The By-Way

SECT. I. The safest, and only infallible way to find out the true Church, is by the Scripture.

W Hen the Donatists, in the most flourishing times of Christian Religion, arrogantly and presumptuously appropriated the Catholic and Universal Church, to their heretical and particular faction: S ^t . Agustine encountering them, states the point of Controuersie in this manner. The question is where the Church should be, what then shall we do? shall we seek it in our own words, or in the words of our Lord Jesus? In my judgment we ought rather to seek the Church in his own words, for that he is the truth, and knoweth his own body.

You have heard the question propounded, and answered by the Oracle of that age. Such is the difference at this day, betwixt the Church of Rome and us; and I heartily wish, we might join issue with them upon the like terms, and both agree with one unanimous consent to seek the Church of God in the word of God; then should we be gathered, as sheep to one sheep-fold, and the weak in faith should be received, not to doubtful disputations, but to the reading of the Scriptures: and they that now question the Visibility of our Church before Luther, would first examine the infallibility of their own, by the Touchstone of the Gospel; and the rather, because it is agreed on both sides, that whatsoever Church professeth, that faith and doctrine, which Christ and his Apostles taught in the first age, the same Church and doctrine hath continued more or less visible in all ages. But to return to the Donatists.

When Christ in the Canticles, demanded of his Spouse where she rested Meridie, at Noone-day, the Donatists concluded Christ's question with their own answer, that the Church did rest Meridie, and that was in the South: & from this ground, excluded all other Churches, but their own in the South of Africa: The Donatists claim, was seemingly derived from the authority of the Scriptures (for Donatus, and Agustine, heretic and Catholic, both urge the Scriptures;) but observe the difference; Saint Agustine puts the whole issue of his cause upon the Scripture: the Donatists claimed their doctrine by the public voices of the Africans, they assumed to themselves the title of the Catholic Church: they magnified the Councils of their Bishops; they gloried in their frequent, though feigned miracles: these were the principal grounds of their Church, and upon these they challenged that great Champion: but hear what answer he makes them. Let the Donatists, if they can, show their Church, not in rumors and speeches of the men of Africa, not in the Councils of their Bishops, not in discourses of any Writers whatsoever, not in signs and miracles that may be forged, for we are forewarned by God's word, and therefore fore-armed against those things: but in the prescript of the Law, in the prediction of the Prophets, in the verses of the Psalms, in the voices of the Shepherd himself, in the preaching and works of the Evangelists, that is in all the Canonical authorities of the sacred Scriptures.

If Saint Agustine had been living in these days, either he must have retracted this Protestant doctrine, or he would have been reputed for an heretic; for all these marks, which were anciently maintained by the Donatists, are proclaimed by our adversaries to be visible characters of the true Church: neither did this learned father require more of the Donatist, then the Catholics of those times were willing to perform on their parts; and therefore he binds himself to the same conditions which he required of his adversaries, and withal renders the reason of his demand. Quia nec nos propterea dicimus, &c. Because we our selves do not say we must therefore be believed, for that we are in the Church of Christ, or else for that Optatus and Ambrose, and infinite other Bishops of our Communion, have commended the Church which we hold, or because our Church hath been published in the Councils of our Colleagues, or because in all places of the world where our Communion is frequented, there are so many miracles wrought. This was the doctrine of Saint Agustine, and the ancient Fathers, and this is ours; they required no more of the Donatists, but to lay apart all pretended titles, and rely only upon the word of God, we offer to the Romanists, no less then to accept the same conditions upon trial of that title, and rely only upon that word.

I must confess, I think a more speedy way might have been found to have given an answer to the Controuersies of that age: for Saint Agustine might have pointed at the Church in the West, which was then as conspicuous as the Sun at Noone day; he might have answered them, it was a City upon a hill, which was visible to all. He might have produced the Apostle for a witness, that her faith was published throughout the whole world: he might have confuted them with sacred Councils, and Doctrine of the ancient Fathers, and confirmed his truth with the death of constant Martyrs, which sealed their doctrine with their blood in the testimony of the true faith. Certainly, all these proofs were pregnant in his time, and he might easily have produced them in behalf of his Church (as our adversaries in these days do for theirs:) but he left these brags to these latter times, and sends them to the Law, to the Testimonies, to the word of Christ, that speaketh better things then was possible for man to utter; and to that end (saith he) thou mightest not err in the Church, and lest any man should say this is Christ, who is not Christ, or this is the Church which is not the Church, hear the voice of the Shepherd, he hath shown thee the Church, that the name of the Church may not deceive thee. The sum and substance therefore of S ^t . Augustine's doctrine was this, that neither Bishops, nor Councils, nor Miracles, nor rumors of the Catholic name, do demonstrate the Church of God to be Catholic (for all these are common to heretics, as well as Catholics;) but the holy Scriptures which bear the testimony of Jesus, they only carry the infallible marks of his truth, and in them (faith he) we have known Christ, in them we have known the Church.

Neither was this the opinion of Saint Agustine only; for Saint Jerome tells us, that in his days the Church was not gone out of her limits of the holy Scriptures, and from thence the timber and materials must be taken, with which the house of wisdom is to be built. And Saint Chrysostom as a wise Master-Builder in this house, gave this Caveat to the work-men in after ages; It can no way be known which is the true Church (nisi tantummodó per Scripturas) but only by the Scriptures; otherwise if they had regard to other things, they should be offended and perish, and not understand which is the true Church. And lastly, the learned Father Irenaeus assures us; Non per alios, &c. by no other have we known the way of our salvation, but by them, by whom the Gospel came to us, which verily they then preached, and afterwards by the will of God delivered the same to us in the Scriptures, to be the Foundation, and Pillar of our Faith.

Tell me then in this latter age and time of Controuersie, wherein it is commonly voiced in our ears, Loe here is Christ, and there is Christ, this is the true Church, and that is the true Church; how shall the religious man, which loveth truth, and seeketh comfort, resolve himself? to which Church shall he safely join himself, when perhaps he wants the learning, perhaps the leisure to look backward for 1600 years, and rightly examine the doctrine of both Churches? If he seek the Protestant Church, behold she being poor, & despised for want of continued eminency, is become a stumbling block to the ignorant. If he look on the Roman Church, behold, She is arrayed in purple and scarlet color, and decked with gold and precious stones, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornications, and they that follow her, wonder with great admiration. And without doubt the Popes triple Crowns, the golden crosses, the Legend of Saints, the multitude of professed Orders, their pomp in Processions, their rich clothing of Images, their pretended power of their Priesthood, the great rumour of their Catholic cause, their Iubilies, and Pardons, their Merits and Miracles do so dazzle the eyes of the ignorant and common people, that they think there is no Church true and visible but the Roman Church: and certainly the case thus standing, we have no better plea for our Church, then the holy Father Saint Agustine, sometimes made to Petilian the Donatian heretic; Whether of us be Schismatics, we or you, ask you not me, I will not ask you; let Christ be asked, that he may show us his own Church.

SECT. II. Our adversaries pretences from the obscurity of Scriptures, and inconveniences of the Lay people's reading them, answered.

I Speak not this, as if the Romanists of these times did wholly wave the Scriptures: for if we may credit Doctor Sanders; There are most plain Scriptures in all points for the Catholic Faith, and none at all against the same. And their own Bristow would make the world believe, from the beginning of Genesis, to the end of the Apocalypse, there is no text that makes for us against them, but all for them. If these men have spoken the truth, let them bear witness of the truth, only let me tell you, the Rhemists in their Annotations upon the Gospel, profess in the name of their Church, that, if we should, when we came to years of discretion, be set to pick our Faith out of the Scriptures, there would be a mad work, and many Faiths among us. And their fellow Ecchius proclaims to all the world, that the Lutherans are dolts, which will have nothing believed, but that which is express Scripture: for all things are not delivered manifestly in the Scriptures, but very many are left to the determination of the Church. And their Proselyte Sanders, who pretends such evident testimonies of the Scriptures in behalf of his Church, accounts it no better then heresy to translate them. And Peresius his fellow Jesuit, complains; It is the Devils invention to permit the people to read them. And it is the general vote of the best learned Romanists, The reading of the Bible makes more heretical Lutherans, then Roman Catholics. If therefore the Scriptures are such pregnant & plain testimonies in behalf of the Roman Faith (as some Romanists pretend) why do they condemn the translating of them? why do they not permit the people to read them? and if all places of Scripture make for them, and none for us, how comes it to pass, that by reading them, many Papists by their own confession become Protestants?

It is the blasphemous assertion of Albertus Pighius; that the Apostles have written certain things, but not to that end their writings should rule our faith, but rather that they should be under, and ruled by our faith and Religion. And hereupon he quarrels with all those that submit their knowledge to the authority of the Gospel: If thou shalt teach (saith he) that those things must be put to the Judgment of the Scriptures, thou showest thyself to be void of common reason: for the Scriptures are dumb Judges, & cannot speak. Neither is this the opinion of some private spirits, which of late have declined the authority of the Scriptures: but if we look beyond Luther, we shall find that almost 300 years before his days, the Romanists did endeavor by all means to extinguish the light of the Gospel.

About the year 1255, there was a great contention betwixt the University of Paris, and the Order of Franciscan Friars, in which dissention the Friar Mendicants published a book called Euangelium aeternum, the eternal Gospel: in this Book it was declared, that the Gospel of Christ was not the everlasting Gospel; that it was to cease and determine as the old Law did at the coming of Christ, that the Gospel of Christ should from that time continue but 50 years, and that their new Gospel did contain as much or more, then the whole Bible, that theirs was the Gospel of Christ, and the eternal Gospel. Neither was this wicked blasphemy published by one man, but by a whole Order of Monks and Friars. Neither were they upstart opinions (like mushromes grown up in a night) but they were set afoot fifty five years before that time. This and much more of the like doctrine is to be read in Matthew Paris, and more particularly in that excellent Treatise of the Succession and state of Christian Churches.

Thus the Romish Priests of the former and latter ages, agree like Pilate and Herod, both to the condemnation of Christ & his Word; and as Herod (saith Ambrose) burnt the Scriptures, lest by means of such ancient Records, some doubt might afterwards be made of his posterity; In like manner our late Romanists have silenced the Scriptures, lest by such ancient Evidences their new Articles of Faith should be discovered; and had it not been for fear or shame, I am verily persuaded, they had fulfilled in a sense to literal the words of the Apostle: The fire shall try every man's work, of what sort it is. Now can any man imagine why these men should be so angry with Christ and his Apostles? Can they say the Scriptures are subject to errors, and need an Index Expurgatorius? No, they dare not, they will not say so; but they say, they are dead characters, a killing letter without life, a matter of contention, a wood of thieves, a shop of heretics, imperfect, doubtful, fall of perplexities, not to be permitted to the common people: for this were all one (saith Hosius) as to give that which is holy unto dogs, and cast 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 pearls before swine. Nay more, Cardinal Bellarmine assures us, that the people will not only reap no benefit, but detriment, by reading them: for they would easily take occasion to err both in manners and doctrine. And for confirmation of his assertion among other proofs he gives this instance: If an ignorant layman should read of the adultery of David, of the incest of Tamar, of the lies of Judith, and many such like things contained in the Scriptures, either it would cause him to imitate their examples, or he would think them to be lying inventions, or being not able to resolve them, would be in danger to believe nothing at all. These & the like examples (which in truth concern the lives and manners of men, not the doctrine,) are registered by the will and mercy of that good God, to prevent despair in others, who may unhappily fall into the like sins; and yet that no man might presume to commit the like sins, by their examples; he who reads of the adultery of David, shall read likewise of the punishment allotted to his sins: and he that reads the particular examples of Tamar and Judith, shall find such severe and fearful judgments in general denounced against those sins, that he shall have little cause or comfort to follow their examples in such particulars; but from hence rather we may observe the sincerity of the Pen-men of the holy Ghost, who impartially set down the vices of the best men, and greatest Patriarchs, as well as their virtues: and by this declaration of the sins of the regenerate, and best servants of Christ, we are taught to humble our selves, and to fly to our Savior for mercy and grace, that every tongue may confess to thee, O God, Thou only art holy: And certainly from hence (I mean from these & the like examples,) Saint Agustine, Saint Jerome, and the ancient Fathers, confuted the Pelagian Heretics, who with Bellarmine and his associates maintained the perfection of righteousness in this life. But admit these and many such like places were hard to be understood in Scriptures, yet there is milk for babes, as well as stronger meat for stronger men there is depth (saith Gregory) for the Elephant to swim, and shallow fords for the lamb to wade in. He that gave a heart and wisdom to the Apostles to preach that heavenly word, opened the heart of Lydia, (a poor ignorant woman) to understand it: and for that purpose (saith Chrysostom) the Spirit of God hath so ordered and disposed the Scriptures, that Publican's, and Fishers, and Tent-makers, and Shepherds, Apostles and unlearned men, should be saved by those books: and to that ende no ignorant man should pretend obscurity for his excuse, it is ordained that the laborer and servant, the widow woman, and the most unlearned man, by hearing them, should reap some benefit. Nay more (saith he) to whom are the Scriptures obscure, who is there that heareth the words, Blessed are the meek, Blessed are the merciful, Blessed are the pure in heart, and the like, that shall need an Expositor? Besides the words, the Miracles, the Histories, they are known and evident to all: and lastly he concludes, that the difficulty and obscurity of the Scriptures, (which the Romanists pretend at this day) Is but a veil and pretext to cloak idleness. This doctrine was so frequent & general among the Ancients in the Primitive church, that Azorius the Jesuit is enforced to confess, We willingly grant, that in those days the lay people were conversant in the reading of the Scriptures. And if we look upon the lay persons of their times, Acosta his fellow Jesuit ingenuously professeth, that Our gracious God hath so provided in holy Writ, that there is none so rude and ignorant, but by reading the Scriptures in humility, may understand many things both profitable and true, as likewise there is none so learned, but he may still be ignorant of more then he knows: nay more (saith he) I have seen some men utterly unlearned, and scarce knowing Latin, have gathered out of the Scriptures such profound knowledge, that I have wondered at them. But the spiritual man judgeth all things. Here is a free confession, and a fair evidence from two learned Jesuits: the one testifieth that the scriptures were usually read by the Lay people in the Primitive Church; the other witnesseth of his own knowledge, that an ignorant man hath received great benefit, and likewise that great profit may redound to the people by reading them in these days.

But put the case a Lay man should not understand those things which are contained in the Scriptures: notwithstanding (ex ipsà Lectione) out of the very reading of them, there will arise great holiness and sanctity of life. Admit many things are hard to be understood in the Scriptures, (which never any Protestant denied) yet saith Jerome, there is the Book of Genesis, most plain for every man's understanding; therein you may see the creation of the World, the beginning of Mankind, the confusion of Languages plainly described: and as touching the book of Job, there you may learn a pattern for Patience, and there you may see the Resurrection plainly deciphered: nay more, The obscurity of the Scripture is very profitable (saith Gregory) for it doth exercise the senses, whereby one may understand that which otherwise he would be ignorant of: for if the sacred Scriptures were easy and familiar in all places, they would be neglected: which obscure places, by study and industry being known, and understood, do comfort and revive the Reader, by how much the more they are with industry and difficulty sought and understood.

But that which is observable, these men, who so much complain of the obscurity of the Scriptures, do both wittingly and willingly endeavor in their Translations, to make them abstruse, and hard to be understood, by their strange & uncouth phrases: look upon their Old Testament in their Douay Translation, instead of Foreskin, they have put Praepuce; for Passover, Phase; for unleavened bread, Azyms; for high places, excelces; for the Holy of Holiest, Sancta Sanctorum. Again, look upon their Rhemist Testament, and there you shall observe these strange words, Depositum, Exinanited, Parasceue, Didragmes, Neophyte, and the like, which shows, that albeit the Scripture of it self were never so plain and perspicuous to every man's understanding, yet there need an expositor: for these inkehorne terms, whereas in truth, although those words were most agreeable to the Hebrew, Greek, or Latin, yet ought they rather to give the most significant and plain terms (the true sense of Scripture always premised) that stands best for the capacity and understanding of the Reader.

It is not then the pretended obscurity of the Scriptures, which gives a just cause of restraint to the lay people, for not reading of them: ( for this is but a color and a vain pretext of them, saith Chrysostom ) the truth is, they fear, lest by reading of them, their Trent doctrine, and new Articles of Faith should be discovered: for it would trouble the best learned Priest, to show his disciples, in what place of Scripture they are commanded to worship Images, to call upon dead Saints, to pray in an unknown tongue, to forbid the Scriptures to the Laity, to deny Marriage to Priests, to adore the relics of Saints; by what Scripture his Holiness hath power to depose Kings, to free souls out of Purgatory, to gather into the Treasury of the Church, the superabundant satisfaction of Saints? It is a crime worthy of the Inquisition with them to have a Bible; but for the ignorant lay man to make such inquiry after Scriptures, for that doctrine which was not conceived in the Scripture, is a sin worthy of death.

Look upon the Tenets of their own Church, and take but their own confessions. The Church of Rome doth represent God the Father, by the image of an old man: yet Vasques the Jesuit confesseth: The Scripture saith plainly, God did forbid the Jews to represent Him by an Image. The Church of Rome doth ordinarily make vows to Saints: yet Cardinal Bellarmine professeth: When the Scriptures were written, it was not the use to vow to Saints. The Church of Rome hath defined, and declared Indulgences for an article of faith; yet their Sylvester Prierias, tells us: They are not made known to us by the authority of Scriptures: The Church of Rome teacheth, that the words of Christ, This is my body, do effect Transubstantiation, yet Cardinal Cajetan confesseth; Non apparet ex Evangelio: It doth not appear that those words are properly to be understood by force of Scriptures: but which is more to be lamented, these men are so far from building their Church upon the Scriptures, that, as it were in despite of Christ's precept, they decree their half Communion for an article of Faith, with a Non obstante. Notwithstanding, Christ did institute in both kinds: And their Council of Trent acknowledgeth that the Apostle called concupiscence sin: but withal commands the contrary belief, with a curse to them that teach the Apostles doctrine; in so much as their own Posseuinus confesseth in sober sadness: The Apostle calls concupiscence sin, but (saith he) it is not lawful for us so to do. This is so truly known and understood of those who have a dispensation to read the Scriptures, that Petrus Sutor, a Carthusian Monk, amongst other inconveniences for which he would have the people debarred from reading of them, allegeth this, in special for one; Whereas many things are openly taught to be observed, which are not to be expressly had in the whole Scriptures, the simple people observing these things, will quickly murmur and complain, that so great burdens should be imposed upon them, whereby the liberty of the Gospel is so greatly impaired, and they also will be easily drawn away from the observation of the ordinance of the Church, when they shall observe that they are not contained in the Law of Christ. It is not then the obscurity of the Scriptures; but a fear by their own confessions of some strange discovery that would be made by reading of them, and in that fear they rather intimate a plainness and easiness in the understanding them: for otherwise what need they fear the people's reading them, if they were so full of obscurity (as they pretend) that they could not understand them.

As therefore we deny not that there is difficulty and obscurity in the Scriptures, so we profess likewise, that there are plain and evident testimonies, which illustrate those difficult and obscure places, and that in those plain and evident places all things cocerning faith and good manners are contained: This was Saint Augustine's doctrine, this is ours; let us therefore follow that sweet counsel, which that holy and ancient Father, by way of prevention, gave the Christians of his time. We are brethren, why do we strive? Our Father died not vntestate, he made a Testament and so died. Men do strive about the goods of the dead, till the Testament be brought forth, then that is brought, they yield to have it opened and read: the Judge doth hearken, the Counsellers be silent, the crier biddeth peace, all the people are attentive, that the words of the dead may be read and heard. He lieth void of life, and feeling in his grave, and his words prevail, Christ doth sit in heaven, and is his Testament gainsaid? Open it, let us read, we are brethren, why do we strive? Let our minds be pacified, our Father hath not left us without a Testament, he that made the Testament, is living forever. He doeth hear our words, he doth know his own words, let us read why do we strive?

SECT. III. The Scripture, according to the Judgment of the ancient Fathers, is the sole Judge of Controuersies, and Interpreter of it self.

BVsaeus the Jesuit, knowing that the Scriptures were not such evident testimonies of the Roman faith, as his fellows pretended; by way of prevention gives this caveat to his disciples; If you cannot avoid disputation with an heretic, touching points of faith; although you find you are able to match him, yet first demand of him, from whence he will derive his arguments against the Catholic faith; if he answer, as commonly they do, Out of the sacred Scriptures: tell him, there is no victory, at least but uncertain, to be hoped for from them, unless it may appear who hath best right to the Scriptures, and to whom belongs authority to expound them. By this Jesuits confession, the points in controversy, are sub judice in question, to which side the right of Scriptures do belong, and to whom authority to expound them; and sooth to say, the controversies of this age, are now brought to this narrow issue, that our adversaries are well content, to try their cause by Scriptures, if the Reformed Churches would grant them but this one poor request, That they may be sole Judges and Interpreters of the Scripture.

A request no doubt, which in most men's understanding, will seem unreasonable, that Christ and his Apostles should be judged by man, or that a man should be Plaintiffe, and Judge in his own cause. It was the constant profession of Saint Agustine; Men spiritual, whether they rule or be ruled, judge according to the Spirit, but they judge not of the spiritual knowledge, which shineth in the firmament (of the Scriptures,) for it is not lawful for any man to judge over so high authority: for be the man never so spiritual, yet must he be a doer, not a Judge of the Law. And in the conclusion of the Chapter, he gives his special reason for it: There a man is said to be Judge, where he hath power and authority to correct. He therefore who shall first dare to correct the scripture, let that man by S Augustine's rule assume authority to judge them: and as touching that Tenet, that a man should be Plaintiffe, and Judge in his own cause, it was a doctrine so different from the Primitive Church, that in the midst of heresies; I say, in the first and best ages, wherein Saint Agustine and Epiphanius mention above fourscore heresies; even then when the Fathers had greatest reason to stand upon the privilege of their Church, they never made answer (like the Romanists) You must hear the Church, and our Church is that Catholic Church that is the sole Judge of controversies, and according to our Interpretation (whose right it is to judge of the Scriptures) it is so and so; but on the contrary, they made the Scriptures sole Judges of their cause, and withal professed, the Text of Scripture was the truest Gloss in expounding of it self.

I speak not this, as if our reueren'd Divines did make the Scriptures sole Judges of our cause, excluding the testimony of the Church: for we have a church as well as they, we have churchmen as well versd in Scriptures, and Fathers as themselves: neither do we deny the authority of the Fathers, which jointly agree in points of faith, for the right expounding of the Scriptures; only we say, the Author of the Word who best knew his own meaning, was best able to expound himself: and in this manner the ancient Fathers, as they grounded their Church upon the Scriptures, so likewise they referred back the meaning of the Scriptures unto the Author of them, as if he that was Judge of all men, should be judged of none, and such we know is the wisdom and goodness of God, that he hath oftentimes hid these things from the wise and learned, which he hath revealed unto babes and sucklings; and, as for those things which it hideth in miseries (saith Agustine) it lifteth them up, not with stately speech, whereby an unlearned mind should not presume to approach as a poor man to a rich, but with a lowly speech inviteth all men, that it might not only feed them with manifest, but also exercise with obscure truth, having that in manifest, that it hath in obscure places: and as concerning obscure places, the same holy Father tells us, that, if they cannot see the things which are obscure and dark in the Scriptures, the fault is in themselves, not in the precepts, as if I should point with my finger at a star, which they would gladly see, and their eye-sight were so weak, that although they did see my finger, yet they could not see the star, at which I point: let them cease to blame me, and let them pray to God, that he will give them eye-sight. And in his four Books of Christian Doctrine, where he purposely treateth of expounding the Scriptures, he plainly proveth, that the meaning of the Word, is learned out of the Word, and the obscure places are expounded by the manifest: and herein he toucheth the freehold of the Roman Church: for (saith he) In this great plenty of Scriptures, we are fed with plain things, and exercised with obscure, those drive away hunger, these contempt, the holy Ghost having tempred them so of purpose: and then he concludeth with the Tenet of our church; There is scarce any thing drawn out of these obscure places, which hath not been spoken, (quod non planissime) most plainly some other where. Neither was this the opinion of this learned Father only, but it was the confession of S Ambrose, There is much obscurity in the Scriptures, but withal, if thou knock at the door with the hand of thy understanding, thou shalt gather by little and little the reason of that which is there spoken, and the door shall be opened unto thee, (non ab alio, sed à verbo Dei) and that by no other but by the Word of God it self. And with these Doctors of the Latin Church, agreeth the Greek Fathers. Behold (saith Basil) and hear the Scripture expounding it self, Yea (saith he) what things be or seem to be covertly spoken in some places of holy Scripture, the same are expounded by other plain places elsewhere. And (saith Chrysostom) Let us follow the scope of the holy Scripture in interpreting of it self, when it teacheth some hard thing, it expoundeth it self, and suffereth not the hearer to err. Let us not fear therefore (saith he) to put our selves with full sails into the sea of Scriptures, because we shall be sure to find the Word of God for our Pilot. And lastly, as it were forestalling that Popish opinion; (that the Scriptures are obscure, and therefore not to be read by the vulgar people) he elegantly incites a Gentile to the reading of the Scripture, by a familiar and common reason; When thou buyest a garment, though thou have no skill in weaving, yet thou sayest not, I cannot buy it, they will deceive me: but thou dost use all means to learn how to know it: do therefore those things which are to be done, seek all those things of God, and he altogether will reaueale it unto thee: So that if any doubt or difference happened in the Primitive church amongst the true believing Christians, they referred the determination of it to the Inquest of Christ & his 12 Apostles, and they only were made the sole Judges of the question. And that we might know this Protestant doctrine continued for many ages in the Church, Pope Clement the first almost six hundred years since, professed it for the Catholic doctrine of his time, that a man must take the sense of truth from the Scripture it self, seeing that every man may have the full and firm rule of faith and truth in the Scriptures. If we descend frō the Pope to the great Council of Basil, it was the general vote of many B. and Cardinals, and confirmed likewise by the Pope himself. The Divine Law, (or holy Scripture) the practice of Christ, of his Apostles, and the Primitive Church, together with Councils and Doctors, grounding themselves truly upon the Scriptures, shall be admitted, for the most true and indifferent Judge in the Council of Basil. The resolution of the ancient Father Optatus, in the question betwixt the Catholics and the heretics, whether one should be twice baptized, may serve for a proof, and a full conclusion of the premisses; You say it is lawful, we say it is not lawful, (between yours it is lawful, and ours it is not lawful) the people's souls do doubt and waver, let none believe you nor us, we are all contending parties, Judges must be sought for: if Christians, they cannot be given on both sides, (for truth is hindered by affections.) A Judge without must be sought for; if a Paynim, he cannot know the Christian mysteries; if a Jew, he is an enemy to Christian Baptism: no judgment therefore of this matter can be found on earth, a Judge in heaven must be sought for. But why knock we at heaven, when we have the Testament of Christ in the Gospel. And thus I have briefly shown you the deputed Judges, and Interpreters of the Scripture in the Primitive Church: now let us observe by what Rule the Scriptures are expounded in the Roman Church.

SECT. IIII. Our adversaries, howsoever they pretend by taking an oath to make the Fathers Interpreters of the Scriptures, yet indeed they make themselves sole Interpreters of Scriptures and Fathers.

IT is an Article of the Romame Creed, published by Pope Pius the fourth, and by the oath their Foreman hath taken, all Priests and I suites are sworn, Not to receive or interpret the Scriptures, but according to the vnifo • me consent of Fathers. It is a large and fair promise, and delivered upon oath: and for my part, if the church of Rome can make good the uniform consent of Fathers, for all their twelve new Articles of Faith, (which hath been often promised, but never as yet by any one performed,) I shall willingly listen to their interpretation, and prefer it before any private, or latter Exposition.

It was the profession of our late King of famous memory, What ever the Fathers of the first four hundred years did with one vnanime consent agree upon, to be believed as a necessary point of salvation, I will believe it also, or at leastwise will be humbly silent, not taking upon me to condemn the same.

I speak not this, as if we should decline the practice of the ancient Church in expounding Scripture by Scripture, but to demonstrate to the world, that our adversaries in this point of their faith, have neither followed the ancient Church, nor the Decree of their Trent Council; whereby it shall appear, that either this Article was newly created, or the former Popes and Councils have disagreed from the latter.

Cardinal Cajetan was so far from subscribing to the Popes Creed in this point, that on the contrary he gives this Praemonition to the Reader of the Scriptures; Not to loathe the new sense of the holy Scriptures for this, that it dissenteth from the ancient Doctors, but to search more exactly the Text and coherence of the Scriptures; and if he find it agree, to praise God, that hath not tied the exposition of the Scriptures, to the sense of the ancient Doctors. This Protestant doctrine is far different from the Tenet of the Roman Church, insomuch that Bishop Cano his fellow Romanist was much troubled, that a prime Cardinal should oppose an Article of the Roman Creed: one while he chargeth him, that acutiùs multo quam foelicius: he expounded the Scriptures in some places more wittily then happily: another while he would so seem to excuse him, that he might be convinced by this or the like argument, To follow the Fathers in all, were to condemn our own wits, and deprive our selves of the means to find out the truth. What arguments might prevail with the Cardinal, I cannot tell, but sure I am, his doctrine disagreed from the Article of the Roman faith. And Doctor Payna Andradius, a principal Pillar of the Trent Council, rebuketh Cano for his rash reproving of Caictan, and defendeth his Tenet with the same doctrine. He teacheth, that when the Fathers seek the literal sense of the Scriptures, they do not always find them, but give diverse senses, one unlike to another. He professeth; We may forsake their senses all, and bring a new unlike to theirs. He addeth further; that experience forceth us to confess, unless we will be unthankfull to most excellent wits, that very many things in Moses and the Prophets, are in this our age expounded more exactly, through the diligence of learned men, then ever they were before: And thereupon he concludeth, that the holy Ghost (the only and faithful Interpreter of the Scriptures) would have many things to be known to us, which our Ancestors knew not, and hath wrought by means unknown to us, known to him, that the Fathers noted good and godly mysteries out of very many places of the Scriptures, whereof the right and natural sense hath been found out by posterity. And thus Cano against Cajetan, and Andradius against Cano, and Cajetan and Andradius both against the Trent Article, allow the Exposition of Scripture by Scripture, and sometimes against the streme of Fathers. I proceed to the examination of more witnesses, and I call Cardinal Bellarmine to testify the same doctrine, that neither he, nor his associates, do hold themselves tied by their new Article of faith, to the Exposition of the Fathers; It is one thing (saith he) to interpret the Law as a Doctor, another thing as a Judge: of the one is required Learning, of the other Authority: the opinion of the Doctors is to be followed according to reason; but the Judges opinion is to be followed of necessity. Saint Agustine, and the Fathers in their Expositions, supplied the places of Doctors, which we may follow as we see cause, the Pope and Council supply the places of Judges, with a Commission from God, and therefore they must be observed and followed of necessity.

Thus we have seen three several Judges and Expositors of the Scriptures. First the ancient Fathers made the Scriptures the only Judges, and true Interpreters of themselves, next the Trent Doctors, decreed the ancient Fathers for Interpreters: and now at length, the later Schoolmen have proclaimed their Popes and Councils, for their chiefest Judges, and best Interpreters of the Scriptures: and These (say they) must be followed of necessity. Pardon them, Necessity is a deadly dart; there is no necessity by their doctrine to obey the expositions of Fathers, which is the second Article of their Faith) but there is a necessity to obey the authority of their late Popes and Councils, in their Exposition, which is but matter of opinion; and from hence it will follow, that either the Articles of the R • man Creed were newly created by Pope Pius the fourth, and that creation was not in his power; or that those Doctors, and Cardinals had not the oath administered unto them; or we may justly suspect they have forsworn themselves. Neither was this the opinion of these particular men only, but the Roman Church, (notwithstanding their solemn protestation, by which they are enjoined to interpret the Scriptures) doth in many things, by her own confession, wave the Interpretation of the Fathers. It is the testimony of Cardinal Baronius, Although the most holy Fathers, whom for their great learning we rightly term the Doctors of the Church, were endued above others with the grace of God's holy Spirit, yet the Catholic Roman Church doth not follow them always, and in all things expounding of the Scriptures. Here is another confession of a great Cardinal, (who was not ignorant of the Articles of his faith, that (notwithstanding the Trent Decree, and the Popes Bull, the Church did not always follow the exposition of the Fathers. Now if any shall require a reason why the Pope and Cardinals of former ages dissent from others of these later times, in expounding of the Scriptures, Frier Stella, who doth not condemn the Exposition given by the ancient Doctors, protesteth, He knoweth full well, that Pygmeis being put upon Giants shoulders, do see further then the Giants themselves. But Bishop Fisher doth more warily excuse it, and with plausible reasons assure us, that Many things, as well in Gospel's, as in the rest of the Scriptures, are now more exquisitely discussed by later wits, and more clearly understood, then they have been heretofore; either by reason that the ye was not as then broken unto the Ancients, neither did their age suffice to weigh exactly that whole sea of Scriptures, or because in this most large field of Scriptures, even after the most diligent reapers, some ears will remain to be gathered, as yet untouched.

How forcible motives, these reasons may seem to other men, I will not here dispute: sure I am, they are vain excuses for Roman Bishops and Cardinals, who are bound by their general Council, and the Popes Bull, to obey the Exposition of Fathers, as an Article of their faith.

But admit these opinions should be excused for the particular Tenets of some private men, let us see how faithfully the Popes & Pastors of these latter times have interpreted the Scriptures, with the uniform consent of Fathers.

Moses saith, God made man after his Image: Pope Adrian interpreteth; therefore Images must be set up in Churches.

Saint Peter saith, Behold, here are two swo • ds; Pope Boniface concludes: Therefore the Pope hath power over the spiritual, and the temporal.

Saint Matthew saith, Give not that which is holy unto dogs. M ^r . Harding expounds it: therefore it is not lawful for the vulgar people to read the Scriptures.

Saint John saith, There shall be one Fold, and one Sheepherd. Johannes de Parisijs tells us: This place cannot be expounded of Christ, but must be taken for some Minister ruling in his stead.

The Prophet David saith, Thou hast put all things under his feet: Antoninus expounds it: Thou hast made all things subject to the Pope, the cattle of the field, that is to say, men living in the earth: the fishes of the sea, that is to say, the souls in Purgatory: the fowls of the air, that is to say, the souls of the blessed in heaven. And lastly, whereas our Savior Christ witnesseth of himself: All power is given to me both in heaven and earth. Stephen Archbishop of Patraca, applied it to Pope Leo the tenth in the Council of Lateran, in the audience of the Pope himself, who thankfully accepted it, and suffered it to be published and printed: and as it is rightly observed by learned Du Moulin, Pope Innocent the third, in his Book of the Mysteries of the Mass; the book of sacred Ceremonies, Durants Rationalls, Tolet, and Titleman, and others do most ridiculously wrest the Scriptures, altogether different from their right meaning, and the Expositions of the Fathers: as for instance: The Scripture saith, The Rock was Christ: therefore say they, the Altar must be of stone. It is written, I am the light of the world: therefore Tapers must be set upon the Altar: It is written: Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth: therefore the Priest must kiss the Altar. It is written: Thou shalt see my back parts: therefore the Priest must turn his back to the people. It is written: Wash me again, therefore the Priest must wash his hands twice. It is written, Put off thy shoes, for this place is holy: therefore the Bishop at Mass changeth his hose and shoes. And lastly, the Pope himself, at the time of his coronation, casteth certain copper money amongst the people, using the words of Peter: Silver and gold have I none, but that which I have, I give thee.

These and the like Expositions do much resemble the strict order of Monks, who reading the words in Matthew, (He that taketh not up his cross and followeth me, is not worthy of me) made themselves wooden crosses, and so carried them on their backs continually, causing all the world to laugh at them: for howsoever they may seem to be the expositions of some private spirits, yet he that makes oath in verbo Sacerdotis, to receive & expound the Scriptures, with the uniform consent of Fathers, and shall render such Expositions of the Text, can be no true Catholic: For whosoever doeth otherwise understand the Scripture (saith Jerome) then the sense of the holy Ghost (who is the Penman of the Scripture) requires, although he hath not departed from the Church, yet he may be termed an heretic. But (as the Friar said wittily in his Sermon) the truth which he preached, was like holy water, which everyone called for apace, yet when the Sexton cast it on them, they let it fall on their backs: in like manner the Romanists seemingly call for the Scriptures, they commonly vaunt that they expound and receive them according to the uniform consent of Fathers; but (as Vincentius Lyrinensis said of the heretics of his time,) When they shall begin not only to utter those sayings, but also to expound them, then the bitterness, then the sowernesse and madness is perceived; then a new devised poison will be breathed out, then are profane Nouelties disclosed, then may you see the bounds of the ancient Fathers to be removed, the Catholic Faith to be then butchered, and the doctrine of the Church torn in pieces.

Pope Pius the fourth who first published the Articles of the Creed, was not ignorant, that the Scriptures must be far fetched, and hardly strayned, to make them speak for the Trent doctrine: he well understood, that it was too general and strict a tie upon every Mass Priest, to receive and interpret the Scriptures with the uniform consent of Fathers, (knowing well, that many Mass Priests were utterly ignorant of the Fathers,) and therefore to qualify the rigor of that oath, adjoined these words to the aforesaid Article; Also that sacred Scripture, according to that sense which the Mother Church hath holden, (whose right is to judge of the true sense and interpretation of holy Scripture) I do admit: so that by the latter part of the Article, they allow the Fathers to be interpreters of the Scriptures; and by the first part, they make themselves sole interpreters of the Fathers; to which addition an ignorant Priest will swear, with a mental reservation, that he doeth not receive nor expound the Scripture, but with the uniform consent of Fathers, that is, according to the sense and judgment of the Roman church: for it is not to be doubted, but the Church will allow of that sense which is most agreeable to that doctrine, and of that interpretation, (although it be far different from the Ancients,) which is most consonant to their Religion, and the rather I incline to this opinion; for that Cardinal Hosius doth protest it for a universal and Catholic doctrine of his Church. If a man have the Interpretation of the Church of Rome, of any place of Scripture, he hath the very words of God, though he neither know nor understand, whether and how it agreeth with the words of Scripture. Now if it happen that those which are better instructed, by comparing of Scriptures and Fathers, do make a doubt of some place of Scripture, which the Church teacheth different from the Fathers, Cardinal Cusanus, by way of prevention, gives him to understand, that there is Fides Temporum, a faith that followeth the time: Neither is it any marvel (saith he) though the practice of the Church expound the Scripture at one time one way, and at another time another way, for the understanding or sense of the Scripture runneth with the practice, and that sense so agreeing with the practice, is the quickening Spirit; and therefore the Scriptures follow the Church, but contrariwise the Church followeth not the Scriptures. This learned Romanist tells us, it is no wonder that the Scripture is at diverse times diversely expounded: he tells us, the Scripture attends the Churches pleasure: and lastly, which is most true, he professeth the Romish Church followeth not the Scripture, but the times.

That this Cardinal speaketh truth, I think no Protestant doth make a question: but that you may be witness also of the practice of these times, you shall observe how fitly these men have applied the Scripture to their Church: whereas it is said to Peter in a vision, Arise, kill and eat: Cardinal Baronius being Interpreter, will tell you: The Pope is Peter, and the Venetians are the meat which must be killed and devoured. In like manner, whereas Saint Paul saith, Haereticum deuitâ, Auoyd an heretic: the silly Friar applies it to times and persons with this Exposition: Haereticum de-vitâ tolle: kill the heretic, meaning the Protestant: and in this manner according to the times, the sense runneth with the practice; or at leastwise I am sure, this practice runneth with these times.

Thus then you have Fides Ecclesia, an Exposition of Scriptures according to the Article of the Romish Creed, and Fides temp • rum, an Exposition suitable to the times, and their own doctrine. If therefore we appeal to Scriptures, they account them dumb Judges, without the Exposition of their Church: if we require an Exposition with the consent of Fathers, they tell us we must admit that sense which the Church holdeth, whose right is to judge of the true sense of Scriptures: If we show them, that their Expositions are senseless, and disagreeing from the Ancients; they tell us the Scriptures may receive different Expositions according to the times. And thus they make the Scriptures sound like Bells, according to their fancies, and violate their oath with a Saluo Iure, saving a right to the sense and meaning of their own Church. This way therefore is Via Deuia, a Wandering and By-way.

It resteth in the last and chiefest place, to observe the difference betwixt the Church of Rome and us, touching the entire Canon of Scriptures (for without doubt this is the only and infallible rule of faith,) and there is a curse denounced by God himself against all those that add to his word, or diminish ought from it. It shall appear therefore by many pregnant and infallible testimonies of our adversaries themselves, that the Canon of Scripture which we profess and believe, was the same which was taught and declared by Christ and his Apostles in the first age; the same which was published, & generally received by the ancient Fathers in succeeding ages; the same which continued in the bosom of the Roman Church in all ages, till the days of Luther.

SECT. V. The entire Canon of Scriptures which we profess (without the Apocryphal additions) is confirmed by pregnant testimonies in all ages, and most of them acknowledged by the Romanists themselves.

IT was the complaint of Campian the Jesuit, that the ancient Canon of Scripture was altered at the coming of Luther; and thereupon as a man enraged against the Lutherans, he makes this open out-cry: What incensed Luther's whelps, to put out of the true Canon of Scripture, Tobias, Ecclesiasticus, and the two books of Maccabees? Desperation: for by these heavenly oracles, they are expressly convinced, as often as they dispute against the defense of Angels, as often as they dispute against Freewill, as often as they dispute against Praying for the dead, as often as they dispute against Praying to the Saints. Surely, if this Romanist had been as real in his proofs, as he was vain glorious in his speeches, he had gone beyond all the Romish Proselytes of our age: for never man made greater flourishes with poorer proofs: for it shall appear, that we have published no other Canon of Scripture, then Christ and his Apostles taught, and received no other then the ancient Fathers declared to be divinely Canonical (and those only Canonical) none other then the learned Doctors and Professors, entirely preserved in the bosom of the Roman Church in all ages: so that if any curse be denounced against us, for renouncing doctrines of faith, deduced from Apocryphal Scriptures, I say it shall appear by the same Decree, they have laid an Anath • ma upon Christ and his Apostles, and have cursed the ancient Fathers, and the principal members of their own Church.

SECT. VI. Our Adversaries pretences from the authorities of Fathers, and Councils, to prove the Apocryphal books Canonical, answered.

THe former Testimonies are so true, and pregnant in our behalf, that our learned adversaries are enforced to confess, that most of those Authors did reject the books in question for Apocryphal. To say nothing of the Trent Anathema, laid upon those reverend Fathers, and learned Doctors, of the ancient and moderne Churches, who rejected those books in all ages; let us weigh their chiefest reasons and arguments for defense of their cause, and it will appear, there are no solid and certain authorities, to prove the Apocryphal books in question for canonical: To instance in particulars: Bellarmine saith, the book of Judith was held by Jerome for Canonical; and withal pretended this reason for it, This book hath a singular testimony from the famous and first general Council of Nice. It is true, that both contending parties subscribe to this first and best Council of Nice; but I pray where is that Canon to be found? and sure I am there is no such testimony extant, as is pretended by the Cardinal: nay more, Salmeron his fellow Jesuit protesteth, Saint Jerome affirmed the book of Judith Apocryphal. And Acosta the Jesuit professeth, (e Canone exemit) he exempted it out of the Canon: and as touching the Council of Nice, their own Lindanus proclaimeth, that this assertion gives him great cause of doubting: for if the Nicene Council did anciently reckon the book of Judith in the Canon, why did not the Council of Laodicea reckon it? why did not Nazianzen make mention of it? what meant he to say, the Church at that time did read the books of Judith, Toby, and the Maccabees, but did not receive them amongst the Canonical Scriptures.

Again, look upon the Council of Laodicea, called in the year 364, there you shall find the book of Judith, by the testimony of Binius himself, rejected for Apocryphal, and this Council is confirmed by the second Canon, of the sixth General Council of Trullo; which the Fathers of that Council would never have done, if the first General Council of Nice had decreed the contrary.

I proceed to the examination of the chiefest ground and principal cause of their Trent Decree; The third Council of Carthage, called in the time of Siricius Bishop of Rome, about the year 399, touching the Apocryphal books, makes this declaration; It pleaseth us, that nothing be read in the Church, besides the Canonical Scriptures: and there they publish for the Canonical books, Toby, Judith, Hester, Esdras, and the two books of Maccabees: And to this Council (say the Romanists) Saint Agustine subscribed. This testimony I confess, is extant in the 47. Canon of this Council; but give me leave to tell you, the Church of Rome doth not generally avowe that Canon of that Council. It is the confession of Cardinal Baronius; Haud omnes, &c. Not all the Canons of this Council are established, but they are allowed in diverse other Councils of Carthage, as namely, that Canon wherein the number of sacred books were defined. And Binius the publisher of the Councils, makes the like acknowledgment, that the 50 Canons, which were entitled to that Council, were not all confirmed by it, but by other Councils of Carthage, (as namely) the 47 Canon: and that which argues suspicion of a forged Canon, the books of Maccabees, which are inserted in the Latin copy of that Council, are not to be found in all, or any of the ancient Greek copies or Manuscripts. Neither is this Council of that authority as the Romanists themselves pretend: for when our learned Protestants do otherwise produce this Council against the head of their Church, Bellarmine makes answer, This Provincial Council ought not to bind the Bishop of Rome, nor the Bishops of other Provinces. If we oppose against it the Council of Laodicea, which decreed those books for Apocryphal: Bellarmine makes answer, The Council of Carthage is of greater authority then that of Laodicea, because it is later, and because it was National; but the Council of Laodicea was provincial. In the one place, when it seemingly makes for him, he terms it a National Council, in the other, when it plainly makes against him, he terms it Provincial. But, Oportet esse memorem, Falsehood had need have a good memory. It is usual with Bellarmine, with Cano, with Costerus, and the best learned Romanists, to excuse, Saint Jerome, Saint Agustine, Saint Gregory, and many others, which denied the Apocrypha for part of the divine Canon, with this general Answer: It was no sin, no heresy in them to reject those books, because no General Council in their days had decreed anything touching them. If therefore no General Council had decreed the true Canon of Scripture in their days, how comes it to pass, that Bellarmine cites the Council of Nice for the book of Judith? Why do the Romanists claim the antiquity of their Canon from the Council of Carthage? Why do they profess in honor of that Council, that it was generally received, and that S. Agustine subscribed to it: when as that Canon touching the Apocryphal Scriptures was not decreed, nor confirmed by that Council by their own confessions? But admit the Council of Carthage had decreed it, yet can any man prove that the Church at that time did receive the books of Judith, of Hester, of the Maccabees, and the rest, for the rule of faith? Shall we think that Saint Agustine maintained the Canon of Scriptures contrary to Saint Jerome? must we believe that the Council of Carthage, within less then thirty years did decree contrary to the Council of Laodicea? nay more, is it so much as probable, that both those Councils should be confirmed by one and the same general Council of Trullo; and yet one should decree a contrary Canon of Faith against the other? And as touching Saint Augustine's subscription to that Council, it is a sufficient allegation against it, that the 47 Canon was never decreed in that Council; and the rather it appears by this, for that S ^t . Agustine did not allow the book of Judith, of Wisdom, of Ecclesiasticus, and the Maccabees for Canonical, (all which are expressly decreed in the Council of Carthage for Canonical.) Touching the book of Judith, he tells us, the Pewes never received it in to the Canon of Scriptures; & withal there he professeth, that the Canon of the Jews was most authentical. Touching the books of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, he tells us, Solomon was a Prophet, as his works (namely) the Proverbs, the Canticles, and Ecclesiastes do witness, all which are Canonical, but Ecclesiasticus, and the book of Wisdom, were only called his for some likeness of style: but all the learned affirm them none of his: yet the Western Churches held them anciently of great authority. And lastly, touching the books of Maccabees, he declareth by pregnant and several reasons, that they are Apocryphal; First, by way of distinction he tells us, this reckoning is not found in the Canonical Scriptures, but in other books, which the Church receiveth for Canonical Secondly, he tells us, they are accounted Canonical for the suffering of holy Martyrs; whereas the Canonical books are simply and absolutely of themselves and for themselves Canonical. Thirdly, he tells us, the Church did receive them not unprofitably, which is as poor a testimony as he could have given of his own works. Fourthly, they are received (with this condition) if they be soberly read in the Church. And lastly, he giveth this special reason in behalf of the true Canon of Scripture; Christ giveth his Testimony to those books, as namely, to the Law, to the Prophets, to the Psalms, because all they bear witness of him: but the Apocryphal books, neither witness anything of Christ, neither are they contained under all, or any of those books, which Christ himself divided into the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms.

It is true, there was Canon Ecclesiastical, wherein all, or most part of the Apocryphal books, which are now read and received in our Churches, were anciently read for example of life, and instruction of manners, and for that cause were commonly called Canonical: and in this manner Saint Agustine speaking of th • Maccabees, tells us, These books the Church did account Canonical, which the Jews did not: yet withal he professeth in the same Tract, that those books which were not in the Jews Canon, and yet were received of the Church for Canonical, were of less force and authority; when as it cannot be denied, that all the books truly and divinely Canonical, were always reputed of equal force and authority. Again, there was Canon diuinus, a divine Canon, which was held the rule of Faith, wherein was numbered only the twenty two books of Scripture committed to the Jews; and this Canon, S ^t . Agustine (who termed the books of Maccabees Canonical) doth distinguish from the Canon Ecclesiastical, and gives his very instance in the books of Maccabees: There may be something (saith he) found in the books of Maccabees, worthy to be joined with the number of those miracles; yet hereof will we have no care, for that we intend the miracles, Diuini Canonis, which are contained in the divine Canon. And thus he distinguished the books of Maccabees, which he termed Canonical, for instruction of life, from the divine Canon of Scriptures, which were received for confirmation of faith: and that divine Canon only, he acknowledgeth to be given by inspiration from God, and to be of most certain credit and highest authority in the Church; and for that cause he gives this further rule, The books which were received of all Churches (such as were in the divine Canon among the Jews) were of greatest authority, and ought to be preferred before those which were not generally received of the all Churches: and thereupon, Bellarmine confesseth, by way of solution; That Saint Agustine was most certain, that all Canonical books were of infallible truth, but was not alike certain, that all the books of Scripture were Canonical: for if he did think so, yet he knew the point was not as yet defined by a general Council; and therefore without any stain of heresy, some books might not be received of some persons for Apocryphal.

Since therefore the pretended Canon of the Nicene Council is not extant, since their suggested Canon of the third Council of Carthage, by their own confessions, is not confirmed in that Council; since the books of Maccabees, which are joined with the Apocryphal books, in the Latin copies are not to be found in the Manuscripts of the ancient Greek copies: nay more, since contrariwise, we have the testimony of Christ and his Apostles for the entire Canon comprehended in the Law, in the Prophets, and in the Psalms: since we have the Council of Laodicca, in the Primitive Church, generally received, and afterwards confirmed by a general Council; since we have the consent of the ancient Fathers, and the ample testimonies of Bishops and Cardinals, and learned Writers, in the bosom of the Roman Church, who witness with us the Antiquity and Vniuersality of our Canon in all ages; I hope we may with good reason reject the Apocryphal Scriptures, as often as they are produced against us for Freewill, for Purgatory, for Prayer for the dead, for Invocation of Saints, for Worshipping of Angels, and the like: these things I say rightly considered, and patiently heard on both sides, I shall appeal to their own learned Cardinal Cajetans confession, who concludes for the antiquity of our doctrine, and the Vniuersalitie of the Jews Canon, with one and the same reason: All Christians receive a double benefit by the Apostasy and obstinacy of the Jews; one is to know which are the true books of the Olde Testament: for if all the Jews had been converted to the faith of Christ, then would the world have suspected that the Jews had invented those promises which are of Christ the Messias: but now for as much as the Jews are enemies unto Christ, they bear witness unto us, that there are no books Canonical, but those only which the Jews themselves acknowledged to be Canonical.

To conclude therefore this first point, since the Scripture is the most certain and safest rule of Faith, by our adversaries own confession, since the Canonical books of Scripture, (which are the only rule of Faith) are contained in the Law, in the Prophets, and the Psalms, under all or any of which the Apocryphal books are not contained, I say, to leave this certain and safe way, and receive Apocryphal additions to that Word, when it is strictly forbidden by God himself: Thou shalt not add to this Word; this is Via dubia, a doubtful and uncertain way; this is Via Deuia, a wandering and By-way.

But because our adversaries insist upon another ground, (viz. ) That by no other means we can know the Scriptures to be divine, nor the books to be holy and (Canonical) but only from unwritten Tradition, I will leave them to their Apocryphal Scriptures, and pursue them in their unwritten traditions in the next place.

SECT. VII. The Romanists in point of Traditions contradict the truth, and themselves; grounding most of their erroneous Doctrine upon unwritten Traditions, and yet frequently allege the written Word for them.

IT is the first Article of the Roman Creed, to which all Bishops and Priests are sworn: I admit and embrace the Apostolical and Ecclesiastical Traditions, and the other observations and constitutions of the Church. What are meant by those Observations and Constitutions of the Church, and how the Priests are bound to embrace them. The Council of Trent declareth in this manner. Traditions appertaining to faith and manners, as if they were dictated by Christ himself with his own mouth, or by the holy spirit; and preserved by a continual succession in the Catholic Church, the Council receiveth with equal reverence and religious affection, as she receives the holy Striptures themselves.

Here was the first alteration made, touching the rule of Faith; and from the Decree of this Council, Bellarmine's doctrine began to take place. The Scripture is but a partial, not a total rule of Faith: for certainly till this time, Traditions concerning faith and manners, were never reputed of equal authority with the Scriptures, nor a part of the Rule of Faith. It was the Tenet of Aquinas, (and the later Schoolmen knew no other doctrine, till the Council of Trent. ) The doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles is called Canonical, because it is the rule of our understanding, and therefore no man ought to teach otherwise. But you shall observe from, and after this time, the Romanists performed their oath (Ex abundanti) I may say more then enough. Cardinal Baronius tells us, Tradition is the foundation of Scriptures, — and excels them in this, that the Scriptures cannot subsist, unless they be strengthened by Traditions, but Tradition hath strength enough without the Scriptures. And that the world may know it is usual with our adversaries, not only to equal their unwritten Traditions, but also to advance them above the Scriptures, let their sayings be weighed by any indifferent man, and it will appear, the Scriptures are of so little use or esteem with them, as if they were not worthy to be named in points of controversy betwixt us. Traditions (saith Lindan) are the most certain foundations of Faith, the most sure ground of the sacred Scriptures, the impenetrable buckler of Ajax, the suppresser of all heresies. On the other side, the Scripture (saith he) is a nose of wax, a dead and killing letter without life, a mere shell without a kernel, a leaden rule, a wood of thieves, a shop of heretics, and the like. Costerus the Jesuit tells us for certain. It was never the mind of Christ, either to commit his mysteries to parchment, or that his Church should depend on paper writings: but say the Rhemists, We have plain Scriptures, all the Fathers, most evident reasons, that we must either believe Traditions, or nothing at all: nay more, saith Costerus, The excellency of the unwritten word doth far surpass the Scriptures, which the Apostles left us in parchments; the one is written by the finger of God, the other by the pen of the Apostles; the Scripture is a dead letter written in paper or parchment, which may be razed or wrested at pleasure: but Tradition is written in men's hearts, which cannot be altered: the Scripture is like a scabbard, which will receive any sword, either leaden, or wooden, or brazen, and suffereth it self to be drawn by any interpretation. Tradition retains the true sword in the scabbard; that is, the true sense of the Scripture in the sheath of the letter. The Scriptures do not contain clearly all the mysteries of Religion, for they were not given to that end, to prescribe an absolute form of faith; but Tradition contains in it all truth, it comprehends all the mysteries of faith, and all the estate of Christian Religion, and resolves all doubts which may arise concerning faith, and from hence it will follow, that Tradition is the Interpreter of all Scriptures, the Judge of all Controuersies, the Remouer of all errors, and from whose judgment we ought not to appeal to another Judge, yea rather all Judges are bound both to regard and follow her judgment.

Now if we look back, and consider those blasphemous speeches used against the Scriptures, and compare those passages, with the reverend regard they give unto Traditions, we cannot but conceive there were some special reasons that induced the Pope & Trent Council to set Traditions in the first place. Andradius who well understood the state of the Church of Rome, being present at the making of that decree, gives this general lesson in their behalf: Many points (of Roman doctrine) would reel and totter, if they were not supported by the help of Traditions. But it may not be forgotten, their own Monk Petrus de Sutor more particularly shows one special cause why the Scriptures were denied unto the lay people. (viz.) Because many things being taught by the Roman Church, and not contained in the Scriptures, would more easily draw the people from the traditions and observances of their Church. And another reason why Traditions are in that special request above the Scriptures, is rendered by their own Bishop Cano: Because Tradition is not only of greater force against heretics, then the Scripture, but almost all disputation with heretics, is to be referred to Traditions. Thus you see by the confessions of two learned Romanists, there was great cause why traditions should have the first place amongst the Articles of the Creed; for the one saith, they prevent the reading of the Scriptures, which otherwise would discover the doctrine of their Church: the other saith, they are more available then the Scriptures, to confute the doctrine of heretics.

These testimonies premised for the honor and authority of Papal Traditions, let us examine what are meant by Traditions; and next, which are those Traditions, that are of that high esteem in the Roman Church: for if their Traditions be of equal authority with the Scriptures, and yet are not contained in the Scriptures, there is great reason they should be approved by testimonies and witnesses aequiualent to the Scriptures.

Doctor Kellison tells us, that Tradition is nothing else, but an opinion or custom of the Church, not written in holy Scriptures, but yet delivered by the hands of the Church from time to time, from Christians to Christians even to the last age. And Saint Agustine declareth more properly: Whatsoever the Universal Church doth hold, not being ordained by Councils, but hath been ever held, that is believed most rightly to be an Apostolical Tradition.

It appears therefore that Papal Traditions, which are of equal authority with the Scriptures, must have Vniuersalitie of Churches, and consent of ages, (or to use the words of their Trent Council, Such as are preserved by a continual succession in the Catholic Church. All doctrinal Traditions of this nature, are received by the Reformed Churches; for we all profess with the same Father: Whatsoever is used by the Church throughout all the world, is to be observed, and it would be most insolent madness to dispute against the same. Let us hear therefore out of their own mouths, what are those Traditions which are not written in any Apostolic Author, and yet have those requisite conditions, and special characters of the Roman Church, viz. Antiquity, Vniuersality and Succession.

Petrus à Soto gives us to understand, that the sacrifice of the Altar, the unction of Chrysme, Invocation of Saints, Prayers for the dead, the Popes Supremacy, Consecration of water in Baptism, the whole Sacrament of Confirmation, Orders, Matrimony, Penance, Extreame unction, Merit of works, Necessity of satisfaction, and confession to a Priest, are all Traditions of the Roman Church. Canisius and Costerus refer to Traditions, the worship of Images, set times of fasting, all the Ceremonies of the Mass. Melchior Cano tells us, the imploring help of holy Martyrs, and celebrating their memories, the worshipping of Images, the consecrating and receiving of the body and blood of Christ by the Priest, the Sacraments of Confirmation and Orders not to be reiterated, are nowhere happily to be found in Scriptures: but amongst all the Romanists, as it is observed by reverend Whitaker's, there is none doth so fully and punctually set down the Traditions of the Roman Church; as their Bishop Lindan, who amongst other Traditions, mentions the Real presence, the Communion under one kind, private Mass, Indulgences, Purgatory, Peters living and dying at Rome. All or most of these Traditions are substantial and fundamental points, and the denial of them makes a man an heretic in their Church. Now it is very observable in the first place, that no unwritten Tradition hath any ground or foundation in the Scripture: for Tradition is so taken (saith Peresius) that it is distinguished against the doctrine, which is found in the Canonical books of Scripture; and consequently touching all, or any of the Papal Traditions, there is no use at all of Scriptures. Herein then stands the difference betwixt the Church of Rome and us: There are many things (saith Cano) belonging to the doctrine & faith of Christians, which are neither contained in the sacred Scriptures, manifestly or obscurely: and this he understands by the Traditions of his own Church: There is no point of Faith taught in our Church, which is not expressly contained in the Scriptures, or by necessary consequence deduced from thence; and if we receive the witness of men, yet the witness of God is greater. 1. John. 5.9. But that which is incongruous to common sense, and altogether different from the Romish doctrine, those men which generally profess, that unwritten Traditions are so called, because they are distinguished from the word written: & as Bellarmine confesseth, do signify that doctrine which is not written by the first Author, in any Apostolic Book, (either for want of a continued succession in their Traditions, or to make the ignorant believe, the Scripture makes in all points for them, I say for those very points (which they term Traditions unwritten) they produce the Word written: as for instance, Purgatory is termed an unwritten Tradition, and therefore by Bellarmine's testimony is not to be found in any Apostolic Author: yet the Cardinal, for this very point, cites twenty several places in the written Word to prove it. Invocation of Saints, is a Tradition unwritten (and therefore not to be found in Scripture) yet the Cardinal proves it out of the Word written: Go to my servant Job, and he will pray for thee. The Communion in one kind is a Tradition unwritten, (and therefore not to be found in any Apostolic Author) yet Fisher Bishop of Rochester, proves it out of the Word written: Give us this day our daily bread. Prayer and Service in an unknown tongue, is a Tradition unwritten, and therefore not to be found in Scripture, yet Ledesma the Jesuit proves it strongly out of the Word written: Our Savior opened the book of the Prophet Isaiah, and afterwards closed it. How poor and weak are these and the like authorities deduced from the Scriptures, I leave to every man's judgment: but sure I am, the number of their Traditions is uncertain, and the nature of them is destroyed by their own Tenets, when they confound the written word with their unwritten Doctrines.

It was the ancient rule of Vincentius Lyrinensis, In the Catholic Church we ought to be careful, to hold that which hath been believed in all places, at all times, and of all persons, for that is truly and properly Catholic, which the force and reason of the name doth declare. Those men therefore which assume the name of Catholic, and accurse all those, who receive not Traditions with equal reverence and authority with the Scriptures; let them prove that their doctrinal Traditions, (before named) have been ever held and believed at all times, in all places, and of all persons; let them prove they were received with the uniform consent of Fathers, let them prove they were decreed in a constant succession from age to age, from Christians to Christians throughout the whole universal Church. These are requisite conditions, and ancient characters of Apostolic Traditions: But that there are any such, or ever were in the Church of Rome, excepting those only which are expressly, or by necessary consequence deduced from the word of God, although they are daily pretended by them, yet to this day were never proved. And hence it is, that for want of sure footing and foundation in the Scriptures, many Ritual Traditions, and Observations of the ancient Church are changed, and many doctrinal Traditions and Constitutions of the Roman Church are newly brought in, which are pretended to be ancient.

Touching Ritual Traditions, Saint Basil tells us: It was not lawful for any man to kneel in the Church upon the Sunday: and this Traditionn (saith he) was given unto us in secret charge by the Apostles of Christ. Yet this Tradition is altered. S ^t . Agustine saith, Between Easter and Whitsuntide it was not lawful for any man to fast, by the Tradition of the Apostles: yet this Tradition is abrogated. The giving of the Eucharist to Infants, was an ancient Tradition, & continued in the Church six hundred years after Christ, saith Maldonado: yet this Tradition is abolished. And as touching the doctrinal Traditions and Constitutions of their Church, (which are made of equal authority with the Scripture,) you shall scarcely find any of them; I say confidently, you shall find none of them to have been received de Fide, as Articles of faith, with the Vniuersalitie of Churches, the consent of 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 Fathers, and continued succession of the now received doctrine in all ages.

That this may the more plainly appear, I will examine the Tenets of the Papal Traditions ab Initio, and see what the Roman Church in general, and the Greek Church in particular, (which for many hundred years communicated in the same Faith with the Roman) hath taught and believed concerning their doctrine.

SECT. VIII. The most general pretended Traditions of the Roman Church, were utterly unknown to the Greek Church, and want Antiquity, Vniuersalitie, and Succession, the proper marks of true Traditions in the Roman Church.

TO examine the foundation of the Greek Church, let us look up to the time of the Apostles, where we shall find S. John writing to the seven Churches in Asia; and Saint Paul sending his Epistles to the Corinthians, to the Ephesians, to the Thessalonians, all principal members of the Greek Church. In these Churches, according to the doctrine of the Apostles, there is nothing that makes for the now Roman Faith and Doctrine, but rather against it: and that the Romanists may not vainly arrogate to themselves the title of Catholic and Universal Church, (as if the whole Christian Faith were confined to the Bishop of Rome and his Diocese) it is plain and evident, that Saint Peter taught the word at Antioch, Saint Andrew in Greece and Muscouie, Saint James in Judea, Saint John in Asia, Saint Philip in Assyria, Saint Thomas in India, Saint Matthew in Ethiopia, Saint Thaddeus in Armenia, Saint Paul in all the countries from Arabia to Slauonia, S ^t . Bartholomew in Scythia, Saint Simon in Persia, Joseph of Arimathea in Great Britain: and all these published the same Faith for substance which we at this day profess in the Church of England.

Look upon the Greek Church in general: Saint Agustine tells us, From the land of Grecia, the faith into all places was spread abroad: and in particular, Saint Chrysostom tells us, The name of Christians beginning first from the city of Antioch, as from a spring, hath flowed over the whole world. And without doubt, that famous City in Greece gave the first name and title to the Christians, and therefore was called, Theopolis, the City of God.

It cannot be denied, that the Eastern Church is before Rome in time, she hath larger bounds, and multitudes of people, almost all the Apostolic Seas, most of the Patriarchs, seven Universal Councils, the Syrian language wherein Christ spake, the Greek, wherein the Scripture of the New Testament was written, and withal a personal Succession, even from the Apostles themselves without interruption; and that which is known to the meanest Grecian, the words of Church, of Bishop, of Priest, of Deacon, of Baptism, of Eucharist, of Christian, are all derived from the Greeks, and prove that Religion came from them, from whom those terms were borrowed. This doctrine is so true, that it enforced the Bishop of Bitonto to profess openly in the Council of Trent. It is our Mother Grecia, unto whom the Latin Church (or the Church of Rome) is beholding for all that ever she hath. And thus much touching the foundation of the Greek Church. Now that we may the better discern the Antiquity of our Religion, and the Noueltie of the Roman, let us examine the Tenets of the Greek Church, and by them we shall discern whether the Roman church hath continued visible in that doctrine which she now teacheth, and consequently whether their pretended Apostolic Traditions have Antiquity, Vniuersalitie, and Succession in all ages.

Matthias Illiricus, being borne in Dalmatia, not far from the confines of Greece, and therefore may be thought to be well acquainted with their orders, tells us: The Churches of Grecia, the Churches of Asia, Macedonia, Misia, Valachia, Russia, Muscouia, and Africa joined thereunto, that is to say, in a manner the whole world, or at least the greater part thereof, never granted the Popes Supremacy, never allowed either Purgatory, or Private Masses, or the Communion under one kind; we may add to these, Transubstantiation, Prayer in an unknown tongue, Forbidding of marriage to Priests, and Popish Invocation of Saints, (as it is now believed) were utterly unknown to the Greek Church, and consequently want Antiquity, Vniuersalitie and Succession, the proper marks of true Traditions in the Roman Church. To examine them in order.

The Popes Supremacy ] is a Tradition Apostolical, and declared for an Article of Faith in the Roman Church; yet this Tradition wants Antiquity, Vniuersality and Succession.

Touching Antiquity, ] Pope Gregory 600 years after Christ, professeth publicly, That none of his predecessors did ever assume that profane (Universal) title.

Touching Vniuersalitie] Aluarez tells us, that Prester John sent unto him, to know why the Pope divided the Churches of Antioch and & Rome, seeing the Church of Antioch was in a manner the chief, and head of all Churches, wherein S ^t . Peter governed & dwelt 5 years. Whereunto when he answered, they were obliged by an Article of their faith; he replied; If the Pope would usurp so great a prerogative, as to command things unlawful, they would make no reckoning of it: and if by such means their Abuna, (their Primate ) would presume so far, they would burn the copy of such a command. In like manner Nile Archbishop of Thessalonica, tells us, The Greek Church, though it never denied the primacy of Order to the Pope of Rome, yet their assumed predominance of authority it always resisted.

Touching Succession] Bellarmine himself confesseth, The first who most earnestly withstood the Supremacy of the Bishops of Rome, seem to be the Grecian Fathers: for since the year 381, they labored to prefer the Bishop of Constantinople, the three Patriarchs of the East, in the second place next to the Bishop of Rome; and this (saith he) may be understood by the second General Council. And as in this Council of Constantinople, there was a resistance made against the power and jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome: so likewise he telleth us further, that in the year 451, the Greek Fathers not being content with their determination, labored to make the Bishop of Constantinople equal with the Bishop of Rome: for in the Council of Chalcedon, the Greek Fathers decreed it, (but deceitfully) in the absence of the Popes Legat, that the Bishop of Constantinople should have the second place after the Bishop of Rome: notwithstanding he should have equal privileges with the other. Thus two general Councils, the one consisting of 150 Bishops, the other of 630, by the testimonies of the Popes Cardinal, opposed the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome, the which Supremacy (if in those days) it had been received for an Article of faith, or a Tradition Apostolic, without doubt those two famous Councils would have subscribed to it, without any resistance or opposition to the universal Head of the Church. And that you may yet further know the Churches of Asia, and Grecia, continued their Resolution in this point, look upon the late Council of Florence, and there you shall observe, that Michael Palaeologus, by reason he submitted himself to the Pope in that Council, was hated of all the people while he lived, and being dead, was forbidden Christian burial. And Isidorus, the Archbishop of Kiouia in Russia, for that he began for Vnities sake, to move the people to the like submission, was therefore deposed of his Bishopric and put to death.

Thus the Popes Supremacy, wants Antiquity, Vniuersalitie, and Succession, the proper marks of Roman Traditions, and consequently can be no Article of Faith, no Apostolic Tradition, as is pretended in this first point.

Purgatory ] is reputed a Tradition Apostolical, and received in the Roman Church for an Article of Faith; yet this doctrine wants Antiquity, Vniuersality and Succession.

Touching Antiquity] Nile Archbishop of Thessalonica, professeth in the name of the Greek Church, that it could be no Tradition Apostolical: for (saith he) We have not received by Tradition from our Fathers, that there is any fire of Purgatory, or any temporal punishment; and we know that the Eastern Church doth not believe it. And amongst other reasons why Purgatory was not received by them, they render this for one: that whereas their Fathers had delivered unto them many visions and dreams, and other wonders concerning the everlasting punishment (in hell) yet none of them had declared anything concerning the temporary fire of Purgatory.

Touching Vniuersalitie ] It is the confession of Fisher, their own Bishop of Rochester: Whosoever will read the Commentaries of the ancient Greeks, so far as I see, he shall find very seldom mention of Purgatory, or none at all: and the Latins (in the Western Church) did not receive the truth of this matter altogether, but by little and little; neither indeed was the faith, either of Purgatory, or Indulgences so needful in the Primitive Church, as now it is. A strange confession of a learned Bishop, that two principal Articles of Faith (viz.) Purgatory, and Indulgences, were scarce known in the ancient Church, nor yet very necessary to be received at all times, and of all persons. Let it suffice, many points of the now Roman Religion were utterly unknown to the Greek Church, (which in the first ages did wholly communicate with the ancient Roman Faith:) and therefore their Alphonsus à Castro, thinks it the best way to solue the point in question with this answer: It is one of the most known errors of the Grecians, and Armenians, whereby they teach there is no place for Purgatory, where souls after this life are purged from their offenses.

Touching Succession ] S ^t . Chrysostom, Gregory, Neocaesaria, Olympiodorus, and diverse ancient Fathers were utterly ignorant of it; and Saint Agustine a Latin Father was so far from receiving it as a point of Faith, that doubtingly he professeth, It is not incredible, that some such thing should be after this life; and whether it be so or no, it may be • a question: and it may be either found, or be hidden. 〈◊〉 we all know, and confess, that if Saint Agustine and the Roman Church, had received the doctrine of Purgatory in his days, (as it is now taught for an Article of Faith) certainly he would never have told us, perhaps it is so, it may be, or it may not be; and it is a doubt whether there be any such place or no. And howsoever it is pretended, that the Greek Church at the Council of Florence, for peace sake, was content to yield, that the middle sort of souls were in a place of punishment; but whether that were fire, or darkness, and tempest, or something else, they would not contend: yet, I say, if they had assented to this or the like doctrine, it was (1400) years after Christ, and therefore most unfit to be received for an Article of Faith: but the truth is, Marcus Bishop of Ephesus, who was one of the Legates of the Patriarchs of Antioch & Jerusalem, would never consent to this Doctrine; neither could the Greek Church afterwards by any means be drawn to yield to it. Besides, within two years after, Cardinal Cusanus, and the Deputies of the Council of Basil, in the year 1438, do sufficiently manifest the opinion of the Greek Church; wherein the Grecians begin their disputation in this manner: A Purgatory fire, and a punishment by fire which is temporal, and shall at last have an end; neither have we received from our Doctors, neither do we know that the Church of the East d • eth maintain it. And from these and the like propositions, they make this peremptory conclusion. For these reasons therefore, neither have we hitherto affirmed any such thing, neither will we at all affirm it. I may add to these Testimonies the opinions of the Muscouites, who affirm that there is no Purgatory, but only two receptacles for souls, Heaven and Hell. Again, the Cophites, and the Abissines, the Georgians, and Armenians, together with the Syrians and Chaldeans, that are subject to the Patriarchs of Antioch and Babylon, from Cyprus and Palestine, unto the East Indies, never made discovery of the new found land of Purgatory.

This doctrine therefore wants the proper marks of the Roman Church, (viz.) Antiquity, Vniuersalitie, and Succession, and therefore can be no Article of faith, no Apostolic Tradition, as is pretended in the second point.

Private Mass ] wherein the Priest alone doth communicate without the people, hath neither Antiquity, Vniuersalitie, nor Consent, and consequently hath not the true marks of Romish Traditions.

Touching Antiquity ] it is the confession of their own Cochleus; Anciently all the Priests and people did communicate together, as appeareth by the Canons of the Apostles, and writings of ancient Fathers. And Odo Cameracensis professeth, that in the Primitive Church they never had Masses without the conuention of the people to communicate together.

Touching Vniuersalitie ] it is the confession of Johannes Hoffmeistenus: The thing it self doeth speak and cry aloud, both in the Greek and Latin Church, that not only the sacrificing Priest, but the other Priests and Deacons, and the rest of the people, or at least some part of the people, did communicate together: and how this custom ceased, it is to be wondered, and it is to be endeavored, that this good custom may be restored to the Church.

Touching Succession ] S ^t . Chrysostom speaking to the lay people of his time, saith: Neither do we receive more, and you less of the holy table, but we taste thereof equally both together. And S ^t . Basil another Greek Father witnesseth the common union of Priests and people expressly in these words: All we receiving of one bread and one cup, &c. the Choir singeth the Communion, and so they communicate together. I will add to these the confessions of their own learned Authors: Cardinal Bessarion, a Greek borne, declareth the manner of the Communion in his time; The very order of the things required: first that we should consecrate, (or bless bread:) next, that we should break it, last of all, that we should divide (or deliver it to the people) which thing we (Grecians) do at this present day. And for a conclusion of this point, Justinian and Durand publicly declare and profess, that in ancient times, diverse parts of one consecrated loaf were distributed to all, (the which the Greek Church useth at this day) that by their Communion, their union with Christ might be more plainly expressed.

Thus Private Mass wants the requisite conditions of the Roman Church, (viz.) Antiquity, Vniuersalitie, and Succession; and therefore can be no Catholic doctrine, no Apostolic Tradition, as is pretended in the third place.

The Communion in one kind] is reputed a Tradition Apostolical, and received in the Roman Church for an Article of Faith; yet this doctrine wants Antiquity, Vniuersalitie, and Succession.

Touching Antiquity ] It is the confession of the Council of Constance (where the Cup was taken from the people) that Christ did institute in both kinds, and the Primitive Church did continue it to the faithful in both kinds. And Alphonsus à Castro tells us, that anciently for many ages, the Communion in both kinds was used among all Catholics.

Touching Vniuersalitie] Cassander witnesseth, that the universal Church at this day, and the Roman Church for more then a thousand years after Christ, did exhibit the Sacrament in both kinds, as it is most evident by innumerable testimonies both of Greek and Latin Fathers.

Touching Succession ] In later ages, Salmeron the Jesuit professeth, It was the general custom for lay people to communicate under both kinds, as at this day it is used among the Grecians, and was used in times past among the Corinthians, and in Africa. And Jeremiah the Ecumenical Patriarch, returns this answer to the defenders of the Faith in both kinds: Dicitis, you say, that all ought to communicate under both kinds, and you say well: for we do so when we participate of the venerable mysteries.

Franciscus Aluarez tells us, that in the kingdom of Prester John, they use in their Church to make a cake of honey, meal, and oil, and pour wine into the cup, and all that communicate of the body of Christ, communicate also of the Cup.

The Christians in Armenia, after they have communicated with bread, in lieu of the cup, by reason there is no wine in India, they take dried grapes, and put them into water; and before the time they are to communicate, they press them, and strain them, and use that liquor instead of wine.

This doctrine therefore wants the requisite conditions of Antiquity, Vniuersalitie, and Succession; and therefore can be no Article of Faith, no Apostolic Tradition, as is presented in the fourth place.

SECT. IX. The Scriptures are a certain, safe, and evident direction to the right way of Salvation; and consequently, to ground Faith upon unwritten Traditions, is an obscure, uncertain, and dangerous By-way.

I Confess it for a truth, that in the first ages of the world, the Ancients had the knowledge of God without writing, and their memories, by reason of their long lives, were Registers, instead of Books: but afterwards, when God had taken the posterity of Jacob to be his peculiar people, the lives of men were shortened; and therefore he gave them their laws in writing, which writing was so true and perfect, that some Romanists confess, the Jews had nothing pertaining to the knowledge and service of God, that was not written.

And that we might have good warranty for the written Word, God himself shown the first way by his own example, who with his own finger wrote the Decalogue in tables of stone; and (saith Moses) The Tables was the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God upon the Tables. And as God was the first Author of writing in the old Law: so our Savior Christ, God and Man, taught the same lesson by his own example and direction in the New: For when the Disciples wrote (saith Agustine) what Christ shown and said unto them, it is not to be said that he did not write, because the members wrought that which they learned by the inditing of the Head. For whatsoever he would have us to read of the things which he did and said, he gave in charge to them, as his hands to write the same. And thus one and the same Spirit, that prescribed the old Law to Moses, gave also express charge to the Evangelist Saint John: Scribe, write these things. And lastly, the reason of this writing, Saint Luke renders to Theophilus, That thou mightest know the certainty of those things wherein thou hast been instructed. Now as things written are of longer continuance, and better assurance, whereby we have the certainty of our faith and doctrine: so likewise by that certainty we enjoy the more safety: and for that cause the Apostle Saint Paul tells the Philippians, that which he delivered by word of mouth being present: To write the same things (saith he) to me it is not grievous, but for you it is safe. And this may be a good comfort for all believing Protestants, that we have these two benefits of the written Word, (by the doctrine of two Apostles) Certainty and Saftie.

This doctrine was rightly observed, and earnestly pursued by the true believers in the Primitive Church, in so much, as it is observed by Eusebius, that the faithful who had heard the preaching of Saint Peter, not thinking that sufficient, nor contented with the doctrine of that divine preaching unwritten, most earnestly entreated Mark, that he would leave them in writing, the Commentaries (or records) of the doctrine which they had delivered unto them br word; and ceased not till they had persuaded him thereto. Now it is reported (saith he) when the Apostle understood this to have been done by the revelation of the holy Ghost, he joyed much in the desire of those men, & by his authority warranted this Gospel in writing to the reading of the Church. Here was a memorable example, both for the Certainty, and Safety of the Christian Faith; the faithful hear the Word of God, yet fearing the uncertainty of that which might be delivered upon report, from hand to hand, they entreat Mark the Scholar and follower of Peter, that he would commit the same to writing: this was performed accordingly, and Saint Peter joyed in the performance of it; and withal testified by his approbation, that their good motion proceeded from the Holy Ghost.

In like manner you shall observe, as the Apostle S ^t . Paul wrote those things which he deliuerd by word of mouth to the Philippians: so likewise he delivers the same things to the Corinthians, which he received according to the Scriptures. And from hence will arise a third benefit, (which is the grand point in question) The Scriptures are alone sufficient without the help of Traditions: for that which Saint Paul hath testified of the Church at Corinth and Philippi, the same Nicephorus expresseth more particularly in these words: What Saint Paul being present, taught by word of mouth amongst the Corinthians, Ephesians, Galatians, Colossians, Philippians, Thessalonians, Jews, Romans, and many other persons, whereunto the holy Ghost sent him, and whom he begat in the faith of Christ, the same things in his absence be compendiously reuoketh into their memory by his Epistles written unto them. If therefore S ^t . Paul set down in his Epistles all that doctrine which he delivered by word of mouth to those several Churches, & withal taught that doctrine which he received according to the Scriptures, it will follow of necessity, that all things necessary to salvation, are contained in the Scriptures: for he witnessed of himself: I have not shunned to declare (all) the Council of God.

Let us appeal to him, touching the sufficiency of the Scriptures: First, he exhorts Timothy, to continue in those things which he had learned, and had been assured of: neither doth he tell him, he was assured of Traditions, but plainly expresseth in that place his meaning of the Holy Scriptures; and that it might appear the Scriptures were not denied by the Apostles to children and ignorant persons, (as it is now used in the Church of Rome) he testifieth in his behalf, that from a child he had known the holy Scriptures: and that it might yet further appear the Scriptures were sufficient for his saving knowledge, without the help of Traditions, he protesteth to him, that they were able to make him wise unto salvation. And lastly, lest it might be thought a particular instruction to Timothy alone, and not to the rest of the faithful, he proclaims the written Word as a general rule, and conclusion for all believers: All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished to all good works. So that, if you regard the authority of the written word, it came from God by inspiration; if the use of it, it teacheth, correcteth, improueth; if the end and perfection of it, that the man of God might be thoroughly furnished to every good work. Now whatsoever is so profitable unto all these ends, to make a man wise unto salvation; must needs be sufficient of it self, and the rather, because there is nothing can be wished for, either to soundness and sincerity of Faith, or to integrity and godliness of life, that is, to man's perfection, & the way of salvation, which, the Scripture given by inspiration of God doeth not teach the faithful servants of Christ: nay more, if that which is written, be not sufficient by the belief whereof we may attain to eternal life; without doubt, Saint John, the beloved Disciple of Christ would never have told us: These things are written, that we may believe, and believing we may have eternal life.

I proceed to the examination of the ancient Fathers, that out of the mouth of two or three witnesses, that written Word may be established.

Athanasius ] the holy Father tells us: The holy Scriptures given by inspiration of God, are of themselves sufficient to the discovery of the truth. And as concerning the fullness of all truth, which is revealed in the Scriptures. Saint Hillary assures us, that in his days The word of God did suffice the believers; yea, (saith he) what is there concerning man's salvation, that is not contained in the Word of the Evangelist? What doth it want? What is there obscure in it? All things there are full and perfect. And Tertullian himself professeth, that he honoreth the fullness of the Scriptures, and denounceth a woe to Hermogenes the heretic, if he take ought from those things which are written, or addeth to them. And Saint Cyril more expressly, All things (saith he) which Christ did, are not written, but those things are written, which the Writers thought sufficient, as well touching conversation, as Doctrine, that shining with right faith, and virtuous works, we may attain to the Kingdom of Heaven. And Saint Agustine gives his consent with the rest of the holy and ancient Fathers: that In those things which are laid down plainly in the Scriptures, all those things are found which appertain to Faith, and direction of life. And thus by the testimonies of the blessed Apostles, and the consent of holy Fathers, we have certainty, we have safety, we have assurance, we have all sufficiency in the Scriptures.

Surely the ancient Fathers did little dream, that the precious stones and timber, on which the Church of Rome was first built, should be repaired in her decaying age, with straw and stubble of unwritten doctrines, and unknown Traditions. Saint Cyprian, that blessed Martyr, was so far from allowing Ecclesiastical Traditions for a point of Faith, that he makes this Quaere: Whence is this Tradition? is it derived from the Lord's authority, or from the precepts of the Apostles? for God willeth us to do those things which are written. But this quaere is so distasted by Bellarmine, that to this short demand, he returns this sharp answer: Cyprian spake this when he thought to defend his own error, and therefore it is no marvel, if he erred in so reasoning: yet we may see what time and errors have brought to pass, those authorities of Scripture which the heretics pretended for their unwritten Traditions in the ancient Church, are the very same which the Romanists at this day assume in behalf of their Traditions. Irenaeus tells us, that in his time the heretics complained, that they who were ignorant of Traditions, could not find the truth in the Scriptures, for the truth was not delivered by writing, but by word of mouth. And for proof of their assertion, they cite the words of Saint Paul. We speak wisdom amongst them that be perfect. Bellarmine alledgeth in this very Text, to prove, that many mysteries require silence, that it is unmeet they should be explained by the Scriptures, and therefore are only learned by Traditions. Tertullian tells us, that the heretics confessed indeed, that the Apostles were ignorant of nothing, — but they say the Apostles revealed not all things unto all men. And for proof, they cite the Word written: O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust. In like manner Saint Agustine tells us, that All foolish heretics do seek to color their devices by the pretext of this Gospel; I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. But (saith he) seeing Christ himself hath been silent of those things, who of us can say they are these and these? or if he dare say it, how doth he prove it? These and the like places are cited by Bellarmine, and the Romanists, for the honor and authority of their unwritten Traditions: nay more, they are urged with such eagerness in defense of their doctrine, that some of them publicly professed. Si Paulus ill Tharsensis, &c. If that same Paul of Tharsus, the chief instrument of divine Philosophy, should condemn any Traditions of the Catholic (Roman) Church, I would confidently prescribe him; abandon him, pronounce Anathema, with direful execrations against this Saul.

Waltram Bishop of Naumburg, a principal member of the Roman Church, and conversant amongst the Monks of former ages, gives the reason which occasioned the Romanists of these later times to stand upon justification of their Traditions. About the time the Devil was let loose, (that is to say, a thousand years after Christ) certain Monks (saith he) for the upholding of Pope Hildebrands faction, desired other doctrines, and brought in masteries of human Institution: and to prevent the knowledge of the truth, they permitted not young men in their Monasteries, to study the saving knowledge (of the Scriptures,) to the end, that their rude wit might be nourished with the husks of devils, which are the customs of human Traditions, that being accustomed to such filth, they might not taste how sweet the Lord was. This learned Author gives us to understand, that the unwritten doctrines in the Roman Church, were but filth and husks of Devils, which without doubt the heretics of former ages had scattered and left behind them. And thus the Priests and Friars have received the doctrine of Traditions from the Monks, the Monks from the heretics, and both jointly sympathize with the heretic Eutyches in the general Council of Chalcedon, and make one and the same general acclamation. Thus I have received of my forefathers, thus I have believed, in this faith I was baptized and signed, in the same have I lived till this day, and in the same I wish to die.

I speak not this to decline the authority of Apostolic Traditions: for I know well, the same Apostle, who tells, the Scriptures are able to make us wise unto salvation, gives also this warning to the Church of Thessalonica: stand fast, and hold the Traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word or our Epistle. Here the Apostle calls his own written Epistle a Tradition; and for ought can appear, that which he taught by word of mouth, was but the word written; (for a man may teach one and the same doctrine diverse ways) but what Protestant, I pray, did ever refuse to hold the traditions which Saint Paul and the rest of the Apostles taught by word of mouth? We generally confess, that they were of equal authority with the Word written; but who can tell us what Traditions those were, if they were not written? We may grant without prejudice to our cause, that Saint Paul delivered more to the Thessalonians by word of mouth then was contained in that Epistle (although the words alleged, enforce no such thing,) for we take not upon us to maintain that the first Epistle to the Thessalonians contained all the doctrine to salvation; but doth it therefore follow, that he delivered more unto them then was contained in the whole Scriptures?

When Paul came to Thessalonica, three Sabbath days (saith the Text) he reasoned with them out of the Scriptures: He taught them, that it behooved Christ to suffer, and rise again from the dead, and that Jesus was Christ: and after that, he witnesseth both to small and great, saying none other things then those which the Prophets and Moses did say should come. Therefore whatsoever he delivered to the Thessalonians, although it be not found in his written Epistle, yet it must needs be contained in the holy Scriptures. Again, if the Thessalonians had insisted only upon unwritten Traditions, yet the Apostle would by no means approve of it: for he professeth that the Jews of Berea, were more noble, then those of Thessalonica, and there he gives the reason for it: In that they received the Word with all readiness of mind, and searched the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so. And hence we have an example of the undoubted Traditions of the Apostles themselves, which were examined by the touchstone of the Scriptures: but no man can show me that ever the Scriptures were examined by unwritten Traditions.

We say therefore that all unwritten Traditions which concern the salvation of the believer, are either immediately, or at least by sound inference, derived from the Scriptures, and those also have a manifest and perpetual testimony of the Primitive Church, and the uniform consent of succeeding Christians in all ages. And whereas our adversaries charge us, that we likewise hold doctrinal Traditions, which have no foundation in the Scriptures, as namely the Canon of the Scriptures, the keeping of the Sabbath, the baptizing of Infants, and the perpetual Virginitie of the blessed Virgin; it is sufficiently apparent, that these things are also derived from the Scriptures: for as we deny not, that the Canon of the Scripture may be termed a Tradition in a large sense; yet we say, even that Tradition is derived also from the testimony of the Apostle Saint Paul, yea and of Christ himself, who witnesseth, that whatsoever he spake, was written in the Law, in the Prophets, & the Psalms, under which none of the Apocryphal Books are contained. Touching the Sabbath day, we hold the observation of it to be perpetual, and unchangeable, because we find it noted in the Scriptures. Touching baptism of Infants, Bellarmine himself proves it; first from the proportion between Baptism and Circumcision: secondly, from two places of Scripture. Lastly, concerning the perpetual Virginitie of Marie, although for the honor and sanctity of that blessed Virgin we believe it, yet this doctrine is not de necessitate, but de pietate fidei; it is more for pious credulity, then for necessity; and yet if we require Scripture for it, the Fathers prove it out of the 44 of Ezech. 2. as Jerome showeth in his Commentaries upon that place.

Now if any man list to be contentious, and demand of us, where it is written that the Son of God is of the same substance with the Father? Where is it written, that Christ is God and man, subsisting in one person? Where is it written, that the holy Ghost proceedeth from the Son as well as from the Father? or where is the word Trinity to be found written in the whole body of the Scripture? If any man shall deny the truth of these things, because they are not plainly in the same words delivered in the Scriptures, what can his question argue less then a plain cavilling, and shifting of a known truth; for as Athanasius in the like case answered the Arians, touching the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , (of the substance with the Father. ) Albeit the word be not found in the Scriptures, yet it hath the same meaning that the Scriptures intend, and import the same with them whose ears are entirely affected towards Religion. And in like manner Saint Agustine made the like answer: Albeit the word perhaps be not found there, yet the thing it self is found; and what more frivolous quarrel is it, then to contend about the word, when there is a certainty of the thing? I will not require of our adversaries to show me in the Scriptures, the word of Transubstantiation, of Mass, of Supremacy, and the like, because they receive them as Traditions which are not contained in the Scriptures: but on the other side, if any Romanist will deny, that the Articles of the Apostles Creed are not contained in the Scriptures, and yet will show me in express words, I believe in God the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth: or that, the holy Catholic Church and Communion of Saints, are the express words contained in the Scriptures, I will subscribe to the Articles of the new Roman Creed, and allow all Papal Traditions for Apostolical. For we do not say that nothing is to be believed de fide, but what is written in the Scriptures in express terms, but we profess it must be directly, or by necessary consequence deduced from the Scriptures. It was the answer of Epiphanius to the disciples of Arius in the Primitive Church. We all of us do confess the Father to be unbegotten, & increate; and it is surely an admirable saying, but show me if you can, where this saying is written: for neither doeth the Law of Moses, nor the Prophets, nor yet the Apostles make any mention thereof. If then we do piously acknowledge this saying, though it were not written anywhere; who can find fault with us, though the word Coessentiall, or Consubstantial be not written. As therefore we confess the words, Vnbegotten, Increate, Consubstantial, the word Trinity, and the like, are not found in Scriptures: so I think no Romanists will or can deny, but that all those words are implied in the Scripture, or by necessary inference deduced from them.

To conclude therefore this second point, and first Article of the Roman Creed, since Papal Traditions have no foundation in the Scripture, nor are contained in any Apostolic author (by our adversaries confession) since they want a continued succession from the Apostles time, with universality of Churches, & consent of Fathers, since they are not resolved of a certain and definite number of doctrinal Traditions, (which ought to be resolved in points of Faith.) Lastly, since the Scriptures by the testimonies of both sides, is the safest and furest rule for all believers: and since many Papal Traditions are different, if not contrary to the Scriptures. To follow unknown, and unwritten doctrines, for known and written verities, is Via dubia, a doubtful and uncertain way; it is Via deuia, a wandering and By-way.

I proceed in the next place to the examination of the ancient Fathers, whereby it shall appear, the Romish faith and doctrine, as it wants Antiquity and Vniuersalitie of Churches, so likewise it is utterly destitute of the consent of ancient Fathers.

SECT. X. Our Adversaries make great boast of the testimonies of the ancient Fathers in general, yet when they come to sifting particular points, either by secret evasion they decline them, or openly reject them.

TEll me then, O thou whom my soul loveth, where thou feedest, whither is thy beloved turned side, that we may seek him with thee? Shall we seek him in the Fathers? Oh (saith Campian) If we once name the Fathers, the field is fought, the wager is won on our side, for they are all ours. Yea, (saith Bristow) In most matters of Controuersie they are so plain on our side, that it cannot with any color be denied, or called in question. Yea Duraeus the Jesuit claims a peculiar interest in the behalf of the Roman Church: We only are the true sons of the Fathers, we do not cite them by the halves, sometimes allowing one part of their doctrine, sometimes rejecting another, but we embrace them all. And for confirmation of this assertion, the Romanists in their Apology, or Petition of Lay Catholics, make this general acclamation: For one place of a Father, sometimes ill cited, sometimes falsified, sometimes mutilated, and sometimes wholly corrupted, (by Protestants) we can produce a thousand, not by patches and mammockes, as they do, but whole pages, whole chapters, whole books, and the uniform consent of all the ancient Fathers, and Catholic Church.

Thus the wicked Jews claimed Abraham for their Father; and thus the frantic Grecian claimed all the ships in Athens to be his, when the poor man had least interest in them. If Campian and his fellow Jesuits had been living in the days of the ancient Fathers, surely they had been branded with the marks of heretics for their false alarums: for Carosus the Eutychian heretic, although his claim reach not to all the Fathers, yet (saith he) according to the Exposition of three hundred and eighteen Fathers, so I believe, and in this faith was I baptized; what should ye say more to me, I cannot tell. And Dioscorus the heretic, much like the Jesuit, makes an open outcry in the Council of Chalcedon: I have the testimonies of the holy Fathers, Athanasius, Gregory, Cyril, I vary not from them in any point, I am thrown forth and banished with the Fathers, I defend the Fathers doctrine, I have their judgment uttered, not by chance, or unadvisedly, but remaining expressed in their books. Thus Paynims & heretics, Jews and Jesuits claim Antiquity and Vniuersalitie in Traditions and Fathers: yea, the heretics did glory and vaunt of the Fathers in the two famous Councils of Nice and Chalcedon, in the very presence of the Fathers themselves; yea Pelagius the heretic, when he disagreed from the doctrine of the Fathers, (like a true Romanist, thought to advance his own heresy, by magnifying the Faith of Ambrose an ancient Father: Blessed S ^t . Ambrose (saith he) that Bishop, in whose books the Roman faith especially appeareth, who like a beautiful flower shined amongst the Latin Writers, whose faith and most pure understanding of the scriptures, the enemy himself dares not reprehend. This is the very practice of the Roman church in these days. They glory in the name of the Fathers, as if they were the true children, & only heirs of their doctrine, when as in truth their chiefest points of faith were scarce known, much less believed de fide, in their days. Neither do I conceive that the Romanists do thus vaunt of the Fathers, because they are favorable to their cause, but because they know the common people can learn nothing of the Fathers, but what they hear and understand from the report of their own Priests.

Look upon the practice of the greatest champions in the Roman church: doth not Andradius, Card. Bellarmine, and Card. Cajetan (contrary to the Article of the Roman Creed) decline the Exposition of the ancient Fathers? Doth not Cardinal Baronius profess that the Church of Rome doth not always follow the consent of Fathers? Doth not their own Lyra witness, that the sayings of the holy Fathers are not of so great authority, but that it is lawful to hold the contrary to them, in those things which are not determined by the Scriptures? Doeth not their Bishop Cano acknowledge, that the ancient Fathers sometimes err, and against the ordinary course of Nature bring forth a monster? Nay more, do not their own Divines at Douay make this public declaration: We bear with many errors in the old Catholic Writers, we extenuate them, we excuse them, and by inventing some devised shift, we oftentimes deny them, and fain some commodious sense for them, when they are objected in disputations, or conflicts with our adversaries? If therefore the best learned Romanists, sometimes excuse them, sometimes decline them, sometimes condemn them, shall we think the Fathers are all theirs? I appeal to their own confessions. First, touching the words of Christ. Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock I will build my Church. Maldonado the Jesuit makes this confession. The meaning of these words (viz. ) That the Rock is Christ) seems not to me to be the true meaning, which all the Fathers think to be so, whom ever I remember to have read, Hillary excepted. In like manner touching the words; Whatsoever thou loosest on earth, shall be loosed in Heaven, &c. he makes this public profession; I will not interpret, that this which is here spoken to Peter, is spoken also in the same sense to the other Apostles, although I see all Interpreters to be of that mind, Origen only excepted. Will you have instances without exception? It is the common sentence of all Divines (saith Bellarmine) simply to admit merit of condignity, which sentence is most true. Yet their own Friar Walden protested confidently, that he was the sounder Divine, and more faithful Catholic, who doth simply deny such merit, —as all the former Saints, that is, (all the ancient Fathers) and the universal Church (until the late Schoolmen) have written. Again, it is the general vote of the later Romanists, that the words (This is my body) are the very formal and efficient cause of Transubstantiation: yet their own Archb. of Cesarea witnesseth, that all the orthodox Fathers both Greek and Latin, teach that Consecration is made by Christ's prayer and benediction, and not by those words, This is my body. Lastly, it is the general Tenet of the Roman Church at this day, that the blessed Virgin was conceived without original sin: in so much as Bellarmine professeth, they are not to be numbered amongst Catholics that think the contrary: and yet their own Bishop Cano witnesseth with us, that Sansti omnes, All the holy Fathers, (vno ore) with one consent affirm, the blessed virgin to have been conceived in original sin. The Fathers then, by their good leave, are not all theirs; & in some capital points, by their own confessions they are none of theirs, nay, they are reputed no good Catholics by their own Tenets that teach not contrary to the Vniforme consent of Fathers. I proceed to the examinanation of more witnesses in the fundamental points of their Roman faith. Touching the Communion in one kind, it is the confession of Aeneas Sylvius: The Fathers in the Primitive Church did not forbid the people to drink of the Cup, but we drive them from it.

Touching the doctrine of Transubstantiation, it is the confession of Card. Cusanus: Certain of the ancient Fathers are found of this mind, that the bread in the Sacrament is not transubstantiated, nor changed in nature.

Touching Private Mass, it is the confession of Cardinal Bellarmine: There is no express testimony amongst the ancient Fathers, but it may be gathered by conjectures.

Touching Prayer & Service in an unknown tongue, it is the confession of Cassander: The Canonical Prayers, and especially the words of Consecration, the ancient Fathers did so read it, that all the people might understand, and say Amen.

Touching Adoration of Images, it is the confession of Massonus, a learned Papist: There is no example in Scriptures or Fathers, for Adoration of Images: they ought to be taken for ornament to please the sight, not to instruct the people.

Touching Indulgences, and Pardons, it is the confession of Cardinal Cajetan: There is no authority of Scriptures or Fathers, Greek or Latin that bring them to our knowledge.

Touching Purgatory, it is the confession of Fisher Bishop of Rochester: Of Purgatory there is very little or no mention amongst the ancient Fathers.

Touching the number of seven Sacraments, it is Bellarmine's confession: The Protestants ought not to require of us to show the number of seven Sacraments in Scriptures or Fathers.

Lastly, touching the Exposition of the Scriptures, Cardinal Baronius makes this ingenious acknowledgment: Although the holy Fathers for their great learning be rightly termed the Doctors of the Church: yet the Catholic Roman Church doeth not follow them always, and in all things, in expounding of the Scriptures.

These men therefore, which so much magnify the Antiquity of their Church, and doctrine of the ancient Fathers, upon examination and trial of their cause, plainly intimate unto us, that the most substantial points, and chiefest articles of the Roman Faith, were altogether unknown, or at leastwise did want the uniform consent of Fathers: And that you may yet further know, notwithstanding they seemingly magnify the Fathers amongst the common people; yet there is scarce any ancient Father of note, but either they cite him by the halves, or condemn him as erroneous, or reject him for a counterfeit at their pleasure. Nay more, there is scarce any point of the Roman Faith, which is not ratified and confirmed by our adversaries from the authorities of some pretended ancient Father; the which authorities upon other occasions are decreed by their own fellow Romanist for upstart and counterfeit opinions: as for instance.

Linus the pretended successor of S ^t . Peter, is cited by Coccius for proof of Purgatory: Upon another occasion his fellow Bellarmine makes answer: The history of Linus is truly counterfeit, and therefore of no authority at all.

Anacletus Epistles are cited by Pighius and Stapleton for proof of the Supremacy: their fellow Cardinal Cusanus pronounceth them to be a matter of forgery.

Primasius upon the Hebrews, is cited by Bellarmine for the Carnal presence, and the Sacrifice of the Mass: his fellow Salmeron makes answer: Primasius never wrote them, but Haymo a late Bishop in Germany.

S ^t . Jerome upon the Epistles is cited by the Rhemists for Justification by works: Their associate Bellarmine elsewhere declareth: That this book is a shameless counterfeit, and hath for his Author, rather the heretic Pelagius, then such an holy Father.

S ^t . Agustine de Ecclesiae dogmatibus, is cited by the Rhemists for Auricular confession: Alphonsus à Castro denies the Tract to be Augustine's, and condemns it for a crafty counterfeit.

Athanasius Sermon, De Sanctissimâ Deiparâ, is cited by Bellarmine for Invocation of Saints: his fellow Baronius professeth that the Sermon is a mere counterfeit.

Anselm in his Commentaries, is cited by Bellarmine for Purgatory, for the Real presence, for the blessed Virgines immaculate Conception, for Freewill: yet his fellow Posseuine professeth, that one Herueus Natalis, living about 250 years since, is the writer of those Commentaries falsely ascribed to Anselm. And thus the Romanists resemble bad debtors, who would satisfy their creditors, some with light gold, some with cracked, some with soldered, some with counterfeit; protesting, that if they be not all English Angels, yet they be Flemish: at least they are stamped with the image of an Angel. But that which is most proper for every man's observation (especially for those that study the Controuersies of these times) let them peruse the works of their greatest Champion Cardinal Bellarmine, and they shall find, as in every point of Controuersie the Fathers are cited plentifully by him, in behalf of the Roman faith: so likewise upon other occasions, when the same Fathers in the same Tractates are produced against them in our behalf, he rejects the same Fathers and their authorities as counterfeit, and accounts them rather as children, then ancient Fathers. As for example.

Dionysius the Areopagite is cited by Bellarmine for Invocation of Saints, for Pugatory, for Monastical life: yet elsewhere he confesseth, it is uncertain whether the book be S ^t . Denys, whose name it bears.

Clemens Recognitions is cited by Bellarmine for Freewill: yet when they are alleged against the Popes Succession, showing that Peter died not at Rome, he disclaimeth them as Apocryphal books.

Ignatius a Greek Father is cited by Bellarmine for Transubstantiation, but when he is produced by us for the Communion in both kinds, he answereth, that Ignatius Greek writings are not much to be trusted to.

Cyprian de Coena Domini is alleged by Bellarmine for the Sacrifice of the Mass, for Purgatory, for Transubstantiation: but when it is produced by us for the Cup to the Lay people, he disclaimeth the Sermon to be Cyprians.

Abdias his works are cited by Bellarmine for Monastical life: yet elsewhere he confesseth that the learned of his own Church hold the same for counterfeit; and for my part (saith he) Ego nullum, &c. I have had no testimony from him.

Amphilochius his Vita S ^t . Basilij is cited by Bellarmine, to prove the Eucharist was given to the sick in one kind: and yet in his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Authors, he pronounceth the same book to be false and counterfeit.

Damasus Pontifical, is cited by Bellarmine for Images, and to prove, that Election of Bishops only belongeth to the Pope: and yet in his Catalogue aforesaid, he saith, It is known that Damasus was never the writer of that book, but Anastasius only the Master of the Popes Library.

Gregory Nyssen his eight Books De Philosophia, are cited by Bellarmine for Freewill: yet in his Catalogue aforesaid, he confesseth they seem not to be the books of Gregory Nyssen.

Lactantius Verses are cited by Bellarmine for Adoration of the Cross: and yet he confesseth elsewhere, that it is doubted whether Lactantius were the Author.

Saint Agustine is cited ad Orosium by Bellarmine, to prove Ecclesiasticus Canonical Scripture: but elsewhere when he is objected in our behalf in that Tract, he answers it is not Saint Augustine's work, as learned men confess.

Justin Martyr, his Questions are alleged by Bellarmine for Unction in baptism, for the Sacrament of Confirmation, for Transubstantiation: but elsewhere he declareth them to be the work of some new Author, and not the works of Justin Martyr.

Origen in his Homilies on the Gospels, is cited by Bellarmine for the Real presence, and his Homilies on the Psalms he cites for Auricular confession: yet the one he disclaimeth as none of Origen's, the other he freely confesseth, it is doubted of who is the Author.

Cassianus is cited by Bellarmine for an ancient Author, for the point of Justification, and set times of fasting: yet elsewhere he acknowledgeth the book for Apocryphal and counterfeit, and condemned in a Roman Council under Pope Gelasius.

Eusebius, his third Epistle is cited by Bellarmine for the Supremacy: yet he professeth elsewhere, it is not certain who is the Author thereof.

He that shall read these and many such like authorities of pretended Fathers in behalf of the Roman Religion, might at first sight happily be induced to believe, that all or most of the ancient Doctors of the Church belong to them, when as in truth our adversaries use them but as Merchants use their Counters, sometimes they stand with them for pence, sometimes for pounds, as they be next and readiest at hand to make up their account.

Thus one while they muster up their forces by multitudes of authorities, as if they would make that good by number, which they want in weight. Sometimes they condemn them as counterfeit, sometimes they purge them, as if they were full of corruptions, & according to several occasions they have their several devices, to produce them, or avoid them at their pleasure: whereas, if they be counterfeit, (as they are confessed to be) they are of no authority: if Catholic and Orthodox, they make nothing for the points in Controuersie, as shall be presented in the next place.

SECT. XI. The most substantial points of Roman Faith and Doctrine, (as they are now taught and received in the Church of Rome) were never taught by the Primitive Church, nor received by the ancient Fathers.

NEither are these men content to challenge a right to all the Fathers, (although they confess they are not all orthodox and true Fathers) but they likewise charge us, that, we make no more account of them, then we do of the Turks Alcaron, or Aesop's Fables. Nay (saith Bristow) it is well known to such as hear the Protestants Sermons, or be in place to hear them, talk boldly and familiarly among themselves, are not afraid to confess plainly, that the Fathers are all Papists. A strange and senseless fiction devised by these men, when not only our learned Divines, but the vulgar people, are all eye-witnesses, that the Book written by the Jewel of our age, is published in all the Churches of our kingdom, whose challenge for the principal points of our Religion is made good, and will ever remain unanswerable out of the Writings and Authorities of the ancient Fathers. But admit some Protestants were so ignorant or senseless, as to say privately, All the Fathers were Papists: what stupidity then may we think it in the chief Pastors of the Roman Church, which by their public writings, and open confession acknowledge the principal points of Controuersie; yea, their chief Articles of Faith, were unknown to the ancient Fathers.

We confess it for a truth, that the ancient Fathers, S ^t . Agustine, S. Ambrose, S ^t . Jerome and the rest were learned men, they were Instruments of Grace, and Mercy: we read them, we reverence them, we give God thanks for them: but withal we learn this lesson frō them: We weigh not the writings of men, be they never so worthy, and Catholic, as we weigh the Canonical Scriptures, but yielding that reverence that is due unto them. We may mislike and refuse something in their writings, if we find they have thought otherwise then the truth may bear: and such (saith Agustine) am I in the writings of others, and such I would wish others to be in mine. Saint Agustine thought it no prejudice to the Roman Church, nor disparagement to his own learning, to have his writings examined by the rule of Scripture. Nay more (saith he) that which in my books thou thinkest to be undoubtedly true, unless thou perceive it to be true indeed, hold it not resolutely: S ^t . Ambrose was so far from wishing Prince or people to rely upon his doctrine, that by way of prevention he writes to Gratian the Emperor: Believe not (O Emperor) our Arguments and our Disputations, let us ask the Apostles, let us ask the Prophets, let us ask Christ. Now admit a doubtful Recusant at this day repair for instruction to a Romish Priest or Bishop, will he answer him with Agustine, Examine my doctrine by the rule of Scripture, and if you find it not agreeable to that Word, hold it not resolutely? or will he answer him with Ambrose, Hear not my arguments, believe not us that are the professed Priests and Pastors of the Church; but read the Scriptures, consult with the Oracles of God, let Christ the Head of the Church resolve the doubts and controversies of Religion? Surely nothing is more to be wished for by us, nothing is less to be hoped for from them.

True it is, that S ^t . Jerome in the question betwixt him and S ^t . Agustine, (whether S ^t . Paul reproved Peter colourably, or in earnest) allegeth seven Fathers against S ^t . Agustine; and withal desires him, to give him leave to err with seven Fathers. But what answer maketh Agustine? He appeals to S ^t . Paul, and (saith he) Instead of all, and above all, I have Paul the Apostle, to him do I run, to him I appeal from all Writers that think otherwise. Here we see seven principal members of the Church against the meaning of one Apostle, and yet all they were not able to remove S ^t . Agustine from that one authority; which was prevalent against all; and I think it cannot be denied, but that this Father went the right way to the Gospel. Again, when he was pressed by Cresconius a Gramarian, with a testimony out of Cyprian, he returns this answer, I am not bound to be tied to that Epistle, because I do not account of Cyprians Epistles as of the Canonical Scriptures, but I examine them by the Canonical Scriptures, and what I find in them agreeable to that word, I receive it with commendations; what I find to disagree from it, with his good leave, I leave it.

This was the account the ancient Fathers made of their own writings, and their fellow Bishops, even at that time when the Church was most visible, and when the Fathers were in chiefest estimation in the Christian world.

I speak not these things, as if there were less hope to find the truth in the writings of the ancient Fathers, then in new and upstart opinions of some private spirits. It is the voice of God and Nature: Ask thy father, and he will show thee, thine ancients, and they shall tell thee: and herein we are obedient children, and according to our duty, We rise up before the hoary head, and honor the person of the aged. We agree with the Fathers, wherein they agree with the Scriptures, and with themselves; and if in some particular points we dissent from some particular Fathers, yet it is in those things which want universality and consent, or are doubtfully uttered, or are delivered as private opinions, and not as Articles of Faith: we follow the Anciens as Leaders, not as Masters: for their writings are no rules of faith, neither have they authority to bind: This is Bellarmine's confession, this is ours. And that the world may know our adversaries have no such cause (as they pretend) to brag of the authorities of the Fathers, let any Protestant or Romanist, examine the substantial points of Controuersie, as they are now published, and decreed by the Popes Bull, and Council of Trent, let them I say, observe the questions, as they are now stated with Anathemas, for Articles of faith, & compare them with the doctrines of the ancient Fathers, and they shall easily discern, that our adversaries oftentimes obtrude the Tenets of particular persons for the general consent of Fathers, and produce doubtful opinions, to prove Articles of faith: for I dare confidently avow, that in all fundamental points of difference, either they want Antiquity to supply their first ages; or Vniuersalitie, to make good the consent of Christian Churches: or unity of opinions, to prove their Trent Articles of belief. And for the better manifestation of this my assertion, I will give you instance in the principal points of the Roman faith and doctrine, that by comparing the doctrine of the Fathers in the first place, with the Tenets of the Romanists in the later, it shall appear, that the Northern and Southerne Poles shall sooner meet together, then their opinions, standing as they do, can be reconciled.

He therefore that will take upon him to prove out of the ancient Fathers, that Christ is really present in the Sacrament to all faithful Communicants, let him spare the labor, I will confess it: (for we acknowledge that Christ is really present, both spiritually by faith, and effectually by grace conferred upon all worthy receivers.) But let him prove, that Christ's body is substantially, corporally, and carnally in the Sacrament, under the accidents of bread and wine; and that Reprobates, and creatures void of reason, much more of faith, may really partake of his flesh and blood, as is now taught and believed de fide in the Roman Church, and I will subscribe.

He that will prove out of the ancient Fathers, that the Sacramental bread and cup were carried home to men's houses, in the time of persecution, and sometime privately received, let him spare the labor, I will confess it: but let him show me, that private Masses, that is, the receiving of the Eucharist by the Priest alone, without a competent number of Communicants, was the pulique practice of the ancient Church, as it is now used in the Roman, and I will subscribe.

Het at will prove out of the ancient Fathers, that the consecrated bread was sometimes given without the cup to sick folks, to impotent, and abstenious persons; let him spare the labor, I will confess it: but let him prove that the Fathers did generally forbid the Lay people, and the communicating Priest, to partake of the Sacramental cup, and that the bread alone was adjudged sufficient without the Cup, as it is now received in the Roman Church De fide, as an Article of Faith, and I will subscribe.

He that will prove out of the ancient Fathers, that Prayers and Service in the Roman Church was commonly taught and practiced in the Latin tongue, let him spare the labor, I will confess it; (for it was the common and known language of the Latin Church) but let him show me that Prayers and Service was delivered in a tongue unknown, and not understood of the common people, as it is now used and received with Anathema in the Roman church, and I will subscribe.

He that will prove out of the ancient Fathers, that Images were allowed for memory, for history, for ornament, let him spare the labor, I will confess it: but let him prove that they were allowed by the Fathers for public and private veneration, or religious worship; and that such worship was established as a doctrine of Faith, as it is now used in the Roman Church, and I will subscribe.

He that will prove out of the ancient Fathers, that the Bishop of Rome, and all other Bishops had power to dispence with the rigor of Ecclesiastical Penance, by Pardons, and Indulgences, let him spare the labor, I will confess it: but let him prove that those Indulgences were the treasure of the Church, by the application of Saints merits, and that private satisfactions which were left to the discretion of every Bishop were transferred wholly to the power of the Pope, and so received de Fide, as an article of faith, as it is now used in the Roman Church, and I will subscribe.

He that will prove out of the ancient Fathers, that Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matrimony, are oftentimes called by the name of Sacraments, let him spare the labor, I will confess it: But let him prove the point in question, that all those Sacraments were instituted by Christ in the New Testament, and that there are neither more nor less, then seven termed by the name of Sacraments, and those only were properly so called, and that number of seven was received de fide, as an Article of faith, and I will subscribe.

He that will prove out of the ancient Fathers, that S ^t . Peter had a primacy of Order amongst the Apostles, and that the Bishop of Rome had the first place amongst other Bishops; let him spare the labor, I will confess it: but let him prove that Peter had jurisdiction over the Apostles, and that the Bishop of Rome was held Christ's Vicar general, and Head of the Universal Church, and that such his power and Supremacy was received de fide, as an article of faith, as it is now taught in the Roman Church, and I will subscribe.

Lastly, he that will prove out of the ancient Fathers, that out of the Cath. church there is no salvation, let him spare the labor, I will confess it: but let him prove, that the present Roman Church, is that Catholic Church, as it is decreed de fide, by their last Article of their Creed, and I will subscribe.

Thus briefly I have given you my poor opinion how to examine the Trent Faith and doctrine, whereby you may easily discover the vanity of those men, who challenge an interest in all the Fathers, in behalf of their Religion: and certainly if this rule be rightly observed, and pursued by any indifferent Judge, he shall find there is not greater distance in the times, then difference in their doctrine.

This is so well known to the best learned on their side, that when we charge them, that they have created new Articles of Faith, unknown to the first and best ages: by way of prevention they give this solution; that true it is, many points of doctrine were not explicit revealed, and publicly declared, as Articles of faith in the days of the ancient Fathers, because no heretics did then oppose them: but (say they) they were, implicit, obscurely, secretly, reseruedly known, and received of the Ancients, with an implicit faith: by which confession, their later error will be greater then the first; for as one way they would seemingly avoid the creating of new Articles of faith: so by acknowledgement of an implicit faith, they overthrow by consequence the Visibility of their Church: for if the Church of Rome had but an implicit belief in those things which are now publicly declared, without doubt the Church at that time was not visible in the faith, it was not like a City upon a hill, known and conspicuous to all persons; and thereupon the grand point of Visibility, (which they so much magnify among themselves) will easily be called in question.

For a conclusion of this point, I will give you but one instance, whereby you may the better judge of the rest. Look upon the learned Treatise of the right Reverend Bishop of Meath, (now Primate of Armach ) wherein the judgment of the ancient Fathers, touching several points of controversy, is faithfully delivered in our behalf: what Reply (might we think) could be made by our adversaries, to those Authorities so rightly produced▪ Behold, a Jesuit by Order, W. Malone by name, hath made a Reply, wherein he hath produced in number many more authorities of Fathers, in behalf of the Roman Church, and Trent Doctrine. The encounter being made, the end of the victory may seem doubtful: for the Fathers are produced by both contending parties, and seemingly they adhere to both sides, as if they made both for Papist and Protestant, in one and the same substantial points of doctrine. The reason being examined, it will appear the Fathers do not vary from themselves, nor from us in points of faith: but the Jesuit produceth Authorities impertinent to the point in question: As for instance in the first Article of Traditions.

Our Reverend Bishop tells the Jesuit by way of prevention, that Traditions of all sorts, are not promiscuously struck at by us, but such unwritten traditions which are obtruded for Articles of Religion: As for example. It is the first part of the Article of the Roman Creed: I admit and embrace the Apostolical and Ecclesiesticall Traditions. To this first part of the article, the reformed Churches do subscribe: but the other Obseruances and Constitutions of the Church, which is the latter part of the Article, we think it great reason to gainsay: for under the pretence of (other Obseruances) the Church of Rome doeth uphold her private Mass, her Latin Service, her half Communion, her Invocation of Saints, her worship of Images, & the like: all which are admitted for part of God's worship, and accepted by them for Apostolic Traditions, when as in truth they are flat contrary to the doctrine of the written Word. The question then is not whether the doctrine delivered by Christ or his Apostles by word of mouth were of equal authority with the Word written (for this never any Protestant denied:) but whether the unwritten Doctrine now taught in the Roman Church, were delivered by Christ and his Apostles: whether their Ecclesiastical Observations and Constitutions now used, be of equal authority with the written Word: whether their Papal Traditions were always, or ever admitted into the rule of faith: and lastly, whether the Scriptures are not sufficient for the salvation of the believer, without the help of those Traditions. Let these questions be rightly propounded in our behalf, and the multitude of the Jesuits authorities will fall to ground of themselves: for what Father hath he produced to prove that the Papal Traditions now received de fide, in the Church of Rome, were delivered by word of mouth by the Apostles? what Father hath he cited, to prove that the Constitutions of their Church had a constant and continual succession from the time of the Apostles, (as Articles of faith ought to have?) what Fa her hath he urged, that admitted doctrinal Traditions unwritten into the Rule of faith? Lastly, what ancient Father hath he truly alleged, that denies the Scriptures to be sufficient for all believers, without the help of Romish Traditions?

It were no difficult matter as I conceive, to give a full answer to the Jesuits reply in the right stating of the Questions, whereby it might easily appear, that he and his associates have taken great pains to little purpose: but I submit my opinion to the judgment of the learned, & proceed from the Fathers in general, to particulars, wherein I will instance in two principal Lights of the Western Church, S ^t . Agustine, and S ^t . Gregory, the one Bishop of Hippo, the other Bishop of Rome, whereby you shall plainly discern how the later Popes and Bishops do differ from the former, and how these two Fathers of the Church concur expressly with the doctrine professed in the Reformed Churches, different from the Roman.

SECT. XII. Saint Agustine in particular is much disparaged by the Romanists, and for instance in many several points of moment, wherein he professedly concurreth with us, is expressly rejected by them.

TOrrensis the Jesuit hath abbreuiated all S ^t . Augustine's works, and published them in honor of his Church, by the name of Augustiniana Confessio, Augustine's Confession. Brerely the Priest hath contracted his doctrine into a lesser model, and more particularly applied it to the Roman faith, by the name of Saint Augustine's Religion, as if Saint Agustine and the Romanists did profess one and the same Religion, & made one and the same confession of their faith. To say little of their great brags of this holy Father, I will give you but one instance, and so descend into particulars, Maldonado the Jesuit tells us, that Saint Agustine is an Author of that esteem, that his opinion, were it neither proved by • cripture, nor reason, nor any other Author, yet the sole reverence of his person deserves sufficient authority of it self. Here is an ample testimony touching the great light of the western Church: but look we back to the Jesuits proceeding, in that very Tract upon the same Chap. within six foregoing Verses of the same Text, (where he gives this free & full approbation of this learned Father) and finding that S. Augustine's Exposition of another Scripture did disagree from the Roman Church, and accord wholly with the Protestant faith, instantly, as it were with the same breath, cries out against him: I confess, I have no author for my Exposition, but I rather allow it, then that of Augustine's, (although his of the rest be most probable) because this of mine doeth more cross the sense of the Calvinists. I will descend into particulars, and notwithstanding our adversaries great brags of S ^t . Agustine, I will give you instances in many principal points of doctrine, wherein they plainly intimate by their own confessions he is wholly ours.

1. Touching the proof of Purgatory: whereas Saint Paul saith, The fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is; for the day shall declare it. S ^t . Agustine (interprets) by this fire is meant the fire of tribulation in this world: but this opinion of his we have rejected, saith Bellarmine.

2. Saint Agustine saith, When Peter received the keys, he represented the holy Church: and therefore the power of the keys was not given to Peter only. Albertus Pighius is a witness against him, that he is the only man, who in this point neither agreeth constantly with himself, nor with others.

3. Saint Agustine saith, by the daily sacrifice spoken of in the Prophet Malachi, is meant the prayers and praises of Saints. Azorius makes answer: We oppose against him the general consent of other Fathers, and the testimony of the Council of Trent.

4. S ^t . Agustine saith, Christ spake these words, This is my body, when he gave a sign of his body. Master Hardin makes answer, that S ^t . Agustine fighting against the M • nichees, oftentimes useth not his own sense and meaning, but those things which by some means, howsoever it were, might seem to give him advantage against them, so as he might put them to the worst.

5. S ^t . Agustine saith, Those words of Saint Luke, I will not henceforth drink of the fruit of the Vine, are to be understood of the Sacramental Cup, and consequently the fruit of the vine, was wine in substance after consecration. Bellarmine is a witness against him, that he did not well consider of that text, which appears by this, that he passed it over lightly.

6. Saint Agustine saith, The Israelites eat of the same spiritual meat, but not the same corporal which we eat: for they eat Manna, we another meat, but both the same spiritual meat. Maldonado confesseth, this is the doctrine of the Calvinists: but (saith he) I am verily persuaded, that if Agustine had been living in these days, and had seen the Calutnists so interpret Saint Paul, he would have been of another mind, especially being such an utter enemy to heretics.

7. Saint Agustine saith, The works which are done without faith, though they seem good, are turned into sin. Maldonado answers: We may not defend that opinion which the Council of Trent did of late justly condemn, although the great Father S. Agustine seem to be of that opinion.

8. Saint Agustine saith: He crowneth thee, because he crowneth his own gifts, not thy merits. M. Bishop protesteth, that Saint Agustine was too wise to let any such foolish sentence to pass his pen.

9. Saint Agustine saith: I know certain worshippers of Tombes and Pictures, whom the Church condemneth. Bellarmine answers: This book was written in the beginning of his first conversion to the Catholic Faith.

10. Saint Agustine saith, In doing good none can be free in will and act, unless he be free by him that said: If the Son free you, you are truly freed. Sixtus Senensis saith: Whilst Saint Agustine doth contend earnestly against the Pelagians, for the defense of divine Grace, he doth seem to fall into another pit, and sometimes attribute too little to Freewill: But saith the Bishop of Bitonto: Let not Saint Agustine move us at all: for it is proper ana peculiar to him, that when he opposetth any error, he doeth it with that vehemency, that he seems to favor another error: even so, when he prosecutes Arius, he seems to favor Sabellius; when Sabellius, Arius; when Pelagius, the Manichees; when the Manichees, Pelagius: and this is very considerable, and ought especially to be noted in him.

Lastly, Saint Agustine (upon the words of Christ) saith, Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock which thou hast confessed, upon this Rock which thou hast known, saying, Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God, will I build my Church— for the Rock was Christ. Stapleton answers: It was lapsus humanus, an human error, caused by the diversity of the Greek and Latin tongue, which either he was ignorant of, or marked not. Bellarmine replies: Saint Agustine was deceived by the ignorance only of the Hebrew tongue. But Albertus Pighius concludes with a witness against him: Nusquam haeret, nusquam figit. He never resolves certainly upon anything, but (as if he were idle-headed, given to crotchets) he fetcheth about this way, and that way, and at length lighting upon some probability, layeth hold on it, and then dislikes it, and presently retracts it.

Thus, if we may credit their best learned Romanists, S ^t . Agustine did not agree constantly with himself, nor others: his doctrine is opposed by the consent of Fathers in the Trent Council: he used not his own meaning in fighting against heretics: If he had been living in these days, he would have been of another mind: He is inconstant, and fixeth in certain upon nothing, but as an idle-headed man; full of crotchets, one while he resolves, another while he retracts it.

You have heard Saint Augustine's confession, and our adversaries solution, touching the chief points in question betwixt us; whereby as yet I see no cause why the Romanists should brag of the ancient Fathers in general, nor of S ^t . Agustine in particular.

I proceed in the next place to examine the faith of Agustine the Monk, that it may appear, whether that doctrine, which he published here in England, above a thousand years since, be consonant to our Religion, or the doctrine of the Roman Church.

SECT. XIII. Saint Gregory pretended to be the Founder of the Roman Religion in England, by sending Agustine the Monk for conversion of this Nation; in his undoubted writings, directly opposeth the Romish faith, in the main points thereof.

AVsten the Monk, was sent into England by Gregory the Great, about the year 600, and is termed by the Romanists of this latter age, England's Apostle. To say nothing of the haughtiness of his person, (through whose pride and contempt twelve hundred poor Christians and holy men of Bangor were murdered, as it is related by Venerable Bede, ) let us observe the doctrine of that age: and because we have no Records of the Monks doctrine, let us reflect upon Gregory the Great, whose writings are extant; and who without doubt, professed the substance of that Faith, which by his Warrant and Commission was then published in England by Agustine the Monk.

It is the general vote of the Romanists in this latter age, that the Faith which Gregory delivered in his days, was so true and Catholic, that If an Angel from heaven should teach other doctrine, then that we have received from Gregory, we are not to hear him. Cano the Bishop of Canaries well understood, that this Assumpsit was of too large an extent, and therefore wisely by way of prevention, gives this caveat to the Reader: It is fitting for a Divine to be admonished, and not suddenly to be persuaded, that all things are perfect which great and learned Authors have written: as for example, Gregory and Bede, the one in his History of England, the other in his Books of Dialogues, have published such miracles, commonly received and believed, which the censurers of this age will think to be (doubtful) and uncertain. I speak not this to decline the doctrine of Gregory, for howsoever many ceremonies and strange opinions, through visions and apparitions of dead men, (which Gregory in his Dialogues complained of) sprung up in his days, yet the principal points of doctrine did as yet remain sound and stable: so that (setting aside his Dialogues, which are but Aniles fabulae, no way fit to prove Articles of Faith:) In his undoubted Writings, there will be found few or no substantial points which are not agreeable to the Tenets of our Church, and altogether different frō the Roman: and that this may become more manifest to the Reader, I have compared the Trent Doctrine and ours with Gregory, that by parallelling the Articles on both sides, the Antiquity of the true Church may visibly appear by the faith of Gregory.

SECT. XIIII. Councils which are so highly extold and opposed against us, were neither called by lawful authority, or to the right ends, as is confessed by ingenious Romanists.

ECckius the Romanist tells us, the authority of Councils is of that consequence, that if they should be taken away, All things would become ambiguous, doubtful, wavering, uncertain, and all heresies would revive again. And that the Romish proselyts might know, what obedience ought to be given to Councils, Gregory de Valentia gives them this caveat: If you find but an Episcopal Synod, or consent of diverse Divines only, affirming such a doctrine to be the sentence of the Church, you are bound to believe it, though it be a lie. Pardon me if I believe them not: for our adversaries give just cause of suspicion, when their chiefest respect tends to the honor of Traditions, of Fathers, of Councils, and the sacred Word is made a by-word of Obscuritie and Insufficiencie.

I speak not this, as if our Church did decline the authority of Councils; for we profess that General Councils, are the representative Body, and as it were a little Model of the whole Church. We approve the first four General Councils, confirmed by our Church, and Acts of Parliament: we acknowledge with reverend Whitaker's, The name of Councils is honorable, their credit singular, and their authority of great esteem: nay more, we testify with learned Bellarmine, that General Councils are very profitable, and in some sort necessary (for the suppressing of heresies) yet (saith he) they are not absolutely and simply necessary, and of this I am easily persuaded for this reason. First, because the Primitive Church for the first three hundred years had no General Councils, and yet perished not: Again, as the Church during those three hundred years continued safe without general Councils, so without doubt it might have continued three hundred years more, and again six hundred years after that, and so likewise a thousand years more: for in those (first) times, there were many heresies, many schisms, many vices & abuses, all which, notwithstanding they wanted the assistance of general Councils, could not endanger the Catholic Church.

But admit that Councils were simply necessary, (which Bellarmine denies) yet their calling must be answerable to their beginning, and therefore let us first inquire by what authority they were first called, and observe how the Commission hath been executed from time to time, by warranty of the first Author.

We read in the book of Numbers, that the Lord commanded Moses to make two Trumpets of silver, that he might use them for calling of the Assembly. Moses according to God's Law, did assemble the people; and, saith the Text, Moses was king in Iesurum, when the heads of the people, and the tribes of Israel gathered together. Moses then had Ius Regale, a Regal power, (although in propriety of speech he were no King) and by this Regal power he assembled the people, and this authority was executed by him as by a King. This right was assumed after him by King David, by king Solomon, by king Josiah, by king Jehoshaphat, and so from Moses to the Maccabees they all practiced the same power of calling assemblies, as Kings & Princes, and there was none of God's Prophets, I say not any one that either opposed, or prohibited these assemblies. At the coming of Christ this commission was renewed, but not altered, there was no new order for calling them, other then had been taken in the old Law, & as soon as kings received the Christian faith, they executed the same power of the Trumpets, which was first granted to Moses.

The first Council of Nice it was the first and best General Assembly that was summoned in the Christian world, after the Apostles time; and this was called by the Emperor Constantine the Great.

The 2 ^d . general Council at Constantinople, was called by the Emperor Theodosius the elder.

The third at Ephesus, by the Emperor Theodosius the younger.

The fourth at Chalcedon, by the Emperor Valentinian and Martian. These four general Councils, are likened by Gregory to the four Evangelists, and these had their right calling by Kings and Emperors, and not by the Bishop of Rome.

If we look upon particular Councils, it will appear, they were likewise called by Kings and Princes in their several dominions, for many ages. The first Council of Arles was called by Constantine the Great. The Council of Aquileia, was called by the Emperors Valentinian and Theodosius: The first of Orleans, by king Clodoueus: the second of Orleans, by Chidelbert the French King; and this manner of calling assemblies by Kings and Emperors continued from Moses to Constantine, and from Constantine to Arnulphus, above 2400. years: for otherwise if this new assertion must take place: The Pope must call Councils: the first four General Councils, which all Christians had in such reverence, not one of them is a lawful Council, nay, saith our Reverend and learned B. Andrew's, The Church of Christ hath to this day never a General Council, Vnâ liturâ, with one wipe we dash them out all, we have never a one, no not one. And that you may know it is not the testimony of the Protestants alone, Cardinal Cusanus doth witness with us, that all the General Councils to the eight, inclusively, were all called by the Emperors: and that we may justly charge the Pope of Vsurpation, both in calling, and assuming a preeminence of place and dignity in Councils, the Cardinal makes this confession: I evermore find, that the Emperors and their Judges with the Senate, had the government, and Office of Presidence, by hearing and conferring of matters, and that they made Conclusions, and Judgments with the consent of the Council, and without any further Commission.

Those men therefore that are so earnest in calling upon us for Councils, should first show us the lawful calling of their assemblies. If Demetrius and his fellow craftsmen will assemble together of their own heads, and keep a shouting and crying for the great Diana of their Religion, this rowt will prove a riot, and is punishable by the Laws of God and man: away therefore with this confusion, away with Demetrius assemblies. If Pope Innocent the Third will assemble in his own name, contrary to the Commission granted to Kings and Princes, by express warrant from God's own mouth; if, I say, contrary to God's command, after a continued succession in the right of Kings and Princes for 2400 years, he will usurp the right of calling Councils, the Pope will not be found Innocent, nor his assemblies lawful: for the Town-clerk of Ephesus could tell Dometrius and his fellows; If they inquire anything, concerning matters, it (must) be determined in a lawful Assembly.

The promises of Christ, no doubt, are many and gracious to his Church, but they are annexed to a condition, (if they come together in his Name) the condition then being once broken, the Obligation to the Church and Council, becometh void, of none effect. It will not be amiss therefore to understand what it is to assemble in Christ's Name, and then see whether the Church of Rome hath performed that second duty in her assemblies.

It cannot be denied, that they are said to assemble in Christ's Name, whom neither respect of private gain induceth, nor the ambitious desire of honor inviteth, nor the prick of hatred and envy incite and drive forward, but whom the inflamed love of peace, and the fervent affections of Christianity impell, and not the spirit of contention. Surely these conditions are requisite to their right calling; and these were anciently performed in the first four General Councils, (to which our Church subscribeth:) but as their own Cardinal Cusanus protested, that the authority of Councils doth not depend upon the Pope; so likewise their own learned Ferus professeth, that In matters of Faith, and things which concern the conscience, it is not sufficient for them to say, We will and command, but you must consider in what manner the Apostles dealt in their Assemblies: they came together in simplicity of heart, seeking only God's glory, and the salvation of others, no marvel therefore if the Spirit of God was in that Council: but (saith he) Nos aliter conuenimus: Our meeting is in another manner; namely with great pomp, and seeking our selves, and promising to our selves license upon fullness of power to do anything; and this being so, how is it possible for the Spirit of God to approve such assemblies. Here then we have our learned Adversaries confessions, that two principal conditions anciently in use, are both abrogated by the latter Councils; the one is, The Pope calls Councils, that hath no right to call them: the other is, That they assemble in their own name, and for their own end, not for the Catholic peace, and Christian Charity. And thus much briefly concerning the authority of Calling Councils.

Let us take a short view of Councils in all ages, and withal let us add to the Popes unlawful Calling, the errors of Councils, the uncertainty of their Canons, the manifest forgeries of ancient Decrees, the palpable and gross suggestions of new devised Acts, with their senseless condemnation of true Decrees and Canons, that make against their Romish Faith, and Trent Doctrine, and tell me if these men have any cause or reason to equal Councils with the Scriptures, or to build upon them in matters of Faith, or to claim them all for theirs, when by their own ensuing testimonies, they are doubtful which are right, which are false, which are lawful, which are counterfeit. And lastly, when they are not agreed amongst themselves, whether Councils rightly called, are infallible, or stand subject unto error.

SECT. XV. Councils, which our adversaries pretend, as a chief bulwark of their faith, give no support at all to the Romish Religion as it is proved by particular objections made against several Councils, in all ages by the Romanists themselves.

CArdinall Bellarmine, who formerly told us, the Church of God might safely subsist without Councils, gives us likewise to understand by way of prevention, that the Books of Councils, being negligently kept, do abound with many errors: and hereby we may guess what is like to be the doctrine of those Councils that are guilty of such errors; and what will be the issue of that doctrine that depends upon such Councils. Whether errors have crept in by the negligence of the keepers, I cannot tell, but sure I am, many general and particular Councils have erred, many Decrees and Canons of Councils, which are produced for the Roman Religion, are acknowledged by themselves to be spurious, & counterfeit: and many true Canons and Councils, which make against their Trent faith, are condemned by our adversaries as fallible and erroneous, as shall appear by their own several confessions in all ages, from the time of Christ till the days of Luther.

In the first Age.] The Council at Jerusalem, gathered under the High Priest, wherein Caiaphas was President, sought testimony against Jesus: and excommunicated those who confessed Jesus to be Christ. Bellarmine tells us, Before the coming of Christ, the Councils of the Jews could not err; but (saith he) Caiaphas with the whole Council did err most pernitiously, when they adjudged Christ a blasphemer. And this may serve for a leading case, to show that Councils may err, as they have erred in the first Age.

In the second Age. ] In the year 102, the Council of Antioch is cited by Gretzerus, by Turrian, by Baronius, for the Worship of Images: yet neither Merlin, nor Crabbe, nor Surius, nor Nicholinus, publishers of the Councils ever mention it; and Binius who produceth it, doeth acknowledge to have received it from Baronius, and Baronius returns his Author for the Jesuit Turrian, and Turrian professeth that Pamphilus found it in Origen's Librarie. And this may serve to show, that some Councils are devised to prove the Trent doctrine, and the ra • her, because worship of Images requires Antiquity, and Consent of Bishops, to prove it an Article of Faith.

In the third Age] In the year 258, the third Council of Carthage had fourscore and seven Bishops; but saith Binius: The Catholic Church doeth not receive the Decrees of this Council. And the reason is pregnant, This Synod toucheth the Popes Supremacy: for when as Stephanus Bishop of Rome called himself Episcopus Episcoporum, The Bishop of Bishops, Saint Cyprian and the whole Council opposed that new Title. And this may serve to prove that some Councils rightly called, are discarded by our adversaries, when they make against their Trent faith.

In the fourth Age] In the year 317, the Council of Sinuessa is pretended to consist of 300 Bishops, besides Presbyters and Deacons; and this Council is cited especially for the Popes Supremacy: yet Binius, the publisher of the Councils professeth: that this Council Although it deserve great credit for the Martyrologies of the Church, yet very many learned men account the Acts to be spurious, and of no force and validity. And this may show the faith of their Supremacy is grounded upon uncertain & doubtful Councils.

The first General Council of Nice was called in the year 325, and is cited by Bellarmine in the 69 Canon, to prove Extreame Unction a Sacrament, and M ^r . Hart saith, This Council hath 80 Canons, and in those Canons the Patriarchs are said to rule their subjects, as the Pope is head of all the Patriarchs, like Peter. Yet 60 of these Canons were denied by Alipius Bishop of Tagasta, by Cyril Bishop of Alexandria, by Atticus Bishop of Constantinople, and by S ^t . Agustine, and the Council of Africa, who allowed only twenty; and, saith Contius their Lawyer: Their bastardy is proved even by this, that no man, no not Gratian himself durst allege them. And this may serve to show, that some counterfeit Canons by their own confessions, are produced for their doctrine of Faith and Sacraments.

The Council of Eliberis ] In the year 328 decreed, That no Images should be set up in Churches: Baronius answers: I suspect some juggling in this Canon. Bellarmine answers: It was a Council consisting but of nineteen Bishops, & a Provincial Council, not confirmed, (by the Pope) and it seemeth to have erred in other Decrees. Here one Cardinal seems to allow the Council, but not the Decree against Images; the other disallowes the whole Council as fallible, both in that and other Decrees. Howsoever this may serve to show, that there were Protestant Bishops in those days, who made public protestation against making and worshipping of Images, and yet neither Canons nor Councils must be allowed, if they make against an Article of their new Creed.

The Council of Milan was cited in the year 355, and was universal, and consisted of three hundred and more Bishops: and yet this Council did err in the cause of Athanasius: for (saith Zozomen) Whereas 300 of the Western Bishops had consented that Athanasius should be deposed from his Bishopric, there were only five against fifteen score that withstood it.

The Council of Ariminum was cited in the year 360, and was universal, and consisted of 600 Bishops: but (saith Agustine) Heretical impiety under an heretical Emperor assayed to overthrow the truth, the multitude being deceived by the subtlety of a few. And saith Jerome: In the name of unity and faith, Infidelity (was decreed) and written. And these are Evidences, that general Councils have erred, & may err.

In the fifth Age] In the yere 455, the general Council of Chalcedon was called; it consisted of 630 Bishops, and decreed, that the Church of Rome should have the primacy, because the city of Rome was the Empire of the whole world. This reason was so unpleasing to Pope Leo at that time and the Romanists in these days, that C. Bellarmine cōplains: It was the Decree of a great Council, but not lawfully made, and therefore of no force and authority: for (saith he) not only the Popes Legates rejected that Decree in the Council, but Pope Leo himself, who confirmed the rest of the Decrees, condemned it. And this may serve to show that the reasons and decrees of 630 Bishops, are no decrees, no reasons, if the Pope or his Legates do not allow them.

In the sixth Age] The fifth General Council of Constantinople was called, in the year 553, wherein both Pope Vigilius himself, and three Chapters of his Decrees, were condemned as heretical, and accursed. And this may serve to show, that the Pope may be an heretic, that a Council is above the Pope, who have authority to condemn him or his Decrees, as they find occasion; and that the Decrees of former Councils may be corrected by the latter; and consequently, there is no certainty, no infallibility in Pope or Councils.

In the seventh Age] The sixth General Council was called at Constantinople, in the year 681, and is pretended by Crabbe & Surius to have nine Canons, whereof the seventh is cited by Bellarmine for Invocation of Saints, yet their own Surius tells us: Those nine Canons are falsely ascribed to the sixth Synod; yea, those Canons are false and counterfeit, saith Caranza. Again, this Synod condemned Pope Honorius for a Monothelite. Put saith Bellarmine, we may safely say, the Fathers did undeservedly reckon Honorius amongst heretics, being deceived by false reports, and not understanding the Epistles of Honorius. Hence we may observe, that sometimes an Article of Faith, (as namely, Invocation of Saints ) is confirmed by our adversaries, from the authority of a general Council, when it is known and confessed by themselves to be counterfeit: and sometimes the Pope himself is adjudged an heretic by a General Council, when as for the honor of the Popes Supremacy and Infallibilitie, the whole Council must be condemned. Lastly, if from the Decrees of this General Council, we shall note the errors of Councils in general: Albertus Pighius a learned man (saith Cano) doeth demonstrate by many arguments, that the Acts which bear the name of the sixth and seventh (General) Councils, contain many errors.

In the eight Age] The second Council of Nic • , called in the year 788, and termed (the Seuenth General Council:) pronounced Anathema against Pope Honorius. What answer therefore can be made to this Council? Bellarmine replies: This Council was deceived by the Presidents of former Councils. This general Council then did not only err, but by this rule we hath no certainty, that other Councils are free from error. And to speak plainly and truly, this accursed Council, that by blood and usurpation first set afoot the worship of Images: This Synod (saith Vspergensis) was rejected in the Council of Frankford, as utterly void, and not to be named the Seuenth, nor anything else.

In the ninth Age] In the year 867, the Eight General Council of Constantinople decreed with the consent of 383 Bishops, that whomsoever Photios, Patriarke of Constantinople did depose or excommunicate, the Pope might not restore nor absolve; and whomsoever the Pope did depose or excommunicate, Photios might not absolve nor restore. Touching this Synod, Bellarmine answers: This Council did err, because the Popes Legates did contrary to the Popes instructions. He that shall read the Decrees & Canons of a General Council, ratified and declared by almost 400 Bishops, would think it strange, that they all could err in a point of faith, viz. touching the Popes Supremacy; and it is no less to be wondered, that the Popes Legates, (either through ignorance or willfulness) should so much digress from the Popes instructions, as to determine things contrary to his command: but the truth is, as the former Council (by the Cardinals confession) was led by the Presidents of other Councils, to oppose the Popes Supremacy: so likewise this Council had power and authority in their days, to create and confirm their Decrees and Canons against Head and members, notwithstanding the Pope or his Legates had imposed contrary instructions.

In the tenth Age] In the year 963, a Roman Council under Otho the Emperor was called, wherein Pope John the twelfth was deposed, and Leo the eighth was substituted in his room. This Synod (saith Binius) was unlawful, because the Bishops assembled without the Popes authority. And thus one Council did err, being misled by the presidents of others; a second, for want of good Instructions; a third, for want of a right calling: yet all tend to this, rather to condemn all Councils of errors, then suffer the Popes Supremacy, and an Article of Romish Faith, (which almost all Councils did condemn) should be violated, and infringed.

In the eleventh Age] In the year 1059, a Council at Rome was called under Pope Nicholas the Second, where it was decreed: Not only the Sacrament of Christ's body, but the very body of Christ, was handled, broken, and chewed with the teeth of the faithful. This decree was thought very doubtful, and dangerous by the Romanists themselves; insomuch as the Gloss upon Gratian gives this caveat: Unless you rightly understand these words of Berengarius Recantation, you will fall into a greater heresy then Berengarius himself. And hence we may learn, that a Council confirmed by the Pope, (which Bellarmine saith, cannot err ) decreed that doctrine of faith, which neither the Pope, nor his Church dare avow for Catholic Doctrine at this day.

In the twelfth Age] In the year 1120, the Council of Turon decreed, That the Eucharist given to sick folks, should be dipped in the cup, that the Priest might truly say, The body (and blood) of our Lord Jesus Christ. Bellarmine saith, that this Decree was amended: for in the third Council of Bracara, the bread was forbidden to be dipped; and it is objected, that Christ did give it in both kinds distinctly, the bread apart by it self, and the cup by it self, although the Council did not thereupon conclude it should be given in both kinds. Here we see Council against Council, and by Bellarmine's testimony, neither of both decreeing an Article of Faith according to Christ's Institution.

In the thirteenth Age] In the year 1215, the Council of Lateran was called, and many things (saith Platina) were consulted upon, but nothing plainly defined, by reason of some wars which Pope Innocentius sought to compose, and died at Perusium. But Math. Paris, who was living at that time, professeth plainly, That the same General Council, which made a great flourish at the first, ended in ieasts and laughter, whereby all the Arch-bishops, Bishops, Abbots, Deans, Archdeacons, and all comers to the Council were deluded. And hence we may learn what certainty of faith the Romanists are like to have for their grand point of Transubstantiation, (where it was first decreed for an Article of belief) when as (by the testimony of their own Writers) there was nothing plainly defined, and the whole Council concluded in ieasts and laughter.

In the fourteenth Age] In the year 1302, Pope Boniface the Eight called a Council at Rome, where he excommunicated Philip the French King, and about the same time, the King summons a Council at Paris, and therein appeals from the Popes sentence, and incites his Prelates and Barons against him, and withal publicly declares, That the Pope was worthy to be deposed, for heresy, for simony, for murder, and other capital offenses. This is witnessed by their own Nauclerus, and Papirius Massonus in the life of Boniface. Here you may see Council against Council, the one contending for the Pope, the other for the Emperor, the Bishops of Italy maintaining Appeales to the Pope, the Bishops of France commanding Appeales to the Council; the one withstanding the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome, the other obeying it as an Article of Faith, yet both members of one body, and professing one and the same Faith, under one Head, the Pope. And hence we may observe, there is no Unity betwixt Head and Members, no consent among the Bishops, to rely upon Councils.

In the fifteenth Age] In the year 1409, the Council of Pisa was called by the Pope, but is now condemned by the Inquisitors in their Catalogue of books forbidden: and the reason is given by their own Authors, Gregory the twelfth, and Benedict the thirteenth were deposed, as Heretics and Schismatics: nay more, when Gregory, (who was a true and lawful Pope by the testimony of Binius ) had commanded his Cardinals, that they should not attempt it: they, not regarding the Popes Supremacy, appealed from the Pope to a General Council. And hence we may observe, that neither Council, nor the Popes Cardinals, received the Popes Supremacy for a point of Faith, (as it is now taught & believed) for then certainly, as they would not have opposed him, so they could never have deposed him. And as concerning the validity of Councils, it is manifest, that as two Popes were condemned by a Council, so likewise that Council (and the like may befall any Council that tends to the prejudice of the Popes prerogative:) is rejected by the Inquisitors with a Deleatur, not to be named amongst Councils. Briefly, there is no infallibility, no certainty in Councils, nor in their Decrees & Canons; when they may be received or rejected at their pleasure, accordingly as they make for the Pope and his doctrine or against it, as may appear by the ensuing testimonies of this Age.

The Council of Constance ] was called in the year 1414, by John the 23 This Council (saith Bellarmine, touching the first Sessions, where they define the Council above the Pope) was rejected by the Council of Florence, and the last Council of Lateran: but touching the last Session, (wherein the Communion in one kind contrary to Christ's Institution) was decreed: Ab omnibus Catholicis recipitur, Pope Martin the Fift, and all Catholics receive them. And herein, if you please, you may likewise credit their own Gregory de Valentia, who affirmeth upon his credit, that the Decrees of the Council of Constance, have no certain authority, but those only which were approved by Martin the Fift.

The Council of Florence ] was called in the year 1430, whereby it is pretended, that the Christians of Armenia and India, consented to the Roman Church: but Binius the compiler of the Councils tells v •• t is doubtful and uncertain, Whether the Armenians continued at the Council of Florence; or whether after the departure of the Grecians, and Armenians, there were some other Sessions of the Council continued, which have not been recorded, or whether there had been another Synod gathered the same year. Here is nothing but certain uncertainty in this Council.

The Council of Basil was called in the year 1431, and is reputed General, yet it is neither generally approved nor received: For the Dominicans object it was no lawful Council; the Minorites on the other side, answered it was true and h • lie, and called the Dominicans Heretics for slandering the authority of the Council: (and saith Viues) the matter had come to a shrewd pass, if Pope Sixtus had not forbid that dispute any longer. And for a conclusion of this point, Albertus Pighius confidently affirmeth; That both the Council of Constance, & Council of Basil erred shamefully: they decreed against the order of Nature, against the manifest Scriptures, against the authority of Antiquity, and against the Catholic Faith. And if you require a reason how they fell into this shameful error, the reason is pregnant: They decreed the Council above the Pope.

Thus if we reflect upon the Decrees and Canons of Councils, many counterfeit and spurious Acts are suggested and forged in behalf of their Roman Doctrine. The Council of Sinuessa is cited by Bellarmine, to prove the Pope above a Council, yet this is condemned (saith Binius ) by many learned Writers. The Council of Chalcedon is cited by Aquinas, to prove the Pope universal Patriarke of the world; yet there is no such Decree extant in the Council. The Council of Nice, in the 69 Canon is cited by Bellarmine, to prove Confirmation a Sacrament, yet that Canon is rejected by Baronius. The Council of Constantinople, in the ninth Canon is produced for Invocation of Saints; yet this Canon is rejected as counterfeit (saith Caranza. )

Again, look upon the true Canons and Decrees of Councils, if they be found to make against the Roman faith and doctrine, they are rejected or condemned as erroneous. The Council of Eliberis decreed against the making and worshipping of Images: what saith Baronius to this Council: I suspect some juggling in this Canon. The Council of Pisa is condemned by the Inquisitors among the forbidden books: why? the cause is evident, it toucheth the Popes Supremacy: for Gregory the twelfth, and Benedict the thirteenth, were deposed, saith Platina. The Council of Laodicea is corrupted, and instead of Angels, they have inserted the word Angles: why? the reason is pregnant: it forbids Invocation of Angels. The General Coūcel of Constantinople did err, and the Popes Legates did contrary to the Popes Instructions; why? the reason is evident, the Council decreed, that the Pope should not absolve whom the Patriarke did depose. The Council of Constance is condemned of error, only in the first Sessions: Why? they decreed the Council above the Pope. Again, their Canons are received in the latter Sessions: Why? they decreed the half Cōmunion which is now received for an Article of Faith. And thus some Canons and Councils are forged, some true and Orthodox are condemned, some Sessions are approved by the Popes Legates, others rejected by the Popes Cardinals and Prelates, insomuch it was rightly observed by Ludouicus: Then the Councils are of account with them, when they make for them, but if they make against them, they make no more account of them, then of a Convent of women, prattling in a common bath, or a Weavers Shoppe.

I proceed to the sixteenth Age, wherein the Grand and admired Council of the Papal world; I mean the pretended General Council of Trent shall be examined.

SECT. XVI. The Council of Trent, which is the main pillar, and last resolution of the Roman Faith, is of small or no credit at all, because it was neither lawfully called, nor free, nor General, nor generally received by the Romanists themselves.

AVgustus Thuanus, a chief Senator and Counselor to the King of France, tells us, that Pope Paul the third summoned a Council at Mantua, and from thence translated it to Vincentia: and, because the Princes of Germany could not agree upon the place, assigned Trent, a city seated upon the confines of Germany and Italy, where this Council was called in the year 1546. This Council then was called by the Popes usurped power, not by the Emperor, & for that cause falls within the compass of Demetrius assembly, which wanted a right and a lawful calling. But let us see with what esteem and authority this Council is received in the Roman Church. Cardinal Bellarmine tells us: If we take away the authority and credit of the present Church and Council of Trent, the Decrees of other Councils, and the whole Christian Faith may be called in question. This Jesuit, who first assured us, That the Church might continue safe without Councils, (if occasion required) at least two thousand years: now, without any regard to the sacred Gospel of Christ, professeth, That if the Roman Church and Trent Council were removed, the Faith of all Christians would be endangered: and Campian his fellow Jesuit, as man ravished with the fame of that Synod, proclaims to after ages: The elder that Council waxeth, the more it will flourish: and as a true Romish Proselyte cries out, to the astonishment of poor Protestants: O good Lord, with what diversity of people out of all Countries, with what choice of Bishops throughout all Christendom, with what excellencies of Kings and Commonweales, with what profound Divines, with what devotion, with what lamentations, with what abstinence and fasting, with what flowers of Universities, with what knowledge of strange tongues, with what sharp wits, with what study, with what endless reading, with what store of virtues and exercises was that sacred place replenished? This Council is like the great Diana of the Ephesians, that carries the universal applause, let us look herefore into the lawfulness and authority of this Council: for if it be of men, it will come to naught, but if it be of God, we cannot overthrow it, lest happily we be found even to fight against God himself.

First then, as this Council wanted a right calling of the Emperor, so likewise it wanted a requisite condition to make it General: for that Council is truly General, whereunto all Christian States are summoned & assembled in his name; and shall this be held the great Council of the Christian world, the chief supporter of all other Councils, and the whole Christian faith, which was confined to a small number, and some few Nations? Look upon the three Patriarchs of Constantinople, Antioch, and Alexandria, were they all present? Look upon the Grecians, Armenians, Medes, Persians, Egyptians, Moors, Ethiopians, were they summoned to this Council? do not these people believe in Christ? have they not Bishops? did their Ambassadors come from all these Nations to the Council? Nay more, were the Legates of the kingdom of England, of Denmark, of the King of Swetia, of Scotland, and the Dukedom of Prussia there present? Look upon the assembly of their Bishops, and it will appear by their History of Trent, that this General and great Council consisted but of forty three Bishops, and some of those also were but Titular, as namely, Richard Pates, Bishop of Worcester, and blind S ^r Robert, Bishop of Armach; these had the bare titles of Bishops, & were no Bishops at all; and two of those Bishops (saith Illiricus ) were taken in adultery, the one stricken with a dart, the other taken in a trap by the husband, and hanged by the neck out of a window, to be seen by all that passed by in the street.

Binius the publisher of the Councils, gives us to understand, that the whole number of Patriarchs, Archbishops, and Bishops under Pope Paul the Third, who gathered the Council, by the greatest account, came but to 62; from which if we take the Titular Bishops, and those who through infirmity could not meet at one & the same time, there could not be present above 43, both as Illiricus, and as the History of Trent do witness: and must we say, or can we think, that the whole Christian Faith, and decrees of all Councils must depend upon the number of 62, if they were all allowed, and agreed together? And that which is most remarkable, in the fourth Session under the same Pope, the points of greatest moment were discussed and decreed by the number of fifty three Bishops: then I say, the prime Articles touching the Canonical books of Scripture, touching Traditions (then equalled to the Scriptures,) touching the authentical Edition of scriptures, touching the Judge of all controversies in points of Faith, were handled and resolved for Articles of Faith by those few Bishops, whereas sometimes it is carried by a single voice or two, and so the number of the whole, at most, is reduced to thirty.

It is true I must confess, that there were many other learned Divines present, but it seems they were chiefly gathered for the instruction of those Bishops; and (saith Stella) If you will make answer, the Bishops bring with them learned Divines which may instruct them what to say, what to answer, as it was used in the Council of Trent; yet in this I cannot forbear laughter. Neither was the access unto the Council safe for all those that were invited; neither was it free for all men to dispute and argue the points of controversy freely. Pope Julius the third, after the death of his predecessor Pope Paul, made a decree, That none of the Princes and free Cities of Germany should have audience, except they would first vow their obedience to the Council; and for that end and purpose, he published his Breue. There shall be a Council, that they which have spoken rashly, either may recant their sayings, or else without further hearing or receiving of the matter, may be denounced and condemned for heretics, according to the Constitutions already made. Here was plain dealing and short warning for every man, either to resolve to subscribe to the Trent Doctrine, or else to be proscribed for an heretic. The Bishops of Apulia did intimate no less in the name of all the Bishops, That they were nothing else but the Popes creatures, and his bondslaves: for there was an oath proposed severally to all, to be taken in this manner: I will defend the Papacie against all men: So help me God, and his holy Gospel. And as there was an oath proposed in behalf of the Papal doctrine, so likewise there was special care taken, and caution given, that whosoever should speak against the Majesty of the Pope, should be banished the Council. We have examples of both in this kind: Cornelius Bishop of Bitonto professed openly in the Council, that Christ in his last Supper did not offer up his (real) body and blood: but the Trent Fathers, (because it was contrary to the Roman Faith) condemned and exploded him. Paulus Vergerius was but suspected for a Lutheran, yet thereupon the Pope comanded him to depart the Council. Guilielmus Venetus, a Dominican would prove the Council of Constance was above the Pope, because the Council did depose him: but he was thought too lavish of his tongue, and therefore was banished the Council. The Bishop of Chioza, professed in the Council, that he disliked the Decree, which made Traditions equal with the Scriptures: but he was expelled the Council. And as touching the Popes Holiness, when a zealous and good Bishop had declared, that God in the Scriptures was termed Holy; and therefore it was honor sufficient for the Pope to be called Holy, and not (most Holy,) the Bishop was sent from Trent to Rome, & there the Pope grievously handled him for this capital offense. Neither do I deny that there was safe conduct promised as well to the Lutherans, as to those which were vowed creatures to the Pope and his doctrine: but (saith Fabritius) the learned Princes of Germany were kept so far from the Castle of Disputation, that they could not be suffered to approach to the entry of it. Fateor extensionē &c. I grant (saith he) there was liberty extended to other Nations, but withal it is added, that the same form of liberty should appertain to none others, but only to them that would repent, and return to the bosom of the Church. If we look upon the Tenour of the conduct, we shall find it was very doubtful, (and in truth it might well be thought strange, that a free and General Council of all sorts of Christians, which should meet for God's glory, and Christian peace, should come in fear and danger of their own safety:) for say they, The holy Synod (as much as it can) grants public faith, and full security, that is, safe conduct; but (saith the History) the Protestants thought the form of the safe conduct very captious, because as well in the Decree, as in the Tenor, there was this clause of reservation, (As much as it can) when as no man demandeth of an other, that which is not in his power to grant. To let pass the like Conduct given to Jerome of Prague, and John Hus at the Council of Constance, can they prove that there was free liberty of speech granted, as it is in all public Consultations? Was there open conference and dispute allowed about the controversies of Religion? was the Scripture appointed to be Judge, or the plea being against the Pope, ought the Pope to be plaintiff and Judge in his own cause? I confess, the Electors and Princes of Germany being assembled at Newburg, in the Popes name, and by the Popes Legates were summoned to the Council; but withal they returned this answer: Mirari se &c. They wondered upon what ground or reason, the Pope should be so bold, how he durst proclaim a Council to them, and call them to Trent: And there they give this reason for it; Because it was neither lawful, nor agreeable to Divine or Human equity, that the Pope should supply the place of a Judge, when as both the dissention and ruin of the Church proceeded from himself. Thus if we consider this Councils calling, it was by usurpation, not of ancient right. If we respect the nature of it as it was, General; many Kings and Princes were so far from allowing it, that they made protestation again •• it: if we observe the number of Bishops in their a • semblie, when the great •• points of controversy we • handled and resolved, there were but fifty three. If we look upon the free access, it was doubtful, and limited to certain conditions. And lastly, if we respect a free conference, The Pope made known by his Legates, that the Judges were tied to him by oath; whereas the plea being against the Pope and his doctrine, he himself ought not to be Judge. I conceive it was but a harsh proceeding, that how many, or how great soever the differences were concerning Religion, yet there could be no dispute, nor yet admittance to the Council, but by an enforced protestation, & vowed obedience to the Pope and his doctrine; insomuch, their own Thuanus gives us to understand, that the fault was not in the Protestants; for notwithstanding they conceived their Conduct was not safe, yet they came to the Council, and desired the Popes Legat to have liberty to dispute; and being made known, that the Protestants were ready to make good their confessions, which at that time they exhibited to the Council; The Trent Fathers were greatly offended, neither could the Protestants have answer to their confessions, and therefore they desired leave to be gone, which being easily granted them, they commended their cause to the Emperors Orator, and so departed from the Council.

I will give you a short and general view of the actions in this Council. Andraeas Dudithius an Ambassador, sent to this Council, from the State and Clergy of Hungary, a man highly favored by Ferdinand, and Maximilian the second, and a known Actor in this assembly, gives the substance of their proceedings in few words very remarkable, and worthy of all men's reading.

What good (saith he) could be done in that Council, which only numbered, but never considered the weightiness of any opinion, if either the cause or reason might have made the encounter; or if a few assistants had but sided with us, the day had been ours, albeit the enemy was very strong: but when only number fought the field, in which we fell short of them, though our cause was never so good, we could not come off with victory: to everyone of us the Pope was able to oppose one hundred of his own; and if a hundred seemed but a few, he could suddenly raise a thousand, and send them to help their fellow Laborers: so that you might daily see servile & poor Bishops, for the most part young men, and almost beardless, wasted with lusts, hasten to Trent, hired and procured by the Pope to speak as he would have them, unlearned men they were and simple, but for their impudency and audacity of much use: as soon as these had access to the Popes flatterers, then did iniquity rejoice to have the upper hand, neither might anything be decreed, but what made for them, who made it their only Religion, to maintain their Popes power and riot. One grave and learned man there was, which could not away with such baseness; he as no sound Catholic, what with fear and threatenings, and what with entreaty, was brought by the Council to allow that which in heart he disavowed. In brief, it came to that issue, by the dishonesty of them that were made and ordained for that purpose, that the Council seemed to consist, not of Bishops, but of shadows, not of men, but of Images, which like the statues of Daedalus, had no motion from themselves, but were carried upon other men's shoulders. The Bishops for the most part were hyrelings, who like a pair of country bag-pipes, unless they were still blown, could make no music. The holy Ghost had not to do with that Council, wherein was nothing but worldly wisdom, and that was wholly spent in propagating the Popes immoderate and shameful Lordlinesse, from whom, as from another Delphi, they did wait for Oracles; and from him in a Carriers clokebag was the holy Ghost sent, of which they so much brag to sit at the stern of their Councils: and, quod admodum ridiculum est, which is most ridiculous, when there fell good store of rain, the holy Ghost could not come unto thē before the floods were abated: so it fell out, that the spirit was not carried upon the waters (as we read in Genesis) but besides them. O strange and monstrous madness, the Bishop like the people: No act or Decree of theirs could be established, unless the Pope were made the first Author of that Decree.

How truly this learned Bishop hath deciphered the state and condition of that Council, I leave to every man's judgment, sure I am, whilst many there carried the business with craft and ambition, in those things which appertain to God's glory, there was more attributed to the Council of man, then to the grace of God. Add to these testimonies, the protestation of Francis the French King, who was so far from approving the Decrees of the Council, that he openly proclaimed, that for his part he neither held it for a General, nor yet for a lawful Council, but for a private Conuenticle, assembled for the ends of some private men; and that neither he nor his subjects were bound to obey it; and that he would have this his Protestation enrolled amongst the Decrees of that Council. Add to this the Protestation of all the Reformed Churches, and diverse Christian Nations, who at this day utterly disavow the Trent doctrine. Add to this the protestation of the Ambassador to Charles the fifth, who made his declaration in like manner: I James Hurtado Mendoza, in the name of the most mighty prince my lord Charles the Roman Emperor, by his especial commission, and in the name of the Empire, & all other his Realms and Dominions, do protest, that the Legates and Bishops which are at Bonenia, for the most part bound to your Holiness, & wholly hanging upon your beck, have no authority to make Laws, in cause of Reformation of Religion and manners.

I forbear to speak more largely of the politic proceedings, and the doctrine of Faith created, and declared in this Council; the former is accurately handled by the History of Trent, and the later is fully confuted by our learned Chemnitz; and as touching Councils in general, let it suffice we have the testimony of Cardinal Cusanus; Many plenary Councils rightly called, have erred, as we know by experience. Let it suffice their own Albertus Pighius gives his assent with us, that In matters of Faith, General Councils have erred, as namely the Council of Ariminum, the second Council of Ephesus, both were general, and both do witness, that General Councils lawfully called, may err. Let it suffice, Panormitan, their chiefest Canonist and Proctor for Pope Eugenius, affirmeth plainly: A Council may err, as otherwise a Council hath erred, about marriage to be contracted betwixt the ravisher, and the ravished, and the saying of Jerome, as being of the sounder opinion, was afterwards preferred before the Decree of the Council. And to prevent that common objection of the Romanists, that the Church would fail in faith, if Councils should err he gives this full solution to the question. Non obstat: It hindereth us little, if it be said, a Council cannot err, because Christ prayed for his Church, that it should not fail. For though a General Council represent the whole universal Church; yet to speak truth, the universal is not there precisely, but by representation, because the universal Church consisteth of all the faithful, and this is the Church which cannot err; whereby it is not impossible, but the true faith of Christ may continue in only one person. Therefore the Church is not said to fail, nor to err, if the true faith remain in any one. And that no man might presume to rely in matters of faith, either upon Fathers or Councils; S ^t . Agustine delivers it for a safe and sure rule; Whatsoever is found written in Scriptures, may neither be doubted nor disputed, whether it be true or right: but the writings of Bishops may not only be disputed, but corrected by Bishops that are more learned then themselves, or by Councils, and National Councils by Plenary or General, and even General Councils may be amended by the later.

My conclusion therefore shall be this, Since the true Acts and Canons of Councils, which make against the Supremacy, against Invocation of Saint, against Images, and the like, are adjudged spurious and counterfeit. On the contrary, since diverse Canons and Decrees are devised for advantage of their cause, and namely, to prove their Real Presence, their Sacrament of Confirmation, their Sacrament of Extreame Unction, the Popes Supremacy, and the like, which authorities are merely forged and counterfeit: since the Books of Councils being negligently kept, do abound with many errors, by the testimonies of our learned adversaries, I say, to seek for the knowledge of infallible Truth, or to search for the soundness of true saving faith in General, or Provincial Councils, is but Via Dubia, a doubtful and uncertain way; it is Via Deuia, a wandering and By-way.

It resteth for our Adversaries last and best refuge, to fly to the Sanctuary of their Church: for in truth, whatsoever pretence is made of Scriptures, of Fathers, of Councils, yet if there be sent out a Melius inquirendum, for the Author of their new Creed, and Trent doctrine, they must return a Non est inuentus, and seek him only in the Church.

SECT. XVII. In the Roman Church, which our Adversaries so highly extol above the Scriptures, there is neither safety, nor certainty, whether they understand the Essentiall or Representatiue, or the Vertuall, or the Consistoriall Church.

CAmpian the Jesuit, who formerly made his claim to all Fathers and Councils, now in the name of the Church, insults against the Protestants in this manner: So soon as the Adversary heard the Church named, he waxed wan and pale. Indeed I confess, it would terrify a religious and sober minded man, to hear such daily blasphemies uttered against the Majesty of God's word, and to sound out nothing but the honor and authority of the Church: who can but wax wan and pale out of pity & charity, to hear the Church named, and see that she hath kept the name only, and lost her wonted nature? who can but wax wan and pale, to see her spoiled and bereft of her Jewels & treasury of the sacred Scriptures, and retain only the caskets and boxes, (the bare name of a Church) where those Jewels lay? Look upon the best learned of the Roman Church, and tell me if they will not astonish a true believing Christian, and make him change his countenance, to hear such odious comparisons, betwixt the Scriptures and the Church: The Church (saith Stapleton) is an infallible foundation of faith in a higher kind then the Scripture: for the Scripture is but a foundation in testimony and matter to be believed; but the Church is the efficient cause of Faith, and in some sort the very formal: nay more, if both of them be properly considered, and compared together, the Church is a more noble subject then the Scripture: yea, the Church hath such authority, that she may set at liberty, or seal up the Scriptures themselves: yea, saith Hosius, a man may speak it in a good, a godly sense, the Scriptures are of no more account, without the authority of the Church, then Aesop's fables.

Neither let this seem strange, that the Romanists insist principally upon the authority of the Church: for he that shall look back, and observe how the sacred Scriptures are condemned of Obscuritie and Insufficiencie; he that will consider how the holy Fathers are censured, and rejected by them, as counterfeit or erroneous; he that shall note the Decrees and Canon of Councils condemned as spurious, or superfluous; these things I say considered, it is no marvel our adversaries fly to the Roman Church, and for this special cause advance the name of the Church above all. Cardinal Cusanus, by way of objection, puts the question to the Bohemians, whether they were better obey the Word of God or the Church: You say, we must first obey Christ's Commandments, and afterwards the Church; and if the Church command us to do otherwise then Christ commandeth, we must obey Christ, and not the Church. It is true, that the Protestants rightly propose that question, (which without all question) cannot otherwise be resolved: but hear what answer he makes them: Verily, herein standeth the beginning of all presumption, when particular men think their own judgment to be more agreeable to God's commandments, then the judgment of the universal Church: nay, he puts the question further; Perhaps you will say, How shall Christ's commandments be changed by the authority of the Church, that they shall bind us, when the Church shall think it good? I tell thee (saith he) there is nothing to be taken for Christ's commandments, unless it be to be so allowed of the Church: when the Church hath once changed her judgment, God's judgment is likewise changed. Cardinal Hosius gives his consent with Cardinal Cusanus, and mor • plainly resolves the question in few words: Whatsoever the Church teacheth, is the express word of God; and whatsoever is taught against the sense • and meaning of the Church, 〈◊〉 the express word of the Devil. To say nothing of the doctrine of Devils, (viz.) the forbidding of Meats, and Marriage, (foretold by the Apostle, and now fulfilled in the Church of Rome,) I will give you an instance or two in the word of God, and the doctrine of the Roman Church, that you may the better discern, whether the Church changing her judgment, there be any variableness, or shadow of turning with Christ, and whether the doctrine of the Roman church be not expressly against the Word of God.

Touching Prayer in an unknown tongue, it is the confession of Benedict, Montanus, a Parisian Doctor: Etsi Apostolus &c. Although the Apostle thought good to have Prayer in a known tongue, yet the Church, upon good causes, hath decreed the contrary. Touching Adoration of Images, it is the confession of Johannes Ragusius, in his Oration at the Council of Basil: Licet in Lege, &c. Although in the old time the visible Images of God, yea and of his Saints were forbidden by the Law of God, and no liberty was since granted either in the Old or New Testament, to make any such, yet (the Church) taught by the holy Spirit, hath not only permitted, but decreed and ordained it. Touching the Communion in both kinds, it is the confession o • the General Council of Constance, and the Council of Trent, Licet Christus &c Although Christ did institu • the Sacrament in both kinds yet saith the Trent Council he that shall say (the Catholik • Church) hath not altered it fo • good causes, or that they err • in so doing, let him be accursed. These are special poin • with them, and the denya • of any of these, make a ma • heretic in the Church 〈◊〉 Rome; yet by their ow • confession are decreed wi •• Non obstante. Notwithsta • ding Christ and his Apostles taught the contrary. Observe then the difference betwixt the Gospel of Christ, and the doctrine of the Roman Church; the Spirit of God denounced a curse, both against men and Angels, that should teach any other doctrine, then that they received from the Scriptures; the Church of Rome pronounceth Anathema against all those that do not teach, and believe the doctrine of their Church, although it be different from the Scriptures.

I confess the name of the Church is honorable, and her credit singular; but that which sticks with me, and as I conceive is worthy of all men's observation; the name of the Church, which is so much magnified, and adored of all Romanists, and Romish Proselytes, I say, that Roman Church, is neither understood by the ignorant what it is, neither is it resolved by the learned amongst them, in certain, what is properly meant & understood by it.

First then, we must know, as the Church hath many parts to act; so likewise the Romanists make her of four several sorts: The Essentiall Church, and this (saith Bellarmine) is a company of men professing the same Christian Faith and Sacraments, and acknowledging the Bishop of Rome to be the chief Pastor and Vicar of Christ upon the earth. The Representatiue Church; and this is an Assembly of Bishops in a general Council, representing the whole body of the Church. The Vertuall Church; and this is the Bishop of Rome, who is said to be the chief Pastor of the whole Church, and hath in himself eminently and virtually both truth and infallibility of judgment, and upon whom dependeth all that certainty of truth which is found in the whole Church. The Confistoriall Church; and this consisteth of the Pope and Cardinals, and is termed by the S • rbonists, The Court of Rome. Touching these several acceptions of the Church, there are several and different opinions. The Gloss upon Gratian put the first question, and thus resolves it: I would know what Church you understand when you say, It cannot err. I answer, It is the congregation of the faithful, that is here meant by the Church. To the second, Bellarmine replies: A lawful Council, by the most general consent is most properly termed the Church. To the third, Gretzerus the Jesuit makes this confession I deny not, but by the Church we understand the Bishop of Rome for the time being, who guides the Ship of the militant Church: and Gregory de Valentia, by the Church we mean her Head, that is to say, the Roman Bishop in whom resideth the full authority of the Church. To the fourth, Marsilius Patauinus gives his free assent: that the name of the Church is of great consequence amongst the moderne Writers, whose Ministers and Presidents are the Pope and Cardinals, which now by use and custom have at last obtained to be called the Church: and of this Church the Pope himself hath made this declaration, Ye shall be the Senators of my city, and like unto Kings, the very hooks and stays of the world, upon whom the very door of the Church Militant must be turned and ruled. Now amidst these different opinions, it must needs seem questionable, to which of these Churches a poor ignorant soul (who desires satisfaction in matters of Religion) should address himself: if he require judgment of the Essentiall Church, there is little comfort, and less assurance to be had from them, for they consist most of the ignorant and common people, and have chiefest need of instruction themselves: besides, it is impossible to know the judgment of all Christians, (who make the universal Church) in all or any particular points of Religion. If he appeal to Councils, their right calling is uncertain, their Decrees and Canons are doubtful, for many of them are adjudged by themselves erroneous, many spurious and counterfeit: If he would consult with the Pope and Cardinals in their Consitory, it is a journey too costly and tedious; besides, it will appear they are subject unto error.

It resteth then that we examine the infallibility of particular Churches, and in particular that we inquire whether the Roman church be that Church which we are commanded to hear and obey, by the authority of the Scriptures.

SECT. XVIII. The most common Plea of the Romanists drawn from the Infallibilitie, Authority, and Title of the Catholic Church, is proved to be false, vain and frivolous.

TO give the Church of Rome her due, let us take a brief suruay of her first foundation, and let us fee what privilege did ancienly belong unto her, and what authority she claimeth at this day. First, the Apostle S ^t . Paul in his Epistles to the Romans, congratulates with them, and sendeth them this greeting: To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be Saints: he testifieth further with prayer & thanksgiving, that their Faith was spoken of throughout the whole world: nay more, he makes an earnest request to God, that he might see the members of that Church, and impart Spiritual gifts unto them, to the ende they might be established. These testimonies of the Apostle were special Caracters of an eminent & glorious Church (although in truth; there is not so much as this name of a Church given to the Romans in all the Scriptures, (unless they will allow the Church at Babylon to be the Church of Rome:) and here was a probable assurance of continued stability and perseverance in the Faith in all Ages: but behold the same Apostle, which did so much glory in behalf of their Catholic Faith, which gave God thanks for them; which, without doubt, prayed for the continuance of that Faith: ( For God is my witness (saith he) without ceasing I make mention of you always in my Prayers. ) As if he had foreseen by the spirit of Prophesy, they would glory in their own worth and merits: shortly after, in his eleventh Chapter of the same Epistle, gives them this special Caveat: Be not high minded, but fear: and withal gives a special reason of that Caveat. For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed also lest he spare not thee, behold therefore the bountifulness and severity of God; towards them that have fallen, severity; but towards thee goodness, if thou continune in his goodness; otherwise also thou shalt be cut off. This Doctrine of the Apostle doth trench so far into the present estate of the Church of Rome, that the Rhemists forbear their Annotations upon this place, for the truth is these last words. Thou also shalt be cut off, Do plainly intimate, that the Church of Rome from the time of the Apostles had a possibility of falling, and consequently was but a particular Church: for so it befell the Church of Jerusalem, and much more (saith the Apostle ) may it befall the Church of Rome.

Let us compare the testimonies and promises in behalf of the Roman Church, with other particular and famous Churches in the time of the Apostles, and see whether those promises did more largely extend to the faith of the Roman Church, then to other Churches: S ^t . Paul (writing to the Thessalonians, terms them by the name of the Church ) he gives this large testimony in their behalf: From you sounded out the word of the Lord, not only in Macedonia and Achaia, but your faith which is toward God is gone forth into all places, that we have no need to speak anything: yea more, he gives them a kind of assurance for the perpetuity of their faith; The Lord is faithful, and will establish you, and keep you from all evil: yet this Church is fallen away, and hath lost her first faith. The Ephesians are termed by the Apostle, The Church of the living God, the Pillar & ground of truth. And for this Church the Apostle makes this confession: I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, that he would grant you according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his spirit in the inner man: yet we see this Church which was the ground and pillar of truth, and for which the Apostle earnestly prayed for, is rased to the ground, and utterly fallen from the truth. The Corinthians are termed by Saint Paul, The Church of God called to be Saints. And this Church is farther witnessed by the same Apostle, that she was rich in all things through Christ, in all kinds of speech and knowledge, and that she was not destitute of any gift: yea, he delivers confident in behalf of that Church, that God would establish them unto the end, even the day of the Lord Jesus Christ: yet soon after some of them denied the Resurrection, they fell from the truth, and are now subject to the Turk. If then the Church of the Thessalonians, of the Ephesians, of the Corinthians, (touching the outward face, and visibility of the local Churches) if they are all fallen, notwithstanding such fair testimonies and large promises in their behalf, (which also were accomplished in the Elect) what stability could the Church of Rome promise to her self, which had not so much as the name of a Church, but was threatened upon the breach of a condition, that they also should be cut off? Whether the condition be broken or no, I will not here dispute: but this I may safely say, If the Jews being the Lord's peculiar people, and the natural branches, were broken off, how much more the Church of Rome, being but a wild Olive branch, might be cut off from the faith of Christ? No doubt the Spirit of God foresaw, that the Romanist would glory in the name of the Church, and advance that name above his word; and therefore the word of God gave not so much as a name of a Church, nor promise of infallibility & perseverance unto it, but a special caveat to put them in mind not to be high minded. I say therefore to the Romanist, as S ^t . Jerome sometimes said to Pammachius and Oceanus: Thou who art a maintainer of new doctrine, whatsoever thou be, I pray thee spare the Roman ears, spare the Faith that is commended by the Apostles mouth, why goest thou about now after 400 years, (I may say 1400) to teach us that Faith which we before never knew? Why bringest thou forth that thing that Peter and Paul never uttered? Euermore until this day the Christian world hath been without this Doctrine.

But observe the cunning of our Adversaries, they do as much glory of the Apostles testimony, (that the Roman Faith was published through the world) (as if the ancient, and the now Roman faith were all one:) And to prove an infallible Succession in their doctrine, they pretend, that S ^t . Cyprian, a blessed Martyr, did witness to the world, that the Roman Church could not err, and consequently the Trent doctrine is the ancient faith of Christ and his Apostles.

S ^t . Cyprian (saith M. Bishop ) tells us, that Perfidiousnesse and falsehood in matters of Faith, can have no access to the Church of Rome: so that by the Apostles confession, they challenge an eminent Visibility, and by this ancient Fathers testimony, they claim an assured stability in matters of Faith. If these things were true, I should crave pardon of Cyprian, not to believe him, because the Apostle teacheth me to believe the contrary: but the truth is, this testimony so often alleged by our adversaries, makes nothing for their purpose; for if Cyprian say that Infidelity cannot come to the Romans, whose faith was praised by the Apostles mouth, then can none of the people of Rome err, because the faith of them all was praised by the Apostles mouth: but the truth is, this holy Father speaks not there of matters of faith, nor of the stability of the Roman Church, (although most Romanists so translate it and apply it) but of the tumultuous and disorderly courses of certain lewd persons, who being censured by the Bishops of Africa, fled to the Bishop of Rome for protection of their cause, and thereupon upbraideth them, that they came to Rome with lies and tales, which could find no admittance, nor harbor there, when as they might well understand, that the Romans were men whose Faith was commended by the Apostle, Et ad quos perfidia non potest habere accessum: unto whom perfidiousness could have no access; that is, they would give no ear to their perfidious and calumnious suggestiōs. This therefore, I must needs say, is unfaithfulness and perfidiousnes in the Church of Rome, willfully to misapply those things which make nothing for them.

I proceed from the infallibility of the Church to the authority of it, wherein you shall likewise observe, the Romanists do insist especially upon that known confession of S ^t . Agustine: I should not have believed the Gospel, except the Authority of the Church had moved me thereunto. But I pray, what do these words concern the Roman Church? why should they be applied rather to the Roman, then to his own Church in Africa, or our Church in England? (for he speaks not of the Roman Church, or any particular Church, but of the Church indefinitely.) Moreover, their own Cano professeth, that S ^t . Agustine had to do with a Manichee, who would have a certain Gospel of his own admitted without further dispute: In this case (saith he) S ^t . Agustine puts the question: What if you find one, which doeth not believe the Gospel? what motive would you use to such a one to bring him to your belief? I for my part (saith he) should not have been brought to embrace the Gospel, if the Churches authority had not swayed with me. And from hence also Bishop Cano draws this sound conclusion. The faith of the Gospel is not founded upon the authority of the Church. This Exposition of their Romanist is agreeable to our belielfe: for we profess, that the first outward motive to bring men to the knowledge of the Scriptures, is the authority of God's Church. If I believe the Gospel (saith Hooker) yet is Reason of singular good use, for that it confirmeth me in this my belief the more: If I do believe as yet, nevertheless to bring me to the number of believers, except reason did somewhat help, and were an instrument which God doeth use to such purposes, what should it boot to dispute with infidels and godless persons for their conversion and persuasion in that point.

He therefore that shall conclude from S ^t . Augustine's doctrine, (which he professed in the name of an heretic) let him receive his answer from the same Father, when he makes his confession as a true Catholic: By the mouth of God which is the truth, I know the Church of God which is partaker of the truth. But as it happeneth sometimes, that he who hath fallen into the hands of an unskillful Physician, is loath afterwards to commit himself even to a good one: So was it in the state of my soul (saith Agustine) which could not be healed by believing, and for fear of believing false things, it refused to be cured by true ones. And in the Chapter following, whilst he was yet a Manichee, he makes this humble confession: Thou, Lord, didst persuade me thus, I say not that they were blameable who believed thy Books, which thou hast grounded by such authority throughout almost all the nations of the earth, but that they indeed were blameable who believed them not; and that no • are was to be given to any, if peradventure they should say to me: How dost thou know that these Books were imparted to mankind by the Spirit of that one God, who is true in himself, and most true, when he speaketh to us; for that is the very thing it self, which is especially to be believed. Thus S ^t . Agustine the Catholic, interprets Agustine the Heretic: After his conversion to the truth, the blessed Spirit did persuade him, that there was no ear to be given to those men which made such doubts and questions (as are daily made in the Church of Rome) viz. How do you know the Scriptures to be the Word of God? but as the Samaritans believed that Christ was the promised Savior upon the report of a woman, yet afterwards when they heard him themselves, they professed they believed him for his own sake, and not for the woman's report: So likewise this holy Father, first conferred with flesh and blood, as the most known & familiar means to introduce a saving knowledge; but after he had received the Spirit and word of truth, he, like the Samaritans, believed the Gospel, not for the Churches sake, but for Christ's own authority, and his Gospels sake.

The Authority of the

I omit diverse Expositions of the learned Romanists, touching this saying of Agustine: Durand, Driedo, and Gerson tell us, That those words of Saint Agustine had relation to the Primitive Church, which both saw Christ's person, and his miracles, & heard his doctrine. Aquinas saith, that S ^t . Agustine spake of the Church as an overruling cause, but not as a foundation of Faith. And for a conclusion of this point; The mind of the faithful believer doth not rest in the judgment of the Church: for (saith Stapleton) Although the Church by reason of her Ministry and Mastership received of God, doth cause us to believe, yet the reason wherefore we believe, is not the Church, but God speaking within us, and witnessing his truth unto us by his holy Spirit. Thus briefly touching the authority of the Church: now I proceed to our adversaries claim touching the Vniuersalitie of it.

Lessius the Jesuit tells us, The Church of Rome, and that Church only and the multitude adhering to it, is the Catholic Church, the Religion of this Church is Catholic, the faith is Catholic, the doctrine is Catholic, and their followers are termed Catholics. What is properly understood by the Catholic Church, S ^t . Agustine delivers in these words, Non haec, aut illa, It is not this Church, or that Church, but the Church dispersed throughout the whole world: and from hence, Our Ancestors named the Church Catholic, that by that name they might demonstrate the Universal. If then the Church of Rome can prove their Church Universal, there would be an end of all controversies: for we profess our selves to be members of the universal Church, we say that Church can neither err totally, nor finally; and we willingly grant, that out of that Church there is no salvation. But certainly this last Tenet doeth strongly evince, that the Roman Church is not Universal, for Saint Stephen, and S ^t . James, and others suffered Martyrdom, and were saved in the Church of Jerusalem, and in the Church of Antioch, before the Church of Rome was ever heard of; and they were all members of the universal Church. But let the Church of Rome claim what title or prerogative she list, she is in danger to fall upon a Rock: for if she confess that she is a particular Church, she stands subject unto error; if she assume the title of Universal, she is altogether invisible: for Vniuersale sentitur non videtur: That which is Universal, is understood, not seen. It is the Article of our Creed: I believe the Catholic Church: and, that is truly said to be believed which is invisible, saith Gregory. And that the world may know the Romanists are Nominals, such as vaunt of the name of Catholics, as the Donatists did in the Primitive Church, when they want the nature of the thing it self, their own Waldensis, who well understood how to make a difference betwixt the particular Roman, and the Vniuersal Catholic Church, tells us: The Church whose faith never faileth, according to the promise made to Peter, is not any particular Church, as the Church of Africa, nor the particular Roman Church, but the Universal Church, not gathered together in a General Council, which hath sometimes erred; but it is the Catholic Church dispersed through the whole world, from the Baptism of Christ unto our times, which doeth hold and maintain the true Faith, and faithful testimony of Jesus. Neither was this the particular opinion of one private man, but many Bishops, and learned Doctors did profess publicly in the Council of Ferara: With whatsoever power the Church of Rome is endued, yet it is inferior to the Universal Church. And if we require a cloud of witnesses, behold both Princes, and Cardinals, and Bishops in the great Council of Basil, resolved, and declared; That the Church of Rome is not Universal, but a part of that universal mystical body of Christ, as appeareth by Gregory: Therefore for as much as it is a member of the said body, it is not, neither can it be, the Head of the same body, since there is a difference betwixt Head and members.

Thus if we look for Infallibilitie, it is not found in the Roman Church: If we look for the Authority of the Church, it is inferior to the Scriptures, unless they say, the Scripture is under the Church, as some say the Sun is under a cloud, when it is above it. If we look for Vniuersalitie, the Roman Church is but a member, and no sound member of the Universal. Let us therefore examine in particular, where, or in whom we shall find this Church, which doeth assume those great and glorious Titles to her self.

SECT. XIX. The Church which our Adversaries so much magnify amongst themselves, is finally resolved into the Pope, whom they make both the Husband and the Spouse, the Head and the Body of the Church.

SAint Matthew tells us, that our Savior Christ gave charge to Saint Peter, as well as to the rest of his Disciples, that if any dissention did happen which they could not well reconcile among themselves, they should tell the Church. If Saint Peter himself was commanded to tell the Church, and the Pope be S ^t . Peters Successor, it would somewhat trouble a doubtful Recusant, how to understand and believe the Pope for the Church: for if Christ had taken Peter for the Church, it is not probable, he would have bid him tell the Church; for that had been all one as to bid the Church, tell the Church: Yes, (saith Bellarmine) the Pope ought to tell it to the Church, that is, to himself. I take not upon me to answer this learned Cardinal, but I dare avowe, that this Exposition of Scripture is not according to the Article of his faith, with the uniform consent of Fathers: Howbeit, by this solution of Dic Ecclesiae, we are informed where, and in whom we may find the Roman Church.

Gretzerus the Jesuit puts the question touching the Pope, and returns his answer in this manner: Thou sayest they interpret the Church (the Pope;) I grant it, what then? yet we may doubt of his sentence: for how can we be certain that he errs not? Yes (saith he) from these sayings, I will give thee the keys, &c. The gates of Hell shall not prevail &c. Whatsoever thou bindest, shall be bound, &c. But who shall judge of the sense of these places? How shall I know those things are spoken of the Pope? From Ecclesiastical Tradition, from the consent of our Elders, from the Suffrage of all Antiquity, from the Text it self, if there be brought no perverse or prejudicate opinion against it: to conclude, whether thou wilt or no (thou shalt believe it) from the Popes own Sentence and determination. To this Church then lieth an appeal from Scriptures, from Councils, from the Essentiall Church; and for that cause Cardinal Bellarmine proclaims it as the Popes Champion, Nos defendimus, We maintain that the Pope is simply and absolutely above the universal Church, and above General Councils: and as great men sometimes love to be soothed up in their greatness, and are led with opinion of their Parasites, to believe that for a truth, which is but a suggestion of falsehood: so it came to pass touching the Popes power in these latter days; they did so much atatribute to his Authority, and Infallibilitie derived from Peter, that Cardinal Zabarella rightly observed, and ingenuously confessed; They have made the Popes believe, that they might do all things whatsoever they listed, yea notwithstanding they were things unlawful: and thus, (saith he) they have made him more then God. Bishop Begnius in the last Council of Lateran, speaking to Pope Leo, cries out in admiration of his Holiness. Ecce venit Leo: Behold, here cometh a Lyon of the Tribe of Judah, the Root of David, behold he hath raised up a Savior, which shall deliver the people of God from the hand of the destroyer. Thou art he, O most blessed Leo, whom we have expected as a Savior, take up thy sword and buckler, and arise in our defense. And thus by degrees, first Vox populi, the common people, by admiring his greatness, then Bishops & Cardinals by their flattering suggestions, have at last ascribed infallibility of Judgment to his Authority, (which I am verily persuaded never Pope did believe in himself) and hereby they have advanced him above Fathers, above Councils, above the Church; and now at last made him the whole Church, in so much that some of his own side are not ashamed to profess, that the Pope may dispense against the Apostles, yea, against the New Testament upon good cause, and also against all the precepts of the Old. Sylvester Prierias, Master of the Popes palace goeth further, he gives us to understand, that the authority of the Roman Church, and of the Bishop of Rome, is greater (then the authority of God's Word) and thereupon he concludes, Whosoever leaneth not to the doctrine of the Roman Church, and of the Bishop of Rome, as unto the infallible Rule of God, of which Doctrine the holy Scripture taketh force and authority, he is an heretic. And for a further confirmation of this belief, Gretzerus the Jesuit makes this conclusion: We do receive and reverence that only for the Word of God, which the Pope as supreme Master of the Christians, and Judge of all controversies, doth determine in the Chair of Peter. Now if it happen that some Proselyte of a tender conscience, should make some scruple, whether the Pope ought to be heard and obeyed, when he is a murderer, a Sorcerer, and a willful subuerter of the truth, (as some Popes have been) Hosius their Doctor, wisheth them not to trouble thenselves with such idle curiosities. God will never have thee consider (saith he) whether the Pope be a Judas, or a Peter, or a Paul; it is sufficient only that he sitteth in Peters chair, that he is an Apostle, that he is Christ's Ambassador, that he is the Angel of the Lord of Hosts, from whose mouth thou art commanded to require the Law. This thing only Christ would have thee to consider. Again, admit a Council, a whole congregation of men should make a doubt whether the Pope may err, and by reason of that scruple, would not readily obey him: Cardinal Bellarmine by way of prevention, gives them this lesson: If the Pope should so far forth err, as to command vices, and forbid virtues, the Church were bound to believe that vices are good, and virtues are evil, unless she will sin against her own conscience. Here is an implicit faith commanded; let the Popes doctrine be true or false, if the Romanists will resign up their senses and understanding to this Vertuall Church, (which is the Pope) they shall have a Priest & Cardinal for their Tutors; but by their leave, they may make shipwreck of their faith, by being their Disciples. I proceed from an implicit faith to a blin • obedience; and therein I will give you a remarkable example from another Schoolman, who above all things doeth honor and commend a blind obedience to the Church (that is, to the Pope.) Gregory de Valentia tells us of an Italian Merchant of Placentia, who reasoned and resolved with himself in this manner: I hold it is better to profess the Roman Religion, then the Lutheran; First, because I can briefly learn the Roman faith: for if I say what the Pope says, and deny what the Pope denies; and if he speak, and I hearken unto him, this alone is sufficient for me: but if I should be a Lutheran, I must learn a Catechism, I must search the Scriptures, which in truth I cannot intend, when I must look after the Ships of Italy, and my Merchandise beyond the Seas. You have heard the reason why this Layman did dislike the Protestants Religion, and what was the rule of his Roman faith, now hear what judgment this learned Schoolman gives concerning this Merchant; Deū nihil habiturum: God (saith he) will have nothing to lay to the charge of this man at the dreadful day of Judgment. To say nothing of this presumption, I pray God that Pagans & Infidels who knew not Christ, arise not up in Judgment against them that teach such doctrine: for whereas all men by the Apostles rule, should be ready to give an account of their Faith, and must be judged by the Word of God; this man by not knowing the Scriptures nor the articles of his faith, but only for intending his Merchandise, with a blind obedience, and an implicit faith, shall be free both from guilt and punishment: and no doubt, from this general belief, of the Popes authority, and infallibility, the saying of Gregory the 13. is verified: Men do with such reverence respest the Apostolical See of Rome, that they rather desire to know the ancient Institution of Christian Religion from the Popes own mouth, then from the holy Scriptures; and they only inquire what is his pleasure, and accordingly they order their life and conversation.

He therefore that will appeal to the Bishop of Rome, to Rome let him go; but woe to the Recusants of England, & other countries remote from Rome, which cannot hear the Church, being so far distant from him: nay, woe to them at Rome, that live in his Sea; for how can they hear him if he never preacheth? But withal, most miserable is the condition of the hearer, notwithstanding he should preach: for his own Cardinal assures us, that if his Holiness teach not the whole Church, he is in as much possibility to err, as Innocent the eight was when he permitted the Norwegians to celebrate the Eucharist without wine. Thus from the multitude of believers, which is the Essentiall Church, we are sent to the Council, from the Council, which is the Representatiue Church, we are sent to the Pope, which is the Virtuall, and now at length being arrived at the Pope Consistory, his Cardinal gives us to understand, that a man may return happily as wise as he went, but withal intimate • 〈◊〉 us, that there are no • oracles, • o infallible doctrine to be learned from his mouth, unless he will first declare by public decree, that he intends to preach to the Universal Church, Besides, how the Vicar of Christ should be the Spouse of Christ, how a particular member of the Church should become a Universal Head of the Church: how Papa, the Pope, anciently a Father, should become the Church, which is always a Mother, it is a mystery unsearchable, & past finding out: for sure I am, if the Pope be the Church, let them pretend whomsoever they will for their Father, they can have no Church except Pope Joan for their Mother.

It remaineth then, that in the next place we examine the certainty of that faith, which must be learned from the Pope: for if the Pope have not Infallibilitie of Judgment, then is he not that rule of faith, then is he not that Church, which is the pillar and ground of truth; and consequently miserable is the condition of those poor Christians, that rely upon his opinion, as upon the infallible Doctrine of the Church; and first I will proceed to the Popes Succession in doctrine and person, & compare the doctrine of the ancient Bishops of Rome with the Popes of these later times, that thereby we may discern, whether the Popes Infallibilitie be privileged by his Chair, or whether the ancient Roman faith be successively derived from the ancient Bishops of Rome, to the Popes of these latter ages.

SECT. XX. The Church which is finally resolved into the Pope, wants both Personal and Doctrinal Succession, as appears by several instances and exceptions, both in matters of fact, and matters of faith.

HOsius the Romanist tells us for certain, that if we reckon all the Popes that ever were from Peter until Julius the third, there never sat in his Chair any Arian, any Donatist, any Pelagian, or any other that professed any manner of Heresy. The reason of this as I conceive is delivered by Card. Cusanus: The truth cleaveth fast to Peters Chair; the whole universal Catholic Church is rolled up to Peters chair, & shall never depart from Christ. I will not take upon me to examine the Pope, in what Office, in what religion, in what piece of his life he hath succeeded Peter: but that you may know, (howsoever the Popes faith is annexed to the Chair) he hath err •• , and is subject to error as • e is Pope, I will compare the doctrine of the ancient Bishops of Rome, with the faith of the later Popes, and the later Popes Decrees and definitive Sentences, with their flat contradictions, and contrary Decrees amongst themselves, whereby it shall appear, that the later Popes have not only erred in disclaiming the decrees of their Predecessors, but have digressed wholly from the ancient Roman Bishops, both in faith and manners, and withal they want that Infallibilitie, that personal, and doctrinal Succession, which they so much magnify amongst themselves.

Anacletus Bishop of Rome in the year 103, decreed, that after Consecration, all present should communicate, or else be thrust out of the Church, for so (saith he) the Apostles did set down, and the holy Church of Rome observeth. On the contrary, at this day it is made lawful for the Priests to receive alone, the people only gazing and looking on; and withal Pope Julius the fourth hath decreed in the Council of Trent: If any shall say, that Masses, in which the Priest alone doeth communicate, are unlawful, and therefore ought to be abrogated, let him be accursed.

Leo the Great, Bishop of Rome in the year 440, speaks of the death of Martyrs in this manner: Although the death of many Saints hath been precious in the Lord's sight, yet the death of no innocent person hath been the propitiation for the world, that the righteous received crowns, but gave none, that of the fortitude of the faithful, have grown examples of patience, not gifts of righteousness: that their deaths as they were several persons, were several to every of themselves, and that none of them by his death, paid the debt of any other man; because it is only our Lord Jesus Christ, in whom all were crucified, all dead, all buried, all raised again from the dead. On the contrary, Pope Pius the 5, and Gregory the 13, both condemned, (saith Bellarmine ) the Divines of Lovaine, and others, who defended, that the sufferings of the Saints, cannot be true satisfactions, but that our punishments are remitted only by the personal satisfactions of Christ. Nay more (saith he) If the sufferings of Saints may not be applied to us, to free us from the punishment due for our sins, lest they should seem to be our Redeemers, then certainly we our selves cannot redeem those punishments by our own labors, lest we also should seem to be our own Redeemers. But Pope Julius the fourth, and the Council of Trent, (saith the Cardinal) most plainly teach the contrary.

Gelasius Bishop of Rome, in the year 492 professeth, and declareth for an Article of his belief: In the Sacrament is celebrated an Image, or semblance of the body and blood of Christ, and there ceaseth not to be the substance or nature of bread and wine. On the contrary, Pope Innocentius the Third, decreed it for an Article of faith in the Council of Lateran, with a Firmiter credimus: We steadfastly believe, that the body and blood of Christ are truly contained in the Sacrament of the Altar, the bread being transubstantiated into his body, and wine into his blood, by the divine power▪ so that there must be really, verily, and substantially present, the natural body and blood of Christ, which was conceived of the Virgin Mary, and which is ascended into Heaven.

Touching the Communion in both kind, the same Gelasius proclaimed to the communicants of his time: Either let them receive the whole Sacrament, or let them be driven from the whole: for the dividing of one and the same Sacrament, cannot be done without great sacrilege. On the contrary, in this latter age, Pope Martin the Fifth, hath decreed it with the consent of a whole Council: If any shall obstinately maintain, that it is unlawful or erroneous, to receive in one kind, he ought to be punished, and driven out as an Heretike.

Gregory the Great, Bishop of Rome, about the year 600, publisheth his instruction for the people touching Images: Let the children of the Church now dispersed, be called together, and taught by the Testimonies of the Scriptures, that nothing made with hands may be worshipped. And withal concludes: If any will make Images, forbid them not; but by all means let him avoid the adoration of them. On the contrary, in this later age Pope Pius the fourth declares it for an Article of Faith: I most firmly avouch, that the Images of Christ, and the Mother of God always a Virgin, and other Saints are to be had and retained; and that due honor and veneration is to be given to their Images. Again, touching the use and sufficiency of the Scripture, touching the Real presence, Private Mass, Communion in both kinds, Merite of works, the Popes Supremacy, and the like: Gregory is flatly opposite to the Popes of these later times. And that you may yet further hear, that the Popes have no Infallibility in their Determinations and Decrees, you shall find likewise, that the later Popes do not only vary from the Faith of the Ancients, but also differ amongst themselves, and contradict each other in many substantial points of their own doctrine.

Pope Caelestine the Third, in the year 1191, published a Decree, that of married persons, if one fall into Heresy, the Marriage is dissolved, and the Catholic party is free to marry again. Neither (saith Alphonsus) was this error of Calestine such as ought to be imputed to negligence alone, that we may say, he erred as a private man, not as Pope: for this difinition of Caelestine was extant in the Decretals which I myself have seen and read. On the contrary, Pope Innocentius the Third, his immediate Successor decided the case, and confessed that one of his Predecessors, (which saith the Gloss, was Caelestine) had decreed otherwise, whose resolution was in the old Decretals, and it was evil that Caelestine said.

Pope Gregory the Ninth, in the year 1227, proclaimeth it to the world, The not knowing the Scriptures, by the testimony of truth it self, is the occasion of errors, and therefore it is expedient for all men to read or hear the same. On the contrary, Pope Clement the Eighth, forbids all the common people, yea • id Regulars also, to read or retain any vulgar Translation of the Scriptures, without license of their Bishop, or Inquisitor: and there he gives the reason flatly opposite to the Tene • of his Predecessor: Because the common use of Scripture is found by experience to be rather hurtful then profitable.

Pope Nicholas the fourth, in the year 1288 declared in his Decretal, that To renounce the propriety of all things, not in special only, but in common also, is meritorious and holy, which Christ taught by Word, and confirmed by Example, and the first Founders of the Militant Church derived to others by pattern of their Doctrine and Life: On the contrary, his Successor John the 22. published and declared, that It is Heretical, to affirm that Christ and his Apostles had nothing in special, nor in common.

Pope Martin the fifth, in the year 1431. in the grand Council of Basil, decreed the Council above the Pope: Pope Eugenius the fourth, his immediate Successor, condemned that Session, & declared the Pope to be above a Council. And, that which is most remarkable, those Romanists which condemn the Translation of our Bible (as if the latter Translation did contradict the former) shall find, that Pope Sixtus Quintus published in the year 1590, and commanded to be read and followed upon such pain 〈◊〉 as are mentioned in his Breue; within two year after was rejected by hi • Successor Pope Clement 〈◊〉 8. as a Translation erroneous, and opposite to th • Truth. And thus saith •• tina, The latter Popes, eithe • vi • lat, or utterly repeal th • Decrees of their Predecessors▪ For the little petty Popes ha • no other study to busy themselves withal, but only to defuce the name, and dignity 〈◊〉 the former Popes.

First then, we may observe, that the ancient Bishops of Rome, published and declared the same faith and doctrine, which the Protestants teach in the fundamental points at this day. They commanded Priests and people to communicate together, contrary to the doctrine of Priua • Masses: they taught, that the Sacrament was a semblance of Christ's body, and that the substance of bread did remain after consecration, contrary to the Faith of Transubstantiation: they commanded the cup to be given to the lay people, which the later Popes forbid at this day: They condemned the Worship of Images, Merit of works, and the Popes Supremacy; all which doctrines are received by the later Popes and councils, and declared with Anathema's, to be believed as Articles of faith.

Thus we see the house divided against it self, the later Popes repealing the Acts of the former, and both contradicting each other. Now how the house should stand which is divided against it self; how the Pope should be the Rule of faith, and yet dissent from the faith of his Predecessors: how the Pope should be the Pillar and ground of Truth, and yet his Truth opposed and contradicted by his Successors, I may well conceive it may be A mystery of Babylon, but I profess I cannot understand it. Briefly and truly I may say of the Popes in these later ages, They have succeeded their predecessors as Caiaphas succeeded Aaron, or as sickness succeedeth health, or as darkness succeedeth light; & from these few examples in Faith and Doctrine, I will conclude with the saying of S ^t . Ambrose: They have not the succession of Peter, that want the faith of Peter.

I proceed to the Popes Succession in person, which (although it be of no force and authority, by the testimonies of our adversaries, unless there be also a right succession of doctrine in the same Church) yet I will give you some few instances and observations of their own Writers, that the uncertainty of their Succession may more easily be discovered by their own confessions.

Gratian the Compiler of the Popes Decrees, well understood, that the Popes succession would be interrupted, if his faith and doctrine should be compared with Peters; and therefore for more certainty, (by transposing the word Faith into Scate ) hath appropriated the right Succession to the Sea of Rome, in these words: They have not the Succession of Peter, that want the Seat of Peter. To let pass these forgeries, it is strange to see what shifts the Romanists do use, to make good the lineal descent of their Popes. Rather then they will want authority of Scriptures to prove Peters being at Rome, they will confess that Rome is meant by that Babylon, which is spoken of in the 16 and 17 of the Revelation, which without doubt is the Seat of Antichrist. Besides, they are not agreed among themselves, whether Linus, or Clemens, or Cletus, or Anacletus succeeded Peter, if he were at Rome. Neither can they well resolve, whether the Pope should succeed S ^t . Peter, or S ^t . John • for S ^t . John lived 33 years after S ^t . Peter (saith Baronius ) so that the succession must be either derived from S ^t . John the suruiuour, or else the Pope, who immediately succeeded S ^t . Peter, must be greater then an Apostle, during the time of Saint John's suruiuourship.

But admit that S ^t . Peter was at Rome, admit the ancient Bishops of Rome did rightly succeed Saint Peter, yet What was the face of the Roman Church (saith Baronius) and how most filthy did it appear, when the most impotent and base Queanes bare all the sway at Rome, changed Sees, and gave Bishoprics a • at their pleasure; and which is most abominable, and not to be named, intruded their Paramours into Peters Chair, false Bishops, whose names are written in the Catalogue of Popes, only to note and design the times.

To pass by the two and twenty Schisms in the Papacie, wherein it was questionable betwixt the Pope • and Anti-Popes, who were the true Successors of Peter. To let pass the vacancy in the Papal Sea for many months and years, during which time the Pope fare at Auinium, & left the Sea of Rome. Their own Genebrard confesseth, there were fifty Popes irregular, disordered and Apostaticall. And Bellarmine tells us, at the Council of Constance, there were three Popes, neither could it easily be resolved, which of them was the true and legitimate Pope. And (saith he) A doubtful Pope stands for no Pope. If then there were false Popes by Baronius confession, if Apostaticall Popes, by Genebrards confession; if doubtful, and consequently no Popes, by Bellarmins confession; what certainty, what assurance can these men have of the Popes personal Succession?

It was a pertinent and full answer made to a Jesuit, by an acute & learned Doctor of our Church, touching the personal succession of

Alphonsus a Castro, was an obedient servant to the Pope, yet would he by no means allow that every Pope had Infallibilitie in a right line of succession from Peter: For admit (saith he) that we are bound to believe out of Faith, that the true successor of Peter is the supreme Pastor of the Universal Church, yet we are not bound to believe with the same faith, that Leo, or Clemens, is the true Successor of Peter, because we are not bound to believe it, as a point of faith, that either of them had a right and Canonical election. The reason as I conceive, why this Succession in person is become so doubtful and uncertain amongst themselves, is partly grounded upon their own Councils, and their Popes Decrees: for the Council of Florence declared, that the intention of the Priest did ordain the Sacraments, and consequently if his intention did fail at the time of Consecration, the Sacrament of Orders was utterly void, and the Priests Ordination and Succession for want of intention, was of no effect, and as touching the Popes Decrees, Julius the second above 120 years since, published and declared by his Bull, (which all Cardinals, at the entrance of the Conclaue, are sworn to observe) That if it happen the election of the new Pope be made and done, either by him that is chosen, or by any other of the College of Cardinals, by the heresy of Simonicall contracts, giving, promising, or receiving any goods of any kind, or by making of any other promise, or obligation of what kind soever, whether it be done by themselves, or others by a few, or by many, that not only the election, or assumption so made shall be from the very moment void and of none effect, but that safely and lawfully they may hold, esteem, and eschew him as a Magician, an Ethnic, a Publican, and an arch-heretic. Now if any man make a question, whether the Pope can commit any Simony or no, let him take his answer from the Popes creature: Thomas Aquinas tells us, that the Pope may incur the sin of Simony as well as any other. Besides, the Popes Bull would never have said (If any Pope happen to be chosen Simoniacally) if they had not believed that the Pope might commit Simony. On the other side, if it be demanded what Pope in these latter times is guilty of that crime, their own Treatise entitled, Novus Homo, The new Man, doth plainly manifest, that Sixtus Quintus did climb into the Chair by foul Simony; and that since the death of Gregory the thirteenth, his predecessor, there hath not been any true Pope, rightly and Canonically elected.

He who was sometimes a Pope, proclaimed to the world by his public Writings: Of the Popes of Rome, we might show forth very many examples, that they have been found either heretics, or else defiled with other vices.

But it shall suffice for a conclusion of this point, the ground of Peters succession is doubtful, the Popes Infallibilitie derived from Peter, is uncertain, and consequently, the Romanists have but a Moral & conjectural knowledge for their Rule of faith. I call Bellarmine himself to witness the truth of this assertion. First, the right of Succession in the Popes of Rome, is founded in this (saith the Cardinal) that Peter by Christ's appointment, placed his Seat at Rome, and there remained till his death. So that the reason of Succession hath his beginning from the fact of Peter. From hence there will arise two questions; the one, whether the Lord did command Peter to make his Sea at Rome: the other, whether the Pope did rightly succeed Peter, if he were at Rome. For resolution of these points, the Cardinal makes these several answers: First, It is not improbable, that our Lord did plainly command Peter to make his Seat at Rome, yet this is no matter of Faith, nor yet of a divine and unchangeable precept, but it is most probable, and it is piously to be believed. To the second he answereth: Peradventure it is not (De Iure divino) from divine right and authority, that the Pope succeedeth Peter, yet it doth appertain to the Catholic (Roman) Faith.

Thus by Bellarmine's confession, it is but probable and piously to be believed, that Peter was at Rome, and made his Seat there: and therefore at the best it can be but probable, that the Pope should succeed Peter in that Sea. Besides, there is no necessity to believe it: for (saith he) it is no point of Faith; and withal, if Christ gave any such precept, yet it may be changed. Again, if the Pope do succeed Peter, it is but with a Peradventure, it may be so, and it may not be so: for (saith he) it is not of any Divine right or command, although it belong to the Catholic Roman faith. Add to these the uncertainty of their pastors Intention in the ordination of their Priests, the uncertainty of their Simoniacal contracts, which make void their election, the known and condemned heresies of Popes in the Roman Sea, with the uncertainty of Peters being at Rome, on which all the succession of person and doctrine doth depend: and tell me, if the Popes infallibility, which is grounded wholly upon probabilities, can be the Rule of faith; tell me, whether the Pope or his predecessors have had an undoubted succession in doctrine and person; tell me, whether to neglect the most safe and sure rule of Scriptures, and to follow this moral and conjectural faith, be not Via dubia, a doubtful and uncertain way, and Vid Deuia, a wandering and By-way.

SECT. XXI. The Infallibilitie of the Popes Judgment, which is made the Rule of Faith, to determine all Controuersies, is not yet determined by the learned Romanists amongst themselves.

TO lay a sure Foundation, that this Papal building may be strong and immovable, Hostiensis, by way of prevention, gives us to understand, that the Pope and Christ make but one Consistory, so that (sin excepted) to which the Pope is subject, the Pope in a manner can do all that God can do. He might more truly have added, that the Pope can do more then God can do: for God cannot lie (saith the Apostle. ) Howsoever, the Pope in this is much beholding to this Cardinal; for (without this exception of sin) the Pope could not have been Antichrist, since he must be The man of Sin. Neither is this man different in opinion from his fellow Romanists: for Cornelius Bitonto pronounced openly in the Council of Trent: Who will so unjustly weigh things, but he will say, the Pope is the light that cometh into the world? Thus the Cardinal hath equalled him with God the Father, (excepto peccato:) and the Bishop hath given him the proper attribute of Christ: and that an Infallibilitie might be granted him, Salmeron the Jesuit proclaims it for a certain truth: The Lord promised his Spirit to Christ's Vicar, and the successor of Peter, and by his authority he determines all matters of Faith. So that from these several assertions, we may confidently affirm, that either the Pope hath the Office of the holy Ghost given him, to lead him into all truth; or certainly There was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, to make war with the Saints, and to overcome them. First therefore let us examine upon what ground the Popes infallibility may be proved, and whether it be received as a doubtful opinion, or as an Article of faith. Touching the first, according to their several fancies, the Romanists have devised several reasons: some pretend, that the truth is annexed to the Chair, as if Christ had prayed for his Tribunals, Courts, & Consistories: others derive it from the example of Caiaphas, who being High Priest by virtue of his office, rightly prophesied of Christ, and consequently, the Pope cannot fail in Judgment. A witty argument, no doubt, and available for the Devil himself; for by the same reason, the Devil may conclude, that he hath also the Spirit of God, for he testified of Christ: I know thou art Christ the Son of the living God. Now the Apostle doth witness accordingly: that No man can say the Lord Jesus, but in the spirit of truth. He therefore that shall read in the 11. of John, that Caiaphas did not speak of himself, but as High Priest, was guided by the spirit of prophesy: let him take his answer from Saint Matthew: that Caiaphas himself the very same year, being high Priest, did publicly and Iudicially pronounce our Savior a blasphemer; and I think none will say, that this judgment of his proceeded frō the holy Ghost, unless he will say, when the Pope speaketh the truth, he doth it unawares, like Caiaphas, when his heart and purpose was bent to overthrow the truth. There are others that confess the Pope may err as man, but not as Pope, as if his Manhood & his Popedom had two capacities, and were in two distinct persons. Plato a heathen Philosopher did note it as a thing ridiculous, that one in his days did maintain: A Magistrate could not err as Magistrate, nor Prince as Prince. And their own Alphonsus à Castro, scoffs at the Dominicans, for that they were wont to brag before the people, that those which have once used the habit of their Order, could not err, nor fail in faith. Shall we say then that this new Divinity was learned from some old Philosopher, or that the Pope is chosen out of the Order of Dominicans, which have the gift of Infallibilitie?

Glaber Rodolphus, who was living in the time of Benedict the Ninth, tells us, that Benedict was chosen Pope at ten years old: shall we say then, that this child had infallibility, and could not err? or must we believe the Truth was annexed to his Chair? and that he was able to guide the whole Church, and direct a whole Council, when he knew not the principles of Religion? Again, what shall we say of heretical and wicked Popes, who have neither Faith nor Religion? If we peruse the Council of Basil, we shall find Pope Eugenius condemned and deposed for a despiser of the holy Canons, a Symonist, a forsworn man, a man incorrigible, a schismatic, a man fallen from the faith, and a willful heretic. Boniface the seventh, (saith Baronius) was a very villain, a Church-robber, a savage thief, the cruel murderer of two Popes, and the invader of Peters Chair. John the 13 was accused and detected in a Synod of Bishops, for murders, adulteries, incests, perjuries and other vices of all sorts. Alexander the sixth, gave his mind to nothing but villeny, and fraud, whereby to deceive men. Sylvester the second, leaving his Monastery, betook himself wholly to the Devil, by whose help he gate the Popedom, upon condition, that after his death he should be the devils both body and soul.

Must we believe these Popes were guided by the holy Spirit, and led into all truth? that the truth was annexed to their Chair, and not to their Persons? must we acknowledge (for what virtue we know not) that these Bishops were the Virtuall and total Church? were these the right successors of Peter in faith and doctrine? or shall we say they erred as men, but not as Popes, they erred in their Palace, but not in their Consitory; they erred in matters of fact, but not in matters of Faith. These things are so groundless in themselves, that they rather deserve laughter, then an answer; they are riddles without sense, that a man, & not a Pope; in a stool, not in the Chair; in a company, not in a Council, may fail • , and not err; wander, but not go astray; miss the truth, but not do amiss. Cardinal Cusanus was so far from the belief of this new doctrine, that he ieasted at Pope Eugenius, and under that pretext, derided the Infallibilitie of the Pope. How can Pope Eugenius (saith he • ) tell this is true, if he will have it so, and not otherwise, as though the inspiration of the holy Ghost were wholly at the Popes command, to breath only where he will have him?

It is confessed on both sides, that Christ is the Way and Truth, and by his word he hath prescribed a sure & an infallible rule to find out the truth: If the Scripture were but a partial rule, yet by Bellarmine's own confession, it is the most certain, and most safe rule of faith. Now • et us see what is the most certain rule of the Roman • aith, and on what assured means their proselytes may • est satisfied, and infallibly • nstructed for the salvation • f their souls. Suarez the • esuite tells us, It is the Catholic truth, that the Pope defining in his Chair, is the rule of Faith, which cannot err, that is, whē he doth propose anything authentically to the universal Church, to be believed 〈◊〉 a divine faith: and thus (saith he) all Catholic Doctors teach in these days; and I think it 〈◊〉 be a thing certainly to be believed. This Jesuit maintain •• the Infallibility of the Pope yet speaks but ( as he thinks and withal tells us, It is th • Catholic doctrine of these times, when as he should have proved it by ancient Records, that it was the Catholic doctrine of all ages: For there is no man living, let him be Papist o • Protestant, if he be a man of • nderstanding, but will hol • it most requisite, and absolutely necessary, that the rule of faith should be declared by Christ and his Apostles, by Catholic Traditions, by General Councils, by the consent of Fathers, and the whole Christian world, and certainly, if the Popes Decrees & conclusions be that rule of faith, they ought to be confirmed by all those testimonies, since on his judgment both Councils, & Bishops do depend; but especially, since the error of the Pope is (adjudged) to be the error of the Universal Church.

Again, he that delivered what he thought was the Catholic doctrine of these times, touching the Popes Infallibility in general, tells us of another point at that time questionable, (viz.) Whether it was to be believed as an Article of faith, that the or that particular Pope were 〈◊〉 true Pope: This doctrine (saith he) I taught at Rome affirmatively, in the year 1585: but withal professeth, that many at that time thought otherwise. He that proclaimed it to the world, that the Popes definitive sentence in his chair, was the rule of Faith, withal professeth, that within these few years it was not resolved, whether this or that particular Pope might err or no. And as it was observed by a judicious and religious Gentleman, (for I shall gladly acknowledge anything that I received frō any man) this later question produced a new Quaere, viz If the Pope were not a true Pope, and Canonically elected, then that person which worshipped a Saint canonized by that Pope, commits flat Idolatry, by reason the Saint wants his right Canonization, for want of the Popes true and Canonical election. Many such doubts (said he) were moved touching this Rule of Faith, which neither the Jesuit was able to resolve, nor the Church had as yet determined. He that can but spell, and put these things together, would fear and tremble, to think he hath no better assurance of his salvation, then a doubtful, uncertain questionable and vrresolued way to guide him into the paths of saving knowledge. And that the world may know the Rule of Faith, (which ought generally to be received De Fide, of all the faithful) is altogether doubtful in the Roman church, I have summoned 12 of the Popes disciples to deliver their several opinions, concerning the Popes Infallibilitie; but how they concur in witnessing the truth of this Doctrine, I leave it to be judged.

1. Bellarmine] It is probable, that the Pope, not only as Pope cannot err, but as a private man, cannot fall into Heresy, or hold any obstinate opinion contrary to the Faith.

2. Albertus Pighius. ] The Judgment of the Pope is more certain then the Judgment of a General Council, or else the whole world.

3. Hosius. ] Be the wickedness of Popes never so great, it can never hinder, but that this promise of God shall ever be true; The Popes shall show thee the truth of Judgment.

4. Johannes de Turrecremata. ] It is better to rest upon the sentence of the Pope, which he delivers out of Judgment, then the opinions of whatsoever wise men in matters of Scripture: for even Caiaphas was a High Priest, and although he was wicked; yet he prophesied truly.

5. Sylvester Prierias] Whosoever leaneth not to the Doctrine of the Roman Church, and Bishop of Rome, as unto he Infallible rule of God (of which doctrine the holy Scripture hath taken force and authority) he is an heretic.

6. Cornelius Mus] I must ingenuously confess, I would give more credit to one Pope in matters of faith, then to a thousand Augustine's, Jerome's, or Gregory's, &c. For I believe and know, the chief Bishop in matters of faith cannot err, because the authority of the Church in determination of things belonging to faith, is resident in that Bishop; and so the error of that Bishop should come to be the error of the universal Church.

Thus the great Mountains were in labor, and at last appears Ridiculus Mus: This man cares neither for Fathers, nor Councils; he knows the Pope cannot err, and he is a man of experience: You may believe him, for he was a Preacher at twelve years old, (saith Sixtus Senensis: ) but there are six more of the Popes sworn servants; they are Legales homines, and crave audience, having the said power and jurisdiction with the rest, only they say they cannot flatter, they must and will speak the truth in this, howsoever the rest be divided from them; and first concerning the first of the second rank.

7. Alphonsus de Castro] We doubt not, whether one ma • may be a Pope and an heretic both together: for I believe there is none so shameless a flatterer of the Pope, that will grant him that prerogative, that he can never err, nor be deceived in expounding the scripture, seeing it is well known, that diverse Popes have been so palpably unlearned, that they have been utterly ignorant of their Grammar, and therefore how can they be able to expound the Scriptures?

8. Lyra. ] Hereby it appeareth, that the Church standeth not upon men, in consideration of their power or dignity Ecclesiastical, or Temporal: for many Princes and Popes have proved Apostate's, and strayed from the Faith.

9. Arboreus.] The Pope may err in Fai h; and he seemeth to me to be in a foul error that thinketh otherwise: surely they do but flatter the Bishop of Rome, that make him free from falling into Schism, or heresy.

10. Laurentius Valla] No man's dignity doth defend him from controulment: for Peter was not so defended, nor many others that were advanced to that degree, as Pope Marcellinus, in that he offered sacrifices unto Idols, and Pope Caelestinus, in that he agreed with the heretic Nestorius.

11. Gerson.] Everyone of what degree soever in the Church, although he be Pope himself, is compassed with infirmities, and subject unto error, and is in possibility of deceiving, and being deceived.

12. Erasmus. ] If it be true which some said, that the Bishop of Rome can never err Iudically, what need General Councils, why are men skillful in the Laws, and learned in Divinity, sent for to Councils? If he pronouncing cannot err, wherefor lieth there any Appeale from the Pope to a Council, or to the Pope himself being better informed? To what purposes are so many Universities troubled with handling questions of Faith, when truth may be had from his mouth? Nay, how cometh it to pass, that one Popes Decrees are found contrary to an other?

The learned Romanists are all vowed servants to the Pope; but they give not up their verdict concerning the Popes Infallibilitie, by reason they agree not in certain amongst themselves, and the reason as I conceive of this their disagreement, is the want of good evidence, and pregnant testimonies given to the Inquest in the Popes behalf: for it is observed by a Reverend

And it was likewise published & declared, within these two hundred years, by their own general and grand Council of Basil, that the universal Church did oftentimes withdraw her obedience from the Roman Bishops, as namely from Marcellinus, Anastasius, Liberius, John the twelfth, Benedict the ninth Benedict the thirteenth, and John the 23: and (there the reason is given) because it is certain, the Pope may err, and this (say they) we have read and seen by experience.

These things being advisedly heard and considered, I have again consulted with the Foreman of the Inquest, (who would have it piously to be believed, that the Pope cannot err:) what should become of those that yield obedience to the Pope, when he may err and teach false doctrine; or how shall a troubled mind learn the Law from his mouth, when he never preacheth? To this the Cardinal replies: It is not material whether you hear the Pope or no, when as there are Teachers in your own Parish, who may inform you. And thus from the Essentiall Church, to the Council, from the Council to the Consitory of Cardinals, from the Consitory to the Pope, from the Pope we are sent at last to the Bishop or Priest of the Parish; & this is Via Dubia, a doubtful and uncertain way, and this is Via Deuia, a wandering and By-way.

SECT. XXII. The Church, upon which the learned Romanists ground their Faith, is no other then the Pope: and the Church, upon which the unlearned Romanists do rely, is no other then their Parish Priest.

TOllet the Jesuit observing, that difference of opinions might breed some distraction in the Church, and scruples in the minds of the ignorant, resolves with what safety the Romish Proselytes may rely upon their Priests doctrine: If one believe (saith he) his Bishop or Prelate preach contrary to the Faith, thinking, that it is so believed by the Church, such a one shall not only not sin, but also in believing that falsehood, shall perform an act meritorious. The belief then of the Romish doctrine, doeth not consist altogether in the truth of it, but in the faith of the believer: for let it be true or false, if it be received with an affected ignorance, and a blind obedience, the party shall be safe, as it were by fire; that is, as they elegantly understand it, shall go through the fire of Purgatory to heaven.

Cardinal Cusanus, hath given his voice with Cardinal Tollet, that it is the safest and surest way to rely upon the Priest as Ruler of the people, without further inquiry of the truth: and thereupon he cries out with admiration, as if he would astonish his Disciples with the name of the Church: O how strong is the building of the Church▪ for no man can be deceived, no not by an evil Bishop, if thou say unto God, O Lord, I have obeyed thee in my Bishop; this shall suffice thee unto salvation: for thou canst not be deceived by thy obedience, that thou yieldest to the Bishop, whom the Church suffereth, although he command thee other things then he ought to do: for the Church presumeth his sentence to be good; which sentence if thou obey, thy reward shall be great. Obedience therefore without reason, is a full and perfect obedience, that is, when thou obeyest without inquiring of reason, as a horse is obedient to his Master.

The Bishop or Priest then is the man we must obey and believe (for his lips preserve knowledge, & his tongue will tell no lies,) but what if he fail in his doctrine? what if he err in his opinion? are we sure he doeth ever deliver the constant Tenet of his Church? Admit then Saint Bernard were alive; and if a poor ignorant soul should come unto him, and demand of him, whether he think it possible for a man to keep the Commandments; will he say, that a man may keep them, for the Church teacheth so, when as he himself confidently affirmeth; Therin thou shalt yield unto us that the Commandments neither have been fulfilled by any man in this life, nor indeed can be. Admit that Thomas Aquinas were alive, and one of his disciples should desire to be resolved, what worship to give an Image, would he tell him, it must be worshipped with Dulia, an inferior honor, when as himself protesteth, that the Image of Christ is to be honored with the same honor that Christ himself is? Admit that Cardinal Cajetan were alive, and one should desire to know whether the Books of Macabees were canonical Scriptures, would he teach they were Canonical, when his fellow Cano professeth, he was so far from teaching it, that he maintained the contrary? Look upon the grand & fundamental point of Transubstantiation, if a Romanist will consult with the Priests and Bishops of these late ages, it will appear, there could be no certainty for an ignorant lay man to build his faith upon the resolution of his Priest or Prelate. As for instance in this particular point: If a lay Papist had required satisfaction of Bishop Fisher, Whether the doctrine of Transubstantiation was grounded upon the authority of the Scripture; it is presumed, he would have answered according to his own writing: Non potest per vllam Scripturam probare: It cannot be proved by any (place of) Scripture. If he had appealed from the Bishop to a Court of Cardinals, Cardinal de Aliaco would have told him, The manner which supposeth the substance of bread to remain, is possible; neither is it contrary to reason, nor the authority of the Scriptures Card. Cajetan would have told him, That part which the Gospel hath not expressed, we have received expressly from the Church: viz. the conversion of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. Card. Bellarmine would have told him, It is not altogether improbable, that there is no express place of Scripture to prove it, and it may justly be doubted, whether the Text be clear enough to enforce it. Again, admit an ignorant lay man would require the judgment of particular Priests in former ages; Bertram a Priest would have told him: In respect of the substance of the creatures, look whatsoever they were before Consecration, they are even the same after. Peter Lombard and Aquinas would have told him, that the Sacrament of the Altar was a commemoratiue sacrifice, because it communicated the effects of the real killing of Christ. Scotus would have told him, Transubstantiation was not believed as a point of faith, before the Council of Lateran, (about 400 years ago. Durand would have told him, The material part of the consecrated bread was not converted. All these were Priests, and members of the Roman Church: they were Defenders of the Roman Faith in their times; they declared by their Writings and Instructions to the people, that doctrine which was altogether different, if not flatly opposite to the Tenet of the now Roman Church. And from hence it will follow, that either the Roman Church doth want that Unity in points of Faith, (which they so much magnify amongst themselves) or otherwise it is an unstable, and a doubtful way to rely upon the instructions of his Bishop or Priest for the assurance of his right belief. Moreover, that the Cardinals & Bishops maintained a different doctrine from their own Church, it will appear by the several confessions, & confutations of their own Churchmen. Touching Bertram, (Bellarmine saith) Paschasius Ratbertus living at that time, wrote a book against him, and confuted his error. Touching Peter Lombard and Aquinas, Bellarmine tells us, They were not careful of that which is now in question, viz. the daily renewed real sacrificing of Christ. Touching Scotus, their own Suarez tells us, he was to be corrected for his opinion of the Sacrament. Touching Durand, Bellarmine professeth, That saying of Durand is heretical, although he is no heretic, because he is ready to submit to the judgment of the Church. Thus for want of that sure rule of faith, which is squared by the Word of God, both Priests and people rest doubtful of the issue and their success in controversy, and if the Trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself unto the battle? (saith the Apostle.)

It is no difficult matter to run through all ages, and all points in difference betwixt us, and to show that many Priests and Bishops, who lived and died members in the Roman Church, taught different doctrine from the now Roman faith. This way therefore is certainly uncertain; and this was easily discovered by their Superiors, insomuch that Stapleton, by way of prevention, prescribeth this direction for the common people: They must not intend what is spoken, but attend to him that speaketh, for he is to be heard, and not judged. And because through such blind obedience, and implicit belief, it might be thought a poor lay man will not be able to render an account of his faith, the Rhemists proclaim it for sound and Catholic doctrine, that if an ignorant Papist be convented before the Commissionere for his Religion, he shall appeal only to the Roman Church, and his own Church shall sufficiently warrant his belief: He saith enough, and defendeth himself sufficiently, say they, when he answereth he is a Catholic man, and that he will live and die in that Faith, which the Catholic Church throughout all Christian Countries hath, and doeth teach, and that his Church can give a reason of all the things which they demand of him. How poor an Apology he makes for his Religion that saith, he is a Catholic, and thinks to be saved by another man's faith, who doeth not understand? Saint Peter who is pretended to be the Popes predecessor, taught the Catholics of former ages another lesson: Be ready (saith he) always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of that hope that is in you with meekness and fear.

But observe the policy of the Church of Rome, they pretend that Ignorance is the Mother of Devotion, and therefore (say they) it will be sufficient for the lay people to believe the Priest, and to rest upon the authority of the Church, and for that purpose, Bellarmine instructeth his Disciples, that the learned must labor, and search out the mysteries of Religion, but the ignorant may sit and take their ease: The oxen did plow and labor, (saith Gregory) and the asses fed by them: By the oxen (saith the Cardinal) are meant the learned Doctors of the Church, by the asses are meant the ignorant people, which out of simple belief rest satisfied in the understanding of their Superiors. I will not apply the Cardinals illustration, for I speak not this out of scorn and disgrace, but out of shame and pity, to see the poor ignorant soul, not only abused in the name, but in the nature of that thing, which concerns the salvation of his soul.

Cano their own Bishop of Canaries, professeth openly, that it was the custom of unlearned men of Saracens, of Pagans, of Heretics, to receive the blind and senseless opinions of their Sects, without judgment and examination. And Espenceus tells us, It was the Colliers faith, who being demanded what he believed, made answer, he believed what the Church believed, and the Church believed what he believed. Is not this the practice of the church of Rome at this day? Are they not fully persuaded, that without deep ignorance of the people, it is not possible for their Church to stand? do they not in this point particularly urge these & the like Scriptures▪ Obedience is better then sacrifice: Hear the Church: The Priests lips preserve knowledge, and the like: How fitly, may I say, prophetically doth S ^t . Jerome reflect upon the Priests of these latter times, wherein they chase the people from the Scriptures, and suffer them utterly to know nothing: These men (saith he) challenge unto themselves such authority, that whether they teach with the right hand or the left; whether they teach good things or bad; they will not have their disciples with reason to examine their sayings, but only for to follow them being their leaders. And certainly herein they much resemble the Jews, who as Lyra reporteth, had that conceit of their great Rabbies, in so much they made it their open profession, Whatsoever they say unto us, we must needs receive it; yea, although they tell us the right hand is the left. And this is the active authority the Bishop or Parish Priest doth exercise toward the people; and this is the passive obedience, with an implicit faith, the people submits unto the Priest. Give me leave therefore to speak unto the Roman Bishop, or Parish Priest in the words of S ^t Agustine the ancient Father: Vsque adeo me stultum putas &c. Doest thou think me such a fool, without reason rendered, I should believe what you would have me, and what you dislike, I should not believe? Shall I believe without judgment or reason? shall I not inquire, nor consider, what is, what may be, what is profitable, what is decent, what acceptable to God, what suitable to Nature, what agreeable to Truth?

Since then no human authority can be the Rule of faith, since there can be no certainty, no infallibility found in any particular Priest or Bishops, (for particular men may err,) I will conclude with that safe and infallible rule which S ^t . Chrysostom gave to the Christians of his time: Let us not have the opinions of many, but let us, search the things themselves: for if it be not absurd for us, not to believe and give credit to others in receiving of moneys; but that we will reckon and tell it after them; why do we, in matters of greater moment, simply and in good faith follow the opinions of other men, especially, seeing we have the most exact balance, square and rule of divine Scriptures for the avouching of any authority. I request therefore, and beseech you all, to leave & forsake what seemeth good to this or that (particular) man, and of these matters search ye all things by the Scriptures. And thus briefly I proceed from the doctrine of Papal Infallibility, unto the grand point of the Visibility of the Church.

SECT. XXIII. Eminent and perpetual Visibility is no certain Note of the true Church, but the contrary rather, as is proved by Instances from Adam to Christ.

THe Materials which hitherto have been brought, have been employed only to the laying the foundation of the Church, wherein I must confess I have been somewhat long, and yet not without reason: for we all know, that a good foundation being once laid, the whole frame stands the more sure. Now as Foundations are not very conspicuous till the building be reared higher: so likewise in succeeding Ages, when the whole building was coupled together, and became a glorious Temple in the Lord: yet, eminent and perpetual Visibility was no sure Note of the true Church, as shall appear both by particular instances, from the time of Adam to the coming of Christ, as also by the testimonies of learned Romanists, who in part were witnesses of a latencie and obscurity in their own Church.

I speak not this to decline the Visibility of the Church; for their own Joachim Abbot above (400) years since tells us, that The whole Congregation of Saints shall be hidden, for so shall the Elect of God being wise, be wise unto themselves: so that they shall not presume, to practice openly, because that darkness shall prevail: not that they shall leave to animate and exhort the faithful in secret, but because they dare not adventure to preach Public by: And Bonaventure another Schoolman, who lived in the Age following, gives the reason how such obscurity may befall the true Church, insomuch as it can hardly be discerned by the true members amongst themselves. The Church (saith he) may be hindered from our sight, three manner of ways; First, Propter defectum organi, for want of a fit organ, if the eyes of our body, or mind, be wanting: Secondly, Propter defectum voluntatis, for want of will; when our affections are so deprived, that we will not see it, though it be visible: Thirdly, Propter defectū luminis, for want of light: So in the time of Persecution, and Arianism it did not then visibly appear. Now if our Adversaries would reflect upon themselves, and examine their own thoughts, they should find that either their affections are wandering, or their will wanting, or their opinions forestalled, or else it would prove no such hard matter for them to discover an ouerspreading Schism in their own Church, with a long and grievous Persecution in ours, which caused this obscurity. This did Gregory de Valentia well perceive, and thereupon he advised his Proselytes to be wary and quick sighted, in discovering and finding out the true Church: For (saith he) when we say the Church is always conspicuous, this must not be taken, as though we thought this might at every season be alike easily discerned, for we know that sometimes it is tossed with the waves of Errors, Schisms, and Persecutions; that to such as are unskillful, and do not discreetly weigh the circumstances of things & times, it shall be very hard to be known. That this doctrine may the better appear, let us look back to the first Ages, and we shall see in what state the Church began, and how it continued in changes and alterations, and became more and less visible in all Ages, till the days of Christ and his Apostles.

Before the Law we find in Adam with whom the Church began, that being in Paradise full of the blessings of God, and having a Freewill to all good, lost at once both himself and it: And as the power of his will, and the faculties of his Understanding, were eclipsed by his fall, in not regarding the voice of God, So did his fall foretell, that the best Churces in their most flourishing State, had a possibility of falling into darkness and obscurity, if they neglected the Word of GOD. Now we must know, as this number was small at the beginning, so it was subject to Persecution: The Church (saith Agustine) was sometimes only in Abel, and he was slain by his wicked brother Kayne; sometimes it was solely in Enoch, and he was translated from the ungodly; sometimes it was in the sole house of Noah, and he swomme in the waves; sometimes in Abraham, and his family, and he suffered of the wicked; sometimes it remained in sole Lot and his house, and he was vexed by the Sodomites.

Again, the Church was under a cloud when Tobias went alone to Jerusalem and served God, and all the rest worshipped the Calf in Naphtali. The Church doubtless was under a cloud in the time of Ahaz & Manasseh, when those Kings made the Temple to be shut up, when Uriah the High Priest placed a a Pagan Altar in the Temple. The Church doubtless was under a cloud when the good King Josiah called for a Reformation, and made a covenant to perform the words which were found in the House of the Lord, so that there was many times a cloud of errors that darkened the true Church, when there wanted a cloud of witnesses to testify her truth.

In the kingdom of Israel under Ahab, the greatest number were Idolaters. In Jeremiah's time the Priests and Prophets, which were the chief in authority, were false teachers, & yet (like the Romanists in these days) they cried out, The Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord. In the time of Elias, there was a general Apostasy in the Church of Israel, insomuch that he being a Prophet could not discern it: so that a visible and illustrious Church may appear to be the true Church, when she beareth but the visor, and title of a true Church, & the Church of God may so lie hid, that the principal members, yea and eminent Pastors themselves may be ignorant where to find it: for God hath not tied his Church to a visible company, that are known to all to be true professors at all times, neither hath he commanded a Register to be kept of their names, that he might call the Church after their names: for if any should call for the names of professors in all ages; nay, if any one should demand but the name of any one of those seven thousand which never bowed to Baal, and were unknown to the Prophet himself, it would seem a mystery unsearchable, and a man past finding out.

Neither was this backsliding, or falling away in the Church caused for want of God's promises, for they were gracious & far exceeding those promises to the Church of Rome. The Prophet tells us, that the glory of God did sit between the Cherubims in the Sanctuary, and God had promised that there should be his seat, and yet the Priests did corrupt it with superstition, & God left the place without any Holiness. He extends his promises further: I will walk (saith he) in the midst of you, I will have my Tabernacle amongst you forever; my name shall be in Jerusalem, I have sanctified it that my name may be there forever: yet of this Church, to which so many promises were annexed, the Prophet complains: The watchmen are become blind, they do no good, they are dumb dogs, they are shopheards that cannot understand. Now as you see the Extent and promises of his Church were large, so you must know, they were all always annexed to a condition: If you be my people, if you serve me, if you walk in my commandments, if you ask counsel at my mouth; agreeable to the answer of the Prophet Osea: Because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will reject thee, that thou shalt be no Priest to me; seeing thou hast forgotten the Law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.

Now as you have heard the Law was perished from the Priests, and Counsel frō the Ancients, (as if there had been a second deluge of People and Pastors:) so now the earth shall bring forth her increase, that is, (as Jerome expounds it) the blessed Virgin, which comes of the earth, shall bring forth the blessed fruit of her sanctified womb, that what was lost by the first Adam, might be repaired by the second: and surely it was high time to rectify the ancient Doctrine; (for the leaven of the Pharisees had almost soured the whole lump:) neither doth Christ defer the time by reason of his minority: for at 12 years old he disputeth with the great Rabbies in their Synagogues; but observe what entertainment they gave him: He calleth for a reformation of life and doctrine: they replied, he would destroy the Temple; he urgeth and layeth open to them the Scriptures; they plead their own Traditions; he discovers & shows unto them their false glosses; they answer, he had a Devil: he preached to them of the kingdom of heaven, they accuse him for speaking against the Majesty of Caesar: yet this Church of Jerusalem, if you regard Antiquity, they were descended from Abraham; if Calling, they were Priests and Scribes; if Place, their Temple was the LORD'S House; if Councils, they had solemn Assemblies and meetings: but if I should demand, where or in whom was the true Church before Christ's coming, (as our adversaries question ours before Luther's ) they may answer, the Jews had a visible Church in regard of God's promises; but I dare promise for them, they can give us the names of a very small number.

Compare then the church of Jerusalem, & the Church of Rome together; the Church of Jerusalem had her Priests, and Caiaphas the High Priest, and Sacrifices, and Councils, and a Temple, and Traditions, and Moses Chair, and the Oracles of God: The Church of Rome hath her Priests, her Sacrifice of the Mass, her Caiaphas, the Pope that is guided by the Spirit of prophecy; she hath her Temple, Traditions, and Peters Chair; and last of all, (because it is least with her in request) she hath the Gospel of Christ. Now when we cal upon the Church for a reformation of doctrine, they answer, Their Church is Catholic, & cannot err: we lay before them the word of God for a Rule to examine their Doctrine: they answer, the Word is not sufficient without the help of their Traditions: we show them their false glosses in Exposition of the Scriptures, they answer, that it is the right of their Church to judge of the true sense of the Scriptures. But if we shall demand of them where, or by whom all their twelve new Articles, published within the memory of man (by Pope Pius the 4,) were received and believed as Articles of Faith before the Council of Trent, I am more then confident, they shall not find so many professors of that Faith and doctrine at Luther's coming, as there were true believers in the Church of Jerusalem at Christ's coming. And for the better manifestation of this Tenet, I will begin from the time of Christ and his Apostles, and briefly relate the courses, and changes, the Visibility and obscurity, the alteration and long wished for Reformation of the Roman Faith and Doctrine in all ages, till the days of Luther.

SECT. XXIIII. The latencie and obscurity of the true Church, is proved by pregnant testimonies of such who complained of corruptions and abuses, and withal, desired a Reformation in all ages, from the time of Christ and his Apostles, to the days of Luther.

IN the First age, the Apostle S ^t . Paul gives us to understand, that the Mystery of iniquity began to work. And S ^t . John tells us of dangerous Heretics in his time, saying, They went out from us, but they were not of us. Now, as Iniquity did closely work, so likewise Error began to spread it self; insomuch, as both those who were called, and those also who were chosen by Christ, did err grievously, both in manners and doctrine; and through their fall, followed a latencie and obscurity in the true Church. Judas erred in Manners being called, when through couetounes he betrayed Christ: The Apostles erred in Manners, being chosen, whē they forsook Christ. Nay more, the Elect Apostles erred in Doctrine, when they thought the Kingdom of Christ to be earthly and not heavenly: for When they were come together they asked of him, saying, Lord wilt thou at this time restore again the Kingdom to Israel? They did Imagine his Kingdom to be like the Kingdoms of this world, presently to come, not after to be looked for; proper to Israel, not common to all Nations by virtue of the Promises: Nay more, when they had received the Holy Ghost in a greater measure from heaven, Peter (saith the Text) went not the right way to the Gospel; John would have worshiped an Angel once or twice: The Apostles and Brethren who were in Judea, thought that the Word of God was not to be Preached to the Gentiles. These Examples do sufficienty witness, that the Elect and Chosen of God may take a fall, but fall away they cannot, and their errors in doctrine and manners foretell a possibility of failing, and consequently, an obscurity in the true Church: and hereupon their own Panormitan concludes: It is possible that the faith of Christ may remain in one alone, and so it is true to say, Faith failed not in the Church, this thing appeared in Christ's passion, for then Faith remained only in the blessed Virgin: And with him consenteth Nicholaus Clemangis, The Church (saith he) may by God's grac • main in a woman alone, as it is reported to have remained in the blessed Virgin, at the time of Christ's Passion. Thus in the College of Christ there were but twelve, and scarce twelve; in the Council among the Jews, there was but one Iosepth of Arimathea, that stood for Christ: there was but one Gamaliel in the Council of the Pharisees that stood for the Apostles: So that the number of true believers was but small, which did visibly appear, even at that time when the Church was most glorious, and therefore Eminent and perpetual visibility is no certain Note of the true Church.

In t •• second Age, Egesippus tells us, The Church remained a pure Virgin unto Traians time, which was 110 years after Christ: for (saith he) such as indeauored to corrupt the perfect Rule, and sound Preaching of the Word, if there were any such, did hide themselves in secret and obscure places: but after the sacred company of the Apostles was come to an end, and that the generation was wholly spent, which by special favor had heard with their ears the heavenly wisdom of the Son of God, then the conspiracy of detestable error, through the deceit of such as delivered strange doctrine, took rooting; and because that none of the Apostles suruiued, they published boldly with all might possible, the doctrine of falsehood, and impugned the manifest and known truth.

In the third Age, there arose a great contention about the keeping of Easter, when as Victor Bishop of Rome went about to Excommunicate all the Churches of Asia, from their Cōmunion, as not savoring aright. And at this time the heresy of Artemon, (who affirmed Christ to be a mere man) daily increased. Those heretics (saith Eusebius) were many, and they corrupted the holy and ancient Scriptures, without any reverence; they rejected the Canon of the ancient Faith, they were ignorant of Christ, not searching what the holy Scriptures affirmed. And S ^t . Cyprian makes a grievous complaint of the Apostasy in his time from the Christian Faith, as appears by diverse passages in his book De Lapsis.

In the fourth Age, Eusebius testifies as an eye witness: We saw the Church overwhelmed to the ground, yea the very foundations themselves digged up, the holy and sacred Scriptures burnt to ashes in the open Market place, the Pastors of Churches, some shamefully hid themselves here and there, some others were ignominiously taken and derided of their enemies; and thus it was commanded by Proclamation, by the Emperor Dioclesian, the Churches should be razed to the ground, the holy Scriptures should be abolished, and the Pastors throughout all Parishes should be imprisoned. Here we see the Church was driven into straights and corners, till the time of Constantine the Great, the first Christian Emperor, about 300 years after Christ; but you shall likewise observe, that no sooner did this good Emperor appear as an eminent part of the visible Church, but Arius the grand Heretic sowed his wicked Heresies, which Like a Canker so spread it self, that the Ship of the Church (saith Jerome) was almost suncke, and the whole world groaned and wondered at it self, that it was become Arian. And with this holy Father agreeth the complaint of Vincencius Lyrinensis, The poison of the Arians did not infect a little portion, but in a manner the whole world; insomuch that all the Latin Bishops, partly by force, and partly by cunning were entrapped, and had a kind of myst cast before their eyes. And when the Arians did vaunt of the multitude of believers, as if Amplitude and Splendor had been certain marks of the true Church. Gregory Nazianzen makes this Quaere: Where are those men which define the Church by a multitude, and despise the little flock? And as touching the perpetual and eminent visibility of the church, it was so far from his knowledge, that he professeth, by reason of the scarcity of true believers in his Church, They were often termed the Ark of Noah, as those who only were escaped drowning in the flood. In like manner, when Constantius an Arian Emperor, had objected the multitude of his Arian side, and the paucity of Catholic Professors on the other, Pope Liberius returneth the Emperor this answer: It mattereth not whether the true professors be more or fewer, for the Church of the Jews was once reduced to the number of three. Now there is no man will deny, but there were many excellent and famous lights of the Church in this Age, yet by reason of Persecutions, it was so much darkened and obscured, that the holy Father Athanasius (who had a fellow-feeling of the persecuted members in the Church) puts the Question and resolves it. What Church doth now freely serve Christ? For if it be godly, it is exposed to dangers, if there be in many places, faithful servants of Christ, (as in all places there be many) they, like the great Prophet Elias, are secret and hide themselves in dens and caves of the earth, or wandering up and down remain in the wilderness. And without doubt, the latencie and obscurity of the true Church was such, that S ^t . Hillarie professeth, at that time it was not to be sought in houses, I rather reckon (saith he) hills, and woods, and prisons, to be places of more safety, for in those, either the Prophets abiding of their own accord, or forced thither by violence, prophesy by the Spirit of God. And from these few instances, it may plainly appear, that eminent and perpetual Visibility is no sure and certain Caracter of the true Church.

In the fifth Age, S ^t . Agustine tells, the Church was like a City upon a Hill, but that City upon the hill (saith he) was the sheep which was lost and went astray: and the shepherd is the hill, and the Sheep upon his shoulders, is the City upon the hill. And thus the true menbers of the Church may wander like stray sheep, till the Shepherd find them, and bring them home to the company of the faithful. Moreover, he that termed the Church, a City upon a hill, in his time well understood, that it was not visible at all times, that is to say, in a great mist, or in the night time: yea, on the contrary he tells us, The Church shall be sometimes obscured, and the clouds of offense may shadow it. Somtimes it shall not appear, by reason of the immeasurable rage of ungodly persecutors. Sometimes, it is like the Moon, and may be hid, yea so obscured, that the members thereof shall not know one an other. And howsoever in S ^t Augustine's time the Church was very glorious and flourishing, yet (under correction of better judgments) I do conceive he did extol the visibility of the Church, because the Donatists at that time did appropriate the Church wholly to their own Faction, excluding all other Churches but their own in the South of Afric. For the truth is, by reason of the multitude of Heretics at that time prevailing, it could not choose but be much darkened and obscured, when as himself makes mention of fourscore and eight several heresies in the Church. Besides, both Agustine and Chrysostom, who were living in this age, tell us, That the Heretics did so abound in multitude, and they had such outward marks of the truth in Traditions, in Fathers, in Councils, in Miracles, under the very name and Title of the Catholic Church, in outward show and semblance of the true Church, that there was no way left to find the true Church, but only by the Scriptures. And Saint Chrysostom alluding to the desolation in the Temple in the latter days, adviseth his profelytes, to fly to the mountains of the Scriptures. And as touching the Discipline of the Church, he complains, that She was like a woman which had quite lost her modesty, and did bear certain badges and tokens of her former felicity; and being utterly bereft of her treasure, kept the empty caskets and boxes of the precious things she had before. And although in this age the Church (since the Apostles time) was most flourishing, yet it was not so conspicuous as any earthly Kingdom, (as Bellarmine would have it:) for at this time S ^t . Jerome likewise complained of an Heretical tempest rising in the countries of the East, carried a ship of blasphemies into the haven of Rome,— and unclean feet did mingle with mud, the most pure fountain of the Roman faith: yea he tells us further, The faith of the Apostles was violated in most things, the Priests and people were drawn into the same consent, and the Bishop of Rome was abused by simplicity, and Marcella, a poor widow did first openly resist it. And this may briefly serve, to show that in the first and best ages, eminent and perpetual Visibility was no sure and certain note of the true Church.

In the sixth Age, Pope Vigilius secretly favored Seuerus and Anthemius, two Heretics, who refused the faith established in the great Council of Chalcedon. Liberatus, who was living at the same time, gives us to understand of his writing to the Heretics in this manner: I signify to you, that I have held, and do hold the very same faith which you also do hold. No man must know that I write these things unto you: but your wisdom must think it best, to have me in suspicion before all others, that I may with more ease, work and bring that to pass which I have begun. This Vigilius (if we may believe their own Pontifical) was a false witness against his predecessor Pope Syluerius; he sought undue means to remove him, and to place himself; he kept him in prison, and sterued him for hunger, he gave a great sum of money to procure the Popedom to himself. He killed his own Notary, he killed a young man, being a widows son; and of these and other crimes being accused before the Emperor, he caused him to be drawn by the neck round about the City of Constantinople, and cast into prison, where he was fed with bread and water. And hence we may observe, that if the Pope of Rome be the Virtuall and total Church, if he be that Rule of Faith, upon whose infallibility the whole Christian world must rely in matters of belief, (as the Church of Rome teacheth) then certainly the Church at this time was driven into great straights, when as the Head of the Church, or rather the total Church fell into dangerous heresy; and consequently, eminent and perpetual Visibility can be no sure Note of the true Church. But as it was rightly observed by Isidorus Pleasitota, the declination of the true Church from the Apostles time, was caused through the distemperature of the Head; and thereupon he makes this ingenuous confession: In the days of the Apostles, and afterwards, when the Church flourished, and labored of no disease, the divine Graces of God went as it were in a ring round about it: — but afterward it grew diseased, and was troubled with faction, then all those things fled away, not through his carelessness and negligence that first enriched her, but through their naughtiness that governed not things as they should have done.

In the seventh Age, Johannes de Molinis tells us, from the time of Heraclius the Emperor, after the year 600, the day inclined towards the evening, and the Church having been in an eclipse set in the West, and became almost deficient. And Gregory himself complains, that the Ship of the Church was in danger of shipwreck. Nay more; The Devil (saith he) so strongly fasteneth his teeth in the necessary members of the Church, that unless by God's grace the provident company of Bishops join together, he will soon destroy the whole flock of Christ. Flens dico, gemens denuntio, I speak it with tears, I tell it with sighs of heart, seeing the Order of Priesthood is fallen within, it cannot now stand long without. The chief reason of this complaint was caused by John Bishop of Constantinople, who at this time assumed the Title of Universal Bishop; and as new Lord's are commonly said to make new Laws, so from and after this time, many alterations succeeded in Faith and Manners, both in Head and members of the same house.

Thus we have heard in the first age, The mystery of iniquity began to work: In the second, there was a conspiracy against the Truth: In the third, Heretics arose and assaulted her: In the fourth, the Church was darkened by the multitude of Heresies: In the fifth, she was most flourishing in her members, but known only by the Scriptures: In the sixth, the Head of the Church was divided by heresy from the body: In the seventh, there was a declination towards the West, and consequently there followed a darkness and obscurity, more or less in succeeding ages.

Now as you have heard complaints against heretics and persecutors that invaded the ancient Church in her first & best ages: so likewise you shall observe, there followed corruptions and errors in Doctrine and Discipline, whereby Obscuritie became the proper mark of the true Church almost in all ages, till the days of Luther.

In the eight Age, Paulus Diaconus calls to the Christians of that time, to awake and listen unto him: for, (saith he) You have buried in contempt and oblivion the word of God, you have made the Temple a den of thieves, and instead of sweet melody, you resound blasphemies against God himself; and therefore very shortly the universal Catholic City will fall to ground. And Venerable Bede calls to them of his time, to behold the lamentable estate of the Church: Neither (saith he) let them behold it without tears, which is worthy to be lamented, in that it is grown worse and worse, or to speak more favorably, it is at least fallen into great infirmities And Charles the Great makes this general complaint touching the doctrine and Doctors of the Church: The Priests laying aside all sound and wholesome doctrine, and little regarding that of the Apostle, (If an Angel preach other doctrine, let him be accursed) they transgress the commandments of the Fathers, and bring into the Church such doctrine as was never known to Christ and his Apostles.

In the ninth Age, Arnulphus Bishop of Orleans, an eye witness of those times, professed openly: There is made a departure, not only of Nations, but of Churches, the Man of Sin now begins to be discovered, Religion is overthrown, and the service of God is contemned by the chief Priests themselves: and that which is more, Rome it self, now almost left alone, is departed from her self.

In the tenth Age, Christ (saith Baronius) lay asleep in the Ship of the Church; and which is worse, there was not any found amongst his disciples, who awaked our Lord, all of them being in a snorting sleep. It was the age next to that, wherein the Devil was let loose, That unhappy age (saith Genebrard) which was exhausted both of men for wit and learning, and of worthy Princes and Bishops. In this time, saith Wernerus, Christian faith began much to decline from her first virilitie, when as in many Christian provinces, neither the Sacraments, nor Ecclesiastical Rites were observed. And Joachim Abbot, complaineth, that the Latin Church was another Fig tree dried up, which did bear naught else but temporal leaves, and bid her self under the Title of the Church, to the shame of the Pope and his Sea.

In the eleventh Age, Who will let me see the Church before I die (saith Bernard) as in the days of old, when the Apostles did cast forth their Nets, not to take silver and gold; but to take souls: There creepeth (saith he) an ugly Rott, at this present, through the whole body of the Church, yea, the wound of the Church is inward, and past recovery. And a Canonized Saint of the Romish Church, tells them of that Age, The Church of Rome which of long time did revolt from Christ secretly, was near revolting from him openly. And in the Rain of Henry the first, The Church of Leodium sends forth this complaint: In time past I was wont to Interpret, that Peter by Babylon did signify Rome, because at that time it was confused with Idolatry and filthiness, but now my sorrow doth interpret unto me, that Peter calling the Church together in Babylon, foresaw by the Spirit of Prophecy, that confusion of dissention wherewith the Church at this day is rent in pieces. And saith Sigebert, All good men and just, and honest, and ingenious men, held that the Kingdom of Antichrist was then begun, because they saw the accomplishment of those things which our Savior had so long time foretold.

In the twelfe Age, Honorius of Authun in France openly cries out; Turn thee to the Citizens of Babylon, and see what they are, ascend to the top of the Mountain, from whence thou mayest behold all the buildings of that damned City: consider the principal persons there, and thou shalt find the Sea of the Beast: In the Clergy thou shalt find the Beasts Tent, for they neglect the service of God, pollute his Priesthood, seduce his people, reject all the Scriptures which belong unto Salvation. And Matthew Paris describeth the state of the Church of England under Gregory and Innocent: In those days Faith waxed cold, and scarcely seemed to sparkle, being almost brought to ashes, Religion is become base and vile, and the Daughter of Zion is a bold faced Harlot without shame. He further complains, that the Monks and Friars of that Age did wholly neglect the Preaching of God's Word, and for that cause he pretends there was a devised Epistle sent from Hell to the holy Fraternities, Wherein Satan and all the company of Hell, did s nd thanks to the whole Ecclesiastical Order, that whereas in nothing they were wanting to their own pleasures, they suffered by their neglect of Preaching, such a number of souls under them to go to hell, as no Ages past had seen the like. And Robertus Gallus, reputed a famous Preacher in those times, amongst certain visions of his own, shows us, That in those days there was scarce any blood or life remaining in the members of the Church, when as the Doctrine which is the soul and life of the Church, was altered and decayed: I did pray (saith he) on my knees, with my face towards heaven, near to the Altar at S ^t . James at Paris, on the right hand, and I saw in the air before me the body of the only high Priest, clad in white Silken robes, and his back was towards the East with his hands lifted up towards the West, as Priests usually stand while they say Mass, I did not see his head, and beholding wishly, whether he were altogether without a head or no, I saw his head lean, and withered, as if it had been all of wood; and the Spirit of the Lord said, this signifieth the state of the Roman Church.

In the thirteenth Age, Grosted Bishop of Lincoln, complained of many errors in the Church, and sought for a reformation, and for that cause, we may read (in Matthew Paris ) the Pope resolved to Excommunicate and accurse him: but this Bishop withstood the Popes Bulls, and for his courage in that good cause, was termed Romanorum malleus, the Hammer of the Roman Church; neither did he oppose those abuses alone, but the Cardinals at that time withstood the Pope in his behalf, & affirmed, that the things wherewith he charged the Pope, were most true, and thereupon they answered the Pope, it was not safe for him so to proceed, lest a tumult should follow, especially (say they) seeing it is known, there must be a departure from us, and a forsaking of the Roman See. Petrarch who well understood the Doctrine of those times, in his Latin Epistles which are full of wisdom and gravity, tells them: Noui expertus, &c. I speak of my knowledge, in the Pope and his followers there is neither Faith, godliness, nor Truth; the Popes Chair is the Chair of lying, that is, a defection, a revolt, an apostasy of people which under the Standard of Christ rebel against Christ, and fight for Satan, they esteem the Gospel for a Fable, and the promises of the life to come for lies. About the same time, Michael Cecenas General of the Order of Franciscans, affirming the different opinions of different Members in the same Church, proclaimeth, There were two Churches, the one of the wicked sort flourishing, in which the Pope reigned; the other, of godly and good men, and this Church he presecuted.

In the fourteenth Age, Occam a learned Schoolman makes this complaint: Alas the time, of which the blessed Apostle prophesied, when men will not suffer wholesome doctrine, &c. This Prophecy is altogether fulfilled in our days: for behold, there are many that pervert the holy Scriptures, deny the sayings of the holy Fathers, reject the Canon of the Church, molest, persecute and bring into bondage, and without mercy torment and afflict even unto death, them that defend the truth: so that we may rightly say of our times, that which Daniel long since pronounced, Iniquity is gone from Babylon, from the Elders and Judges which seemed to govern and rule the people: for many that should be Pillars in the Church of God, and defend the truth even unto blood, cast themselves headlong into the pit of Heresies.

In the fifteenth Age, Gerson the Chancellor of Paris bids you open your eyes, and see if the Houses of Nuns be not Stews of filthy Harlots, if the consecrated Monasteries be not Fairs, Markets, and Inns; Cathedral Churches, dens of thieves, Priests under pretence of mayds, keep harlots: consider whether so great variety of pictures and Images be fit, and whether it occasion not Idolatry in the simple: look upon the number and variety of religious Orders, the Canonizing of new Saints, though there be too many already, as Bridget of Swetia, Charles of Britain; the feasts of new Saints more religiously kept, then those of the blessed Apostles: inquire if there be not Apocryphal Scriptures, and prayers in process of time, either of purpose, or of ignorance brought into the Church, to the great hurt of the Christian Faith: consider the diversity of opinions, as the conception of Marie, & sundry other things. Again, in his Consolatory tract of Rectifying the Heart, amongst many other considerations, he complaineth, There is intolerable superstition in the worshipping of Saints, innumerable observations without all ground of reason, vain credulity, in believing things concerning the Saints report in their uncertain Legend of their lives, superstitious opinions of obtaining pardon and remission of sins, by saying so many Pater nosters in such a Church before such an Image, as if i • the Scriptures and authentical writings of holy men, there were not sufficient direction for all acts of Piety and Devotion, without these frivolous addititions: nay, which is worse, see if these observations in many countries and kingdoms of the world, be not more urged then the Laws of God, even as we shall find in the Decrees and Decretals, a Monk more severely punished for going without his Cowle, then committing Adultery or Sacrilege, and more grievously corrected in going against one of the Popes Decrees, then offending against the divine precepts, and the Gospel of Christ. This learned Author was Director of the Council of Constance, and there complained of 75 exorbitant abuses and errors that were crept into the Roman Church, but found no amendment; nay more (saith he) We must not look for a Reformation in things that concern Faith and Religion, or doctrine, or manners, except the Secular powers do seriously take it in hand. Experto creed, Believe me in what I say, I have tried it, dispute no more of it, speak not to deafness it self, thou shalt never be heard. Lastly, when he found there was little hope of reducing Religion to the former purity of the Primitive Church in Christ's time, yet he wished at least a restoring of the ancient Faith in the Fathers time; and (saith he) If the Church may not be reformed according to the state • it was in the time of Christ and his Apostles, yet at least it should be brought to the state it was in the time of Sylvester, which was about 300 years after Christ. To let pass the observation of Tho. Walsingham, that in those days it was the common argument in every man's mouth: He is a Friar, Ergo a liar. At this time Aluarez Pelagius wrote a Book De Planctu Ecclesiae, of the Churches complaint, wherein he tells us, The Church which in her Primitive state was adorned of her Spouse with many royal graces, was clouded and eclipsed with the black mists of ignorance, iniquity and error. In like manner, Nicholaus Clemangis, Archdeacon of Baieux, wrote a Book of the corrupt estate of the Church, wherein he complains, The study of Divinity was made a mocking stock▪ and which was most monstrous for the Popes themselves, they preferred their own Traditions far before the Cōmaundements of God. What doest thou think (saith he) of the prophecy of the Revelation of S ^t . John: doest thou not think, that in some sort it belongs to thee; thou art not grown so shameless as to deny it: consider therefore of it, and read the damnation of the Great Whore, sitting upon many waters, there contemplate thy worthy acts, and thy future fortune. Cardinal Cameracensis wrote a Book De Squaloribus Romanae Ecclesiae, touching the Deformitie of the Roman Church, (which book is to be seen in the Library at Westminster ) wherein amongst many other complaints touching the Roman Church, he tells us, That Pagan abuses, and diabolical superstitions were so many at Rome, that they could not well be imagined: but (saith he) as there were seven thousand which never bowed to Baal, so it is to be hoped, that there are some who desire the Churches Reformation: and accordingly it happened: for Pope Alexander the Fift, in this age, and in the year 1411, promised solemnly to intend a Reformation; and for that purpose to assemble the most learned of all nations, and at the Council of Senes, 1423, the proposition of Reformation was revived, but withal, it was adiourned de die in diem, and the Reformation is not yet come.

In the sixteenth Age, Hieronymus Sauanarola, a Dominican by Profession, and for his Doctrine, and sanctity of life, termed a Prophet, was examined with tortures (saith Guicciardine ) for inueying against the Clergy, and Court of Rome, Upon which examination a Proces was publishd to this purpose, that he was not moved thereunto out of any evil intent, but this one thing he only respected, that by his means a General Council might be called, wherein the corrupt manners of the Clergy might be reformed, and the degenerate state of the Roman Church (as far forth as was possible) might be reduced to the likeness of that it was in the Apostles time, or those that were nearest unto them: and if he could bring so great and so profitable a work to effect, he would think it a far greater glory then to obtain the Popedom it self. And Philip de Comines gives us likewise to understand, that he told the French King, Charles the eight, He should have great prosperity in his voyage into Italy, and that God would give the sword into his hand; & all this, to the ende he should reform the corrupt state of the Church, which if he did not perform, he should return home again with dishonor, and God would reserve the honor of his work to some other, and so (saith he) it fell out. This holy man thirsted for a Reformation, He complained against their Communion in one kind, against Justification by Works, against the manifold Traditions and Constitutions of their Church, against the Popes Supremacy; and withal, proclaimed that the Roman Church taught not the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles, and this was counted to him for Heresy, and for this he was first hanged, and then burnt.

About this time, there was likewise written by Doctor Vicelius a Book called Methodus Concordiae Ecclesiasticae: Wherein he complains also, of Traditions contrary to the word of God, he calls for the translation of the Bible, and wished the Service were delivered in a known tongue, he complained of the worship of Images, of Prayers to Saints, of Purgatory as a doubtful opinion, he wished that Priests and people should rather marry, then live loosely as they do: and for these, and the like Articles, wherein he desired a Reformation: his Book is condemned inter libros Prohibitos, among the Books prohibited, & certainly the errors both in Doctrine and Discipline, were grown to that height, insomuch as Erasmus professeth, it was commonly argued in the Schools: Whether the Pope might not abrogate that which was decreed in the Apostles Writings, Whether he might ordain anything contrary to the Doctrine of the Gospel, Whether he might create a new Article of the Creed, Whether he had greater power then Peter, or equal, Whether he might command Angels, and take away Purgatory 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 altogether, Whether he were a mere man, or God, or participat of both natures with Christ, Whether he were more merciful then Christ was, seeing it is not read that Christ called any man out of the pains of Purgatory. Six hundred things (saith he) of that sort were disputed and published in great volumes, by great Divines, especially famous for profession of Religion, and these things in the Schools of Divinity were seriously handled, And without doubt, abuses were grown so exorbitant in the Church; that Machiavelli Protested, The Kingdom of the Clergy had been long since at an end, if the reputation and reverence towards the poverty of Friars had not borne out the scandal of the Bishops and Prelates.

Amidst these manifold errors and corruptions in the Church, arose Martin Luther, and desired a Reformation, as his predecessors had done, and at that time things were in so bad estate (saith Guicciardine) that the blood of Christ was profaned, the power of the keys was made contemptible, and the redemption of souls out of Purgatory, was set at a stake at dice, by the Pardon sellers, to be played for. This was so notorious, and visible to the world, that by the testimony of their own Historian, there were that year many meetings at Rome, to consult what was best to be done. The more wise and moderate sort wished the Pope to reform things apparently amiss, and not to prosecute Luther▪ This reformation was long before wished for: (as we see by the complainants in their own Church,) neither did Luther (as some pretend) oppose the errors of the Roman Church out of any prepensed malice: for We plainly and expressedly profess (saith he) as our Books do witness, that if they would not contstrain us to Articles openly impious and blasphemous, we would defend them in other things.

Neither came Luther alone (saith Alphonsus) such is the unhappiness of this age, but guarded with a great troop of Heretics, who seemed to look for him, that afterwards they might fight under his banner: for presently Philip Melancthon, Faber, Capeto, Lambertus, Conradus, Pelican, Andreas, Osiander, Martin Bucer, entered their names in his Book, and many other in process of time, in great numbers, inserted themselves into his family. And as it is observed by their learned Cassander, the Church Doctrine and discipline was so far out of order at his coming, and before, that many learned Writers published and declared their long wished for Reformation of the Church.

Thus briefly in the Apostles times you have seen the glorious rising of the Sun; in the ages following, the Sun at highest: from after 600 years, you have seen the Sun towards setting. In the first age she was like the Moon in the first quarter, and daily increasing: in the ages following she was in the full, in succeeding ages she was in the wane. In the first age, she was like the Star that appeared in the East, and guided the Wisemen; in the ages following, the Fathers were the fixed stars, and gave light in the midst of Heresies; in the latter ages there were Stellae erraticae, wandering stars that fell from heaven, such as S ^t . John speaks of, Priests and professors, that left their faith, (their first habitation.) And thus we see there is one glory of the Sun, another of the Moon, another of the Stars, and to all these the Church is rightly compared by Saint Agustine: The Church is the Sun, and the Moon, and the Stars; and as the Sun shall be darkened, and the Moon not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven: so the Church shall not appear, by reason of persecution, and worldly security: then the power of heaven shall be moved, and they that seem to shine in grace, shall fall, and those that are most strong in faith, shall be troubled.

These things premised, we may rightly infer for a conclusion of this point, that there was always a remnant of true believers in the bosom of the Roman Church, who resisted the Papacie, and noted the abuses: neither were they ignorant lay men, or an illitterate sort of Priests, but they were Bishops, & Cardinals, and learned Pastors, that complained of the latencie and obscurity of the true Church: they longed for a Reformation in Doctrine, and Discipline, they wished that the true Religion might be restored to her first Integrity, the Church to her ancient liberty, her Faith and Doctrine to the Primitive sincerity; and for this cause, a continual voice and lamentation was made by many of her children, and she would not be comforted, because they were not such as she first bred them. From these and the like testimonies, (who constantly and continually wished a Reformation in Faith and Manners) we may certainly conclude, that eminent and perpetual Visibility is no certain Note of the true Church.

I proceed in the next place, to show that there was a kind of necessity, for the latencie & obscurity of the true Church, especially in the later ages, because it was foretold by Christ and his Apostles in the first Age.

SECT. XXV. The aforenamed corruptions, and most remarkable declination of the Church of Rome in the later ages, was foretold by Christ and his Apostles in the first Age.

AS the complainants have made known unto us, that there was an Apostasy, a falling away from the truth in the later ages, so likewise you shall observe, that they told nothing of the defection in the Church, which was not foretold by Christ and his Apostles, at that time, when the Mystery of Iniquity began to work; whereby you shall see, the one foretells, the other answers; the Apostles spake of errors and heresies that were to come; the complainants tell you of errors and heresies, that in their days were come, vt impleretur, that whatsoever was foretold, might be accomplished. Now, that the Church of Rome hath fallen frō her first purity, that she is that Church at which the Prophecies long since pointed, and is now fallen, that the Pope is that Man of Sin, that sits in the Temple of God, which was forespoken, and that there is not, neither can be any other Church to which the Prophesies can fitly agree, I will compare the Romish Doctrine with those Prophesies, that her Tenets in the Church may appear to the Evidence of things foretold, and her doctrine may appear to be the accomplished Revelation of S ^t . John's Revelation.

First then let us examine, (by way of question and answer) Whether the Church of God hath not fallen from her first sincerity more or less in all ages.

How comes it to pass, that the Pope of Rome assumes to himself the fullness of power, and is advanced above the kings of the earth (which are called God's? ) It was foretold: The Man of Sin shall be revealed, which is an Adversary, and is exalted above all that is called God, and that is worshipped, so that he as God sitteth in the Temple of God, showing himself that he is God.

How comes it to pass, that there are such lying wonders, and false miracles wrought in the Church of Rome in these latter times? It was foretold: The son of perdition shall be revealed, whose coming is by the effectual working of Satan, with all power, and signs, & lying wonders.

How comes it to pass, that the Shepherd of the flock is become the wolf, and the chief Pastors teach perverse doctrine, to make Proselytes of their own? It was foretold: After my departure, grievous wolves shall enter in among you, not sparing the flock, and shall speak perverse things, to draw Disciples after them.

How comes it to pass, that the common people are given to believe fables, and read Legends instead of Scriptures? It was foretold: The time will come when they will not suffer wholesome doctrine, but having their ears itching, shall after their own lusts get them a heap of Teachers, and shall turn their ears from the truth, and shall be given to Fables.

How comes it to pass, that the Church of Rome makes a distinctiō of meats, and forbids Marriage unto Priests? It was foretold: In the later times some shall depart from the faith, and give heed to the spirit of error, and doctrine of Devils, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats.

How comes it to pass, that Indulgences and Pardons are granted for money, and made the treasure of the Church? It was foretold: There shall be false teachers among 〈◊〉 by whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of, and through covetousness shall with feigned words make merchandise of you.

How comes it to pass, that the number of the faithful are so few, that at all times they cannot easily be discerned? It was foretold: When the Son of man cometh he shall not find faith upon the earth. Again, The day shall not come except there be a falling away first, and that man of Sin be revealed.

How comes it to pass, that the Devil hath seduced the people in these latter aages? It was foretold: When a thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, and shall go to deceive the people in the four quarters of the earth.

How comes it to pass, that the Church of God, (which is termed a City upon a hill) should be obscured, and scarcely discerned in these latter ages? It was foretold: The woman fled into the wilderness, where she had a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there.

How comes it to pass, that in the time of peace and security, errors were brought in by the enemy of the Gospel? It was foretold: While the husbandman slept, there came the enemy, and sowed the tares among the wheat: and the enemy was the Devil.

Lastly, how comes it to pass, that we have made a departure from the Church of Rome? Vt impleretur: that it might be fulfilled, which was spoken, Go out of her my people, that ye be not partaker of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.

And certainly, all these sayings are come to pass, that not one jott of his word should pass not fulfilled, so that we see not any things fulfilled in the Church of Rome, which were not foretold; neither was anything foretold, but in the fullness of time shall be accomplished.

SECT. XXVI. The Conclusion of this Treatise, showing in sundry particulars, the certainty and safety of the Protestant, and the uncertainty and danger of the Romish Way.

THe Philosopher tells us, that Truth and Falsehood are near neighbors, & the outmost posts of their doors are both alike; yet their way is contrary: for the one leadeth unto life, the other unto death. If we shall inquire further how to distinguish the house of Truth from the house of Error, he gives this Character. The door of Falsehood is painted and beautifully adorned, but the door of Truth is plain and homely; and hereby it appears, that many times men are deceived, and mistake the door, and go into Errors house, when they seek the Truth.

These two ways I have briefly suruayed, and distinguished by two several Titles, The Safe way, an • The By way: The one (like the house of Truth) is plain and naked, and known only by the Scriptures; and this is Via Tuta, a certain & Safe way. The other (like the house of Falsehood) is adorned with specious shows, and colorable pretences of Traditions, of Fathers, of Councils, of a pompous outside, of an eminent and glorious Church; and this is Via Deuia, an uncertain and By-way. Let us look back, and take a short view of the particulars.

We say the Scripture is a sure, evident, & perfect rule of Faith, and this is Via Tuta, a certain and Safe way: They say the Scripture is ambiguous, obscure, and insufficient; and this is Via Deuia, an uncertain and By-way.

We say, all Traditions concerning Faith and manners, that can be proved by Scriptures, are of equal authority with the Scriptures; and this is Via Tuta, a certain and Safe way: They say, that diverse Traditions of faith and manners, whereof there is no ground nor evidence in the Scriptures, are to be received with equal reverence, & religious respect, as the Scriptures themselves; and this is Via Deuia, an uncertain and By-way.

We say, the undoubted writings of the ancient Fathers are to be followed, according to their own rule, so far as they disagree no from the Scriptures; and this is Via Tuta, a certain and Safe way: They say, and take an oath, to follow the judgment of the Fathers, making no distinction of true and doubtful Authors, nor limiting their doctrine to the Scriptures; and this is Via Deuia, an uncertain and By-way.

We say, that General Councils lawfully called, are of great authority, and singular use in the Church, to determine Controuersies of Religion, but yet are subject unto error; and this is Via Tuta, a certain and Safe way: They say, that General Councils called and confirmed by the Pope, are of an infallible auhoritie; and their Decrees are to be obeyed under a curse by all Christians; and this is Via Deuia, an uncertain and By-way.

We say, the Church is a Congregation of Pastors, & people, wherein the word of God is truly preached, and the Sacraments rightly administered, and these are Essentiall marks of the true Church, and this is Via Tuta, a certain and Safe way. They say, sometimes a Council, sometimes a Pope and his Consitory, sometimes the Pope alone, is the Church, & the marks of their Church are amplitude, and splendor, and miracles, &c. and this is Via Deuia, an uncertain and By-way.

We say, the Rock upon which the Church is built, is Christ; and this is Via Tuta, a certain and Safe way: They say, the Rock is the Succession of Popes derived from Peter; and this is Via Deuia, an uncertain and By-way.

We say, the effect of the Sacraments depends upon the Institution of Christ; and this is Via Tuta, a certain and Safe way: They say, the efficacy of the Sacraments depends upon the Intention of the Priest; and this is Via Deuia, an uncertain and By-way.

We say, we ought to call upon God by Christ, and that he is our Mediator who only knows the secrets of our hearts, and sits at the right hand of God, to make intercession for us: And this is Via Tuta a certain and Safe Way: They say, we ought to use Saints and Angels for Intercessors, when as they have no commission from God to present our prayers, nor can know the secrets of the heart, nor have we any assurance that they hear us at all, and this is Via Deuia, an Vncertaine and By-Way.

We say we ought to adore Christ's bodily presence in Heaven where he sits at the right hand of the Father, according to the Apostles Creed: and this is Via Tuta, the certain and Safe Way: They say, we ought to adore Christ's very body and blood in the Pix, under the accidents of Bread and Wine, according to their Trent Creed, and this is Via Deuia, an uncertain and By-Way.

Lastly, we say that we are all unprofitable servants, and no man living can be justified in the sight of God by his own merits; and therefore all that expect saluatiō must lay hold on Christ by a lively faith, and wholly rely upon his merits only; & this is Via Tuta, a certain and Safe way: They say, that the Law of God may be fulfilled in this life, and that they can merit and perform works of Supererrogation, and accordingly they rely partly upon their merits, & partly upon their superabūdant satisfaction of Saints, for their Salvation, and this is Via Deuia, an uncertain and By-Way.

Thus I have set before you Truth and Error, Light and darkness, the Safe Way, and the By-Way. Give Me leave therefore by way of Conclusion to adjure You in the sacred form of words, sometimes used by the great Prophet, and faithful Servant of God. I call Heaven and Earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing, therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live.