, to the Pope of Rome, but to other Patriarkes: and plainely deciareth, Episcopuin Romanum habere primatum. That the Bishop of Rome is supreame. And by denying this, to haue beene the decree of the Nicen Councell, they proue the Popes suprea­macie from the beginninge. For Socrates Socrates in histor. tri­part lib. 4. cap. 9. writeing how the Antiochian Councell kept within twentie yeares of that of Nyce. Was reiected, because not approued by the See of Rome, writeth thus: Cum vtique Regula e [...]clesiastica iubeat, non oportere praeter sententiam Romani pontifi [...]is Con ilia celebrare. The ecclesiasti­call Rule commaundeth, that Councells be not called, without the consent of the Pope of Rome. There­fore their Bishop Bilson writeth thus: The Ca­non Bilson true diff pag. 67 pag. 66. sup. of the primatiue Church forbad any Councell to be called without the Bishop of Rome his consent. The canon of the primatiue Church made euery thinge voide, that was done without the Bishop of Rome. Then what may wee thinke of the Prote­stants doeings in England, where his Au­thoritie Nicephor. Calix. hist­ecel in con­cil. Ephes. Prosper in Chron. An. 431. is so dispised? In the third generall Councell at Ephesus the then Pope of Rome Celesti [...], constituted Cyrillus Patriarke of Alexandria, to be president for him. In the fourth generall Councell at Caleedon the [Page 188] cause of the Popes supreamacie, is so cleare, that D. Downame denieth not, but it attributed Downam l. 1. Anti­christ. c. 3. pag. 36. concil. Cal­cedon. sess. 8. to the Pope of Rome to be heade of the Churche. In that Councell in the 8. session is thus regi­stred: Omnes Episcopi clamauerunt &c. All the Bishops cryed out, next vnto God, Leo (then Pope of Rome) hath Iudged. And the Pope him­self not being present in that Councell, his legates gaue sentence against Dioscorus. The wordes of the Councell be these: Et cum Concil. Calced. Act. 1. 2. 3. adhuc in sua permaneret pertinacia &c. And when Dioscorus continued in his obstinacie, Paschasinus Bishop, and with him Lucentius Bishop and Bonifa­cius Priest holding the place of the moste holy and moste blessed Archbishopp of the Apostolicke See, the elder Rome, Pope Leo pronownced sentence. A Bill Conc. Cal­cod. Act. 3. was preferred to the Councell with this Title: Sanctissimo & beatissimo vniuersali Archie­piscopo &c. To the moste holy, and the moste blessed vniuersall Archbishop, and Patriarke of greate Rome, Leo, and to the venerable Synode of Calcedon. The Concil. calced. Act. 1. ex nou. trans. Church of Rome is there called, Caput om­nium ecclesiarum: The heade of all Churches. And graunted, if any Councell was called with­out Authoritie of that See: Nunquam ritè factum est, nec fieri licuit; It was neuer rightly done, nor lawfull to be done. The Councell writeth to S. Leo then Pope, to confirme their decrees. Concil. Cacled. epistol. ad S. Leon Leo epistol. 53. 54. 55. 59. 60. 61. And he confirmeth them, excepting the precedencie of Constaminople before Alexan­dria, and Antioche. Further in this greate ge­nerall Councell of 630. Fathers more Ec­closiasticall Orders then Protestants allowe [Page 189] are assigned, their marriadge disallowed, Can. 6. Can. 11. Can. 15. Can. 23. except lectors. For Monkes or sacred vir­gins to marry is excommunication. Like­wise for temporall men to lyue in, and pos­sesse Monasteries, and Religeous howses.

The fist generall Councell, held at Constan­tinople, wholly proceedeth against errors of that time, and handleth nothing now in Controuersie, yet both that, the sixt gene­rall following, and all others before, are confirmed by Pope Leo the second, in these Lee 2. epist. ad Constā ­tin. 4. Im­perat. seff. 18. concil. 6. wordes. Because, this sixt Councell, hath moste fully taught the definition of true faith, which the Apostolicke See of blessed Peter doth reuerently receaue, Therefore wee also, and by our office this venerable see Apostolicke agreeably and with one minde, consenteth vnto, the things which by it are defined, and by the authoritie of S. Peter confirmeth them, as vppon a firme Rocke &c. And re­ceauing all these sixe Councells by name, and approuing them, decreeth, that the Fathers in them assembled, are to be numbred, Inter fanctos Ecclesiae Paires, atque Doctores, amonge the holy Fathers, and Doctors of the Churche. The same generall Councell wri­teth Epist. 6. sy­nod. ad A­gathon 1. ppam. to Pope Agatho, in this: Wee referre vnto thee, standing vppon a firme rocke, as to the Ruler of the cheefe See, of the vniuerfall Church, what is to be done, yeelding to the letters of true confession, sent from your fatherly blessednes, which wee acknow­ledg, Epist. Aga­sess. 4. synod 6. as sent from the highest heade, of the Apostles, written by diuine instinct, by which wee haue driuen away the lately risen hereticall sect of manifold [...]r­rors [Page 190] &c. In which so much applauded Epistle these wordes are conteyned, concerning the See Apostolick of Rome: This is the Rule of true faith, which both in prospiritie, and aduersitie, the Apostolicke Church of Christ hath liuely held, which by the grace of God, shall be proued neuer to haue erred, from the pathe of Apo­stolicke Tradition, neither hath shrouke depraued with Hereticall nouelties, because it was saide to Peter, I haue asked for thee, that thy faith saile not, and thow sometime conuerted, confirme the b [...]ethren. Here our Lord hath promised, that the faith of Peter should not faile, and hee admonished him to confirme his brethren, which all men knowe the Apo­stolicke Popes, predecessors of my meannes haue all­waies confidently done. And because these Pro­testants doe so freely acknowledg, the Trullan Canons, to be the decrees and Ca­nons of this sixt generall Councell, allowed by them: first in the second Canon are ap­proued Can. 2. so manie prouinciall Councells, and writings of the auntient Fathers, vtterly condemning Protestant Religion. In the third Canon is taught, how the custome of the Church of Rome for an vnmatryed Can. 3. Cleargie is the true obseruation of the Ec­clesiasticall Canon therein. And for the Church of Greece it self deposeth Preists, Deacons, and Subdeacons marrying after Orders. And to shew both the Ecclesiasticall Or­ders which Protestants condemne, and disable matrimonies of votaries against these men, thus they decree. If any Bishop, or Can. 4. [Page 191] Preist, or Deacon, or Subdeacon, or Reader, or Cant [...]r, or Ostiarius shall haue companie with a womam dedicated to God, lett him be deposed, as hee that hath violated the spouse of Christ. But if a lay man doe it, lett him be excommunicate. The maner of the consecrating and receauing Concil. Carth. 4. can. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12 Concil. 6. gener. supr. can. 2. can. 6. Bishops, Preists, Deacons, Subdeacons, Acolythite [...], Exorcists, Lectors, Ostiariers, Psalmists, Nonnes, Widowes &c. Is conteyned in the 4. Cartha­genean Councell, confirmed in this sixt ge­nerall Councell. Their 6. Canon defineth thus: Because it is saide in the Canons of the Apostles, of those that be not marryed, are promoted to the Cleargie, onely Readers and Singers may marry: we [...] also obseruing this decree, that from henceforthe is he lawfull for no Subdeacon, Deacon or Preist to con­tract marriadge: and if hee shall dare to doe it, [...]et [...] him be deposed. And concerning Bishops, thus begynneth the 12. Canon. It alltogether com­maundeth, that Bishops after they are Ordered, de­parte Can. 12. from their wyues. They receaue, and al­lowe those formes of Masses, that be attri­buted to S. Iames the Apostle, and S. Bas [...]le, Can. 32. and affirme them to be the true Authors of them. The monasticall single life, with the Can. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. Can. 48. Rules of Monasteries, are set downe in diuers Canons. And when a Bishop is chosen that was marryed, hee is seperated from his wife, and shee put into a Monasterie, far from him: Vxor eius mo­nasterium ingrediatur, proculab Episcopi habitatione extructum. They define thus for lent: Visum est Can. 56. &c. It seemeth good that the whole Church of God, which is in all the world, should keepe faste following [Page 192] one order and obstayne from eggs and cheese, as from the flesh Creatures &c. Honor to the signe of the crosse is thus concluded: Vt ei p [...]r quam ab antiquo lapsu saluati summ &c. Seeing the viuifi­cant Can. 73. Crosse hath shewed vnto vs, that saluation, wee ought to vse all diligence to giue due honor to that, by which wee are saued from our old fale. Whereuppon giuing adoration vnto it, both in minde, in worde, and sence, wee commaunde that the figures of the Crosse, made by some on the grounde, and pauement be blotted out, least that which is the Trophee of Vi­ctorie vnto vs, be iniured, by the treading of them that goe vppon it. The vse and Reuerence of holy Imadges is sufficiently approued, when they call them, Venerabilium Imaginum picturas, Can. 82. The pictures of venerable Imadges, commaunding the making, and vse of them. In the last Canon they giue diligent, and longe dire­ctions, Can. 102. vnto preists, how to behaue them­selues, in aduising and absoluing penitents, in the Sacramen [...] of penance. Therefore I may conclude, that Protestants Religion is vtterly condemned by generall Councells both of the primatiue Church and latter a­ges: And consequently by all other Iudg­ments, in the Church of Christ: Because these men haue told vs, that all Bishops, Doctors, and Professors of Religion, are bownde to followe the definitions, of ge­nerall Councells.

CHAPTER IX. WHEREIN IS PROVED BY these Protestants, That the authoritie of the primatiue Fathers, is to be receaued, and followed in matters of Religion: And how it wholly proueth, the present do­ctrine of the Church of Rome: vtterly condemninge all Protestant Religion.

THE authoritie, and value of the Testimonie, of the auncient Fathers, and that they taught and approued the doctrine of the present Churche of Rome, euen by the graunt of these Protestants is euident in the laste Chapter: for being of that opinion in generall Councells, and publicke assemblies, and sentences, to which by their owne consent, and subscription they submitted, and bownde themselues, as to their lawfull and commaunding Rule, they could not, and might not, teache and write otherwise in priuate, then in pu­blicke themselues and others had authori­tatiuely concluded. Yet for a full sa­tisfaction to Protestants in all things, I will breefely entreate of these also, as they wer [...] priuate writers: And first of their autho­ritie, I argue thus.

Whoso euer allowe in shewe, and wordes, amonge the Ignorant Readers, or hearers of their writings, and sermons, the authoritie of the auncient, and pri­matiue Fathers, to procure people to beleeue that their Religion, and doctrine agreeth with them, as men teaching and writing the truthe, and to that purpose doe yeeld vnto them greate respect, and reuerence, ought truely and syncerely to beleeue and embrace their Religion: But these English Protestant writers be such: Therefore they ought and are bownde to followe, and embrace their doctrine. The Maior proposition is euidently true: for as dissimulation, craftie, and double dea­leinges, to delude and deceaue others, in all thinges is a vile and abominable synne, against truthe, charitie, and Iustice, so in matters of Religion, wherein not the least equiuocation of to saue a mans life, may be vsed, it must needs be an offence, moste damnable, and deuelishe. The Minor proposition is thus proued, by these Protestants: Their Protestant Bishop D. Bilson writeth thus: The Bilson suru. pag. 85. auncient consent of godly Fathers, is with greate care to be searched, and fallowed of vs, cheifely in the Rule of faith. And agayne: Wee rest vppon the Pag. 82. sup. scriptures of God, vppon the authoritie of the auncient Doctors, and Councells. And maketh the same reason, with Vincentius Lirinensis, in these Pag. 83. sup. words: Leaste euery man should wrest the scriptures, to his fansye, and sucke thence, not the truthe, but [Page 195] the patronage of his error. And hee addeth, that S. Augustine gaue this respect, not onely to generall Councells, but to the testimonies of par­ticular Fathers, Irenaeus, Ciprian, Hilarius, Ambrose, Gregory &c. Chrisestome, Basil and others. D. Sutcliffe writeth thus: Wee Sutcl. sub­uers. pag. 87. acknowledge the faith of the Fathers of the fourth, fift, and sixt ages, and adioyne our selues to that Church. And to credite his cause, and make his readers beleeue, hee consenteth with those Fathers, hee speaketh in this maner: The Fathers in all points of faith, are for vs (Pro­testants) Sutel. ag. D. Kell. pag. 17. and not for the Pope. D. Willer knowing of what little credit his bare worde is, euen by his Protestants, as appeareth hereafter, would procure creditt to his protestancye by damnable periury, in these wordes: I take God to wittnesse, before Willet Antilog. pag. 263. whome I must render accompt, &c. That the same faithe and Religion, which I defend, is taught and confirmed in the more substantiall points, by these Historians, Councells, Fathers that liued within syne or sixe hundred yeares after Christ. And further Pag. 264. sup. thus: It is moste notoriously euident, that for the gros­sest points of Popery, as Transsabstantiation, sacrifice of Masse, worshipping of Imadges, Iustification by workes, the supreamacie of the Pope, prohibition of Mariage, and such other, they (of the Romane Churche, haue no shewe at all, of any euidence from the Fathers, within syue hundred yeares of Christ. In all which questions, amonge others, I am to proue the contrary be these Protestants themselues hereafter, in their [Page 196] place. And in an other page of the same treatise hee writeth thus: The auntient Fathers that liued within sixe hundred yeares of Christ, are Willet An­til. pag. 271. K. speache in parl. An. 1603: conference at Hampt. pag. 73. against them. His Maiesties speach in parla­ment it this: I will euer yeeld all reuerence to anti­quitie: And in their conference: For my parte, I knowe not, howe to answeare the obiection of pa­pists, when they charge vs, with nouelties, but to tell them their abuses are new. And hee approueth the dayes of Constantine for a Rule, in Reli­gion: saying: Constantine is not to be appeached of superstition, but thinges then vsed may still be conti­nued. Confer. pag. 69. But now it shall appeare, that these Protestant Doctors, and Ministers, are so far from iustifying these their oathes, pro­testations; and assertions, they be enforced to acknowledge, those primatiue Fathers doe allowe, teache, and approue the do­ctrine of the present Romane Churche, which these men impugne and persecute: and for that cause doe not onely deny the authorities of those primatiue, learned, and holy Fathers, but call, and censure them, with vnciuill, barbarous, contemptuous, and Irreligeous names, and phrases. For proofe whereof I argue thus.

Whatsoeuer Sect, Religion, or People, being vrged by such testimonies, as Prote­stants haue giuen for allowance of the Fa­thers authorities before, to followe them, accept of their doctrine, and stand to their Iudgment in these controuersies of Reli­gion, doe vtterly refuse, and disallowe it, [Page 197] though his Maiestie should approue it, but say they are vnfit Iudges, in controuersies of diuinitie, that their Iudgment is little to be respected, their testimonie is not worthe answearing, there is no probabilitie in their opiniōs, they are not to be beleeued, deserue not credit, are not credible, to be admitted, are not fitt Iudges, were to partiall, are to bee forsaken, contemned, and dispised; such men cannot with any apparance of truthe, affirme those primatiue Fathers, and Do­ctors, to allowe, their Religion, and pro­ceedings, or defend their cause, by their Authorities: But these Protestants Do­ctors, and Ministers of England be such: Therefore, those Fathers are not for their Religion. The Maior proposition is to manifestly true, and the Minor is proued also by these Protestants themselues in this maner. M. Wotton expressely con­trolleth the Kings sentence before, con­cerninge Wotton def of Perk. pag. 15. 16. the time of Constantine, and anti­quitie: his wordes be these: the triall of Doctrine, is not to be fetched from the opinions and examples of men. And agayne. It may not seeme straunge, if superstition were crept into the Church before Constantines time. M. Ormerod scoffeth Ormerod pict. pag. 78. at the authoritie and testimonie of S. Ana­cletus, Pope of Rome, that liued in the Apostles time and was a glorious Martyr, for Christ, because hee proueth the supre­amacie Middleton papistem. pag. 200. of the See of Rome from the graunt of our Sauiour. M. Middleton doth the like, by [Page 198] Papias, lyueing with the Apostles, for the same doctrine. M. Hull condemneth for like causes, allmoste all the blessed Popes, Hull Rom. pol. and Martyrs, Bishops of Rome from S. Peter the Apostle, with in the first foure hundred yeares, as shall be cited hereafter. D. Couell before hath stiled S. Augustine with Part. 2. cap. Cere­monies. Wotton def. of perk. pag. 8. pag. 17. 9. 88. the greatest commendation of learninge: yet M. Wotton writeth: Wee neede not feare S. Augustine, though against vs. Eusebius is to be re­prehended. There was want of modestie, and truthe also in the treatise of Hierome against Vigilantius. The auntiēt Fathers spake more like philosophers, then dyuines. It is more then I knowe, that Gregory is a Sainct. The Author of the Epistle to the Philippians, (attributed to S. Ignatius) is an vnfitt Iudge in Wotton sup. pag. 118. 224. 422. 440. 462. controuersies of diuinitie. Tertullians wittnesse is of small authoritie. Damascen is not greately to be respe­cted O [...]igen is generally condemned. Ignatius epistle to the Romanes (approued by S. Hierome and Protestants also) is a counterfaite Ignatius, for Pag. 340: Pag. 387. Pag. 467. Pag. 494. Pag. 495. teaching meritt of good workes. Ciprian is toe farre caryed away, since hee ascribeth to almes daes the purgeing of sinne. Irenaus Iudgement is little to be respected. Tertullians testimonie is not worthe ans­weareinge. Tertullian and Origen may be ioyned together. Chrisostoms Rhetoricke is better then his Pag. 499. Logicke, Hieroms authoritie in case of single life is not murch worth. Those Christian Fathers which con­demned Pag. 500. Iouinian (as S. Augustine, Ambrose, Hierome &c.) delt vnchristianly with him. The Pag. 519. Pag. 520. authoritie of the auntient writers (Athanasius, Augustine, Hierome) concludeinge a worke of per­fection [Page 199] from those wordes of Christ goe sell all &c. is Pag. 543. not to be admitted. The authoritie of Clement of Alexandria and Augustine, with the schoole Doctors is inferior to the Iewes. Origen and Theodoret (whome before hee preferreth before S. Pag. 545. 546. 584. 594. Augustine) ouerthrowe their owne distinction. Lactantius though hee were an auntient Christian, yett in his verses (of worshipping the Crosse) hee sheweth himself liker a light Poet, then a graue writer. And as hee hath vsed all the learned Fathers of the primatiue Churche, for teacheing the doctrine of the present Church of Rome, so he exclameth as bar­barously, and vndutifully, against all Chri­stian Kings, of this, and other nations, for the same cause, his wordes be these. The Wotton def. of perk. pag. 53. Ormer. pict. pag. 44. Kings of England, and Scottland &c. were Sathanes Souldiers, when they were of the Popes Religion M. Ormerod disalloweth S. Leo, because hee taught that God assisted the See of Rome in decres. For the like reason D. Downame reiected the autho­ritie of many holy Popes, and Martyrs of that Church, in her best dayes, when it was a Rule to all, accordinge to his Maiesties Cen­sure, Down. lib. 1. Antichr. cap. 3. pag. 35. 36. because (to vse his wordes) Diuers Bishops of Rome before the time of Socrates the Hi­storian, contented to haue the primacie, ouer all other Churches; and that is the cheife scope of many of their epistles decretall. Yet this was as our Kinge Conference at Hampt. pag. 75. Perk. pro­blem. pag. 4. hath told vs, when it was a Rule to all, and when no man might seperate himself from the do­ctrine of that Churche. M. Perkins hath written thus: The Fathers haue spoken many things incom­modiously [Page 200] of holy thinges. The auncient Fathers did Pag. 93. 94. Pag. 105. Pag. 184. synne in the Inuocation of Saincts: yea, were guiltie of sacriledge, such were Paulinus, Fortunatus, S. Leo, S. Ephrem, S. Fulgentius, Petrus Damianus, Prosper. The auncient Fathers sometimes speake in­conueniently, of the Article of Iustification. Some of the auntient Fathers (as Tertullian and Cyprian) are Montanists▪ or at the leaste doe erre filthely, for making Confirmation a Sacrament. D. Sutcliffe Sutel. subu. pag. 5. Pag. 8. Pag. 9. Whoe before made so much shewe of reue­rence to the Fathers, writeth thus: Meta­phrastes is a lyeinge pedant, writeinge more lyes then leaues: Bede reporteth to many thinges by heareasy. Ado is a fabulous writer. The Historie of Kinge Lu­cius his conuersion (testified by so many autho­rities) Pag. 19. May well be parogoned, with the tales of Kinge Arthure, Sir Tristram, and Lancelot Du­ [...]acke. The Brittaynes haue cause to detest the me­morie of Augustine: That holy Sainct syrnamed the Apostle of our nation for conuertinge i [...]. M. Ormerod is not onely at defiance with Ormer. paganop. pag. 44. all Fathers, for teaching that Christ descen­ded to comforte the Patriarkes, and Fathers deade before him, but compareth, the Article and beleefe of Christs descending into Hell, for such purpose, to the fable of Hercules, fayned to goe thither, and fetche from thence Theseus, Pe [...]ithous and Cerberus, the greate dogge of Hell, with three heades, as the poets Imagine. M. Midd­leton Middleton papistom. pag. 40. writeth thus: The credit of men is but a sandy foundati [...]n to builde vpon: Meaninge the holy primatiue Fathers of the Church: and scoffingly telling, that greate Sainct and Pag. 27. [Page 201] Doctor, S. Epiphanius, that hee loste the booke of Pag. 45. the Apostles Constitutions out of his bosome, which hee cited Haeres. 45. hee addeth of him thus: I must craue leaue to say of Epiphanius: many asser­tions hee counted for Heresies, which were not Here­sies: many assertions hee counted not Heresies, which are Heresies: And all this, because hee con­demneth diuers Protestant opinions of He­resie, and iustifieth the doctrine of the Church of Rome, against them. Against S. Middleton sup. pag. 49. Dionysius the Areopagite, for teaching prayer for the deade, hee scoffeth in this maner: Denys his aunsweare is shortheeld, readie to fall backe. When S. Ambrose approueth Christs reall presence in the blessed Sacrament, and Transsubstantiation: hee writeth of him thus: Pag. 61. Pag. 64. hee is gultie of presumptuous, and desperate blasphe­mye. At S. Chrisostome hee scoffeth, and tea­cheth him, how hee should speake, because hee teacheth the doctrine of prayer for the deade. And vseth this mocke against him, callinge Pag. 66. sup. it an apostolicall Tradition: well might Chrysostome say, the Apostles knew what profite redownded to the deade, by prayer for them: for himself knew not. And thus in generall: The Fathers sometime went beyonde the boundes of sobrietie, in the doctrine Middlet. sup. Pag. 133. Pag. 134. of chastitie: The Fathers are not fitt Iudges to deter­mine either of Preists marriage, or vawes of chastitie. And for this doctrine, thus hee writeth of S. Ambrose: That man hath the Apostaticall dra­gon, the deuill dwelling in hym. And, so hee will send Midd. pag. 135. Ambrose away with his Quietus est. Chrisostome is so hotte in his amplifications, that hee forgetts him­self. Pag. 137. [Page 202] Chrisostome in his vehemencie, goeth beyonde Pag. 138. measure in reprehendinge: and the Christians of his time in their lightnesse went beyonde measure in vowinge. The Canons which Epiphanius citeth against Priests mariadge, or marryed men to be made Preists, Middleton sup. Pag. 141. Pag. 143. Pag. 144. Pag. 156. Pag. 161. are apocryphall. Hee was two partiall affected in this matter. The auncient Fathers did erre. Augustine was a moste subtile disputer: y [...]t a quicke wi [...] soonest falleth into contradiction. Neither is Hilarie (how­soeuer the Romish Church hath made him a Sainct) ouer hastely to be receaued. Irenaeus, Hilary, and Epiphanius, (for teaching free will) are Pelagian Pag. 179. Pag. 180. Hereticks. Wee haue harde before, what great respect in wordes the Protestant Bishop of Winchester, giueth to the auntient Fathers, yet by his owne confession, his owne Protestant Brethren charge him, with the contrary in these wordes: all this Bilsons sur [...]. pag. 84. greate shew [...] of cleauing to the Fathers Iudgment, is but coloured in you. For in other points againe wee see, when they speake not to your liking, the case is altered. You forsake the auntient, and learned Fa­thers. You contemne and despise them. You affirme Pag. 85. against all the Fathers. You little regarde the sownde doctrine of the Fathers. And the same Protestant Pag. 98. Bishop D. Bilson telleth vs, that these Prote­stants which haue thus written of him, doe for themselues lesse (if it may be) regarde those auntient learned Fathers: for writing Bilson sup. pag. 98. pag. 274. 275. prefa. to the King [...] sup. against them, in this kinde, hee intituleth one Treatise thus: The defenders disdayne of the Father, Others: wrested, and leudely falsyfied. And againe. They cond [...]mne all the Fathers, [Page 203] Greeke, and Latine, as conspiring against the truthe, and peruerting the scriptures. Therefore I con­clude this Argument, by these Protestants, that the primatiue Fathers be not for their Religion, but wholly for the doctrine of the Church of Rome. And herevpon, (though needeles) I make a new argu­ment against them, by themselues, in this maner: whosoeuer to make their Readers beleeue, that the Fathers be for their cause, doe falsefye them, corrupt, indignely and iniuriously handle them, clipp, shamfully corrupt them, greately abuse, vntruely al­leadge, misquote, mayme, mistranslate, notably corrupt, Father falsehoods vppon them, peruert their true Arguments, dis­dayne, wrest, and lewdely falsefy them, cannot iustely pretend, that they be for their Religion: But these English Prote­stants are by their owne testimonie, in this case: Therefore they cannot iustely pre­tend, that the Fathers be for their cause. The Maior proposition is euidently true. And the Minor is sufficiently proued before, by D. Bilson and other Protestant writers. To which I add affirmed, and publickly with priuiledge published, against D. Willet, whoe before hath so damnably sworne, that the Fathers be for the Religion of Protestants. Park [...] a­gainst Lymboma­stix p. 170. pag. 151. def. of 3. test. sect. k. k. k. def. of 1. and 2. test. p. 2. 5. sect. 18. 21. pag. 181. 166. 101. 100. def. of 2. place sect. 10. 11. 20. def. of 3. test. sect. 7. 12. 15. 16. &c. pag. 7. 10. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. def. of 3. test sect. 16 pag. 28. def of 1. 2. 3. test. M. Parkes in his booke dedicated to the then Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury writeth of him in these wordes: Hee condemneth all the auntient Fathers, for dreamers. Condemneth [Page 204] all the auntient Fathers, for dreamers. Condemneth all the Fathers. Hee condemneth all learned and godly diuines, for enemyes of Christs Crosse, and blasphemers of his passion. Hee instifieth moste wicked Hereticks, and condemneth moste holy Fathers. Hee falsely translateth, corrupteth, indignely handleth, greately abuseth, vntruely alleadgeth, misquoteth, mayneth, mistranslateth, much abuseth, notably corrupteth, &c. S. Augustine, Origen, S. Ambrose, S. Chrisostome, S. Leo, S. Hierome, Tertullian, S. Bernard, &c. Fathereth falsehoods vpon them, per­uerteth their true Arguments, corrupteth their wordes. Hee teacheath vs further, that he belyeth Bellarmine, and Catholicke writers, decea­ueth the world. Hee straungely peruerteth, belyeth, depraueth, abuseth, much abuseth, falsefyeth holy scriptures. And the same D. Willet hath wri­ten, and published with priuiledg also, as fowle dealings, or more vile in his Iudg­ment, and the Censure of the Protestant Approuers of his booke, of the same En­glish Protestant Author. The particulars are toe many, grosse, and tedious, there­fore I will onely set downe the Title of his booke, to giue some coniecture of the con­tents in this kinde. It is stiled in these wordes. Loidoromastix, that is a scourge for a Willet in Lo [...]doro­mastix in the Title of it. Rayler: conteyning a full, and sufficient Answeare, vnto the vncristian Raylings, slaunders, vntruthes, and other iniurious imputations, vented of late by one Richard Parkes, Master of Artes, against the Author of Lymbomastix, wherein three hundred Raylings, errors, Contradictions, falsifications of Fathers, cor­ruptions [Page 205] of scripture, with other grosse ouersights, are obserued out of the saide vncharitable discourse by Andrewe Willet Professor of diuinitie. Hither to the onely Title of that Booke, published by a Professor of diuinitie, as hee termeth himself, and priuiledged by publicke al­lowance, of English Protestants. There­fore there is no shewe, either of probabili­tie, or possibilitie, that the authoritie, and testimonies, of the holy, learned, and aun­tient Fathers, of the primatiue Church, should be for the Religion of these Prote­stants: when by their owne writings, it is di­rectly condēned by them, whether wee exa­mine their workes and authorities in parti­cular, or when they were assembled in gene­rall, or others generally cōfirmed Councells as demonstration is made by their owne Assertions. And by this it is euident, by these Protestants themselues, that their so termed Religion, is Hereticall, impious and damnable, and for such condemned in their owne Iudgments, by all generall and approued Rules, and growndes in diuinitie, The holy scriptures, sacred traditions, The Church of God, decrees, and sentence of the highest, and all Apostolicke Sees, generall, and other approued holy Coun­cells, learned Fathers, and whatsoeuer can be pretented, to be a Iudge in these causes. So that not any one true Christian Consistorie, or Censure can be truely claymed, or cited for iustifying of their pro­ceedings. [Page 206] Which is as much as can, and more then needeth to be alleadged, for condemninge of Heresie, or any error in Religion. Yet to leaue nothinge omitted, to satiffy these Protestants, in these questions, and recall them to the vnitie of the true Church of Christ, or from their sauadge crueltie of persecution. I will in the next, and second parte of this worke immediately following, make like de­monstration by their owne writings, and authorities, published, allowed, or recea­ued amonge them, since the beginning of the Raigne of our Soueraigne, Kinge Iames, in England. That in all the cheefest Contro­uersies, of this time, in particular, The doctrine of the present Church of Rome, is onely orthodoxe, Catholicke, and true: And the Contrary of these Protestants, erroneous, Hereticall, and damnable.

CHAPTER I. WHEREIN BY THE PRESENT English Protestant writers, is proued against Protestants, and their doctrine, That the predestination of particular men, cannot without particular Reuela­tion, be certaynely knowne: much lesse as a matter of faith.

AS amonge all Questions of Religion, the eternall prede­stination of men to be saued, being from eternitie, in God, can haue none before it in duration; So in order lett vs first entreate, and begin from thence: how fare and certainely it may be knowne of [Page 208] particular mens preordination to glorie, in this worlde.

The holy Councell of Trent, aduertising all men with S. Paule, to worke their saluation with feare and trembling, hath thus defined of Philipp. 2. v. 12. Conc. Trid. sess. 6. can. 12. this secrett. So longe as wee lyue in this mortalitie, no man ought so much to presume, of the hidden mi­sterie of Gods Predestination, that he certainely determine himself to be in the number of the prede­stinate, as though it were true, that hee which is iu­stified, could either syn no more, or if hee shall syn, ought to promise to himself a certaine Amendement: for except by speciall reuelation it cannot be knowne, whom God hath chosen. The like doctrine it concludeth against the predestinaries of Can. 15. 16. sup. this time, in the 15. and 16. canons, of the same session.

The contradictorie of which Catholicke position, hath beene so fare and generally defended by Protestants: That it is as the See cap. 2. infra. principall and cheefest grownde of their Religion: That as a man is iustified by faith, so this faith is that, which assureth him, that hee is iust, in grace and fauour with God, that hee cannot (at the leaste finally or totally) fall from grace: And so consequently that hee knoweth as a matter of faith, that hee is both iust, and pre­destinate: as will sufficiently appeare in the next chapter by English Protestants synce his maiesties entrance into England, the short time which I haue limited to dispute against them by themselues; what incon­ueniences, abuses, and iniquities, this in­uention [Page 209] hath brought into the world, will in some sort appeare in this chapter, by their owne writeings: and is so much knowne to all men, by lamentable ex­perience, that I neede not to repeate it in this place. Wherefore I will onely confute this Protestant opinion by the present English Protestant writers, and thereby de­monstrate the Catholicke doctrine of the cited sacred Councell, to be moste true, and religious, in this point, euen by their sentence.

Then first, concerning this proposition, I argue thus No doctrine or opinion, which is a desperate doctrine, contrarie to diuinitie, and to the true doctrine of predestination, is or can be the true doctrine in this question: But the pre­destinarie Protestant doctrine, with assu­rednes of faith (without particular re­uelation) that a man shall be saued, is thus desperate, contrarie to diuinitie and to the true doctrine of predestination: Therefore it neither is, nor can be the true doctrine.

To deny the Maior or first proposition, is blasphemie: because God, infinite, and immutable wisedome, cannot possibly commaunde, or reueale for truth, any such error, Therefore the first proposition being euidently true, The Minor or second proposition is authoritatyuely with English Protestants, concluded against this pre­destinarie opinion in the publicke Protestant [Page 210] Conference at Hampton Court, before his Conference at Hamp­ton court pag. 29. Maiestie and with his allowance, in these words. Verie manie in these dayes, neglecting holines of life, presume too much of persisting in grace, layeing all their Religion vppon predestination, If I shall be saued, I shall be saued, which is a d [...]sperate doctrine, contrarie to good diuinitie, and the true doctrine of predestination, wherein wee should reason rather ascēdendo, then discēdendo, thus: I liue in obedience to God, in loue my neighbour; I followe my vocation &c. Therefore I trust that God hath elected, and predestinated mee to saluation. Hitherto the consent of this English Pro­testant Conference: from whence it is ma­nifest, that no certanitie, much lesse by faith, but onely a morall trust, or hope, according to the good life of man, can be had without reuelation, that wee are pre­destinate.

Secondely supposing, which with the scriptures all Protestants graunt, that without grace by Christ, and persisting in it, no man can be saued: I Argue thus. No man that is vncertaine, whether hee sall fall from grace, can be certaine with cer­tanitie of faith, that hee is predestinate, or shall be saued: But without particular Re­uelation all men, Protestants, and others, be vncertaine, whether they shall fall from grace: Therefore no man without par­ticular reuelation, is or can be certaine, hee is predestinate.

The Maior proposition is certainely true. [Page 211] And his Maiestie in the same cited Pro­testant Assembly, citeing the place of S. Paule before related, against the certainerie of predestination, concludeth the Minor or second proposition thus. Wee may full from grace: Conference at Hamp­ton sup. pag. 30. and addeth: the doctrine of predestination should be handled with greate discretion: which hee insinuateth the Protestants haue not done, and speaketh plainely of them in these words: The Inferring of the necessitie of standing and persisting in grace is a desperate presumption. The like is taught more at lardge in other places of that conference: where it is also Confer. sup. pag. 41. 42. 43. acknowledged, that present Iustification, or iustice is loste, by any mortall or greuous syn: which to be frequently committed by Protestants will appeare hereafter by their owne testi­monies.

My third Argument is this: No doctrine that is pestilent, and scandalous, to all Churches, is, or can be true doctrine: But this predestinarie doctrine is such: The­refore neither is, nor can be true. The Maior Relation of Religion cap. 45. is euident. The Minor is proued by the Protestant Relator of Religion, whoe telleth vs, that Protestāts in Germanie will rather returne to the Church of Rome, then admitt this Protestant point of doctrine, which they call predestinarie pestilence: and addeth, that this with some others Cap. 48. of their opinions, hath exceedeingly scandalized all other Churches.

My fourth Argument is this. Nothing that is not reuealed of God, can be beleeued [Page 212] with certaintie of faith, or with faith: But particular mens predestination is not re­uealed of God: Therefore it cannot be by faith beleeued.

The first proposition is euidently true: because Gods reuelation, or to be reuealed of him is the formall obiect, or cause of beleefe, and true faith. The second proposition is thus proued, by D. Couell; whoe en­treating Couell def. of Hooker pag▪ 59. of this greate question, hath these words. A curious searcheing into that will, which is not reuealed, serueth but to breede a contempt, of that, which is reuealed vnto vs. Man desireth rather to knowe, then to doe; nay to knowe, euen those things, which doe not concerne him, rather then to doe that, for the neglect whereof, hee must giue an accompt. From hence cometh it to passe, that what the schooles haue curiously sought out, concerning the nature of Gods will: the pulpitts, nay the stalls of Artificers, haue vndertaken to decide them all. And Pag. 62. sup. prosecuteing this question, hauing cited and approued the Catholicke distinctions of the will of God, into antecedent, consequent, of Gods good pleasure, and the signe of it: into a will absolute, conditionall &c. hee concludeth thus: God willeth all men to be saued. Whoe therefore that they are not it is not his decree, but their owne fault. Certainely saithe S. Ambrose, hee willeth all men to be saued, if they will themselues: for hee that hath giuen a lawe to all, doubtles hath excluded none. Yf any Protestant will answere, (as Wottō def. of Perkins pag. 467. &c. many of them vnlearnedly holde.) That deduction from scripture, as they suppose [Page 213] maketh a matter of faith. I tell him with all learned dyuines, and in true diuinitie, that nothinge vncertayne, doubtfull, or fallible, can possibly make a matter of faith, which must of all assents in this world be moste certaine. But euery de­duction from such supposed scripture, especially where neither the matter, man, his name, parson, or any thinge of him in particular is reuealed, must needs be vncer­tayne, doubtfull, and fallible: Therefore it cannot make a matter and conclusion vn­fallible and of faith. For the conclusion, in no syllogisme can be more certayne, then the premises, and fallible humane de­duction, from, and by which it is con­cluded: But according to the Rule of Lo­gicke, semper sequitur debilioreni partem; allwayes followeth the weaker part. And the Maior is eui­dent in it self before. The Minor is proued thus by Doctor Feild: priuate Interpretation (or Feild pag. 226. Couell def. of Hooker pag. 8. deduction) bindeth not. But true faith bin­deth all men. And D. Couell expressely writeth the same, which I haue answered, and in these words. Doctrines deryued are not the word of God. But nothing, but the word of God, written or nor written, as is eui­dent, maketh a matter of faith euen by Protestants.

The first Argument is framed thus: whatsoeuer is onely knowne of God, cannot be knowne, muche lesse with cer­tainetie of faith by particular men: But par­ticular [Page 214] mens predestination is onely knowne to God: Therefore not to parti­cular men, much lesse with certanitie of faith. The Maior proposition is euidently true, the worde onely, being exclusiue, and denying all others. The Minor proposition is thus testified, by D. Couell in expresse words. Couell def. of Hooker pag. 63. and pag. 108. God onely knoweth who are predestinate. And in an other place, thus: Mens predestination vnto life none can knowe, but God onely.

The sixt Argument is: No doctrine that draweth from consideration, what con­cerneth mans saluation, and bringeth con­tempt of good works, is true: But this predestinarie opinion is such: Therefore not true.

The Maior is euidently true, euen in the doctrine of English Protestants, making in Artic. 12. their square it self of their Religion▪ good workes to be necessarie to saluation, and the consideration of it also. The Minor is thus proued by D. Couell. If all men rightly con­sidered Couell def. of Hooker pag. 107. 108. in those actions, that concerne mans saluation, how farre wee are tyed, not onely in obedience, but for vse, to those things that are meanes to effect the s [...]me: few would haue beene so carlessely resolute, to contemne good workes, through an opinion of eternall election. By which sentence hee doth not onelie denie the Protestant certanitie, and securitie of predestination, but plainely teacheth, that good workes are the meanes to ef­fect saluation. Then as the end cannot be ob­tayed, without the meanes, that bringeth [Page 215] vnto it: so it cannot be predestinate without such meanes, except God could, or should predestinate things to be, otherwise then they be, or can be, which is vnpossible.

The seuenth and last Argument in this question, may bee this. Noe man Ignorant of that whereuppon predestination, or the certaine knowledg thereof dependeth, can certainely know himself to bee predesti­nate: But all Protestants are ignorant of that; which is, whether they shall lyue and dye in good workes: Therefore noe Protestant is certaine of saluation.

The Maior is euident: And the Minor pro­ued Couell. sup. pag. 108, by the same Protestant Doctor in these wordes: Eternall election includeth a subordination of means; without which wee are not actually brought to enioy what God secretly did intend: and therefore to builde vppon Gods election, yf wee keepe not our­selues to the wayes, which hee hath appointed for mee to walke in, is but a false deceauing vanitie: for all men notwitstanding their preordination vnto life (which none can knowe but God onely) are in the Apo­stl [...]s opinion, till they haue embraced the truthe, but the children of wrathe, as well as others. And to mani­fest that this was the doctrine of the pri­matiue church, by which these Protestants say they will be Iudged; D. Morton writeth Morton A­pol. part. 2. pag. 223. in these wordes. Veteres Patres fere omnes arbi­tratisunt, praedestinationis causam fuisse praeuisa ho­minum opera. All moste all the auncient fathers did thinke that the good deeds of men foreseene, were the cause of predestination. And M^r. Wotton wri­teth [Page 216] thus: wee acknowledge that the fault is wholly Wottō def. of Perkins pag. 86. in cuery man, that is not saued. Therefore I con­clude this question, that euen by English Protestant Doctors, the doctrine of the Ro­mane Church in this is true: and that of the predestinarie Protestants is false, erroneous, and damnable.

CHAPTER II. PROVETH BY THE SAME Protestants of England: That onely faith (much lesse the assureing faith of Prote­stants, neither doth, nor can Iustifie.

NEXT vnto this Question of pre­destination, lett vs entreate of that, which hath moste and nea­rest connexion vnto it, mans Iu­sification in this life: whether it be by the supposed assureing faith of Protestants, that a man is iustified and righteous as thy com­monly call it, or otherwise, by these writers. Of which matter the Councell of Trent first for Catholicks defineth thus: It is necessa­rie Codcil. trid. ses. 4. can. 9. to beleeue syns neither are forgiuen, neither were at any time forgiuen, but freely by the mercie of God for Christ. And then addeth concerninge the presumptuous faith of Protestants (which it had before confuted) in this maner. If any Can. 12. sup man shall say, that iustifying faith is nothing els, but a [Page 217] confidence of Gods mercie, remitting sins for Christ, or that by that onely confidence, wee are iustified: lett him be Ana [...]hema.

Now that the ordinarie Protestant opi­nion hath been and still is, a man to be iu­stified by this onely kinde, of their supposed assureing faith, or confidence: as also that a man iustified cannot totally or finally fall from grace, is manifestly knowne vnto all acquointed with their doctrine, and this is often repea­ted and allowed in their recited conference at Hampton court. And these present Pro­testant Confer. pag. 41, 24. 30. Wottō def. of perk. pag. 129. 134. 279. 280. writers with others. M^r. Wotton writeth thus: it is out of doubt, that assurance of saluatiō by saith may and must be had. And againe. Falling from faith is vnpossible, And further thus. Wee hold it as vnpossible to lose charitie, as to lose faith. Hee which hath not both faith and charitie to the end, neuer had them. M^r. Powell speaketh Powell. l. Antichrist. pag. 508. 712. & 476. Pag. 712. & 518. sup. thus: Euery one that is elect, is and ought to be assured of a full remission of his syns. The faithfull ought to be assured, they shall haue eternall life, and hee which de­nieth it, doth not beleeue his Creede. To affirme that a man which is Iustified, may fall from grace and be damned is not to beleeue the Creede. It is blasphemy to say, a man truely iustified and sanctified, may totally and finally fall from grace. The Protestant Cate­chisme printed in the yeare of Christ 1609. Catechis. An. D. 1609. pag. 35. Maxey Serm. 8. Ianuar. 1604. thus defineth faith: Faith is a full assurance of my saluation in IESVS CHRIST alone.

This supposed, first I argue against these Protestants (and it is graunted by M^r. Anthony Maxey the Kings Chapleyne in his sermon [Page 218] before his maiestie) in this maner. Yf a man is, or may be suer, that hee is iust or instified, and certaynely in grace, and cannot totally or finally fall away, hee is alsoe and may be suer that hee is predestinate: Because noe man perseuering and dyeing in grace, is or possibly can be damned: But noe man (as is proued by Protestants in the former chap­ter) without particular reuelation, is or can be certayne, that hee is predestinate: There­fore neither is, or can be so certaine of his Iustification, and perseuerance, yf hee were Iust, and could be soe assured of yt.

Secondly the same doctrine of the not certaintie of Iustification is confirmed and proued by Protestants, in their recited Con­ference, Confer. sup. pag. 29. 30. Articul. 17. alleadging from their booke of Articles, that the promises of God in scripture tou­ching these things are generall. From which I ar­gue thus: noe promise of God in generall doth make a reuelation particular to any priuate parson: But all promises of him, of these things, are onely generall: Therefore they can make noe reuelation in particular, or cause such faith of any priuate parson. Bothe propositions are proued before, and are euidently true: For noe priuate man by his humane deduction vncertaine. And sub­iect to error, can possibly apply generall things vnto himself, with such assurednes, and vnfallible certainetie, as is, and of ne­cessicie must be in faith, founded vppon the immediate Reuelation and word of God, [Page 219] which by noe power can be vncertaine or doubtfull. For as these Protestant writers haue assured vs before: Priuate Interpretation or Part. 1. cap. Interpret. of scriptu­res. deduction, as it is not the worde of God, so yt bindeth no man vnto it. Therefore it is not true faith, but a most certaine folly, for D. Raynolds, D. Sutcliffe, D. Feild, D. Morton, or any Pro­testant to beleeue, that hee in particular is Iuste, shall so perseuere, or is predestinate. When not so much as the leaste memorie, or mention of their particular predestination, Iustice, or preseuerance, or name it self, is once remembred in any Reuelation or word of God, the onely Rule and ground of faith.

Againe these Protestants that ascribe Iu­stisication to their supposed assureing faith, doe also teache, that such faith and good workes Articl. An. Dom. 1562. confirmed in Can. Reg. can. 5. Conference sup. pag. 41. cannot be seperated. So they haue agreed in their reconfirmed canons. And also that euery greuous syn depriueth of grace, and iustification. Then that this opinion of Protestants is not true in this point, I further argue in this maner. All Protestants, or others whatsoe­uer, that be assured by faith, that they are Iust, must likewise be as certainely assured, that they haue good workes, liue in obedience to Conference pag. 29. God, loue towards their neighbour, followe their voca­tion, and are, voide of all greuous synne, as they haue tanght vs before: But no Protestants will or can truely affirme soe of themselues: There­fore they neither are, nor can be certaine in such maner, that they are Iust. The Maior is [Page 220] euident; And for the Minor all men knowe they are in the contrary condition and state, that is in greate and generally greuous sins. And themselues freely and truely acknow­ledge their most wicked and sinfull lyues. First D. Couell telleth vs plainely, that chari­tie Couell mo­dest exami­nation pag. 144. faileth in the Protestant Cleargie. Then that Protestant Cleargie cannot by their owne doctrine be iust or iustified by faith, for iu­stifieing faith, as they teach, is not, where charitie faileth, or is not. And yet it is the Protestant cleargie which cheefely and principally patronizeth and defendeth that doctrine of onely faith assureing to Iustifie, and the others but as taught and instructed by them. Further, those Protestants that write against the puritans, as D. Bilson Pro­testant Bishop of Winchester, D. Couell, D. Sutcliffe, M. Ormerode, M. Powell, M. Parkes with others commonly and vn­doubtedly esteeme them, either as Hereticks, Schismaticks, or such as cannot be in state of grace: and the Puritans condemne as gene­rally and absolutely the Protestants of the like, and other greate damnable syns, as I haue in other places entreated, and is knowne vnto all that haue perused their writeings. Therfore I will onely at this time cyte the testimonie of M. Hull, who speaketh generally of all Protestants, Puritans or not Puritans: his words be these: These are the daies Hull Romes polocies, in prefat. whereof our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles so longe agoe fore prophecied, wherein charitie should waxe [Page 221] colde, and faith should scarce appeare, wherein man should be slidebacks from Christ, and Apostals from his true Religion, wherein they shoulde be louers of themselues, coue [...]ous, cursed speakers, dis­obedient, vnthankfull, vnholy, truce breakers, false ac­cusers, despisers of them that are good, Traytors, headie, high minded, louers of pleasure, more then lauers of God, hauing a shew of godlines, but haue denyed the power thereof; yea wherein men are become Vsers, Newters, Temporisers, Atheists, the earth, the stable earth (hee there alludeth to an earth quake lately chaunceing as hee citeth) begins now to quauer, and to shake, as being ouer burdened with our syns, and to weake to beare the waight of our Iniquities. Hitherto this Prote­stant preacher, in his more then vncharita­ble booke against Catholicks, witnesseth of Prot. proof-part. 1. c. 9. cap. 8. &c. his owne brethren in Religion, the English Protestants. Of the more then irreligeous and prophane behauiour of their cleargie of English Protestants, in abuseing, falsefieing, & peruertinge the holy Scriptures, Fathers, Councels, and all Authorities for Religion, I haue for this point sufficiently entreated before, to proue that they are not iust, or righteous, but most vniust and impious by their owne testimonie. What other syns they are defiled with, let their owne liues and the world censure: But suer I am they are not voide of all greuous sinnes, which they must be, if they be iustified and in gra­ce: and such they must be in deed, before they knowe themselues to be such, except they can know that to be, which is not, as [Page 222] their sharp wits would seeme to doe in this and other questions of Religion.

Then seeing it is to apparant, that Prote­stants are not iust, either by their Imagined assureinge faith, or howsoeuer: let vs further examine by these writers, and Protestant professors, whether it is in it self possible, that this supposed faith should Iustifie. The contrary whereof thus I demonstrate from their owne writings. All men that pretend to be iustified by this Imagined faith, must needs be iustified by some act or acts there­of: But no man is Iustified by any act or acts thereof: Therefore no man is iustified by it. The Maior is manifest. The Minor is thus pro­ued by Protestants. First D. Feild with Feild pag. 177. others doth, and of necessitie must affirme, that in this busines of their fantasied Iusti­fication, their deuised faith hath twoe, and onely twoe acts: One going before iustification, teaching vs to pray, entreate God, and humble our­selues, when wee are not iust: and this act as hee acknowledgeth it to goe before Iustifi­cation, so hee thus freely confesseth, that it doth not iustifie. The second Act, as hee telleth vs, doth followe Iustification, and so by no possibilitie (because the cause cannot be after the effect caused by it) that is able to iustifie: wherefore his owne words of this Act of their inuented faith, be these: Shee doth not actiuely Iustifie, but findeth the thinge done. Therefore seeing they teach, there be but two acts in their new faith, the first, and [Page 223] second te laste which admitt no more, and neither the one nor other, nor both toge­ther, (because they graunt there is no par­tiall influence or cooperation from them, to that purpose) dothe, doe, or can iustifie, there is no possibilitie of Iustification by such idle faithe, for so two contradictoryes should be true: man is iustified by some act of faith: man is not iustified by any act of faith. Which in Logicke and nature is knowne to be vnpossible, and a stupide ab­surditie to affirme it. This matter is further proued by D. Couell: who reiecting Lu­thers Couell def. of Hooker pag. 42. opinion, in this question, graunteth a seperabilitie, of faith and workes, and that faith, as they commonly graunte, doth not iustifie. Then Iustification cannot possibly be by onely faith, which in an other treatise hee declareth by example in these words: Faith is the fowndation of spirituall buylding of Gods howse, charitie the Roofe, without which the best are, Couell a­gainst Bur­ges pag. 148. but as howses vncouered, that cannot longe continue. Then iustification which is the Roofe of our spirituall buildinge in this world, is and musts needs be the worke and buildinge of charitie, and not of faith alone. Which de­monstratiuely is true by his graunt, that faith, and the works of charitie may be se­perated: for they consent that without such works man is not iustified, therefore not possibly by this their Poeticall faith.

Further, both the present Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury D. George Abbot [Page 224] against D. Hill, and D. Feild also, doth often tell vs, that the Greeke Church is the true Church of Christ. Then supposing from my first chapter in the first part of this worke, by the graunt of the same D. Feild, Protest. proaf. part. 1. cap. 1. D, Couell, D. Sutcliffe, M. Wotton, and M. Or­merod, that the direction thereof is to be followed, her Iudgment to be rested in, that it hath authoritie to commaund her children, the Iudgment of it, is a very speciall grownd of faith, supporting the truthe, as a piller doth vnderpropp a building, is a diligent and true keepr of doctrines committed to her, chaun­geth nothing, diminisheth nothing at any time, addeth nothing superfluous, looseth not her owne, vsurpeth not things belonging to others: and that there is no saluation, remission of syns, or hope of eternall life out of the Church. All which be the verie words of those laste cited Protestants rela­ted in that place. From which graunts thus I argue. No doctrine or opinion, that is a thinge moste horrible, vnworthie any Christian, against the lawe of God, and light of nature, is, or can possibly be true: But the paradoxe of Protestants, that this their supposed onely faith doth iustifie is such: Therefore it neither is, or can be true. The Maior is euidently true, and to affirme the contrary is to denie all true Religion, and the Authoritie of God: for yf hee should, or could teach, or reueale to men to followe doctrine that is horrible, vn­worthie a Christian, against his owne lawe, and naturall light, such doctrine could not [Page 225] be true, nor hee honored as God, but to be accoumpted a deceauer and seducer. The Minor or second proposition be the expresse words of the Greeke Church, so true, to be obeyd and followed in doctrine by these Protestants as before is cited. For Hiere­mias Patriarke of Constantinople cheef in Hieremias Patriar­cha con­stant in censura cap. 5. that Church in his censure against Prote­stants vseth these words in this article. The doctrine that onely faith doth iustifie, is a thinge moste horrible, vnto or thie any Christian, against the lawe of God, and the light of nature. Therefore these men mayntayning so horrible do­ctrine by the censure of the true Church, as they teach, and out of which, as they affir­me before, there is no saluation, remission of syns, or hope of eternall life, are so farre from being iust, iustified, or to be saued by faith or any other meanes in their proceedings, that by their owne confession, they haue left vnto themselues, no hope of eternall life, or saluation at all.

Moreouer I argue thus: Nothing which cannot be defended without graunting and mayntayninge, more new and straunge absurdities, and impossibilities, is or can be true doctrine: But this Protestant assertion, of their onely assuring faithe iustifying is such: therefore it neither is, nor can be true. The first proposition is euidently true, for euery truthe may, and is defended without any absurditie, or inconuenience: The seconde proposition is also manifestly [Page 226] proued from D. Feild and others before: To whome I add M. Wotton, who labou­reing what hee can to defend this his forged faithes iustification, and answere that place of S. Paule: How shall they call on hym, in whome they doe not beleeue: being vrged to Rom. 10. proue that faith goeth before prayer and other good workes, without which they teach a man is not iustified: and which themselues vrge in a sence like to that, as they (thoughe vntruely) suppose, against prayer to Angells and Saincts, in whome wee doe beleeue: (yet the beleeuing, allthough not in them, that it is lawfull to pray to them, sufficeth in that case) hee maketh his supposed faith a very chime­ricall fiction, and no true reall thinge of that nature: but is forced to this absurditie, to say: assuring faith, and prayer proceeding after Wottō def. of Perkins pag. 209. faith, be simul tempore, bothe together in the same instant of time. Which is vnpossible, being di­uers distinct acts, specified from diuers obiects, produced by diuers powers and operations of the soule, one precedent going before, the other following and (to vse his owne words, proceeding after. There­fore by himself, except before and after Prius & Posterius, be simul and simul tempore, together, and together in tyme, which euery yonge logitian in Cambridge will tell him is moste childish and absurde, both this his Answere is a new grosse absurditie, and that his former doctrine, that cannot be otherwise de­fended [Page 227] is of like qualitie: which will more appeare in the next argument by this mans diuinitie also.

Therefore I argue fur [...]her thus: Nothinge that wanteth assurednes, but hath doub­teinge, and is not without doubt, can be a matter of faith: But this Protestant posi­tion, euen by their owne confession wan­teth assurednes, hath doubting, and is not without doubt: Therefore it is no matter of faith, or true faith. The Maior or first pro­position is so certainely true, that Pro­testāts generally acknowledge (as the truthe is) that nothing can be more certayne and vndoubted then faith: for being grownded vppon the vnfallible word and Reuelation of God which it moste vndoubtedly cer­tayne, true, assured, and without all doubt vnpossible to be otherwise, [...]f God be God and truthe it self. How can there be any place of doubt of any thinge of that nature? and therefore that common sayeing, Dubius in fide est infidelis, hee that doubteth in faith is an Infidell: so much as in him lyeth makeing God vnworthe to be beleued, is ordinary­ly allowed with Protestants. The Minor proposition is also proued by Protestants, and M. Wotton himself wittnesseth of this their Imagined faith in these wordes: Without doubt it is not. And againe in this Wottō def. of Perkins pag. 135. 152. pag. 161. maner: I may graunt the faithfull ordinarily are not assured of their saluation by such a faith, as hath no doubteing in it. And further thus; our faith is [Page 228] not without some doubteing, and our feeleing not so stronge, as it should, and may be. And they haue spoken so longe in defence of this their fantasticall faith, that they proued them­selues not to haue a sownd and certayne faithe of those things that of all others are moste generally beleeued of all (excepting Atheists) that there is a God: for amonge Protestants the same Protestant faith, there be such doubts: Whether there be a God, or no. Wherefore M. Parkes a Protestant writer amonge them might iustly speake of his English fellowes in Religion, in this maner: Heresie and Infidelitie Ioyne and labour to subuert Parkes Apol. pref. and ouerthrowe all grownds of Christian Religion. Thus hee of these Protestants.

Againe I argue in this maner from the 16. article of their Religion. Where it is thus Artic. 16. defined: After wee haue receaued the holy Ghost wee may depart from grace, and fall into syn. And after, it teacheth that true repentance procureth forgi­uenes of syn. Now this true repentance either goeth before, or followeth this their Ima­gined iustifieing faith. If it goeth before this their faith, then that faith iustifieth not, because man is made iust before any Act of that applying faith is exercised. If this Re­pentance followeth, then againe that their supposed faith doth not iustifie, for by their owne doctrine a synner Impenitent is not iust. For theyr applying faith is to apply (as they say) the promises of Christ vnto vs, but Christ in scriptures is so fare from pro­misinge [Page 229] saluation to man impenitent, that hee promiseth and denownceth damna­tion. That both these Acts should be toge­ther, is vnpossible, as I haue demonstrated against M. Wotton, in the like case before. This is also proued by the Arguments con­cerning predestination, in the former chap­ter; for those Protestants which hold this Iustification by faith, defend also assurednes of predestination, teaching that euery one that is at any time iust, is predestinate, and so the one is as well knowne vnto them, as the other, and either of them a matter of faith with these men, Againe faith and hope be distinguished; faith is the grownds of things to be hoped. Faith, Hope, Charitie, these three. But where there is assured faith to obtayne a thinge, or hauing a thinge, Hope is there euacuated. Againe: These Protestants with the scriptures graunt, that the iuste, and iustified are in heauen. But faith is not in heauen, being euacuated by beatificall vi­sion, therefore Iustice is not by faith. Againe: faith is not discursyue; D. Feild Feild. pag. 226. Couell def. of Hooker pag. 85. writeth as truthe is, that priuate Interpreta­tions bynde not; and D. Couell saith, doctrines de­riued are not the word of God: then they are not matter of faith. But all these pretensed faithes of these Protestants are onely their owne priuate interpretations, applications, and deriued doctrynes: for no scripture saith, that any one Protestant in particular, D. Willet, D. Powell, or other, is iustified, [Page 230] or shall be saued: Therefore no faith, much lesse iustifying faith.

CHAPTER III. WHEREIN BY THESE PRE­sent English Protestant writers, the Ca­tholicke doctrine of Iustification by inhe­rent grace, and Iustice, is proued against the same Protestants, and their opinion.

NOW it will be no difficultie, for a Christian man to beleeue do­ctrine of inherent grace, [...]ustice, & iustification by good workes: if hee will, as all Christians doe, are ought, graunt and beleeue any iustification at all. For the contrary opinion of Protestants, being euen by Protestants our Aduersaries themselues confuted, that of the Catho­licke Church must needs be true. In which question the Councell of Trent for Catho­licks Concil. Trid. sess. 6. can. 11. defineth thus. If any shall say, a man is iu­stified either by onely Imputation of the Iustice of Christ, or the onely remission of syns, excluding grace, and charitie, which is diffused in their harts by the holy Ghost, and is inherent, or that the grace whereby wee are iustified, is onely the fauour of God, lett him be Anathema. For proofe of which doctrine euen by my contry Protestants, and to pro­cure [Page 231] their conformitie (as they ought) first I argue thus.

Wheresoeuer there be degrees of Inhe­rent Iustice, and man more or lesse accor­dingly so iustified, there must needs be in­herent Iustice, and iustification by it: But when a man is iustified, there be such de­grees of inherent Iustice, and more or lesse iustification by it: Therefore there is iusti­fication by inherent grace, and Iustice. The Maior and first proposition is manifestly true: The second is proued by D. Feild: who Feild pag. 118. acknowledgeth the denyall of inherent grace, to be vntruthe, and is so farre asha­med of the Protestant opinion in this poynt, that he writeth thus. Luther neuer de­nyeth inherent Righteousnes to be more in one, then in an other, and more in Mary the Mother of Christ, then in any other. Then of necessitie there is inherent Iustice and grace in men iustified, and men be iustified by it, otherwise it is not Iustice or righteousnes, if it doth not make men iust and righteous: for being in­herent as hee confesseth, it must needes de­nominate the subiect wherein it is, as all inherent and intrinsecall formes and qua­lities doe. Heate, colde, bewtie &c. make men and bodyes wherein they be inherent, to be, and be called truly, hote, colde, bew­tifull &c. And seeing in iust men there be degrees of this inherent grace, and Iustice, encrease and accesse of it, there must needs be inherent grace, and Iustice, for new [Page 232] degrees of encrease are not, where the thing encreased is not. Neither the compa­ratiue degree, (more) but where the posi­tiue is: No man or thinge can be said to be better, fayrer, colder, hotter &c. then it was before, except before it was good, fayre, colde, hote &c.

Againe I argue in this maner: whatsoeuer is the cause of glorie and encrease thereof in heauen, is the cause of Iustice and Iusti­fication, from which such glorie cometh: But inherent grace is the cause of glorie in heauen, and the differences thereof: There­fore it is the cause of iustification in earthe. The Maior is euidently true: And the Minor is proued by D. Feild in these words: From this Imparitie of Inherent righteousnes, it is, that there Feild pag. 116. are so different degrees of Ioy and glory, fownd amonge the Saincts of God, that are in heauen. Then seeing the difference and excesse of glorie, and Ioy, in heauen proceede from the imparitie of inherent righteousnes, or Iustice, and righteousnes or Iustice is the cause of glorie, inherent Righteousnes or Iustice must needs be that, by and for which wee are iustified in earth, and glo­rified in heauen.

Thirdly from the same Protestant Doctor I argue thus: All Iustice and glorie of man cometh either from inherent grace, or imputed: But not from imputed: There­fore from that which is inherent. The Maior is euident: for all grace must needs be [Page 233] inherent, or not inherent: and if not inherent it is by imputation, if any way at all. The second proposition is proued by D. Feild: who doth not onely renownce the error of equalitie of Ioyes, and rewards in heauen, taught by Iouinian, and seemeing to followe vppon the Protestant doctrine of Iustification and glory by imputation of righteousnes: but clearely also confesseth with Catholicks, & the recited Councell of Trent, Ioyes and reward in heauen for inherent Iustice, and not imputed righteous­nes: his words be these: That there is an equa­litie Feild pag. 140. of ioyes, and reward in heauen, imputed to Io­uinian, wee doe not hold. Where his worde (wee) and plurall number proueth hee speaketh generally for Protestants. And concerninge the second hee writeth thus: from imputed righteousnes no imparitie of Ioy can flowe. Then seeing the first sentēce graunteth an imparitie of Ioye and reward: and the second affirmeth, it cometh not from imputed righteousnes: The third and conclusion must needs be this: That bothe Ioy and reward in heauen, and their degrees, imparitie or inequalitie, proceede from inherent Iustice.

My next Argument is this: All grace wherewith mens soules in Sacraments, or otherwise be filled, and is infused into them, must needs be inherent: But grace of iustification and sanctification is such: Therefore man is iustified by inherent grace. The Maior is euident, for fillinge and [Page 234] infusion, is by putting in of things, and not by imputation: for no such thinge can fill any thinge. The Minor is thus proued by D. Feild speakeing of children baptized: and the like reason is of others. His words be these: Children when they are adopted and made Feild. pag. 179. the sonnes of God, when they are instified and sancti­fied, are filled with habits or potentiall habilities, of these vertues faith, hope, and loue. The same Feild l. 1. c. 4. pag. 10. doctrine hee teacheth in an other place to be cited hereafter, when I shall entreate of the grace and efficacie of Sacraments: where this Article will be more declared. For this time it is further confirmed by D. Couell who also in playne termes approueth Couell def. of Hooker pag. 114. habituall, and reall infusion of grace, and con­cerning iustification auoncheth thus: The doctrine of Luther in this poynt was not vniustly called Pag. 40. sup. into question, by those of the Romane Church. And seemeth to laboure to reconcile that, which hee esteemeth the best opinion of Protestants in this matter, to that of the Churche of Rome.

Further I argue thus: All that is a guift of God a qualitie in the soule, an internall ha­bite, and infused from God, is inherent: But the grace of iustification is such: Therefore it is inherent. The first proposition is ma­nifestly true▪ the second is proued by M. Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 81. 82. Wotton in these words: Grace is some guift of God, which is a qualitie in the soule. And a little after. The habits of grace be infused from God.

Lastely in this matter I reason thus: whatsoeuer maketh euery true Christian to be righteous in the sight of God, is true Iu­stice: But Inherent grace maketh euery true Christian righteous in the sight of God: Therefore inherent grace is true Iustice. The Maior is manifestly true: And the Minor thus playnely proued by M. Wotton, in Wotton def of Perk. pag. 12. pag. 186. these words: Wee acknowledge euery true Chri­stian to be righteous in the sight of God, by inherent Righteousnes. And answering for Protestants and writing this for their acknowledgment in the plurall number would haue vs take it for their common opinion. And thus Ca­tholicke doctrine of inherent grace is di­rectly and demonstratiuely proued to be true euen by Protestants. And their deniall thereof together with their conceipt of imputatiue righteous, also by themselues conuinced for false and erroneous. Which is further confirmed by M. Higgons in his Sermon at Paules Crosse, wherein speaking of the iust, hee calleth them. Parsons hauing Theoph. Higg. Ser. 3. mart. 1610. pag: 24. grace dwelling in them. And againe: Wee haue in­herent righteousnes in our selues. Then seeing formes inherent, doe, and must needs de­nominate the subiect, in which they inhere, and be subiected, as heate, cold, whitenes, blacknes, and the like, are the true cause, why those things in which they are subie­cted, be named, and truely are thinges hott, cold, white and blacke: so Iustice, inherent and subiected (as these men tell vs) in the [Page 236] soules of men, must needs make them, both truely named, and truely and really to be iust. And this is euident through all the theologicall vertues faith, hope, and charitie or loue of God (all one) as in other vertues. For as by prudence or wisedome a man is named, and truely is prudent, and wise: by temperance temperate, and so of the rest: So by theologicall vertues resideing and inherent in vs, wee are named, and truely be, as their denomination, acts, and effects are. Of faith and beleife, wee are onely named, and are faithfull, and beleeinge; by hope, hopefull or hopeinge; by charitie or loue of God, loueing of him, and keeping his commaundements, which is mans iusti­fication, as M. Wotton shall be wittnes, in Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 175. these his words: Righteousnes saith Austin is nothinge els, but not to syn: not to syn, is to keepe the commaundements of the lawe: that is as himself presently expownds it. To doe none of those things, that are forbidden, and to doe all those things, that are commaunded. Therefore faith (though it be necessaryly required) is not as Cambridg saith, the whole cause of iustification. Yet there is more hereafter of this matter.

CHAPTER IIII. WHEREIN THE CATHOLICK doctrine of the efficacie and validitie of good workes, done in grace, their meritt and reward is proued by these English Protestants.

CONCERNINGE the validitie, and efficacie of good workes, done in grace, sufficient to iustifie: the Doctrine of the Church of Rome to be holy and syncere in this matter, hath beene sufficiently proued by our contry Protestants, in the former chapters. But to take away all pre­tence of exception, I will a little more par­ticularly speake of this Question: Wherein the Councell of Trent hath thus defined. Eternall life is to be proposed to those, that worke well Concil. Trid. sess. 6. to the end, and trusting in God, both as a grace mercifully promised to the children of God by Iesus Christ, and as a Reward by the promise of the same God, faithfully to be rendered to their good deeds, and meritts. And a little after, yeelding a reason, for the dignitie and worthines of such good workes, addeth thus: Christ Iesus himself as the heade to the members and vine to the braunches, doth continually inflowe vertue, anticipateth, accompanieth, and followeth allwayes their good workes, and without [Page 238] which they could by no meanes, be gratefull, and me­ritorious to God. Hitherto the words of the Councell, for Catholicks. Now to proue how Protestants doe accommodate them­selues to this doctrine, first I argue in this maner.

Good workes should haue iustified in the state of Innocencie if Adam had not fallen: Therefore they can iustifie being done in the state of grace, by Christ: The paritie and consequence is proued by the dignitie and value of Christs passion, and meritts, restoring for this purpose, that which wee loste in Adam. The Antecedent is iustified by D. Couell, who comparing the good workes of Christians by grace in Christ, repayring the fall of Adam, with workes in the state of Innocencie, writeth thus: Had Adam continued in his first estate, mans abso­lute Righteousnes, and integritie in all his actions, Couell def. of Hooker pag. 40. had beene the way of life to him, and to all his poste­ritie. And seeing this integritie in mans Actions, had tended but either to the keepeing of the precepts, or doeing works of perfection, both which by Protestants here after be possible, this reason conclu­deth. Secondly I argue thus: whatsoeuer procureth pardon for sins doth iustifie: But good workes done in grace, procure par­don for sins: Therefore they iustifie. The first proposition is euidently true: for as no­thing but syn maketh man vniust; so that which taketh it away, must needs leaue him [Page 239] iuste. The second proposition is thus proued first by D. Couell writing in these words: Couell def. of Hooker pag. 42. Feild pag. 116. Good workes, Humiliation, Fasteinge, and Weepeing are meanes to blott out syn. And by D. Feild also in this maner: Good workes done in grace procure pardon for synne. Againe thus I argue: That which is able to iustifie perfectly, in the sight of God, and did iustifie Abraham, the Father of the true beleeuers, and iustified, doth also iustifye vs: But good workes are of that efficacie, and did iustifie Abraham, our Father: Therefore they iustifie vs his children. The Maior is manifestly true. For first both that power and abilitie is in vayne which neuer is acted, as that common grownde in learninge teacheth: and the Protestants make the maner of the iustifyeing of Abra­ham, a forme of our iustification. The second proposition is proued by M. Wotton, who Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 241. see Wotton pag. 174. 175. and infrac. 5. speaketh thus in the name of Protestants: Wee teache, that those that are in deede adiudged good workes, are able to iustifie a man perfectly in the presence of God, and to deserue euerlastinge life. Whereby hee doth not onely teach iustifi­cation by workes of grace, but that they deserue euerlasteing life; but of this their worthines and meritt I will dispute he­reafter. And the same M. Wotton in the same Wotton sup. pag. 240. Wotton sup. pag. 203. his defence of M. Perkins, writeth thus: M. Perkins professeth that Abraham was iustified by workes, euen before God: not onely before men. This a little before the same place. And for himself concerninge the iustifieing of [Page 240] Abraham, his words be these: Abraham was iustified longe before God made him the promise, and before hee came out of the land of Chanaan. Which was before his faith so much vrged by Protestants in this question, was so commended.

Further I argue thus: Nothing that is error, is true doctrine: But the deniall of iustifica­tion by good workes, is error: Therefore not true doctrine. The Maior is euidently true: for truthe and error are opposites. The Minor is thus proued by D. Couell, whose words be these: To say wee clayme nothing by any dutie wee doe, or any vertue wee finde Couell def. of Hooker pag. 42. in our selues, in the best construction, maketh but an harshe sownde, and discouereth the error, which they of the Church of Rome haue thought vs to holde. Where hee directly calleth that error, which the Romane Church hath charged Protestants with, in this question; and ex­presseth it to be, in extenuating good wor­kes so farre, that they and vertue in vs were not sufficient Title to clayme reward for them of God: which could not be, except they were of a iustifieing and deseruing na­ture and power.

Moreouer thus I reason: That which is the obseruation of the lawe, is righteousnes, and Iustice: But good workes done in grace at the obseruation of the lawe: Therefore they are righteousnes and Iustice. The Maior is euident. The Minor is proued by the Couell def. of Hooker pag. 42. same Protestant Doctor in the same place, [Page 241] and in these wordes: Amongst creatures in this worlde, onely mans obseruation of the lawe, of his na­ture is righteousnes: onely mans transgression syn. Which might also be sufficient for an other Argument: for if onely transgression of the lawe, is synne, and vniustice; then good workes the keeping of the lawe, must needs be Iustice. And in an other place thus the same Author speaketh of prayer, a part of good workes: Prayer is the best meanes both to Couell mo­dest. exa­minat. pag. 176. testifie our dutifull affection, and moste effectuall to obtayne, whatsoeuer wee wanting can desire at Gods hands. D. Sutcliffe thus commendeth this good worke. By prayers wee obtaine remission of Sutcliff ag. D. Kellison pag. 72. 73. sins. By prayers wee obtayne Gods grace. And yet it is euident euen in Protestants doctrine, that they which haue remission of syns, and Gods grace, are iust, and righteous, in their phrase of speakeinge. Good deeds done in grace, me­retoreous, by English Protestants

Now that good deeds done in grace are also meritorious, thus I argue: Whatsoeuer is rewarded, rewardable, bindeth an other to giue for it, was by antiquitie, and now also properly called meritt, is meritorious: But good workes done in grace, are such: Therefore they are meritorious. The Maior is euident: And the Minor thus proued first by D. Couell which speaketh thus: That Couell def. of Hooker pag. 51. 52. workes of perfection to which wee are not bownde, haue greater reward, then keeping of the precepts. Then bothe the one and other must needs haue their reward, the one [Page 242] greate, and the other greater: and conse­quently be so meretorious, and deserueing; for euen in our vulgare language, and pro­prietie of speache, reward is not but where deserueing is; signifyeing a Retribution or payeing againe for a thinge. Againe the same Protestant Doctor writeth thus in Coueli sup. pag. 40. 44. playne termes: Rewards doe allwayes presuppose such duties performed as are rewardable. It was the phrase of Antiquitie to call our vertuous attaynment by the way of meritt. The phrase of the Latine doth properly make one to meritt of an other, and as it were to binde him to him, who doth any thinge which pleaseth, and delighteth him, for whome it is done. Which sufficiently proueth that second pro­position. And from this graunt, this matter is thus, further demonstrated by their Ar­ticles to which they haue, all subscribed, Articl. of Relig. Articl. 12. where it is thus defined: good workes which are the fruites of faith, ar pleaseing and acceptable to God in Christ. Vppon which words, good workes doe please God, their publick glosse is in these Rogers in art. 12. pr [...]pos 1. pag. 53. words: God hath commaunded them to be done, and requireth righteousnes, not onely outward of the body, but also inward of the mynde, and hath appointed for the vertuous, and godly, rewards both in this life, and in the world to came, and to the wicked punishments, spirituall, corporall, and of body and soule, eternall in the pitt of Hell: And for this doctrine cite these scriptures: Matth. 5. 16. Ioh. 15. 12. Phil. 2. 14. &c. 1. Thess. 4. 3. &c. 2. Tim. 2. 19. Iames 2. Matth. 5. 22. 26. &c. And all these Protestant Confes­sions, Heluetia. Basile, Boheme, Fraunce Belgia, [Page 243] Ausburge, Saxonie, Wittemb. Sueue. Therefore wee need not be doubtfull of it, by Protestant proceedings.

But to make it further, and without all exception, moste apparantly true: I further argue in this maner. That which was taught by the true primatiue Church in this point, is true doctrine: But meritt of good workes was then taught by it: Therefore it is true doctrine. The Maior is euident before. And the Minor is proued thus, by these Prote­stants. D. Morton from Caluyn acknowled­geth, Morton apolog part 1. pag 275. 276. Couell mo­dest. exam. pag. 120. Sutcliff subuers. pag. 50. that the word meritt was vsed of the Auncient Fathers, in obtayning rewarde. D. Couell assureth vs thus: Diuers both of the Greeke, and Latine Church, taught freewill, meritts, and inuocation of Saincts, as Catholicks doe. D. Sutcliff telleth vs, that within the first 600. yeares (time of truth with him and other Protestants) the doctrine of meritts and good deeds was taught. And M. Wotton acknowledgeing that the aun­cient Fathers vsed the name of meritt, in this question concludeth thus: The doctrine of me­ritts, as it was held and taught by the auncient Chri­stians, wee acknowledge, and embrace. Therefore seeing Protestants (as M. Wotton generally Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 339. vndertaketh in their name) acknowledg for true the doctrine of the Fathers concer­ning meritts, and (as before by Protestants) the Fathers and the present Romane Church agree in this poynt, Protestants also must subscribe vnto them. And not to make these Protestants singular in this con­sent, [Page 244] I will add M. Bell to their number: hee Bell tryall of the new Religion cap. 9. writeth thus: True it is, I freely graunt, that the holy Fathers doe often vse the word, meritt, and doe often call the workes of the faithfull, meretorious. And doth not onely yeeld; that, to be worthie, and meretorious, is all one, but that such workes of the faithfull, are rewarded with heauen. I Argue againe in this order: workes that are rewarded in heauen, may or ought to be done in respect of reward, and bringe a speciall worthines vnto the workers of them, are meretorious: But the good deeds of Christians done in grace, be such: The­refore they are meretorious: The Maior is euident before, both by the description of reward, by the graunt of Protestants, and in respect that M. Bell last cited, hath assu­red vs, that, to be worthie, and to be meretorious, is all one. The Minor is thus proued: first M. Ormerode writeth thus: You (meaning Ca­tholicks) Ormerod paganopa­pis. pag. 53. doe notoriously slaunder vs (Prote­stants) beareing the world in hand, wee teach that none ought to doe good in respect of reward, be it knowne vnto you, wee are farre from teacheing, that a man ought not to doe good in respect of reward. M. Wotton hath these words: God will reward the Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 302. pag. 334. leaste good worke of any of his children. And a­gayne: They that are iustified, shall haue a speciall worthynes in themselues, when they shall come to re­ceaue their inheritance, because they shall be truly, and fully sanctified. Where not onely a reward is graunted to good workes, but that they make the doers of them meritinge, and [Page 245] worthy of their eternall inheritance, and that this worthynes is caused by grace, and Iustice whereby they are iustified, and bringe forth workes, of such worthe, value, and deserueinge.

And to cleare further this name of reward, which some of them would violently wrest from the true and proper meaneing thereof in this question: Thus I argue againe: whatsoeuer is so effectuall, that reward, or stipend cannot be denyed vnto it, without iniustice, is meretorious: But good workes done in grace, are such: Therefore they are meretorious. The Maior is manifest, for that which is due by iustice, is due by Title and worthines: for the proper act and office of Iustice is, to render to euery one his owne, and due. The Minor is thus proued by M. Wotton, who entreateing of the crowne Wottō def. of Perkins pag. 337. 338. 2. Timoth. 4. v. 8. of Iustice, which accordinge vnto S. Paules doctrine, God as a iust iudge is to render, writeth thus: S. Paule reckons vp his good seruices: and good reason: for the reward is not due to any by promise, but to them that doe good workes. For els what should be rewarded? But why should it be called a crowne of Iustice? because it is giuen to the iust, according to their iust works. And in that respect God is called a iust iudge, in giueing this crowne: because hee giues good for good. And againe: wee wholly subscribe to S. Wotton sup. pag. 339. Augustine, that God cannot but reward our good workes, because of his promise, and because they are such, for the substance of them, as hee hath enioyned: and so (as I haue saide often) in [Page 246] generall Iustice, they that doe well, must haue well.

Lastely in this Question I argue thus: That which deserueth condigne, or worthie reward, is meretorious But good deeds done in grace, be such: Therefore they are meritorious. The Maior is euident: because Meritum ex condigno, Meritt by con­dignietie, is the greatest, and that which hath beene moste impugned by Protestants. The Minor is concluded by his maiestie, in his approbation of the Accidence, before the Grammar, vsually taught in England: where speakeing of schoolemasters deseruings, for the teacheing, and instruction of children, his regall and resolute sentence, for this matter, is vttered in these words: you shall Approbat. of th [...] Ac­cidence init. deserue of allmightie God condigne rewarde. Where both deserueing, which is meritt, and the reward to be condigne, is testified. And thus much, for this question, out of their priuate Authors and Doctors, Now lett vs cite somewhat, out of their publick Theater. Theater of greate Bri­tan pag. 342.

In which they deliuer vnto vs first the common opinion of that primatiue age of Christianitie in this point, generally in these termes: It is not to be wondered at in that these times, the holy Acts of men, which no doubt were many, and the habitt of monkes, the accounted holy garments of humilitie, were so meritoriously respected and reputed in the deuoute harts of the Religeous. Where wee see, that this doctrine of the meritt of good workes, was so ge­nerall, and vniuersall, that no man might [Page 247] wonder at it: Their reason shall, be answe­ared in his proper place; Therefore seeing this vniuersall doctrine of meritts, was in that vnspotted tyme of the Church, as these men haue often graunted, it may be wondered at, with what colour, or pre­tence of truthe, these men against their owne Rule, and Iudgment should now deny it, or bringe it into question. Especially seeing they assigne through all their worke, this cause of meritt and satisfaction to haue giuen the cheife grownd, and originall, to so many holy, and Religious fowndations, in England, to meritt and procure pardon of God, to satisfy for the syns of themselues, the fownders, their frends, Ancesters, and posterities. As wee may vnderstand by these few Examples, which they propose vnto vs in this order: Oswy Kinge of Northumberland Theat. pag. 338. n. 2. hauing cruelly slayne Kinge Oswyne of Deirans, in that place afterward for satisfaction of so heynous an offence, a monastery was built, as vppon like occa­sions, many the like fowndations were layde. And of him againe (partly cited in an other place:) This Kinge Oswy hauing raygned 28. Pag. 338. n. 8. yeares falling sicke, stroke with remorse for the death of good Kinge Oswyne, and the blood which hee had spilt, vowed a pilgrimadge to Rome. So they de­scribe Pag. 339. n. 3. vnto vs, K. Wlfhere his workes of satisfa­ction, in building Churches, and monasteryes, for his Murthering, or Martyringe his sonnes Wlfald and Ruffin. And againe: Ethelbert of Kent in fown­dinge Pag. 302. n. 4. S. Paules Church in London, in his [Page 248] charter hath these wordes: Ethelbert Rex Deo inspirante pro animae suae Remedio, dedit Episcopo Mileto terram &c. Ethelbert Kinge by Gods Inspira­tion, for remedy of his soule hath giuen to Bishop Mi­letus the land called Tu [...]lingham for the Monastery of Pag. 343. n. 4. S. Paule. And againe: Kinge Ethelbald liuing a wicked life being reprehended by the epistle of Boni­face an English man, and Archbishop of Mentz, in repentance released and priuiledged the Church from all tributes to himself▪ and built the Abbey of Crow­land in Lincolneshire, for the pacifyeing of Gods wrathe towards his syns. And againe: Kinge Offa in testimonie of his Repentance, for the blood hee had Pag. 345. spilt, hee gaue the tenth part of all his goods vnto the Church men, and vnto the poore. At Bathe hee also built an other Monastery, and in Warwickshire a Church, where the adioyninge towne, from it and him beareth the name Offa Churche. In greate deuo­tion hee went to Rome, where hee made his Kinge­dome subiect to a Tribute then called Peter peace, afterwards Rome-scot. In honor of S. Albane, and in repentance of his syns ouer against Verolamium in the place then called Holmehurst where that Proto-martyr of Brittaine for the constant profession of Christ, loste his heade, Offa built a magnificent Monastery, endoweinge it with lands and ritch re­uenewes for the mayntenance of an hundred monkes. And thus againe: King Ethelstan hauing consented Pag. 363. to his brother Edwynes death, repented the same; for besides his seuen yeares penance voluntarily vn­dergone, to pacify the ghost of his betrayed brother, hee built the two monasteryes of Middleton, and Michelnesse, goeing into the North against the Pag. 364. [Page 249] Danes, as hee was a man much deuoted to godward, turned a side to visitt the Tombe of S. Iohn of Beuer­ley, where earnestly praying for his prosperous successe, for want of richer iuells, there offered his knife, voweing that if hee returned, hee would redeeme it with a worthie pryce. Which as they tell vs, hee truely performed, though they mention not, what it was. But to putt vs out of doubt, that both this doctrine of Meritt, and satisfaction, and the execution of it, by such meritorious good deeds, was both grate­full, and pleaseing to God, and honorable with all good men, first they testifie of this laste recited Kinge in these wordes: rela­teing of a straunge miracle wrought by Pag. 364. sup. n 8. 10 & pag. 365. him, thus they add: The enemyes by craft and subtlety comeing to his campe, hee awakeing boldly rushing vppon his enemyes, putt them backe with the death of fyue petty Kings, twelue Dukes, and well neare of the whole Army. Hee ioyned Northumber­land to the rest of his Monarchye, and returninge to Beuerly redeemed his owne knife. His dominion was the largest that any Saxon before him had enioyed, and his fame the greatest with all forreyne princes, who sought his frendshipp both with loue and alliance by matching with his scisters, and presenting him with rich and rare presents: for Hugh Kinge of Fraunce be­sides other inestimable Iuells, sent him the sword of Constantine the greate, in the hilt whereof, all couered with gold, was one of the nayles that fastened Christ to the crosse, and of the speare, and crowne of thornes. Before him they make Kinge Elfred the most worthie, and after him, Kinge Edward a [Page 250] Saint, and yet make them bothe in doctrine and practise of meritt, and meritorious workes to be renowned. Of the first they Pag. 351. write in this maner: Elfred the fourth sonne of Kinge Ethelwolfe and ladie Osburge his wife, a child of fyue yeares old, was sent very honorably attended to the citie of Rome, where Leo then Bishop confir­med him, was his godfather at confirmation, and anoynted him to the expectation of a Kingedome: growne in yeares hee grewe so in discretion, magna­nimitie, and fauour of all men, that in the successiue Raignes of his three elder brethren, hee ruled as a viceroy, or secondary Kinge vnder euery of them, and Pag. 357. after them at the last succeeded in the English mo­narchye: Hee was a moste worthie prince. Gurmund or Gurthurne the danish Kinge with thirtie of his cheife nobilitie came to conditions with Kinge Elfred, and are christened. His buildings were many, bothe to Gods seruice, and other publicke vse, as at Pag. 359. Edelingsey a Monastery, at Winchester a new Minster, and at Shastesbury a howse of Nunnes, wherein hee made his daughter Ethelgeda the Abbesse. His other holy workes and meritorious deeds are to many to be remembred in this place; but they conclude of him in these words: The Pag. 359. sup. n. 25. 28. vertues of this prince are matchable to any, that euer raigned before him, and exceed the moste, that euer raigned after him, both in seruice of God &c. Con­cerninge K▪ Edward syrnamed the Confessor, it would be to tedious to make recitall, but of parte of his holy vertues, and merito­rious workes, in this place I onely add from these men: The 40000. pownds yearely of Dane [Page 251] guilt was remitted by him, payed for 40. yeares con­tinuance, Pag. 397. 398. 399. 400. 401. 402. out of the lands of all, except onely the cleargye, because (say our auntient lawes the Kings reposed more confidence in the prayers of holy Church, then in the power of Armes. His words of Q. Editha his wife openly vppon his death bedd were: [...]hee was his wife, but in secret embraceings as his scister. K. Edward (and his successors after) miraculously cureth the disease called struma, now the Kings euill, with other propheticall and heauenly guists hee was en­dowed. Hee vowed a pilgrimadge to Hierusalem, for dischardg whereof hee built the Church of Westmini­ster &c. These Protestants conclusion of him is this: Kiuge Edward a prince of much vertue and integritie of life, raigned with such Iustice and pietie, that hee obtayned the venerable name of Saint, and vnto posterities is distinguished from other Edwards, by the adiunct, Confessor. ô how happy were it, if either Catholicks, or Protestants could truly write so much of Protestant princes, neither frends to the doctrine or fauoures of exercise, of meritts, and meritorious deeds. Therfore the vniuersitie of Cambridge, by their owne Doctors were ouerseene, to say: Wee houlde charitie to be no concurringe cause of iustification with faith. Yet somewhat more of this matter, is, conteyned in the next chapter.

CHAPTER V. WHEREIN IS PROVED BY these English Protestants, that the com­maundements of God are possible to be kept by grace: may, and ought so to be kept.

CONCERNINGE the keeping of Concil. Trid sess. 6. can. 11. Gods commaundements, The Councell of Trent hath thus de­fined. No man ought to vse that teme­rarious saying, and condemned by the Fathers, vnder Anathema, that the precepts of God are vnpossible to be kept of a man iustified, for God doth not commaunde vnpossible things, but commaun­ding doth admonish, both to doe what thou canst, and to aske, what thou canst not doe, and doth help that thou mayest be able to doe, whose commaundements are not heauie, whose yoke is sweete, and burden light, for they which are the children of God, doe loue, and they which loue him, as himself wittnesseth, keepe his sayeings. Hitherto the Councell of Trent, for the doctrine of the Romane Church: now that the English Protestants by their owne writings, are, or ought to be of the same opinion, in this question, thus I argue.

Whatsoeuer all Christians Iustely vowe to keepe and performe, that in all true [Page 253] doctrine they are able to keepe, and per­forme: But by the opinion of English Pro­testants, all Christians vowe to keepe the commaundements: Therefore they may, and must keepe them. The Maior is manifest by Protestants, graunteing with the holy scriptures, and Fathers, that iust vowes be both of things possible, and must be kept: for if the iust promise of man to man bindeth, how much more a iust promise to God, which is a vowe obligatory and byn­deing? The Minor is proued by the publicke Protestant English communion booke, re­confirmed by his Maiesties authoritie: which both teacheth, that wee are bownde to Communion Booke tit. chate­chisme, and tit publicke Baptisme. §. well be­loued frends. keepe the commaundements, and all that are baptized vowe to doe it. Then seeing all English Pro­testants, doe either sweare, or subscribe vnto, and dayly followe and execute the doctrine, and prescription of that their authenticall Rituall, and Directorie, as they cannot by their oath or subscription deny it without periury or denyall of their faith: so by the rule it self, they committ sacri­ledge in reiecting that doctrine.

Secondly I argue thus: All things that are of necessitie to bee obserued, or kept of men, in Religion, are possible: But the com­maundements are of necessitie to be obser­ued, and kept: Therefore they are possible. The Maior is so euidently true, that if it were false, all Christians of necessitie must be damned, and none saued, not beeing able [Page 252] [...] [Page 253] [...] [Page 254] to doe that which of necessitie they must doe, or els not be saued, but damned. The Minor is proued by the present Protestant Archbishops of Canterbury, and D. Feilds allowed Greeke Church: which censureth thus: The commaundements of God of necessitie are Hieremias patriarch. constant. censur. cap. 5. to be obserued. Therefore if they would deny their cōmunion Booke it self, which before hath proued the same, for vowes iustly made are of necessitie to be kept: yet if D. Feild and such will be members of their allowed true Church, they must be of this opinion: & I the rather hope so, because, D. Feild with others say: out of the Churche there is no saluation. Thirdly that doctrine which is Feild sup. paert. 1. cap. 1. so absurde, that by Protestants opinion, no man teacheth it, is not true: But this of the vnpossibilitie to keepe the commaun­dements is such: Therefore it is not true. The Maior is manifest: The Minor is made as manifest by these words of D. Sutcliff: Sutcliff ag. D. Kellison pag. 74. 91. No man doth teach, that the commaundements are absolutely, and symply vnpossible. Therefore they may be kept.

Further I argue thus: All that graunt the doctrine of the Church of Rome (expressed before out of the Councell of Trent) to be true in this point, and that God exacteth of vs to keepe the commaundements, must needs graunt the possibilitie, to doe it, and con­sent herein with Catholickes: But English Protestants doe, or must doe so: Therefore they must graunt this possibilitie, and con­sent [Page 255] to Catholicks. The Maior is euidently true: The Minor is proued by D. Couell thus: Couell def. of Hooker pag. 55. 58. The Churche of Romes opinion is true concerning committing or auoydeing syn. And agayne: God exacteth wee should keepe all the commaundements. Pag. 57. And further in these words: If wee be not our­selues wanteinge, though wee cannot auoyde all syns: yet wee may, and shall auoide all greate and pre­sumptuous syns. And to make this matter more cleare, if it needed, hee addeth: Because S. Pag. 58. sup. Iames saith, hee that keepeth the whole lawe, and offendeth in one, is guiltie of all: some thought, all syns to be imputed to him, that committed any one: But S. Iames onely telleth to vs, that God exacteth a keepeing of them all. This then is the Conclusion, that though no man be without all syn, yet many are without many presumpteous syns, which trough prayers, and good meanes they auoyde. What these men teach of veniall syns, and the distinction of them from mortall, and greuous syns, agreeable to Catholicke doctrine, I shall entreate hereafter: In the meane tyme further I argue thus. If true charitie such as keepeth the commaundements, may be had in this life, them they may be kept: But such charitie may be had in this life: Therefore the commaundements, may be kept. The first proposition is euidently true: for the sufficient cause beeing putt, the effect must needs be possible, otherwise the cause were not sufficient, contrary to our supposition: Wottō d [...]f. of Perkins pag▪ 15. The Minor is thus proued by M. Wotton writeing in this maner: True charitie, thoughe [Page 256] not perfect, may be had in this life, and by it the commaundements of God may be, and are kept, though not perfectly. Therefore (which hee graunteth in expresse words) the com­maundements both may, and be kept. The­refore may be kept, for things vnpossible neither are, nor can be done. Ad impossibilia non est potentia: Ther is no power to things vnpossible. And the same Protestant writer, speakeing of inherent Iustice writeth thus: Neither doe wee (Protestants) deny, that this inherent Righ­teousnes Wotton sup. pag. 174. 175. is such, as might enable vs to keepe the lawe, and shall when it is perfect. Righteousnes sayth Austin is nothing els but not to syn: not to synne, is to keepe the commaundements of the lawe: That is as himself presently expownds it, to doe none of those things that are forbidden, and to doe all those things that are commaunded. To him I may add D. Barlow Protestant late Bishop of Lincolne, who Barlowe Answ. to a name lesse Cath. pag. 304. relateth two things which may serue this purpose: The first is how princes haue the greatest Temptations & are moste vnlikely by that meanes to keepe the commaunde­ments, and keepe themselues from greate syns: his words be these: Kings haue many occa­siōs, which may allure thē to syn, especially hauing that priuiledge in scripture, whether exgratia or de facto: whether by exemption from God, or feare of men: that no man may say vnto them, why doe you thus. And the second thing concerning keepeing the commaundements, and lyueing without greate synne, hee writeth of Queene Elizabeth (no more confirmed in grace then other [Page 257] princes for any thinge hee writeth, or any man can coniecture) in these words: Queene Elizabeth neuer in her life committed helish cryme. Therefore if shee a princesse, and Barlow [...] sup. pag. 73. Queene, by this mans testimonie (though I take it not as a reuelation) liueing in that dawngerous stafe of those of her ranke, by his Iudgment before, neuer committed any synne deserueing Hell, I hope hee will, or must graunt, that by his Iudgment, others not in such case of dawnger, and some of them also that be of that place, may lyue without syns hellish, or if they committ any in their life, may doe pennaunce for them, keepe the commaundements, and be saued. And thus much of this matter: And I hope a full dischardge of the scruple of the Vniuersitie of Cambridge, in their last question, by their owne learned Doctors and pro­fessors.

CHAPTER VI. WHEREIN THE CATHOLICKE doctrine of free will in man, is proued by these English Protestant writers.

THE Councell of Trent for Catho­licks, entreateing of the fall of Concil. Trid. sess. 6. can. 1. man, by the syn of Adam, hath thus declard in this Question. Men were so much the Seruants of syn, and vnder the power of the deuill, and deathe, that not onely the gentiles by the strenght of nature, but neither the Iewes by the letter of the lawe of Moses, could be deli­uered, or rise from thence, allthough free will was not extinguished, but weakened in power, and decli­ned in them. And thus againe: The begynninge of Can. 5. sup. iustification in them, that be of discretion, is to be taken from God, by Iesus Christ, by grace preuenting, that is from his calling, by the which when they had no meritts, they are called: That they which were auerted from God by syns, by his excitatinge and helpeing grace, to conuert them, are disposed to their iustification, freely assenting to the same grace, and cooperating: So that God touching the hart of man, by the illumination of the holy Ghost, neither man himself doth nothing at all, receauing that inspiration, when hee may abiect it, neither not withstanding without the grace of God, can moue himself to Iustice, before him, by his free will: Wherevppon in holy scripture it [Page 259] is said, be you conuerted to mee, and I will be conuer­ted Zachar. 1. to you, was [...]e admonished of our freedome: when wee answere, ô Lord conuert vs to thee, and Psal. 84. we [...] shall be conuerted, wee confesse wee are preuented by the grace of God. Hither to that holy Coun­cell, which I haue related more at lardge, in regard that many Protestants haue (and I feare sometymes voluntarily) mistaken and reported the doctrine of the Romane Church in this Question. And after this, the same sacred Councell defineth against the Concil. Trid. sup. sess. 6. can. 6. enemyes of free will, in this maner: If any m [...]n shall say, that the free will of man, after the syn of Adam, is lost and extinct, lett him be An [...]hema. Now lett vs heare, how these English Pro­testant writers will agree with this Catho­licke sentence. In which matter thus I argue.

Where there is freedome in will, from coaction, and necessitie, there is free will: But in mans will after the fall of Adam, is this freedome: Therefore in him there is free will The Maior is euident by Protestants graunteing such freedome to make free will: The Minor is proued by D. Couell Couell def. of Hooker pag. 35. writing thus: Notwithstanding all the wownds given to humane nature, by the fall of Adam, Igno­rance, Malice, Concupiscence, and Infirmitie: [...]et the will is free from necessitie, and coaction, though not from miserye and infirmitie▪ where hee doth moste playnely teache a freedome of the will from syn: for where no necessitie and coaction is, there must needs be libertie and [Page 260] freedome: and in the will, freedome in it, and free will. And to make Protestants agree with the recited Councell of Trent in this matter, thus hee speaketh againe in their name: In supernaturall thing [...] wee say, the Couell sup. pag. 37. will of man hath not obtayned grace by freedome, but freedome by grace. Meaneing that by the grace of Christ man is made free to doe all duties, in supernaturall and religeous affaires, of themselues aboue the naturall power, be­fore it is assisted by spirituall, and super­naturall help and grace. And concerning the naturall power it self, before the com­ming of grace, hee speaketh in this maner: There is in the will of man, naturally that freedome, whereby it is apt, to take or refuse, any particular Couell sup. obiect whatsoeuer, beinge presented vnto it. And frome hence I argue further in this order.

That without which mans actions are neyther good nor euill, must needs be graunted: But free will in man, is such: Therefore it must needs be graunted. The Maior is euident: for if mens actions were neyther good nor euill, there could be no reward for vertue, because nothing should be vertue, where nothinge is good: nor punishment for syn, because nothing could be syn, where nothing could be euill. The Minor is proued by D. Couell, who ascribeth to this freedome of mans will, the goodnes and malice of humane actions, as if hee would say, if man had not freedome, and libertie of will, his Actions could not be [Page 261] praysed for good: nor condemned for euill: his words be these: All the vnforced Actions of Couell sup. def. of Hooker pag 49. 50. men, are voluntarie▪ and all voluntary actions, tending to their end, haue choice: and all choice presupposeth the knowledge of some cause, wherefore wee make it: And therefore it is no absurditie, to thinke, that all Actions of men, endued with the vse of reason, are ge­nerally either good, or euill. Where wee may see, what a creature man is made by them that deny free will vnto him, that euen in Pro­testants Iudgments, by that denyall, not onely his actions (as before) be neither vice, or vertue: and himself thereby depri­ued of the power of choice and election, is denyed to be a reasonable creature, and proued by their owne deductions, to be a beaste and wholly mortall.

Againe I argue thus: All that graunt, and acknowledge the truthe, of the doctrine of the schoolemen, and of the Church of Rome in this poynt, and further, that man hath libertie to vertue, and vice, must needs graunt free will in man: But these English Protestant writers following, graunt these things: Therefore they must graunt free will in man. The Maior is both too manifest, and copious: The Minor is proued by these Protestant citations, D. Couell writing of Couell def. of Hooker pag. 34. the fall of man in Adam, setteth downe his opinion in this o [...]der: Wee must needs con­fesse, that by syn hee hath loste much: who is now able to comprehend all that hee should? But wee dare not affirme, that hee hath loste all, who euen in this blin­denes, [Page 262] is able to see some thinge, and in this weakenes, stronge enough, without the light of supernaturall iu­stifyeing grace, to treade out those pathes of morall vertues, which haue not onely greate vse, in humane societie, but are also not altogether of a nature oppo­sitely different from mans saluation. And further thus hee writeth: Though syn hath giuen (as the Couell sup. pag. 35. scholemen obserue) foure wownds vnto our nature; Ignorance, Malice, Concupiscence, and Infirmitie: the first in the vnderstanding, the second in the will, the thirde in our desiring appetite, the laste in the Irascible: yet the will is free from necessitie, and coaction, though not from miserie, and Infirmitie. For (as S. Bernard saith) there is a threefold freedome, from necessitie, from syn, from misery; the first of nature, the seconde of grace, the third of glorie. In the first from the bondadge of coaction, the will is free in it owne nature, and hath power ouer it self. In the seconde, the will is not free, but freed from the bondadge of syn. And in the third it is freed from the seruitude of corruption. Now that freedome, by which the will of man is named free, is the first onely: And therefore wee dare say, that the wick [...]d, who haue not the two laste, (being captiues to syn in this life, and to misery in the life to come) yet for all this, want not the freedome of will. And to make playne demonstration, that in this question hee ioyneth with the Church of Rome: as hee hath before followed the scholemen in Part. 1. cap. 2. Couell sup. def. pag. 35. 36. 37. generall, cheefest Agents and foretops of poperye (as they are called by Protestants before, so in particular hee appealeth to the Autho­ritie of Petrus Lombardus, Master of the Sen­tences. [Page 263] To Albertus, Bonauentara, Scotus, S. Thomas &c. For decision hereof. Whose opinion to be the same with the present Catholicke Church no man can make question. To this man I add the fore-named approuers of the Greeke Church to be the true Church, D. Abbots the present Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury D. Feild &c. For this Greeke Church censureth in these words: Man hath Hieremias Patriarch. constant. Censur. cap. 18, [...]. 19. free will to eternall saluation. And againe: Vertue and vyce be in the power and choyce of man. Wee may auoide all syns. It is against the nature of things, that to be esteemed vertue, which a man doth by ne­cessitie. For euerye vertuous action must proceede from the libertie of the will.

I argue further thus: That which was the doctrine of the primatiue Church in this poynt, is true: But to graunt free will was the doctrine thereof: Therefore it is true. Both the Maior and Minor be proued be­fore. Part. 1. cap. 9. part 2. c. 4. Couell mod. examinat. pag. 120. Sutcliff. subu. pag. 50. The Maior in the first part and this also. The minor in the 4. chapter before out of D. Couell and D. Sutcliff. And so nothing in this argument requireth proofe any further. Therefore I make this new argu­ment. All men graunting vnto man, liber­tie to syn, or, not to syn, to be saued, or not to be saued, must needs graunt free will in man, as Catholicks doe: But the Protestants following graunt such libertye, and free­dome to man: Therefore they graunt vnto him free will, as Catholicks doe. The Maior is manifest: and the Minor thus proued by [Page 264] M. Wotton, who defendeinge M. Perkins, Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 67. pag. 68. compareing a synner out of grace, to a prisoner, addeth thus for himself: Hee that is chayned by syn, may chuse whether hee will doe such an Action, or no. And againe thus: Libertie in the state of grace, to will spirituall good, wee thank fully acknowledge. And Wotton sup. pag. 85. further in these words: A man may with hold himself from breaking into grosse syns. Wee deny not, that it is in the power of men, to make choyce of life. Wee acknowledg that the fault is in euery man, that Pag. 86. Pag. 88. is not saued.

I Argue further: That which true Rely­gion doth not denye, and was consented vnto, by the primatiue Church, is not to be denyed for true: But the doctrine of free will in man is such: therefore not to be denyed for true. The Maior is manifest. And the Minor both confirmed by D. Couell and D. Sutcliff: and now proued by M. Wotton, Wotton def of Perk. pag. 88. who both confesseth, that the auntient Fathers in the primatyue time consented with Catholicks, in this question: And concludeth thus: Wee say with Austin both in words and meaneing, Sup. pag. 90. that true Religion neither denyes free will, either to a good, or bad life.

My laste Argument against all English Protestants is from their owne publick de­cree, and framed thus. Whosoeuer by their owne publicke decree, and subscription in Religion, agree with the Councell of Trent, in this question, doe graunt free will: But all English Protestants be, or [Page 265] ought to be such: Therefore they graunt free will. The maior is manifest by the re­cited degree of the Councell. The Minor is thus demonstratiuely proued: for the Booke of the Articles of their Religion (as be­fore) confirmed by his Maiestie, to which all Ministers haue subscribed, or so ought to doe, by their owne proceedings, doth teach them thus: The condition of man after the Artic. 10. of Religion. fall of Adam is such, that hee cannot turne, and pre­pare himself by his owne naturall strength, and good workes, to faith, and calling vppon God: Wherefore wee haue no power to doe good workes, pleasent, and acceptable to God, without the grace of God pr [...] ­uenting vs, that wee may haue a good will, and working with vs, when wee haue that good will. Then with the Councell of Trent it suppo­seth, that by grace man is made free euen to supernaturall things: and before grace is by nature free. And this is sufficient for this Question.

CHAPTER VII. WHEREIN THE CATHOLICKE doctrine, of the distinction betweene pre­cepts, and cownsayls, and how they binde, is proued by these English Protestant writers.

THE common doctrine as well of the Church of Rome, tea­ching a distinction betweene precepts, and counsayles, the necessitie of the one, & not the other, as also the contrary ge­nerally taught by Protestants, are sufficient­ly knowne to all, acquainted with the con­trouersies of this time; wherefore without needles repetition further, to proue that these English Protestant writers, doe or by their owne writings ought to agree, and consent to Catholicks in this question, Thus I argue, and but briefly, because it is so playnely yeelded vnto, by these men.

All that consent with the Romane Church, in this question, graunt this distinction of precepts and counsayles, as it doth: But these English Protestants accompted lear­ned writers, amonge which are cited here­after, doe so consent with the Romane Church: Therefore they graunt, or ought [Page 267] by their doctrine to graunt this distinction of precepts, and counsayles. The Maior is manifest: The Minor is proued by these Pro­testant Doctors. First D. Feild confesseth it Feild. pag. 241. thus: Besides precept [...] many things were deliuered by the way of counsayle, and aduise onely to the Churches. Secondly I may add all those which before haue graunted vnto vs, that the commaundements of God may be kept, the denyall of this distinction and doctrine, being but an accidentarie, and subordinate error, defended, to vphold that falsehood, that the commaundements are not possible to be obserued: wherefore, I will thirdly cite D. Couell a man playnely deliuering his owne consent, and of his fellow Protestants also, so farre as hee can allowe their Reli­gion, in this matter: his words be these. Precepts and Counsailes haue this difference, that the Couell def. of Hooker pag. 51. pag. 52. one is of absolute necessitie, The other left vnto our free election. To cast away wholly the things of the world, is no precept of necessitie, but an aduise of greater perfection. Hee that obeyeth not a precept, is guiltie of deserued punishment: but hee that faileth of these counsayle [...], onely wanteth without syn, that measure of perfection. For it is not a faulte, not to vowe, but to vowe, and performe is praise. Hee that performeth the one, shall haue greater glory, but hee that fayleth of the other, (without repentance) shall haue certayne punishment. Neither is it said, saith S. Augustine, as thow shalt not committ adultery, thow shalt not kill: So thow shalt not marrye, for those are exacted, this is offered. This if it be done, is praysed: [Page 268] Those vnlesse they be done, are punished. For saith S. Hierome, where it is, but aduise, there is left a freedome: But where there is a precept, there is a necessitie. Pr [...]cepts are common to all: counsailes to the perfections of some fewe. The precept being ob­serued hath a Reward, being not obserued a punish­ment: But a counsaile or aduise, not obserued hath no punishment: and beinge obserued hath a greater reward. And yeelding, as it were a reason, why, according to my former assertion, some Protestants and others, haue denyed this doctrine, hee addeth thus: In these points Couell sup. all haue not holden the same opinions; some thought these cownsailes to be of the same necessitie with pre­cepts: as those Hereticks called Apostolici, others esteemed them as things indifferent. Others as things forbidden, which error is accused by some of our Ad­uersaries, to be an opinion of our Church. There is none of any second Iudgment in our Church, which doth not thinke, that willinge pouertie, humble obe­dience, and true chastitie, are things very commenda­ble, and doe bringe with them greate aduantadge, to the true perfection of a Christian life. By these wee doe more, then without these wee should. And be­fore he maketh a longe discourse, how the Couell sup. pag. 50. 51. states of pouertie, chastitie, and obedience, belonge to these perfections: Which is also euident in his words recited.

Wherefore out of this graunts thus I argue againe: what soeuer Catholicke do­ctrine is so certaine, and allowed, that it is warranted by the word of God, the lawe of reason, by S. Augustine, S. Hierome, [Page 269] the primatiue Church, and denyed by no Protestant of Iudgment, by Protestant te­stimonie, that without all doubt is true: But this Catholicke doctrine is such, so al­lowed and warranted: Therefore it is true. The Maior is without all question true: for those Rules of true doctrine, the worde of God, primatiue Church &c. Neither in Ca­tholicke or Protestant proceedings can de­ceaue vs: The Minor is proued by the very words of the Protestant Doctors before cited. Therefore I will conclude with this Argument following.

Whatsoeuer Church, or congregation, graunteth, so many workes, and estates of perfection, as before they haue recompted, Pouertie, Chastitie, and Obedience, and yet in life and execution do not practize any one of them in any condition, company, fraternitie, or congregation, in any, one place or contry in so longe time, as Prote­stancie hath Raigned, but spoiled, abando­ned, persecuted, or ouerthrowne all Mo­nasteryes, howses and communities liuing in such perfection, neither is, nor can be the true, and perfect Church and spowse of Christ; but that which proceedeth in the contrary course: But the Churche or con­gregations of Protestants are in this case, as all men knowe, and the Romane Catho­licke Church in the contrary disposition and state: Therefore the Protestant Reli­gion is not true, but onely the Catholicke. [Page 270] How holy and Religeous this our Kinge­dome hath beene in this high degree of san­ctitie, in tymes of Catholicke Religion, how many hundreds of Monasteries were fownded to such purpose, how many glo­rious Kings, Queens, and Princes, forsa­keinge their Kingedomes, Diadems, and Honors, haue embraced this state of perfe­ction, in chastitie, pouertie, and obedien­ce, and became Monkes and Nunnes, may in sort be gathered out of the Protestant late Theater, where you shall finde the num­ber to greate to be cited. I will onely al­ledge their words in one place to giue some triall of it, which are these: Not onely preists T [...]at. of gr. Britan. pag. 305. n. 16. 17. and lay men vowed and performed pilgrimadges, to Rome. But Kings, Queens, and Bishops also did the like. So greate a deuotion was in their harts, and so holy a Reuerence held they of the place. Kinge Egbert succeeded his vncle Ceolnuph in the Kingedome ru­ling with peace and pi [...]tie twentye yeares foresooke the wo [...]ld, and shore himself a monke, as diuers other Kings in those dayes had done, as Inab, Ethelred, Kenred, Sigebert, Sebbi, Offa, Cronulph &c. Some Pag. 17. 25. 37. 47. 298. 301. 308. 338. 351. 360. of the Queenes were these: Q. Aelfrith, Cuthburga, Elemner, Andrye, Quinburge, Eadburge, Eue, Segburge, Ethelburge, Cuthburga, Oswith, Kinswith Ethelwith, E [...]fride, Eanifled, Erminhild, Ethelswith, Edgiua, Elfgine, with others. The examples of the sonnes and daughters of Kings, with such greate princes, would requier a volume to giue them due remem­braunce. I will onely recite two or three [Page 271] relations, from these Protestants, how ho­norably these works of perfection with their vowes were then esteemed, and how barbarous a thinge it was then, to violate them. They write of Kinge Etheldred in these words: The remorse of conscience for the Pag. 341. n. 4 blood hee had spilt, and the places of Oratoryes by him destroyed (besides his Intrusions into an other mans Right) strucke so deepe a wounde into Kinge Ethelreds breast, that e [...]er hee bethought him what recompence to make. First then building a goodly Mo­nastery at Bradney, and that moste fruitefull seated in the countie of Lincolne, thought that not sufficient to wa [...] aw [...] [...]he scarrs of his fowle offence, but de­termined in himself to forsake the world, for that was the terme attributed to the monasticall life. But such was the Religion then taught, and the goldy zeale of the good princes then raigneinge, whose workes haue manifested their vertues, to posterities, and faith in Christ, the saluation of their soules, in whose paradise wee leaue them, and Etheldred to his deuent intent: who to reconcile himself first vnto Kenred, bequeathed the Crowne solely to him, all­though hee had a sonne capable thereof: then putting on the habit of Religion, became himself a monke in his owne monastery of Bradney where hee liued in a regular life the terme of twelue yeares, and therin lastely died Abbot of the place, when hee had raigned 30. yeares. Chelred the sonne and heire apparant of this Kinge Ethelred, entered into Religion, when hee Pag. 341. n. 6. was of sufficient yeares to haue succeeded his Father in the Kingedome. Of the miraculous victory of Kinge Osway by his vowe to dedicate his [Page 272] daughter to Christ in perpetuall virginitie, they write in this maner. Penda the mercilesse Pagan Kinge inuading Kinge Oswy refuseing all Pag. 338. n. 4. 5. Iuells and offers of peace, Kinge Oswy seeketh help of God by prayer. And with such zeale as was then em­braced, vowed his yonge daughter Elfled to be conse­crated in perpetuall virginitie to him, with 12 farmes and their lands, to the erection, and mayntenance of a monastery; And his enemyes army beinge thirtye times his and of well appointed and old tryed souldyers, Penda loste his life, with discomfiture of all his mer­cian power. Of Ethelwald sonne of Ethelbert Pag. 360. n. 3 thus they write: He entereth now rebellion, and besides the alleadgeance due to his prince, in sacri­ledgeius maner brake the hests of holy Church, in deflowring, and taking a votarist to wife. But fearing the Army of K. Edward bad in the night winborne (which hee had taken) and his Nunne adue, flyeinge to the Danes in Northumberland. Where wee se that this point of Protestant doctrine is by their owne sentence, sacriledge, a breaking of the hests of holy Churche, Ioyning it self against God and contry, with Rebellion and infidelitie. And a thinge though vsed by Infidells, yet a monster and seldome hard of amonge Christians: for of those Infidell Danes they add in these words: Hungar and Pag. 354. cap. 35. n. 5. Hubba began with fier and sworde to lay all waste before them spareing neither parson, sexe, nor age. The places respected for publick good, and sacred temples consecrated onely to God, which all other Ty­rants haue forborne, the sauadge men as the earthes destroyers cast downe, and trampled vnder their pro­phane [Page 273] feete: amonge which for note were the goodly Monasteryes of Bradney, Crowland, Peterborough. Ely, and Huntington, all layed in leuell with the grounde, and their votaryes aswell the Nunnes as the Monkes, murthered with their inhumane and mer­cilesse swords: to auoide whose barbarous pollutions, the chaste Nunnes of Coldingham deformed them­selues to their lasciuious eyes, by cutting of their vpper lipps and noses: but to euerlasting remembrance they remayne moste fayre and well beseeminge faces of puer virgins. Then if the glory, and honor of such vowes, workes of perfection, their vowers, votarists, and professors are so greate, and estimable with God, and good men euen in the Iudgment of these Prote­stants. And those that haue (though but in small things in respect of these Protestants) afflicted and persecuted them, are worse then tyrants, sauadge men, earthe destroyers and prophane; what is become of those Prote­stants that destroyed so many hundreds of holy Temples, Monasteryes, and places consecrated to God, which all other tyrants haue forborne? And what hope can be to these, that lyue, per­sisting in those stepps of their forerun­ners, and dayly adding new, and more af­flictions to the sacred Preists, and holy pro­fessors of that Religion, and perfection therin? God of his infinite mercy graunt them true penance, and turne away his so much deserued vengeance, from this na­tion: And that as these men haue much ex­exceeded the Infidell Danes in offendinge, [Page 274] so they may in some kinde imitate them in satisfaction and repentinge: for they them­selues in this Theater are wittnes, that their Theat of gr. Britt. pag. 391. 392. greatest Kinge Canutus (whome I chuse to exemplify in) for satisfaction of such his syns. Went on pilgrimadge to Rome to visit the se­pulchre of S. Peter and Paule. Built many Churches and Abbeyes, greately reuerenced S. Benett (whose Monasteryes were so persecuted) hee offered vp his crowne vppon the Martyrs S. Edmunds Tombe. Most rich and royall Iewells hee gaue to the Church of Winchester, whereof one is recorded to be a crosse worth as much as the whole reuenewe of England a­mounted to in one yeare. Hee set his crowne, on the heade of the picture of our Sauiour on the crosse, at Winchester, neuer weareinge it more. Vnto Co­uentry hee gaue the Arme of Saint Augustine the Doctor: which hee bought at Papia, in his returne from Rome, and for which hee payed an hundred Talents of syluer, and one of gold. With his owne hands hee did help to remoue the body of Saint Al­phegus at the translation of it from London to Can­terbury, whome the Danes (not withstanding his Ar­chiepiscopall and sacred calleing) before had mar­tyred at Greenewich. Gunhilda daughter of this Kinge, and Emma his wife, was the first wife of Pag. 393. n. 24. Henry 3. Romane Emperor, her surpassing bewtie bredd in the Emperour Ielousy of her Incontinencye, the matter to be tryed by combatt, her champion was her page, but a youth brought out of England, against agyantlike man, but the page cutt of his heade. The Emperesse refuseth the Emperors bedd, and tooke the holy vayle of a Nunne in Flaunders where shee spent [Page 275] the rest of her life. O how happy had it beene, for K. Henry 8. and his daughter Q. Eliza­beth, themselues, for vs, and all posterities in England, if as in synninge they imitated and exceeded the vnbeleeueing Danes, so in repenting and satisfaction they had beene Imitators of their pietie.

CHAPTER VIII. WHEREIN THE CATHOLICKE doctrine, of the distinction betweene mortall and veniall syns is proued by these Protestant writers.

IN this Question thus I breefely make demonstra­tion, for the Catholicke do­ctrine, by these Protestants: All men that graunte, and doe not deny this difference of syns, some to be mortall, depriueing of grace, others veniall, not depryueing of it, but consisting with it, doe graunt this di­stinction, and doe, or ought to agree with Catholicks therein: But these English Pro­testant Doctors, and writers doe thus: The­refore they doe, or ought to agree with Catholicks therin. The Maior is euident: For as matters of faith may neuer (without that greate horrible offence, of deniall of a [Page 276] mans faith) be denyed, so they ought ac­cording to the obligation, and dutie of so­me tymes professing our faith, be also some tymes confessed: But the rest of the Maior which is sufficient in this argument is ex­pressely affirmed, and the Minor thus proued. First the publick Protestant Conference at Conference pag. 41. Hampton Court, assureth vs thus: Amonge syns some be greuous, or mortall, which depriue of grace, others veniall, or which doe consist with grace. Which is the same which the Church of Rome teacheth, in this Question. And D. Feild entreateinge of this matter, writeth Feild pag. 116. thus in the name generally of Protestants: Wee doe not denye the distinction of veniall and mortall syns, but doe thinke, that some syns are rightly sayde to be mortall, and some veniall: some doe ex­clude grace, out of that man in which they are fownde, and so leaue him in a state, wherein hee hath nothinge in himself, that can or will procure him pardon; others doe not so farre preuayle, as to bannish grace. Couell def. of Hooker pag. 56. D. Couell disputing against the Heresies, of English Puritane Protestants, vseth these words: Your three false conclusions, seeme to esta­blish a threefold error, contrary to the doctrine of all Churches, that are accompted Christian. First, that all syn, is but one syn. Secondly that all syns are equall. Thirdly that all syns are vnited. The first making no diuision of the kindes of syn; the second no distinction, of the qualities of syn; and the third no difference in committing synne. Against these wee say, (and wee hope warranted by truthe) that syns are of diuers kinds: of diuers degrees: of diuers natures. [Page 277] From which, thus I argue againe.

Whatsoeuer doctrine, is contrary to the doctrine of all Churches accounted Chri­stian, is erroneous, and in the contrary to that, which is warranted by truthe, is not true: But that Protestant doctrine, which denieth the diuers kynds, degrees, and na­tures of syns, is such: Therefore it is not true. The Maior is manifest: for true do­ctrine cannot be contrary to all Christian Churches, to truthe, nor can be erroneous, opposite to truthe. The Minor is expressely in playne words, proued by D. Couell before, who maketh it so odious, that in his opi­nion, none accompted, or to be accompted a Christian will defend it. And the same do­ctrine of distinction of syns thus hee confir­meth in these wordes: Yt is not all one, to be [...] foote, Couell def. of Hooker pag. 57. 58. and a rodd wide. And therefore the lawe that forbad but one thinge (thow shalt not kill) forbad three things, as Christ expowndeth it; Anger to thy Brother: to call him foole: to offer him violence: these hauing euerye one as their seuerall degrees, so their seuerall punishment. This Heresie then wee leaue to his first Authors Iouinian, and the rest.

From which sentence thus I argue agayne: Nothing that is Heresie, and was for such condemned in the Heretick Ioui­nian, and others for such, can be true do­ctrine: But this Protestant puritane do­ctryne here confuted by D. Couell in his I [...]dgment is such: Therefore it cannot be true. The Maior is euident: for true doctrine, [Page 278] and Heresie, be contrary. The Minor is proued in the last Protestant citation. La­stely I argue thus.

That doctrine which hath scandalized all Churches, and leaueth many followers of that Religion, wherein it is taught, ill satisfied, cannot be true; But the doctrine of diuers Protestants in this question, is such: Therefore it cannot be true. The Maior is euident, for truthe cannot scandalize all Churches, nor leaue the Professors ill satis­fied. The Minor is proued by the Protestant Relator of Religion, who entreating of this, Relation of Religion cap. 48. and other such Protestant paradoxes, writeth thus: Touching the eternall decrees of God, the qua­litie of mans nature, the vse of workes, some of their cheife Authors haue scandalized all other Churches withall, yea and many of their owne to rest verie ill satisfied. Therefore the former Catholicke doctrine in this poynt is true, and Orthodoxe, euen by these Protestants. Which shall suf­fyce in this question, perhaps not so gene­rally receaued by English Protestants, espe­cially in the Articles of their Religion: to which they haue subscribed.

CHAPTER IX. WHERE THE DOCTRINE OF the Romane Church concerninge the vse and reuerence of holy Imadges, is proued by these English Protestant writers.

NEXT vnto these Questions, so nearely concerninge the Inter­nall sanctitie, Iustice, and sancti­fication of man: I would willin­gly giue contentment to my contry Protestants, from their owne Do­ctors, and Professors in Religion, in those Articles which they moste dislike in the Romane Churche. Wherefore as is it suffici­ently knowne, that the Protestant Relator of Religion, is by his profession in his writing both a professed Enemy vnto Catholicks, and amonge Protestants a man of reputed worthines, and taking vppon him an expe­rimentall knowledge of Religeous causes: so I hope no exception will be taken vnto mee, if I first make Answere, and giue sa­tisfaction vnto his demaunde: which to make an vnion betweene Catholicks and Part. 1. cap. 2. Relation of Religion cap. 48. Protestants, in onely on the behalf of Ca­tholicks (as I haue also before remembred) is thus set downe in his owne words: To giue ouer worshippinge of Imadges, offering suppli­cation [Page 280] to Saincts, offensiue Ceremonyes, Indulgences, and vseinge of straunge languadge, not vnderstand in our deuotions. These be all which hee willeth Catholicks to relinquish in their Religion, amonge so many controuersyes in essentiall things, as their stiled Professor D. Willet and other of their writers haue registred: And consequently willeth Protestants to con­forme themselues to the Romane Church in all the rest. To whome I will Answere in euery particular, euen by his English fel­lowe Protestant writers, and himself also: And first in generall, vppon his owne graunt and desire I argue thus.

When two Churches are at difference in Religion, and by graunt of both, one is the true Church of Christ, and differ in many greate questions, and many of essentiall poynts by the graunt of Protestants being one of the Churches, and the other Church by their Iudgment onely to haue an vnion needeth to relinquish fyue things, and none of them essentiall, but dispensable all, and the other Church to submitt in all others, then by thas doctrine which Protestants haue taught vs in the first chapter of the first parte of this worke about the Infallibi­litie of the true Church, and generally that it cannot erre in any essentiall thinge, that Church which is by the Aduersaries con­fession in this state of truth in all things es­sentiall, is the true Church, and the other false: But by the Protestant Relator before, [Page 281] the Romane Church is in this state of truthe, and the Protestants Church in the contrary: Therefore the Romane Church is true, and that of Protestants false. Both the propositions be euidently true, and proued before. Therefore lamentable is the condition of that Protestant Religion, de­fectiue, and to be reformed by their owne sentence in so many and essentiall Que­stions. And this Protestant Relator, and all Protestants with him, may certaynely knowe, (considering what they haue written of the true Churches priuiledges Part. 1. [...]. 1. from error before) that their so deformed congregation is a false Church, and the Church of Rome which so longe time hath beene accused by Protestants of a generall Reuolt, and Apostasie, and now by her enemyes Iudgment needeth to amend onely fyue dispensable things, so small a blemishe and spott to be washed away, doth also want those deformities, and Pro­testants eyes are dazeled as well in those few now, as in so many before now recan­ted. But to giue him and all other Prote­stants of England particular satisfaction by their owne writings both in those fyue, and all other cheefe questions betweene vs, I will now first begyn with that, which hee nameth first, worshippinge of Imadges, as hee termeth it.

The Councell of Trent entreating how holy Imadges, are to be vsed and kept in [Page 282] Churches, expresseth the reuerent respect to be obserued towards them, in this maner: Not because it may be beleeued, there is any diuinitie Concil. tri­dent. sess. 9. or vertue in them, for which they are to be worship­ped: or that any thinge is to be asked of them: or any trust to be placed in the Imadges: as of old it was done of the gentils: which placed their hope in their Idolls: But because the honor which is giuen vnto them, is referred to the Prototypa which they repre­sent: So that by the Imadges which wee kisse, and before which wee putt of our hats, and kneele downe, wee adore Christ: and reuerence the Saincts whose similitude they beare. Which is that which is esta­blished against oppugners of Imadges, by the decrees of Councells, especially the seconde Synode of Nyce. Hither to the opinion of Catholicks in this question, being the same, and no other, but that, which the second Nicene Councell had decreed 900. yeares agoe. Wherein a relatiue worship, or Reuerence of holy Imadges, was defined. Then supposeing what I haue cited before from D. Feild, D. Morton, D. Sutcliffe D. Willet and others that a generall Councell hath the highest byn­ding Part. 1. c. 6. Iudgment, and that neither the Prote­stant Church in England, or all places of Europe where it is, euer had, or can haue any such Councell, by their owne confes­sion, but euery Rule they haue, or can haue, Prince, Parlament, or Conuocation, is falli­ble, and hath erred, as is proued in the first part of this worke; This, I say, supposed thus I argue.

That which is confirmed and allowed by a generall Councell, the highest commaun­dinge Rule in the Church, is to be obser­ued, and receaued before any Protestant article, or position, allowed by no such, but by a deceitfull Rule: But this Catholicke doctrine was so confirmed and allowed, and the contrary of Protestants onely by a fallible and deceauing Rule: Therefore the doctryne of Catholicks, and not of Prote­stants in this Question is to be obserued. The Maior is euidently concluded forth of these Protestants before, and so much of the second proposition that the Protestant doctrine of these men neither in this or any one Article hath been allowed by any such highest or bynding Rule. That which re­mayneth to be proued is onely this, that by Protestant testimonie this Catholicke posi­tion hath beene allowed and confirmed by generall Councell: which is performed by D. Willet, writing thus: The Greeks in a gene­rall Willet Antilog. pag. 169. Councell held at Ny [...]e confirmed and allowed the Adoration of Imadges, about the Time of Adrian the first. And their Theater hath lyke words:

Againe thus I argue That doctrine which the true Churche (by Protestants Iudg­ment) embraceth, is by them to be recea­ued, and beleeued: But the doctrine of the Romane Church is the same in this poynt, with that of their true Church, the Greeke Church: Therefore it is to be receaued, and beleeued of them. The Maior is proued be­fore: [Page 284] And the Minor by the Relator of Religion Relation of Religion cap. 54. himself who seeketh this Attinement: for speaking of the Christian Gretians, hee writeth thus: They holde the worshipping of pi­cture. And their owne Patriarke in his Cen­sure of Protestants, deliuereth his sentence in this order: Wee doe honor and are prostrate, to Hieremius in censur. cap. 21. their Imadges, not with that worshipp which is proper to God, but relatiuely, and with a certayne respect to the Exemplars. Therefore by these Protestants the doctrine of the Romane Church is true in this Question. Thirdly I argue thus.

All men allowing honor or reuerence to be due, and done to things lesse significatiue of God, Saincts, or holy things, must needs allowe it to things more significatiue and representing: But these English Protestants allow such honor or Reuerence to things lesse representatiue, and onely vnder that formalitie of representing; Therefore they ought to allowe to things more represen­tinge, holy Images &c. The Maior is euident being an Argument affirmatiue from the lesse to the greater; The Minor is thus proued by these Protestants, by citeinge from them how they allowe honor and reuerence to things lesse representinge, then Images, that is to bookes, to the name of a thinge to be honored, To sacraments which they say are onely signes, D. Feild entreating of the re­uerence done to Imadges writeth thus: it is Feild pag. 152. like to the honor wee doe to the Bookes of holy scrip­ture. [Page 285] To this I add their commaunded reue­rence in their seruice and Churches to the name of Iesus when it is reade in the ghospell. Comm. Booke con­firmed. Which custome of reuerence the vniuer­sitie of Oxford in their Answere to the Pu­ritans Millinarie petition confirmeth and defendeth in these words: Reuerence done at Answere to the Milli­narie peti­tion pag. 14. the name of Iesus, to be our Inward subiection to his diuine Maiestie, and an apparant token of our deuo­tion. Then needs must the reuerence done at a picture and Imadge be such. Concerninge the signes in Sacraments with them, M. Perkins probl. pag. 163. Perkins the famous Sacramentary writeth thus. Honor, veneratio, reuerentia exhibetur Sacra­mento, quatenus signum est. Honor, worship, reue­rence is giuen to the Sacrament, as it is a signe. Where honor, worship, and reuerence is allowed not onely to a signe, but vnder that formalitie, quatenus signum est, as it is a signe; and when wee come to examine this Protestant, it is no immediate signe of Christ, but of grace by him, onely a qualitie spirituall, as their definition of their Sacra­ments: signes of grace, doth wittnesse. There­fore Articul. Relig. 25. an Imadge the Immediate signe, repre­sentation, and expression of Christ (and so of other holy Imadges) and more perfectly representing, is rather to be honored, worship­ped, reuerenced, as his words be.

Fourthly I argue thus: All men allowing Honor, Reuerence, or worship to the signe or Imadge of the Crosse of Christ, must al­lowe it to his immediate and perfectly re­prenting [Page 286] Imadge: But these English Prote­stants allowe it to the signe or picture of the crosse of Christ: Therefore they ought to allowe it to his Imadge; And so of others by like proportion. The Maior is sufficiently proued before, as also that the signe of the crosse is lesse figuring and presenting Christ, then his owne Imadge: The Minor is proued thus by their owne writings. First in the Kings Canons the signe of the crosse is named, an honorable badge: therefore Can. 140. it may be honored: for whatsoeuer is hono­rable, worthie of, and deseruing honor, may be honored. D. Couell writing against Burges the puritane, denying the vse of the signe of the crosse writeth thus: There was a Couell a­gainst Bur­ges pag. 115. reuerent vse, and estimation of the signe of the crosse in the Apostles time. Therefore it is still to be as then, vsed and esteemed with reuerence. And thus againe hee writeth of the signe of the crosse: It is a lawfull outward ceremonie, and Couell sup. pag. 116. honorable badge: and the verie name of the crosse hath and shall be honorable amongst all true Christians to the worlds end. And againe: It was so farre hono­red Pag. 126. sup. by the holy Ghost, that it often expresseth, the whole meritt of Christs passion. It seemeth to be an Apostolicall tradition. It had then honor, was an auncient and reuerende signe. M. Perkins writeth Pag. 139. in these words: The wood of the crosse in the Church of Constantin: in the feaste of the exaltation Perkins probl. pag. 79. Pag. 83. sup. of it, was kissed and worshipped, adoratur. The crosse was reuerenced, and worshipped within the first 400. yeares. And to that purpose hee citeth Pru­dentius, [Page 287] Paulinus, S. Hierome, Euagrius, alleadging diuers publicke examples, in that sence.

Further I argue thus out of M. Burges the puritane: what soeuer honor was giuen to the signe of the crosse by the primatiue Fa­thers, may now be giuen by Catholicks to the Imadge of Christ: This is proued before: But as much reuerence as Catholicks vse was vsed to the signe of the crosse by the primatiue Fathers: Therefore Catholicks may lawfully vse their reuerence to holy Imadges. The Maior being before proued: The Minor is iustified by M. Burges in his Burges a­pol. apud Couell pag. 146. Apologie, writing, that the Auntient Fa­thers, Origen, Tertullian, S. Ciprian, S. Hierome, S. Athanasius, and S. Augustine did allowe as much reuerence and vertue to the signe of the crosse, as Ca­tholicks Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 594. doe. And M. Wotton confesseth thta Lactantius approued the worship of the Crosse.

Fiftely in this Question I argue thus: whatsoeuer doctrine about Imadges was practized by S. Basile and the primatiue Church, is true, and may still be practized: But such vse of Imadges as is with Catho­licks now was then practized: Therefore it may still be practized. The first proposition is often proued and graunted before: And the Minor thus proued by these Protestants: Wotton def. sup. pag. 594. first. M. Wotton graunteth from S. Basile, these words: I honor the history of Imadges, and doe properly worshipp them. Therefore they Perlins probl. pag. 78. may be so still vsed. M. Perkins writeth thus: The vse of Imadges was publicke in Churches [Page 288] within the first 400. yeares. And againe: The Imadge of Mary the virgin was wont to be caryed in solemne pompe, solemni in pompa efferri. And so no doubt reuerenced, as whatsoeuer is so solemnly caryed and borne in pompe and honor, must needs be vsed: The very bea­ring it self in such order being a reuerence.

Lastely I make this Argument: such vse of Imadges as was practized by the Iewes in the time of the lawe, is still lawfull for Christians: But the Iewes in that time did practize without reprehension the wor­shipp or reuerence of Imadges: therefore it is now lawfull. The Maior is euident, for all dyuines graunt, that the prohibition to the Iewes (prone to Idolatrie) was as se­uere or more to them, then to Christians. The Minor is thus graunted by M. Wotton: The Iewes in the Temple before Christ, Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 581. 582. did worshippe the pictures of the Cherubyns. Then if the pictures of Cherubins, being mere Creatures, were publickly in the temple worshipped, how much more is the picture, and Imadge of their and our Lord, Iesus Christ to be had in reuerence, and so to be vsed: And so of Imadges of his seruants, and Saincts in their due proportion: Because the Saincts themselues may be honored, and prayed vnto, as I am to proue by these Protestants in the next chapter. And this is further proued by these Protestant Theat of gr. Britt. pag. 342. n. 2. Bishop in their Theater, where they testifie in these words: By the cleargie that are accompted [Page 289] the light of the worlde, in a Councell at Rome held vnder Pope Constantyne the first, it was decreed and commaunded, that carued Imadges should be made to the memoriall of Saints, and should be set vp in Churches, with respectiue adoration. Which is, to be referred vnto, and terminated in the prototypa, Saints, represented by such Imadges, and by such Images yeelded vnto them, and in them ended. And in an other place they call such Imadges Monuments of Christian Religion, and sufficiently proue, they were euen from the time of Christ both vsed for the memory, and reuerence of Christ, or his Saints, whome they represen­ted. Their words of the miraculous Imadge erected in honor of Christ, by the woman in the Ghospell cured by the hemm of his garment touched, and reuerenced by her, testified by Eusebius, and others are these: Iulian (the Apostata) destroyeth all monuments of Theat. pag. 266. Christian Religion, amonge others the Imadge of Christ made of brasse at Caesarea Philippi, where the miraculously curing herbe grewe. And they con­demne him for this wickednes, in ouer­throwing that Imadge, erected to the honor of Christ, and miraculously confirmed, both to be religeously erected to his honor, and so continued. But let vs come into our owne nation, where they will giue vs some light, (though by them misted what they can) in what reuerence these haue beene vsed in this Iland, euen from the first con­uersion of the Brittaynes, and euer after, [Page 290] both with Kings, and subiects. Of Subiects thus they write: In Diocletian his time a thow­sand Saints suffered Martyrdome at Lichfeild, in Theat. pag. 206. n. 19. memorye whereof the citye beareth armes to this day, in an Eschacheon of Landskip, sondry parsons diuersly martyred. Of our Christian primatiue Kings Pag. 207. n. 22. first they write thus: Our Kings ranked for san­ctitie before all other potentates of the earth, as Vin­centius Pag. 206. n. 20. recordeth. Then thus: The virgin Mary with her sonne in her Armes, in the ensigne of Ar­thur, so often desplayed for Christ doth shewe the badge of that ages Christianitie. And againe: In Pag. 207. n. 21. the auntient Charters of the fowndation of Glasten­bury it is called Origo Religionis in Anglia: in an other: Tumulum Sanctorum, ab ipsis discipulis Do­mini aedificatum fuisse vener abilem. The beginninge of Religion in England, that it was a graue of Saints builded by the disciples of our Lord, and vener able Kinge Arthur benefactor vnto it, his Armes there an Escucheon, whereon a crosse with the virgin Mary in the first quarter is set, and held to be the Armes of that Abbey. And further of our English Kings in this order from the yeare of Christ 643. they testifie, how they honoured these holy Imadges, in their moste honorable Ensi­gnes, and badges of honor. Kinge Oswy giueth Pag. 385. n. &c. a playne crosse in euery part a Lyon Rampant. The next Kinge Wlfhere a S. Andrewes crosse. So these Kings following Kinge Ethelred, Kenred, Chelred, Ethelbald, Offa, Egfride, Kenwolfe to the yeare 800. And so they recompt after, of Kinge Egbert, Ethelwolfe, Ethelbald, Ethelbert, Ethelred, Elfred, Edward syrnamed the elder, Ethelstan, Edmund, [Page 291] Edred, Edwy, Edgar, Edward syrnamed the Martyr Ethelred, Edmund syrnamed Ironsyde, and Edward the Confessor. And of these English Kings, in an other place they write in this maner: The Saxons before Kinge William his time vsed onely Pag. 424. n. 60. to signe their Charters, with guilt crosses, and such markes. So greate and respectiue regard our blessed Kings of that happy age bore vnto such Imadges, signes, and remembrances of our Sauiour, and his holy Saints, that euen in their temporall actions they euer had them in presence, and memory. Much more in Churches and places of holy wor­shipp, where they vsed them in as religeous respects, as the Romane Church doth at this time; as wee may gather by the very words of these Protestants in this booke, where they write of Kinge Inas esteemed a Saint by these men themselues, in these Theat. pag. 298. 299. words: Kinge Ine buildeth the renowned Abbey of Glastenbury moste stately to the honor of Christ, Peter, and Paule, where formerly stood the old cell of Ioseph of Aremathea, which this Kinge Ina after a most sumptuous maner new built, the chapell whereof hee garnished with gold, and syluer, and gaue rich ornaments thereto: as Altare, Chalice, Censor, Candlesticks, Bason, and holy water buckett Imad­ges, and pale for the Altare of an incredible value. And how these Imadges were vsed, so pla­ced in cheefest place of adoration, and with such other Instruments of Catholicke wor­shipp wee cannot make a question; If wee should, they will direct vs, and make it eui­dent, [Page 292] that such reuerence as Catholicks now vse, was then vsed vnto them. Their words of Kinge Canutus are these: Canutus the Danes Theat. pag. 205. n. 17. greatest Kinge, so soone as hee became a Christian in England, held it his cheefest maiestie, to be the vassall of Christ. And with such deuotion as then was taught, crowned the Crucifixe at Winchester, with the crowne hee wore: and neuer after, through all his Raigne, by any meanes would weare the same.

CHAPTER X. WHEREIN THE CATHOLICKE doctrine of prayer, and honor to Saincts and Angells, is proued true: by these English Protestants writers.

NEXT I must by the Protestant Re­lator his order, entreate of Sup­plication to Saints: and to An­gells consequently. Of this mat­ter thus wee reade in the Coun­cell of Trent. The holy Councell doth commaunde Concil. tri­dent. sess. 9. all Bishops and others, which haue the office and chardge of teaching; That according to the vse of the Catholicke and Apostolicke Church, receaued from the primatiue times of Christian Religion, and the consent of holy Fathers, and decrees of holy Councells cheefely, that they diligently instruct the faithfull of the Intercession of Saincts Inuocation, honor of Re­licks, and lawfull vse of Imadges: teaching them, that [Page 293] it is good that the Saincts which raigne with Christ offer their prayers to God, for men: and that it is profitable, humbly to call vppon them: and to fly to their prayers, ayde, and helpe, to obtayne benefites of God, by his sonne Iesus Christ, our Lord, who alone is our Redeemer and Sauiour. Hitherto the do­ctrine of Catholicks in this Question. Now let vs argue from these English Protestants to the same purpuse.

First I argue thus: All that be in blessed­nes in heauen, and instate of excellencie with God and worthie of honor, and both heare or know our prayers, and doeings, and pray for vs, are to be honored, and may be prayed vnto: But the Saincts and Angells in heauen be such, and in this con­dition: Therefore they are to be honored, and may be prayed vnto. The Maior is appa­rantly true, and with those conditions gra­unted by these best Protestant writers: The Minor that the Saincts and Angells in heauen are in that state, is thus proued by these English Protestants. D. Feild writeth thus: The Feild. l. 3. c. 31. pag. 143. Saincts in heauen doe pray for all in generall. And thus againe of Vigilantius the Hereticke: Yf hee absolutely denyed, that the Saincts departed doe pray for vs, wee thinke hee erred: for wee (Prote­stants) hold they pray in genere. Then it is proued, the Saincts be in heauen and glorie a state worthie honor, and that they pray for vs: now I will proue they heare our prayers by these Protestant writers, be­cause they teach vs that they knowe our [Page 294] Protestations, Professions, and expect our seruyces. D. Feild to make vs know, that hee thinketh they knowe these things, (for Feild pag. 192. a Doctor may not make things that vnder­stand not, to vnderstand, and be made witt­nesses of things they knowe not hath these words: Wee protest and professe before God, men, and Angells: his frend D. Willet writeth thus: Willet Antil. in epist. dedic. anglic. That the Angells expect his Maiesties faithfull seruice. Then they knowe his seruice: And if they knowe the deeds and seruices of princes, and Kings are to doe their seruice faith­fully. No doubt but they knowe the deeds of Subiects also, and in doeing faithfull ser­uice the subiect is not to be freed, where the Soueraigne is not exempted. And con­cerninge Prynce Henry his sonne, thus their Theater prayeth. vppon whose parson I pray that the Theat of gr. Britt. pag. 37. n. [...]. Angells of Iacobs God may euer attend, to his greate glorye, and greate Britaynes happines. And as these for the Kinge and his sonne. So the Protestant Bishop of Lincolne D. Barlowe en­ueying against his Catholicke Aduersarie not writing of Q. Elizabeth, as himself did, Barlowe Answere to a nameles Oath pag. 69. freeing her from all mortall syn in her whole life, hath these words: ô blessed Trinitie, and all you glorious Angells can you endure this hellish blasphemye, and brooke these slawnderous us impieties, in silence and vnreuenged? Then I hope if a Prote­stant Bishope may inuocate, and pray to the Angells, to take reuendge, to hurt and hin­der mee: it will be as agreeable to the lawes of Charitie, and true Religion, to desire [Page 295] their help, assistance, and pray vnto them to releyue our wants, in our time of necessi­tie, or at any time to honor them. The like vnto this, is written by D. Wilkes, and other Wilkes obedience pag. §. 3. Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 12. Protestants: And M. Wotton proueth the same of the Saincts in heauen in this maner. The Saincts departed wee loue and honor; of their credit with God wee doubt not: their care of men wee deny not. And to assure vs, that they haue not a care of vs onely in generall, but in parti­cular also and so knowe our actions, first M. George Close parson of blacke Torrington in de­uonshire, M. George Close ser. before the Iudges at Exeter. in his sermon before the Iudges, at Exeter, mouing wicked lawyers, to Re­pentance, vrgeth it in these words: So shall the Angells reioyce in your contrition, allmightie God accept your Confession, and the whole world keepe an holy day for your satisfaction. Therefore if the Angells knowe our particular internall Actions, such as Contrition, and sorrowe of mynde is, how much more those that be externall, and in no wayes shrowded from their vnderstandings. And to this veritie his Maiestie himself giueth testimonie speaking Kings spea­che die 21. Martij An. 1609. at Whitehall thus: It is a Christian dutie in euery man, reddere rationem fidei, and not to be ashamed to giue an ac­count of his profession, before men, and Angells as oft, as occasion shall require. Therefore seing Audi­tors in taking Audite must needs knowe the Reckonings, and Accompts, of their Ac­comptants, the Angells and Saincts cannot be Ignorant of our Actions, done before them, as his Maiestie expresseth. And D. Couell [Page 296] in Examination of Puritaine, writeth thus: Couell exa­minat. pag. 195. Doth any man thinke, the Angells doe not help vs, being ministring spirits? and seing God hath giuen his Angells chardge ouer vs, may wee not pray to haue their assistance. From whence thus I argue againe.

They that be in glorie, can helpe vs, and haue charge ouer vs to minister, and men may pray to haue their assistance, and they attend to further our requests, may be re­quested and prayed vnto: But the Angells (and consequently) the Saints in heauen be in these conditions towards vs: There­fore they may be requested, and prayed vnto. The Maior is euident: and the Minor also sufficiently proued by this last citation from D. Couell, and thus confirmed agayne Couell exam. sup. pag. 178. by him. The Angells attend to further our Requests. Therefore wee may request their help.

Further I argue thus: That which is the doctrine of the L. Protestant Archbishops, and D. Feilds true Greeke Church, may not be reiected. But this doctrine of prayer and honor to Saincts, and Angells is such: Therefore not to be reiected. The Maior being before graunted; The Minor is thus proued by the Greeks in their censure of Protestants; where speaking of the one onely true God, they haue these words: Hieremias in censur. cap. 21. Wee doe not acknowledge other for God besids thee: But wee make all Saincts Mediators, and cheefely and excellently aboue all others, the Mother of God himself, Mary the Mother of God. And wee constitute [Page 297] all Saincts Mediators, and Aduocates for vs. And they pray not onely for vs, but also for those which be deade, so that they dyed not in mortall syn. For in such a case, no Iob, or Daniell, though they should stand vp to pray, should deliuer their children. Wee call vppon our Lady, Angells, Archangells, that Pre­cursor and Prophet of our Lord, the Baptist, also the glorious Apostles, Prophets, Martyrs, and holy Pa­stors, and Doctors, also the Companie of holy women, and all Saincts, to make intercession for vs synners. Hitherto the Censure of the Greeke Church, both teaching the same doctrine, with the Church of Rome, and preuenting the friuolous obiections of Protestants in this poynt.

Againe thus I argue: That which was the doctrine of the primatiue Church, free from superstition (as his Maiestie wittnesseth) Confer. pag. 69. is true doctrine and to be embraced: But the practize and doctrine of the Romane Church to pray to Saints was the doctrine of that time: Therefore it is true, and to be embraced. The Maior is graunted, and proued by Protestants before: And the Minor now thus proued by them. M. Perkins speaching of the doctrine of that time in the Church, in this matter, speaketh thus. There was in the Church Intercessio singularium, Perlins probl. pag. 89. prosingularibus, Intercession to Saincts in particular, for men or things in particular. This hee testifieth for inuocation to Saincts, and their prayers for men in particular, (for hee had with other Protestants graunted before a gene­rall [Page 298] Intercession of the Saincts for those that lyue.) Pag. 88, sup. And citeth for particular inuocation, the histories of Eusebius, and Palladius. And addeth further thus: The auncient Fathers were wont in their Masses, (In liturgijs) to recite the names of Pag. 89. sup. Martyrs and Saincts, requiring further, and asking our Lord, that hee would graunt this, or that, by their prayers, or intercessions. Hee might haue Pag. 93. sup. added more with truth, if it had pleased him, that those Auncient Masses or liturgies had diuers particular prayers vnto Saincts. And this doctrine of particular prayer, and inuocation of Saincts, was so generally vsed, both in the publicke Masses, and by the Fathers of that time, That this Prote­stant writer both freely acknowledgeth it, and calleth it syn, and sacriledge in them: his words be these: The auntient Fathers es­pecially Perkins sup. pag. 93. after 400. yeares of Christ did syn in the inuocation of Saincts: yea were guiltie of sacriledge. And for this doctrine so chargeth amonge others, these holy and learned Fathers: S. Pag. 94. sup. Paulinus, Fortunatus, S. Leo, S. Ephrem, S. Fulgentius, P. Damianus, Prosper &c. And this is the straunge Idolatrie, wherewith some of these men haue so fondly accused Catho­licks: and therefore notwithstanding all their shewe of desire to be tryed by the Fathers, M. Ormerod seeing how they Ormerod pict. pap. pag. 26. condemne Protestants, for deniall of this prayer, and inuocation: speaketh thus of those holy, and learned Fathers: They did not ponderously consider of this question. Is not this a [Page 299] ponderous consideration of so worthie a Protestant writer, to condemne all anti­quitie of want of consideration, when the lett not with his humour? and yet hee wri­teth further thus: Allthough the Auncient Fathers Pag. 27. sup. had all ioyntly embraced this opinion: yet are not wee therefore bownd to receaue it. Where hee dea­leth as old Protestants were vsed to doe, not to regard any Authoritie, but what pleaseth them. But to proue by the confes­sion of Protestants, that this was the do­ctrine of the primatiue Church, this is suf­ficient. Yet I add M. Middleton, who wri­teth Middleton papistom. pag. 129. thus: Austin teacheth vs: That Christians celebrated the memories of Martyrs, for these two intents: That wee may be associate to their meritts, and holpen with their prayers. And D. Morton al­ledgeth: Morton Apol. part. 1. pag. 227. 228. how all Antiquitie taught inuocation of Saincts.

Lastely in this Question I argue thus: No doctrine which denieth any Article of our Creede, is true, or to be receaued: But the deniall of Angells (and more strongely of Saincts whose Communion is in the Creede) to offer vpp our prayers which wee in earth make, is to deny an Article of our Creede: Therefore, it is not true, nor to be receaued. The Maior is euident by Prote­stants: The Minor is thus proued by D. Couell, Couell a­gainst Bur­ges pag. 89. who disputing against Burges the puritane, who called this an vsurping vntruthe, and taxed the Booke of Tobias, because there the An­gell saide, hee was one of the seuen holy Angells, [Page 300] that offer vp the prayers of the Saincts of God: Ans­wereth Couell sup. pag. 90. in these words: If it be an an vsurped vn­truthe, for the Angells to offer vp the prayers of the Church, vnto God, in the mediation of his sonne, wee shall (peraduenture) depriue our selues of a greate parte of their Ministery, and dissolue that communion of Saincts, which wee professe to beleeue as an Article of Gods truthe. Therefore I will by these Pro­testants conclude in this matter, that the doctrine of the Romane Church herein is Orthodoxe and true: and the contrary here­tofore taught by Protestants, false and im­pious. And the rather because it seemeth by the Kings Canons, to be excommunication Kings Ca­nons. An. 1604. can. 8. to deny this Catholicke doctrine: for in these Canons it is excommunication, Ipso facto, to affirme, or teach, that the forme and maner of making and consecrating Bishops, Preists, and deacens, conteyneth any thinge in it, that is repugnant to the word of God. And yet the Protestant Au­thor of the booke called Abridgment thus Abridgmēt An. 1605. pag. 30. testifieth of the oathe in that Booke of or­dination: The oathe of supreamacie is thus conclu­ded, so helpe mee God, and all Saincts, and the holy Euangelists. Which the late edition by Barker Booke of Mak. Bish: &c dea­cons Oath sup. hath left out. The Churches that were dedi­cated to Saints in this Kingedome euen in the time of the Christian Britaynes, and Sa­xons after, the honor, and worship, that was done, and due vnto them, how they are na­med euen by Protestants the Tutelar pa­trons of our nation, there be to many Theat of gr. Britan. Examples in the late Theater to be recited.

CHAPTER XI. WHEREIN IS PROVED BY these English Protestant writers, that the Ceremonies of the Romane Church, so much heretofore impugned by them, are now contrariwise in their Iudgment, adiudged holy, auncient, reuerent, de­cent &c.

THE third thinge which the Pro­testant Relator in this his desired Attonement, requireth the Church of Rome to giue ouer, is to leaue their offensyue Ceremonies, as hee ter­meth them, what they be in particular hee doth not expresse, but by the writings of others, his Associates in Religion, wee may iustely suppose, hee moste aymeth at the ceremonyes vsed in the holy sacrifice of Masse, crossings, candells, and such as I will iustifie by themselues in this Chapter, par­ticularly reciting them, or the cheefest, which I now omitt in this place to auoyde Repetitions, to which I am often forced. And first concerninge Ceremonyes, by what Authoritie, they may be ordayned, and being so duely ordayned, of what au­thoritie, and reuerent estimation, they ought to be, ensueth thus by these Prote­stants: [Page 302] Their publicke Articles haue thus Articul. Relig. 20. sentenced: The Church hath power to decree Rites, or ceremonyes, and authoritie in controuersies of faith. Then much more must that her authoritie needs extend to accidentall things in Reli­gion, such as these ceremonies are: D. Couell Couell mo­dest. exa­minat. pag. 64. 65. telleth vs, they be to be had in such Respect, that (to vse his words:) The primatiue Coun­cells haue condemned them as Hereticks, onely for being stiffely opposite in this kinde. And entreateth Couell sup. pag. 56. of them in these words following. Wee call them, Ceremonies, properly all such things, as are the externall Act of Religion, which haue their commen­dation, and allow ance from no other cause, but onely, that in Gods worshipp they are vertuous furtherances of his honor. And after hee had thus defined, Pag. 58. 59. or described them, hee doth also diuide them, in this order, and in these words:

All Ceremonies may be diuided thus: some were for iustifications, such as the lawe commaunded, whereby the obseruer was made more purified, and more holy. In place whereof afterward succeeded those, that were for ornament, and to signifie such vertues, as were requisite in those parties, that rightly vse them. Secondly in Respect of the Author, some were ordinances of nature, as to looke vp to heauen, to lyft vp the hands, to howe the knees, to knocke the breast, and such like, when wee pray, things vsed in their de­uotion by the Heathens themselues: others were ap­pointed by God himself, some by the Apostles, and Bishops, that succeeded in their place: thirdly some in the parts of the immediate worship, as sacrifice, prayer, adoration, and such-like: some onely dispose, [Page 303] as fasting, austere liuing: some are onely instruments, as Churches, Altares, chalices, and all those, which religeously beinge seperated. serue onely to make the deuotion more solemne, and that solemnitie to be more holy. Fourthly of these some, respect parsons, some times, some other concerne places, all which concurringe in a dyuine worship, are with Ceremo­nyes by seperation made sacred, and so fitter to serue vnto holy vses. Lastely some are particular, some more generall, and vniuersall. And hauing thus en­treated Couell supr. pag. 65. of the originall, description, and di­uision of Ceremonies, hee writeth further of their necessitie, in this maner.

There is nothinge, can be a surer preseruer of Re­ligion, then to keepe it from contempt: a thinge not easely done, where it is left destitute and depriued of holy Ceremonies. For the principall excellency of our Religion being spirituall, is not easely obserued, of the greatet number, which are carnall: and therefore wee propownde not naked mysteryes, but cloathe them: that these offeringe to the sences a certayne Maiestie, may be receaued of the minde, with a greater Reuerence. And therefore some of the Fa­thers, accounting them as the shell to the kernell, haue saide, that noe Religion, either true or false, was able to consist without them. Hitherto the words of this Protestant Doctor. From which I first argue in this maner.

Whatsoeuer Religion omitteth, and ne­glecteth those things, which are so necessa­rie, for the preseruation of true Religion, that it cannot consist without them, can­not be the true Religion: But the English [Page 304] Protestant Religion is such: therefore it cannot be true. The first proposition is eui­dently true in the light of nature: for any thinge that is necessarie for the preseruation of an other, cannot be seperated from it. The second proposition is likewise Mani­fest, for the Protestants of England neither esteeme so of Ceremonies, as this Doctor telleth vs, they ought to be accompted of, neither retayne such Ceremonies, as his di­uisions comprehend, as is euident. There­fore the Romane Church is true, and the Ceremonies thereof holy, otherwise there should be no true Church, or Ceremonies practized: and consequently no true Reli­gion, by this Doctor before.

Againe, supposing, as before is graunted by these Protestants, that either their Church, Religion, and Ceremonies, or the Romane Church, Religion and Ceremo­nies be true, I argue thus: No Church, or Religion, which omitteth, and denyeth those holy Ceremonies which are parts of the immediate worship, and the Instru­ments thereof, can be the true Church, and Religion: But contrariwise that which em­braceth and alloweth them: But the Prote­stant English Church omitteth, and denieth ceremonyes, parts of the immediate wors­hippe, and the instruments thereof, that is, sacrifice, altares, &c. which D. Couell telleth vs before to be such, and the Romane Church embraceth and alloweth them: Therefore [Page 305] the Romane Church and Ceremonyes, and not the Protestants are true. Bothe the pro­positions are manifest: Therefore the Ce­remonyes of the Romane Church be holy, reuerent, &c. otherwise no true Church and Religion could haue them, or be such.

Thirdly I argue thus: The true Church hath power to decree Rites, or Ceremo­nies, and consequently to bynde others to receaue them, and not reiect them: But by Part. 1. cap. 2. the graunt of Protestants in the first part, the Romane Church was the true Church when it ordayned all ceremonies now vsed in it: Therefore they ought to be vsed and bynde all men to receaue them, and so are consequently holy, decent, reuerent &c. The Maior proposition consisteth of the Articul. Relig. 20. words of their allowed article before cited. And the second proposition largely proued by these Protestants, as I haue cited. And by D. Couells citation it would haue been ac­compted Couell mo­dest. exa­minat pag. 64. 65. Heresie in the primatiue Church to haue beene stiffely opposite in this kinde. Therefore Protestants may not deny them, vnder such perill in his Iudgment.

Further thus I argue: Those which be the Ceremonies of that Church, which the English Protestants acknowledge for the true Church, are to be receaued for holy, decent, reuerent &c: But the Ceremonies of the Romane Church that now is, be the Ceremonies of the Lord Protestant Arch­bishops and D. Feilds and others true [Page 306] Church, the present Greeke Church: The­refore they are to be receaued as holy, de­cent &c. The Maior is manifestly true, out of their Article before, and their writers Articul. 20. sup. against the puritans. The Minor is proued out of the Protestant Relator of Religion, who speaking of them of the present Greeke Relation cap. 53. or cap. 54. Church, writeth thus: With Rome they con­curre in the opinion of Transsubstantiation, and gene­rally in the seruice, and whole bodie of the Masse, in praying to Saincts, in auricular confession, in offering of sacrifice, and prayer for the deade, and in these without any, or with no materiall difference. They holde purgatorie also, and worshipping of pictures, for the forme and ceremonyes of the Masse, they much Cap. 55. sup. resemble the Latines. In crosseings they are verie plen­tifull. Their liturgies be the same that in the old time, namely S. Basils, S. Chrisostomes and S. Gregoryes Cap. 53. or 54. translated, without any bending of them to that chaunge of languadge, which their tonge hath suffered. In summe all those opinions which grew into the Church, before that seperation, betweene the Greekes and Latines, and all those ceremonies which were common vnto bothe, they still retayne, as their Cros­seings and Tapers with others. Thus they haue proued, not onely that the Ceremonies of the Romane Church agree with, or be the same with those of that Church, which they teach to be the true Church, but to haue beene vsed in the primatyue Church, in the Masses of S. Basile, S. Chrisostome and S. Gregorie the greate, Pope of Rome the laste that added any thing to that Masse, [Page 307] which the Romane Church now vseth, and is also vsed amonge the Gretians themsel­ues, being translated into Greeke, as this Relator wittnesseth: And this will moste playnely further appeare in that hee sayth, the Greekes agree with the Latines and Romane Church in all opinions, and ceremonies vsed before their seperation. For to make manifest the An­tiquitie of these holy ceremonies by that his prescribed time of seperation: first D. Willet Willet Antil. pag. 169. telleth vs, it was before the writing of the tripartite historie, which hee citeth to that end, and was twelue hundreds of yeares synce. D. Downame is of the like opinion, Downame Booke of Antichrist. denowncing it to haue beene in the dayes of the primatiue Churche, before they take any exception to the Churche of Rome D. Feild is of the same mynde, all of them assi­gning Feild. l. 3. c. 1. pag. 62. Sutcliff subuor. pag. 89 & epist, dedicat. Willet An­tilog. pag. 263. 271. it longe before the 600. yeare: which D. Sutcliffe, D. Willet and others allowe for an vnspotted time in Religion, and cere­monies thereof. And thus wee see, that those things which to their ignorant Rea­ders, and Auditors, they will seeme to re­prehend, themselues in their owne Iudg­ment, and Rule in such causes, haue moste highely and vndenieably confirmed and iu­stified.

Againe I argue thus, from the Relator himselfe: Those Ceremonies which breede order in the Church, auoyde scandall, giue propagation vnto Religion, breede vnitie, and doe ingender, quicken, encrease, and [Page 308] norish the inwarde Reuerence, respect, and deuotion, which is due vnto soueraigne Maiestie, and power: and of themselues, are decent, reuerent, and significant, are to be allowed, retayned, and adiudged such as become true Religion: But the present Ce­remonies of the Romane Church, at this day are such: Therefore to be allowed, re­tayned, and adiudged for decent, holy, re­uerent &c. The Maior proposition is with­out all question true, and more then the Protestants require in this case. The Minor is Relation of Religion cap. 47. proued by this Relator, speaking of the Church of Rome, and the ceremonies thereof in these words. For order in the worlde, for quiet in the Churche, for auoyding of scandall, for propagatinge and encrease, of what greate power that vnitie is, which proceeds from authoritie, the papacie may teache. And againe. The outward state and glorie of their seruice, doth ingender, Relation sup. cap. 6. quicken, encrease, and norish the inwarde reuerence, respect and deuotion, which is due vnto soueraigne Maiestie, and power. Their outward gestures are de­cent, Cap. 5. reuerent and significant. Then these holy Ceremonies hauing so greate allowance, from our Enemyes themselues, for their de­cencie, reuerence, signification, vertue, and antiquitie, must needs be so embraced, pre­serued, and exercised, and may not be ter­med offensyue ceremonyes by that or any Pro­testant. And to exemplify particularly, in those ceremonies of the present Church of Rome, which be moste disallowed of our [Page 309] English Protestants: I argue thus: Those ceremonies which were vsed in the prima­tiue Church of Rome when it was in her best and florishinge state a Rule to all &c. ought, or may still be practized and obserued: But those ceremonies which the present Ro­mane Church now obserueth, and are so much disliked by many English Protestants, are such: Therefore they ought, or may still to be vsed, and with reuerence practized. The Maior proposition is often graunted be­fore, Articul. of Relig. 20. An. 1562. by these Protestants, and thus defined in the 20. Article of their Religion. The Church hath power to decree, Rites or ceremonies, and authoritie in controuersies of faith. So that whether these ceremonies belonge to faith, or manners, being practized, or ordayned by our Mother Church of Rome, and the go­uernors thereof, when by all confessions, it was holy, and the true Church of Christ, they are religeously to be embraced, and receaued.

The Minor proposition is thus proued by these men: M. Hull in his worke intituled Hull Romes polecies pag 82. 13. 83. 84. 85. 86. Romes polecies: thus recompteth them. Lent, embringe dayes, friday, altares, lynnen, Albes, corpo­ralls, preists Roabes, the feaste of S. Peters chaynes, the feast of Candlemasse. The exaltation of the crosse, the Saincts fastinge euens, Annoyntinge the sicke, an­noynting Bishops, crossinge with Chrisme in Baptis­me, Saincts Shrynes, Hymnes. pax to be caryed about to be kissed, the paschall Tapar on Easter Eauen, to be hallowed, organes and Church instruments, singeing [Page 310] of psalmes in order with Antiphones, Masse for the deade, canonicall howres, processions, processions to goe rownde about the Churche euery sonday. Hitherto the words of this Protestant writer. Others of them, as D. Morton, D. Couell, M. Ormerod, Morton Apol. part. 2. pag. 141. Couell exa­minat. Ormerod pict. parit. G. 2. 1. 3. 4. Theat of gr. Britan. pag. 298. 299. 351. &c. doe add holy water, holy fonts, interrogatories in Baptisme, dedication of Churches, introyte of Masse, wafer cakes to be consecrated in the holy Mysteries, Gloria in excelsis, the Ringe in Marriadge. And others are added by their Theater before, and other Protestants. And they tell vs fur­ther, the names of those sacred Popes and Pastors of the Church that vsed, approued, constituted or confirmed vnto vs these sa­cred Ceremonies to haue beene in the pri­matiue Church, when it truely was by his Maiesties graunt in her best estate and Mother Church, to prescribe vnto other prouinciall Kinges speache in parlam. Churches, her daughters, and (as they then were and now should be) her obedient children. And they name them as followeth: Telesphorus, Calixtus, Stephanus, Siluester, Sixtus, Hull. sup. pag. 82. 13. 83. 84. 85. 86. Morton Couell Or­mer. sup. Vigilius, Honorius, Bonifacius, Sergius, Leo, Inno­centius, Zozimus, Vitellian, Celestine, Pelagius, Vr­banus, Agapitus, Damasus, Higinius, Pius, Ce­lestinus, Alexander. All which ruled the Church, and liued, longe before Prote­stants exception to the Church of Rome, K. in par­lam. Kinge in Confer at Hampton pag. 75. and when it was in her florishing and best estate, such as wee may not depart from it by his regall sentence. Of what higthest and commaunding authoritie, ouer others the Popes of Rome were, in those vnspotted [Page 311] dayes of Christianitie, hath beene proued before.

To which I add, that D. Couell doth not onely tell vs, that Metropolitanes, Archbishops Couell mo­dest. exam. pag. 111. &c. came from thence, and who to whome should be obedient, and Superior, and were so vsed before the first generall Coun­cell, to testifie that this supreamacie was from Christ immediately, and not from Councells: But hee further speaketh thus: Eyther Euaristus Bishop in the See of Rome (in the Couell supr. pag. 162, yeare 112) or as some say, Dyonisius first assigned the precincts, to euery parish, and appointed to each Presbiter, a certaine compasse, whereof himself should take charge alone. Hitherto his words.

Then if this supreame and binding au­thoritie, was in that chaste and florishinge time of true Religion, in the Bishop of Rome, ouer all Preists, Bishops, Archbishops, Me­tropolitanes &c. to appoint, constitute, and decree, not onely what ceremonies, and so­lemnities should be vsed in all Churches: but to rate, and proportion out, what power, priuiledge, and iurisdiction, all Pa­stors, prelates, and spirituall Rulers should enioy, how farre the compasse, precincts, and bownds of their Regiments should ex­tend, whome to whome should be obe­dient, and subiect, who Gouernor and Su­perior: I trust no man will be soe obstina­tely willfull, as to resist the holy Ordinance of God, his holy spouse our Mother Churche, the sacred primatiue Pastors [Page 312] thereof, renowned Saincts, and Martyrs, and the sentence of our Kinge himself, be­fore cited, as to call these Religeous Cere­monies now after soe many hundreds of yeares into question. Especially to vse and conclude with D. Couell his words in this Couell ex [...]m pag. 65. poynt: The primatyue Councells haue condemned them as Hereticks, onely for being stiffely opposite in this kinde. And againe of such English Prote­stants: They haue done nothing els, but vntile the Pag. 61. howse, that the Rafters, beames, and the mayne timber might with the violence of tempests more speedely pe­rish. And thus much of this Question.

CHAPTER XII. Of Indulgences.

AFTER these, by the Relators di­rection I am to entreate of in­dulgences, and laste of straunge languadge in deuotions: bothe which being by his estimation of those things, which in Religion are dispensable, and not essentiall to be beleeued, I might passe ouer as entreated of and allowed be­fore by these Protestants, in the laste cha­pter, amonge so many other holy Ceremo­nies, and accidentall practizes, and custo­mes in the Church of Christ. Yet to satisfie all desires I will speake in particular also of [Page 313] these Questions: And first of Indulgences, in which I argue thus.

Whosoeuer graunt that the Church hath authoritie and power both to forgiue syns, and to remitt the seueritie or punishment due for syn, must needs graunt the Catho­licke doctrine of Indulgence: being nothing els but such Relaxation: But the English Protestants doe, or by their writing must graunt this forgiuenes of synne, and release of paine due for synne: Therefore they doe, or ought to allowe the Catholicke doctrine of Indulgence. The first proposition is eui­dently Cai [...]an. tract. 15. c. 5. Sot. dist. 21. q. 1. ar. 3. Abul q. 90. in 16. Matth. Ledes. p. Sot. & alij. Feild l. 1. c. 17. true, by the common acceptance and definition of Indulgence, both with Ca­tholicks and Protestants, which is a Release of payne, for synne enioyned or to be en­ioyned. The Minor proposition is proued from D. Feild in these words: The true Churche admitteth and receaueth all that with sorrowfull re­pentance returne, and seeke reconciliation, how greate soeuer their offences haue beene: not forgetting to vse due seueritie, which yet shee sometime remitteth. And reciting the causes of such remission, hee addeth thus: The due and iust consideration, mouing the Church to remitt some thinge of her wonted seueritie is, either priuate or publicke perill. And for proofe of this doctrine, hee citeth 1. Corinth. 2. v. 8. 9. 10. that place of S. Paule, to the Corinthians, of graunting Indulgence or relaxation of payne to the incestuous parson. Whereby manifestly appeareth that in this Protestant Doctors Iudgment, authoritie and power [Page 314] ought to be allowed to the Church, to re­lease and remitt seueritie, and punishment due for synne; which is the same which is termed Indulgence. Neither can hee finde any euasion by distinguisheing between pe­nances enioyned, and not enioyned. For that power, facultie, and authoritie, which can enioyne penance, and after it is enioyned, rebeace it againe, cannot be interpreted, but (at leaste, in that supreame Pastor, to whome the highest prerogatiue of binding, loosing, and releacinge, is committed) to haue habilitie, to pardon, remitt, or releace it, before it be enioyned. Secondly thus I argue: That doctrine and practize, which the auncient primatiue Bishops of Christs Churche held and vsed, is true, and to be continued: But the doctrine and practice of Indulgences is such: Therefore true, and to be continued. The Maior proposition is eui­dently true, often graunted before, by these Protestants: and the Minor thus proued by D. Feild, in these wordes: The auncient Bishops Feild. sup. l. 1 c. 17. pag. 33. were wont to cutt of greate partes of enioyned pe­nance: which remission and relaxation was called an Indulgence. And that is to noe purpose, which hee addeth immediatly in these termes: Out of the not vnderstanding whereof, grewe the popish pardons and Indulgences. For first how more probable it is, that the Bishops of the Romane Church, immediately and succes­siuely succeeding these auncient Bishops, practizeing the true doctrine, and vse of [Page 315] Indulgences, should continually preserue it, and vnderstand it, then those, which by interposition of a thowsand and more yeares, come after them, and without any order episcopall, or preistly, but by vsurpa­tion and intrusion (as is proued by these Protestants themselues in this treatice) teach, and of their owne heads propose the contrary? secondly his exceptiue addition destroyeth his entent for which it is allead­ged, and Protestants opinion in this poynt: for the substance of Catholicke doctrine concerninge Indulgences, to make it a re­leace of payne due for synne, is the same with the practice of those auncient Bis­hops, by him allowed, as is proued before, and in all congruitie hee that both can in­flict and take away punishment, can much rather take it away without infliction: for hee that can doe twoe things, can muche more and with greater facilitie doe one of them: because this one is conteyned in those twoe, and power of doeing the one of necessitie must needs be graunted to him, that hath power to doe bothe: especially the highest Ruler and Gouernor in such things.

Thirdly thus I argue: Whatsoeuer do­ctrine, or practize, these English Protestants teache, or exercise, in their publicke and iudiciall courts, and Consistories, that they may not denye to be lawfull: But in such authoritatiue places, and Iudgments, they [Page 316] allowe, and approue the Catholicke do­ctrine concerninge Indulgences: Therefore they may not deny it. The Maior proposition is manifestly true, otherwise two contra­dictories might be true, and in Religion which is vnpossible. The Minor also is as eui­dently certayne, by their ordinary and vsuall release, and relaxation of payne, and seueritie due for synne, against the auncient primatyue Canons, allowed by them, and by no pretext iustifiable, but by way of Indulgence, as appeareth playnely in their proceedings. And this euen in cases and causes scandalous moste requiring satisfa­ction and penance in their owne doctrine. If they thinke their Relaxation or Indul­gence therein to be frustrate, their dea­lings therein be impious, and they decea­uers: if they allow them for iust, they also allowe Indulgences, being nothinge els but a release of such penance and seueritie, as before. If they will not blushe to say that the money or bribes giuen by the penitents to them, their wyues, or Seruants doth satisfie, this is friuolous, and in the grownds of Protestants denying good deeds) if these were such) to be satisfactory and mereto­reous, more then foolish, and ridiculous to be affirmed. And against D. Feild his two Feild sup. l. 1. cap. 17. considerations mouing the Church to such Indulgence, or release, which hee telleth vs be priuate or publi [...]ke perill; insinuating, that in his Iudgment the Indulgence or release as [Page 317] the nature thereof requireth, must be free and liberall, and not a commutation or chaunge for guifts or money, which in Pro­testants denying the enioyninge of penance, must needs be wicked and Symoniacall.

Fourthly thus I argue: Whosoeuer graunt, and allowe Authoritie, to absolute penitents in confession, both a paena, & culpa: from the punishment and guilt of synne, must mayntaine the doctrine of Indulgences: But these En­glish Protestants graunt authoritie to ab­solue both from the guilt, and punishment of synne, therefore they must mayntayne the doctrine of Indulgences. The Maior proposition is often proued and allowed before. The Minor is thus demonstratiuely confirmed, out of the communion Booke, receaued in the Kings Canons: where in the Com. Booke Tit. visitat. of the sicke. treatise of the visitation of the sicke, their Rule and direction is sett downe in these wordes: Here shall the sicke parson make a speciall confession, if hee feele his conscience troubled with any weightie Matter. After which confession the preist shall absolue him after this sorte.

Our Lord IESVS CHRIST, whoe hath left power in this Church to absolue all sinners, which truely repent, and beleeue in him, of his greate mercie forgiue thee thine offences: and by his authoritie committed to mee, I absolue thee from all thy sins, in the name of the Father, and of the Sonne, and of the holy Ghost. Amen.

Where wee see not onely a Iuridicall, and authoritatiue absolution, from all sins, giuen [Page 318] by Protestants diuinitie, by the Preists, as the­re they call their Ministers, expressed in these Iudiciall and iuridicall words: the Preist shall absolue him. Christ hath left power in his Church to absolue all sinners. by his authoritie committed to mee, I absolue thee from all thy sins, &c. But also as full and powerable authoritie, arrogated, and vsurped of them, to giue plenatie pardons, and Indulgences of the seueritie, due for sin before by their owne confession, and that in more lardge, illimited, and ample order, then the Pope himself teacheth or practi­zeth. For first they generally hold, that not­withstanding any punishment or seueritie that such a parson had deserued for his sin­nes, yett after their such absolution and au­thoritatiue Indulgence, without any penan­ce to bee performed, either in this life, or in Purgatorie, (which they deny) presently after the separation of his soule from the bodie, hee is in heauen, and euer dureing happi­nes. Secondly their Rubricke and Religion is, to giue these plenarie pardons to all, re­questing them. Thirdly euery priuate mini­ster is allowed to giue these plenaries, which neither Preists nor Bishops themselues with vs, can ordinarily doe. Fourthly they giue these there plenary Indulgences, without any iust cause, or any cause of pietie at all: which the Pope himself neuer doth, concer­ning Bull. Mar­tini. Ex­trau. vni­genitus such punishments for sins, as are payed in purgatorie, or the like, as is euident not onely by the writings of all moderne Ca­tholicks [Page 319] of this time, but by these lawes, Clement [...] 6. Bonau. d. 20. 1. p. q. vlt. Ric. ibidem q. 1. ma. q. 2. Gabr. lect. 57. in can. Missa. Gersō q. de hacre. Aug. de Ancon. in summa q. 30. ar. 4. & 5. Adr. Ca. Sot. Cord. Le­desm. q. 20. &c. Canons and former Catholicke Doctors here cited, and others.

Lastely thus I argue: whosoeuer teach the distinction of mortall and veniall sins, depri­uinge, & not depriuing of grace, allowe se­ueritie, & punishmēt for sinne, both cōmit­ted and remitted, & denying purgatorie, say all the elect presently after death are in hea­uen, must needs teach the doctrine of Indul­gences, and in more ample maner, then ca­tholicks doe: But the English Protestants before and commonely soe teache: Ther­fore they must so allowe of Indulgences. Bothe propositions are euidently true, and confessed by Protestants: and neede no pro­bation. Therefore the catholick doctrine of Indulgences may not bee denied by English Protestāts: They thēselues though in words denying, yett in practice exercisinge it, in an higher measure, then is vsed by the Pope himself, as I haue proued before. And may further add, from their communion booke, where it is registred in these wordes: In the Com. Booke tit. commi­nation § Brethren. primatiue Church there was a godly discipline, that at the begynninge of Lent, such parsons as were notorious synners, were putt to open penance, and punished in this world, that their soules might be saued in the day of the Lord, and that other admo­nished by their example might be the more afraide to offend. That the said discipline may be restored is a thinge much to be wished. Where they graunt not onely a punishment for example of others [Page 320] to take heed to offend, and to satisfie their congregation, but to satisfy God for their syns committed against him, by their words, to be putt to penance, and punished in this worlde that their soules might be saued in the day of the Lorde. For as their frend M. Higgons publickly preached, and with priuiledge printed: As Theoph. Higg. ser. 3. Mart. An. 1610. there is a death in syn, and a death to syn, so there is a double resurrection: the first à culpa from syn; the second à paena, from the punishment, which followeth therevppon. Therefore these men graunting such temporall punishments due for syn, euen when and where the culpa, syn or guilt is forgiuen, and yett not exercising any such discipline, or punishment for syn, must needs in their owne proceedings allowe of Indulgences, in a farre more large, ample, or rather prodigall, and presumpteous ma­ner, then is, or at any time was vsed in the Church of Rome.

CHAPTER XIII. Of the publicke Seruice of the churche in La­tine, or greeke: and not in the vulgare Tonges.

NOW lett vs speake of the Relators laste scruple: a straunge Tonge in de­ [...]tions, as hee termeth our latine church seruice. which allthough it bee both in it self, and his Iudg­ment a matter ceremoniall, in Religion, and soe entreated of, and proued before, yett I will breefely iustifie it by these Protestants themselues, in particular, and argue thus.

That which was the practice of the churche of Christ, from the first conuersion of nations vnto him, vntill this age, of Pro­testants, is still to bee obserued or lawfully may: But the publicke church seruice to bee in the latine tonge in this part of the worl­de, wherein wee liue, was euer soe vsed and practized: Therefore still it ought or may bee soe lawfully continued. The first propo­sition is euidently true, and before often graunted by these Protestants. The seconde is thus proued by D. Doue Protestant Bishop of Doue per­suasion Pag. 23. 24. cap. of prayer. Peterboroughe: his words bee these, Vntill of late (sc. these dayes of protestancie) throughout the west part of the worlde publicke prayers were in [Page 322] Latine: in the east part in Greeke euen amonge those nations, to whome these languadges were no mother tonges. And this the confesseth, to haue beene the custome from the first conuersion of nations. For these two languadges, Latine, and Greeke, with the Hebrue, beeing the learned tonges of the world, (and the He­brues and Iewes especially in Iury, for the moste part remayninge in incredulitie) The learned and religeous Conuerters of con­tries to Christ, often not vnderstandinge their barbarous languadges, but preaching and persuading by Interpretors, yett vseing a publicke Liturgie, Masse or church seruice, could neither practize it for themselues, or frame it for others, in their tonges vnknow­ne. Of which D. Sutcliffe giueth vs a fitt do­mesticall example, of this nation English: his words of S. Augustine coming hither from S. Gregorie Pope of Rome to conuert vs, are these: comming alsoe into Kent, hee was not Sutcliff Feb. Pag. 19. able to speake one worde of English, nor to preache, vnlesse it were by his Interpretor. And yett hee doth, and must needs acknowledge, that S. Augustine vsed a publicke Liturgie, and ser­uice, which could be none in any equall Iudgment, but that which was vsed in Ro­me, & hee brought from thence. And in no wise English for this hee must either find among the Infidells, which could not bee: or els to be composed by him or his asso­ciats, or by them translated, which cannot be Imagined, they neither (as before vnder­standing [Page 323] our languadge to compose it, for the Inhabitants, or vse it for themselues. But this they haue confessed before.

Againe thus I argue: Such church seruice, masse, or liturgie, and in such tonge, as was sunge in the citie of Constantinople it self the cheefe citie of Greece, and in the time of a generall Councell, and yett not in Greeke, may with as good reason, or more be now vsed in England, or any such nation: But the latine Masse was then and there sunge. The­refore it may bee still vsed in England and other nations. The Maior is euident: for by no probabilitie the commaunding citie of Greece and of the christian world at that time, and a generall Councell there and then assembled, would haue allowed a publicke absurditie in Religiō: hauing so much more shew of authoritie to reprehend and cor­rect, euen by Protestants sentence then they haue. The Minor is proued by M▪ Hull in these words: Latine Masse was sunge at the sixt Sy­node Hull Romes polecies Pag. 83. at Constantinople in the yeare. 666.

Thirdly thus I argue: all that allowe of the publicke church seruice in a straunge and barbarous tonge to people not vnder­standing, ought in al reason rather to allowe it in the latine, a learned and common tonge to all learned, in this part of the world: But the English Protestants allowe of the church seruice in such a barbarous tonge vnknowne: Therefore by much more rea­son they must approue of the publicke ser­uice [Page 322] [...] [Page 323] [...] [Page 324] in the Latine tonge, which allwayes the Preist and cheefest Auditors doe vnderstand. The Maior cannot bee denied: And the Minor is thus proued from D. Doue a Protestant Doue per­suas. pag. 24. Bishop in these words: In Wales their mother tonge is welche, in Cornewall cornish, in Ireland Irish, yett in all these places the publicke seruice is reade in English. And yett hee will neuer proue, nor with all his Protestants take such paynes in catechizing, that the Ignorant people in those Prouinces (those that most neede in­struction) will euer bee able to vnderstand the English seruice, vsed among them, or other more shorte and familiar things in our languadge so straunge vnto the.

Fourthly supposing, as often is proued before, the primatiue Church, and practize thereof to bee a warrant vnto vs, as also that (which no Protestant can deny) the priui­ledges of the Latine Church to bee at the leaste equal with the Greeke: and that which all experience and obseruation by lyuing among Greeks, and Romanes proueth that the present vulgare Greeke languadge com­mon in Greece is altogether different from that learned tonge of Greece vsed in the primatiue Church with the holy Fathers, of that Church in those times, as S. Basile, S. Chri­sostome and such others, thus I argue.

The present Greeke Church (allowed for the true Church before by Protestants) pu [...]lickly vseth the Masses of S. Basile, S. Chriso­stome, &c. Which the common Grecians doe [Page 325] not vnderstand: Therefore the Contries vn­der the Latine Church may vse their aun­cient Latine Masses, and Liturgies. The conse­quence is not to bee denied: And the Ante­cedent is proued from the Protestant Relator, who speaking of the custome of the Greeke Church, hath these words: Their Liturgies bee Relation cap. 53. or 54. the same that in the olde time, namely S. Basils, S. Chrisostomes, and S. Gregories translated, without any bending of them to that chaunge of languadge, which their tonge hath suffered.

Lastely in this point, supposing the mayne graunde of Protestants against Latine serui­ce to bee, because so the vulgare and igno­rant not vnderstanding it remayne without due Instruction, as they pretend, I argue thus. That Church (whether it is the Catho­licke, or the Protestant) which by confes­sion and graunte of the opposites and Ad­uersaries, doth much more duely, truely, and diligently, instructe, and catechise yong peo­ple, and the ignorant both by word, and writing in their knowne and common lan­guadge, then the other doth, is not to bee condemned either of negligence or vnskill­fulnes in this busines: But the present Church of Rome, by Protestants testimonie is in this case: Therefore not to bee condem­ned. The Maior is euident, and the Minor pro­ued from the same Relator of Religion, who speaking of Catholick Preists vseth these words: They bee of excellencie for pietie, and re­uerence Relation cap. 27. sup. towards God, zeale towards the truthe, of [Page 326] loue towards this people, which euen with teares they can often testifie, they match their aduersaries, (Pro­testants) in the best, and in the rest farr exceede them. And further to the same of Protestants, and honour of our Religion, thus hee wri­teth: For bookes of prayer and pietie, all Contryes are Cap. 27. sup. full of them at this day in their owne languadge, Their opposites, Protestants, by their weakenes and coldnes are enforced to take their bookes to supply theirs. And againe in this maner. Such is their diligence, and Cap. 28. sup. dexteritie in instructing, that euen the Protestants themselues (in some places) send their sonnes to their scholes, vppon desire to haue them proue excellent in those arts they teache. This order hath alsoe their so­lemne catechizinge, in their churches, on sondayes, and holydayes, for all youth that will come, or can bee drawne vnto it. But this point of their scholes in in­structing youth, is thought of such moment by men of wisedome and Iudgment, beeing taught so by very ex­perience and triall thereof, that the planting of a good Colledge of Iesuites in any place, is esteemed the onely suer way, to replant that Religion, and in time to eate out the contrary. Hitherto this Protestant Relator, to his owne and his Associats shame, and confusion in this cause. And so I end his Questions: hoping that himself with others of his so confounded Religion, will vppon this so great satisfaction conforme them­selues to the Church of Rome, and doctrine thereof, as hee hath before aduised.

CHAPTER XIIII. CONCERNINGE REVERENCE of holy Relicks.

WHEN I entreated before of the religeous vse of holy Imadges, I would also haue spoken of this question, the reuerence of holy Relicks, being so neare and symbolizing doctrines, had not the Relator of Religion before referred mee to an other course. Therefore I will now speake there­of, in which case the Catholick doctrine expressed in the Councell of Trent, is this: Cōcil. Trid. Sesi. 9. Veneranda esse àfidelibus &c. The bodies of Martyrs &c. Are to be reuerenced of the faithfull. Accor­ding to which thus I argue, in this Article by these Protestants.

That which was the doctrine of the pri­matiue Church in this question, is true, and what it cōdēned for Heresie, is false: But the primatiue Church taught reuerence of Re­licks, as the present Romane Church now dothe, and condemned the contrary of Protestants for Heresie: Therefore the Ca­tholicke doctrine is true in this controuer­sie, and the contrary of Protestants, false and Hereticall. The Maior proposition is eui­dently true, by often graunte before. And the Minor is thus proued. First D. Willet ci­teth [Page 328] and approueth S. Ambrose thus speaking Willet An­till. pag. 201. Sutcliff Subu. pag. 27. Pag. 50. of Valentinian deceased. I will honor his Relicks, and commend his gratious memorie. D. Sutcliffe wittnesseth that S. Gregorie and S. Augustine, (that conuerted this nation) esteemed much the relicks of Saincts. And in their time, Churches were built in the honor of Saints, and their relicks worshipped. And D. Willet with others Willet An­til. pag. 13. acknowledge (as they needs must) that Vigi­lantius was condemned of heresie for denyall thereof, in the primatiue Church, and by the autho­ritie thereof.

Secondly I argue thus againe: That which was the custome and doctrine of the prima­tiue Church, may, or is still to bee kept and defended: But to pray at the monuments of Saincts, and reuerence their Relicks was the custome and doctrine then: Therefore still to bee kept, and defended. The Maior is eui­dent: and the Minor thus proued. First M. Wot­ton Wotten def. of Perk. pag. 9 hath these words: It was the maner of the primatiue Church to pray at the Tombes of Martirs: and the Christians assembled ordinarily, where the Martirs were buried. And to shew what they did there (which hee would willingly haue concealed, for hee loueth not prayers to Saints, nor reuerence of their Relicks, for which causes the primatiue Christians so there assembled hee citeth S. Hierome writing Wotten sup. pag. 544. in this maner of holy Paula: shee went into the Sepulchre, and kissed the stone of his Resurrection, which the Angell had remoued from the dore of the Tombe: the place of his bodie, where the Lord had [Page 329] lien, as if shee had thristed for the desired waters, shee li [...]k [...]d with her faithfull tonge. D. Downame writeth the like, of the holy pilgrimadge of that blessed woman. And to giue moste conuin­cing instance, and proofe in this matter, M. Perkins in his Problema writeth thus: Primi­tiua Perkins problem. pag. 81. Ecclesia honorauit & veneratione prosecuta est reliquias mortuorum. The primatiue Church did ho­nour, and prosecute with reuerence the Relicks of the deade.

Thirdly thus I argue: That vsadge and behauiour which was lawfull to the Iewes, and practized of them towards their Reliks, is now in the time of grace, giuen by Christ, as lawfull for Christians, towards their holy Relicks, and things: But the true faithfull Iewes lawfully vsed reuerence and honour to their Relicks: Therefore it is lawfull to Christians to doe the like. The Maior is eui­dent, this beeing no ceremoniall or legall thinge, abrogated by Christ, but rather con­firmed, by making the things of his lawe and Ghospell more reuerentiall, then the fi­guratiue was: The Minor is thus proued by M. Wotton in these words: You bringe diuers Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 581. proofes, that the Arke was had in greate reuerence: all needlesse for whoe denies it? and againe: The Iewes, saith Hierome, in foretimes worshipped the holy of holies, because there were the Cherubins, and the pro­pitiatorie, and the arke of the testament, Manna, Aarons rodd, and the golden altare, and further in this maner: Hee speakes not of worshippinge the Pag. 581. 582. Arke, but the holy of holyes, because of the things, that [Page 330] were in it. Hee makes the Propitiatorie, Manna, Aarons Rod, and the golden Altare, causes of that wor­ship, as well as the Cherubins. In the words followinge hee counts the Sepulchre of our Lord more worthie of wor [...]hip. Then seeing those Relicks vnder the lawe, and before Christ (the meritorious cause of all grace, and such excellencie) were so worthie of worshipp, and reuerence, that they were not onely reuerenced in them­selues, but other things were worshipped and reuerenced because of them: and yett by this Iudgment the Relicks in Christiani­tie (as the Sepulchre, no part of Christ, but the place of his sacred bodies some few howers lyeing there) are more worthie of wor­ship, as this Protestant writer confesseth: wee may not deny this Reuerence, and the Ca­tholick doctrine thereof, to bee holy, euen by English Protestants sentence.

Lastely thus I argue, from the generall practice of English Protestants: if it is law­full to giue ciuill reuerence to the bodie of a noble man, or woman deceased, because they were noble, and honored when they liued, much more reason there is, to giue re­ligeous and spirituall Reuerence to the bo­die of a Saint, holy and honored by God, and man, when hee lyued, and now in Ioyes, in heauen, truely and for euer honorable: But the Antecedent is true, by English Prote­testants, whoe by their Heralds of armes al­lowe, and practice, that all Inferiours shall giue and yeeld the same honour to the bodie [Page 331] of the honorable parson deceased, that was due vnto him, lyuing his soule and bodie beeing vnited; and this though in all morall Iudgment the soule of such an one is dam­ned. And this is the custome and ceremonie, not onely with Heralds, but vsed in Court, ratified by their Bishops, Doctors, and Vni­uersities, as many and late examples teache, which I will vrge no further, but desire all may liue and die well, that they may leaue behinde them sufficient, or some motiue, eyther to bee honored, or helped by the prayers and deuotions of the lyuinge. The consequence is euidently true, and thus de­monstrated▪ for as excellencie is the cause of honor, and ciuill excellency of ciuill and terrene honor: so spirituall or religeous ex­cellency of spirituall, and such honor. And much more: for the ciuill honor and motiue thereof is onely ens rationis, an inuention, worthines, and attribute of men, and no­thing at all Inherent in the bodie, or soule of the partie so honored: when the other excellency and cause of honor, is both per­manent, and an Inherent dignitie, as is pro­ued before of inherent Iustice, and for euer remayneth in the soule glorified, in the pre­sence of God, his Saints, and Angells in hea­uen, and there by them esteemed truly wor­thie of honor.

And how honorable such holy Relicks haue euer beene, especially in this nation, from the first conuersion thereof to Christ, [Page 332] these Protestants themselues in their Theate [...] (though so much as they can suppressing all honor, and memory of such things) will suf­ficiently testifie. Concerninge the often and frequent pilgrimadges to Rome, to visitt and reuerence the holy monuments, and relicks there, they haue told vs before in these words: Not onely Preists and lay men, vowed and Theat. pag. 305. performed pilgrimadges to Rome, but Kings, Queenes and Bishops also did the like. And in particular in these words: Kinge Kenred abandoned both crowne Pag. 307. and contry, and went to Rome, where of Pope Con­stantine hee receaued the tonsure and habit of a monke, at the Apostles tombes. Kings Cadwallader and Pag. 164. Chodwald (if not both one) abandoned their kinge­doms about the yeare 682. touke habitt of Religion in Rome, so Kinge Iuor a Brittaine and Kinge Iue a Saxon. Ceadwalla King of the west Saxons goeth on Pag. 298. pilgrimadge to Rome. Kinge Inas after hee had rai­gned Pag. 298. in greate prosperitie 37. yeares and odd moneths, professing voluntary pouertie, went to Rome, where in the habitt of a Religeous man hee ended his life in pore estate. Kinge Osroy vowed a pilgrimadge to Ro­me. Pag. 338. 345. Pag. 391. Kinge Offa in greate deuotion went to Rome. I haue spoken before how Kinge Canatus went on pilgrimadge to Rome, to visitt the sepulchres of S. Peter and S. Paule. And so of others. And Pag. 285. for Hierusalem so farr, and daungerously di­stant, thus they write: Yt was an auntient custome to goe to Hierusalem on pilgrimadge with a redd crosse worne on their backe, whence the name crosse-backe, or in old English crouche-backe was to them attribu­ted. Whence Edmund Earle of Lancaster second [Page 333] sonne to Henry 3. gott that name. So the crouched or Pag. 92. crossed friers. And of Princes in particular thus they write: Lagman Kinge of man gaue ouer his kingdome, tooke the crosse wento to Hierusalem. They tell vs also of Q. Helena a most vertuous reli­geous Pag. 205. &c. 258. brittish Lady, Mother to Emperor Constantine the greate her pilgrimadge to Hierusalem. And agayne: Offa heire to the crowne of Eastangles vppon Pag. 311. a Religeous deuotion tooke his pilgrimadge to the se­pulchre of Christ. And agayne: Swayne eldest sonne Pag. 400. of Earle Goodwyn (so potent against K. Edward the Confessor) vppon a remorse of Conscience vndertooke a pilgrimadge to Hierusalem, and in his returne dyed in Lycia. Of Robert Father to Kinge William the Pag. 413. first, they write in this maner: Seeing at the city phalesia in Normandy a moste bewtifull damsell called Arlett, tooke her to his bedd, he begatt on her William his onely sonne, and after vppon a remorse of Conscien­ce vndertooke a pilgrimadge vnto Hierusalem from whence hee neuer againe returned. Duke Robert in­tending his pious pilgrimadge vnto the holy Land, as­sembled all his nobilitie, caused them to sweare fealtie vnto his sonne William, beeing then but seuen yeares old. Entering Iury, not able to trauayle, was borne in a litter vppon the Saracens sholders, and neare vnto the cytie meetinge a returning pilgryme, desired him to re­port in his contrie what hee there sawe, which is (said hee) I am caried to heauen vppon the deuills backe. And to leaue forreine contries with their holy places and relicks thus reuerenced, this our owne nation as it visited other contries in this respect, so in the same also it was visi­ted and frequented of them. Thus they [Page 334] write: Charles Kinge of Fraunce congratulated Pag. 345. Kinge Offa, with letters of Gladnes, both for his vi­ctories and Christian piecie in his land embraced: desi­ring of Offa safe conduct for such his subiects as come to his contry in deuotion to God. In which amonge other places Glastenbury was renowned, for, [...]hat Rectory (to vse their words) was in the Pag. 207. charters of Edgar, Edmund, Elfred, Edward, Bring­walthius, Kentwin, Baldred, Ina, Kenwall, the Con­queror Rufus and others continually termed THE GRAVE OF SAINCTS; THE MOTHER CHVRCH: THE DISCIPLES FOVNDATION. Of the hand of Kinge Oswald, thus they write: After his death Pag. 337. it neuer consumed, but was shrined in siluer in S. Pe­ters Church at Bedda, now Bambrough, with worthy honor was worshipped for the miracles, and cuers that Pag 364. it did, as likewise the earth wherein his blood was spilt. They tell vs also of the pilgrimadge, and reuerence to the Relicks of S. Ihon of Be­uerly, Pag. 391. both by Kings, and subiects. Kinge Canutus before offered vp his crowne vp­pon the Martyrs Saint Edmunds tombe. And honored the body of S. Elphegus at the tran­slation 392. Pag. 83. of it from London to Canterbury. The Re­licks of S. Cuthbert, at Durham were visited in pilgrimadge, and reuerenced by our Kings and others. They tell vs, how the bodies of Pag. 294. the two yonge Princes Nephewes to K. Egbert, were miraculously reuealed, (their names Ethelred and Etherbert) and greately reuerenced. Of K. Kenelme thus they write: Pag 307. 308. Murthered, obscurely buried, but miraculously knowne, and afterwards with greate honor and ceremony [Page 335] translated to the Monastery of Winchcombe, which his father founded. And so of that glorious and noble Saint Neote, supposed to bee the sonne of Pag. 351. 352. Kinge Ethelwolfe, brought vp at Glastenbury. Hee planted a Monastery in Cornewall, whereunto hee vsed for deuotion and studious meditation (beeing one of the first diuinitie Readers in Oxford) often to with­drawe himself, which of his aboade there, was after­wards called NEOTESTOKE, and when hee was deade, his body was with greate honor interred in the countrie of Huntington, at a place then called ANVLFESBVRIE, and afterward in regard of his Interment, Saint Neotes, and now Saint Needs. And in the same shire of Huntington at S. Iues, Pag. 57. they tell vs, that S. Iue a Persian, an Heremite beeing buryed, his body was vncorrupted in Robes Epi­scopall. Had in greate honor, and the towne tooke denomination of him. And so of others to many to bee recited.

CHAPTER XV. Of the reall presence of Christ, and transsub­stantiation, in the blessed Sacrament, of the Altare.

BECAVSE I would bee loath to omitt any one question, especial­ly of moment, wherein these Protestants take exceptiō against the doctrine of the Church of Rome: I [Page 336] will next make recitall what their two greate writers D. Sutcliff and D. Willet most dislike therein, and Answere it vnto them, and all others, in whatsoeuer not before al­lowed, and iustified, by their owne writers.

D. Sutcliff making mention of those Arti­cles, Sutcliff Subu. pag. 44. which hee supposeth wee cannot iusti­fie, onely reciteth these, that followe: Reall presence, Transsubstantiation, the sacrifice of Christs bodie for the quicke and deade, halfe communion, Popes supreamacie, Indulgences, worshipping of Imadges, and Purgatorie.

D. Willet (as before) assigneth these that Willet Antil. pag. 264. ensue: Transsubstantiation, the Sacrifice of Masse, worshipping of Imadges, Iustification by workes, the supreamacie of the Pope, prohibition of Marriadge, (in the cleargie) which hee calleth the grossest points of popery. Hee addeth also, an equalitie of Bishops, onoly approueth the Hebrue scripture:, Iustifi­cation by faith, and disliketh free will. These bee all their Exceptions: neither doth the Booke of Articles of their Religion make mention of any other much materiall (except Sacra­ments whereof hereafter) then either such as I haue allreadie handled, or bee compri­sed in these Cataloges: Allthough all in these remembred are not the doctrine of the Parlament Protestant Church of England. But Additions, and new Inuentions of par­ticular Puritanes, as D. Willets Hebrue scriptu­res, equalitie of Bishops, &c. In which (excepting that which I haue spoken of the scriptures before consonant to the Councell of Trent) [Page 337] I must leaue him to bee censured as a periu­red man (hauing sworne to their Articles) by their owne Religion, lawes and procee­dings. For the rest, most of them bee proued by themselues before, as Popes supremacie, In­dulgences, Imadges, Iustification by workes, or inherent Iustice (not onely by faith) and free will. All the others I am now to examine. And first of Transsubstantiation, and Christs reall presence in the blessed Eucharist, Because it compre­hendeth as well this maner of Christs pre­sence, and a true Sacrifice, as they all graunt, vppon proofe of that veritie: as the que­stion also of D. Sutcliffs termed half commu­nion; For if Christ bee substantially, truly, and wholly present in both kinds: Then it is not an half, but whole communion, and re­ceauing of Christ: for hee must needs bee equally receaued and participated vnder the one, as vnder bo [...]h kindes and formes: ac­cording D. Thom. 3. p q. 80. ar. 3. Gabr. lect. 84. Ric. d. 11. Caiet. 3. p. q 3. ar. 3. Sot d 12. q. 1. ar. 12. pet. Sot. lect. 20. Eu­char. L [...]des Claud. de Saincts Ruard. & alij. to the common opinion of schoo­les, aswell longe before the Councell of Constance as after, teaching that no more fruite is communicated and giuen to the Receauers and Communicants, by both, then by one kinde. this supposed. I Argue thus in this Question. Whatsoeuer doctrine the highest binding, authoritatiue, and com­maunding Iudgment which (by these Pro­testants before) is a generall Councell, hath determined, defined & concluded, is to bee embraced and mayntained: But the doctri­ne of Christs reall presence, and Transsubstan­tiation, [Page 338] is such: Therefore to bee embraced, and maintayned. The Maior is euident, and often graunted by many of these Prote­stants. among whome D. Feild writeth thus: The Bishops assembled in a generall Councell, may in­terpret Feild l. 4. c. 16. the scripture, and by their authoritie suppresse all them that shall gayne say such Interpretations, and subiect euery man, that shall disobey such determina­tions, as they consent vppon, to excommunication, and censures of like nature. The Minor is also proued Couell def­of Hook. pag. 21 Parkes ag­ainst Lim­bom. pag. 176. Tom. [...]. Cō cil. in Con­cil. Later. Bergam. hist. an. 1213. Ge­nebr. hist. an. 1215. Palmer. Floren. chron. an. 1215. Concil. La­teran. cap. 1. by them, directly in this maner: for first both D. Couell and M. Parkes cite and allow the Councell of Laterane, as a Rule of faith. And hauing present in it the Patriarkes of Greece, Constantinople and Hierusalem, 70. Metropolitanes, 400. Bishops and other Fa­thers aboue 800. together with the Legates both of the Greeke and Romane Empire, with the Orators of the Kings of Hierusa­lem, Fraunce, Spayne, England (so especially binding vs) and Cyprus: I trust the rest of them cannot deny it to bee generall, if euer any was so termed, this beeing farr the grea­test that euer was in the worlde: now that it defined Christs reall presence in the blessed Sacrament, is euidently demonstrated by these expresse words of the Councell gra­unted by Protestants: Verum Christi Corpus & Sanguis in Sacramento altaris sub speciebus panis & vini veraciter continetur, transsubstantiatis pane in Corpus, & vino in Sanguinem, potestate diuina. The true bodie and blood of Christ is truely conteyned in the Sacrament of the altare vnder the formes of [Page 339] breade and wyne, the breade beeing transsubstantiated into his bodie, and the wine into his blood, by the diuine power. Therefore all English Protestants are Feild l. 4. c. 16. suppressed by D. Feilds sentence before, from gayne saying it. And to shew further that this was no new and straunge doctrine, then first held, and defined, but of the auncient primatiue Fathers, thus I argue againe in this question.

Whosoeuer held that there is in this Sa­crament a conuersion, mutation of one thinge into an other, and not in shape; but in nature, that breade is made Christs bodie, that the visible creatures are chaunged into the substance of Christs body, & blood, &c. Doe and must needs graunt transsubstantiation, and Christs reall presence in the B. Sacra­ment: But the auncient Fathers doe this: Therefore they teach and graunt Transsub­stantiation. The Maior is euident, those termes beeing equiualent with transsubstantiation, and seme the verie same both in effect and name. The Minor is proued by M. Perkins in these Perkins probl. pag. 153. 154. words: The Auncients when they speake of the sup­per, haue many formes of speache, which shew a con­uersion: Ambrose vseth the name of conuersion, and the name of mutation. Ciprian saith, it is chaunged not in shape but in nature. Origen saith, that breade is made the body by prayer. Gaudentius saith, Christs bodie is made of breade, and his blood of wyne. Eusebius Emis­senus saith, that the Preist by secret power doth chaun­ge the visible creatures into the substance of Christs bodie, and blood. And that the breade doth passe into [Page 340] the nature of our Lords bodie. Anselmes saith, that the breads doth flitt into Christs bodie. Fulbertus saith, it is transfused, Algerus saith, it is transiected and transfer­red into Christs bodie. Hitherto this Protestants words of those auncient Fathers doctrine in this point, to which hee might haue ad­ded many more, and more conuincing: But hee knew these too many, and manifest against them, as appeareth by this his friuo­lous glosse vppon their expresse sentences, confounding and confuting himself in his owne words, which bee these: But the Aun­cient Doctors where they speake of the conuersion and chaunge of the breade, they vnderstand the chaunge of the vse, and condition, not of the substance. What man but impudent, and voide of all shame, and grace, would Father vppon so many holy, and renowned Learned Fathers, so grosse equiuocation, or rather flatt lyinge, to speake one thinge, and meane an other, as hee speaketh, and this in so cheefe and mate­riall article of Faith, and Religion, wherein not the least equiuocation may bee vsed, if it could saue the life of thousands or mil­lions of men. And to confound this Sacra­mentarie by his owne fellowes: First D. Feild Feild pag. 150. writeth thus: The bodie of Christ is present in, and with the sanctified Elements. The primatiue Church thought the sanctified and consecrated Elements to bee the bodie of Christ. Where hee plainely confes­seth that those primatiue Fathers ment as they spoke, and both spake and ment, as Catholicks now doe, that Christ is really [Page 341] present there. And that there was a substan­tiall chaunge, or transsubstantiation of the breade and wine into the bodie and blood of Christ. Secondly D. Downame tolleth vs, Downame l. 2. Antich. pag. 110. that S. Ambrose, one of his cited Authors speaketh thus: Wee adore in the misteries that flesh of Christ, which the Apostles adored in the Lord IESVS. Then if the same flesh of Christ, which was adored of the Apostles, is both present in this Sacrament, and to bee ado­red, that Doctor did speake of a true and substātial conuersion and mutation. Thirdly hee is so cleare in this point for Catholicks, that M. Middleton not knowing how to glosse him, yett more then inconsiderately angry with that holy and Learned Sainct, and Do­ctor, for that his doctrine, speaketh of him in these prophane termes: Hee is guiltie of pre­sumptuous Middleton papistom. pag. 61. and desperate blasphemie. Fourthly M. Perkins before citeth and numbreth with the other auncient Fathers, Algerus, who Alger. l. contra Be­reng. wrote expressely against Berengarius, in the question of transsubstantiation, and in his booke extant in that matter handeleth and confu­teth the obiections of carnall reason against it, in the some order as the present schole­men doe. And it is so manifest that hee taught this doctrine of transsubstantiation, which the other as then an Hereticke de­nied, that M. Middleton confesseth, that Beren­garius Middleton papistom. pag. 94. 95. in his Recantation beginning Ego Beren­garius, &c. did so far aknowledg the real pre­sence, & Transsubstantiation, that hee thinketh the Catholicks of this time rather suppose [Page 342] hee confessed to much, then to little in that Matter. And the present Protestant Arch­bishop of Canterbury speaketh of him in these words: Berengarius in deed was onely called Abbots ag­ainst D. Hil pag. 60 in question for denying of Transsubstantiation, in the Sacrament, and h [...]e yeelded once or twice, to recant, and abiure the doctrine, which hee held. Then they which write against him, and all those Lear­ned Fathers cited by M. Perkins before, con­senting with them, as hee confesseth, must needs maintaine the reall presence of Christ and Transsubstantiation. And those Protestants of England, which defend the contrary, must needs bee Heretiks, for that cause, as is thus by a new argument proued from their owne Protestant Archbishop. Whosoeuer maintayne a doctrine publickly, and Iuridi­cally recāted, & abiured be Hereticks: But al English Sacramentaries bee such: Therefore they bee Hereticks: and the contrary is true Catholicke doctrine. The Maior is euidently true: And the Minor proued before by their cited Archbishop, teaching (which they all confesse) that the recanted and abiured he­resie of Berengarius▪ is the same which they defend. Againe thus I argue: whatsoeuer thinge, beeing Christs bodie, when it is re­ceaued of vs: and is with deuotion to bee receaued, because it is his bodie: and is after an ineffable maner his bodie: and by grace made Christs bodie: and is his bodie present in the sanctified elements, is the true bodie of Christ: But the B. Sacrament of the Eu­charist, [Page 343] is so: Therefore it is the true bodie of Christ. The Maior is manifestly true: And the Minor thus proued by these Protestants. First D. Doue Protestant Bishop of Peterbo­rough Doue per­suas. pag. 28. writeth thus: As often as wee bee made par­takers of the Lords Table, wee recreaue the Lords bodie because hee hath said it his owneself. Wee re­ceaue it with reuerence and deuotion, because it is his bodie. And approueth the Catholick doctrine of Bishop Gardiner and others, saying with allowance thus! Stephen Gardiner and the learned of their Church were wont to say, it was his bodie ineffabili modo, after an vnspeakable maner, after such a maner as mens tonges could not vtter. And so say all Catholicks at this day, numbering this amonge the greate mysteries of Christian Religion, as the auncient fathers did. Where­by the sacramentaries are confounded: For to say, or thinke that breade and wyne may bee figures of Christs bodie, and blood, as many other things are, and diuers things bee figures of others, is neither vnspeakable, or not able to bee vttered, but a thinge so easie to bee conceaued, and spoken, that euery ignorant man can both without difficultie conceaue, and vtter it. Againe the same Pro­testant Bishop thus writeth of Catholicks in Doue supr. England: If they will receaue at our hands, wee will not bee ouer hastie with them to examine them, how they doe expound the words, Hoc est Corpus meum, this is my bodie. Which no man of conscience, and learning can write, much lesse a pretender to bee a Bishop and Pastor, except hee doth in­wardly [Page 344] thinke the Catholicke doctrine of Transsubstantiation, and the reall presence to bee true: otherwise hee should admitt both men that bee vnworthy, & in some of their Iudgmēts, Idolaters to the greatest Sacramēt, which cannot bee excused from moste hey­nous sin. To him I add M. Middleton speaking Middleton papistom. pag. 106. in this maner: Though breade by nature bee but a prophane common Element, appointed of God to feede our bodies: yett by grace it pleaseth the Lord to make it his bodie. D. Feild as before writeth thus: [...]he Feild pag. 1 [...]0. bodie of Christ is present in and with the sanctified Elements. Therefore there is a reall presence and Transsubstantiation.

Further thus I reason: That which by the omnipotencie of God, is made Christs bo­die, and is that in which Christ is really pre­sent, and in which there is probably taught transsubstantiation of breade into Christs bodie, that which by antiquitie was said to bee made Christs bodie, and is the flesh, which was giuen for the life of the worlde, is vere­ly and truely the bodie of Christ: But the Eucharist is thus: Therefore it is the true bodie of Christ. The Maior proposition is euident. And the second thus proued by D. Couell whose words of this sacred miste­rie bee these. The omnipotencie of Christ maketh Couell def. of Hooker pag. 276. it his bodie. Wee all agree in a reall presence. And speakinge of the maner how Christ is mira­culously made present there, hee writeth thus: Wee must truly beleeue, that Christ is there Couell def. pag. 116. 117. sup. present. Which because some irreligeous men, at the first doubted: men haue beene driuen to finde out, these [Page 345] reasonable satisfactions, or rather satisfactions to hu­mane reason, from his omnipotencie, transsubstantia­tion, or such like: whereas in deede wee knowe that in many misteries of our faith, it is sufficient to beleeue the thinge, though wee cannot comprehend the maner how. And citeth there the highe misterie of the Trinitie, the Resurrection and this blessed Sacrament to bee of that kinde. Then seeing by this allowance, it is so certaine, that Christ is really present there, that it is Irreli­gion to doubt it, and it is a reasonable satis­factiō, euen to humane reason (from whence Protestant arguments against it bee dedu­ced) that the maner is by Transsubstantiation, as wee Catholicks teache, no man but Irreli­geous, and vnreasonable, can call it into question. And hee writeth further of this matter in these words: it is on all sides plainely Couell sup. pag. 119. confessed, that this Sacrament is a true and reall parti­cipation of Christ, who thereby imparteth himself, euen his whole entire parson. Therefore if the whole entire parson of Christ which cannot bee without his bodie and blood, is there, and there imparted and receaued, damnable is that diminisheing doctrine, wherein sa­cramētaries would haue it but a signe & fi­gure: And hee expressely teacheth, that they doe not, or should not differ from the Ro­mane Churche, concerning the true, reall, and substantiall presence of Christ, in this Sacrament. Which hee as plainely expres­seth, where entreatinge of the dignitie of Preists, hee writeth thus: To these parsons, God Couell sup. pag. 87. [Page 346] imparted power ouer his mysticall bodie, which is the societie of soules, and ouer that naturall, which is him­self, for the knitting of both in one, a worke which Antiquitie doth call the makinge of Christs bodie. And in an other treatise hee speaketh, of the same matter, in this maner: The power of the Couell mo­dest exa­minat. pag. 105. Ministry by blessing visible Elements, it maketh them inuisible grace. It giueth daily the holy Ghost. It hath to dispose of that flesh which was giuen for the life of the worlde: and that blood which was powred out to redeeme soules. Hitherto this Learned Prote­stant: whose words bee so plaine in this point, that no conclusion, but themselues, needeth to bee inferred from them. And not onely in this, but other Questions, as be­fore, these Protestants of England are so cleare, for Catholiks doctrine, and against that, which their parlamentarie Religion doth, or would seeme to teache, that D. Willet Willet a­pud Parkes against Limbom. pag. 20. 21. def first te­stim. writeth of them in this sorte. They maintayne traditions, free will, freedome from sin, Iustification by workes, workes of super erogation, of transsubstantia­tion with diuers others. Therefore euen by Pro­testants, this sacred doctrine of the Romane Churche is to bee embraced, and defended: as well taught by Catholicks, Protestants, and D. Feilds true Greeke Church also: from which lastely thus I argue.

That doctrine which is taught by the true Church in Protestants Iudgment, which by them cannot err in any essentiall thinge, is true: But the doctrine of the Ro­mane Church concerning the reall presence [Page 347] and transsubstantiation is such: Therefore it is true. The first proposition is proued and graunted before: And the second is manifest in these the expresse words of the Greeke Churches censure, vppon Protestant doctri­ne: It is the Iudgment of the Church, that in the holy Hierem. in censur cap. 10. supper after consecration, and benediction, the breade doth passe, and is chaunged into the verie bodie itself of Christ, and the wyne into that blood of his, by the power of the holy Ghost. For our Lord in the same night wherein hee was betrayed, taking breade and giuing thankes, brake it and saide, take and eate, this is not breade, or a figure of my bodie, but this is my very bo­die, and my blood. So that, both then and now the breade is transformed and chaunged into his bodie, and the wyne into his blood, as our Lord promised, and affir­med in many places of scriptures. And this is more then sufficient of this matter: especially seeinge not onely Queene Elizabeth, in her Parliam An. 1. Eli­zab. parl. 1. Iacob parl. 1. Edw. 6 c. bothe kin­des. first Parlament receaued this doctrine of Transsubstantiation, by allowing and reuiuing the statute of Kinge Edward, the sixt in that behalfe, and this their statute was neuer yett repealed: But also in the first parlament of his maiestie confirmed with the rest of Q. Elizabeth. The Protestant publishers of Praefat. in Petr. Gal­latin. Frāc. An. 1602. Mortō App. pag. 396. & pag. 395 Petrus Gallatinus, tell vs, that the testimonies which hee bringeth from the Rabbynes before Christ, are vndeniable, which allowed, D. Mor­ton writeth thus: They are more playne and pre­gnant for transsubstantiation, then are these sayings of transsubstantiators themselues. They make so directly for transsubstantiation, that the moste Romish Doctors [Page 348] for the space of allmoste a thowsand yeares, after Christ, did not in so expresse termes publish this mystery to the world. Againe D. Androwes Protestant Bishop Casaubon resp. ad Card. Per. pag. 50. 51. of Ely cited by Casaubon and Casaubon him­self, from our Kinge himself, (as hee saith) affirme: Yt is Christs body, the same obiect, and thing, which the Romane Church beleeueth. Therefore ac­knowledging there is a chaunge in this Sa­crament, as commonly they do, that before the words of consecration it was breade, and wyne, and after, is the same obiect and thing which the Romane Church beleeueth, the body and blood of Christ. This chaunge beeing from breade into the body of Christ, and from wyne into his bloode, which is a chaunge. Substantiae in Substantiam, of one substance into an ohter, must needs bee (as wee Catholicks teache) Transsubstantiation.

CHAPTER XVI. Of the holy Sacrifice, of Christs blessed bodie, & blood; cōmonly called the Masse, daily offered in the Church.

AND hereby is not onely proued the Catholicke doctrine of this particular question, of Christs reall presence in the B. Sacra­ment, and the maner how by transsubstantia­tion of the elements breade and wyne by power of his omnipotent worde into his moste sacred bodie and blood: but those also which depend from thence, as is before re­membred, the sufficiencie of communica­ting [Page 349] of such as doe not offer the holy sacri­fice (first instituted and euer to be conti­nued in both kindes) in the one kinde onely: as also the true externall and publicke sacrifice of Christs true Church, consistinge of the oblation and offering of his most B. bodie and blood, in these holy Misteries; for which, because it hath beene so pro­phanely and blasphemously contradicted by diuers of our English Protestants, I meane to speake a little more particularly therein: and from themselues first argue thus.

Whatsoeuer is the reall and true bodie, and blood, of Christ, now vnseperable from his moste blessed soule and is publickly of­fered vnto God by the lawfully called and authorized preists of his Church, is a true, publicke, and holy sacrifice: But that which is commonly called the Eucharist, or blessed Sacrament of the altare, offered by Catho­licke preists, of the Romane Church in Masse, is such: Therefore it is a true pu­blicke and holy sacrifice. The Maior proposi­tion is euidently true and confessed of all men of learning in Christianitie, neither can be doubted of any, that is ignorant if hee knoweth the termes themselues expres­sely signifieing and shewing the veritie thereof euen by the light of nature. The se­cond proposition is also more then aboun­dantly proued and verified by these Prote­stants in the last chapter: yet to giue it a further (though needles) confirmation, I [Page 350] proue it againe in this order to be a sacrifice externall and publicke.

That doctrine which that Church, which is esteemed by Protestants to be the true Church teacheth, is to be allowed: But this doctrine of Christs blessed bodie, and blood, to be ouer publicke sacrifice, in the Church, is such: Therefore it is so to be allowed. The first proposition is often graunted be­fore; and the second of the Greeke Chur­ches opinion, and practice, both at this present, and from the time of the primatiue dayes of christianitie, to be agreeable with the present Romane Church, is iustified by the Protestant Relator of Religion in the chap­ter of holy ceremonies His words (to make Relation cap. 53. or c. 54. a new repetition) of that Churches do­ctrine are these: With Rome they concurr in the opinion of transsubstantiation, and generally in the seruice, and whole bodie of the Masse, in praying to Saincts, in auricular confession, in offering of sacrifice, and prayer for the deade, and in these without any, or with no materiall difference. They hold purgatorie also, and worshipping of pictures. For the forme and Cap. 55. ceremonies of the Masse they much resemble the La­tines. In crosseings they are verie plentifull. In summe Relat. of Relig c. 53. or 54 sup. all those opinions which grew into the Church, before that seperation, betweene the Greekes and Latines, and all those ceremonies which were common vnto bothe, they still retaine. Then this doctrine and practice of this publicke sacrifice, beinge not onely the vse of these two Churches now, but before their seperation, which [Page 351] these Protestants in that place haue told vs Cap. 11. sup. to haue beerie 1200. yeares agoe, must still with reuerence be obserued. Which this Protestant Relator shall here confirme againe, Relat. sup. cap. 53. or 54. speakinge of the present Greeke Church in these words: Their liturgies be the same that in the olde time, namely S. Basils, S. Chrisostomes, and S. Gregories (which is the same that the Romane Church now vseth) translated, without any bending them to that chaunge of language, which their tonge hath suffered. M. Middleton also Middleton papisto­mast. pag. 51. Morton Apol. part. 2. pag. 81. telleth vs of the Masses of Basile, Chrisostome, and Epiphanius, and that in them the deade were prayed for. D. Morton goeth higher, to the dayes of the Apostles, citing and allowing not onely the Masses of S. Basile and S. Chrisostome, but S. Iames the Apostle himself. Where­fore I hope hee and others will be the better pleased to accept the Censure of Hieremias the Constantinopolitane Patriarke taking vppon him to be supreame in that Church, vttered in these words: The holy Masse is a sacri­fice Hierem. in censur. instituted of Christ in memorie and commenda­tion of all his mercie and humilitie sustayned for our sakes. Saint Iames the Apostle, called our Lords Bro­ther, first reduced into order that liturgie and Sacri­fice, being so instructed of Christ to doe it. In all parts of that holy sacrifice, nothing els is handled, but an vniuersall order of things, which our Sauiour vnder­tooke for our Redemption. How these primatiue Masses, liturgies or formes of the B. sacrifice of Christs bodie and blood, in all questions and articles of Religion agree with that [Page 352] which the Romane Church now practizeth from S. Gregorie, as these men before al­lowe, and others write from S. Peter the Apostle, is apparant in those liturgies and Masses, and too longe to be cited in this place. And from hence thus I argue againe.

That doctrine, and publicke practice of Sacrifice, or other, which was instituted by Christ, practized by his Apostles, and such holy Saincts and Doctors of the Churche, as Sainct Basile, S. Chrisostome, S. Epipha­nius. and S. Gregorie were, may and ought still to be obserued, kept, and vsed: But the doctrine, and practice of our publicke Church Sacrifice, or Masse, is such. There­fore it may, and ought still to be kept and vsed. The first proposition is moste euidently true, and cannot be denied by any true Christian: and the Minor is before proued in these laste Protestants allowed citations: and may further be confirmed by these Pro­testant writers: D. Sutcl [...]ffe writeth thus: Wee reade in Ignatius this phrase, offerre and, sacri­ficium Sutcliff subu. pag. 32. immolare, to offer and immolate sacrifice, and like phrases in Irenaeus, Ciprian, Tertullian, and Martialis, who mentioneth also Altares. And these words, and the things, truely signified by them, Altare and Sacrifice, are in the Greeke and other tongues so vnseperably ioyned, and knitt together, that D. Morton doth thus acknowledge: Wee cannot dislike the sentence Morton App. pag. 162. l. 2. cap. 6. Sect. 1. concerning the mutuall relation and dependance be­tweene an Altare and sacrifice: but graunt that altare [Page 353] doth as naturally and necessarily inferre a Sacrifice, as a shryne doth a Saint, a father a sonne. And a­gaine: it is truely said Sacrifice and preisthood are Relatiues. Then, for altares hee hath hard be­fore, that they were in the Apostles time: and consequently Masse, the Christian sa­crifice was then: for hee hath told vs they cannot be seperated. And his Protestant Bishops in their late Theater, will putt him out of all doubt, that from the beginnynge of Christianitie, euen in England, such al­tares for sacrifice were vsed of the Chri­stians. Their words be these: It is reported that Theater of greate Brit. pag. 205. n. 12. pag. 204. Patrick the Irish Apostle, and canonized Saint longe before the Raigne of Kinge Lucius preached the Ghospel in many places of Wales: And also that Ninianus Ber­nicius of the race of the Brittish princes conuerted the Picts to the Religion of Christ. To which effect also the sayings of S. Iohn Chrisostome Bishop of Constanti­nople enforce. And amonge Ilands expressely nameth this our Brittayne: Whose Inhabitants (saith hee) haue also consented to the word, which is planted in euery harte, in honor whereof they haue erected their temples, and Altares. Thus in the Brittans tyme; that S. Augustine brought in Altares, Masse, and the ceremonyes thereof is proued by these Protestants in other places. And the Theater it self setteth this for one of the Que­stions of S. Augustine to S. Gregory: Guifts Theat pag. 330. offerred on the Altare how to be distributed asked by Augustine of Pope Gregory. And thus they write of Kinge Redwald. After baptisme returninge to Ido­latry, Pag. 333. in one and the same temple after the maner of [Page 354] the olde Samaritans, hee erected an Altare for the seruice of Christ, and an other little Altare for burnt sacrifices, which stood vnto the dayes of Beda himself. And longe before againe in the Brittans tyme they tell vs of Preists stayne standinge at the Altars. And againe in Pag. 291. Pag. 317. Gildas tyme 1200. yeares since, oathes taken vppon the Altars made of stome. And to se­cure D. Morton what the sacrifice offered vppon those Altars was, they tell vs, that in this primatiue tyme in this Iland, amonge the brittans: The Altar was called the seate of the Theater pag. 317. sup. n. 6. celestiall sacrifice. And againe, whereas D. Morton hath graunted before, That Sacrifice and preist­hood are Relatiues, which bee of an vnseperable nature, Both hee, and all others that now so earnestly contend to haue themselues acco­unted Preists, must as much labour for this externall sacrifice, which as hee affirmeth, is vnseperable from preisthood. Otherwise if they shall agayne fly vpp and downe, to their fantasied spirituall preisthood, and sa­crifice, Queene Elizabeth (if her prayers and deuotions had beene as greate) was as good a Preist. As S. Peter was, and D. Mortons Mother, grandmother, beldame, and all wo­men of his kiudred, or in the world, (if their vertue were equall, were as good Preists as hee: if hee were a true Preist, which I deny: And yet they all agree, that all woman sexe, and kinde is vncapable of holy preisthood. Againe D. Morton with his frend Theodore Bi­bliander Morton App. pag. in sacrif. assuer vs, that the Rabbins before [Page 355] Christ did teach, that those which receaued the Messias, should in place of the sacrifices of Moses lawe, haue an externall sacrifice in breade and wine, and called it Thoda. Which is sufficient for this place, & purpōse, where I onely proue, that there is in Christian Religion an exter­nal sacrifice to succeed the sacrifices of the Lawe; for that this sacrifice though begun in breade and wyne, is the blessed body and blood of Christ, I haue proued by these Protestants in the former chapter. And this which I contend in this place, is playnely graunted vnto mee by Casaubon, wrighting in Casaub. resp. ad Card. Per. pag. 51. 52. &c. our Kings name, and by his commaund as hee protesteth, and in these words: neither is the Kinge Ignorant, nor denieth, that the fathers of the primatiue Church, did acknowledge one sacrifice, in Christian Religion, that succeeded in the place of the sacrifices of Moses Lawe. And accordinge to this it is confessed by other Protestants, allowin­ge also, the doctrine of the primatiue fa­thers for a Rule to vs: The words of M. Middleton are these: The sacrifice of the Al­tare, Middlet. Papist. pag. 92. 113. and vnbloody sacrifice were vsed in the primatiue Church; and the auntient fathers called the sacrifice of the body, and blood of Christ, a sacrifice. And agay­ne: The primatiue Church did offer sacrifice at the Pag. 49. sup. Pag. 137. 138. 47. 45. Altare, for the deade. Sacrifice for the deade was a [...]radition of the Apostles, and the auntient fathers. Then if this was from the beginninge, true and Catholick doctrine, to offer sacrifice, and say Masse for the deade, much rather for [...]he liuinge, and so both for the lyuing and [Page 356] the deade, in Protestants Iudgment. And so both the forme of our holy preisthood. Receaue power to offer sacrifice in the Church for the liuinge and deade: And also holy sacrifice of Masse, offered for such purpose, by a duely consecrated Preist, is holy and acceptable before God. And all English Protestants that shall deny it, ar not onely within the Anathe­ma of the Councell of Trent in these words: If any man shall say, that in the Masse a true and Cōcil. Trid. Sess. 6. cap. 1. de Sa­crif. Miss. proper sacrifice is not offered, lett him bee Anathema: But subiect to the cursse and condemnation of the primatiue Church against Aë [...]ius, the Hereticke, and his complices, as their owne Doctors Feild and Couell are wittnesses in this maner: Aërius condemned the custome of the Church, Feild pag. 138. l. 3. cap. 29. Couel. Exam. pag. 114. in naminge the deade at the Altare, and offeringe the sacrifice of Eucharist for them: and for this his rash and Inconsiderate boldnes, and presumption, in con­demninge the vniuersall Church of Christ, hee was iustly condemned. How much more then are these present Protestants worthie condem­nation, who do not onely contemne the doctrine, and custome of the present Ro­mane, Greeke, and vniuersall Church of Christ, in this so greately concerning que­stion, but against their owne Iudgments, with rash inconsiderate boldnes, and presumption condemne the vniuersall primatiue Church, an [...] confederate themselues with Hereticks (i [...] their owne Iudgment) iustly condemned, against it. And contrarywise this holy Ca­tholicke doctrine of Masse, or Sacrifice fo [...] [Page 357] the liuing and deade, by our Enemies allow­ance, a Tradition of the Apostles, vse and custome of the vniuersall Church of Christ, in the primatiue, and best florishing estate thereof, and euer since continued, is inuio­lably to bee maintayned.

CHAPTER XVII. OF THE SINGLE, AND CHASTE life, of Preists, and vowes of chastitie.

NOw lett vs come to that doleful and heauie Question to these maried Protestant Church men; To proue by them also the aun­cient and true Catholicke do­ctrine, and practice of the single, and chaste life of Preists, and vowes of chastitie: The contrary wanton, licentious and sacriled­geous libertie vnto this and other works of perfection, whillfull pouertie, and obedien­ [...]e as it first made way for Protestant here­ [...]es into the world, as appeareth by their Apostle Luther, and the rest presently vppon [...]heir reuolt, for chastitie, pouertie, and obe­ [...]ience, which they had vowed: for the most [...]art giuing themselues ouer to their contra­ [...]es, Lust, Riches & Rule: so it is to this day [...] vnpleasing a thinge in this Epicurean [...]ct, that they cannot endure to follow the [...]nons either of the Latine Church, vnder [Page 358] whose obedience they should bee, if thy will shew any at all, or to the Gre [...]ke Church eyther as will appeare in this chap­ter, howsoeuer they will seeme to allowe thereof, especially in this Article, of later dayes vsing more libertie therein, then other Churches But to omitt all things of discon­tentment to this people I argue thus. That doctrine and practice which is a worke of perfection, profitable vnto, or making per­fect the members of Christs misticall bodie, his Church, ought to bee allowed and pra­ctized of them: that call themselues the per­fect, and reformed Church, especially in that sorte of people, or some greate part of them, that are, or would bee esteemed the moste perfect, reformed guides and dire­ctors to others, as their ministers pronounce themselues to bee: But the doctrine and pra­ctice of single and chaste life, and vowes of chastitie. Bee such: Therefore to bee embra­ced and allowed of these Protestants, other­wise they haue not the perfect and refor­med but vnperfect and deformed Church.

The first proposition is euidently true, and in the light of nature too grosse absur­dities doe followe in denying it. The second proposition is at lardge proued by these Protestants in the chapter of precepts and Cap. 7. sup. counsailes before from whence at this time I will onely shew by D. Couells testimonie, that it is so absurde to deny it, that hee would free all Protestants from it. His [Page 359] words of the workes of perfection bee these. In these points all haue not holden the same opi­nions: Couell def. of Hooker pag. 52. some thought the counsailes to bee of the some necessitie, with precepts: as those Hereticks called Apostolici. Others esteemed them as things indifferent. Others as things forbidden, which error is accused by some of our Aduersaries, to bee an opinion of our Church. There is none of any sound Iudgment in our Church, which doth not thinke, that willing pouertie, humble obedience, and true chastitie, are things verie commendable, and doe bringe with them greate ad­uantadge to the true perfection of a Christian life. By these wee doe more then without these wee should. Then these men graunting the doctri­ne, and neuer practizing the vse of it, from whence this aduantadge to true perfection is brought, are in a practicall error, in this point and ought to reforme themselues. Yf any man will excuse their omitting of it: hee must needs answere, that it is, either be­cause they will not, or are not able to per­forme it. If it onely proceedeth of willfull­nes, they are generally to bee reproued of willfull obstinacie, and sin against the holy ghost, vniuersally refusing or resisting such holy motions, Inspirations, and graces. If they say, it proceedeth from want of grace, spirituall power, and assistance to effect it, they plainely proue, and thereby acknow­ledge themselues, and their Religion, to bee gracelesse, and not of God; not hauing that habilitie, and strengthe in any one compai­ne, or societie of men, or women, amonge [Page 360] them in so longe time, to embrace and pra­ctice that which so profiteth to perfection. And as strongely graunt, the Church of Rome, and the doctrine thereof for true, wherein that grace hath beene giuen to thousands of societies, to professe, to lyue, and die in perpetuall vowed chastitie; which hath not beene bestowed one any one fraternitie in their Religion. And there­by demonstrate to the world, that those Ca­tholicke Preists of our nation, whom they persecute as enemies to God, are in this greate fauour, and grace with him, in per­forming that perfect estate, of continencie which our Aduersaries openly confesse they cannot do. Which wee are so fart from acknowledging in vs, that in greate multi­tudes, wee will solemnely sweare, wee truely performe it.

And no man vnderstandinge the seuere canons of Catholicke Religion, for such offendors, the greate reuerence wee giue to that moste blessed sacrifice, which wee daily offer, and what Innocencie of life at the leaste to bee free from all carnall and other mortall sinne, wee require vnto it, and the ministring of all other Sacraments conti­nually practized by vs, can condemne our Order in this matter further in this question I argue thus: That which was decreed by the Church, within the first 400. yeares of Christ, is now to bee obserued: But the vowe of continencie was then decreed to [Page 361] bee annexed to holy orders: Therefore still so to bee obserued. The Maior is allowed befo­re: And the Minor proued by M. Perkins in these words: Continentiae votum, necessarium, & Perk pro­blem. pag. 192. perpetuum, &c. The vowe of continencie, necessarie, and perpetuall, seemeth first to haue beene decreed in the west Churche, about 380. yeares after Christ. Traely it was receaued before, but by the priuate de­uotion of some, not by the publicke Iudgment of the Churche. If any man saith, hee acknowled­geth, then onely to bee decreed though vsed before, and this in the west Church; it sufficeth for this purpose, and is obligatorie to Protestants, both confessing that a time of truthe, the Romane Church then to haue beene the true Church, and Mother vnto others, and themselues vnder the Iurisdi­ction of that westerne & Romane Church. And customes are not vsually decreed, but vppon Transgression of them. But M. Middle­ton will tell vs, That S. [...]piphanius an holy Sainct and blessed Bishop of Greece, writ­eth of such decrees, and Canons to the whole Church, both to haue beene extant, and practized longe before that time and from the beginning of Christianitie, as his words (traditions) without limitation argue. Epiphan. l. 1. to 2. cō ­tra her. Cathari apud Mid­dleton pa­pistom pag. 139. 140. Thus hee is cited by him writing of the Ca­thari Hereticks. Those Traditions which were deliue­red peculiarly for the Cleargie by reason of their su­pereminencie in celebration of the diuine mysterie, These Hereticks would haue all men tyed vnto, when they did heare that a Bishop ought to bee vnreprouea­ble, [Page 362] the husband of one wife, and continent, and like­wise of Deacons and Preists. For in truthe since the comming of Christ, the doctrine of the Ghospell doth not admitt into these offices any, that haue married a second wife, by reason of the excellent dignitie of preisthood. And this holy Church doth sincerely obserue, yett doth not the Church admitt any into those offices that is the husband but of one wife, whose wife is yett lyueing with him in the fellowship of marriadge, sed eum qui se ab vna continuit, aut in vidui [...]te vixit. But him onely that either was neuer married, or that after the death of his wife lyueth vnmarried, the Church receaueth into the office of a Deacon, Preist, Bishop, or Subdeacon, which is especially obser­ued, where the Ecclesiastical Canons are sincerely kept. But thow wilt say vnto wee, that in many places, Preists and Deacons do liue in wedlocke: But this is not according to the sinceritie of the canons. Hitherto, and further, bee the conuincing words, of this holy, and learned Father, of the Greeke Church, whose euidence is so playne for the Catholicke doctrine, and practice in this Question, and against Protestants, that M. Middleton flatly saith: Epiphanius was too par­tially Middleton sup. pag. 143. affected in this point. And hereuppon thus I argue againe: That doctrine, which is so plainely, and directly held, and maintayned, by the learned holy fathers, of the primatiue Church, that the present Protestant Aduer­saries, (otherwise seeming to allow these fa­thers) confesse it to bee their opinion, and of the Church in their time is to bee embraced and obserued: But this Catholicke doctrine [Page 363] of Preists continencie, and vowes of chasti­tie is such: Therefore to bee embraced, and obserued. The Maior is manifestly true, both Catholicks and Protestants in shew at the leaste, allowing the primatiue Church and Fathers thereof for Iudges in questions of Religion. The Minor is thus proued. First M. Middleton acknowledgeth S. Epiphanius, S. Hierome, S. Chrisostome, and S. Ambrose, to bee so playne against their Marriadge in the Clergy and their doctrine against vowes of chastitie: that hauing written of S. Epipha­nius as before. hee addeth of S. Hierome thus: Hee made vnciwill entroades against Gods holy ordi­nance, Middleton supra pag. 134. Pag. 138. in this point. Of S. Chrisostome thus: Chrisostome in his vehemencie goeth beyond measure in reprehending, and the Christians of his time in their lightnes went beyonde measure in voweing. Of S. Ambrose thus: Ambrose had the Apostoli­call Pag. 134. dragon, the deuill dwelling in him. And of the holy auncient Fathers in generall in this matter. Hee speaketh in these termes: Neither Middleton sup. pag. 133. is it any thinge to the purpose, that the auncient Fa­thers allowed vowes of chastitie, and single life of Preists. And againe: The Auncient Fathers are not Pag. 334. fitt Iudges to determine either of Preists Marriadge, or vowes of chastitie. M. Wotton well percea­uing, the doctrine and practice of the holy primatiue Churche, in those vnspotted dayes, dealeth as freely with vs in these words: Such was the opinion of holines in single life, Wotton, def. of Perk. pag. 491. in the primatiue Churche: that it is not to bee looked for, that antiquitie should afford vs any testimonie, [Page 364] against the practice and Iudgment of those dayes. Then how gracelesse, and impudent are these men, to cite both fathers, and Coun­cells, to proue that, which in their con­science, and knoweledge, they both vnder­stand in themselues, and publish thus vnto the world, they vtterly denyed, and disal­lowed; wholly and clearely teaching the present doctrine of the Romane Church, and the contradictorie to Protestants asser­tions? Whether they were Greekes or Lati­nes: and this in so serious maner, that such breach of chastitie vowed (which M. Perkins confesseth to bee aboue 1200. yeares olde) was called Incest and punished with excom­munication. From whence I argue thus further.

That which by holy fathers is called In­cest, and by allowed generall Councell in the primatiue Church, censured with ex­communication, is not to bee adiudged lawfull: but the contrary. But breache of the vowe of chastitie, now aboue 1200. yeares annexed to preisthood is such. The­refore it is not to bee adiudged lawfull: But the contrary. The Maior proposition is eui­dently true: And the Minor thus proued, by M. Perkins, in these words. Epiphanius in his Perk probl. pag. 201. 61. heresie saith, they that marry after they vowe do sin, and enioyneth them penance. So Augustine and Hierome. viduit c. 9. After these Marriadges began to bee accompted of some for a more greuous sin, after the yeare 380. Basile calleth these Marriadges, In­cest, [Page 365] the offence of whoredome and adulterie, in his hooke of virginitie; by the Councell of Calcedon in the 15. canon they are punished with excommunication. But they will say the later Greeke Church vseth more libertie in suffering the vse of Marriadge in holy orders: Though this is nothing to vs, that bee vnder the westerne and Romane Church, by their owne con­fessions, yett thus I demonstrate, that they neither agree with the auncient, nor present Greekes in this question, but make lust, li­centiousnes, and libertie to bee their lawe. For proofe whereof I argue thus.

That which is the cheefest lawe to the Greekes (beeing as D. Feild writeth, the 13. Feild l. 3. c. 18. pag. 101. Canon of the 6. generall Councell, other­wise the 13. canon made in Trullo) doth onely licence Subdeacons, Deacons, and Preists, maried before Orders, not to bee sepera­ted from their wiues, but to abstaine from them in the tyme of their turne, that is in the tyme when they sa­crifice, as the second Councell of Carthadge in the 2. Canon defineth. But the Fathers say that they know it deliuered for a canon to the Romane Church, that Deacons, or Preists in their ordination professe, that they will not any more company with their wiues. But both the doctrine, and practice of Prote­stants, are contrary marrying both before, and after orders, not regarding any time of sacrifice, but denying it, and beeing vnder the Romane Churche, yet professe open disobedience to the Canons of it. And not onely to the Latine but to the Greeke [Page 366] Church also. For in the Greeke Church nei­ther their Bishops, Religious men, or wo­men, or votaries of chastitie are permitted to marry: but for such to marry is adiudged sacriledge in that Church, the words of their Patriarke Hieremias are these: Whosoeuer Hierem. in cens in epi­log. shall not performe the vowe of chastitie, doth incurr the moste filthy sin of sacriledge: and to performe such vowes, is the moste angelicall and excellent life that can bee ledd on earth: therefore wee must greately ex­toll monasticall life, and conuersation. Therefore these Protestants, not onely permitting and tollerating, but inciting, prouoking, and procuring Bishops, Monkes, Fryers, Nun­nes, and all votaties to marriadge, are by this censure guiltie of the filthie sin of Sacriled­ge, and agree with no Church, Greeke, or Latine, in this point, and question.

But these men in their Theater and els Obiect. where tel vs that there were married Preists in Ireland, in the time of S. Malachy, and in Speed in Theatr. pag. 145. &c. England in the time of S. Dunstan, our Arch­bishop of Canterbury. But they haue beene told before, euen from primatiue Saincts, Answ. and Doctors, that wheresoeuer, and when­soeuer such were, it was an error, and intru­ded abuse, and not accordinge to the sinceritie of the Canons. And answell by this kinde of Ar­gument, that such, and such things haue beene, or now bee, without proofe that they are good, and ought to bee, they might proue murder, treason, Adultery, incest, sa­criledge, blasphemy, and whatsoeuer villa­nies, [Page 367] and Impieties to bee holy or Iustifiable things: for these things were, not onely in one, or two kingedomes, in one or two ti­mes, but bee, and haue beene with such wic­ked men, in all tymes, and kingedomes. And to lett them knowe by their owne authori­ties, that it was so in this their obiection, wicked men that were thus married, or al­lowed it; and holy, and Saincts, that forbad, and condemned it, They themselues in this their Theater wittnes, in these words: S. Mala­chy Theatr. sup. n. 9. pag. 145. (whose life S. Bernard writeth) prohibited Preists Marriadges in Ireland. And to assure vs further, that they were holy men, that forbad these Marriadges, and the highest authoritie by their owne Iudgment before by which they were forbidden, thus they testifie in these words: Pope Gregory sendeth hither (into En­gland) Theat. pag. 421. n. 47. his Bulls, with damninge curses, against the marryed Cleargie: commaundinge that none should heare their Masses. And thus againe: Pope Gregory in a generall Synode excluded the married Preists from execution of their holy offices, and forbad the lay men to heare their Masses. And our Archbishop of Can­terbury, Pag. 373. then by their owne sentence a Saint, condemned them miraculously as they testi­fie; so were they cōdemned by other Coun­cells and authorities. The sanctitie of S. Dun­stan, Pag. 371. 372. his miracles, guifts of Prophetie, and verified Propheties of the calamities, and punishments which God inflicted vppon the Princes and fauourers maintayning tho­se wicked marriages, are in some part testi­fied [Page 368] in their owne Theater. The Princes that Theat. pag. 377. &c. cap. 43. l. 7. disallowed them were holy and Saincts; amonge which was Kinge, and S. Edward the Martyr murthered and martyred by the fa­uourites of married Preists Amonge which was his Mother in Lawe Queene Elfrida, and hir sonne his half brother Ethelred after Kinge by this Martyrdome. Where vppon these men themselues haue thus registred: The harts of the Subiects drawne from their Souerai­gne. Theat. sup. Dunstans Prophesie against their wickednes. A cloud of blood and fier, and many extreame miseries of that tyme. Dunstan further prophesieth of other calamities to the Land after his death, Queene Elfri­da, this greate patronesse of those wicked Marriadges, and Murderesse of that blessed Kinge, & Martyr, acknowledged her error, and did perpetual penance for those Impie­ties: their owne words thereof bee these: Elfrida the second wise of Kinge Edgar, procured the Theat. pag. 372. n. 17. murder of Kinge Edward, her sonne in lawe, that her owne sonne Ethelred might come to the crowne: and afterwards to purifie his, and her husbands, ghost and to stopp the peoples speaches, of so wicked a fact, shee founded the Abbeis of Amsbury, and Whorwell, in the Pag. 374. n. 10. counties of Wiltshire, and South-hampton: in which later shee liued with greate repentance, and penance vntill the day of her death. But both the life and death of them that repented not, was by these mens relation, odious and execrable. I will onely exemplify in two Kings, Ethelred before related, and Kinge Edwyne before him, both maintayners of Preists marriadge. [Page 369] of Kinge Edwyne they write in these words: Theat. pag. 366. n. 7. 8. Pag. 369. n. 2. 3. Kinge Edwyne the day of his coronation before his no­bles sittinge in counsell at that age, not aboue thirteene yeares old, with shamelesse and vnprincely lust abused a lady of greate estate, and his neare kinsewoman. Hee was a greate enemy vnto the Monkish orders, whom from the monastery of Malmesbury, Glastenbury and others, hee expelled, placing married Preists in their Romes. Dunstan likewise the Abbot Saint of Glosten­bury hee banished the Realme, for his ouerbold repre­hensions, &c. His subiects deny him obedience, And sett vpp Prince Edgar his brother in Mercia, and Nor­thumberland, not fully fourteene yeares old. Edwyne then raigninge in a still decaying state, was held of such is subiects, in no better esteeme, then was Iehoram of Iudah, who is said to haue liued without beeing de­sired: for very greefe whereof after foure yeares of his Raigne, hee ended his life. His wife thought to bee to Neare in the blood royall, to bee matched with him in spousall bedd, the subiects dislikinge of the vnlawfull marriadge (the cause of Dunstans banishment) failed by degrees to performe their duties to their Kinge, and her, they likewise forced to a seperation in the third yeare of his regardlesse gouernment.

The miseryes and punishments of Kinge Ethelred, and this Kingedome for his syns, they recompt in this maner: Ethelred not able Theat. pag. 376. 377. to resist the Danes, his subiects not loueing him, payeth vnto them 10000. pounds to depart. An other peace hee purchaseth with 16000. pownds. The next com­position 20000. pownds. Then 24000. pownds. Then 30000. pownds, and lastely 40000. pownds, vntill the land was emptied of all the coyne, the King­dome [Page 370] of her glorye, the nobles of courage, commons of content, and the Soueraigne of his wonted respect and obseruaunce. The miseryes of this land, for the syns of the patrons of such marriadges, as now be defended, and honoured in En­gland, which then it felt, are to many, and lamentable to be remembred at this time. And a man may iustly call it a straunge Ex­ample, that amonge other straunge punish­ments of Kinge Henry the eight that greate patron of Cranmer, that marryed bishop (that mared Religion) and supreame head of such a Church, that in his life time so iumbled, tumbled, and tumbled the world together, should haue no better commen­dation of these Protestants now, but to be ranked by them, as the cheifest amonge wicked, and iustly punished English Kings, in their late published history of the worlde, in these words: Now for Kinge Henry the eight▪ if History of the world in pref. all the pictures and patterns of a mercilesse prince were loste, in the worlde, they might all agayne be paynted to the life, out of the story of this Kinge. And be­cause Protestants memoryes serue them not, to call to mynde, the holynes, sanctitie, and Saints, that haue beene in our English Ca­tholicke Cleargie, but like filthy swyne de­syre to tumble, moyle, and roote in dyrt, lett them cast ouer their accompts, throughe out the historyes of this kingedome, be­gynning with their owne Marriadges, and tyme, and so ascendinge to the first conuer­sion of this land to Christ, and it will be no [Page 371] difficult Auditt to make, that they them­selues▪ and those which were marryed, as these be, were the moste disordered, pro­phane, and irreligeous that were in our En­glish Cleargie; lett them make the calcula­tion, I may not now intend it, my methode will not allowe it. Being fittest for such as be partakers of such impieties. Onely to begyn their reckoninge, I must putt them in mynde, out of their Theater and other their owne historyes, penned by Protestants. That as this Kingedome, of our English, or saxon Christians, hath beene but twyse con­quered, and ouerrunne, once by the Danes, then by the Normans, the greatest miseries and punishments it hath endured; So the same their Theater, other histories, and Pro­testant writings, neuer obiect vnto vs, more Married, and disordered Preists, and cleargie men, then at those tymes. God of his mercy graunt, that their third state of married mi­nisters, presage vs better bydeings, and bring vs greater comforts. Of vowes and profes­sion of perpetuall chastitie, and other wor­kes of perfection it is further entreated in the proper question of such holy and reli­gious life and conuersation.

CHAPTER XVIII. OF PVRGATORIE, AND PRAYER for the deade.

AFTER this, lett vs entreate of prayer for the deade, and Purgato­rie: And because, these Prote­stāts before haue giuen so greate allowance, to the Greeke Church, especially D. Feild Intituling the 5. chapter of his third Feild l. 3. c. 5. in titul. booke: Of the nature of scisme, and kindes of yt, and that it no way appeareth that the Churches of Greece, &c. Are hereticall or in damnable schisme. And it is their common assertion, that the doctrine of purgatorie is onely taught by the Romane, and not Greeke Church, I will first thus argue from the authority thereof. That doctrine which is taught by that Church, which is neither hereticall, nor damnably scismaticall cannot bee hereticall, nor damnable, but orthodoxe, and Catho­licke: But the doctrine of Purgatorie is taught by this so Iustified Church, the Greeke Church. Therefore not hereticall, nor dam­nable. But orthodoxe and Catholicke. The first proposition is euidently true: for it is the doctrine, and practice of any companie, or priuate parson, that giueth vnto it, the denomination, Hereticall, Schismaticall, Ortho­doxe, &c. The second proposition is proued [Page 373] by these Protestant Testimonies following. First the Protestant Relator, writing of this Greeke Church, speaketh thus: With Rome Relation of Relig. c. 53. or c. 54. they concurre in the opinion of transsubstantiation, and generally in the seruice, and whole bodie of the Masse, in praying to Saincts, in auriculare confession, in offeringe of sacrifice, and prayer for the deade, and these without any, or with no materiall difference. They hold Purgatorie also, and worshipping of pictures. Therefore these doctrines of purgatorie & the rest must needs by their Iudgment bee orthodoxe and Catholicke, and neither he­reticall nor damnably scismaticall, other­wise against D. Feilds supposition, and Title, his fellow Relator had proued it to bee such. Againe M. Middleton telleth vs, that in the Middleton papistom. pag. 51. Masses of Basile, Chrisostome, and Epiphanius (all Greeke Fathers) the deade were prayed for. But because they will perhaps looke for the ve­rie name of Purgatorie, I deduce it from the tyme of the Apostles to haue beene taught, and the doctrine thereof in the Greeke Church: For M. Perkins telleth vs, that Dio­nysius Perk. pro­blem. pag. 178. The Prote­stant booke of Homel. Bell. motiu. fol. 133. &c. (commonly called, and by Protestants, The Areopagite, S. Paules Scholler) did teach: In Purgatorio expiari peccata. That sinnes are purged in Purgatorie. Therefore hee thought there was a purgatorie, as Catholicks doe, and in that satisfaction was made for sins. And there hee setteth downe the prayer vsed for the deade, recorded by the same S. Dionysius in these words. Dionysius Hierar. Ecclesiast. p. 3. Perk. sup. c. 7. Oratio illa precatur diuinam clementiam, vt [Page 374] cuncta dimittat per infirmitatem humanam admissa peccata, defuncto. That prayer doth beseech the diuine Clemencie, to forgiue to the par [...]ie deceased, all sinnes committed by humane Infirmitie. To like purpose (as hereafter D. Bilson the Protestant Bishop Bilson Sur­uey of Christs sufferings. of Winchester citeth, S. Iustine, Ir [...]naeus, Cyrill, Chrisostome, Theodoret, Ignatius, Clement of Alexan­dria, Eusebius, Athanasius, Epiphanius, Basile, Gr [...]gorie Nazianzene, Damascen, Theophilact, &c. The glo­ries of the Greeke Church. And therefore Gennadius Schol. the Learned Patriarke of that Churche, in his defence pf the Counc [...]l of Florence, writeth thus of that matter. The Cennad, Schol. de­fens. 5 cap. 3. doctrine of Purgatorie, prayer, and sacrifice for the deade was a Tradition of the Apostles. That which the Latines call Purgatorium (purgatorie) they of the Greeke Churche name Catharterion. Signifieing a purging, cleansing or satisfying place, of the Greeke verbe [...] to purge, cleanse, ex­piate, &c. And prouing this at lardge, by the auncient Greeke fathers, hee addeth thus: They were onely Schismaticorum s [...]ctat [...]res, followers Gennad. sup. of S [...]ismati [...]ks, whi [...]h denied it. For such Masters in Religion will our Protestants fynde out to followe, if any time, age, Church, or so­cietie had them. Lastely in this Argument, the Censure of the Greeke Church vppon this error of Protestants, is deliuered in these words: That the soules departed are to bee Hierem. Patr. con­stant in cē ­sur. c. 15. releeued by prayers, sacrifices, and good deeds, of those which lyue, and that it was decreed by the holy Apostles, that in the celebratiō of the holy misteries, a memorit should bee made of them, that were departed this life.

Againe I argue thus: That which was the doctrine and Tradition of the Apostles, and holy Fathers, of the primatiue Church, is to bee embraced: But the doctrine of Purgato­rie, praying, and satisfying for the deade, was such: Therefore to bee embraced, and ob­serued The first proposition is often graun­red before. And the second also proued in this chapter, yett thus I add vnto it. M. Mid­dleton Middleton Papistom. pag. 64. saith, that S. Chrisostome taught it to bee the Apostles ordinance, to pray for the deade. And con­fesseth: It was a Tradition in the primatiue Church; Pag. 45. 46. sup. receaued from the fathers to pray for the deade, and begg mercie of God for them. And againe: The Pag. 51. sup. deade were prayed for in the publicke Liturgies (or Masses) of Basile, Chrisostome, and Epiphanius. And further thus: The Churche in Epiphanius time vsed Pag. 47. 48. 49. to craue mercie for the deade. M. Hull telleth vs that in the primatiue Churche, Leo appoin­ted Hull Rom. pol pag. 86 Morton a­pol. part. 1. pag. 329. Mortō sup. pag. 273. Masses for the deade. D. Morton saith of S. Augustine, that hee prayed for his Mother Mo­nicha deceased. And from Caluine hee wittnes­seth generally thus: Ipsi veteres preces fundebant pro defunctis. The auncient fathers prayed for the deade.

Further I argue thus: whatsoeuer doctrine beeing denied ouerthroweth an Article of our Creede, & beeing graunted confirmeth it, is true, by Protestants: if they denie not the Articles of the Creede, as they will not seeme to do: But the doctrine of Purgatorie beeing denied, destroyeth an Article of our Creed, and beeing graunted, confirmeth it: [Page 376] Therefore it is, or ought to bee esteemed true, by Protestants. The Maior is euidently true, for the Articles of our Creede bee moste true, and cannot by true doctrine and positions bee proued otherwise. I proue the Minor in this maner. Those places both of scriptures and fathers, which the Protestants themselues against the Puritans namely D. Bi [...]son (Protestant Bishop of Winchester with others) vse to proue the Article of Christ discent to hell, doe proue purgatorie, which is made euident by citing some fewe. As that of the Prophet Dauid. Hee ledd them Psal. 106. v. 14. 16. forthe of darknes, and the shadowe of death: and brake their bonds. Hee shattered in pe [...]ces, the brasen gates, and brake the Iron barrs. And that of the Prophet Zacharie speaking of Christs dis­cending thither: Thow also in the blood of thy Te­stament, Zachar. 9. v. 11. hast lett out the prisoners from the lake. And Dauid and S. Paule of his ascending with these captiues into heauen. Thow aidst ascend Psal. 67. v. 19. Ephes. 4. v. 8. 9. on highe: thou tookest captiuitie. And in S. Paule: Ascending on highe, hee ledd captiuitie captiue, hee gaue guifts to men. And that hee ascended, what is it but because hee descended also first into the Inferior parts of the earth. Which sayings of holy scrip­ture (that cannot bee vntrue) cannot bee in­stified of the hell of the damned, from whence none were deliuered: because in hell there is no Redemption. Therefore the same Protestant Bishop Bilson assigneth a third Bilson Sur­uey pag. 552. 656. place, besides heauen and hell, his words bee: Abrahams Bosome was vpward farr aboue hell. [Page 377] Neither did I make Abrahams bosome to bee paradise or heauen. And citing the fathers to proue Christ discent to hell, hee bringeth them ordinarily prouing Putgatorie, or if not by that name, yet in effect, teaching that Christ descended to a place of punishment, were many deceased were punished, and detayned captyues, and deliuered them from thence which (as before) could not Bilson sup. from pag. 582. to pag. 665. be hell. The very names of those Fathers proueing this doctrine, are toe many and tedious to be related, their sentences may be seene in that his collection.

Lastely I argue thus: whatsoeuer do­ctrine is defined, or proposed to Prote­stants by their highest commaunding Rule of their Religion, as Communion Booke, Booke of Articles &c. to which they all subscribe, they may not deny: But this doctrine of Purgatorie or prayeing for the deade is such: Therefore they may not deny it. The Maior is euident, and the Minor proued out of their publickly allowed and reconfirmed Communion Booke. Where in the Buriall of the deade their Ministers are appointed to pray for the partie deceased in these words: That wee with this our Brother, and all other depar­ted Comm. Booke Tit. Buriall of the dead [...] neare the end: §. all­mightie God. in the true faith of thy holy name, may haue our perfect consummation and blisse, both in body and soule, in the eternall and euerlasting glorie: Amen If this prayer, that people deceased may come to heauen bodie and soule (man hath no other part to be prayed for) is not to [Page 378] pray for the dead nothing can be called praying for the deade, and for their salua­tion. And so I end this Question, with this sentence of M. Higgons, in his publick ser­mon, Theophil. Higg. serm. 3. Mart. 1610. at S. Paules Crosse, giuing a reason of this doctrine, in these words: As there is a death in syn, and a deathe to syn, soe there is a double resurrection: The first a culpa, from syn: the second a paena, from the punishment which followeth ther­vppon. Which must needs be the temporall punishment of syn, the grownde of Pur­gatorie, and satisfaction, after death being oftentimes not satisfyed, answeared, or (to vse his owne phrase) not risen from, in this life. For the eternall punishment of hell, due for greate syns, is euer remitted, and risen from, in his resurrection a culpa, from syn. Otherwise a man now intituled heire of the kingedome of heauen, and saluation, should also be guiltie of hell, and damna­tion, saued and damned, in heauen and hell together. And vppon this and other such holy grownds, these Protestants in their late Theater recompt vnto vs so many hun­dreds Theat. of greate Brit. &c. of Religeous howses fownded by holy Kings, princes, and others in England to pray for the soules of themselues, their Auncesters, posteritie, and other Frends.

CHAPTER XIX. TEACHEING HOW THERE be 7. Sacramentes in number, by these Protestants, accordinge to the doctrine of the Romane Church.

HAVEING ended all other Que­stions to the full satisfaction, and accordinge to the requests, and demaunds, of Protestants, desi­ringe to be satisfied therein, and perfor­ming this from themselues, and owne wri­tings: I will proceede in the same maner in the Articles of the holy Sacramentes, and first of their number, thus sett downe in the Councell of Trent: There be seuen Sacra­ments Concil. Trid. de­cret. de Sa­crament. of the new lawe, instituted by IESVS CHRIST our Lorde, neither more nor fewer: Baptisme, Con­firmation, Eucharist, Penaunce, Extreame Vnction, Orders, Matrimonie. For defence and proofe of which doctrine, by these Protestants themselues, thus I argue.

Whatsoeuer doctrine a confessed true generall Councell, hauing authoritie to bynde all by these Protestants before, hath deter­mined in this question is to be receaued and followed: But the Catholicke doctrine of the Romane Churche concerning seuen Sacraments, is thus determined by such ge­nerall [Page 380] Councell, and bynding authoritie: Therefore to be receaued, and followed. The first proposition is graunted before, and must needs be thought so equall to all Protestants, that how soeuer they thinke of the infallible sentence of such assemblies in matters of faith, yet none of them may be soe partiall, but to preferre a generall Councell to any Protestant assemblie, cen­sure, sentence, or decree. The second is euidently proued, supposeing what is writ­ten before euen by Protestants of the gene­rall Councell of Florence, and for such with the doctrine thereof not onely ac­knowledged, by D. Willet and M. Parkes but Willet Limbom. Parkes pag. 137. 180. Gennadius in defens. concil. Flor. Concil. Florent. de Sacramen­tis nouae legis. by the Patriarke of Greece himself in his defence thereof. Where it is thus decreed, both with assent of Grecians, & Armenians: Nouae legis septem sunt Sacramenta, scilicet Baptis­mus, Confirmatio, Eucharistia, Poenitentia, Extrema Vnctio, Ordo & Matrimonium &c. There are seuen Sacraments of the new lawe, that is, Baptisme, Con­firmation, Eucharist, Penance, Extreame Vnction, Orders, and Matrimonie. Which doe muche differ from the Sacraments of the olde lawe, for they did not cause grace, but did onely figure that it was to be giuen by the passion of Christ. But these of ours bothe conteyne grace, and giue it vnto them that worthely receaue them. Hitherto the decree of that holy generall Councell, receaued by all Christendome, Latines, Armenians, Iacobynes, Grecians. From whence I further argue in this maner.

Whatsoeuer doctrine essentiall in Reli­gion, (such as Sacraments be) is taught by the true Church, that is neither hereticall, nor Scismaticall, is to be embraced: But the doctrine of seuen Sacraments, as the Romane Church teacheth, is such, being likewise taught by the Protestants true Greeke Churche: therefore to be embra­ced. The Maior is also proued in the laste Argument, and further confirmed in the Censure of the Greeke Church, vppon Protestants in these words: There is an holy Hierém. in censur. cap. 7. Catholicke and Apostolicke Churche, of all true Chri­stian men. In this Catholicke and true beleeuing Church there be seuen diuine Sacraments, Baptisme, the Vnction of holy Oyntment, holy Communion, Or­ders, Matrimonie, Penance, and the oyle of Ex­treame Vnction. And they further prosecute (as also the cited generall Councell of Florence doth) the institution, forme, mat­ter, effect, and other things, belonging to these seuen holy Sacraments, according to the present doctrine, of the Romane Churche.

Againe, I suppose, that Catholickes in their definition of the Sacraments of the new lawe, requiring a conteyning and gi­ueing of grace, by these holy Sacraments, besides their signification thereof: (being onely signes, Seales &c. as the common Protestant opinion is) to be farre more re­stricted, and limited, then that of Prote­stants, because many more thinges be, and [Page 382] may be signes of any thinge, then bothe signes, and causes: as appeareth to be true in all genericall and specificall differences. For example vnder animal a lyuing creature are conteyned more, then vnder animal ra­tional [...], a lyueing creature with reason, onely limited to man, who otherwise ab­stractinge from his rationalitie, is with all other lyueing creatures comprehended, Vnder the Genus Animal a lyueing Creature. So a Signe of grace as well agreeth to the Sacraments of the old lawe, as to those of the Ghospell: but not to conteyne and giue grace. Onely proper to those of the new Testament, as is recited before from the generall Councell of Florence, and is at Concil. Trident. decret. d [...] Sacramen­tis ecclesiae &c. lardge sett downe against Protestants in the Councell of Trent. This supposed which no man can deny, I argue thus.

All things that agree with the definition of a Sacrament, be Sacraments: But accor­ding to Protestants all those seuen before remembred, Baptisme, Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Extreame-Vnction, Orders, and Matri­monie agree with, and haue the definition of a Sacrament: Therefore they are Sacraments. The Maior is euident, because in Logicke the thinge defined, and definition, are conuerti­bles: as this: man and a reasonable creature. Whoesoeuer is the one is also the other, being one and the same. The second pro­posi [...]ion Doue per­suas. pag. 27. 28. is thus proued by D. Doue Protestant Bishop of Peterboroug in these words: [Page 383] Concerning the number of Sacraments, wee will not dispute, for accordinge to their (Catholicks) defini­tion of a Sacrament, there bee seuen. Then much more as I haue demonstrated, there must bee so many by Protestants definition of Sacraments. As for his ouerplus number, more then seuen, which hee addeth, if hee can proue it, hee shall deserue better, then in writing that booke, in findeing forth more holy instruments of grace, and san­ctification then hitherto haue beene knowne; in the meane time God graunte him more and better knowledge with grace. But in that hee graunteth our num­ber of seuen Sacraments, according to our definition, it is as much as wee contend, and all which hitherto they haue denyed: for when Catholicks entreate of Sacraments, their number, grace, forme, matter, Chara­cter &c. they speake of them, accordinge as they are defined, and taken in the Catho­licke Churche, and schooles: and come not to Protestants, either to define, or deter­mine them, or any other question in Reli­gion. Yett, as before, except I am to old to remember my Logicke, or this Bishop ne­uer did, or now will not vnderstand it, if the definition of Catholicks more particu­lare and limited extendeth to seuen Sacra­ments: That of Protestants more lardge or generall, will stretch as farre, and further: except the lesse is greater then that which is greater then it, two more then three, the [Page 384] Species more ample in Logicke then Genus, and in grammar our degrees of comparison bee altered, the positiue turned into the comparatiue, superlatiue and contrary.

I argue againe in this maner: wheresoe­uer in controuersie of any question in Re­ligion, betweene two societies, whereof one is in the truthe, the aduerse parte it self doth graunt that their opinion is not true by their owne proceedings. There the contrary is to bee adiudged true, otherwise against the supposition neither should haue the truthe but both be in error: But in this questiō this is the case between Catholicks and Protestants, the Protestants acknow­leding more Sacraments by their procee­deings then twoe: Therefore the Catho­licke doctrine of seuen Sacraments is true. The Maior is infallibly true, and so proued by Protestants, graunteing generally, either their Religion and doctrine, or that of Ca­tholicks Petition of 22. prea­chers excep. 3. against comm. Booke. Suruey of the Booke of comm. prayer pag. 117. quaest. 26. & pag. 134 135. 132. 133. 120. to be true. The Minor is proued by the 22. preachers of london, in their peti­tion, who resolutely affirme, that Protestants must needs yeeld to more then two, by their proceedings; Therefore to the Ca­tholicke doctrine of seuen Sacraments, els their supposition should be false, and all Religions in error, in so greate a Question. Which is further confirmed by the Prote­stant Surueyors of their communion booke, teacheing the same doctrine, and expressely iustifyinge it in Confirmation, Penance, and [Page 385] Matrimonie. And to shew their opinion and censure in this thinge to be iust, I demon­strate both them and the rest to bee Sacra­ments, by English Protestant proceedings in this maner, by the thinges they require to a Sacrament.

Whatsoeuer is a visible Signe, or ceremonie, ordeyned of God, or a visible signe with grace, is a Sacrament: But all those seuen, taught by Catholicks, are such: therefore they are Sacraments. The Maior is the Protestants definition of a Sacrament, as the same 22. 22. Prea­chers in pe­tition sup. excep. 2. Protestant preachers testifie, euen from their approued bookes of Articles, and Communion, and the Booke of Articles it self to which all Ministers subscribe testi­fieth in these words: Sacraments ordeined by Articles of Religion artic. 25. Christ be certaine suer wittnesses, and effectuall signes of grace, and Gods good will towardes vs, by the which hee doth worke inuisibly in vs &c. All which being not onely graunted by Ca­tholickes, but further expressely that to the worthie receauers they conteyne and giue grace ex opere operato, of themselues, where due preparation and disposition is, as the Councell of Trent hath declared: Cōcil. Tri­dēt decret. de Sacram. sup. which is all and more then Protestants or­dinarily require to Sacraments, it must needs followe by D. Doue his graunt before, that all those seuen, esteemed by Catho­licks for Sacraments, conteyne all those things, which these Protestants require vnto Sacraments, because they agree (as [Page 386] hee hath confessed) with the Catholicke Doue supr. persuas. pag. 27. 28. definition of Sacraments, which as before, conteyneth all, and more then Protestants demaund.

Further thus I argue: All of those other seuen accompted amonge Catholicks, for Sacraments, which haue a visible signe or cere­monie ordeyned of God, as Baptisme, and Eu­charist haue, bee Sacraments, as they are. But all those other fyue, reiected by Prote­stants, haue such visible signe, or ceremo­nie, ordeyned by God: Therefore they bee Sacraments. The Maior is the graunt of their owne subscribed Article: wherein Articl. of. Relig. sup. art. 25. admittinge Baptisme and the Eucharist for Sacraments, in these words: (There are twoe Sacraments ordeined of Christ our Lord in the Ghospell, that is to say, Baptisme and the supper of the Lorde.) They refuse the others for this onely cause, as followeth: Those fyue com­monly called Sacraments, that is to say, Confirma­tion, Penance, Orders, Matrimonie, and Extreme Vnction, are not to bee compted Sacraments, of the Ghospell: for that they haue not any visible signe, or ceremonie ordeined of God. So that all I haue to proue by this highest Protestant sentence, to proue them Sacraments, is: that they haue a visible signe, or ceremonie ordeyned of God. For which I produce D. Doue againe graun­ting our definition to agree with these: for our schooles put a Sacrament in genere signi: and so farre hold, that they are all in­stituted by Christ, that the Councell of [Page 387] Trent defineth thus: Si quis dixerit Sacra­menta Cōcil. Trid. decret. d [...] Sacram. nouae legis non fuisse omnia a Iesu Christo do­mino nostro instituta, aut esse plura, vel pauciora quam septem, videlicet Baptismum, Confirmatio­nem &c. Anathema sit. If any man shall say that all the Sacraments of the new lawe were not instituted of Iesus Christ our Lord, or that there bee more or fewer then seuen, that is Baptisme Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Extreame Vnction, Orders, and Matrimonie: or els that any of these seuen is not truely and properly a Sacrament, lett him bee Ana­thema. Againe these Protestants will further tell vs, in particular, how euery of those fyue hath a ceremonie visible, or externall, ordayned of God: and so to bee Sacra­ments: and first for Confirmation, thus I argue.

Whatsoeuer hath an externall ceremo­nie Confirma­tion proued a Sacra­ment by Protestāts. instituted by Christ, signifyeing or gi­ucing grace, is a Sacrament: But by these Protestants, Confirmation is such: There­fore a Sacrament. The Maior is at lardge proued and graunted before. The Minor is proued in this maner. The communion Booke reconfirmed in the title of Confirma­tion giueth this direction to the Bishop in these words: The Bishop shall lay his hand vppon euery child seuerally: therefore there is an ex­ternall Ceremonie or signe: and that it was ordeined by Christ may both appeare by their Conference at Hampton Court, in these Conference at Hamptō pag. 10. 11. words: Confirmation is an Apostolicall tradition. And that they meane it to be signe, such as [Page 388] the signe of a Sacrament is, the Bishop is appointed to vse these words: Wee make our Communiō Booke tit. conf. sup. §. Almigh­tie. humble supplications vnto thee for these children, vppon whome after the example of the holy Apostles, wee haue layde our hands, to certifie them by this signe of thy fauour, and gracious goodnes, towards them. Therefore this externall signe, both deliuered by the Apostles, vsed by their example, and so far signifieing Gods grace, and fauour, and certifyeing the par­ties thereof, must needs bee ordeined by Christ, and a Sacrament no other externall signe by Protestants, being able to make such certificate: whis is further confirmed, with this Protestant Argument, that fol­loweth.

Whatsoeuer signe externall giueth spiri­tuall strength, to the receauers thereof, and force to serue God is a Sacrament: But Confirmation doth this: Therefore a Sacra­ment. The Maior is euident by Protestants, graunteing that such spirituall force, and strength is not giuen by any signe, but such as is a Sacrament: neither doe all of them graunt, that it is giuen by Sacraments. The Minor is proued by D. Couell in these words: Couel Mod. Examina­tiō pag. 192 Remembringe the conflict wee haue vndertaken (in Baptisme) wee come (to Confirmation) for an addition of new forces: in Baptisme wee are regenerate to life, but in Confirmation wee are strengthened to battaile. So that being an ex­ternall signe, and giueing grace as Baptisme doth, it must needs bee a Sacrament as that [Page 389] is, and the signe must needs bee ordeyned by Christ, for none other but God can or­deyne Penance a Sacrament by protest. Chapter of Indulgēces. a signe to bee a meanes of grace.

Concerninge Penance, to bee a Sacrament, I haue made demonstration before in the chapter of Indulgences, and it is euidently true in this order. Wheresoeuer in any ce­remonie, and externall signe, grace is so amply giuen, that not onely all guilt of synnes by Protestants, but their punish­ments are forgiuen, and by authoritie from Christ, there must needs bee both an ex­ternall ceremonie or signe instituted by him, and a Sacrament: But thus it is in these Protestants Iudgments in Confession, and Ab­solution: Therefore a Sacrament. Bothe the Maior and Minor are aboundantly proued in the recited chapter before. And to proue, that such confession may bee auricular, (as they terme our Catholike confession to a preist) though that kinde of confession is not soe needfull to make it a Sacrament: M. Hull writeth thus: Auricular confession was Hull Romes polec. pag. 89. 90. vsed in the primatiue Churche, before the time of Zozomenus the auncient historian. And his Maiestie in the Conference at Hampton Conference pag. 13. witnesseth: That the particular and parsonall ab­solution from syn, after confession, is apostolicall and a verie godly ordinance. Therefore I thus argue againe.

That which was vsed in the primatiue Churche, is an externall ceremonie, for­giueing syn, an Apostolicall, and godly or­dinance, [Page 390] is a signe ordeyned by Christ, and a Sacrament: But Penance is such: Therefore it is a Sacrament. Bothe propositions are graunted, and proued before.

And hence also is proued, that Orders is a Orders a Sacrament by Prote­stants of England. Sacrament. For: whosoeuer haue power to giue grace, and forgiue syns, (except in Baptisme) by an externall ceremonie, must needs haue, and receaue that power in a Sacrament: (for such extraordinarie guifts bee not giuen as Protestants confesse, by miracle: But preists as before, haue this power: Therefore Order and consecration is a Sacrament. Both propositions are mani­festly true.

Further I argue thus: whosoeuer ac­knowledge, that in consecrateing preists, by imposition of hands, by the Bishop, the holy ghost, grace, and power is giuen, to giue grace, and forgiue syns, must needs acknowledge Orders or ordination to bee a Sacrament: But the Protestants of England doe this: Therefore they must acknow­ledge Orders to bee a Sacrament in their pro­ceedings. The Maior is euident. And the Booke of cons. in Preists. Minor expressely is conteyned in their au­thorized, and confirmed publicke Booke, of Consecrateing preists &c.

Againe thus I argue: That externall visi­ble ceremonie, by Imposition of hands vppon ordinary men, whereby power is giuen them, aboue others from Christ, to translate from darkenes into glorie, to make [Page 391] inuisible grace of visible Elements, daily to giue the holy Ghost, to dispose of the flesh, and blood of Christ▪ and giueth power which noe potentate on earthe, can giue, and the like prerogatiues, aboue all humane power, is to bee esteemed a Sacrament: But (by these Protestants) Orders hath these, and such more prerogatiues by Imposing of hands, &c. Therefore to bee esteemed a Sa­crament. The Maior proposition is euidently true: for an externall ceremonie, giuing, and signifying such power, grace, and priuiled­ges, that no terrene power, and authoritie can giue, must needs bee instituted by Christ himself, and so by that, which is proued be­fore, bee allowed for a Sacrament. The Minor is proued by D. Couell, where entreating of the power, and eminencie of Preists, by their Couell def. of Hooker pag. 87. function, and Order, in the externall cere­monie, of imposition of hands hee hath these words: To these parsons God imparted power ouer his mysticall bodie, which is the societie of soules, and ouer that naturall, which is himself, for the knit­ting of both in one a worke which antiquitie doth call the making of Christs bodie. And in an other Couel mod. Examinat. pag. 105. Pag. 115. See D. Co­uell def. of Hooker pag. 87. 88. 91. and ci­ted cap. seq. of Chara­cter, &c. Treatise thus: The power of the Ministry by blessing visible Elements, it maketh them inuisible grace, it giueth dayly the holy Ghost. It hath to dispose of that flesh, which was giuen for the life of the worlde: and that blood which was powred out, to redeeme soules. And againe: It is a power, which neither Prince, nor Potentate, King, nor Caesar on earth can giue: The Apostles leaue, and impart the fame power, to ordaine, [Page 392] which was giuen to them. From whence I argue further in this order.

That externall and visible Ceremonie, whereby the Apostles receaued supernatu­rall grace, power, and preeminencie, and left it to the Church, to continue, beeing first instituted of Christ, is a Sacrament: But Orders is such: Therefore a Sacrament. The Maior is graunted and proued before: and the Minor also: to which I add the sentence, of their publicke Cōference, at Hampton Court, Conference at Hamptō where it is concluded by authoritie, among them, that this power of Orders giuen (as they pretend) by imposition of hande, is, Diuinae ordinationis, and de iure diuino. The ordinance of God, and by his diuine lawe. From which do­ctrine graunted by them, in so publicke as­semblie one of their owne fellowes in Re­ligion inferreth this conclusion in these termes. If the English Protestants opinion bee main­tained, Certaine cōs. pag. 46. that Bishops Iurisdiction is de iure diuino, his Maiestie and all the Nobilitie ought to bee subiect to excommunication.

Neither do I vrdge these Protestants Au­thorities, The Au­thors intēt. and mean­ing by pro­uing seuen Sacramēts by Prote­stants how to bee vnd­erstood. either for this, or the other Sacra­ments, that I seeme to graunt vnto Prote­stants, that number of seuen Sacraments, to bee among them, to whome (as to other Hereticks of any other now want a true and lawfull succession in orders as they do) I can onely allow two Sacraments, Baptisme, and Marriage, whereof the first for the neces­sitie thereof may bee in such cases of ex­tremitie, [Page 393] (as this Inundation of heresie is) not onely bee administred by Hereticks, but Infidells themselues, retayning the true matter, forme, and Intention due in that holy Sacrament. And the other of Matrimony, not requiring as of the essence thereof, the operation of the Preist: Yett do I not graunt the grace of this Sacrament to any Prote­stant, or other out of vnitie of the Catho­licke Church, out of which as there is no saluation, so no grace to bee hoped for, bringing men to eternall beatitude. But seeing this number of seuen Sacraments, hath beene so much Impugned, by Protestants, and denied by them to bee in the true Ca­tholicke Church, which before I haue pro­ued the present Church of Rome to bee, I haue now made demostration, by them selues, that by their owne proceedings, they ought to allow this number vnto the Church of Rome. And now I proceede in like maner to Matrimonie, and Extreame vnction: and in the first I argue thus.

That which hath an externall, or visible Matrimo­nie a Sa­crament by English Protestāts. signe, or Ceremonie, instituted of God, si­gnifying, or giuing grace, and sanctification, is an holy estate, & honorable representing the grace of vnion, betweene Christ and his Church, is a Sacrament: But Matrimonie is such: therefore a Sacrament. The Maior consisteth of the Protestant definition of a Sacrament, wholly conteyning it and more them Pro­testants require vnto it, and so cannot by [Page 394] them bee denied. The Minor is proued by their owne publike directorie, where, in the treatise intituled The forme of solemnization of Comm. Booke tit. Matrim. §. dearely. &c. Matrimonie, it is called in these termes: Holy Matrimonie, an honorable estate, instituted of God, si­gnifying vnto vs the mysticall vnion, which is betweene Christ and his Church: which holy estate Christ ador­ned and bewtified with his presence, and first miracle. And in an other place it is named, holy wed­locke. §. For as­much, &c. To which purpose tendeth, also that their prayer ouer those that bee married, in these words: God the father, God the sonne, God the Sup. §. God, &c. holy Ghost, blesse, preserue, and keepe you: the Lord mercifully with his fauour looke vppon you, and so fill you with all spirituall benediction, and grace. Againe thus I argue.

That externall visible ceremonie, or signe, that is consecrated of God, to such an ex­cellent misterie, as to signifie the spirituall Marriadge betwixt Christ, and his Church: and by the grace, and bonde whereof, men are bound to loue their wyues, as their owne bodies, to leaue Father, and Mother, (to whome by nature wee are so much bownde) and to bee but one fleesh with his wiffe &c. must needs bee a Sacrament: But Matrimonie is such by Protestants of England: Therefore by them, to bee estee­med a Sacrament. The Maior is manifestly true, in it self. And the Minor in those §. ô God. §. all yee which. words, and more expressely (to proue it a Sacrament) sett downe in that their pu­blicke directorie in the places here cited. [Page 395] And had not the licentious wantonnes of these men soe much for their ownc lasci­uiousnes mayntayninge Marriadge, and accomptinge it an holy state in those of the cleargie, in whom the holy Fathers before name it incest, sacriledge and matter of ex­communication, disliked of the insepera­bilitie betweene man and wife, which beeing graunted for a Sacrament it brin­geth with it, they would neuer haue de­nyed vnto it that dignitie and denomina­tion. To which, soe often and many plu­ralities of wiues in their ministry it self and some Protestant Bishops amonge them (vntill a little restraint was ordayned by his Maiestie in parlament) are more then The Sacra­ment of Extreame vnction. Iacob. 5. v. 14. 15. sufficient testimonie in this case. That Ex­treame-Vnction, is a Sacrament, by their Arti­cles, and S. Iames, his doctryne in his epistle, [...]eceaued by them, for canonicall, is more then manifest. And soe manifest, that (ex­cept credible Protestant Testimonies de­ceaue mee) greater Protestant Authoritie hath soe graunted, then these their Do­ctors may contradict. In which I will bee silent; and onely add in this place, that their Communion Booke it self, and their common doctrine conteyned in their Catechisme there, set downe to bee beleeued of all, sufficiently insinuate, that either there be seuen Sacraments, as Catholicks beleeue, or at the leaste, more then two, accordinge to their Article doctrine before. For in [Page 396] proceedinge dialoguewise, by question, and answeare, their words be these. Question. How Communiō Booke Tit. Catechis­me. many Sacraments hath Christ ordeyned in his Church? Answeare. two onely, as generally necessary to saluation, that is to say, Baptisme and the supper of the Lorde. Where the words, generally, and necessary to saluation, do emply, that there be others, not generally to be receaued of all, as Matrimony is peculiar to the marryed, Orders to cleargie men; &c. neyther are these absolute necessary to saluation, otherwise the vnmaryed, and virgyns could not bee saued; all women which are vncapable of preisthood, should be damned, and none but cleargie men saued &c. And these Pro­testants doe not holde, that those words, generally, necessary to saluation, are essentiall to the definition of a Sacrament, which they define in the next words followeinge in this maner. By this word Sacrament I meane an Catechis. supr. outward and visible signe, of an Inward and spiri­tuall grace, giuen vnto vs ordeyned by Christ him­self, as a meanes whereby wee receaue the same, and a pledge to assure vs thereof. Which aswell, proueth the Catholick doctryne, that Sa­craments giue grace, of which hereafter, as also that, which I haue vrged, in this place.

CHAPTER XX. PROVING BY THESE PRO­testants, the Catholicke doctrine, of an Indeleble Character, in the Sacra­ments of Baptisme, Confirmation, and Orders.

CONCERNING the Catholicke doctrine, of the Church of Rome, teaching a spirituall Cha­racter, to bee impressed in some of these Sacraments, and hitherto denyed by Protestants: The Councell of Trent hath thus defined: In three Sacraments, Baptisme, Confirma­tion, Cōcil. Tri­dēt. Sess. 7. cap. 4. and Orders, a Character is impressed in the soule, that is, a certaine spirituall and indeleble signe, that they may not bee iterated. For proofe of which doctrine, by English Protestants, I argue in this Maner.

That doctrine, which is taught by the Greeke Church, neither hereticall, nor Scis­matical, but orthodoxe by these Protestants, ot by a generall Councell, whose decree, and sentence bindeth all, is to bee allowed by them, much more, if both those their Rules so confirme it: But the doctrine of this Inde­leble character, in the Sacraments of Baptisme, Confirmation, and Orders, is taught and appro­ued both by the Greeke Church, and a ge­nerall [Page 398] Councell, that of Florence, for such allowed by them before: Therefore it ought to bee embraced by them. The Maior is eui­dently true, by their graunt before. And the Minor thus proued. First the Greeke Church, by Hieremias their Patriarke, in their Censure Hierem. in censur. cap. 11. vppon Protestants, in the eleuenth chapter, hath so censured. And the generall Councel of Florence, with the assert of the same Greeke Church, Armenians, Iacobines and all Christendome hath defined it in these words: Inter haec Sacramenta, tria sunt, Baptismus, Cōcil. Flor. in vnion. Arm. Confirmatio, & Ordo, quae Characterem. i. spirituale quoddam signum à caeteris distinctum, imprimunt in anima indelebile, &c. Among these Sacraments, there are three, Baptisme, Confirmation, and Order, which impresse in the soule a Character, that is, a certaine spirituall signe, distinct from others indeleble: where­vppon they are not Iterated in the same parson, but the other fowre do not Impresse a Character, and admitt Iteration.

To bee breife, I argue thus once for all. That doctrine, which is generally maintai­ned, not onely by all professors of it, but also acknowledged, and defended by them, that bee esteemed learned among the enemies thereof, and professe the same Religion with them, is true: But this doctrine of a Character is such: Therefore it is true. The Maior is euidently apparēt, for no more then frends, and Aduersaries learned, can consent to any truth. The Minor is thus proued, by these Protestant Doctors, following, Ioyning in [Page 399] Religion with them, that impugne and per­secute the Church of Rome. First D. Feild Feild. l. 1. cap. 15. acknowledgeth a Character in Baptisme, and to remayne euen in the excommunicate: And so inde­leble. D. Couell affirmeth the same of Baptisme, and Orders, and seemeth to insinuate it, of Confirmation. Hee writeth of it in these words: It is not amisse both termed a kind of Marke, Couell def. of Hook. pa. 87. 88. 91. or character. And confesseth it to bee Indeleble. And for Orders hee addeth thus: For ministeriall power is a worke of seperation, because it seuereth them, that haue it, from other men, & maketh them a speciall order, consecrated vnto the seruice of the moste highe, in things wherewith others may not meddle. I call it indeleble, because they which haue once receiued this power, may not thinke to putt it of and on, like a cloake, as the wether serueth. And againe in this maner. Where there is a chaunge of estate, with an Sup. pag. 91 Impossibilitie to returne, there wee haue reason to account an Indeleble Character, to bee imprinted. This saith the Church of Rome, is in Baptisme, Confirma­tion, and Order, This forme, figure, or Character is called Indeleble, because that is not to bee reiterated (as Protestants confesse of Baptisme, Confirmation and Orders) from whence it cometh. The Character of Order is an actiue power, as the schoolemen speake, which giueth an Abilitie, publickly to administer the Sacraments, vnto those, whome the Church hath estee­med fitt. The Character of Baptisme, is a passiue power, which maketh men fitt, to receaue the rest. And from hence, not onely is proued in as playne words, as any schooleman, or other Catho­licke can speake, the Catholicke opinion of [Page 400] a Character, but also that Orders, and others besides them allowed for Sacraments, are to bee so esteemed as his last wordes (the rest) insinuate. And this sufficeth of this Que­stion.

CHAPTER XXI. PROVING BY THESE PROTE­stants, that the Sacraments of the Ghospell giue grace, and, as the schooles speake, ex opere operato: by the vvorke vvrought.

CONCERNING the validitie, and grace of Sacraments, The Coun­cell of Trent defineth thus: If any Cōcil. Trid. Sess. 7. man shall say, that the Sacraments of the new lawe, do not giue grace, by the worke wrought, (opere operato) but that onely faith of the promise of God sufficeth to obtaine grace: lett him bee Ana­thema. And to demonstrate, that the present Protestants of England are, or by their owne writings, ought to bee of the same opinion, thus I argue.

Whatsoeuer Catholicke doctrine of the Romane Church, is confirmed both by the publicke proceedings and priuate writings of the Protestants of England, ought to bee allowed, and embraced by them: But the do­ctrine of the Romane Church, concerning the [Page 401] efficacie of Sacraments, that they cause gra­ce in the worthie, and duely disposed Re­ceauers of them, and that ex opere operato, as the Councell before, and our schooles speake, is such: Therefore it ought to bee allowed, and embraced by them, for true. The Maior is euidently true, and cannot bee denied, for no man may or can hold against his owne opinion, or that publicke Rule, and Authoritie, to which hee hath subscri­bed, and submitted himself in Religion. The second proposition is thus proued: and first by that cheefe Rule their booke of Arti­cles, Booke of Articl. of Relig. art. 25. to which they haue all subscribed: where it is thus defined in their Religion: Sacraments ordeyned of Christ are effectuall signes of grace, and Gods good will towards vs, by the which hee doth worke inuisibly in vs. And againe, in their newly reformed communion booke in these words. By this words Sacrament I meane an Comm. Booke re­for. titul. Catechis. outward, and visible signe, of an inward, and spirituall grace, giuen vnto vs, ordeyned by Christ himself, as a meanes, whereby wee receaue the same. Therefore beeing graunted by the greatest Rules of Religion, which English Protestants haue, that Sacraments bee effectuall of grace, and Gods fauour, giuing grace, and meanes whereby wee receaue grace; And all English Protestants Ministers haue subscribed to these doctrines in those bookes, They must needs graunt, that Sa­craments bee causes of grace: for among causes the efficient, and effectuall is not onely a cause, but of extrinsecall causes, by many [Page 402] degrees the cheifest. And beeing allowed for such Instruments, and meanes, by which God worketh inuisibly in vs, and giueth grace, and wee so receaue grace, as their words bee: They must needs bee true instrumental causes of grace, and such worke in vs. And their same practi­call Rule of their Religion the Communion booke hath the same doctrine concerning Baptisme, and consequently of all others, proued by them to bee Sacraments, one and the same reason beeing of all: for in the Treatise of Baptisme thus it prescribeth the Minister to speake vnto God: By the Baptisme of Comm. Booke Ti­tul. publick Baptisme. §. Almigh­tie and euerlasting §. allmigh­tie and im­mortall God, &c. sup. thy well beloned Sonne IHESVS CHRIST, did­dest sanctifie the flood Iordan, and other waters, to the misticall washing away of sinne. And in the next prayer, they pray in these words: Wee call vppon thee, for these Infants, that they comming to thy holy Baptisme, may receaue remission of their sinnes, by spirituall Regeneration. Then seeing the Sacra­ment and water of Baptisme washeth away sinnes, and remitteth sinnes, which cannot bee done without grace, it must needs haue an Influence, causalitie, and efficacie in this sanctification; for to washe, and to remitt, are not without operation, and causing. Neither can those Protestant Bishops, and Doctors, that were assembled at the conference at Hampton Court, bee of other minde, for Conf [...]rence at Hamptō pag. 16. graunting (as there they do) a necessitie of Baptisme to saluation. They must also of neces­sitie teach, that it giueth grace, which is so necessarie to saluation, that no man can bee [Page 403] saued without it, for so hee might bee saued without Christ. And this (as before) they must graunt, except they would say (which none of them to my remembrance doth) that it is onely conditio sine qua non, a necessarie condition, but no cause, which if any man should affirme it is directly against his sub­scribed Rule befote.

Now lett vs come to their particular writers, of which, the first to bee cited, the Author of the Suruey of the communion Booke, confirmeth that which I haue concluded, by their publicke Rules in this case, telling vs plainely, that by the publicke Protestant The Prote­stant Sur­uey of the Booke of common prayer pag. 104. 118. 89. 141. 103. 104. Feild pag. 10. 179 Middleton pap [...]stom. pag. 108. Pag 106. Religion of England, Sacraments or meanes of grace, and do worke, ex opere operato, by the worke done. As the Catholick Councell of Trent hath before defined. D. Feild acknowledgeth no lesse: and affirmeth plainely, that the water of Baptisme is filled with sanctifying force and power. Therefore it is a cause of grace, and such sanctification. M. Middleton speaketh of com­munion in these termes: It doth exhibite, and conuey the graces, and merits, of Christs passion vnto vs. And hee nameth it, an effectuall Instrument of grace. And of Sacraments thus hee writeth: They are effectuall Instruments, of our regeneration. Pag. 100. Sutcliff Ans. to th [...] lay pet. pag. 22. Sutcliff ag. D. Kell. pag. 69. D. Sutcliffe, besides the matter, and forme of a Sacrament, instituted by Christ, requireth vnto it, grace and Iustification. And writeth fur­ther in these wordes: Wee confesse, that God worketh sanctification, by the Sacraments of the new testament. D. Couell commending the opinion [Page 404] of the Catholicke scholemen, in this Que­stion, Couell def. of Hook. pag 96. 97 98. 99. 100 101. 102. &c. Against Burges pag. 101. 102. 103. and def. sup pag. 96 teacheth: Sacraments bee Instruments of grace: causes of sanctification: giue grace instrumen­tally. His words bee these: The Sacraments are not onely signes, but causes of our Iustification. And reciting the opinion of our Catholicke scholes, approueth, and expoundeth it, in this maner: Agent causes wee know are of two sortes: principall, which worketh by vertue, and power of his forme: as fier maketh hoate: and thus nothing can cause grace, but God himself: grace beeing a par­ticipation of the diuine nature. Instrumentall, which worketh not as the other, by the vertue of his owne proper forme, but onely by that Motion, which it hath from the principall, and first Agent. Thus do Sacra­ments worke. And further allowing, and ex­pounding the schoole phrase, and doctrine, that Sacraments worke by the worke done (ex opere operato) hee iustifieth the same, and sheweth, how the Church of Rome hath beene slaundered by Protestants in this point: his wordes bee these: The Sacraments bee Couell sup. pag. 97. effectuall meanes and vessels of grace, as glasses contey­ning potions to cure the sicke. Neither doth any man say, no not the Church of Rome (allthough they bee so accused by some of vs) That the Sacraments worke of themselues, by a vertue resigned vnto them without God. God worketh by them as by Instruments power­full, and thought in his wisedome fittest. The Sacra­ments are powerfull meanes of Regeneration, hauing by a diuine ordination, a force, and vertue, to begett faith. And therefore iustly amongst all the Treasures, that God hath left vnto his Church, wee honour, and [Page 405] admire most the holy Sacraments. And againe: Sa­craments Couell sup. pag. 98. Pag. 99. are the powerfull Instruments of God, vnto eternall life. And further thus: It is a strong grow­ing fancie, to bee afraide to say, that the Sacraments begett faith. Sacraments giue grace by the worke done, ex opere operato. And reciting what things are required to the due receauing of Sacra­ments, concludeth thus: Now that, which in all Pag. 99. sup. this, actiuely, and instrumentally bringeth grace, is the externall Action, which is commonly called the Sacra­ment: this hauing vertue from his Institution. And hee doth not onely Ioyne with the Church of Rome (as before) in this Article, But for it approueth the decrees of our Popes, and Councells, euen of Trent it self in this maner: Wee say with the Auncient fathers, Stepbanus, Siri­cius, Couell sup. pag. 102. Innocentius the first, Leo, Anastasius the seconde, (all Popes of Rome) in his Epistle to Anastasius the Emperor; with the Councells, first the generall Councell of Nyce, the first Councell of Carthage, the laste assembly at Trent, with the testimonies of the Fa­thers, and Doctors, that the Sacraments for the Institution of Christ, and his promise, are effe­ctuall, &c. And thus much from these Pro­testants themselues, against themselues, for those sacred, and Catholicke doctri­nes, of the Romane Church; for the moste Iust, and worthy defence, and pro­fession whereof, they haue so longe time, so rigorously, and Iniuriously against their owne sentence, persecuted their naturall frends, and Catholicke Contrymen. Here­after God of his mercie graunt vnto them, [Page 406] and all Enemies of his holy Church, grace to knowe the truthe, and to professe, and followe it, when they knowe it.