Romanism Discussed, Treatise · Article 1 · Section 13
SECT. XIII.
In which the Cloſe of H. T. is retorted.
ANd for his cloſe I thus retort it. Now let any rational and diſintereſſed man be judge whether the Fathers of the firſt Councils for five or ſix hundred years were true Proteſtants or Roman Catholicks (that is, whether they have taught and defined Proteſtant or Roman catholick Doctrines) and doubtleſs when he hath well read their Writings he will ſay, not Roman Catholiks, but true Proteſtants, and ſo by conſequence all Ages, and countreys which have received and approved them for Orthodox, by humbly ſubmitting to their Decrees, to wit, all Ages ſince Chriſt's time, who with his holy Apoſtles and the orthodox Fathers and Councils for many hundred years taught Doctrine contrary the now Roman Tridentin faith. Therefore let no Papiſt or Sectary, ſuch as H. T. is, (who like as the Donatiſts excluded all from the Church, who were not of Donatus his party; ſo he …xcludes all from the Church of God, who are not of the Biſhop of Rome's party, and thereby ſhews himſelf a Schiſmatick divided from the Catholick Church) delude himſelf and his ignorant and credulous followers, with a pretence to Council, ſeeing there is no one to be found for them (ſpeaking of General and Oecumenical Councils for the firſt five or ſix hundred years which were the beſt) which hath defined and taught their poſitive Doctrines, but all have more or leſs condemned all or ſome of them, according to the occaſions then emergent, and in particular that which Dr. John Rainold in his Conference with Hart, cap. 9. diviſ. 4. ſaid ſtands yet good, that all Chriſtian Churches, except the crue of the Italian Faction, have and do condemn the Popes uſurped Sovereignty over the whole Church of Chriſt, and that no Council did give him that viſible Mo…archy be now uſurps, and the Jeſuited party now aſcribe to him till the laſt Lateran Council under Pope Leo the tenth, 1512. After which it was oppoſed by the Univerſity of Paris and the French church, and even in the Trent council there was a party which ſtrugled againſt it in right of Biſhops, though they were overborn by the Romiſh devices, and the multitude of Italians. Even at this day the Jeſuits have not brought all the Papiſts under the Popes girdle: which makes the Pope cautelous how he determins controverſies among his own party, leaſt the condemned party appeal from him to a council, and the oppreſſed Kingdom ſet up a Patriarch of its own. So that I may ſay it is an impoſſible task for this Scribler H. T. or any of his party to make a true catalogue of chief Paſtors or Councils, or approved Doctors in all ages for the Popes ſupremacy, tranſubſtantiation, communion under one kind, worſhiping of images, invocation and worſhiping of deceaſed Saints and their reliques; but a better catalogue may be made of more godly perſons (with whom their Popes for this one thouſand years are not to be compared, their own writers being Judges) who have oppoſed theſe doctrins of the now Romaniſts, as hath been ſhewed by many learned men to the eternal confuſion of Popiſh novelties, then this Author hath here, or any Popiſh writer elſewhere hath made, to prove a ſucceſſion of Paſtors, Councils, Profeſſors and Nations avouching the preſent Roman opinions, which were never ſo avouched or enjoyned as now they are in Pope Pius the fourth his new Creed, till about one hundred years ago. And to this inſolent demand, where was your Church before Luther? Proteſtants may reply to Papiſts, where was your church which believed, as you now do, before Boniface the third, Gregory the ſeventh, Innocent the third, and Leo the tenth? The ſpeeches of the Fathers for the churches continued ſucceſſion, do none of them prove the major of H. T. his Syllogiſm, that is the only true Church of God, which has had a continued ſucceſſion from Chriſt and his Apoſtles to this time, meaning it of local perſonal ſucceſſion, of which H. T. means it, but only of ſucceſſion in holding the ſame doctrin. Nor do any of them prove H. T. his minor, that the church now in communion with the See of Rome and no other, has had a continued ſucceſſion from Chriſt and his Apoſtles to this time, for they were all dead above a thouſand years afore this time. All that can be proved, is that in caſe of hereſies or Schiſms they made uſe of the ſucceſſion in the Roman church, (which was then leſs tainted then ſome others) to repreſs them, yet ſo as that they alleged a ſucceſſion in other churches as well as it, but none ever, as this Author, held it neceſſary, that all churches ſhould own the Biſhop of Romes ſupremacy, or the Roman churches communion how corrupt ſoever they ſhould prove: only while they continued uncorrupt in the faith they held communion with them, and ſo ſhould we, if they would embrace the primitive purity of doctrine and worſhip, which Peter and Paul and other Apoſtles firſt taught in the churches of Chriſt, of which that at Rome, though not the firſt, yet was one of the moſt famous, and till their declining of great eſteem.