The Ancient Doctrine of the Church of England, Part 1 · Response to body of book · Chapter 8
CHAP. VIII. The ſumme of his Anſwer to Sect. 8.
1. That I allege but three Authors, Adrian, Coſter, and Harding; and them falſly, or impertinently, for three ſeverall points of the Proteſtant Faith, none for the univerſality of it in generall, as the title promiſeth.
2. That it is not ſufficient to name ſome in the Roman Church, who held ſome of our opinions, but that I muſt ſhew a diſtinct companie from the Roman, making a Church.
3. That it is not to purpoſe, to ſhew the Antiquitie and Vniverſality of thoſe points wherin we agree with you, but in thoſe other points wherein wee diſagree.
4. That if it were granted, the Proteſtant Church in former ages lay hid in the boſome of the Roman Church, that proveth it to have been inviſible, rather than viſible.
The Reply. IN the eighth Section, I aſſumed to prove the Antiquitie, and Vniverſalitie of our Religion, by and with the conſenting teſtimonies of the Romane Church: you tell mee, It is a bold and unlikely adventure, and it is ſhameleſſe and impudent.
Theſe words be like a houſe full of ſmoake without fire: but what is the occaſion of all this heinous complaint? Forſooth, the Knight bringeth not one Author, I ſay, not one for the Vniverſalitie and Antiquitie of his Church. And is this ſo grievous an accuſation? Surely, I thought there was none ſo ignorant or impudent, as to denie both the Vniverſalitie and Antiquitie of three Creeds; two Sacraments inſtituted by Chriſt; the two and twentie books of Canonicall Scriptures; of the firſt foure Generall Councels; of the Apoſtolike Traditions; of the Ancient Liturgies; of the Ordination of Prieſts and Deacons. Theſe are our Tenets, and theſe were the particular Inſtances which I made: and to bring Authors for the proofe of theſe, as if we made a doubt of that which all true Chriſtians did generally receive and beleeve, I ſay with St. Auſtin, Inſolentiſsimae dementiae. Aug.It were a ſigne of moſt inſolent madneſſe.
But admit I ſhould produce ſome Authors for proofe of this generall beleefe, would their Authoritie free me from your termes of Shameleſſe, and impudent adventure? Certainly no: for (ſay you) If hee ſhould have one, two, or three, or ten men, it would not be ſufficient for him, unleſſe hee have the Authoritie of the Catholike Church, or Church of Rome.
To cite many Authors, or to bring none, then is all alike to you; for in your doome, nothing will free mee from the name, and puniſhment due to Hereſie, but the authoritie of the Church: and yet in this, you have granted mee more than I could expect; for you have given mee liberty to take my authoritie from the Church, ſo it be from the Catholike, or the Roman. And hereby you have made your Roman Church diſtinct from the Catholike, which is moſt true; which, both you your ſelfe, and moſt of your fellow Jeſuits have made all one, and confirmed by the title of (Roman Catholike) in all your writings.
This being granted, I proceed to the reſt of your exceptions. In this Section (ſay you) he bringeth onelyonly three Catholike Authors, Adrian, Coſterus, and Harding, but no word for Antiquitie, or univerſalitie. Thus you.
Hee that ſhall reade my Section in Via tuta, with this your Anſwer, muſt needs confeſſe that you deale not fairly, nor ingeniouſly with mee: for ſometimes you leape from the beginning of a Chapter to the end, then you returne againe to the beginning, being willing to conceale or confound the truth of my Aſſertions. You ſo mingle my words with your own in the ſame Character, that a prudent Reader can hardly diſcerne mine from yours: but moſt uſuall it is with you to cry down my words with bitter paſſages, and decline the queſtion in all. As for Inſtance, in this Section, whereas I ſaid, the Church of Rome doth confeſſe the Antiquitie, and Vniverſalitie of our Religion long before Luther, I inſtanced in our three Creeds, and the reſt before named. One while you cry out of my impudencie, that I cite no Authors; another while, that if I did cite them, they would not ſerve my turne: but you never mention either the Creeds, or Scriptures, or Councels, or any of the points which you well knew had Antiquitie, and Vniverſalitie in the name and opinion of all Chriſtians. After that, you flie to the later end of my Section, and there you tell mee, I cite but three Authors, and yet none prove the Antiquitie or Vniverſalitie of our Faith. Then you goe backe againe, and you tell the Reader, I ſay nothing here of the mans notable cunning and falſhood, in making him beleeve, as if we did excuſe our ſelves in thoſe things whereof they accuſe us.
If ſuch extravagant excurſions and reproches you call a Reply, or a Catholike Anſwer, I will lay my finger on my mouth, and ſay with your Cardinall, Qui decipi vult, decipiatur.
Briefely, the ſubſtance of my Aſſertion was this: The three Creeds, the Canonicall Scriptures, the Apoſtolike Traditions, the foure firſt generall Councels, and the reſt were ſo generally received in the boſome of the Roman Church, that for that reaſon it might ſeeme a ſenſeleſſe queſtion, to demand where our Church was before Luther.
Next I ſhewed that the poſitive Doctrines of our Church (mentioned in our (39.) Articles) were contained in a very few points, and thoſe alſo had Antiquity and Vniverſality; then I ſhewed that thoſe doctrines which they obtruded upon us, were but Additions and Negative Tenets in our Articles, and that many of thoſe additions were condemned, or at leaſt excuſed, by their owne men: And I inſtanced in three Authors before mentioned, for three ſeverall points of their Doctrine; and this is the ſubſtance and true meaning of that Section; and thus much by way of advertiſement to the moderate Reader. Now to anſwer you diſtinctly to that you have produced confuſedly.
Your firſt exception is touching Pope Adrian the ſixth: you ſay, It is not as Sr. Humphry putteth it, to wit if the conſecrated Bread be Christ, but if it be rightly conſecrated.
And doe not you ſtill by Adrians confeſſion excuſe your adoration, by implying a condition? and is it not all one according to your doctrine? For if it be rightly conſecrated, it is Chriſt, if not, it is a Cruſt, and no man amongſt your Communicants knoweth what it is, becauſe he knoweth not the Prieſts intention. Take it therefore which way you will, yet my aſſertion ſtands true; we condemne you for adoring the Elements, for ought you know, of bread and wine, becauſe it doth depend upon the intention of the Prieſt, whether Chriſt be there or no; but yet you cannot condemne us for adoring Chriſts, rent body in the Heavens: and however the Prieſts doe conſecrate, yet (ſaith Gerſon) when the hoſt is adored, that condition is ever at leſt to be ſuppoſed (if it be rightly conſecrated) that is,Gerſ. compend. Theol. Tit. de tribus virtut. p. 111. if it be truely the body of Chriſt; And this is that Pope Adrian hath delivered by your owne confeſſion, and therefore they are not to be cleered from Idolatry, becauſe they intended to worſhip one God, (as indeede there was but one God) but becauſe they adored him there where he was not, and in that manner as they ſuppoſed him to be. The caſe (ſaith Catharinus) is like in the hoſt not conſecrated: Cathar. Annot. in Caiet. p. mihi 134.For God and Chriſt is not adored ſimply, but as he is exiſting under the formes of bread and wine. If therefore he be not there, but it be found that Divine worſhip is given to a creature insteede of Chriſt, there is Idolatry alſo: For even in this regard they were Idolaters who adored Heaven, or any other thing, ſuppoſing with themſelves that they adored in it the Divinity, whom they called the ſoule of the world. Compare then the certainty of your faith, with ours (which is the point in queſtion) and tell me if in this we are not more certaine and ſafe then you can be. Firſt, your owne Bellarmine tels us,Bell. de Iuſtific. l. 3. c. 8. that none can be certaine by the certainity of faith that he doth receive a true Sacrament. No man (ſaith Andreas Vega) can beleeve aſſuredly, that he receiveth the leaſt part of the Sacrament, Vega l. 9. de Iuſtific. c. 17.and this is ſo ſurely to be credited, as it is apparant that we live; And both give one and the ſame reaſon for it: For there is no way, except it be by Revelation, that we can know the intention of the Miniſter, either by outward appearance, or by certainty of faith. From this dangerous conſequence, we condemne your adoration, and reſolve to let you know from your owne men,Th. Saliſtar. de arte Praedicandi. c. 25. that No man, be he never ſo ſimple, or never ſo wiſe, ought preciſely to believe that this is the body of our Lord that the Prieſt hath conſecrated, but onelyonly under this condition, if all things concerning the conſecration be done as appertaineth; for otherwiſe he ſhall avouch a creature to be the Creator, which were Idolatry.
Now as this way in the generall is uncertaine and dangerous; ſo likewiſe there are many other wayes, which may eaſily occaſion this Idolatry; and therefore you cannot deny us to be in the more certaine and ſafe way. As for inſtance Iohannes de Burgo, who was Chancellor of Cambridge about (200.) yeares ſince, gives us to underſtand that a Prieſt may faile in his intention many wayes. As for example,Pupilla Oculi c. 3. & 5. &c. If the Bread be made of any other then wheaten flower, which may poſsibly happen, or if there be too much water in quantity, that it overcomes and alters the nature of wine; if the wine be changed into vinegar, and therefore cannot ſerve for conſecration; If there be thirteene cakes upon the Table, and the Prieſt for his conſecration determine onelyonly upon twelve, in that caſe not one of them all is Conſecrated: Laſtly, if the Prieſt diſſemble, or leave out the words of Conſecration, or if he forget it, or minde it not, in all and every of theſe wayes, there is nothing Conſecrated, and conſequently the people giving divine honour to the Sacrament all Bread or Cup, commit flat Idolatry.
When I heare the Apoſtle proclaime to all Chriſtians, that he which doubteth is condemned already; I cannot chuſe but pitty the ſtate and condition of that miſerable man, who hath a doubtfull, perplexed, and uncertaine faith, who taketh all upon truſt, and upon the report, ſometimes of an Hypocrite, ſometimes of a malitious Prieſt, who hath no intention at all to adminiſter the true Sacrament.Hiſtory of Trent. For (ſaith your Trent hiſtory) if a Prieſt having charge of foure or five hundred ſoules were an Infidell, but a formall Hyppocrite, and in abſolving the Penitent, baptizing of children, and Conſecrating the Euchariſt, had an intention not to doe that which the Church doth, it muſt be ſaid that the children are damned, the penitent not abſolved, and that all remaine without the fruite of the Communion.
Now let the Reader judge which doctrine is moſt certaine and ſafe, either that of your Church which may occaſion flat Idolatry in the worſhiper, or our ſurſum corda, with hearts and eyes lifted up to Heaven, where we adore our Saviour Chriſt in his bodily preſence according to the Article of your Faith and ours; and this is agreed on both ſides to be without feare or perill of Idolatry.
Laſtly, as if you were guilty of falſe accuſations, you ſay, ſuppoſe Adrian hath erred in this, or in any other point, doth it follow that he agreeeth with you in all other? Then you tell a ſtory of the Popes Bull againſt Luther.
You quarrell with your owne ſhadow, for I had no relation at all to your Pope, nor made any inſtance of him more then in a Marginall Note; but ſince you ſtand ſo much upon the juſtification of his Doctrine, hearken I pray wherein he maketh for you, and wherein he is wholly againſt you.Agrippa de vanit. ſcient. c. 64. p. mihi. cap. de Lenonia. Your Agrippa tells us, that in theſe latter times Pope Adrian erected a moſt famous Stewes at Rome. I confeſſe in this particular you may challenge him wholly for your owne; But whereas you ſay he deteſted Luthers doctrine as moſt wicked and damnable, you might have added likewiſe, he wiſhed a reformation of his owne, and withall taught that doctrine for which you condemne both Luther and all his adherents for Haeretikes.Hiſtory of Trent. l. 1. pag. 25. 26. & 30. Firſt, witneſſe his Nu tio Franciſco Chiericato, who had Commiſſion from his Holineſſe, To ackowledge that the confuſion of the Church, was cauſed eſpecially by the ſinnes of Prieſts and Prelats, confeſſing that ſome abhominations, ſome yeares ſince, were committed even in the Holy See, that there were many abuſes in ſpirituall things, ſo that it may be ſaid, that the infirmity is paſſed from the head, to the members, from the Popes, to the inferiour Pelates; And laſtly, he reſolves himſelfe that he would uſe all diligence that the Church of Rome ſhould be firſt reformed; and the rather, becauſe hee ſaw all the world did earneſtly deſire it. And that you may know the Church of Rome, as well as the Court of Rome was fallen into errors and hereſies, hee himſelfe publiſheth, that he heard it related of his Predeceſſor, Pope Iohn the 22th. That hee would have induced the Vniverſitie of Paris to beleeve, that the ſoules of the righteous doe not ſee God face to face; and that no man ſhould take his degree in Divinitie, unleſſe hee ſhould firſt ſweare to maintaine that perſtiferous. Hereſie, and perpetually to cleave unto it. And that you may be aſſured hee was not wholly yours, hee affirmeth for certaine, one Poſition which would confound all Poperie,Adrian in 4. de Sacram. Confir. ſub finem. (viz.) That the Pope may erre, even in things touching the Faith, and avouch that which is Hereſie y his determination, or decree. And thus your Pope Adrian complaines of many abominable things in his owne Church: he tels us, his Predeceſſor was reputed a Heretike: he confeſſeth, that both himſelfe, and all his Succeſſors after him, were in poſſibilitie of erring, even in matters of Faith: and it is very probable in his erring opinion, hee began to erect that moſt noble Brothell-houſe in his owne See. And thus much touching the Marginall note of Pope Adrian.
Your ſecond exception is touching Coſterus, occaſioned by theſe words, Wee accuſe them for taking away the Cup from the Lay-people; they excuſe it, that it was not taken up by the commandment of the Biſhops, but is crept in, the Biſhops winking thereat (ſaith Coſterus.) In anſwer to this, ſay you, I would know what excuſe you can find for ſuch a notorious lye.
Let the Reader judge, whether this modeſtie of yours deſerve an Anſer, or whether this ſaying of Coſterus may not be termed, an Excuſe. Howbeit (ſay you) this cuſtome came in, not ſo much by the commandement of the Biſhop, as by the peoples uſe and practiſe.] Well, take it as you would have it; yet, I ſay, his meaning muſt bee underſtood not at all by the Commandement of the Biſhops, for that which is done by Command cannot bee ſaid to have crept in. But the truth is, under colour of quarrelling with words, and giving me the lye, you ſeeke to dazle the eyes of your Reader, and when you omit the weightier things of your Church, then you queſtion, Where is Coſterus teſtimony for Antiquitie, Vniverſalitie, Certaintie, and Safetie, when as you know well this teſtimony was not cited for that ende; And thus you ſtraine at a Gnat, and ſwallow a Camell. Let us heare the reſt of your verball diſcourſe.
Since you are ſo ſhameleſſe as to ſay, That we doe not condemne you for receiving in both kinds, Looke into the Councell of Trent, and ſee whether you doe not finde a heavy curſe, &c. Thus you.
And are you ſure that your Councell hath ſufficiently curſed us, For following Chriſts example, and receiving in both kinds; for thoſe were my very words, Following Chriſts example: (which you altogether omitted.) If therefore we have altered any part of Chriſts Inſtitution, I ſay againe, Curſe on in Gods name, and let your curſes take effect: but if the celebration of our Myſteries be anſwerable to his will and word, that firſt ordained them, you curſe not us whom you would hurt, but him that your curſed tongues cannot hurt, which is, God to be bleſſed for ever. But let us heare your Councels? The Councell of Trent (ſay you) layes a heavie curſe againſt any that ſhall ſay, that all and every of the Faithfull ought, by the precept of God, or neceſsitie of ſalvation, to receive both kinds.
This curſing Councell toucheth not my Aſſertion: for this Canon ſpeaketh of the Precept of Chriſt, whereas I ſpake of his Example onelyonly.Bell. de Euch, …. cap. 7. and for proofe of this, wee have Bellarmines teſtimony as well as ours: It is not to be doubted, but that is beſt, and ſitteſt to be practiſed, which Chriſt himſelfe hath done. And therefore my Aſſertion ſtill ſtands good, (viz) You doe not condemne us for following Chriſts example.
Touching the Councell of Conſtance, it condemnes not our receiving in both kinds, but prevents the condemnation of her owne. They decreed their halfe Communion with this Caution,Concil. Conſtant. Seſs. 13. that If any ſhould obſtinately maintaine that it was unlawfull, or erronious, to receive in one kind, hee ought to be puniſhed, and driven out as an Heretike. And howſoever you would ſeeme to condemne our Aſſertion, yet you condemne not our practiſe as unlawfull; for the Councell of Baſil, not twentie yeares after your Decree in the Councell of Conſtance, granted the uſe of the Cup to the Bohemians.
Your third exception is touching Mr. Harding, who in the queſtion betwixt him and Biſhop Iuel, of Private Maſſe, ſtands not to juſtifie his ſolitary, or private Maſſe, but rather excuſeth it in this manner;Iuels Articles of Private Maſſe. pag. That it is through their owne default and negligence, whereof the godly and faithfull people, have ſithence the time of the Primitive Church much complained. This (ſay you) hath no ſenſe, for here is a Relative (Their) without an Antecedent. And let me tell you, this is a poore Pedanticall obſervation; for to ſpend many lines about ſuch toyes and trifling words, and to paſſe by the maine ſinew & ſtrength of the Citation; this is to confeſſe in plaine termes, that you cannot juſtifie your doctrine: and the rather it appeares in this particular point, wherein Maſter Harding doth not onelyonly condemne the people for their neglect, but excuſeth hereby your Churches ordinance in generall, as being not guilty of the coldneſſe of the people. Nay more, hee plainly intimates the Antiquitie, and Vniverſalitie of our Doctrine in theſe words;Iuel. Diviſ. 7. p. mihi, 11. In caſe the people might be ſtirred to ſuch devotion; as to diſpoſe themſelves worthily to receive their Howſel every day with the Prieſt, as they did in the Primitive Church; what would theſe men have to ſay? And as touching Safety, and Certainty of our Doctrine, hee freely expreſſeth his thoughts, and liking of our Communion of Prieſt and People, ſaying; It were to be wiſhed, Iuel in Art. 1. Diviſ. 9 p. 17.as oftentimes as the Prieſt doth celebrate the high Sacrifice, that there were ſome, who worthily diſpoſed, might receive their Rites with him, and be partakers Sacramentally, of the Body and Blood of Chriſt with him: and hee gives a reaſon for it,Idem, Diviſ. 25. p. mihi, 45. Becauſe it would be more commendable, and more godly on the Churches part. And thus much touching your three Authors, whom (ſay you) I have ſo egregiouſly belyed.
Touching your worſhipping of Images, I referre it to his proper Section. And whereas wee charge you with flat Idolatrie in the adoration of the Sacrament, of Reliques, of Images, and the like; howſoever, I ſay, you excuſe your ſelves with the manner of your adoration, yet (to our endleſſe comfort be it ſpoken) you cannot charge us in the Poſitive Doctrine of our Church; no, not with the leaſt ſuſpition of Idolatrie. This I told you before, and (bleſſed be God) you have not wherewith to charge us in your Reply. But you ſay, It is far greater evill for you to be truly charged with Hereſie, than for us to be charged with Idolatrie: yet neither you, nor all your fellow-Jeſuits could ever prove us guilty of either. But what may wee thinke of your Church, which is juſtly charged, and highly guilty of both? Your Popes (which the Jeſuits reſolve to be the Church) are condemned for Heretikes by your Councels, acknowledged Heretikes by the Popes themſelves, and condemned of Hereſie by your beſt learned Divines. Your worſhip of Images and Saints, concludes in flat Idolatrie; and in particular (by the Doctrine of your owne Church) the adoration of the Sacramentall Bread and Cup, (for want of a right intention) becomes an Idoll in the Temple. Theſe things I have in part proved, which in place convenient, ſhall be more fully handled hereafter.
But it is obſervable, after I had ended my Section with this point of Idolatrie, I ſay, after this concluſion, you flye backe to the middle of the chapter, and now queſtion me where our Church was before Luther: but when I anſwered that from your addition, and Articles of Faith, The queſtion doth truly reſult upon your ſelves; Where was your Church? that is, where was your Trent Doctrine, and Articles of the Roman Creed, received de fide before Luther? You are ſo farre from ſhewing it, that you cunningly ſuppreſſed theſe words, and not ſo much as mentioned them: and thus, one while ſuppreſſing the point in queſtion; other whiles, by declining the true ſtate of the queſtion, you ſhew your wit is better than your cauſe, and declare your Sophiſtrie to be better than your Divinitie.
But to follow you backe againe, you ſay, Wee muſt ſhew you a companie of men in former times diſtinct from yours.
It were no difficult matter, to ſhew you many that did ſeperate both from you, and the errours of your Church in former Ages. The Waldenſes were a diſtinct companie of Beleevers, and ſeparate from your Church above 500. yeares ſince: Reinerius the Inquiſitor confeſſeth upon their examination, that hee found they had in one Dioceſe, one and forty Schooles, in another, ten;B. pp. Tom. 13. Reiner. contrà Wald. cap. 3. p. mihi, 299. and withall, reckons up forty Churches by name in Lombardy, in Province in France, and other Kingdomes; he proteſteth that amongſt all Sects, There was none more pernitious to the Church of Rome, than it, and that for three cauſes: Firſt, Ibid.becauſe it is of longer continuance; for ſome ſay it hath continued from the time of Sylveſter, (which is three hundred yeares after Chriſt) others ſay, from the time of the Apoſtles. Secondly, becauſe it is more Vniverſall, for there is ſcarſe any Country, wherein this Sect hath not crept. Thirdly, whereas all other ſorts blaſpheme God, this Sect hath a great ſhew of godlineſſe: for they live juſtly before men, they beleeve all rightly concerning God, and the Articles of the Creed; onelyonly they ſpeake evill of the Church of Rome, and hate it; and by this meanes draw multitudes to their beliefe after them. Thus if you require Antiquity for their Doctrine, they derive it either from Chriſt, or from Sylveſter, 300. yeares after Chriſt; if Vniverſality, all Countries were filled with their Doctrine; if good life, they lived well before men, and beleeved all rightly concerning God, and the Articles of their Faith; and this the force of truth hath extorted from your grand Inquiſitor.
Auguſtus Thuanus Preſicent of the Parliament of Paris, Thuan. hiſt. Tom 1. 1550. p. 457. & 465.tells us, that theſe who are commonly called Waldenſes, Picards, Albigenſes, Cathari, Lollards, though by their difference of place they had divers names, yet they held the ſame faith, which Wicliffe held in England, and Huſſe in Bohemia, and gathered ſtrength at the comming of Luther, eſpecially in the Caparienſes, who profeſſed a Religion agreeing almoſt in all things with Martin Luther: But withall he ingeniouſly profeſſeth that Cardinall Sadolet did examine them, and found many things malitiouſly fained againſt them.
Poplinerius ſaith, that about the yeare 1100. theſe men did publiſh their doctrine differing but a little from the Proteſtants, Poplin. Hiſt. Franc. l. 1. Bb. Vſher de ſtatu. Eccl. c. 8. p. 209.not onelyonly through France, but alſo through all the coaſts of Europe: For both French, Spaniards, Engliſh, Scots, Italians, Germans, Bohemians, Saxons, Polonians, Lituanians, and other nations doe peremptorily defend it to this very day; And by reaſon they ſeparated from the doctrines of the Roman Church, Pope Innocent the third, about the yeare 1198. authoriſed certaine Monkes, who had the full power of the Inquiſition in their hands, to deliver the people by thouſands into the Magiſtrats hands, and the Magiſtrats to the Executioners.Hiſtor. of the Wald. c. 3. St. Dominick who inſtituted the order of the begging Monkes, called Dominicans was a great perſecutor of them and their doctrine. The Mother of this Monke ſaith your Martyrologe, Martyrologe in the life of St. Dominick P. (mihi) 556.before he was yet borne, dreamed that ſhee was delivered of a whelpe, with a firebrand in his mouth, with which he ſet the whole world on fire; and your learned Doctors have interpreted this dreame, that Dominick ſhould be that dogge that ſhould vomit out the fire which ſhould conſume the Haeretikes. your infallible Pope likewiſe tells us, that he ſaw in his ſleepe the Church of St. John Lateran, to totter and ready to fall, Ibid. p. 562.and that St. Dominick ſupported it, and held it up with his ſhoulders, ſignifying thereby, that he, and thoſe of his order ſhould doe great good to the Catholike faith. And howſoever theſe reports may paſſe for dreames, yet this dog behaved himſelfe ſo worthily in the perſecution of thoſe Chriſtians, that from that time forward, the Monkes of his Order have bin alwayes imployed in the Inquiſition.Hiſtor. Wald. c. 2. But herein we may admire the great mercy and goodneſſe of God unto this ſeparate Church, that notwithſtanding this grievous perſecution, it was recorded by George Morell, at that time a Paſtor amongſt the Waldenſes, that there were then remaining according to common report, above eight hundred thouſand perſons that made profeſſion of the ſame faith. And thus breefely I have given you one company of men in former times diſtinct from yours. If we looke beyond thoſe times; the Greeke Church was likewiſe ſeparate from yours above eight hundred yeares agoe, and differed in the points of Tranſubſtantiation, of Purgatory, of private Maſſe, of Prayer in an unknowne tongue, of Marriage of Prieſts, of the Communion in both kindes, and the Popes Supremacy, I ſay in all theſe they ſeparated from your Church; and this Church, if you require Antiquity, is before Rome in time; if Vniverſality, ſhe hath larger bounds, and multitudes of people, moſt of the Patriarchs, ſeven univerſall Councels, the Greeke tongue wherein the New Teſtament was written, inſo much as your Biſhop of Bitonto was not aſhamed publikely to profeſſe, It is our Mother Graecia,Concil. Trid. Epiſc. Bitont. unto whom the Latin Church is beholding for all that ever ſhe hath. And as touching the proceſſion of the Holy Ghoſt, which your men ſay they deny (and therefore charge their Church with a knowne haereſie) it may ſeeme rather that this is an aſperſion laid upon them then any juſt exception;Concil. Florent. Seſſ. 35. For at the Councell of Florence, about 200. yeares ſithence, your Pope Eugenius anſwered the Graeoians, that he was well ſatisfied by them touching the proceſſion of the Holy Ghoſt; and that you may know they agreed with us in the principall points of our doctrine, the Greeke Patriarch congratulates with the reformed Churches in this manner. We give thanks to God, the Author of all grace, Patr. reſp. 2. in init, & reſp. 1. pag 148.and we rejoyce with many others, but eſpecially in this, that in many things your doctrine is agreeable to our Church. For a concluſion, the Muſcovites, Armenians, Aegyptians, Aethiopians, and divers other countries and Nations (all members of the Greeke Church) taught our doctrine from the Apoſtles time to ours. This is ſo true an evidence in our behalfe, that Bellarmine, Bellarm. de ver. Dei. l. 2.6. ult. in fine.as it were in diſdain of the Churches, makes this anſwer; We are no more moved with the examples of Muſcovites, Armenians, Egyptians, and Aethiopians, then with the examples of Lutherans, or Anabaptiſts, and Calviniſts, for they are either Haeretikes or Schiſmatikes. So that all Churches (be they never ſo Catholike and Ancient) if they ſubſcribe not to the now Roman faith, are either Schiſmaticall or Haereticall.
Thus I have briefely ſhewed you two ſorts of Chriſtians, who were diſtinct from you, and yet lived in the Communion of the Catholike Church. I ſhewed you others alſo which lived and died in the boſome of the Roman Church, but as farre different in opinion from your now profeſſed Faith, as thoſe that went out from you. The firſt ſort ſeparated themſelves from your Church and Doctrine, the latter continued in communion with you, but ſeparated themſelves from the errors of prevayling faction in your Church: the one ſort you perſecuted unto death, for the other you cut out their tongues for ſpeaking truth.
But you are not of it (ſay you) ſince the time you have begun to be againſt it. And this you would inferre from Tertullian, That us out of the mild, fat, and profitable Olive, Tertull. de praeſcrip. c. 36.the ſower baſtard Olive groweth; ſo have errors fructified out of the true Church, but became wild by untruth and lying, degenerating from the graine of truth, and ſo not yours; and this doth fully anſwer the matter (ſay you.) Surely if you compare the true and fruitfull Olive to your ſelves, and us unto the baſtard, and wild Olive, the matter (as you ſay) will be eaſily anſwered: but this is to beg the point in queſtion, neither indeede can it be granted to you, without a ſinne againſt the Holy Ghoſt. For the Spirit of God hath ſpoken it in particular to the Roman Church, that, Thou wert cut out of the Olive tree, which is wild by nature, Rom. 11.24.and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good Olive tree. Now if the haereſies and errors (which are compared to the wild Olive) have ſprung out of that good Olive tree, into which you were firſt grafted, or if the wild Olive is now returned to its owne nature, I will ſay to you, as ſometimes Diogenes ſaid to the Philoſopher, A me incipias, & erit verus ſillogiſmus, let the wild Olive be applied to your Church (as it ought to be) and the compariſon will redound upon your ſelves, and returne into your owne boſome.
From the Communion with your Church, you queſtion the Antiquity and Vniverſality of thoſe points wherein you differ from us; and you would have me ſhew the deniall of them to have beene antiently and univerſally taught.Pag. 121.
Your demand to the firſt is unreaſonable; For it is ſufficient for us, that we profeſſe that Faith which was once given to the Saints; beſides, thoſe new Articles which you thruſt upon the Church, are wholly yours, and the proofe lies on your part to make good, as being properly your owne: on the other ſide, to ſhew the deniall of them to have bin anciently taught is unſenſible; for the explicite deniall of them could not be taught till ſuch Articles were offered and obtruded to us, but the implicite deniall we prove by the poſitive doctrines of the Ancient Fathers, which is incompatible with your new additions and corruptions.
From the Doctrine in generall, you deſcend into the particulars; and you ſay, one of our Sacraments is an empty piece of Bread, and a ſup of wine. Pag. 123.Hannibal of Carthage, Cicero de Oratore lib. 2.when he heard Phormio the Orator talke pleaſantly a long while together, being afterwards demanded what he thought of his Eloquence, made anſwer in this homely ſort; Multos ſe vidiſſe deliros ſenes, ſed qui magis quàm Phormio deliraret, vidiſſe neminem. I will leave the application to your ſelfe, and the interpretation to the Reader, becauſe you ſay I cannot tranſlate Latin.
Some truth or modeſty I ſhould gladly heare from you; but this is ſuch an impudent Calumny, as Bellarmine himſelfe would have beene aſhamed to have heard it fall from the Pen of any learned Papalin; heare therefore what your owne men confeſſe of Calvin and others, and what we profeſſe in the name of our Church. Your F. Kelliſon ſaith of Calvin, Kelliſ. Surney. lib. 4. cap. 5. p. mihi, 229.That if hee did meane as hee ſpeaketh, hee would not diſpute with him, but would ſhake hands with him, as with a Catholike. And then hee repeats Calvins words; I ſay that in the Mysterie of the Supper, by the ſigne of Bread and Wine, is Chriſt truly delivered, yea, and his Body and his Blood. And a little before thoſe words, hee giveth the reaſon; Becauſe, ſaith he, Chriſts words, [This is my Body] are ſo plaine, that unleſſe a man will call God a deceiver, hee can never be ſo bold as to ſay, that hee ſetteth before us an emptie Signe. This is likewiſe Bellarmines confeſſion of him;Bell, de Euch. lib. 1. cap. 1. Non ergo vacuum & inane ſignum, It is no vaine and empty ſigne. Thus you ſee your fellowes and you agree like Harpe and Harrow; you ſay it is an empty peece of Bread, they anſwer in Calvins behalfe and ours, that it is not an empty ſigne: Idem ibid. c. 8.Nay, ſaith Bellarmine, both Calvin and Oecolampadius, and Peter Martyr, doe teach the Bread is called Chriſts Body figuratively, as being a ſigne or figure of his body, but they adde withall, it is no bare (and empty) figure, but ſuch as doth truely convey unto them the things ſignified thereby; Bilſon in the difference betwixt Subjection, and Chriſtiſtian Rebellion. Part. 4. p. mihi, 779.for which truthes ſake, Chriſt ſaid not this Bread is a figure of my body, but it is my body.
To give you an inſtance in ſome of our Church; God forbid (ſaith our learned Bilſon) wee ſhould deny that the fleſh and blood of Chriſt are truly preſent, and truly received of the Faithfull, at the Lords Table. It is the Doctrine that wee teach others, and wherewith wee comfort our ſelves. Wee never doubted but the Truth was preſent with the Signe, and the Spirit with the Sacrament, (as Cyprian ſaith) Wee knew there could not follow an operation, if there were not a preſence before.
Neither doe I thinke you are ignorant of this, but that you have inured your ſelfe to falſities and reproaches. For it is apparently true, that the queſtion in theſe dayes, is not of the truth of the preſence, but of the manner: that is, whether it be to the Teeth and the Belly, or Soule and Faith of the Receiver. And therupon our learned and Reverend B. Andrews returned his Anſwer to Bellarmine; Wee beleeve the preſence, Wee beleeve, B. Andrew. ad Bell. Apol. Reſp. c. 1. p. mihi. 11.I ſay, the preſence as well as you: concerning the manner of the preſence, we doe not unadviſedly define; nay more, wee doe not ſcrupulouſly inquire, no more than wee doe in Baptiſme, how the blood of Chriſt cleanſeth us.
From the Sacraments; you procceed to our two and twentie Bookes of Canonicall Scripture, and indeed wee allow but two and twentie. But will any Catholike (ſay you) allow this to have been Catholike Doctrine?
Yes, without doubt,(Scil.) Orig. in Expoſit. Pſal. 1. many good Catholikes did follow the Hebrew Canon of the Iewes, which (ſaith Origen) compriſeth but two and twentie bookes of the old Teſtament, according to the number of the letters among them.
Melito, Bellar. de verbo Dei. l. 1. c. 20.Biſhop of Sardis, was a Catholike, and (ſaith Bellarmine) hee did follow the Hebrew Canon of the Iewes.
Hilary, Hilar. in Prolog. in Pſal. explanat.Biſhop of Poictiers, was a Catholike, and he told us, The old Teſtament was contained in two and twentie bookes, according to the number of the Hebrew letters.
St. Cyril, Cyril. Catechiſ. 4.Biſhop of Hieruſalem, was a Catholike, and hee gave us the like Leſſon; Peruſe the two and twentie books of the old Teſtament, but meddle not with the Apochrypha.
Athanaſius, Anthanaſ. in Synopſ.Biſhop of Alexandria, was a Catholike, and affirmes, that the Chriſtians had a definite number of books comprehended in the Canon, which were two and twentie, equall to the number of the Hebrew letters.
Ruffinus was a Catholike,Bellar. de verbo Dei. l. 1. c. 20. and Bellarmine confeſſeth hee did follow the Hebrew Canon, which conteined our two and twentie books.
Gregory Nazianzen was a Catholike,Naz. Carm. Iamb. ad Seleucum. Iamb. 3. and hee ſhewed to Seleucus, a Catalogue of the Canonicall bookes, and hee cites the bookes in order from Geneſis to Malachie, the laſt of the Prophets; and leaveth out all the Apochrypha.
The Fathers of the Councell of Laodicea were Catholikes:Concil. Laod. cap. 59. and in the 59th Canon, they allow onelyonly thoſe two and twenty bookes for Canonicall, which wee receive.
There are others whom you terme Catholikes; as namely, Damaſcene, Hugo de Sancto Victore, Lyranus, Hugo Cardinalis, Toſtatus, Waldenſis, Driedo, and Cajetan: all which differ from your Tenet of the Apochryphall bookes which are canonized by your Trent Councell (ſuch agreement is there amongſt your beſt learned, touching the greateſt point of your Beleefe) and yet forſooth your Church cannot be depraved.
But here is one thing (ſay you) which giveth mee much cauſe of wonder; which is, that you talke of Traditions, as diſtinct from Scripture. I ever tooke you to be ſo fallen out with them, that you made the deniall of them a fundament all point of your Religion, that you would not indure the word Tradition; but alwaies tranſlated, or rather falſified it into Ordinances. Thus you.
It is a true ſaying of the Heathen Orator;Cicero. Hee who once goeth beyond the bounds of Modeſtie, had need to be luſtily impudent. I proteſt, I onelyonly termed your Additions, Traditions; and you queſtion our Church, for falſe tranſlating of the word. And cannot wee indure the word Traditions? Doe not we allow of all the Apoſtolicall Traditions, which agree unto the Scriptures? Nay more, doe wee not tranſlate the word Traditions in the Scripture, when the Text will beare it according to the Greeke originall? Looke upon the fifteenth of Matthew, Matth. 15. v. 2, 3, 6.and in three ſeverall verſes, 2, 3, 6. wee uſe the word Tradition. Looke upon the ſeventh of Marke, Marke 7. v. 3, 8, 9, 13.and in foure ſeverall places of that chapter, you ſhall find likewiſe, wee tranſlate Traditions. Looke upon Saint Paul to the Coloſsians, Galatians, and upon Saint Peter; Coloſ. 2.8. Galat. 1.14. 1. pet. 1.18.and in all theſe, in the Tranſlation joyned with your Rhemiſh Teſtament, you ſhall find the word Traditions. How may your Proſelytes beleeve you another time, when you ſay, Wee alwaies tranſlate it, or rather falſifie it into Ordinances?
For a concluſion of this Section; you ſay, that the three Creeds, the two Sacraments, the foure Generall Councels, the two and twenty books of Canonicall Scripture, We had them from you. Let it be your comfort then, that you had ſomething in your Church which was worth the gleaning, after the devill had ſowed the Tares amongſt the good Corne. But I would not have you overmuch confident of that neither; for originally wee had them from the Church Catholike, before there was a Roman. For, the Goſpell was preached in England before it was in Rome; and we had in England, a Chriſtian Church and King, before Rome had a Chriſtian Emperor, yea long before Poperie, or the name of Pope was heard of in the Chriſtian world; (in the ſenſe you now take it.) And in after Ages, when the Goſpell of Chriſt was rooted out by Heathen perſecutors (where it was firſt planted) it was afterwards replanted by Preachers, partly ſent from Rome, partly by the Greeke Church, but by neither was the Faith preached and reſtored; which your preſent Church now teacheth, and maintaineth at this day.
And laſtly, if wee had the three Creeds, the two Sacraments, the 22. bookes of Canonicall Scripture, and the firſt foure Generall Councels from you, then you cannot deny that we teach the Ancient Faith, firſt given to the Saints; and that we had a Church viſible long before Luthers dayes, (for thoſe Tenents were ſufficient of themſelves to make a glorious, and a viſible Church in the firſt and beſt ages) they were received by ſucceeding Chriſtians in all the later Ages, and are now become the Poſitive, and Affirmative Articles of our Beleefe, which for the greater part, were ever taught and received in the boſom of your owne Church. To ſhut up all your bitter Aſperſions, of Corrupting, of Falſifying, of Lying, of Lynding, and I know not what reproches, caſt upon me in theſe firſt (8) Sections; I will ſhut up all, I ſay, which hitherto hath beene delivered by you, with that anſwer of Socrates to his accuſers, before the Judges:Plato in Apologia Socratis. My Lords (ſaith hee) in what ſort your affections have been ſtirred with mine accuſers eloquence which you heard them ſpeake, I cannot tell. But well I wot, for mine owne part, I my ſelfe, whom it toucheth moſt, was almoſt perſwaded to beleeve, that what they ſaid was true, yea although it were againſt my ſelfe; ſo handſomly they can tell their tale, and ſo likely, and ſo ſmoothly they convey their maters: every word they ſpake, had appearance of Truth, and yet in good ſooth, they have ſcarſely uttered one word of Truth.
The Titles of the ſeverall Chapters, and Sections in the enſuing Treatiſe.
Chap. 9. Alphab. 1.
Sect. 1. Of Iuſtification by Faith onelyonly. Pag. 2. d:
Sect. 2. Of Tranſubſtantiation. Pag. 12.
Sect. 3. Of Private Maſſes. pag. 42.
Sect. 4. Of the ſeven Sacraments. pa. 69
Sect. 5. Of Communion in both kinds. pa. 127
Sect. 6. Of Prayer in an unknowne tongue. pa. 145
Sect. 7. Of the Worſhip of Images. pa. 176
Sect. 8. Of Indulgences. Alphab. 2. pag. 8.
Chap. 10. Of the certaintie of the Proteſtant, and uncertaintie of the Romiſh Faith. pag. 44
Chap. 11. Of the greater ſafetie and comfort in the Proteſtant Faith, then in the Romiſh. pa. 68
Chap. 12. Of reſpect due to the Ancient Fathers. pa. 84
Chap. 13. Of razing Records, and clipping Authours tongues, by the Roman Indices Expurgatory. pa. 92
Chap. 14. Of the perfection and perſpicuitie of Scripture, and our Adverſaries blaſphemous Exceptions against it. pa. 104
Chap 15. Concerning Bellarmine his ſubſcription to Proteſtant Doctr: in the main point of Iuſtification. pa. 122
Chap. 16. Of Martyrs, and particularly, that the primitive Martyrs were not Papiſts. pa. 128
Chap. 17. Concerning the Proteſtants charitable opinion of Papiſts, pag. 137. And in what ſenſe ſome affirme the Romane a true Church. pag. 148
Chap. 18. Concerning the Confeſsion on all ſides for the Safetie of the Proteſtant Religion. pa. 154
A Sermon preached at the Funerall of the Right Worſhipfull Sir Humphrey Lynde, at Cobham in Surrey. p. 171
Errata in the ſecond Part.
PAge 5. lin. 7. reade authors. in marg. l. 15. reade gloriamur, p. 17 l 8. r. eat ye, p. 22. l. 8. in mar. r. fieri, p. 40 l. 1. dele of. p. 98. l. 28. in marg. r. alleviationem. p. 109. l. 2. in mar. r. de pecc. mer. p. 148. l. 10. r. at the firſt in. p. 151. l. 9. r. Of. p. 191. l. 12. in mar. r. perhibeat. p. 202. l. 12. dele viſible. p. 203. l. 6. r. Miracles. l. 14. wonders ſhew. p. 218. l. 6. dele the.
Alphab. 2. pag. 39. l 12. in mar. r. hic. p. 51. l. 5. add hee. p. 58. l. 16 r. et. & l. 26. r. her. p. 62. l. 19. r. Of. p. 92. l. 8. r. Caietans. p. 134. lin. 5. r. the.
Errata in the Sermon. Pag. 181. l. 12. in mar. r. vertit. p. 184. l. 14 in mar. r. Condemnant. p. 191. l. 1. r. menacing. p. 192. l. 35. in mar. r. illaqueet. l. 36. oblectet. p. 195. l. 27. r. conſeruare. p. 202. l. 8. in marg. r. puteum. p. 204. l. 16. in mar. r. foreign. l. 17. r. foreign pa. 211. l. 6. in mar. r. volentibus. l. ult. r. his. p. 212 l. 3. r. dores. l. 8. in marg. r. Christo pa. 214. l. 7. in marg. r. obd…citur. & l. 11. in mar. r. Epitaphii. & l. 14. in mar. r. la…rymis implentur.